The Farewell Party - Movie Review by Michael Clawson

The Farewell Party  

Starring: Ze'ev Revach, Aliza Rosen, Levana Finkelstein, Ilan Dar

Directors: Tal Granit, Sharon Maymon

Release Date: June 12, 2015

by Michael Clawson of Terminal Volume

There is dignity in death and The Farewell Party searches for it in humorous bursts of empathy.

It begins with an elderly tinkerer ringing up an older woman. “This is God,” he says, and the woman, senile and confused, believes him. “You are certainly going to heaven, but we have no vacancies, so you must get your treatment.” The woman nods.

At this point you realize you’re in for for something very unique, and likely heartbreaking.

The tinkerer is Yehezkel (Ze’ev Recach) and he is watching his best friend suffer in pain in a care facility. His prognosis is terminal. Morphine no longer works, and he’s developing bedsores that are increasingly painful. His wife, at the end of her rope, suggests they end his agony and the gears in Yehezkel’s head begin spinning.

What happens next is a devastating examination of mercy as Yehezkel and his band of helpers plan, build and implement a euthanasia machine. The device is crude -- it is driven by a small motor and a bicycle chain, and uses drugs intended for animals -- but it is effective at ending the suffering of Yehezkel’s “patients,” who seek him out at great risk for themselves and their loved ones.

The Farewell Party handles all this in a serious way, but you can’t help but smile at its subtle brand of bleak comedy, from the gay man literally trapped in the closet and an overzealous traffic cop repeatedly talked out of writing tickets, to a touching scene with much of the elderly cast nude and high in a greenhouse to cheer up a friend with dementia. The gallows humor manages to give brief reprieves between each heartbreaking death.

The Israeli film, directed by Tal Granit and Sharon Maymon, is beautifully staged and photographed. The camera almost never moves, preferring instead static shots that give the scenes and their terrifying implications reverence. When it does move, in a lovely musical number and later in a tragic moment of realization for Yehezkel, it does so to punctuate the delicate nature of life and death.

It ends precisely where you want it to, but it stings even as it rings true. This is a beautiful film, one that gazes long and hard into the soul of the dying, and those who look over them.

Jurassic World - Movie Review by Michael Clawson

Jurassic World  

Starring Chris Pratt, Bryce Dallas Howard, Vincent D’Onofrio, Omar Sy, Judy Greer, and Nick Robinson

Directed by Colin Trevorrow

Rated PG-13

Run Time: 124 minutes

Genre: Action-Adventure/Sci-Fi

Opens June 12th

by Michael Clawson of Terminal Volume

Jurassic World desperately craves 1993, when CGI was in its infancy, the internet was not in wide use, and when dinosaurs could inspire awe and wonder from all who gazed upon them. Just picture the film as a Scooby Doo villain, an old crotchety man shaking his fist: “If it weren’t for those meddling kids and their Tweeter and their Facepages, then this park would be the greatest park ever.”

I’m not one to miss the 1990s, but Jurassic World makes me yearn for those halcyon years, before we became cynical and jaded, before we started turning our back on the Mona Lisa to take selfies with selfie sticks, before we started thumbing our nose at the marvelous. That’s the attitude of Jurassic World, in which a theme park with living, breathing, chomping dinosaurs is struggling to pay its bills because “no one is impressed by dinosaurs anymore.” Times are so tough that they have bio-engineer the Indominus Rex, whose DNA is a chunky stew of other creatures’ chromosomes. Kids these days, the film laments, they just want their phones, their Snapchat, and a hoodie to retreat into. One character has to be reminded to put his smartphone down to see a Titanic-sized sea monster gobble a great white the way we crunch on goldfish crackers.

This is Jurassic World’s most fundamental failure: it wants us to believe that a theme park with dinosaurs would get old. Lions, tigers and elephants have existed longer than man has, yet we still line up to gaze at them at zoos, so what makes Jurassic World thinks we’d be bored with cloned dinosaurs? It’s an idiotic concept that produces no fruit, just leafless limbs that end in broken stumps, and it’s a premise that the entirety of the film is grown around. More on that later.

Jurassic World has many failings, but it is, first and foremost, a rip-roaring dino-adventure. If you watched the first three films and thought “not enough dinosaurs” then this fourth entry in the franchise has you covered in every combination imaginable: I-Rex on raptor, mosasaurus on I-Rex, pterodactyl on human, human on raptor, T-Rex on human, T-Rex on I-Rex … so many variations that it sounds like an erotic personals section in a paleolithic newspaper. The scenes are long and action-packed, and they give heroic treatment to dinosaurs that were only glimpsed at in previous films. The velociraptors, so often the villains in the other pictures, are essentially good-guy sidekicks here. Think of them as trained orcas at SeaWorld, another disaster park with deadly man-eating attractions.

The raptors are trained by Owen (Chris Pratt), who was with them when they hatched and who now oversees their development as park stars. They may know tricks, but they’re still deadly predators as we see in an early scene involving a rookie taking a spill into their pen. (My question here is why didn’t Owen use the raptor flute from the third movie, but then I remembered that even a raptor flute is too ridiculous for this movie.) Owen has to fight back a corporate stooge who wants to militarize the raptors into some kind of living battle-drones. I wish I could tell you this character was played by Paul Reiser from Aliens, but I cannot — he is played by Vincent D’Onofrio who actually has the line, “These things would have been great in Tora Bora.” At the conclusion of this line the sound of 400 collective eye-rolls was loud enough to fill the theater in 3D sound.

Owen flirts occasionally with park director Claire (Bryce Dallas Howard), who is busy negotiating deals around the park, including a Verizon Wireless sponsorship —”what’s next, the Pepsisaurus?” a computer tech asks. (Yes, says Pepsi.) Clair is hosting her nephews, Zach and Gray, who are taking some time for themselves so their parents can divorce, because what you want in a dinosaur movie is lots and lots of family drama.

As Zach and Gray set off into Jurassic World the film wonderfully establishes the setting as a working theme park, something way beyond what even Jurassic founder John Hammond could have hoped to achieve. There are canoe trips down brontosaurus-lined rivers, herbivore tours inside glass gyro-bubbles, an aviary with winged creatures, and many opportunities to watch carnivores gobble up their lunches in bloody clouds of pink mist. The mosasaurus exhibit is especially nifty: the bleachers begin at the topside at the lagoon with live feedings, and then they lower behind glass walls to get submerged views of the croc-like monster. An absolutely adorable petting zoo with pudgy little leaf eaters makes an appearance as well, and it is cuteness overload.

People look like they’re having a lot of fun, but the evil “board” doesn’t like sagging numbers, so they greenlight the I-Rex, which is smarter than any character in the film and has heat-vision like the Predator. And this is where Jurassic World loses its damned mind. The dinosaur itself is awesome, but its existence, its origins, its supernatural powers … it’s all a bit much. Of course it escapes, of course it goes on a killing rampage, and of course every human character suddenly decides it’s time to make the worst decisions of their lives. I want smarter characters in a movie about the genius of mankind. Instead I get Claire, who would rather watch dinosaurs regurgitate half-chewed guests then evacuate the park; Owen, who carries a John Wayne-style lever-action rifle when everyone else carries machine guns; the military guy who apparently has a contract from Weyland-Yutani; and the Jurassic’s CEO, who fatefully admits in his first scene that he’s got two more days of flying to get his helicopter pilot's license. Yep, that helicopter is totally crashing.

The characters in the original Jurassic Park were guilty of hubris and for “playing God,” but they were generally smart people taken down by a computer hacker with selfish motives. In Jurassic World, though, the gruesome deaths — including one entirely unnecessary devouring of Zach and Grey’s wedding-planning babysitter — are entirely linked to the complete and utter stupidity of the plot, its characters and director Colin Trevorrow, who jams so much garbage into his film that you have to wonder if he really wanted to make a movie about dinosaurs at all.

The biggest failure, though, is that Jurassic World truly believes that dinosaurs alone aren’t enough, which is why it throws in a romance, family drama, battle-raptors, sulking teens, obsessive marketing mavens and that hulking bio-fabricated dinosaur. “We have to up the wow factor,” one characters says.

“They’re dinosaurs — they’re wow enough,” responds Owens. Amen to that.

Jurassic World - Movie Review by Monte Yazzie

Jurassic World  

Diectorr: Colin Trevorrow

Starring: Bryce Dallas Howard, Chris Pratt, Nick Robinson, Ty Simpkins, B.D. Wong, Vincent D’Onofrio, Omar Sy, and Irrfan Khan

123 Min

Universal Pictures

Cue the music, open the gates, light the torches…the park is open and the dinosaurs are back. It’s been more than twenty years since Steven Spielberg’s “Jurassic Park” roared into theaters in 1993, bringing a blend of practical and computer-generated special effects that changed the landscape of what was possible with visual storytelling. The prehistoric came to life, spawning two sequels and now Colin Trevorrow’s “Jurassic World”. The vision of Jurassic Park from the first film has come to operational life in a corporate driven amusement park bent on bigger and badder dinosaurs. And the results are as expected, “Jurassic World” amps up the dinosaur action with exciting sequences making it feel like a thrill ride while also paying homage to the original film with clever nods and telling humor. However, the action adventure aspect is just half the ride, albeit the half most fans will be coming for. The second half, where narrative and character development exists, is where “Jurassic World” barely meets the height requirement.

John Hammond (the late Richard Attenborough) envisioned Jurassic Park as an amusement park, though things didn’t end up so well. Fast forward twenty years and Jurassic World has been operational for a few years, shipping in visitors on boats and running a theme park with shows and interactive rides. Zach (Nick Robinson) and Gray (Ty Simpkins) are on their way to visit their Aunt Claire (Bryce Dallas Howard), who is the uptight and organized manager of the park. With corporate sponsors wanting new attractions the executives of the park decide to genetically build new dinosaurs; one specifically meant to be the mightiest attraction is called Indominus Rex. Things go terribly amiss leading Claire and former Navy man Owen (Chris Pratt), who is training velociraptors, on the hunt for the new deadly dinosaur.

“No one is impressed by dinosaurs anymore”. This comment from Bryce Dallas Howard’s character is all too telling. While Stan Winston’s practical creations for “Jurassic Park” still hold strong, movies are creating all forms of goliath computer generated monsters now, making the sights seen in 1993 a commonplace. So it’s not surprising that “Jurassic World” feels more like a monster movie than any of the films before. Indominus Rex is a monster built by man that stalks and hunts, killing anything that gets in the way and progressively moving towards a population of people. The CGI dinosaur designs are impressive, Indominus Rex is intimidating, the velociraptors are still shrewd, and a new water creature steals an early scene by jumping out of the water and eating a great white shark. These are just a few of the many new species on display.

Colin Trevorrow, who last directed the amusing science fiction comedy “Safety Not Guaranteed”, understands what this film is meant to offer, which is a visual feast of dinosaur action. On that account he succeeds with flying colors. However, there is also a narrative and human characters that need attention too. It’s a shame that two great actors like Bryce Dallas Howard and Chris Pratt are saddled with weak dialogue in a relationship scenario that is easily expected. Chris Pratt plays the role of trainer fairly straightforward without the comedy that is usually attributed to his characters, for much of the time it works. Bryce Dallas Howard is also good, her character is initially unfeeling and all business however changes once her nephews are placed in danger. The narrative starts promising, structuring the past events into connection with the present while also displaying how the science of past has been innovated to create for the future. There are other elements that, regardless of how awesome they may seem, fall apart once implemented. The side story with velociraptors being trained for military operations feels like an idea doomed from the beginning, though it serves as easy exposition to move the film from one place to another. Still, velociraptors running alongside a motorcycle is pure summer movie excitement.

“Jurassic World” will be watched and rewatched all summer long, it’s the kind of film that will draw in new audiences and satisfy the prehistoric sensations of fans. While it may not live up to all the lofty expectations, it never disappoints in providing the viewer with dinosaur indulgence.

Monte’s Rating

3.00 out of 5.00

Jurassic World - Movie Review by Eric Forthun

Jurassic World  

Starring Chris Pratt, Bryce Dallas Howard, Vincent D'Onofrio, Omar Sy, Judy Greer, and Nick Robinson

Directed by Colin Trevorrow

Rated PG-13

Run Time: 124 minutes

Genre: Action-Adventure/Sci-Fi

Opens June 12th

By Eric Forthun of Cinematic Shadows

Jurassic Park was an exhilarating adventure from start to finish, driven by strong characters, a Spielbergian family core, and thematic resonance that lingered in practically every frame. Its two follow-ups, particularly the third installment, never regained the sense of wonder and spectacle that the first one's outstanding visual effects accomplished. That's primarily due to their belief that story came second and visuals triumphed emotion. Jurassic World follows that same mantra, albeit with a more self-aware touch and a modern relevance that feels shockingly advanced for a summer blockbuster. Riffs on product placement and meta commentary regarding the need to be "bigger" and "cooler" every few years in order to keep the public's attention occur in the first half hour to snickering satisfaction. It's unfortunate, then, that the film falls into those exact traps, brandishing Mercedes-Benz and Starbuck's cups like they're going out of style and including every familiar plot point from the first film but with more misogynistic characters. The result is an occasionally exciting, mostly mediocre effort that strives for social commentary but falls into overblown, mildly engaging fare.

The story opens on Isla Nublar, the home of the original Jurassic Park that has now been developed into Jurassic World. It's a theme park that feels like a mix of Disneyland and SeaWorld, even with the modern touch of animal cruelty through painful, lonely captivity (Blackfish slam!). The person in charge of running the park is Claire (Bryce Dallas Howard), a conventional career-driven woman that puts everything before family. She knows that her nephews, Gray (Ty Simpkins) and Zach (Nick Robinson), are coming to visit the park under her supervision per her sister's (Judy Greer) instructions, but she doesn't even supervise. She instead delegates that to her British assistant. Claire is under pressure from investors and merchandisers to deliver a new attraction in order to stimulate public interest; a dinosaur doesn't wow everyone anymore. They want something newer, bigger...scarier. If this sounds like sly commentary, it actually is. But when Claire seems to lose control of her new species, she calls upon one-time fling and raptor trainer Owen Grady (Guardians of the Galaxy's Chris Pratt) to come save the day, especially when military contractor Hoskins (Vincent D'Onofrio, whose career is finally picking up proper steam) poses a threat to the sanctity of the park.

The director here is Colin Trevorrow, who last made the Sundance hit Safety Not Guaranteed. It was a disarmingly effective science fiction comedy that hit practically every strong note in its narrative. He recently said in an interview that the writing here, which is done by four different peeps, crafts characters that fall into traditional gender tropes of previous generations. Oh, how he is sadly right. The first Jurassic Park utilized strong female characters and made an emotional connection between everyone, particularly the children. Here, the children are crafted as grating and annoying until they finally bond, but it takes too long to get there. A lot of mindless oogling at teenage girls occurs and halts the momentum. Claire, played well by Dallas Howard considering the limitations of the role, never moves past the "uptight career-oriented bitch" archetype until the last act. It's frustratingly old-fashioned and one-dimensional. Chris Pratt is respectable but he doesn't seem as settled as he was in his previously snarky big-screen efforts. Simply put, everything feels off when it comes to the performances, and the story doesn't do any of the characters much justice until the admittedly strong third act.

And that third act? It delivers a dino vs. dino epic battle that reminds of 2013's Pacific Rim in terms of its child-jumping-out-of-their-seats excitement. It's just a blast. Yet that violence is cartoony and appropriately animalized. When the film really starts to stray from the original is when it sensationalizes its human deaths, treating their bodies like pieces of meat and tossing them around the screen like rag dolls. While many of the casualties early on are dwelled on and treated with fragility, the latter ones mean nothing to the audience and the animals attacking them look like gross hybrids that aren't cool or exciting. It's mildly repulsive. Nonetheless, the story does have its merits, notably in the early developments when the Blackfish-esque undertones run rampant and preach for treating animals in captivity with respect, while recognizing that they are indeed wild animals that can snap at any given moment. Chris Pratt's Owen gets a few moments that truly work. The nostalgia, too, excels when spaced out, particularly the epic John Williams score we all know. For every element I enjoyed, another annoyed me. But I suppose Jurassic World delivers on audience expectations. I don't know if that's necessarily a good thing, though, as it falls far short of what Spielberg laid out 22 years ago.

Spy - Movie Review by Eric Forthun

Spy  

Starring Melissa McCarthy, Rose Byrne, Jason Statham, Jude Law, Allison Janney, and Miranda Hart

Directed by Paul Feig

Rated R

Run Time: 120 minutes

Genre: Comedy/Action

Opens June 5th

By Eric Forthun of Cinematic Shadows

Melissa McCarthy continues to prove that, when given ripe comedic material, she is one of the funniest actresses on the planet. After some misfires like Identity Thief and the thoroughly unpleasant Tammy, she re-teams with Paul Feig for Spy, their third collaboration following their previous endeavors Bridesmaids and The Heat. Feig's script is an emphatic statement of comedic authority, proving that his sense of comic timing is relatively flawless, particularly in making jokes after a scene already feels like it has run its course. That's a talent that other writers often attempt to emulate, instead bogging down their films with unnecessary improvisations or quips that fall flat. Feig does the exact opposite, riffing on the well-worn spy genre and infusing it with his own dash of feminine star power, using McCarthy, Rose Byrne (great as ever), and relative newcomer Miranda Hart. Together, they create a film that defies the norms of the action genre and makes a mockery of its masculinity, while simultaneously paying homage to their bloated plots and double-edged characters.

The film follows Susan Cooper (Melissa McCarthy), a desk-bound CIA analyst that guides her field agent, Bradley Fine (Jude Law), one of the agency's top men. She's been working with the agency for ten years, mostly content with her work as one of the finest technological minds in the company. When Fine disappears, though, and a conspiracy for the sale of a nuclear bomb to terrorist groups emerges, Cooper is chosen as a candidate to help save the world due to her unrecognizable self. CIA head Elaine Crocker (Allison Janney) has seen Cooper's footage from the academy and knows that she is one of the finest agents they've ever had. Because of the built-in misogyny in the workplace and the mentality that a woman could not do the work of an active agent, Cooper decided to delegate herself to desk work. Now is her time to shine, and her friend Nancy (Miranda Hart) is proud of her accomplishment, even if she is still stuck at a desk. Cooper is joined in the field, unwillingly, by smarmy, ridiculously masculine agent Rick Ford (Jason Statham), who can help her catch Rayna Boyanov (Rose Byrne), the woman behind the transactions leading to the bomb.

A lot happens in Spy, but the convoluted plot is intentionally meant to simultaneously confuse and thrill. In the film's opening moments, Feig establishes the narrative as a satire of the spy film, with Fine acting as a complete buffoon who needs the help of his "secretary" to get things done. In a summer fueled by female breakthroughs like Elizabeth Banks directing Pitch Perfect 2 and Charlize Theron owning the seemingly testosterone-fueled Mad Max: Fury Road, it still feels refreshing to see women getting the attention they deserve in comedies that decidedly hone the craft and make men secondary to the more engaging and realistic women. McCarthy is phenomenal, having her character form into a full-on spy that talks trash like no other; her motor is filthy and relentless, particularly in a scene where she makes a grown man cry because she points out his incompetence. Feig has a brilliant comedic touch at the end of that particular scene that makes it a hoot. Supporting actors like Statham and Byrne surprise with their acerbic lines and demeanors. Everyone is, quite simply, perfectly cast.

The story admittedly strays as its characters backstab each other countless times and twists seemingly come out of nowhere. But we know enough about these characters and their intentionally formed archetypes that when the twists emerge, they feel authentic to the types of characters that they are. While that may not make a lot of sense in writing, it will on screen. The subtlety to the film's power derives from the way it treats the leading ladies. Feig ensures that the film does not craft its women in the typical fantasy limelight, ensuring that no nudity is used to detract from their comedic talents or the narrative. Nor are there any particularly racist or sexist jokes, which may sound like a thing that all movies should avoid, but you'd be surprised with the types of sequels and mainstream entries this summer that have found those amusing. Nonetheless, the film contextualizes its jokes and derives them from the characters. Jokes do not pop out of nowhere or fall flat. They're either slapstick or character-driven. Feig's an immensely talented writer-director and him and McCarthy simply own the film, proving to be an apt comic duo. They make Spy not only the year's best comedy so far, but one of the year's best films.

Insidious: Chapter 3 - Movie Review by Eric Forthun

Insidious: Chapter 3  

Starring Dermot Mulroney, Stefanie Scott, Lin Shaye, Leigh Whannell, and Angus Sampson

Directed by Leigh Whannell

Rated PG-13

Run Time: 97 minutes

Genre: Horror

Opens June 5th

By Eric Forthun of Cinematic Shadows

Insidious: Chapter 3 shows remarkable signs of life for a series now entering its third film in five years. After a significant drop in quality from the delightfully terrifying first film to the mediocre, repetitive second film, the latest entry tells a story that takes place years before the events of the first two films. As a prequel, it surprisingly fills in the gaps of the previous films and creates a more linear, simplistic universe. It's singularly defined and surprisingly emotional, telling two narratives about people failing to let go of their loved ones and having evil spirits latch onto them. Lin Shaye also gets the defining role of the series, which allows her to expand upon her mysterious psychic Elise Rainier, giving her depth and narrative significance. Writer-director Leigh Whannell, who also wrote the first two films, uses her moments behind the screen to really put a signature on it, even if it has many of the same difficulties that the previous entries had. Too much family drama and not enough time in "the Further" make the film drag at moments, but the payoff is rewarding and quite scary.

This time around, the story follows Quinn Brenner (Stefanie Scott), a teenager who aspires to be an actress in New York City. Currently, though, she's going through her senior year of high school and cannot wait to get out of her father's hands. Sean (Dermot Mulroney) is a struggling widow that works tirelessly and does not have the time to shop for food for his children; rather, he delegates many of the conventionally motherly tasks to Quinn, who already has a lot on her plate. Quinn often talks to her mother and occasionally gets responses, although she knows that communicating with the dead can be a tricky craft. She contacts Elise (Lin Shaye), the gifted psychic that vowed she would never work with the outside world again. We know based on the events of the first two films that it's just silly. Elise explains to Quinn that communicating with the dead may not always reach the good; rather, when you talk with the non-living, every single deceased person can hear you. That means that Quinn has malevolent spirits coming after her, and a near-death experience causes one to latch onto her with no intentions of letting go.

This entity that grasps onto Quinn drives the entire narrative, which is decidedly old-fashioned and rare nowadays in horror. Because the story employs a single villain, it makes for an admittedly slow journey that finally gains traction as the characters start to navigate into the world of the dead. The Insidious films have consistently kept the same tone and feel, whether that be in the opening moments with the violent musical screeches over the title or the dark, cloudy world of the afterlife. The film's most defining moments are its jump scares, which won't really linger long after viewing. But there are genuinely terrifying moments, most notably as Quinn is put in leg casts and rendered defenseless for much of the film. There's a scene that sent shivers down my spines but I won't spoil it. The fact remains, though, that story trumps scares when it comes to horror, and Insidious: Chapter 3 delivers with two strong female characters that are defined by their sense of loss. It also acts as the catalyst for the events of the entire series. As a third piece of a puzzle, it holds pretty well, and stands on its own better than the previous two entries.

Entourage - Movie Review by Monte Yazzie

Entourage  

Director: Doug Ellin

Starring: Kevin Connolly, Adrian Grenier, Kevin Dillon, Jerry Ferrara, Jeremy Piven, Emmanuelle Chriqui, Haley Joel Osment, and Billy Bob Thornton

105 Minutes

Warner Bros. Pictures

“Entourage” had a cable television run from 2004 to 2011. It was a television series that ran the familiar gamut of staying around for a few seasons too long, rehashing tired ideas and beating the same jokes into unfunny submission. Still, the fan following for this show has continued and, just like “Sex in the City” did twice, “Entourage” has found its way to the big screen. Surprisingly the continued story of a tight group of friends from Queens who find Hollywood success is slightly better than expected, making what basically amounts to an extended episode satisfying for the clamoring fan while also being an acceptable time passer for those who aren’t familiar with the long running jokes.

Eric (Kevin Connolly), Turtle (Jerry Ferrara) and Johnny Drama (Kevin Dillon) are on a speedboat traveling to the yacht of their movie star friend Vince (Adrian Grenier) who just got a divorce and is throwing a party. Vince’s recently retired agent Ari Gold (Jeremy Piven) joins the group by phone to announce that he is coming out of retirement to run a studio. Ari has interest in Vince for a movie however Vince has ideas for his directorial debut. Fast forward and Vince’s big budget retelling of “Jekyll and Hyde” is over budget, Ari is forced to find production money from a wealthy Texas oilman (Billy Bob Thornton), Eric is having a baby with his ex-girlfriend Sloan (Emmanuelle Chriqui), Turtle is trying to date MMA fighter Ronda Rousey, and Johnny Drama is still seeking the perfect role.

To call “Entourage” a party movie would be unfair if the film didn’t revolve mostly around lavish parties, lavish cars, and lavish ladies. Include the star studded lineup of celebrities that flood nearly every scene of the film, Pharrell Williams, Rob Gronkowski, Russell Wilson, Andrew Dice Clay, Mark Cuban, Gary Busey, Liam Neeson, Jessica Alba, Warren Buffet, Armie Hammer, and Tom Brady are just a few that make very small cameos, and “Entourage” becomes the definition of its title. Producer Mark Wahlberg, whose life the show is loosely based upon, makes a funny appearance as well. But is this indulgence and star power all the appeal for the theatrical “Entourage”? To an extent it is, but it’s fun nonetheless. Watching celebrities playing themselves and encountering the fictional group can be amusing even when it’s overdone. What is problematic about the film is that the narrative is perfectly content with letting these cameo scenes and the onslaught of glamorized outlandish celebrity lifestyle take precedent without any purpose other than being eye candy for the viewer.

The primary group of friends in the film have great chemistry when onscreen together. It’s the kind of character chemistry that could have made “The Hangover” sequels more tolerable. The best parts of “Entourage” are the scenes when the friends get to mock and ridicule one another with in jokes from past seasons and new scenarios for the film to build laughs upon. One scene with the group, particularly Turtle, and Ronda Rousey is especially comical.

Unfortunately “Entourage” lacks the narrative consideration to build on the interesting aspects of celebrity that could have moved this film into a culminating ending for the series. But let’s be honest, the television series never attempted to meet these thought provoking questions but instead was complaisant with the satire and indulgence of celebrity living every season of the show maintained. This doesn’t make “Entourage” the movie feel like much of an ending but instead more like a Friday night party, leaving fans ready to see what happens on Saturday night.

Monte’s Rating

2.75 out of 5.00

Aloha - Movie Review by Eric Forthun

Aloha  

Starring Bradley Cooper, Emma Stone, Rachel McAdams, John Krasinski, Bill Murray, and Danny McBride

Directed by Cameron Crowe

Rated PG-13

Run Time: 105 minutes

Genre: Romantic Comedy

Opens May 29th

By Eric Forthun of Cinematic Shadows

It's difficult to process that Aloha is a Cameron Crowe film considering the film's monotonous tone and overwhelmingly expository dialogue. It feels like the project of a first-time writer-director attempting to find his identity. It's surprising, then, that this is a film from an acclaimed storyteller with a propensity for compassionately engaging with our most base emotions. The film is a passionate misfire through and through; Crowe deeply cares about the subject matter and his characters, which makes it all the more frustrating as a viewer that he can never string together a cohesive narrative with all of this mish-mashed parts. This is obviously two interesting ideas that have been melded together with the super glue of Bradley Cooper's Brian Gilcrest, who drives both narratives but never establishes a strong foot in either one. If the first half of the film were not so catastrophically obvious and dialogue-driven, the film could have achieved something more, since the morality of the film's message is apparent. The subtleties and humanity that emerge in the second half are affecting, yet would only work as a whole if Crowe fully developed his story.

The aforementioned Brian is a a seasoned military contractor working for a company headed by billionaire Carson Welch (Bill Murray), a man who wants to launch his own satellite into space. Due to certain laws passed during the 1960s declaring that space does not belong to any country or person, Welch has the opportunity to do this without any restrictions, even if his intentions are a bit shrouded in secrecy. Nonetheless, Brian travels to Hawaii, his old stomping ground, to christen a new bridge and work with military officers on the bases in the state. That includes being greeted by old friend Colonel "Fingers" Lacy (Danny McBride, whose character has a knack for wiggling his fingers when he speaks), old fling Tracy Woodside (Rachel McAdams), her husband Woody (John Krasinski), and established, serious officer Allison Ng (Emma Stone). Brian must visit with local Hawaiians to ensure they are okay with potential land changes due to the military's presence, and the natives are far from accepting of the military's decision making. Brian also explores his romantic options, which include flirting with married Tracy and wooing Allison, a stern-faced woman without any commitments.

The biggest problem with Aloha is that the synopsis I just wrote barely scratches the surface of the storytelling. There are simply too many subplots, characters with speaking roles, and so little subtlety because everything is explained through dialogue with a shred left unspoken. Crowe's film is glaringly dumbed down to a fault, with insincerity running rampant in the first half. These characters speak their emotions like soap opera stars and explain everything to the audience; it's insulting. The performances are particularly strained and unsettled in the first half. The reason I keep qualifying the first half as being a train wreck is due to Crowe's merits standing out in the second half; there's little dialogue in the final half hour and the story begins to find a voice in one of its stories. The problem remains, though, that at least two stories are given front billing, and another never jives. Crowe is an enormously talented filmmaker; just watch ...Say Anything or Almost Famous again if you need a reminder. Aloha, though, is a film that only has a strong sense of setting but little else that becomes established. It's never a convincing story, even when Crowe wears his heart on his sleeve in the final moments.

Barely Lethal - Movie Review by Monte Yazzie

Barely Lethal  

Director: Kyle Newman

Starring: Hailee Steinfeld, Sophie Turner, Samuel L. Jackson, Rachael Harris, Thomas Mann, Toby Sebastian, Dove Cameron, and Jessica Alba

The assassin film gets a teen high school comedy spin in Kyle Newman’s “Barely Lethal”. Not as lonely as Saoirse Ronan’s teenage Hanna in the 2011 film or as deadly as Scarlett Johansson’s Black Widow from “The Avengers”, Hailee Steinfeld’s character, known simply as #83, is inquisitive and eager to experience the teenage life taken from her. With the aggressiveness and bloodiness dialed way back when compared to other films like it, “Barely Lethal” takes a soft-hearted comedic approach and offers a subdued action film that feels harmlessly overly familiar, while unfortunately also maintaining an anticipation for potential inventiveness that never arrives.

#83 (Hailee Steinfeld) is a teenage special ops agent who has been trained in the deadly arts of assassination since she was a child. Told to hold no remorse and never become attached, #83 does the bidding of her boss Hardman (Samuel L. Jackson). However, this lethal young woman yearns for a normal teenage life, which leads her to faking her own death and assuming the alias of Megan and the identity of a foreign exchange student from Canada. To her surprise, and against the best intelligence on teenage culture she amassed from magazines and movies, the life of a teenager proves harder than the deadly threats she encounters as an assassin.

“Barely Lethal” displays potential throughout, combining the action of hand-to-hand and tactical combat with the modern teen comedy features like high school cliques, joking jocks and mean girls, and the sarcastic and quipping banter that has come to define these films throughout different decades. In a great scene #83 researchers teenage life through film, watching movies like “Clueless”, “Bring It On”, and “Mean Girls” and reading teen fashion magazines to prepare the navigation of adolescent life. Unfortunately the unique qualities that are present here don’t persist; instead it comes and goes with the filler being the monotonous and predictable aspects of average teen comedies seen before.

With a good cast that is squandered, Dove Cameron and Thomas Mann are best in supporting roles. Cameron is particularly good with her quick witted and wisecracking comments. Mann plays the role of audio-video nerd and overlooked good-guy effectively. Hailee Steinfeld is a great actress, though here she is unfortunately poorly composed. The potential to develop her identity into something unique is instead wasted by a formulaic reproduction. And Samuel L. Jackson again plays the leader of a unique group of individuals, in basically the same uniform as Nick Fury from "The Avengers" minus the eye patch.

While the title will possibly raise more eyebrows than interest in the film, “Barely Lethal” displays an early potential that suggests a movement towards interesting places but instead falters with tedious clichés that follow familiar and typical paths.

Monte’s Rating / 2.00 out of 5.00

Barely Lethal - Movie Review by Eric Forthun

Barely Lethal  

Starring Hailee Steinfeld, Sophie Turner, Samuel L. Jackson, Jessica Alba, and Thomas Mann

Directed by Kyle Newman

Rated PG-13

Run Time: 96 minutes

Genre: Action/Comedy

Opens May 29th

By Eric Forthun of Cinematic Shadows

The high school genre has increasingly worn its welcome in film, with many modern entries attempting to both subvert and pay respect to the tropes of the genre. Unfortunately, Barely Lethal does much of the same, aiming to take down the familiarity of the genre by infusing it with espionage and action but never establishes its own identity. There's an eclectic cast here, led by Hailee Steinfeld, Samuel L. Jackson, Jessica Alba, Game of Thrones' Sophie Turner, and up-and-comer Thomas Mann, who stars in June's fantastic Sundance hit Me and Earl and the Dying Girl. Either that sounds like the cast of the weirdest romantic comedy ever made, or the least menacing group of action stars ever assembled. Suffice to say it's a mixture of both, as the film focuses on a group of kick-ass teenage girls who have been trained since their childhood in the arts of fighting. When thrown into a high school setting, the film should prove ripe for riffs, where it admittedly hits the mark on a few stellar scenes. Most of the film is flat, though, despite the promise behind the screen from director Kyle Newman.

The film focuses on Megan Walsh (Hailee Steinfeld), a teenage special ops agent who was raised without parents under the guidance of her operations mentor, Hardman (Samuel L. Jackson). When she is handed a mission involving Victoria Knox (Jessica Alba), a hard-nosed assassin who always seems to evade their special ops unit, Megan is presumably killed in the line of battle after she falls hundreds of feet from a suspended rope into a body of water. She fakes her death, however, in order to live a real teenage life. She discovers how the media represents teenage culture through watching films like Mean Girls, Clueless, and Bring It On, while reading magazines like Cosmopolitan. She poses as a foreign exchange student and enters the Larson family, headed by an understanding mom (Rachael Harris) and another teenager, Liz (Dove Cameron). Megan crushes on a boy at school, Cash (Toby Sebastian), who leads a popular band, while befriending a timid boy named Roger (Thomas Mann), who clearly crushes on her despite remaining friends. Megan must combat her past coming back to her, particularly as a fellow agent, Heather (Sophie Turner), discovers her undercover.

A few scenes pop when the script advances into some delightfully subversive territory. One of the best scenes in the film involves a gossip session between Megan and Liz that follows the "traditional" teenage girl conversation about losing your virginity, only that it's about Megan waiting for the right person to be her first kill. It mostly works, but would spring even more if it stood alongside similar scenes in the film. Most of the story's structure, though, despite feeling like something original, is actually the clichéd high school story infused with little moments that tell you this is an espionage thriller. The same formulated emotions occur, the familiar loud arguments happen, and the characters end up in the same situations that they always do. The performance from Steinfeld in the lead is quite good, and Mann is simply phenomenal. He's such a talent, and his work in June's Dying Girl is equally sublime. The film surrounding their performances, even with Jackson and Alba committing to their contrived roles, is simply unexciting and too familiar. Newman needs to take chances as a director, because his voice is apparent behind the camera. He just needs to work with more exciting and adventurous ideas.

San Andreas - Movie Review by Monte Yazzie

San Andreas         

Director: Brad Peyton

Starring: Dwayne Johnson, Carla Gugino, Alexandra Daddario, Paul Giamatti, Hugo Johnstone-Burt, Art Parkinson, Ioan Gruffudd, Archie Panjabi, and Will Yun Lee

114 Minutes

Rated PG-13

I remember in grade school when my science teacher talked about how a big enough earthquake would eventually drop California into the Pacific Ocean. Call in the summer blockbuster movie makers to make this story a realization through the extravagance of special effects.  We’ve seen New York flood and freeze over in “The Day After Tomorrow”, we’ve seen a dormant volcano spew lava over the streets of Los Angeles in “Volcano”, we’ve even already seen an earthquake destroy most of Los Angeles in 1974’s “Earthquake”, it was only a matter of time before the natural disaster would return to the big screen. This time the film adds exceptional special effects to make the collapsing Golden Gate Bridge and crumbing Los Angeles skyline feel as realistic as possible. For those that have seen the movie trailer, you know what you are getting into and why you are going. It’s not for science factual filmmaking or in depth narrative structure.  It’s for the rumbling and tumbling visual stimulation of the disaster film; everything else is merely an afterthought..

Ray (Dwayne Johnson) is a rescue helicopter pilot in California. Fresh off a rescue that saved the life of a young woman, Ray is eager to help his daughter Blake (Alexandra Daddario) move back to college. Unfortunately an earthquake forces Ray back to work and sends Blake to San Francisco with her mother’s (Carla Gugino) new boyfriend (Ioan Gruffudd). A seismologist (Paul Giamatti) at CalTech discovers that a program he has been researching can predict earthquakes, however not before one destroys the Hoover Dam. Los Angeles is the next target, but it’s an appetizer for the main course of San Francisco. This leads Ray and his wife to venture across California to save their daughter.

“San Andreas” is directed by Brad Peyton, who last helmed “Journey 2: The Mysterious Island”, and stars the frequently reliable Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson. Johnson has a screen presence reminiscent of the larger-than-life action stars of the 80’s and a sense of humor, humility, and hubris that brands his characters; this quality has saved many of his films. However, in a film stuffed with this much visual flair as “San Andreas”, Johnson is surrendered to playing the heroic role from the back seat, yelling cautionary warnings and motivational one-liners amidst falling debris and shaking camera work. Though he is given the opportunity to rip the door off an SUV in one early scene.

While the script offers a few moments for the characters to grow, a glossed over storyline about a broken family dealing with the loss of their daughter offers a small glimmer of character development, most of the performances are reactionary or physical. These narrative moments are simply bridges to connect the demonstrations of destruction. While the film attempts to establish some sort of relationship between the viewer and characters, one that makes the viewer care about the spotlighted people in danger, the short interactions don’t allow proper time to establish a connection when all around them are millions of people perishing.

“San Andreas” is a spectacle of visual indulgence, an overload of devastation that somewhat lessens the impact and interest of the scenes. It’s a film that doesn’t waste time with an overwhelming plot, there is barely one here, or characters that do more than direct the film from one bang and boom scene to another. Instead “San Andreas” is comfortable with the simplistic quality associated with disaster film entertainment, which it achieves quite well, but unfortunately this alone is not enough.

Monte’s Rating

2.50 out of 5.00

Don't Think I've Forgotten - Movie Review by Monte Yazzie

Don’t Think I’ve Forgotten: Cambodia’s Lost Rock and Roll Director: John Pirozzi

105 Minutes

Director John Pirozzi composes an enlightening and passionate documentary about the musical explosion in Cambodia during the 50’s, 60’s, and 70’s. Ultimately the beautiful and artistic musical art made from these forgotten musicians, at least from a Western perspective, encounters a tragic end. Though the history of this time is brought back to stirring life through the eyes and ears of the people that heard and saw these musicians in Cambodia during these uplifting and tumultuous times. Assisted by archival footage and the striking music made during the time, “Don’t Think I’ve Forgotten” is an exceptional documentary of rediscovered music and the influential musicians that created it.

Music is a universal language, a combination of rhythms and melodies that speak a common language of emotion. The music throughout Pirozzi’s soundtrack is a reflection of the changing Cambodian culture, one that found Western influences combined with the traditional aspects of song and lyric that distinguished Cambodian popular music. There were the ballads of crooners and divas, the go-go style, girl groups, and numerous rock n’ roll forms; music in Cambodia was a product of the world’s popular music while also being distinctively individual. Hearing the music produced by these artists, Sinn Sisamouth with his jazz styled crooning and Ros Serey Sothea the soulful songstress, it wouldn’t be surprising today to see some crossover with their own hit songs. Unfortunately many of these talented careers would never come to full fruition because of the aggressive appropriation of power from Prince Sihanouk, a supporter of the arts who played a crucial role in Cambodia’s independence. The Khmer Rogue in 1975 would further harm Cambodia’s thriving culture by decimating the population of thinkers, artists, and supporters of Western methods.

“When two big elephants fight, who suffers? It’s the grass that takes the hit”. This comment is telling of the changing political and social atmosphere, the shifting and hostile takeover of leadership, and the effect of the Vietnam war at the borders of Cambodia. Massive powers pushing and colliding into one another, with the neutral country of Cambodia trying to avoid the conflict of the world but also the people cultivating a culture of change in the region. These relatively small forces are matched against larger more powerful forces, and the damage to Cambodia was devastating.

“Don’t Think I’ve Forgotten” is a film about music and musicians during a period of history in Cambodia, but it’s also much more. At the core is a documentary that displays the power of music, the power that provides hope and motivates change. It evoked an emotion for these Cambodian artists to explore creativity and express the feelings, positive or negative, happy or sad, public or personal, that they wanted to share with the world. What happens to Cambodia is not a mystery, and while history has proven brutal and unforgiving for the people and musicians on display in this film their story and music should not remain a mystery.

Monte’s Rating / 4.00 out of 5.00

Slow West - Movie Review by Michael Clawson

Slow West  

Starring Michael Fassbender, Kodi Smit-McPhee, Ben Mendelsohn, Rory McCann, and Brooke Williams

Directed by John Maclean

Rated R

Run Time: 84 minutes

Genre: Western

by Michael Clawson of Terminal Volume

A teenager stumbles into a cluster of trees as he walks his horse through clouds of acrid smoke. He comes into a clearing where he discovers the source, a smoldering Indian encampment. Burned teepees are scorched and ruined, their bones still upright and revealing their triangular corpses. The scene is played in black and greys, with an immense feeling of dread that looms over the wayward boy lost in nature’s wrath. The sequence was likely shot on a soundstage, but it feels like a Caravaggio painting come to life in the West.

I’ve never quite seen anything like this before, which further proves the resilience of Hollywood’s oldest genre, the western.

Slow West is an intense burn of a cowboy picture. It comes together like an epic romance: a lovelorn teen, Jay Cavendish (The Road’s Kodi Smit-McPhee), journeys to America’s Western frontier to find his sweetheart, Rose. Rooted in romance and the Old West, the film is more an absurdist road adventure and surreal fantasy: In an early scene, Jay looks up over the frontier, aims his revolver at the stars and watches as they light up like a shooting gallery. This scene leads into the burning of the Indian village, which is so hauntingly beautiful that it seems plucked from another movie in another genre. Jay quickly meets Silas Selleck (Michael Fassbender), a bounty hunter with a secret in his pocket: a wanted poster with Rose’s picture on it. Silas agrees to help Jay find Rose, even though his intentions are deadly and selfish. What transpires on their journey is a magnificent set of adventures, the likes of which have never before been seen in a western. You’ll know you’re very far away from John Wayne and Clint Eastwood when Jay meets a trio of Congolese singers on the road. Who are these men, and where did they come from? Slow West doesn’t elaborate, just presents images and shambles onward toward Rose’s doom. Much of the film can be broken up into episodes, including one where Jay and Silas are stalked by the film’s villain, a fellow bounty hunter. I kept thinking I knew where this scene would go, and the Slow West goes far and wide to prove you can’t predict anything in this strange western universe. The confrontation, or lack thereof, ends when the creek they’re camped next to floods, washing their weapons away and leaving them with soaked clothes. They ride away in their longjohns with their clothing tied to clotheslines stretched between their horses. Another episode takes place with a traveling preacher, who imparts one last piece of advice on a slip of paper that reads “West” with an arrow pointing. If only Jay had picked up the paper before the breeze, which forever scrambles the arrow’s intended direction. In another scene, Jay and Silas are caught up in a store robbery that goes wrong in every conceivable way. And then they step outside and it gets even worse.

Slow West is written and directed by John Maclean, whose debut here as an innovative force is about as fine as debuts come. Maclean’s biggest film credit before this was in High Fidelity, in which his band at the time, the Beta Band, has a song featured in a key sequence. How he got here to Slow West, and why — and what took so long — are questions almost as fascinating as the film itself. Almost.

It’s written perfectly, with balance for the deceptively complex narrative and the intriguing characters; the performances are spot-on, with Smit-McPhee and Fassbender making an unlikely but likable pairing; and the visuals are poetic and serve the film’s larger theme that man is not nearly as cruel as nature. Consider these three shots: a tree that has fallen on a lumberjack, his axe-wielding skeleton splayed out beneath the trunk. Ants crawling on and in the barrel of a gun. And, in one of the final shots of the film, jump cuts to each and every person killed since the beginning of the movie.

Death comes for everyone, but in Slow West it lingers, and chokes, and it does not come quickly.

Slow West - Movie Review by Eric Forthun

Slow West  

Starring Michael Fassbender, Kodi Smit-McPhee, Ben Mendelsohn, Rory McCann, and Brooke Williams

Directed by John Maclean

Rated R

Run Time: 84 minutes

Genre: Western

Opens May 22nd

By Eric Forthun of Cinematic Shadows

Slow West’s revisionist Western narrative is bogged down by a confused, unbalanced tone wavering between slapstick comedy and romantic melodrama. The film premiered at the 2015 Sundance Film Festival from writer-director John Maclean, a first-time feature filmmaker with a knack for establishing a visual landscape. Yet his emphasis on eye-popping splendor steers the tale away from the necessarily established characters and motivations. Outside of a desire for love, the lead played by Kodi Smit-McPhee is a shell of a protagonist, with Michael Fassbender’s rogue bounty hunter acting circles around the inexperienced actor. The highlight of the film is its bouts of comedy, whether that be an encounter with Native Americans that feels like a Marx Brothers sketch or a gag involving salt on someone’s wound that has to be one of the funniest scenes in any film from the festival. Maclean’s desire, though, for a heartfelt story leads to an unfulfilling resolution that doesn’t particularly care for sending off its protagonist with grace. Rather, Slow West devolves into familiar tropes that hinder the audience’s connection to the characters, leaving the film as an emotional mess with gorgeous cinematography and a terrific ensemble.

The film centers on Jay Cavendish (Smit-McPhee), a 16-year old traveler who searches for the love of his life after she mysteriously disappears. The journey takes him across the 19th-century American frontier, a landscape marked by the mindset of Manifest Destiny while coping with its treatment of Native Americans in the previous decades. On his journey, Jay encounters Silas Selleck (Fassbender), a rogue traveler that eerily mirrors Clint Eastwood’s early work. Their first run-in involves murder, so naturally their path will be blood-soaked and vile. Silas is seeking out a bounty for a man and a woman that are on the run, leading to the search involving Jay looking for his love while Silas wants the money from his dangerous mission. There’s a highly engaging moment in a local store that builds tension masterfully and firmly establishes the tone as dreary and ruthless. The journey, though, devolves into more comedy than expected, leading to a serious identity crisis in the second act of the film.

Maclean is a talent behind the screen that will work with more phenomenal actors and improve his craft. But Slow West is a tonal mess that never meshes coherently with its uniquely identifiable Western landscape. Take, for instance, a scene where Jay and Silas encounter Native Americans; the scene starts with terrifying action, and then aims for laughs, before settling on a light dramatic note. It’s frustrating as a viewer because there is only a vague semblance of what Maclean wants to establish with his work. Fassbender is always terrific on screen and doesn’t disappoint here; his Silas is a cold man with a heart hidden very deep inside. Ben Mendelsohn also delivers a satisfying, scenery-chewing turn where he constantly wears a fur coat so, naturally, he’s our bad guy. Potential brims from the surface of practically every scene, so it’s unfortunate that the minimalist Western approach makes the narrative fluffy and shallow. Slow West’s true takeaway is its lush, portrait-like cinematography, a reminder that the film knows the essence of a Western but cannot seem to formulate

I'll See You in My Dreams - Movie Review by Eric Forthun

I'll See You in My Dreams  

Starring Blythe Danner, Martin Starr, Sam Elliott, Rhea Perlman, June Squibb, and Malin Akerman

Directed by Brett Haley

Rated PG-13

Run Time: 96 minutes

Genre: Drama/Comedy

Opens May 22nd

By Eric Forthun of Cinematic Shadows

Tenderness and compassion are rare elements in the modern film industry. Yet I'll See You in My Dreams prides itself on its old-fashioned emotions and of-a-certain-age lead characters. That could have led to a refreshing if contrived narrative, but Brett Haley's film emerges as a strong example of living both old and young in a modern age, as the world moves far too quickly with scarcely any attempt at warning or preparing oneself for what's to come. Blythe Danner, seen in an abundance of supporting roles over the past decade, finally receives a much-deserved lead as a widow quietly struggling with the loneliness that pervades old age. Her performance will stand as one of the year's finest by a leading female. While the story itself seems to move through familiar motions and touch upon familiar feelings, the characters that inhabit the film are simply raw and surreal; it's uncanny how they resemble both the moods and embodiments of their respective age groups. Those characterizations, and the remarkable complexity of the romances at the center of the film, make for an ostensibly recognizable but wholly unique tale.

The story opens with Carol Petersen (Blythe Danner) coping with the sickness of her old golden retriever. When her dear friend passes away, her loneliness begins to build. She's been a widow for the past twenty years and, while she has her own interests, the days grow longer and more monotonous with age. She often visits her friends that live in a retirement community, a place where they feel happy but Carol cannot see herself living. Those friends include the oblivious Georgina (June Squibb) and the rambunctious Sally (Rhea Perlman), both of whom appear content with their life choices but discontent with Carol's seeming sadness. Sure enough, Carol meets two men that begin to change her life: Lloyd (Martin Starr), a recent graduate with a college degree in Poetry that has been working as a pool cleaner for the last few months, and Bill (Sam Elliott), an old gentleman who hangs out at the retirement community with a penchant for fishing and holding a cigar in his mouth. These men not only change her everyday actions, but also how she wants to reform herself in the waning years of her life.

The film's realization of characters and their realization of each other is profoundly moving. One of the most affecting scenes in the film is when Carol and Lloyd visit a karaoke bar, where they talk over drinks about why the bar is not very busy even though it's fairly late at night. Lloyd explains that young people go out very late nowadays, even though it's a weekday; the reason, of course, is that they don't really have jobs anymore, not like they used to. While this aside is treated as a joke, it's a harsh embodiment of modern youth culture and the perpetual struggle to find jobs post-graduation. The scene also allows Lloyd to discover Carol's talents as a singer, a nice touch for a woman that clearly did not pursue her dreams when she chose to make a living. Danner's performance makes the film excel when it should remain contrived, and the script is only a shred away from insincerity. But everything rings true. I'll See You in My Dreams mines strong performances from its supporting players and develops them well, and it's a film so unlike anything else in the marketplace right now. No explosions, no "big" moments or reveals. Just characters talking affectionately about life. It's remarkable.

Tomorrowland - Movie Review by Monte Yazzie

Tomorrowland  

Director: Brad Bird

Starring: George Clooney, Brittany Robertson, Raffey Cassidy, Hugh Laurie, and Kathryn Hahn

117 Minutes

Rated PG

Walt Disney Pictures

A young boy brings an invention, a rocket pack made from household materials, to the 1964 World’s Fair in New York. After a failed demonstration he is given a souvenir pin by a young girl that serves as an invitation to a technologically advanced world known as Tomorrowland. Walt Disney’s affinity for technology and the wide possibilities of advancement that could exist for the future are on full display in director Brad Bird’s “Tomorrowland”. Bird has demonstrated a talent for portraying the conflict that exists between imagination and conformity through his films and the theme continues here if a little more heavy handed than in past films. Bird is a great director, bringing a childlike sense of wonder with nostalgic settings, futuristic cities, and characters whose dreams hold no limitations. “Tomorrowland” has all the exciting flash and flair of action and adventure seen throughout Bird’s film catalog but unfortunately stumbles as a script that unevenly focuses on cautionary ideas of humanities contribution to self-destruction and the hopeful possibilities of unrestrained imagination.

Casey (Britt Robertson) has an exceptionally mind, one that is utilized to break into NASA’s launch facility at Cape Canaveral in an attempt to delay demolition. Casey is caught by authorities and sent to jail. Upon release she finds a souvenir pin for Tomorrowland in her belongings. The moment she touches the pin she is whisked to a world of wonder, a place where she believes anything is possible. Unfortunately there is a mysterious group on the hunt for perspective Tomorrowland candidates but a young girl named Athena (Raffey Cassidy) offers Casey information and protection. Athena sends Casey to a man named Frank (George Clooney), a former member of Tomorrowland, to assist her in saving the world.

Frank, a jaded inventor, makes a statement about how the future looked different when he was a kid. This statement made early in the film is immediately followed by interruptions from an optimistic young person. “Tomorrowland” uses this contrasting feature quite often throughout the film, displaying the cautious, analytical, and sometimes-negative attitudes lamented with age against the hopeful, encouraging, and sometimes-naive sentiments of youth. When this works the film builds a wonderful dichotomy of age, societal perspectives, and technological awareness. When this doesn’t work, more often than expected, is when the film languishes in its own self-aware and indulgent need to finger point and chastise. Though the opinions are necessary and very truthful here, it doesn’t work when the film breaks the pace to indulge with long-winded monologues or extended visions of humanity’s destruction.

The film evokes some early Spielberg-ish qualities; young people tasked with responsibility in an adult world against the backdrop of American nostalgia and futuristic concepts. And the creations found in Tomorrowland, jet packs, a maze of slender skyscrapers, and a hovering monorail, are just a few of the well composed designs.

It’s unfortunate that the script doesn’t accommodate these nice touches. Brad Bird is a smart director who struggles to find the aim of the themes here. “Tomorrowland” feels in small moments like some of Bird’s better work, “Iron Giant” and “The Incredibles” come to mind, unfortunately the film lingers then lunges then lingers again.  Much like the jet packs that stream the skies of Tomorrowland in an early scene, the film maneuvers without much aim.

Monte’s Rating

3.00 out of 5.00

Tomorrowland - Movie Review by Eric Forthun

Tomorrowland  

Starring George Clooney, Britt Robertson, Hugh Laurie, Tim McGraw, and Thomas Robinson

Directed by Brad Bird

Rated PG

Run Time: 130 minutes

Genre: Science Fiction/Adventure

Opens May 22nd

By Eric Forthun of Cinematic Shadows

Tomorrowland is admittedly ambitious and told with a sense of visual splendor in its first half, but the second half fails to fulfill the promises of its convoluted storyline. Director Brad Bird has moved his career away from animation (The Iron Giant, The Incredibles, Ratatouille) toward action films (Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol), even steering toward live-action science fiction, a genre that would assumedly fit him well. Yet the adventure here hinges on the triteness of the script, which offers many impassioned ideas that fall remarkably short of payoff in the film's final act. As a piece of Disney filmmaking, it's a genius ploy at making their theme park properties into other forms of merchandising; imagine the Tomorrowland posters and toys being sold in gift shops in Tomorrowland itself! The grating effect that the film instills in its opening moments involving a journey through Disneyland reminds the audience that, despite the film aiming for original ideas, it's still a product on the Disney assembly line. I like Brad Bird, and I like his ideas; they just don't add up to enough emotional power for the story to warrant artistic merit.

Tomorrowland is a world shrouded in secrecy, largely due to Disney's sly marketing campaign. For that reason, I won't dive into too many specifics. The film's protagonist is Casey Newton (Britt Robertson), a teenager bursting with scientific curiosity under the wing of her father, Eddie (Tim McGraw), who is a NASA engineer. Her interest in space exploration leads to her breaking into a NASA site and aiming to stop a demolition; this leads to her being discovered by a young girl that introduces her to Tomorrowland. Casey sees all of the technological advancements and the futuristic potential of the world, and becomes ravenous for an improved world. Her optimism is a rarity, as many observe, particularly noted by a former Tomorrowland enthusiast named Frank Walker (George Clooney, who effectively is not introduced until the halfway mark). As a young boy, he was not only introduced to Tomorrowland, but also gifted the opportunity to live there. The human leader of that adventure, Nix (Hugh Laurie), had a falling out with Frank that led to their embattled relationship and his future difficulty in reaching Tomorrowland. Talks regarding existentialism, the end of the world, the potential of the future, optimism vs. pessimism, and the ability of art to change the world transpire.

If that seems intentionally vague and confusing, that's largely because the film's plot remains shrouded even to the viewer until about the second act. That leads to a deliberately confusing narrative with ironically impressive ambition. Bird's vision of Tomorrowland is vibrant and feels like it's being seen through a child's eyes; that's both a testament to the kinetic filmmaking style and the desire for storytelling from the protagonist's perspective. When ideas regarding robots are introduced and other sci-fi lore come into play, the story feels less impactful and more formulaic. Its ideas and scope are eerily reminiscent to last year's sci-fi epic Interstellar, aiming to forebode about the ramifications of our actions now for its effect on the future. The most surprisingly affecting scene in the film is a monologue delivered by Hugh Laurie near the conclusion, which acts as a bit too on-the-nose but reminded me of the power of Charlie Chaplin's monologue during the finale of The Great Dictator. It's that good. But the story surrounding that moment feels like a conventional blockbuster with big action scenes just for the sake of having them. Tomorrowland has the remnants of a great story, albeit one where Disney stripped it for the marketable, sellable parts.

Good Kill - Movie Review by Eric Forthun

Good Kill  

Starring Ethan Hawke, Bruce Greenwood, Zoe Kravitz, January Jones, and Jake Abel

Directed by Andrew Niccol

Rated R

Run Time: 91 minutes

Genre: Suspense/Thriller

Opens May 22nd

By Eric Forthun of Cinematic Shadows

Good Kill is one of the first films to tackle the heated social issue of drone strikes, and it treats the subject with strong morality and biting criticism. The film stars Ethan Hawke as an embattled military pilot that has been subjected to indirectly flying drones over the Middle East in an air-conditioned office, a workplace with which he is both uncomfortable and unsettled. This dilemma feels particular to a military man, but the message behind his work is clear: drone strikes are morally unsound and often kill innocent lives. Even if an attack against terrorists saves many citizens, are the innocent ones lost considered inconsequential and treated as war casualties? It's a sad realization within Andrew Niccol's film, which evolves from a stark modern commentary into a melodramatic familial drama in its second half. That does not detract from the film's strengths, though, nor its overarching message regarding doing the right thing when a war effort seems to be aimed at the wrong ideals. It's a morally challenging and decidedly modern film.

The story focuses on Major Thomas Egan (Ethan Hawke), a family man married to a former dancer, Molly (January Jones). He used to work as a pilot for over a decade in the United States military, but was recently transferred to work as a drone pilot under the command of Lt. Colonel Jack Johns (Bruce Greenwood). Johns is a man marked by his desire to inform soldiers that flying a drone carries as much weight and responsibility as being a normal pilot, but it seems to be a message that goes over every soldier's head. Men often talk about how flying a drone feels like a video game and that civilian casualties are a necessary evil of the job, but soldiers like Thomas and Airman Vera Suarez (Zoe Kravitz) have a moral compass that steers them away from traditional gung-ho beliefs. As Thomas' family life begins to crumble as his professional life grows increasingly strained and unethical, he descends into alcoholism and struggles with himself as a whole. He hates the man he has become, and the means to which the government must go to supposedly preserve freedom.

Andrew Niccol's script is astute and keenly relevant. It holds a bite that rings true and stands as one of the most important political films of the past decade, at least in terms of the overarching message in its first half. The second half, though, while not awful, proves to be a misfire that grinds the film to a momentous halt. The familial drama that emerges, most notably the shrill nature of January Jones's character, makes for an unforgivingly sluggish third act. The film undervalues its supporting female characters until it allows Vera, playing well by Kravitz, to emerge as a potential third party in the relationship who stands as her own strong individual. Niccol's films are decidedly hit-and-miss when they come to their effectiveness; I was a fan of his most recent In Time, not necessarily as a remarkable piece of filmmaking but as a strong example of world-building and atmosphere. Here, he grounds his story in reality from the get-go, making an emphatic statement about the ever-growing military-industrial complex in the United States. He's sometimes too on-the-nose, but when he aims for subtlety, Good Kill excels as a morally divisive fable.

Mad Max: Fury Road - Movie Review by Monte Yazzie

Mad Max: Fury Road  

Director: George Miller

Starring: Tom Hardy, Charlize Theron, Nicholas Hoult, Hugh Keays-Byrne, Zoe Kravitz, Rosie Huntington-Whiteley, Riley Keough, Josh Helman, and Nathan Jones

120 Minutes

Rated R

“Mad Max: Fury Road” starts off going one hundred miles per hour, stops to drink a few energy drinks, and continues going even faster. Director George Miller, who directed “Mad Max”, and “Road Warrior”, and co-directed “Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome”, crafts one of the most visceral, frenzied, and energetic action movies of the year, if not the last few years. The beating, bursting pulse of this film is the exceptional George Miller, who without much dialog or extensive story constructs a violent dystopian world that consumes and swallows the viewer, and then promptly asks for seconds.

The location is a harsh post-apocalyptic landscape; the dust that carries in the wind devours remnants of cities long forgotten. The people are broken, ruled by merciless leaders who destroyed humanity with greed and war. Max Rockatansky (Tom Hardy) is a survivor and loner road warrior of few words who is haunted by visions of his deceased family. Max is captured, tortured, turned into a transfusing “blood bag” for other vicious warriors, and forced into a brutal chase lead by a tyrannical leader named Immortan Joe (Hugh Keays-Byrne). The task is to recovery Joe’s five wives who were stolen/saved by a tough-as-nails woman named Imperator Furiosa (Charlize Theron).

George Miller builds an immersive world here, one that doesn’t depend on detailed scenes of exposition or complex character developments. Instead the director utilizes subtle expressions, purposeful gestures, and crafty camera pans and cuts to drive the story forward; a look or movement into a certain direction is sometimes all the story needs to communicate danger, approval, or uncertainty. Whether the smirk and thumbs up from Max during a tense moment on a speeding tanker or Furiosa’s long gaze into a desolate horizon, the audience understands everything that is being said without words. This type of storytelling has the potential to go terribly wrong, especially with the vast amounts of action being thrown at the screen, however in the brilliant hands of George Miller the film feels more suited for the art house than the grindhouse. It’s a visionary director bringing the world of his mind onto the silver screen, a seemingly uncompromised film of near flawless execution.

The film takes a linear path, one clear direction of mayhem in flame throwing, gas guzzling beautifully designed vehicles; one even having the towering amps of a heavy metal concert with a guitar wielding animal attached to the roof. The movement of the story is secondary, it’s very easy to recognize where the group will end up, but the decisions of characters push the film forward, bringing to light themes associated with revenge, reward, and rebellion.

The cast is outstanding as well. Tom Hardy speaks volumes with his subdued actions but, as the film displays during a scene between the two actors, Hardy sits passenger seat to Charlize Theron’s stunning Imperator Furiosa. Theron matches Hardy’s screen presence, even at times shadowing every other actor on the screen. Bringing back Hugh Keays-Byrne, who played Toecutter in 1979’s “Mad Max”, was also a nice touch for fans. Nicholas Hoult is good as a crazed “wardog” of Immortan Joe’s army. Hoult’s wild-eyed portrayal fits the characters kamikaze-like devotion to the rewards of the afterlife.

It’s interesting that a film like this exists in the current summer box office scramble. “Mad Max: Fury Road” is a hardened, no-holds-barred genre film from the creative mind of George Miller, who exhibits that after thirty years of waiting, the dust that settled on the “Mad Max” franchise was only waiting to be furiously blown off again.

Monte’s Rating

4.50 out of 5.00

Mad Max: Fury Road - Movie Review by Eric Forthun

Mad Max: Fury Road  

Starring Tom Hardy, Charlize Theron, Rosie Huntington-Whiteley, Zoe Kravitz, and Nicholas Hoult

Directed by George Miller

Rated R

Run Time: 120 minutes

Genre: Action-Adventure

Opens May 15th

By Eric Forthun of Cinematic Shadows

Imagine a beautifully composed and intimate film, telling a story of a world destroyed by men with a pervasive allegory for social class and female empowerment. If I told you that this same film includes a mutant playing a flamethrower guitar as his fellow henchmen drive across the deserts of the world, you'd probably be taken aback. But that aptly describes Mad Max: Fury Road, George Miller's tremendously exciting action film that probably contains the greatest action scenes I've ever encountered. That may sound like hyperbole, but I'm being frank. They're simply that great. The story comes thirty years after the last installment in the Mad Max franchise but feels like its own self-contained narrative, picking up with the titular Max and his adventures with Furiosa, a brazenly great action character played by Charlize Theron. George Miller's vision of this dystopia is brilliantly rendered and mostly feels like a moving portrait, composed of eye-opening moments that are enhanced by the film's rapid-fire, relentless editing. Fury Road culminates into a brilliant action film, marked by deeply rooted passion and commitment from everyone involved.

The story follows Max Rockatansky (Tom Hardy), a man of action and decidedly few words. He is haunted by the death of his wife and daughter, which consume him every waking moment. When he is captured by Immortan Joe (Hugh Keays-Byrne, who played the original villain in 1979's Mad Max), Max must find a way to escape from the grasps of the self-proclaimed leader running the fabled city of Citadel. Joe rules over people by controlling their water and oil, two of the most valuable resources in the post-apocalyptic landscape. He's also held back by a breathing machine and a rather grotesque body that seems to have been morphed by nuclear war; suffice to say, he's a big ball of ugly. Nonetheless, Joe sends out his lead officer, Imperator Furiosa (Charlize Theron), to the nearby Fueltown in order to carry a recent shipment, but she takes her war rig off of the beaten path and goes on a life-altering detour. This leads to a savage race that, along with Max's escape, involves the search for a better land amidst a world marked by chaos, car chases, cannibals, and crow people. If that doesn't pique your interest, then maybe this isn't the film for you.

The primary driving force of the film, outside of the absolutely bonkers car chases, is Furiosa's desire to preserve five women that are being held captive as Joe's many wives. He aims to impregnate them on the off-chance that he will find the perfect human specimen to raise, killing the children that do not come out as expected. These women are played by the likes of Rosie Huntington-Whiteley (famous from Transformers: Dark of the Moon), Zoe Kravitz (who is on a tear over the next month, with a strong supporting role in the compelling Good Kill and a role in the great Dope), and Riley Keough (a grandchild of Elvis Presley). These women are decidedly strong and can stand on their own, while acting as Joe's crutch because he doesn't want to kill his valuable property. The longer that Furiosa holds onto them, the longer she has a bargaining tool and time to find a means of finally escaping his cruel grasp. Theron's role is fantastic and suits her demeanor perfectly; it's a role that reminds me of Sigourney Weaver's defining Ripley in Alien. She's a better shot than almost every man in the film, and the overarching feminist pull that latches onto the weak-minded men proves to be a worthwhile twist in the testosterone-fueled action genre.

And that action. Oh boy, that action. It's remarkably insane, fueled by fire, blood, and fuel. But most importantly, it's given context and moves as fluidly as water in a river. Most of the film has to be fluid because it remains, effectively, one long car chase. While that sounds like a disaster waiting to happen on paper, it becomes a tour-de-force of emotional impact and narrative substance. However conventional the story elements may seem, they become enhanced by their action groundings and the amazing set pieces that Miller and company have composed. Junkie XL's music sets the tone masterfully, moving between high-octane metal and symphonic ballads without a missed beat, and the aggressive editing from Jason Ballantine and Margaret Sixel makes the film simultaneously intimate and overwhelming. Even John Seale's cinematography, which feels both picturesque and like a twelve-year old boy's wet dream, owes a lot to the likes of Lawrence of Arabia, a piece of high praise but one that works due to their use of desert heat and terrain to great cinematic advantage. Mad Max: Fury Road is an absolute blast of a motion picture, marked by strong performances, immaculate direction, and an overwhelmingly ambitious vision of a dystopia.