FelixisaJerk

Man, I thought this day would never come. I just saw the third installment of the Equalizer with my best friend and in D-BOX! As the camera turned and panned, as evil mobsters got their heads bashed in, my seat vibrated, shook, twisted, and put me in the firing line. There is a moment in the film where we watch the equalizing happening from the point of view of Denzel and for a moment I felt like I was the Equalizer!

I actually really enjoyed myself and liked this movie a lot. I'm no newbie either, I've been an Equalizer-head since 2014. I remember seeing the first two in theaters on their opening nights. The third seemed like it was happening (for a year), then it wasn't (for three years), then boom I saw a trailer and a month later my ass was in a D-Box seat.

Equalizer 3's strengths are in its setting, characters, and performances. I love the Italian town the movie takes place in. It's cinematic and beautiful and never looked like a green screen or backlot. It felt like an authentic place with a real community I fell in love with. Performances across the board are strong. It is incredibly pleasing to see Denzel Washington reunite with Dakota Fanning. Their scenes are playful and well done, even if Fanning's character is a little weak. She's a CIA agent who gets the whole case spelled out for her by McCall and then she literally repeats what she's told to her boss (who is David Denman aka Roy from The Office) making her look like a genius. "Investigate this person, stake out this location, ask this question." It would've been cool to see an actual partnership where she is allowed to have skin in the game and not simply given the answers.

I know this may not come as a shock to anyone, but if Equalizer 3 has a weakness it's in the story. Nothing new comes to light, nothing truly develops, Robert McCall's (that's two Cs and two Ls) character arc isn't actually an arc, it is a straight line. That doesn't make E3 a bad movie, because it most certainly is not one. But I can't help but think of how much stronger the film would've been if McCall had doubts, weakness, fears, and regrets of his violent life. There are more than a few clues hinting that the filmmakers wanted to do something like that, but nothing more than glimpses.

Talking with my friend after this one, I believe there is an alternate cut of the movie that exists in which McCall struggles with his mortality, his faith, and his guilt. There is a lot of evidence supporting this. Spoilers here: in the opening scene after McCall is shot in the back, he actually attempts suicide, he puts the gun to his temple, pulls the trigger but it's empty (any John Q fans out there?). Exciting yet uncharacteristic, McCall would certainly know how many bullets he had left, but more so, the Robert McCall I know, the one who helped Ralphie make security guard and Sam Rubentsein get his sister back, would never commit suicide. It made for a fascinating opening scene, as I was immediately excited and intrigued by what I assumed was coming: what happens when you just can't Equalize any more?

The picture is steeped in religious imagery, is McCall looking for redemption? Even if he killed the worst men on the planet: pimps, mobsters,terrorists, and rapists in often brutal, painful ways; How do you live with that? As he ages there are more days behind him than ahead, that must take a deep toll on a person.

The fact those pieces exist make me think Fuqua and crew wanted to make that movie, but studio pressure for an action-summer feel-good-popcorn-blockbuster left the thoughtful parts of the character out. Equalizer 3 doesn't go any deeper than the surface; it's also a full half hour shorter than its predecessors. McCall kills em' all, and drinks tea and dances in the street at the end.

Despite the shortcomings, The Equalizer 3 is a good movie. Good enough for me to not worry about the issues, and just go with the flow. I would gladly watch three more Equalizer movies, I just enjoy them. I've mentioned in prior reviews of this franchise that the main competition is John Wick. Well I am happy to report I haven't seen nor have any interest in the 4th John Wick. So Equalizer wins.

I have to give Mob Land a lot of credit. For a Saban film it actually had an advertising campaign, a trailer with a slowed down cover of House of the Rising Sun, a theatrical poster, and even a theatrical release! That's awesome! They're really stepping up their game. When I saw the trailer for Mob Land I figured I'd have to get this from RedBox but I'll be darned, it actually came soon to a theater near me.

And ya know what? It really wasn't a bad movie! Which unfortunately kind of plays to the audiences detriment. It's not bad enough to be fun and not good enough to be fun. It's a middle of the road picture that grasps at some really interesting ideas but doesn't have the finesse to make them work effectively.

For example our lead character is an out of work mechanic with Parkinson's who is at his wits end on how to provide for his family (interesting!), his solution is to rob a local drug dealer with his scumbag uncle (not very interesting). When the big boss hears about the robbery he sends his top head smasher to go recover the stolen loot and deliver the punks responsible. It's been done a lot.

The acting is good, actually. Stephen Dorff and John Travolta give a solid effort and have the charisma and depth to add nuance to their characters. Kevin Dillon plays that moocher, kinda scummy uncle we all have. There are decent performances here. It's the script that squanders their potential to push the movie out of mediocrity.

Mob Land is a movie very much in the same vein as No Country For Old Men, The Place Beyond The Pines, and Hell or High Water. Yes, those films had staggering budgets and a plethora of Grade A talent but most importantly they had wonderful scripts. The difference between Mob Land and those other pictures is that when characters have philosophical conversations about their motives, or meandering questions about their situations, it's interesting. They're building to something. Through misdirection and unconvention these films grip the audience and never let go.

I feel like Mob Land tries hard to be a character study disguised as a crime drama but it doesn't know how to examine itself. It's a vacuum sucking up all this inspiration from wonderful films but it just sits there with the pieces.

Also, Mob Land suffers from some pacing issues, that meandering, philosophical dialogue I mentioned earlier? There is a lot of it here. And we're sitting in cars listening to it, sitting in diners listening to it, sitting in garages listening to it. But philosophy turns to redundancy; it simply never goes anywhere.

Unlike the camera in this movie which goes everywhere! I've coined a new term for how this movie was shot: "Chimp-Cam". 95% of this movie was shot handheld with a stomach-churning shaky cam that is crotch level looking up at the actors. I literally, in my mind, pictured a chimpanzee shooting this movie. And it made it better. 20% of that 95% were tracking shots that were tracking shots just to be tracking shots. Do we need a nauseatingly shaky tracking shot to watch a guy walk from his car to his front door? What's the point?

I don't want to rag on this movie, truly. It's a massive step in the right direction for Saban Films. I feel like they've made an actual film in Mob Land.

If this script could've had one or two more passes that took those longer dialogue exchanges and cut them down to be leaner and more tense...shoot this would be so much better. If they could've given a little more dimension or originality to our lead character's development, hot dang this would be a different review. If they would've hired an actual director of photography and not a half trained chimpanzee...

Beau is Afraid demands us to see it again. It basically screams to be rewatched, paused, rewound, dissected, and examined. The brilliance of writer and director Ari Aster is that these repeat viewings will never ever help you get this movie. It's never going to click and magically make sense - going back to the well will only deepen your appreciation for the craft of the film.

Beau is a marvel of modern cinema not just for its striking visuals, alarming contemporary setting, and technical merit but for the fact that by all means it shouldn't even exist. No superheroes, not a sequel, not pushing a trending agenda or remade from a novel. How can anyone profit from such a film?!

I sound bitter or jaded. I'm not, I just want to express how deeply satisfying it is to see something so original and unique and beautiful and upsetting. Movies like this make me want to get off my ass and get on my ass. I mean to write. Like writing a movie.

Joaquin Phoenix is Beau, who may be one of the least reliable narrators I've seen in a film for a long time. The movie follows him on what should be a simple trip to visit his mother, but from what I can gather, nothing is ever simple with Beau. Beau's journey takes us through at least six vastly different settings but they feel like alien dimensions that effectively skew reality but also mash genre, medium, and technique. I think I'd like to leave the synopsis at that, the premise is set up in the opening scene and what unfolds becomes an odyssey unlike anything I've ever seen. To attempt an explanation or listing every character and actor seems like it would be a disservice.

It's gross, it's vulgar, it's profound, it's gorgeous - there is no shortage of adjectives to use here. Most importantly, it is worth your time. Beau is Afraid is a story that can only exist as a film and that's a true mark of greatness.

It seriously felt like there was an hour of this movie cut out. I mean I'm glad it's only 93 minutes but things move so fast that it feels inorganic. We spend so little time with Adam Driver before he's zooming off into space and we are somehow expected to care.

The fact this came from the team that wrote the Quiet Place movies makes this hurt even more. Those movies take their time and we grow to deeply empathize with the family. In 65, the first three minutes set up the whole movie.

I don't want to beat this movie up too much, it's basically what I expected from the trailer. Adam Driver is a good grunter and this movie has lots of grunting.

I wish he was on the planet alone and this could've taken a more Cast Away vibe, but what we got is what we got.

It's cheesey, it's goofy, it's thin, it's slow season at the movies. What should've been Adam Driver's Turok is actually Adam Driver's After Earth.

Steven Spielberg, it's to the point where even just trying to write something after his name is daunting. One of the most examined, talked about, beloved, celebrated living filmmakers who has ever existed. There's something inherently exciting about watching his films. They're so lovingly crafted, it feels like Spielberg wants to take care of the audience when he makes a film. Almost like a cinematic hug, there's an assurance and comfort when watching even his most challenging and upsetting films. You're in good hands, you're watching a film made by someone who has devoted their entire life to the artform.

Catch Me If You Can, feels very different from his work. Not in the sense it's a lesser film or not as lovingly crafted, nothing like that, the film wildly underrated and usually isn't as conversed about as his other films. I am not sure why.

My favorite aspect of Catch Me If You Can, is the complete lack of bitterness throughout the film. Even when the movie gets heavy (and at times a bit mopey) the characters never resort to anger or violence. Frank Sr. Has every reason to burst with rage when his wife has an affair, instead he sinks into depression and loses all of his confidence, which Chris Walken underplays beautifully. Carl Hanratty wants to catch Frank Jr. So badly, he's been humiliated by Frank on numerous occasions, but even when they're face to face or talking to one another on the phone, their dialogue is playful and without contempt. I think it's great Carl never screams something like "YOU'RE GOING DOWN!". That largely plays on the father-son relationship building between them. Carl never forgets Frank is just a kid.

And take Frank, at the age of 16, the rug gets pulled out from underneath him, his perfect idyllic family crumbles, but his life of crime doesn't come from a place of anger, but a desire to outrun his loneliness. His attempt to fill an emotional void with money, sex, and adventure completely fails him. The character and the audience realize he can't con himself.

I think it displays a maturity in the script as well as Spielberg's direction. I enjoy the way Spielberg can make mainstream crowd pleasers and still avoid a lot of convention most other filmmakers would succumb to (or be forced into by the studio). On paper it's a crime movie but it never feels like a movie about a criminal. There is a very fun and lightheartedness to the fraud and lies (aside the awkward scene where Frank scams a sex worker played by Jennifer Garner. Seriously what was that whole scene?) The movie only gets heavy when dealing with the broken families that both of the main characters are reeling from.

There are some incredible shots in this movie too, John Williams' score feels unique, technically speaking the movie is perfect. The movie does feel a bit long. If Spielberg managed to get this to two hours on the nose, I would consider this a masterpiece. But the pacing at times is challenging. And all of the women in this movie feel a little underbaked.

When a movie is called Truck Turner, and it's the lead character's name, and that lead is played by Isaac Hayes, and he also composes the score, and he's topless in nearly all of the promotional material, there is already a lot to look forward to.

What I wasn't expecting was the sheer amount of character, spunk, grit and cinematic perfection Jonathan Kaplan's: Truck Turner delivers; and seeing it in a packed house on 35mm made it all the more memorable.

The film is drenched in realism and is fiercely un-flashy. We see Truck's crappy apartment littered with fast food wrappers and a surplus of beer cans, then him angrily swatting his girlfriend's cat who just happened to piss on his last clean shirt which he puts on and wears for like a third of the movie, this is just the opening scene.

From there we are taken on a tour of the least glitzy part of the criminal justice system: the bail bond brokers. Cinematographer Charles Wheeler shot this like we're looking at the Vegas strip. Loud signs selling freedom ("I'll have you out, if it takes 10 years.") and quick justice, dozens of these shabby offices seem to occupy one single city block. This is Truck's world, when his promising career as a football player is cut short due to an injury "Mack '' Truck decides to take out that aggression on bail jumpers

This film has so much fun setting up its straightforward story while introducing us to an astonishing roster of characters (with a stellar cast) and settings. We meet zany pimps (one of them named GATOR), blood thirsty prostitutes (the scariest one played by an icy Nichelle Nichols), violent drunks, crooked cops, and Saul Goodman-esqe lawyers (decades before Vince Gilligan got to the scene). We go from a water processing plant to shabby bars to a funeral for a pimp to drug dens, the creativity and resourcefulness is a spectacle. Truck Turner punches way above its weight class on a budgetary level. The movie just makes the absolute most of every scene and setting.

What also caught me off guard were the tonal and perspective shifts. There is a moment when Truck shoots a guy and the movie suddenly takes place from the dying man's point of view. The whole movie slows down and we watch many things happen to this man, we see his shock as he realizes he's dying and bleeding out, but his body is still propelling him forward as he fumbles for his keys and makes his way to his car. Just over his shoulder the hulking presence of Truck is looming from behind. The dying character gets to his car, puts the keys in the ignition, spits up a bunch of blood and the eerie silence that has been built up is shattered when he falls faceforward onto the car's horn. So much is conveyed without any dialogue or special effects (aside from blood). It's crazy effective and I'm not sure if this film had invented this style of shot but it's henceforth been replicated by legends such as Gaspar Noe and Darren Aronofsky among others.

It is a surprisingly artful chunk of filmmaking in an unflinchingly un-arty movie. Somehow this betrayal works perfectly. Truck Turner is full of awesome stuff but that part of the movie really spoke to me in a strong way. The film is endlessly quotable, hilarious, sincere, action packed, shocking, brilliant...the list of adjectives can go on and on and on. I'm leaving out a lot of great stuff I'd love to tell you, but go experience it for yourself. It really is perfect. The 70's were the best period of cinema. Truck Turner is bulletproof evidence of that.

I'm always rooting for a filmmaker. I want their newest work to be their best. Even if a director has made movies I haven't enjoyed, I set my bias aside and take a chance. It's only bitten me a few times (like Baz Luhrmann's Elvis)!

What this seeming disclaimer is building up to, is that M. Night Shyamalan and I have a checkered past. I love his unique vision, the way he crafts stories, and his willingness to take true risks without fear of losing an audience. Almost equally, I can't stand his bungling dialogue, stiff delivery, and eccentric humor. The way he gets his actors to almost feel like robots, awkwardly delivering lines and jokes that rarely land, truly test my endurance and patience.

For the sake of avoiding spoilers here is the most Shyamalan example I can possibly make up:

Main character we've spent two hours with gets shot, is bleeding out, his family or partner or whatever is holding their head, crying, whispering "please don't die" into their ear, then the main character opens their eyes, looks up and says "do you smell pickles?"

Dies.

End.

I completely understand using humor (especially of the absurd variety) to shift the tone and feel of a scene. Shyamalan is trying to capture the absurdity and unpredictability of real life. I respect that, but more often than not I feel he fails.

To give him some credit, I think the film that perfectly captures his odd style of humor and handles it effectively is Signs. For example: Joaquin Phoenix is finally convinced aliens are invading and he is most certainly going to die. He's watching the world end on a network news channel and he looks at Mel Gibson and goes into this monologue about being at a party; and a super hot lady he's had a crush on ends up on the same couch as him and they start to fool around. He's in paradise, in total disbelief of his luck, when he suddenly gets the urge to turn his head away from the woman he's been making out with. At that exact moment he turns his head, she profusely vomits. Why is he suddenly telling a stunned Mel Gibson (and stunned audience) this disgusting anecdote? Because that's the moment he found definitive evidence of God's existence. "She would've thrown up right in my mouth."

It's so hilarious and absurd we forget the world is ending around them. It's beautiful in its sincerity and its stupidity. And it completely works in this movie and proves Shyamalan can do it effectively. I wish I could say the same for most of his work.

So in the first 3 minutes of Knock at the Cabin, when a main character starts telling fart jokes to a jar of crickets, I assumed I was in for a long night.

I'm happy to report that the film quickly turns quite serious, as we are immediately immersed into one of the most original and intriguing stories of Shyamalan's filmography.

The corny humor is dropped for pure dread and morbid curiosity. When the humor does reappear it's touching and a quick breath of air before we are resubmerged into the thick of the film.

To explain Knock at the Cabin is to explain a joke. It only stands to suck the curio out of a movie that is best experienced with as little prior knowledge as possible.

When I saw the trailer I was really afraid it had spoiled the best parts of the film and I had essentially knew how it would go well before I had seen it. I'm glad I was wrong. This isn't simply because of the "Shyamalan Twist" he's so famous for, it's because the story goes deeper than marketed.

Though, if you do not buy into the story, if you're not willing to go on the ride, then you will not enjoy the movie. Sitting and staring at the film in uncompromising skepticism or doubt is no way to experience it.

For me, the performances drew me in, mainly in the form of Dave Bautista. I've been a champion for the talents and skills of this actor ever since Blade Runner 2049.

His hulking mass and flesh covered in tattoos may draw the unconscious bias that he's just a lumbering gorilla in even the least judgmental audience members. But the delicacy and sensitivity he displays in this role show there is real depth and nuance in his performance.

Shyamalan's casting couldn't have been more perfect for the entire film but giving Bautista a vessel to be more than a large grunting alien (Guardians of the Galaxy) and an intimidating yet dialogue-less assassin (Spectre) pays massive dividends.

It's also great seeing an unhinged Rupert Grint. His American accent may not be flawless, but his performance is wonderful.

As is Nikki Amuka-Bird, her performance teeters between tender and delicate to intense and compelling. Watching her is a real treat.

I only had a couple of issues with the film that kept me from thinking it is Shyamalan's best. First there were a couple of plot points that resolved a little too easily for me. Whether for the sake of runtime, or lack of foresight, or writing, etc. The oversimplification of the events that occur make the end of the film less effective. I wish I could give a good example without spoiling it.

Also at times I wish the movie moved a little quicker. The main characters are in disbelief of the situation they're in and it takes nearly two thirds of the film for them to finally get on board and find a way out. It wasn't that the performances or dialogue were weak or uninteresting, it's just that it retreaded some ideas over and over and over.

Also, a movie about the end of the world should be pretty terrifying and mostly we get there. It would've been cool to crank up the destruction meter a couple more notches to illustrate the possible fate of the Earth.

Ultimately, Knock at the Cabin is an incredibly effective thriller, with a unique premise, passionate cast and I enjoyed myself immensely.

I'm so glad this is what it was.

I have a slight aversion to documentaries about famous people, in that they typically over analyze, needlessly connect dots, and add slanted exposition that elicits the response the filmmaker wishes to instill on their audience.

I'm not saying that's wrong or bad; I just don't always love it (of course there are exceptions; The Last Dance, The Velvet Underground Documentary, The Sparks Brothers). I don't always want to know how the hotdog is made, I just want to enjoy it for what it is.

Bret Morgen let's me enjoy my hotdog.

Moonage Daydream isn't a music documentary, it's not even a documentary, I mean it sometimes is but no, actually, not really. It moves and acts like a narrative film, assuming different roles and reinventing itself over it's duration.

I was totally mesmerized by its violently creative visuals and blown away by the intricate, beautiful, and oftentimes overwhelming sound design.

It immediately ebbed my fears away, fear that learning more about David Bowie might make him less fun or mysterious.

I saw this in IMAX and am so glad I did. While it gets harder and harder to leave the house these days, a spectacular theatrical experience makes it worth the while.

Moonage Daysream is composed of Bowie's music and is narrated by his responses to interviews as well as his muses, writings, and thoughts. There are no "talking heads" so to speak and the rise of that style of documentary is refreshing.

Do I know more about David Bowie, the person after seeing this? No. And that makes me happy. Hearing him talk about his motives and process is endlessly interesting but not all together cathartic in the sense I feel like I understand him. And that's a good thing.

Some people are more interesting as you peel back their layers and learn how they tick and some are more interesting to merely observe and listen to. That's Bowie, and Bret Morgen allowed us to observe in the best of ways.

A lot of conflicting feelings for me here.

Clerks and Clerks II were so edgy and realistic. Those films struck a chord with me, from the first time I saw them. They reflected the way I talked as a younger man, and the way my friends would talk about life, work, sex (or lack thereof), and most importantly movies. It's a fearless reflection of a counterculture (no pun intended) consisting of misguided youths and depressed 30-somethings simply trying to get by.

It's literally the only reason Kevin Smith has a career, he captured something so raw and real in Clerks and everyone went wild for it. The world looked at him as the next voice for a generation.

He did it again with Clerks II, albeit loaded with more theatricality, more showmanship, more gags, but it all leads to the emotional crux of Dante and Randall's confrontation in the jail cell. Just when you think Clerks II is all donkey shows and fan service, you get sucker-punched with the emotional honesty that made the first Clerks an indie masterpiece.

Crass, vulgar, offensive, but also deeply personal and honest.

Clerks III is commendable in that it reaches for the emotion but everything supporting it feels off to me.

I think the plot, dialogue, and humor are the culprits.

It's not that Clerks III feels cleaned up for today's more sensitive audiences, I mean, it is, but if Clerks II came out today, Kevin Smith would effectively be canceled. But I'm not seeking the offensive-ness, the dialogue outside of Dante and Randall's more heartfelt exchanges doesn't have the same bite or wit of the first two films.

Despite Clerks III being a significantly darker film, the humor doesn't accurately reflect that, the tone isn't effective or cohesive. I had a few good chuckles but never honestly enjoyed myself or felt like the movie was truly working.

And that's a shame because I like the fact Smith, went in a darker direction, we learn Dante's life is incredibly tragic, not just because he's a 50-something man stuck in a convenience store, but he's a widower, he lost the love of his life and his daughter to a drunk driver.

Damn, that's hard, I want to see Smith delve into that a bit more, then Randall almost dies from a heart attack, rather than that bringing these guys together, Kevin has it divide them, which is a great twist, but what comes from it isn't nearly as cathartic as the previous films. I don't feel much resolve from where we end with these guys.

The lack of a true emotional connection mixed with a painful level of fan service makes Clerks III feel like it's more desperate. The way it panders to the audience bothers me; from retreaded jokes and visual gags (remember this, and this, and this?!) to literally recreating scenes from the first film, all quickly goes from enjoyably meta and nostalgic to slightly frustrating. I found myself mainly wanting to see new things with these guys and this cast. But we don't get much new, Clerks III is primarily a fictional biopic of Kevin Smith making the first Clerks.

I think Brian O'Halloran and Jeff Anderson do a really good job of playing these guys, they both hit depths that I found impressive. O'Halloran has some genuinely emotional and effective scenes, without which, this movie would be a total wash for me. But it's not fair for one actor to try and carry the whole show, especially with so much roughness around it.

I'll be the first to say, if filmmakers only made films that needed to be made, then cinema as a whole would be much less fun (yes, this goes for Marvel Movies too, I suppose). That said, in my gut, I do not feel like Clerks III needed to be made, I was perfectly content where we left off with Dante, Randall, and Elias at the end of Clerks II. Knowing they'd be leading perfectly average, normal lives in the convenience store they now own, makes perfect poetic sense.

Going back to the Quick Stop for one last hurrah excited me as a Kevin Smith fan, but disappointed me as a movie lover.

I love Kevin Smith's work. And I'll continue to support, watch, and listen to anything he releases. His life story is incredibly motivating for me as a filmmaker and his films have given me a ton of motivation over the years. I think he's a brilliant writer, and a creative who legitimately appreciates and adores his fans, and he wants to make them all happy, but Clerks III feels too safe for me.

No true spoilers, but I will talk about a few details you might want to see for yourself before reading.

Ye have been warned.

Nolan who? Keaton who? There were multiple times during my screening of Matt Reeves' The Batman that literally had me smiling. A big, fat, toothy, cheek straining smile. I couldn't help it. My edible might have helped elicit that smile, but I was so happy during this screening, it was ridiculous.

Seeing a true Batman detective story engulfed in the cling wrap of horror and sadism provided by The Riddler, topped with a perfect Catwoman, and supported by the best version of Gotham City I've ever seen, made me really happy.

Take Batman out and you still have a thrilling crime mystery. Comparisons could be made to Taxi Driver, Zodiac, and Seven. Combining film noir, 70's grit, and horror to weave a dark and dramatic story lifted directly from some of the most heralded Batman comics.

That was really special to me. Seeing elements of Frank Miller's Year One, Jeph Loeb's The Long Halloween, Darwin Cooke's Ego, brought to life and mixed with snippets and frames of other beloved Dark Knight stories. It reminded me of why people go so crazy for comic movies.

I'm still jaded. Especially when it comes to modern mainstream superhero movies. I thought, for certain, Warner Brothers and DC Films greedy desire to build/resurrect/reboot the DCU would totally mess this movie up.

I was expecting them to: Shoehorn in avenues for Wonder Woman, Aquaman, Flash, etc.

Lick the boot of the all mighty-the all encompassing-the mega load: Marvel Cinematic Universe using the same strategy and direction of those films for this new Batman Tell a story so wholly incomplete you need two or three sequels just to feel like you've actually seen a complete film

And thank god, none of that happened. Reeves' stuck to his guns, fought to make his story, and told it his way. It paid off.

For starters, it's not an origin story. Chris Nolan's Batman Begins is a perfect inception film. Tim Burton, Joel Schumacher, and Nolan have shown us the baby steps: we've already seen him train, we've seen him build the batsuit, witnessed his parents die, etc. Reeves' and crew decided to begin our Batman, two years into his crime-fighting crusade. And that was a perfect move.

This Batman is reckless, less patient, and more emotionally driven. We hit the ground running by opening on Halloween Day, right at the start of Riddler's murder spree.

I've been saying for years that Robert Pattinson is one of Hollywood's most exciting actors. Pattinson's Batman/Bruce Wayne is the 2005 emo dream boy I wish I could've looked like when I was 13. Joking aside, this is a fresh take on Bruce Wayne. Not so much a billionaire playboy as a disconnected recluse. He literally hates the sun.

Watching him mull over dusty files and scan crime scenes for clues is deeply satisfying. Hearing diary entries delivered through monologue provide us with insight into Wayne's process that other film entries never had. Seeing that he forces himself to write everything down to avoid losing the memories in the blurry, dark, sea of ceaseless nights. I think we can all relate to that in different ways.

This film also addresses a key detail no other Batman movie ever has: the black eye makeup. Over the years we've seen a small army of guys in the cowl. They take off the mask and magically there is no trace of the black eye makeup they all wear. This Batman keeps it real, we see his make up run all the time, when he takes that mask off there is sweat and dirt and makeup everywhere. It's a really cool detail that makes the movie feel more realistic and gritty.

Pattinson is surrounded by excellent supporting cast members.

I knew at the very least The Batman would work cast wise, I couldn't imagine these actors giving bad performances. Zoë Kravitz is the best on screen Catwoman, ever. Not taking anything away from the other performers who have played the character. Reeves and Peter Craig simply wrote a better Selina Kyle and Kravitz takes it for all it's worth. Physically perfect for the role but more importantly a good enough actor to make us believe she really exists in Gotham.

It's hard to not be upstaged by Bat's and his villains. This Selina Kyle soars above them.

Jeffery Wright's Jim Gordon, is exactly what we needed him to be. Batman and Gordon work as true partners. Wherever Batman is, Jim is right there with him. Clever uses of humor and well written dialogue make this Jim Gordon shine. I am certain there will be a spin off TV series called "Book of Gordon".

Which leaves us to the villains. Batman's Rogues Gallery is a deep roster filled with incredible characters. While I would love to see a villain that hasn't yet graced the big screen, I really dug Paul Dano's take on The Riddler. He's played like a modern day extremist and it's topical yet un-cheesy. Dano goes big. That's just him, so I knew Riddler was going to be a howling, goraning, beast in what looks like the body of a 16 year old. Dano is almost 40 but somehow still looks like a boy. They exploit it in this movie, the way almost all serial killers have a childlike lostness deeply embedded in their heavy faces.

Speaking of heavy, Colin Farrell is unrecognizable as Oz (Oswald)/Penguin. I can't not think of Robert DeNiro, but that's a good thing. Using every pound of his physical bulk and that classic prohibition-era, NYC, mobster drawl-Penguin is a fascinating villain. John Turturro plays a good Falcone. He's modern, sleazy, creepy, it all looks and sounds right.

The desperation of Gotham City is palpable. Everything is dripping wet and grimy, crime is on the rise. It feels a lot like the city I live in. Greig Fraser, (who just came off of the brilliant Dune) is one of the best cinematographers working in the business. The shots are so clever and creative yet economical. The camera's lack of movement boldly intensifies the action, rather than a series of Bourne-Style quick cuts, the camera is mounted and unflinching as Batman pummels his foes. It replicates Batman's style of watching, staking out, waiting perfectly, silent and still for the right moment to emerge from the shadows. Why move the camera if you don't need to? The sets are so spectacular, I wish I could pause the movie and just revel in it all.

About midway through there is a genius POV shot from Batman's perspective as he tails and watches Selina, he's on an opposing rooftop looking into her shabby apartment, trying to get a read on who she is. It actually duplicates the film's opening shot but instead it's from Riddlers POV as he stalks his first victim, also from an opposing rooftop. It essentially blurs the line between them, their motives may be polar opposites but their operations are eerily similar. That's great visual storytelling, active, engaged viewers will be able to connect those dots without the use of expositional dialogue: "We're not so different you and I!"

Which brings me to what keeps The Batman from masterpiece territory. There are a few small things. Being as though this is a mainstream movie that needs to rake in hundreds of millions of dollars by putting as many asses in seats as possible, I understand some of the dialogue has extra exposition, some things are needlessly explained or repeated. It makes sense from a business viewpoint. But I still wish it wasn't there. At times dialogue can feel a little cut up and chewed for you, but it's done to help your stupid uncle (who's probbaly taken 4 pee breaks) understand what's going on. I think the best films use exposition sparingly and cleverly, and for the most part The Batman does but it makes the outliers standout.

Another gripe, this should've been rated R. To really sell the horror/intensity aspect more effectively there should've been more blood. Near the end of the film Batman shoots himself up with adrenaline (Venom; possibly, for any die-hards out there) and starts beating a guy's face in with multiple punches, his face should've looked like ground meat. The fact he had some bruising and a lumpy nose didn't really show what kind of terrible things Batman (especially a supercharged Batman) is truly capable of. Blood should've been spraying on Batman's face as Jim Gordon pulls him off of the thug, who we can assume will need to be hooked to a ventilator for the rest of his life.

Same for Riddler, he is a sadistic, brutal murderer. And selective blood/gore can be a really effective way to showcase brutality. By holding that element back, this felt a little too safe. I think of films like The Silence of The Lambs or No Country For Old Men and how they handled grotesque violence. The violence is incredibly dramatic and upsetting but it's delivered in small yet concentrated doses. This goes with my complaint above about being a mainstream film that needs to be optimized for the masses. An R-rating can adversely affect that income.

But sheesh, I get really excited when I think about how a few more cranks on the brutality dial could've really made this the best Batman movie I'd ever seen. And honestly this is close to what I personally feel would be my perfect Bat-Flick. But I don't like being teased with something dark and edgy and then pulling it back when it comes time to show it off. Once again, I don't agree with it, but I understand it. I get why this ultimately couldn't be rated R, I get why they need to simplify or re-explain some things (like I am doing right now). But if they left that stuff out and got out of their own way, I'd have zero hesitation in saying this isn't only the best Batman film ever made but one of the best action films ever made.

Despite my small issues with the movie I am still in love with this film and totally captivated by it's brilliant pacing, insane set pieces, gorgeous musical score, and stunning photography. Film and comics are two of the most impressive and immersive visual mediums and The Batman is a glorious example.

Jackass Forever Hollywood Theatre Portland, OR Lance Bangs Introduction and Q & A

I seriously haven't had this much fun in a movie theater since I saw Nutty Professor II: The Klumps with a primarily all black audience in Atlanta, GA back in 2000. That night 22 years ago was one of the highlights of my life. I had never seen an audience so engaged, so loving, so appreciative of the film presented. I missed almost all of the dialogue because the audience never ever seemed to cease laughing. It's a theatrical experience I am incredibly grateful to have been a small part of.

My experience last night wasn't quite all that, but it was damn close. Jackass is a big deal in Portland. Jackass-Heads like myself know the city has a long history with the TV Show and film franchise as stunts and pranks have been filming here since 1999. The theater was packed last night at The Hollywood and eclectic folks from all walks of life made up the excited audience. It was a beautiful thing.

Jackass Forever is a magnificent film. I watched all three films last week by myself in my bedroom and had a blast. Seeing the long awaited follow up in a packed house was a physical revelation. For the first time in 2 years, I forgot about covid in a public space (Hollywood requires masks at all times and proof of vaccination to get in, so that helped) and I felt like I was a part of a small community.

All of these people joyously cheering at bruised testicles, projected vomit, broken bones, pig semen, bee stings- a plethora of the odd, the cringe, the bravado; nearly brought a tear to my eye.

Seeing my childhood heroes up there still taking the relentless, bone snapping, slams, the bull by the horns, the high-speed nut shots, being shot out of cannons-it doesn't skip a beat. This wasn't mild or phoned in, despite the aging of the cast.

The torch is passed to a handful of new Jackasses, with knees full of cartilage, young, tight, flesh un-marred with burn damage or scar tissue. All of whom are delightful. I was so scared the new Jackass members would be tik-tokkers and just in it for the "likes." But no, they are the damaged, the rejects, the gluttons for punishment. Humble, funny, and gracious, just like the goofy-gladiators I've loved since I was 7 years old.

It's a film best watched cold. Don't read reviews, avoid trailers, just get in the theater and see it.

Lance Bangs was in attendance last night. For the uninitiated, Lance has been filming Jackass since the late 90's. He is a dear friend of Spike Jonze. Even if Lance's name isn't ringing a bell, you've seen him vomit many, many times. I was lucky enough to kick off the Q and A last night asking Lance what his relation was to Portland, and moreover what the city meant to the Jackass Franchise. He was already in the city shooting music videos for Nirvana and Sonic Youth when Jonze called him and asked if he wanted to help film for Jackass. How could he say no?

Many of the cast members lived in Portland at this time (and still do), it just made sense to film here. Plus no one in Portland was expecting TV cameras anywhere, back in 1999-2000, so the pranks made a lot more sense, as the reactions were much more genuine than what they were getting in Los Angeles, where TV cameras are always expected.

Jackass Forever is a deeply cathartic, healing film. The kind of film this country and world need right now. I had such a great time last night. I can only hope your screening is as fun as mine.

Ever since I first heard about this movie I've had a weird feeling. A feeling...I guess you could say is a little bit foreboding and uncomfortable. Like, maybe this movie should not exist. Maybe this movie will be one of the worst things to ever come out... like maybe this new Matrix movie would kind of exhume the coffin of a franchise that is dead and buried. Like maybe this new Matrix movie would violate the corpse inside of that exhumed coffin.

Not that The Matrix Franchise is an inviolable corpse, it has its faults (i.e. The last two movies), but the most respectable thing about the third film is that it has a definitive conclusion. Say what you will about Revolutions, that movie ends. Hard. Like a book slamming closed. It makes it pretty clear that the series is finished.

So why is there a new Matrix movie?

That exact question gets asked, a lot, in The Matrix Resurrections.

But I am going to stop there. I don't want to say too much about the plot.

But I will say that The Matrix Resurrections is actually a good movie.

Like past installments, it's not without fault, but what franchise is faultless (besides LotR)? I like the way Lana Wachowski turned everything on its head and tried something bold and brave and strange and new. That's exactly what made the original Matrix so appealing and enduring, it was so unlike everything else being made at the time. The irony is that after it was released, everything attempted to be just like it. Endlessly imitated, endlessly parodied, never bested. It set a new standard in sci-fi, in the narrative of action films, and film in general.

It would be nearly impossible for Resurrections to match the original, but Lana doesn't do that; and that's why Resurrections works. The movie would be a total embarrassment if Lana tried to outdo the brilliant film she and her sister Lilly created 23 years ago. Lana finds brilliant ways to acknowledge the towering success of the original movies but makes Resurrections its own beast with a very unique identity, yet it still fits in the family.

It's a good movie, but as mentioned above there are faults.

It is too long, it clocks in at 2 and half hours, it feels very front heavy. Setting everything up takes way too much time and isn't incredibly helpful now that I've seen the whole thing.

Restraint (not those kinds of restraints, you Bound freaks!) has never been Wachowski's strong point and this movie needed more restraint in it's exposition and dialogue. It gets laughable (not the good kind) at a few points, and even cringe inducing at others.

Keanu Reeves feels right at home reprising his role, but he is completely outshined by Carrie-Anne Moss. She truly delivers a phenomenal performance. That cringey dialogue I was talking about? She makes it sound good and that is very difficult and is a testament to just how great she is.

Visually the movie looks fantastic. The CGI is good. I just saw Spiderman: No Way Home and thought the CGI looked so cartoony; it's crazy that Resurrections is far more cartoony in it's premise but visually looked so much more impressive and realistic.

This is a good movie.

Why do I have to keep saying that? Like I am trying to convince myself...

Despite my praise I still have reservations (possible Matrix 5 title?) about this movie. An unresolved sinking feeling in my gut. A mild discomfort.

I think it's because I inherently feel wrong about this film's existence. I truly don't believe it needed to be made. It bothers me that Lana and Lilly can't get the money they deserve to tread new ground. Warner Bros. Just wants to keep the money rolling in, so why not resurrect the franchise?

But I can't hold that against this movie...can I?

A really well made movie. Well shot, brilliant performances, good writing, but overall I wasn't swept away in this one.

For whatever reason, I was never invested in the story, it did start coming together for me a bit in the last act.

I found myself simply watching the movie and then aware of the acute annoyance of just watching it. Not feeling much, not experiencing much, just watching it.

Maybe that's a me problem? My girlfriend (who is far more emotionally and intellectually intelligent than myself and also has immeasurably better taste) said she kinda sorta felt the same way a little bit.

She said "maybe in ten years it'll mean a little more to us."

And I think she has a good point, this is very much about a man who falls into a parental situation and for my girlfriend and I, those are just about the last kinds of situation we're trying to find ourselves in.

So wouldn't that be a great hook for getting us on board? A single, career focused individual having to step up and be a role model and look after his nephew?

The problem is, Joaquin Phoenix as Johnny is just too good of a character, he makes so few mistakes as he just seamlessly becomes a great figure for young Jesse (Woody Norman). And even when he does make a mistake he's so quick to realize it and correct it.

I guess most of the turmoil of the film is what's happening with Jesse's mother and father, but we don't spend a ton of time with them.

For the record, I like Mike Mills other work, 20th Century Women was absolutely brilliant as was Thumbsucker.

I really enjoyed the black and white photography, and the filming locations are wonderful. We sprawl from Los Angeles, Oakland, New York City, and New Orleans. All great cinematic locations.

Overall, it's a good movie and I can see how this would mean so much to a specific audience member, I am also happy to see Joaquin put on some weight, after Joker, he was looking really unhealthy. But personally, it just didn't have the euphoric effect I get when I watch something that really speaks to me.

I'm not sorry.

I suppose the gamble of any film told in a series of vignettes is to capture the rapt attention of your audience in one segment only to lose it in the next (see: The Ballad of Buster Scruggs).

None of the vignettes in The French Dispatch ever truly lost me, but one came close. And it's not to say that particular story was poorly written or directed or performed, it's simply that the one preceding it was so dazzling and fantastic I wasn't quite ready to move on from it.

Moving on is a large part of this film as it never stops marching forward both literally and figuratively. It has (a) large story(ries) to get through and if you can't keep up...sorry. No crying.

The French Dispatch is a film told in five parts. Three articles bookended by an introduction and an epilogue. These five pieces make up the final issue of the magazine titled (wait for it): The French Dispatch. We "read" the final issue by watching the articles unfold through Wes Anderson's beautiful, obsessive, whimsical lens.

Visually this is an Anderson film cranked to 11. The photogenic establishing shots, contrasting symmetry, and pastel color scheme of his entire career drenches every shot of this film. The picture beautifully shifts from black and white to color, and always at the perfect moment. His creative and effective use of animation and miniature sets are mesmerizing.

Basically if you don't like Anderson's style you're really, truly going to hate this movie, but your mind was probably already made up.

Seeing this in a theater packed full of micro-beanie, gold wire framed glasses wearing hipsters reminded me of why I don't typically like seeing Anderson's films on opening weekends. There is exactly one reason to ever talk during a movie, and that's if there is a fire, after that there is not one good reason to ever speak in a theater, especially if you're talking directly to the screen which a handful of these people did.

The French Dispatch is an excellent film and Anderson is an excellent filmmaker. I think his style and creativity are a much needed burst of originality on the canvas of filmmaking. It also just made me feel nice after watching The Last Duel, that movie stole a piece of my soul... I like unconventional filmmakers, I like divisive filmmakers, and even in his missteps, I'll continue to be excited by and support Wes Anderson.

It's impossible for me to review this documentary without bias. Anthony Bourdain has inspired me more than anyone on this planet (filmmaker Kevin Smith is up there as well, but this isn't about him). When I was a child, I religiously (more cultishly if I am being honest) watched his shows, vicariously living through this skinny punk rock, foul mouthed, cigarette devouring force.

I saw the way he talked to people, all people and studied how he listened, how he asked questions, how he made sure people knew they were actually heard. Watched how language barriers were leapt over, cultural differences were celebrated and how food and drink were a catalyst for love, honesty and for a sense of community.

I grew up in poverty yet following Anthony, to all corners of the world and seeing real places with real history, meeting folks with real stories, who came from and lived in conditions that made my shabby duplex look like the Ritz Carlton. It was transformative. It was escapism yet absolutely grounded in the real world.

I'd read his books and be drawn to a truly unique voice. I'd fall under a spell driven by a deeply compulsive, page turning, "I can't put this down" frenzy. I'd never read stories more relatable yet fantastical, hilarious, sad, and positively sobering. Critically important, emotional lessons for the writer, filmmaker, chef, and person I knew I was destined to become.

I read Kitchen Confidential and got a job as a dishwasher that same summer, then once I had a bit of money I'd watch No Reservations or Parts Unknown and before I knew it I was on a plane to China, then Europe, then China again. I even tried to film my own, one man crew, travel show in Jiujiang. The results? Disastrous, but I am still proud of the attempt.

Roadrunner is exactly the film I hoped it would be. The film I needed it to be. It didn't show us some hidden side of Anthony. It didn't make him out to be anything he isn't. That is impossible. Bourdain showed us the realness from day one. No film, book, documentary, podcast, review- anything-can ever change that.

Director Morgan Neville caught my attention with his 2018 documentary about Fred Rogers (Won't You Be My Neighbor?). He just shows the footage, his questions aren't set up with some hidden agenda, he lets the subjects and cast speak for themselves. That's the exact brilliant documentary filmmaking Roadrunner is fueled by.

The best part of Anthony's inner circle? They all have so much to say. The powerful, beautiful, wondrous impact this man's life had on them yet the devastating, painful, frustrating crater-sized hole his death left in them.

Roadrunner covers that. It has to. But it largely celebrates Tony's life. I didn't cry during the film, I got a lump in my throat but was able to stay composed. The interviews and footage are dazzling and engaging. I was too fascinated to cry. Too eager to see more, I came prepared (with six neatly folded kleenex in my pocket) but refused to let my emotions distract me from my viewing experience-then the credits rolled. Left alone in my own head to process what I just saw. Emotion came over me like a crushing wave. I felt lucky to make it to the car, to sit there and let myself feel it.

And that, is good filmmaking.

Bourdain showed me the world, showed us the world with his incredible story telling, sharp wit, sarcasm and humor. He found a way to shrink the globe, while making every place he went to seem as vast and important as any other. It was delicious food, a sense of community and humor that linked the planet, nothing else matters. He showed it was possible and attainable to get there, just buy a ticket. Stop lying to yourself, stop talking about it, stop dreaming about it and just make it happen.

Go see Roadrunner. You deserve it.

Suicide is preventable, there are resources, there are outlets, there are ways to get better. Check in on your friends and family, make the effort. You never really know who will need it, you just might save a life.

No hardcore spoilers but plot details are examined. Maybe you should read this after?

There's your warning.

Got to catch a premier of this at Cinema 21 in Portland. It's a little extra special being as though the movie was filmed in Portland and made even cooler that the writer/director and writer/producer were there in attendance.

Pig opens in a forest, and a hermit looking man named Rob (Cage) is truffle hunting with his swine-companion merely named Pig. It feels old-world. It's beautifully shot. Then all of a sudden a bright yellow Camaro comes blaring up the path to Rob's hut. Wow, this takes place in 2021? It was surprising. Inside the Camaro is Amir (played by Alex Wolff of Hereditary fame). He buys the treasured truffles from Rob and sells them to high-end restaurateurs in Portland. One night thieves break into the hut, assault Rob and steal Pig. Rather than getting the blood-soaked rampage audiences could easily assume they're in store for, we get a quiet, slow burning story that painfully unfolds through Portland's underground foodie scene.

Nic Cage gives a measured, contemplative performance fueled by grief and anger but rarely letting himself emote or explode. When he speaks it's thoughtful and heavy. This is a wonderful project for Cage, and I love seeing actors do great work. Especially aging actors. Cage still has plenty of mileage left as he doles out the performances that pay the bills but also undertakes the roles that are challenging from talented filmmakers who realize he isn't a dancing, screaming monkey. We slowly learn small snippets of information about Rob. He's been living in his hut in the woods for over a decade, but at one point he was a chef of legendary renown. Simply saying his name turned heads and raised brows from chefs and customers alike. One day he disappears. We never really learn why, but it likely has to do with the death of his wife and the jaded cynicism with modern cuisine.

There is a good scene in which Rob explains to a higher end, five star chef that the pretentious food he is serving isn't real, the "foodie" customers aren't real, none of this modern malarkey means anything. It's bloated, it's fake, it's tasteless. This devastates the chef but there is a certain truth to what Rob says. Cage's delivery here is intense and dark but almost said with a note of self defeat. It's good stuff.

Rob partners with Amir to find out where Pig is and how to get her back. Alex Wolff gives a strong performance. To act alongside Cage and not just be overshadowed requires good writing and great performing. The team they form is funny and at times tumultuous yet most importantly they're believable. It also helps Wolff has a great emotional range on the canvas of his face. There are close up shots of him processing what's going on and he says so much without ushering a word (reminiscent of Hereditary). It's powerful stuff. Amir is trying desperately to make a name for himself in the industry without using the credentials of his celebrity chef father who he has been overshadowed by his entire life. After the loss of his mother, he and his father have little reason to communicate.

The reason this film is successful is because the duo is so good. Pig could've easily followed Rob the entire time but the fact that it doesn't gets us invested in both men and their plights for resolve by the end of the film.

Pig takes the difficult approach to dealing with grief and loss, it demonstrates the power of difficult conversation compared to the standard issue shoot out. I respect that. I appreciate it used violence as a catalyst to the plot but never to solve itself. That is realistic. Much like real life, the characters we meet continue living without drastic change. It's an interesting film made with a lot of love and care. I was feeling a little melancholic at the end of the film. I felt robbed of the emotional payoff I was setting up in my mind. I didn't get that, and I respect Pig for that. I am curious to see what first time filmmaker Michael Sarnoski has in store for us next.

This is a really good movie. It's got a tightly written, quick moving script by Ed Solomon, supported by a sharp director in Steven Soderburgh and pushed forward by a great ensemble cast. It's a crime story that takes place in Detroit in the 50's and primarily shot with a super wide lens. This causes extreme warping on the ends of the frame that add a compelling visual effect to the darkly comic tone and subtle brutality of the story.

Any time Brendan Fraser is in something, I see it. I will support that man until the day I die. Not to mention Julia Fox from Uncut Gems, Kieran Culkin, Matt Damon, Ray Liotta, a chilling Bill Duke adding their style to the mix- and they're not even the lead cast. Don Cheadle and Benicio Del Toro are at the top of their game here. Everything just works. This is one of those movies that can be three and a half hours long and I wouldn't mind, but coming in under two makes this tight and well paced. It's always better to be left wanting a little more than it is to be overindulged. That sounds really dirty, but in movies it's true.

(Spoilers)

Okay, let's get started. Here's the deal with Unhinged:

It suffers from a totally lousy script. Whoa, surprised already? I mean this dialogue is painful to hear. It slows the entire film down, way down. That might seem insane when the premise is a woman and her child being road rage chased by a furious,truck driving grizzly bear in the form of Russell Crowe. Slow is not an adjective that should even be considered in the use of describing this film.

But somehow, here we are.

I do want to say it is worth seeing. Unhinged is not without merit. Russell Crowe brings the intensity. His acting and delivery is so good, that the fact there isn't just a "Crow-Cam" in the bottom right hand corner of this movie at all times is a missed opportunity. Crowe drives a big ol' truck in this film and he spends a lot of time screaming in it, why couldn't this movie just be that?

He speak-screams with such a guttural, ferocious, low-key roar, that this terrible dialogue, from this weak script actually sounds good.

Here's where the problem lies: we spend 80% of the movie with everyone else.

When the rest of the cast perform this dialogue-it just does not work at all. Which isn't to say they're bad actors, they're not. Jimmi Simpson is a good actor. Seriously, go watch the last 4 minutes Zodiac right now. The lead role, the woman who is being chased, is Caren Pistorius, a relatively new actress. She has potential. Really. They're not terrible. They were put in the unfortunate, unwinnable position of not being able to act through poorly written dialogue in the way only Russell Crowe can. So their parts of the movie make everything come to an a**-grinding halt.

Let me break it down further. Unhinged is 90 minutes long on the button. The opening credit sequence (of actual violent viral videos...which say a lot about society) is about five minutes long, the ending credits are about seven minutes long, so really, there is a mere 78 minutes of actual movie. And it still somehow feels incredibly long.

When Crowe is on screen, it doesn't. He portrays anger really well. His performance is big and brutal and scary. I half joked with my buddy while watching the movie: "if they remake The Shining, cast Crowe as Jack Torrence." Whether his real life outbursts, divorce and mean tabloids were actually used to fuel his performance remains to be divulged- it seems like it. He freaks about a skeezy divorce lawyer and SPOILERS barbarically kills him. It works.

This was made for thirty-three million dollars. When I told my buddy that, his jaw dropped. We both justifiably assumed this was in the ten to fifteen million dollar ballpark. I have no idea what they did with all that money. Most of this movie takes place in cars and on obvious sets. The camera work is simple and fairly straight-forward. There are some car crashes, and a few fights and some blood and makeup effects (which are actually pretty good, SPOILERS at the end Crowe gets a pair of scissors (heavy handedly referenced throughout the film) kicked into his eye (oh yeah the lead, Pisorius, tells a one-liner before she does it too...dang). The effect looks good. Outside of that, I don't know what the money was spent on. Maybe it was the grizzly bear.

I checked out a blu-ray copy from my local library. So I didn't pay for it. Which maybe you should do too. And maybe smoke a big joint. Or do whatever you want, but if any of the Crowe talk I mentioned is of any interest to you, check it out. I like Crowe, he has a good sense of humor. All of his John Oliver stuff is really funny, I recently learned when Seth Rogen was receiving death threats after that political comedy about Kim Jong-un came out (you remember), Crowe called him up and offered him safe passage and board at his barren (yet comfortable) Australian ranch. I think that's pretty cool. So cut him some slack and watch this.

Tarantino's Basterds: The Homeless Filmmakers of Hollywood

"...This is where I should be. If I want to make movies in Hollywood I should live on the streets." - Per "Pit" Ingvar Tomren

Joe Black, Bumdog Torres, Per "Pit" Ingvar Tomren: all filmmakers, all cinephiles, all living on the streets of Hollywood. They are each either obsessed or influenced by Quentin Tarantino in some way. Hence "Tarantino's Basterds", Pit and Torres hawk their films and merch outside of the Tarantino owned New Beverly Cinema. Using the funds raised not only to eat and survive but to produce their own films. Black has over 14 feature length films to his name, Pit has two, Torres has one.

Now this movie is presented as a "meta-mockumentary" so trying to decipher what is totally true and what is movie fiction is nearly impossible. I do know Bumdog Torres is an actual homeless man, we've been friends for years and his photography series and books have acclaim in real life. I am not totally sure about Joe Black or Pit. But the truth is, it doesn't really matter. The story is naturally gripping and trying to determine what's real and what is not is a worthless endeavor.

It's inspiring to see how these artists keep this dream alive. Steeped in pure irony. These men sleep on benches advertising Tarantino's newest feature "Once Upon A Time In...Hollywood", settle down for a sandwich under Mr.Robot billboards or film an interview under a massive "First Man" banner. These are movies and productions with budgets that run into the hundreds of millions of dollars, employ thousands of people and take years to make. In one segment a conversation goes something like this Torres: How much did your last movie cost? Black: Six hundred bucks and from writing to release it was done in 28 days.

Continuing the deep irony, these guys are selling their movies outside of art house theaters. Here is a source of such a deeply rooted, beyond underground, untapped well of independent art at its most pure and gritty and these lines of patrons pay them no mind, let alone money. There are 30 people in line for a 35mm John Cassavettes film festival and not one of them will look up from their phones. Cassavettes would be ashamed.

The most beautiful thing about this "meta-mockumentary" is we see how these guys really are living on the streets- artists or not, is no paradise, but their love for eachother and their craft gives them a purpose. A reason to stay alive, a reason to keep trying. It's truly a modern day folk tale. There goes Bumdog the homeless filmmaker pushing his cart and oh there's Pit rolling away on his wheelchair with custom "Once Upon A Time In...Hollywood" rims.

This movie is impressive not solely because it was made by homeless artists, it's impressive because it's just a good film. With a two hour runtime that examines more than a love for film, but a passion for life, traveling, photography, and philosophy. I also love that no one points a finger at anyone else for being homeless, these guys know what got them there whether by choice or bad luck. I'm not exactly sure how you can get your hands on a copy of this. Being friends with the director helped me, but if you look @bumdogtorres up on IG shoot him a message.

I was completely and absolutely captivated by Judas and The Black Messiah. Unable to think about my bills, my stresses- this film is relentlessly powerful. Expertly crafted with a booming soundtrack, precise and meaningful cinematography and outstanding compelling performances from Daniel Kaluuya, LaKeith Stanfield, Jesse Plemons and Dominique Fishback.

After the previous year of not seeing (m)any new movies it's easy to feel like nothing is on the horizon besides superheroes, director/producer/co-writer Shaka King slaps us in the mouth with a new film that is reinvigorating and bold.

Movies like this remind me why I love movies so much. Why I need movies, and why stories like this are incredibly important on many different levels. And why it's important to see new films from young filmmakers.

See it anyway you possibly can, right now. My local arthouse theater in Portland invited me to a virtual screening, I believe it's also coming to HBO Max,

Support art. Support film. Support black art. Support black film.

Sonic the Hedgehog 2/13/2020

It brings me no joy to give Sonic a bad review, which brings the total joy Sonic gave me to zero.

Please read the next paragraph with increasing speed as you go along, on your mark, get set, GO!

When his home planet is attacked by, uh, miniature Sonic/Predator things Sonic escapes to Earth using magical golden rings that transform into portals to other worlds. He lands in Green Hills, Montana where he spends years creepily stalking the residents of the small town. He watches movies through their windows, he has conversations they'll never hear and he keeps little trinkets in a dank, underground cave he calls home. One night a game of 1 person baseball (which you have to see to believe) gets out of hand, a frustrated Sonic runs the diamond so fast that all of the power on the West Coast shuts down; triggering alerts to the government that something weird is happening. The government hires Dr. Robotnik (Jim Carrey) to investigate. Then a small town cop aspiring to be a big town cop Tom (played by James Marsden), discovers Sonic in his garage. Tom shoots Sonic with a tranquilizer gun, he accidentally drops a magic ring which open a portal to San Francisco, and then he accidentally drops all of his rings into the portal which leads Sonic and Tom to take a road trip to San Fran to recover his rings, with the evil Dr.Robotnik trying to capture them both.

Take a deep breath.

The effects are actually decent, Sonic the Hedgehog is competently shot, technically, it's a well made movie but the writing, the writing is so incredibly painful. It's like the writers looked up every trending Reddit post, meme and internet trope that was PG appropriate and threw it in the script. We have Keanu jokes, iPhone jokes, Amazon jokes, big stupid Toyota and Chevy ads, and MULTIPLE Olive Garden jokes. None of it has any heart, any resonance or any actual creativity. There's no real humor just a 2019 Internet Joke Yearbook. It'll be absolutely and spectacularly irrelevant in less than a year.

No kid's favorite movie is going to be Sonic the Hedgehog, because it's not even a Sonic movie. Aside from the 2 minutes we spend on his home planet, nothing makes this story about Sonic. You could swap him out for Mario, Donkey Kong, Samus, Pikachu, a Digimon, a Furby, anything, because this story doesn't care, at all. It's a road trip movie about a man who is annoyed with his sidekick.

So, how's Jim Carrey? It kinda sucks to watch him do stuff like this. Carrey used to be able to make anything funny and vibrant and entertaining. From Dumb and Dumber to Ace Ventura to Batman Forever and The Cable Guy, I mean even if the movie wasn't good you could at least say "Golly Ma, wasn't that Jimbo really sunthin'?" To be fair Carrey had the most interesting scenes due to his unpredictability as a villain but his silly rubber face wasn't enough to make me forget the lifeless, corporate corpse of a family film he's trapped in. I don't get why he did this? Is he out of Republicans to paint?

Actually that's maybe the best thing I can say about this McRib (my phone wants to autocorrect this every time I type movie, so I'm keeping it), by hiring Carrey, it's safe to assume this entire production was Anti-Trump which is a great cause. So actually, ya know what? Forget it, go see this movie, it's wonderful.

Adam Sandler delivers a stellar performer as New York Diamond District Jeweler: Howard. Howard is in way over his head. In debt to multiple tough guys, in bed with one of his at least 20 years younger employees, and on the brink of a divorce with a court date TBD. Oh and he might have colon cancer. He's robbing Peter to pay Paul, and borrowing from Tim to pay a bookie and taking money owed to him and placing large bets on NBA games.

The constant elevation of tension and stakes is almost nauseating, seeing just how bad and convoluted things get for Howard is mesmerizing. And Sandler embodies it without a hitch. Sandler hasn't been this convincing to me since Punch Drunk Love. I was absolutely entranced by his character. His physicality, his accent, his delivery. It blew me away.

The Safdie Brothers have crafted a film that feels so authentic, so real, the audio is not theatrical, it feels like life as it's often hard to make sense of the dialogue when you have five people yelling at each other, two phones ringing, and music in the background. It's a very fly on the wall approach and works perfectly.

I didn't know I could hold my breath for two hours. Uncut Gems, is a pot boiler of stress, tension and anxiety. If those three words are triggers for you, this film might be one you want to avoid as it's two hour run time is an endurance test. But if you're willing to endure you'll be rewarded with one of the best movies you'll see all year.

Parasite Hollywood Theater 11/09/19

Disclaimer, this review is in two parts. Part One will have zero discussion of plot points and contain zero spoilers. Part Two will delve deeper into the film itself, so read part 2 only if you're cool with mild plot spoilers or have seen the film. With that out of the way:

Part One:

Parasite is no misnomer. It fully lives up to its title, as this film has taken over my brain and infiltrated my thoughts. Parasite has burrowed deep into my cerebrum and has interrupted my normal thinking capacities. I can't go a few minutes without remembering of some image, joke, line, or scene from the film. My self-diagnosis is apt and I fear I may be terminal.

I think the best way to go into this film is to go how I went, totally blind. I've been looking forward to Parasite well before it took the Palme D'Or at Canne this year. Bong Joon-ho and crew have made an absolute masterpiece. A devilishly wild, pitch-black comedy, very much domesticated and between two families. I'll leave it at that and will not dive into the plot or story. Just know this film is in Korean so it is subtitled. It loses nothing in translation but I really wish I knew how to speak Korean so I could better relate to the natural flow of dialogue.

The story is incredibly unique and builds astonishing tension that still has you holding your breath as it unfurls. Parasite pulls you in deeper and deeper, like quicksand, before too long you're in too deep. The editing is so feverish and well put together the 2 hour plus run time soars by. It feels modern, sleek, and gives me great hope for the future of filmmaking and leaves me with an even deeper respect for film made abroad.

It's worth traveling to see, with Joker in every single theater in the country it hurts my little liberal arts heart that Parasite will likely not make its way outside of larger cities. My podunk friends, I apologize, you'll have to wait for a digital or physical release, likely around the end of the year. Lucky for you "Terminator: Dark Fate," and John Cena's new firehouse dog movie "Playing with Fire," will keep you company while you wait.

Part Two: Where we actually talk about stuff, here be potential spoilers, ye' ave' been warnd' (sorry I am still processing The Lighthouse)

Parasite is astonishing on an emotional level. It's a spiderweb of high tension thrills, hidden identities and masterfully curated small details. We meet the Kim family. Dirt poor, living in the basement level of a towering overcrowded building. Their lives are a struggle, phones turned off, internet turned off, it's an eye-opening depiction of poverty in 2019. The entire family (mother, father and two 'twentysomething' kids) is out of legitimate work, to help make some semblance of ends meet the entire family folds frozen pizza boxes for a young entrepreneur. When a fortuitous opportunity arises for Ki-Woo (their son) to tutor the daughter of the ultra rich, affluent Park family, he finds a way to get each member of his family working for the Parks. It starts slowly, as his sister Ki-Jung acts an art therapist to young Da-Song, his father becomes Mr. Parks driver and his mother takes the place of the previous housekeeper.

Typing that all out is simple enough, but none of these people are what they say they are. And the theatrical scams put in place to get the Kim family into the house are increasingly risky and hilarious. Ki-Woo (played by Woo-sik Choi) failed his college entry exam 4 times, his sister Ki-Jung (played by So-dam Park) is a true con artist, she literally Googled art therapy and ad-libbed everything else, his mom Chung-Sook (played by an awesome Hyae Din Chang), a physically intimidating champion shot putter is absolutely not a high end housekeeper, but most fraudulent of them all is dad, Ki-taek played by regular Bong Joon-ho collaborator Song Kang-Ho. I love this man. I love this actor. I love this character. He's totally pathetic, physically weak, he seemingly has no real skills. What is evident about his character is he truly loves his family. Seeing his face light up and beam with pride when his kids commit these scams is actually heartfelt and touching.

I quickly fell in love with these characters as if they were my own family. You might get the misconception that the Park family might be rich, snobby, rude people but they really aren't. That's something I respect about Parasite, there aren't any clear cut villains or heroes. It's not that kind of story. It's so grounded in reality. Director and writer Bong Joon-ho apparently started getting this idea when he was an actual college tutor, in a luxurious house in which he didn't belong. He started thinking about how funny it would be to have his friends working in this house too.

What really grips me with Parasite is how the movie utilizes senses. It's visually stunning, the architecture of the Park mansion contrasted with the shabby half basement the Kims live in, the way light, darkness and color is used, but maybe the most impressive is how much smell comes into play. You can't smell movies, but somehow Parasite has smells. Smell becomes a large part of the film. It's hard to explain but if you've seen Parasite you'll get what I am talking about.

Bong Joon-ho has created something truly mesmerizing and thrilling. I do not have a single critique of the film. It's absolutely flawless and leaves a taste in your mouth long after viewing. I was absolutely convinced Quentin Tarantino's: "Once Upon a Time in Hollywood," was the best film of the year but Parasite may have stolen my vote, or maybe that's exactly what the little bug in my brain wants me to say. See it as soon as possible.

Parasite Hollywood Theater 11/09/19

Disclaimer, this review is in two parts. Part One will have zero discussion of plot points and contain zero spoilers. Part Two will delve deeper into the film itself, so read part 2 only if you're cool with mild plot spoilers or have seen the film. With that out of the way:

Part One:

Parasite is no misnomer. It fully lives up to its title, as this film has taken over my brain and infiltrated my thoughts. Parasite has burrowed deep into my cerebrum and has interrupted my normal thinking capacities. I can't go a few minutes without remembering of some image, joke, line, or scene from the film. My self-diagnosis is apt and I fear I may be terminal.

I think the best way to go into this film is to go how I went, totally blind. I've been looking forward to Parasite well before it took the Palme D'Or at Canne this year. Bong Joon-ho and crew have made an absolute masterpiece. A devilishly wild, pitch-black comedy, very much domesticated and between two families. I'll leave it at that and will not dive into the plot or story. Just know this film is in Korean so it is subtitled. It loses nothing in translation but I really wish I knew how to speak Korean so I could better relate to the natural flow of dialogue.

The story is incredibly unique and builds astonishing tension that still has you holding your breath as it unfurls. Parasite pulls you in deeper and deeper, like quicksand, before too long you're in too deep. The editing is so feverish and well put together the 2 hour plus run time soars by. It feels modern, sleek, and gives me great hope for the future of filmmaking and leaves me with an even deeper respect for film made abroad.

It's worth traveling to see, with Joker in every single theater in the country it hurts my little liberal arts heart that Parasite will likely not make its way outside of larger cities. My podunk friends, I apologize, you'll have to wait for a digital or physical release, likely around the end of the year. Lucky for you "Terminator: Dark Fate," and John Cena's new firehouse dog movie "Playing with Fire," will keep you company while you wait.

Part Two: Where we actually talk about stuff, here be potential spoilers, ye' ave' been warnd' (sorry I am still processing The Lighthouse)

Parasite is astonishing on an emotional level. It's a spiderweb of high tension thrills, hidden identities and masterfully curated small details. We meet the Kim family. Dirt poor, living in the basement level of a towering overcrowded building. Their lives are a struggle, phones turned off, internet turned off, it's an eye-opening depiction of poverty in 2019. The entire family (mother, father and two 'twentysomething' kids) is out of legitimate work, to help make some semblance of ends meet the entire family folds frozen pizza boxes for a young entrepreneur. When a fortuitous opportunity arises for Ki-Woo (their son) to tutor the daughter of the ultra rich, affluent Park family, he finds a way to get each member of his family working for the Parks. It starts slowly, as his sister Ki-Jung acts an art therapist to young Da-Song, his father becomes Mr. Parks driver and his mother takes the place of the previous housekeeper.

Typing that all out is simple enough, but none of these people are what they say they are. And the theatrical scams put in place to get the Kim family into the house are increasingly risky and hilarious. Ki-Woo (played by Woo-sik Choi) failed his college entry exam 4 times, his sister Ki-Jung (played by So-dam Park) is a true con artist, she literally Googled art therapy and ad-libbed everything else, his mom Chung-Sook (played by an awesome Hyae Din Chang), a physically intimidating champion shot putter is absolutely not a high end housekeeper, but most fraudulent of them all is dad, Ki-taek played by regular Bong Joon-ho collaborator Song Kang-Ho. I love this man. I love this actor. I love this character. He's totally pathetic, physically weak, he seemingly has no real skills. What is evident about his character is he truly loves his family. Seeing his face light up and beam with pride when his kids commit these scams is actually heartfelt and touching.

I quickly fell in love with these characters as if they were my own family. You might get the misconception that the Park family might be rich, snobby, rude people but they really aren't. That's something I respect about Parasite, there aren't any clear cut villains or heroes. It's not that kind of story. It's so grounded in reality. Director and writer Bong Joon-ho apparently started getting this idea when he was an actual college tutor, in a luxurious house in which he didn't belong. He started thinking about how funny it would be to have his friends working in this house too.

What really grips me with Parasite is how the movie utilizes senses. It's visually stunning, the architecture of the Park mansion contrasted with the shabby half basement the Kims live in, the way light, darkness and color is used, but maybe the most impressive is how much smell comes into play. You can't smell movies, but somehow Parasite has smells. Smell becomes a large part of the film. It's hard to explain but if you've seen Parasite you'll get what I am talking about.

Bong Joon-ho has created something truly mesmerizing and thrilling. I do not have a single critique of the film. It's absolutely flawless and leaves a taste in your mouth long after viewing. I was absolutely convinced Quentin Tarantino's: "Once Upon a Time in Hollywood," was the best film of the year but Parasite may have stolen my vote, or maybe that's exactly what the little bug in my brain wants me to say. See it as soon as possible.

Jay and Silent Bob Reboot Cinemark 10/17/19

I would not call myself a Kevin Smith apologist, because you shouldn't ever have to apologize for loving what you love, if you believe there is merit and you connect to someone's work, forget apologizing for it. I love Kevin Smith, he is one of my main idols in life, he's inspired me to create my own podcasts, start writing scripts and start directing films of my own. I've met him multiple times, seen his various live, traveling shows and know his films front to back. So of course, when Fathom announces a Jay and Silent Bob Grindhouse I gotta go, we caught a double header of Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back and it's 18 years later sequel Jay and Silent Bob Reboot. This time around Jay and his hetero life mate Silent Bob must go back to Hollywood to stop the superhero reboot of the franchise based on their likeness: Bluntman and Chronic. This time the journey has them discovering there is more to life than comics, weed and movies.

The verdict?

My first reactions after the movie were generally positive. I knew what I was getting into: tons of cameos, breaking the 4th wall, and most of all frequent callbacks to the View Askew-niverse, the world in which all of Kevin Smith's films and characters live in. We get references to pretty much every single one of his movies from Clerks and Clerks II to less cherished favorites such as Jersey Girl and Tusk (both of which I absolutely love). The Dogma scene with Matt Damon is hilarious but the one that caught me off guard as having an emotional impact was Chasing Amy. Ben Affleck and Joey Lauren Adams reprise their roles and actually perform here. Seeing what these characters are doing 22 years later truly hit me, Affleck delivers a wonderfully stirring and believable monologue about love and family and death, which was expertly penned by Smith. It was those few moments that prove how talented of a writer he is.

Jason Mewes in the title role of Jay gives a great performance. It's impressive to see his growth from "Strike Back" to seeing how his characters adapts to a film in 2019. As I said before the film gets emotional at times and seeing him show depth as an actor was incredibly impressive, I like where Jay's life is headed. Also, incredibly good was Harley Quinn Smith, Kevin's daughter. She has skill and talent and she's so young. I am curious to see what her future has in store for her as she does not need to stay in her dad's flicks, she has the chops to do this on her own. She also starred in a small role in Quentin Tarantino's Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, this year. This performer is going places.

My issues with the film flushed out during an after-movie discussion with a friend. Of course not all the jokes land, but it's rare a comedy has a 100% delivery, that's not the real issue. Jay and Silent Bob Reboot is grounded in reality. Whereas Strike Back, has tons over the top fantastical moments such as a run in with Scooby-Doo and the gang in the Mystery Machine, a wild Planet of the Apes segment, and physics defying action sequences to name a few. These set up the wacky world this movie inhibits and are frankly hilarious. They work because these characters are such larger than life caricatures, they're so ridiculous, that the unbelievable, zany stuff going around them makes a lot of sense. Reboot doesn't follow those tropes, the movie is surprisingly reserved and real, and that feels a little less fun and exciting. One of the craziest highlights of Reboot is Jay and Silent Bob crashing a KKK rally (led by a clan leader played by 2000's WWF sensation Chris Jericho) but other than that and a few moments in the conclusion of the film, it really occupies a grounded 2019. And reality is just not where Jay and Bob are at their best; that said, the great performances from Mewes and Harley Quinn make that realness work. I really think the film would've benefited if Smith kept the emotional resonance from the performances and got a little crazier with the hijinks Jay, Bob and the crew of misfit young friends they meet along the way, find themselves in.

It was awesome to see characters reunited from some of my all-time favorite movies; it's the main reason to see this flick but the reason to stay is the emotional depth and good performances. Watching them back to back was a great night, flooded with memories of laughing with friends and family through the years gave me some nostalgic experiences I didn't expect and made me incredibly excited to see what Smith would do with the recently announced Clerks III.