Tag Archives: Paramount Pictures

31 Days to Scare ~ Rosemary’s Baby (1968)

by Movie Review • Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The Facts:

Synopsis: A young mother-to-be grows increasingly suspicious that her overfriendly elderly neighbors and self-involved husband are hatching a satanic plot against her and her baby.
Stars: Mia Farrow, John Cassavetes, Ruth Gordon, Sidney Blackmer, Maurice Evans, Ralph Bellamy, Patsy Kelly, Angela Dorian, Charles Grodin
Director: Roman Polanski
Rated: Approved
Running Length: 137 minutes
TMMM Score: (10/10)
Review: A sure sign a film is destined for classic status is when it gets better with each viewing. Like great music, sometimes you need time to step back and reflect on the reaction of all your senses before returning to the source to recalibrate your feelings. I’ve started off hating albums that I now can’t live without, and the same goes for movies that didn’t thrill me at first glance, but on repeat watches have found their way into my soul. Part of that comes with understanding the importance of art; the other is an emotional maturity that allows you to appreciate what the given medium is saying and at what time/place it was speaking.

Watching Rosemary’s Baby recently in a theater with a near-capacity crowd, I was struck by how ahead of its time it was. Released in 1968, a year after Ira Levin’s novel of the same name was published, the rights had already been with B-Movie impresario William Castle (I Saw What You Did) since it was in galley form. When Castle brought it to Paramount big wig Robert Evans intending to direct it, he instead saw his movie handed over to European auteur Roman Polanski. As brilliant at marketing a picture as Castle was, even he had to admit that this movie required more than a stock schlock push; it needed the Paramount polish.

Young couple Guy and Rosemary Woodhouse are moving into The Bramford, an impressively imposing but enviable apartment building in the heart of New York City. Like most old buildings, this one comes with a storied history involving witchcraft and Satanism, but that was years ago, and the Woodhouses don’t need to be concerned about any of that…for now. Instead, there is much to be done as Rosemary (Mia Farrow, See No Evil, waifish and wonderful) gets their new home in order while her struggling actor husband Guy (John Cassavetes, The Fury) goes on auditions, hunting for his big break.

Rosemary meets a woman around her age in the spooky basement laundry room, and they hit it off. Friends are hard to come by at The Bramford, though, because not long after, the girl is found dead on the pavement outside, the victim of an apparent suicide. She had been staying with an elderly couple down the hall from Rosemary, and soon Minnie and Roman Castevet have wormed their way into the lives of the Woodhouses, becoming overly gregarious (read, pushy) neighbors they can’t quickly get rid of. Actually, Guy appears to like the Castevets more than Rosemary and begins to spend more time at their place. 

Soon after, Rosemary has a horrific dream of being attacked and violated by a hideous beast. And then she finds out she’s pregnant. And Guy gets his big break…at the severe expense of the health of his closest rival in the acting profession. Rosemary’s world gets smaller the bigger she grows and the more successful Guy becomes until she’s a shadow of her former self. That’s when the paranoia sets in, and her suspicions arise that perhaps her neighbors and husband are conspiring against her…but to what end? With her due date drawing near and options running scarce, Rosemary must decide if she’s going to fight to be a mother or first fight for her life.

Polanski’s first US picture has become an indisputable classic for many reasons, too many to mention here. The highlights are its exquisite production values, filmed on both the East and West Coast. The viewer can hardly tell when the action switches between exteriors in NYC and soundstages in California. The Woodhouse apartment begins dark and confined but is given contemporary life by Rosemary’s good taste and modern sensibilities. The rest of the apartments and owners feel stuck in a different time, and Rosemary represents (and is costumed to look like) the future.

The casting across the board in Rosemary’s Baby is perfect. Relative feature film newcomer Farrow was a risky choice, and while more prominent names were mentioned, sticking with the rising star was a fantastic move. The entire film is told from her perspective, and I’m sure she’s onscreen for nearly all the 137 minutes. Barely any scenes happen without her direct involvement, and you can see why Farrow’s husband at the time, Frank Sinatra, wanted his bride back home so bad that he served her with divorce papers on the set when she kept working instead of returning when he beckoned. How Farrow didn’t wind up with an Oscar nomination is beyond me. Though this was the year of the infamous tie between Barbara Streisand and Katherine Hepburn, Farrow’s name should have been one of the five.

Someone who did take home an Oscar that year was Ruth Gordon for her unforgettable performance as Minnie Castevet. The nosy neighbor is pure “Niw Yahwk,” talks a mile-a-minute, and potentially hides a dark agenda you don’t want to be a part of. Gordon is sensational whenever she is onscreen, and for a role that creates such an energetic whirlwind, she always manages to make her co-stars look good. That’s why she won a Best Supporting Actress Oscar, one of the most deserved wins ever in the category. I’ve always liked Cassavetes more as a director than an actor, so it’s hard to judge him fully here, especially since he’s playing such a louse…but wow, does he nail it.

Bringing his European ethos to his film, Polanski (Carnage) pushes the boundaries for sex and nudity, making Rosemary’s Baby far more adult than I remembered. There’s a scant amount of blood, with Polanski preferring to let audiences create their own terror but getting more mileage out of the unnerving dream sequences Rosemary has the deeper she falls under The Bramford’s strange spell. They don’t always make sense, but these sequences are surprising and disturbing and achieve the desired effect of keeping the viewer off balance if Polanski wants to keep them on shaky ground. 

When Polanski wants your attention, he knows how to get it. My mind explodes when I think of how audiences in the summer of 1968 reacted to the last 20 minutes of the movie, a tour-de-force of suspense that will make your heart jog right up into your throat. William A. Fraker’s cinematography frames Farrow holding a knife that both reassures you she can defend herself but terrifies you simultaneously because you become acutely aware she (and we) is about to head for an unknown horror. The tail end of the film may be a little soft, but if you’ve been following along the breadcrumbs Polanski dropped (he wrote the screenplay), it should make perfect sense.

I’ve said it before, and it’s worth repeating. Certain movies are classics for a reason, and it often doesn’t take long to figure out why. In both The Exorcist and Rosemary’s Baby, I’ll admit that when I was younger, I came to them expecting to experience horror the same way I was trained to experience it: with it being thrown in my face accompanied by blaring rock music. Now, when I watch both movies, I have to talk myself into it because I know both will keep me up at night. As effective now as it was then, Rosemary’s Baby earns its reputation as an all-time horror classic, a legitimately scary movie for the ages made during a time when the voices of many were struggling to be heard. 

Movie Review ~ The Passenger (2023)

by Movie Review • Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The Facts:

Synopsis: Randy is perfectly content fading into the background. But when his co-worker Benson goes on a sudden and violent rampage leaving a trail of destruction in his wake, Randy is forced to face his fears and confront his troubled past in order to survive.
Stars: Kyle Gallner, Johnny Berchtold, Liza Weil, Billy Slaughter, Kanesha Washington
Director: Carter Smith
Rated: NR
Running Length: 94 minutes
TMMM Score: (6/10)
Review: Here’s a perfect example of why watching a preview can ruin the natural discovery you get when watching a movie. While the trailer for The Passenger doesn’t tell you everything you can expect to find if you decide to hop on an intense road trip with two men from the same non-descript small town, it does reveal a vital pivot point that might have held a decent element of surprise at the end of the first act. Knowing what awaited me, I began the movie with a specific idea of certain characters without letting the film define them for me as it played out.

That may not seem like a big deal for most, and from what I gather when talking about this with friends and family, it hasn’t bothered them on the same level that it does for me. When I break it down for them and say, “But what if you went in not knowing this <insert any moment from the Scream VI trailer> was going to happen?” that’s when it clicks, and they realize how much was spoiled in advance. Now, The Passenger doesn’t hit Scream-level spoilers, but if you can’t tell, I’d urge you not to watch any preview in advance and go in as blind as possible. 

By all accounts, it looks like it will be another mundane day for Randy (Johnny Berchtold). We can tell by his room, house, car, and how he holds himself that he’s settled into a stagnancy that won’t change anytime soon. Small-town life doesn’t just suit him, it is him, and he’s blending into the scenery. Even showing up at his job, a roadside burger joint, barely receives any notice from his horny co-workers Jess (Jordan Sherley, Do Revenge) and Chris (Matthew Laureano), his boss (Billy Slaughter, The Magnificent Seven), or Benson (Kyle Gallner, Smile), another lone wolf like himself.

Today is not going to be like any other day, however. And it’s not because of the good news that his boss asked him if he’d be interested in a management position at a new (better) location nearby or because Chris humiliates him in front of the others as they prepare to open. After a shocking outburst of disgusting violence, Benson will take a vested interest in Randy’s future and bring him along for a ride that will push him past his limits. In a mad attempt to break Randy out of his cocoon, Benson goes to extreme lengths to force a change in the docile man, uncovering secrets from his past and using them twistedly to open his eyes to the world around them.

With its brief, but stomach-churning, eruptions of violence (some of which skids the line of bad taste), The Passenger arrives at its destination with most of its important pieces intact. That’s thanks partly to a tight script from Jack Stanley (Lou) and more focused direction from Carter Smith than he displayed in 2022’s Swallowed. Smith also draws more consistent performances here, with Bechtold and especially Gallner creating distinct, deeply flawed men with more issues to be worked out than can be handled in a 94-minute car ride.   There’s excellent supporting work from Liza Weil as a critical influence from Randy’s past and especially Kanesha Washington as a diner waitress who stands out in two pivotal scenes.

How much mileage you get out of The Passenger may be in your ability to look past the film’s tendency for overzealous violence and instead appreciate the way it attempts to be a character study of the trickle-down effect of the bully. Both men are bullies in their own ways, but digging into how they resolve those issues and their fractured histories is where the film fires on all cylinders.   

THE PASSENGER will be on Digital and On Demand on August 4, 2023
and coming to MGM+ later in 2023.

Movie Review ~ Scream VI

by Movie Review • Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The Facts:

Synopsis: The survivors of the Ghostface killings leave Woodsboro behind and start a fresh chapter in New York City, only to again be plagued by a streak of murders by a new killer.
Stars: Melissa Barrera, Jasmin Savoy Brown, Mason Gooding, Jenna Ortega, Hayden Panettiere, Courteney Cox, Jack Champion, Henry Czerny, Liana Liberato, Dermot Mulroney, Devyn Nekoda, Tony Revolori, Josh Segarra, Samara Weaving
Director: Matt Bettinelli-Olpin and Tyler Gillett
Rated: R
Running Length: 123 minutes
TMMM Score: (8/10)
Review: Despite winding up raking in a cool $140 million at the box office, the resurrection of the Scream franchise in January of 2022 was a regrettably sloppy affair. Although it was nice to see the return of OG cast members Neve Campbell, David Arquette, and Courteney Cox, the three were primarily relegated to the sidelines until they either needed to be killed (RIP Dewey) or kick butt (the film’s most significant thrills were derived from Campbell’s iconic character demonstrating her final girl moxie). That left the bulk of the fifth installment to be carried by weak leads and a mediocre script laced with the kind of juvenile dialogue you’d overhear the next booth over at an Applebee’s. 

That’s why I wasn’t hoping this sixth chapter would be anything better. Moved into production quickly and losing Campbell just as fast to a pay dispute, the newest round with Ghostface would find Cox the longest-surviving cast member. At the same time, fan-favorite Hayden Panettiere’s Kirby from Scream 4 would fill some of the nostalgia quotients Campbell vacated. Moving locations was another risk returning writers James Vanderbilt, and Guy Busick took, shifting coasts from the warm coast of Woodsboro, CA, to the shadowy streets of NYC. 

It turns out that a change of scenery was the magic touch needed to kick Scream VI into the high gear necessary for a more aggressively entertaining entry than its predecessor. Almost from the beginning, you can feel a greater focus on developing the characters past the surface, making it mean something when they are dispatched through grueling and gruesome methods. As is often the case with sequels (according to Randy’s “rules”), the body count is higher, the production is more extensive, and anyone is fair game not to make it to the final credits.

Have no fear – the remainder of this review is spoiler-free and will only speak to the essential plot elements. I will assume you’ve seen 2022’s Scream, though. I would caution you to avoid any/all trailers released so far for this new installment. I went in completely blind to Scream VI, and I’m glad I did. Watching the trailers after the fact made me realize how many of the film’s surprising moments or interesting reveals are spoiled in advance, thanks to the marketing materials. If only studios would have more faith in their audiences and keep something hidden for paying customers!

A year after the horrific events in Woodsboro, sisters Samantha and Tara Carpenter and twins Chad and Mindy Meeks live in New York City while the twins and Tara attend Blackmore College. As Sam (Melissa Barrera, Carmen) deals with the knowledge of her link to original killer Billy Loomis and subsequent internet rumors regarding her involvement with the slayings, she remains protective over Tara (Jenna Ortega, X), who is just trying to hold down a typical college experience. A shocking set of murders disturbs whatever peace they seek, though, and soon their friend group is dwindling as a cunning killer dropping clues from the past slices their way closer and closer. 

Clocking in as the longest Scream film to date gives directors Matt Bettinelli-Olpin and Tyler Gillett (aka Radio Silence, responsible for the fun Ready or Not) more breathing room to let the movie’s first half build up the characters and interpersonal relationships more. That means when the violence does occur, it’s all the more shocking because it’s crashing through this continued healing the self-named Core Four are attempting to achieve. Thankfully, Sam and Tara’s new roommate Quinn (Liana Liberato, To the Stars) has an NYC cop (Dermot Mulroney, The Inhabitant) for a dad, and he teams up with FBI Agent and fellow Ghostface survivor Kirby Reed (Panettiere, Remember the Titans) to check out the potential killer. 

The list of suspects is long…at least at the beginning. No sooner does Mindy (Jasmin Savoy Brown, Sound of Violence) start taking a hard look at the potential killers than the natural process of elimination gets real bloody real quick. Stopping by to help out is legacy survivor Gale Weathers (Cox, You Cannot Kill David Arquette), now based in NY and eager to get to the bottom of who has started up another cycle of killings she is all too familiar with. Vanderbilt and Busick have several nice twists at the ready, keeping the viewer second-guessing whodunit it right up until the reveal, and it’s to everyone’s credit that the film has more than enough steam to keep the suspense high as it builds to a satisfying finale.

More than the previous three entries, Scream VI feels like a sequel that has matured dramatically from one installment to the next. It’s quite like Scream 2 in that regard (in several ways, actually), and perhaps that’s why I think Scream fans will respond to this one so well. There’s more emphasis on suspense here than violence, with a return to the nail-biting terror that served the first two Wes Craven-directed entries so well. I’m well aware this isn’t the last we’ll see of Ghostface, or these characters, so let’s hope this trilogy builds on the strong note Scream VI has struck.

The Art of the Tease(rs) ~ The Golden Child (1986)

by Movie Review • Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Occasionally, I’ll revive one of my old “special” columns from my early days. Formerly titled In Praise of Teasers, I’ve rebranded my look at coming attractions The Art of the Tease(rs) and brought it back for a short run over the next few weeks. 

Starting in 2013, I used these peeks at past previews to highlight the fun (and short!) creatively mounted campaigns that generated buzz from audiences who caught them in front of movies back in the day. Some of these I remember seeing myself, and some I never had the pleasure of watching. More than anything, it makes me long for studios and advertising agencies to go back to showing less in modern trailers because the amount of spoiler-heavy material shared now is ghastly. Today, where all aspects of a movie are pretty well known before an inch of footage is seen, the subtlety of a well-crafted “teaser” trailer is gone.

Let’s revisit some of the teaser trailers I fondly remember and, in a way, reintroduce them. Whether the actual movie was good or bad is neither here nor there but pay attention to how each of these teasers works uniquely to grab the attention of movie-goers.

The Golden Child (1986)

Looking for a movie to watch one night recently, I suggested The Golden Child because it had been some time since I had seen this 1986 Eddie Murphy action comedy. I remembered it being a minor speed bump in Murphy’s hot streak between the first two Beverly Hills Cop films but forgot how abysmal a slog it was. While not an outright bomb because of its Christmas release and audience devotion to what Murphy was selling back then, its reputation as a disaster has followed it like a curse, and very rightfully so. For an action movie, its pace is deadly, and as a comedy, it only comes alive when Murphy is let loose to work his magic. That the comedy frequently has little to do with the plot only shows you how disinterested everyone involved was with the finished product, something that makes sense when you hear how the film was massively changed during post-production. Originally intended as a more serious new direction for Murphy, poor test screenings scared studio execs into reshoots that scrapped a supposedly intelligent plot in favor of the incoherent mess it winds up as. It’s also got one of the worst scores ever, quickly composed dreck that replaced a more classical theme from John Barry.

On the flip side, the teaser trailer for The Golden Child, a rare find on YouTube, is exceptional. Filmed exclusively for this coming attraction, it uses a voiceover to lay out the plot and tacks on Murphy at the end to goose the audience with laughs. It’s no wonder they turned out in droves to see it. How disappointing that The Golden Child would be so leaden.

For more teasers, check out my posts on Exorcist II: The Heretic, Flashdance, Mortal Kombat, Strange Days, Fire in the Sky, The Fifth Element, The Addams Family, Alien, Misery, Bram Stoker’s Dracula, Showgirls, Jurassic Park, Jaws 3D/Jaws: The Revenge, Total Recall, Halloween II: Season of the Witch, Psycho (1998), The Game, In the Line of Fire

Movie Review ~ 80 for Brady

by Movie Review • Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The Facts:

Synopsis: Four old female friends travel to Houston to watch their hero Tom Brady and the New England Patriots play in Super Bowl LI
Stars: Lily Tomlin, Jane Fonda, Rita Moreno, Sally Field, Tom Brady, Billy Porter, Rob Corddry, Alex Moffat, Guy Fieri, Harry Hamlin, Bob Balaban, Glynn Turman, Sara Gilbert, Jimmy O. Yang, Ron Funches, Matt Lauria
Director: Kyle Marvin
Rated: PG-13
Running Length: 98 minutes
TMMM Score: (6/10)
Review: The moment I got into my car after the 80 for Brady screening, I sent my mom this text:

“You are going to LOVE 80 for Brady.”

She replied:

“Glud to his it.” (which I know translates to “Glad to hear it!”)

When it came time to sit down and write this review, I had a sinking realization. I didn’t love 80 for Brady. But I want my mom and her friends to see it because I know they will. This is another one of those movies that must be taken with a certain grain of salt and an understanding that perhaps when the filmmakers of this good-natured comedy got together to create this project, they didn’t have my demographic in mind. And that’s OK.  In my book, it didn’t need to be a touchdown to be a home run for someone else (see what a did there?).

I could say that I wish the talents of the celebrated stars (three Oscar winners and one Oscar nominee) had been used in a tighter script and a production that didn’t feel so inexpensive and tacky. One that didn’t rest on jokes about retirement homes, broken bones, senility, and getting randy after 70+ years. I long for a movie about older people that won’t use terminal illness as a Sword of Damocles-ish way to get them out of their houses and live their lives. And I really could do with less of the lusty single octogenarians who have been divorced multiple times but still somehow need to be shamed about their late-in-life romantic foibles.

80 for Brady has all of that, which was a bummer for me and why I didn’t enjoy it as much as I could have. I’m grading it for what it could have been because that’s my job here. If we look at it from the view of people excited by the prospect of seeing the likes of Lily Tomlin (Grandma), Jane Fonda (Book Club), Rita Moreno (West Side Story), and Sally Field (Spoiler Alert) hitting the road for comic shenanigans as they try to get into the 2017 Super Bowl, the outlook is far sunnier.

Fans of these pros will undoubtedly be swept away (as was the audience I saw it with) by the story, inspired by a true tale of four women so enamored with their love of football and one particular team/player that they trekked to Houston to see the big game. Elements of the story have been changed for the movie, and screenwriters Sarah Haskins and Emily Halpern crafted more personal backstories for each.

Tomlin’s Lou is a cancer survivor and de facto leader of the group, bringing them all together in football during her treatment. Trish (Fonda) loves a wig and falls head over hairpiece for any handsome man that comes her way. Still adjusting to being a widow, Maura (Moreno) can’t give up her apartment or the room in the senior living center she’s been keeping at the ready. Then there’s Betty (Field), an empty nest-er that finds herself having to play mother to her needy husband (Bob Balaban, Fading Gigolo). 

All the women are ready for this road trip, and while the details of how they get on the road are sketchy (don’t even get me started on how three of them “break” Maura out of her elder care), arriving in Houston poses another set of problems. An admittedly funny romp at a mansion where all four unknowingly get stoned adds some zip at the midway point. Still, aside from a brief bit of zing from the appearance of Billy Porter (Like a Boss) as a choreographer with connections, unnecessary drama threatens to derail what, up until then, had been a mild and cheery outing. 

Director Kyle Marvin makes his feature film directing debut, and it shows. While the sets don’t look nearly as sound stagey as they did on Tomlin and Fonda’s Netflix series Grace & Frankie, most of them appear like the paint is still wet or a strong gust of wind could knock them over. Continuity is a problem, as is general logic throughout. Technical nitpicks are largely thrown out the door when you are being stared down by any of the imposing stars. All four exude such bright light that it makes 80 for Brady almost impossible to dismiss entirely. One thing is for sure. If you can’t get in touch with your mom/grandmother this weekend – check your local listing for the showing of 80 for Brady closest to them, and you’ll know where they are.

31 Days to Scare ~ Venom (1981)

by 31 Days to Scare, Movie Review • Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The Facts:

Synopsis: Terrorists in the process of kidnapping a child get trapped in a house with an extremely deadly snake.
Stars: Klaus Kinski, Oliver Reed, Nicol Williamson, Sarah Miles, Sterling Hayden, Lance Holcomb, Susan George, Cornelia Sharpe, Michael Gough
Director: Piers Haggard
Rated: R
Running Length: 92 minutes
TMMM Score: (6/10)
Review:  I could imagine a viewer in 1981 standing in front of the poster for Venom seen above and scratching their head in confusion. Referring to The Birds, Psycho, The Omen, and Jaws call to mind four classic but drastically different horror experiences. Even if you lifted the elements from all four films the poster indicated, it couldn’t quite describe the odd appeal of Venom or its continued life on the periphery of the genre. I have had this one on my ‘to-do’ list for some time but kept delaying, thinking it was one of those half-hearted productions that lured stars in need of cash. Surprisingly, a good deal of money seems to have been invested in it, though it’s debatable how well it was all spent.

Not expressly a creature feature but not without its share of jump-out-of-your-seat moments thanks to a reptile on the loose, Venom had a troubled production that resulted in an uneven film. Original director Tobe Hooper (Poltergeist, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre) was replaced after the first week, and new director Piers Haggard arrived to find a cast and crew at odds with one another. Haggard went on record later saying the snake was the nicest member of the cast to work with if that indicates the atmosphere on the set. With strong personalities like the infamously eccentric Klaus Kinski and combative Oliver Reed, not to mention stalwart Sterling Hayden, you can understand how the film starts to cater more toward its human stars than its central antagonist. That’s especially disappointing because the first 40 minutes of the film are gripping.

A wealthy American family living in London is targeted by a kidnapping plot meticulously plotted from within their household. Mother Ruth Hopkins (Cornelia Sharpe) is hesitant to leave her asthmatic son Philip (Lance Holcomb) for a few days in the care of her father Howard (Hayden), who is recovering in their home after an illness. Still, the family’s British maid Louise (Susan George, Fright) and chauffeur Dave (Reed, The Brood) know Philip’s routine, and it’s a school holiday, so there’s little to be worried over. That is until Louise’s secret lover Jacques Müller (Kinski, Nosferatu) arrives to help the house staff carry out plans to kidnap Philip and hold him for ransom.

Never underestimate the plans of a naughty boy and his irascible grandpa, though. While Ruth thinks her son and father are going to lay low (the script is so freewheeling with exposition that Sharpe has the line, ‘You need to be careful of your asthma since we’re in London, but at least you’re with your grandfather while I’m away for the weekend. Well, at least there’s no school for a few days. Just don’t go out.”) they’ve planned for the boy to travel alone to an exotic animal store and pick up a new harmless house snake to add to his home zoo. A mix-up at the store has sent his purchase to Dr. Marion Stowe (Sarah Miles) at the Institute of Toxicology though; he unknowingly goes home with a deadly black mamba.

It doesn’t take long for the snake to pop out and cause massive problems for the kidnappers and potential victims, adding an extra layer of danger for all. To put even more pressure on the situation, the police are tipped off about the kidnapping and surround the tiny flat, forcing Jacques to take more desperate measures to escape capture. With a slithering predator moving silently around the house, a nest of criminal vipers crafting their next move, and London’s finest rallying outside, the race is on to see who will strike first.

If you have any fear of snakes, Venom will surely crank up that blood pressure at the outset. Waiting for the snake to appear makes for more than a few deliriously fun sequences, and even watching the camera (standing in for the snake) slowly gliding through the air ducts is enough to make your hairs stand on end. I don’t have the greatest affinity for these reptiles and admit that when the mamba makes its first appearance, it comes as a significant shock. If only the rest of the elements in the film lived up to that initial thrill.

The further the movie gets away from being about the snake and more about the trio of criminals (and the police outside), the less interesting it becomes. These are all fine actors, but we bought a ticket to Venom, not Kidnapper Talks to Police. When the film should be surging into its final act, it’s still fooling around with Kinski and Reed’s shameless mugging for the camera. Hayden sometimes gets a bit into the action but largely rises above those shenanigans. I liked Miles as the knowing doctor, and George was fun as a femme fatale that should be more careful about what dark places she peers into. George has one of the trickiest acting exercises in the film, one that Kinski must recreate later, but the younger actress comes off far better than Kinski’s comically overbaked take.

It can’t hold a candle to the movies it name drops on its poster, but, like its marketing, Venom manages to get the job done and serve its purpose at the time. I’m surprised no one has attempted to remake it over the years because the story, while containing far-fetched elements, is a more believable set-up than you’d think. Movies like Crawl can make us believe someone can be stuck in a house with a crocodile; why not re-do Venom with a more restrained cast and tighter directing?

Movie Review ~ Dangerous Game: The Legacy Murders

by Movie Review • Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

The Facts:

Synopsis: A family reunion at a remote mansion takes a lethal turn when they are trapped inside and forced to play a deadly survival game where only one will make it out alive.
Stars: Jonathan Rhys Meyers, Will Sasso, Jon Voight, Laura Mennell, Megan Charpentier, Kaya Coleman, Skyler Shaye, Dylan Playfair, Bradley Stryker
Director: Sean McNamara
Rated: R
Running Length: 96 minutes
TMMM Score: (2/10)
Review:  Each critic has their standards for evaluating a movie. Some keep (like me) keep it broad, which makes it easier to treat each film with a certain amount of fairness. This is why I can post a review of a classic such as In the Heat of the Night and newer work like Heathers: The Musical and give them nearly the same score but not necessarily equate them as the same kind of “good” movie. The one criterion I have is universal, no matter what: the taste level. I think every movie, even the bad ones, can eek out a fraction of good taste, and those that can’t manage to instantly have to start at the bottom and work their way up on my scoresheet.

Barely twenty minutes have passed in Dangerous Game: The Legacy Murders before someone sent a small cat down a garbage disposal, an act that has zero bearing on anything else that happens in the film. The act may illustrate a character trait that comes into play later, but it’s so vile (with poorly executed VFX, I might add) that I briefly considered skipping the rest of the film altogether. That the film doubles down and shows us the aftermath is even more alarming. It’s not as if I believed the unmistakable stuffed animal with its limbs shredded and covered in red sauce was real. Still, that director Sean McNamara (The King’s Daughter) kept it in makes you wonder who drove the ship for this ill-advised mystery thriller.

The kitty disposal bit is sadly not the first of many questionable choices that happen within this film, a lame Knives Out knockoff that doesn’t have the star power or the creative writing to get in the hemisphere of the ingenuity that 2019 movie crafted. Instead, we have Jonathan Rhys Meyers (WifeLike) and Will Sasso (The Three Stooges) as brothers gathering to celebrate the 80th birthday of their much-hated patriarch, Oscar-winner Jon Voight (Anaconda). With their significant others and children in tow, the clan travels to Voight’s secluded island, where his stately mansion becomes a death trap, and a peculiar game arrives that, when played, reveals family secrets that should have stayed buried.

Often, you find yourself with a movie that starts with a strong set-up or working from a place of promise only to go downhill, dragged into the depths by its unrealized potential. That’s not the case with Dangerous Game: The Legacy Murders. It starts badly, with a prologue that drops you right into confusing action, and ends worse. Nearly every character is morally bankrupt and reprehensible, and the one that potentially has a kind bone in their body gets dealt the most unbelievably gruesome demise imaginable. We’re talking organ-removing while still alive territory, ala the board game Operation.

With Voight objectively terrible performing an oddly specific impression of a good friend of his who shall remain nameless (let’s call him Ronald Grump), Sasso grossly overeating the scenery, and Rhys Meyers outrageously miscast based on his age, I’m almost wondering if this was meant to be a comedy and I just missed the memo. Or maybe the actors missed it. Or perhaps everyone involved was just collectively making their own movie and didn’t discuss it with one another. That’s how it honestly feels as you’re watching it. Nothing makes a lick of sense in Dangerous Game: The Legacy Murders, and for a mystery dependent on the pieces fitting together, that’s a problem.

Movie Review ~ Smile (2022)

by Movie Review • Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

The Facts:

Synopsis: After witnessing a bizarre, traumatic incident involving a patient, Dr. Rose Cotter starts experiencing frightening occurrences that she can’t explain. As an overwhelming terror begins taking over her life, Rose must confront her troubling past to survive and escape her horrifying new reality.
Stars: Sosie Bacon, Jessie T. Usher, Kyle Gallner, Caitlin Stasey, Kal Penn, Rob Morgan, Robin Weigert, Judy Reyes
Director: Parker Finn
Rated: R
Running Length: 115 minutes
TMMM Score: (8/10)
Review:  While I’m happy that movie theaters have gotten back into full swing and we’re able to experience films made for the big screen in the larger-than-life projection as they were initially intended, there’s a cold truth that must be said. It’s still annoying to deal with audiences that simply don’t care about preserving the art of movie-going with the same magic it used to have before technology, bad manners, and entitlement took over. The texting remains as bad as ever, loud talking with disregard for other patrons is still there, and general apathy toward the personal space of the people around you is firmly in place. Don’t believe me? Tell it to the gentleman and his date I had to sit a few rows behind the other day who used their shiny phones to brightly correspond with friends while putting their feet up on top of the (occupied!) seats in front of them.  

For all these bad apple audiences, when you find yourself in one that not only plays by the rules but adds their bit of fun, you remember again why a communal spirit is an integral part of the shared movie-going experience. Watching the nerve-rattling new horror film Smile, the audience (for once, a nice mix of ages and races that represents a broad spectrum of ticket-buyer) came to get their bones rattled. You could feel the energy building the scarier the film got and the more reactions from row to row. Even a rogue talker providing color commentary, usually a source of ire for me, successfully landed some well-timed zingers that didn’t impede the mood.

I’ve been in audiences like this when a movie is terrible (like the time a thirtysomething man was laughing so hard at the 2007 Lindsay Lohan debacle I Know Who Killed Me he literally fell out of his seat and rolled down the aisle) but with a movie like Smile, which is far better than average, you know early on how forgiving an audience will be. Because Smile is pretty silly if you dwindle on any significant part of the plot, not that writer/director Parker Finn stays in one place for too long in his film that’s, coincidentally, too long. From a prologue that sets a tone of uneasiness that continues throughout to a dedicated embrace of all the tricks in the genre playbook, Smile is aggressively coming for your screams and won’t stop until it gets it. It got me; it will get you.

Hospital emergency ward therapist Dr. Rose Cotter (Sosie Bacon) is dedicated to her work and helping patients through traumatic events. In the few brief character-building moments we have with her as the film opens, we get the impression her passion for care often outweighs what she can reasonably offer from a medical or emotional standpoint. She’s supposed to be headed home for a well-earned rest when she takes one last admit, a tormented patient (Caitlin Stasey) that speaks of a presence stalking her that only she can see. Before Rose can learn more, the patient commits a crazed act of self-harm that serves as the starting point for Rose’s descent into her paranoia of supernatural menace.

Unable to do her job effectively, her boss (Kal Penn) puts her on leave, while her fiancé (Jesse T. Usher) doesn’t know what to do to stop a growing madness from taking over. A visit to Rose’s therapist (the excellent Robin Weigert, Bombshell) fills in some blanks into Rose’s childhood and the trauma endured that has followed her around ever since. Were these demons reawakened when she bore witness to the recent violence, or has a curse transferred to her, a curse now working as a doomsday clock counting down to a similar gory fate?

Drawing bits and pieces from films like The Ring, Drag Me to Hell, and a little bit of It Follows, Smile is set apart by a style and sophisticated production elements which give it a prominent studio sheen. Indeed, Paramount’s 17-million-dollar investment has been used wisely, with special effects from legendary masters of the craft Alec Gillis and Tom Woodruff Jr.  Spending your money where it counts provides the film with calling card frights. These nightmare-inducing images leap out from the dark at you, accompanied by a sting of dissonant music from Cristobal Tapia de Veer. 

Finn uses the score and sound effects to keep you on your toes. Sure, much of the screeching jolts feel like cheap ways to goose you into a reaction, and yet they work like walking through a haunted house when there’s an endless parade of scares while you traverse down a hallway. With frights jumping out at you from every angle, it’s natural that you will jump right when you are directed to because that is the point. The same is true here. The cheap scares are one thing, but the earned ones (and there are quite a few) are dandy. Consider getting a lid for your popcorn and a seat belt for your chair, so you don’t levitate right out of your seat.

We’re on a great run of horror films lately (The Black Phone, Barbarian, House of Darkness), and Smile continues that streak. I loved watching this one and how unrelenting it was in its mission to mine us for all the shrieks it could.   Even the short title design cast its particular mood on this viewer. Those unwilling to have that joy buzzer scare will likely emerge from Smile feeling used. Understanding what it’s purposely doing and how it aims for the extreme versions of overused motifs will give you something to flash your pearly whites for.

Movie Review ~ Top Gun: Maverick

2
by Movie Review • Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The Facts:

Synopsis: When he finds himself training a detachment of Top Gun graduates for a specialized mission the likes of which no living pilot has ever seen, Pete “Maverick” Mitchell faces an uncertain future while confronting the ghosts of his past, culminating in a mission that demands the ultimate sacrifice from those who will be chosen to fly it.
Stars: Tom Cruise, Jennifer Connelly, Jon Hamm, Ed Harris, Glen Powell, Lewis Pullman, Danny Ramirez, Monica Barbaro, Manny Jacinto, Val Kilmer
Director: Joseph Kosinski
Rated: PG-13
Running Length: 131 minutes
TMMM Score: (10/10)
Review:  I think it’s safe to say that we’ve had our share of star movies over the past several years. You know what I’m talking about, too. Films that are the real draw more than any living, breathing actor or actress appearing in the picture. It’s like a long-running Broadway show in that, at a certain point, it doesn’t matter who is playing the leading role; it all depends on if the audience is willing to pay out money to see the machine at work. A seemingly endless stream of Marvel, DC Comics, franchise, and known content have clogged up theaters even before the pandemic, and now that’s all audiences want to spend their money on. It takes a bold movie with hot word of mouth (like the ongoing box office smash Everything Everywhere All at Once) to break through the noise. And it takes a movie star.

If anyone could bust through that wall of sound, it’s going to be an actor that’s been literally trying to break the sound barrier for years. Superstar Tom Cruise has had his fair share of bad press during his career and especially over the past half-decade, but what he continues to deliver is a breathlessly impressive supply of limit-pushing adventures that put the capital “C” in Cinema and remind you why you pay that extra fee to watch movies on the most giant screen you can find. His Mission: Impossible films have morphed from the kitschy fun of the original to mind-boggling action epics. Last onscreen in 2018’s Mission: Impossible – Fallout, with a two-part capper to his Ethan Hunt character from that series starting in 2023, Cruise is sliding back into theaters with a film that has been finished for a few years but has been delayed due to the pandemic. 

For a while, it felt like a sequel to the bombastic classic 1986 film Top Gun would never see a theatrical release. Already coming off to some like a stretch project thirty years too late, Cruise made it a point to let detractors know he’d been approached for a follow-up on multiple occasions, but it wasn’t until now that a script came together that felt right. With better technology and the opportunity to have actors trained to fly the jets (and film themselves as well!), Cruise could give fans a second chapter that would be worth waiting for. No one could have expected how long the wait would be, though. Intended for release in July 2019 (yes, 2019), it was bumped back for a myriad of reasons along the way. The important thing is that Cruise held out to keep Top Gun: Maverick from being a victim of the studio’s wave of pandemic straight-to-streaming offloads…and we should be forever grateful.

Thirty years into his career in the U.S. Navy, Captain Pete “Maverick” Mitchell (Cruise, Rock of Ages) has remained a test pilot, passing up promotions to stay airborne and avoid the dreaded desk job of senior officers. Currently working on a hypersonic test jet at the film’s start, when he breaks protocol and is targeted by a commanding officer for permanent grounding, he’s called back to familiar territory at San Diego’s Top Gun training program. His skills are needed to oversee a new mission carried out by an elite group of the best recent graduates, many of whom weren’t even born when he was in their shoes. One of the pilots, Rooster (Miles Teller, The Spectacular Now), isn’t thrilled to see Maverick onsite due to their complicated family history. Fans of the original will make the connection (and it’s no spoiler), but I’ll let screenwriters Ehren Kruger (Dumbo), Erin Warren Singer (Only the Brave), and frequent Cruise collaborator Christopher McQuarrie (Jack Reacher) connect the dots while you watch.

Rekindling a romance with old flame Penny (a barely-there character from the original and the substitute for Kelly McGillis, who, like Meg Ryan, sadly doesn’t return for the sequel, though other familiar faces do), Maverick balances questioning the need for stability at his age with, well, feeling the need for speed. You can guess what wins most of the time, but credit Cruise and Jennifer Connelly (Alita: Battle Angel) as Penny for creating a mature, age-appropriate relationship that is allowed to take center stage believably and often without a lot of dialogue. Connelly is so good (and eternally, impossibly beautiful) at conveying whole paragraphs with just an eye movement, that she makes one of the best Cruise love interests I’ve seen in quite some time. It’s the kind of non-mushy romantic involvement that even audiences coming for full-throttle action won’t mind pausing for.

Not that the film doesn’t have the pulse-pounding, nail-biting action to keep you alternately on the edge of your seat or pushed back gripping your armrests. Making good use of the IMAX cameras it was filmed on and incredible cinematography seamlessly blending the actual flying from any green screen, it’s as realistic an action-adventure as you’ll see this side of a documentary or Navy-approved training video. Credit to Cruise and the actors for going the distance and putting in the work to make it look accurate. Working with a mission more in-depth than the first film could have brought more complex challenges to keeping engagement, but it’s an easy-to-follow film with easy-to-root for high stakes.

Like an authentic ’80s summer sweltering blockbuster, it has a power anthem from Lady Gaga with a needle drop at a perfect position. It was a fantastic move to have its theme weaved into the score throughout. I still like the Oscar-winning Giorgio Moroder/Berlin song from the first film best, but I am glad Gaga and Hans Zimmer didn’t simply remake that classic. Gaga has a serious chance to win another songwriting Oscar for her fist-raising barn burner that rounds out one of the most enjoyable times I’ve had at the movies in my recent memory. If you’ve been waiting weeks, months, or years (?) to head back to the theater…Top Gun: Maverick is the film to break your fast. See it on an IMAX screen as big as you can find with a great sound system and you’ll get the full impact. Waiting until streaming will not do at all. Top Gun: Maverick is a must-see in general, but you can’t miss it in the movie theater.

Welcome to Summer 2022.