The Conjuring 2 - Movie Review by Monte Yazzie

The Conjuring 2  

Director: James Wan

Starring: Patrick Wilson, Vera Farmiga, Madison Wolfe, Frances O’Conner, Lauren Esposito, and Simon McBurney

While waiting inside a darkened theater a young woman wearing a nun outfit with a painted white face wandered around the theater scaring unsuspecting moviegoers. While watching the playful theatrics help assist in building the optimal atmosphere for watching the newest summer scarefest, I overheard a young man telling his girlfriend “when it gets scary just tell yourself that it’s only a movie”. This comment immediately made me think of the tagline for Wes Craven’s 1972 horror shocker “Last House on the Left” that says “To avoid fainting, keep repeating: It’s only a movie, it’s only a movie, it’s only a movie”. In todays oversaturated horror genre market it’s unlikely that a film will affect audiences as much as Wes Craven’s film did in the 1970’s but it’s nice to see some film directors are still trying.

Much of the recent resurgence in the demon/apparition/ghost storytelling in film can be attributed to the creative mind of James Wan and his 2010 film “Insidious”. Utilizing clever effects and playing the genre characteristics for all of its knowing jump scares and anticipatory frights helped bring the scares back into the mainstream market. Though it wasn’t until 2013’s “The Conjuring” that Mr. Wan succeeded in capturing the essence of the traditional ghost story.

Ed (Patrick Wilson) and Lorraine (Vera Farmiga) Warren return as the famed ghost hunters in “The Conjuring 2”. The two, now very famous personalities, are making appearances on talk shows defending their apparitional findings. However they are not received as respected authorities, in fact they are considered more charlatans than conjurers. This doesn’t stop them from having a connection to the unknown; specifically it doesn’t stop Lorraine from having visions of a terrifyingly ghostly nun offering a warning. A warning the couple ignores when a young girl becomes possessed by a malevolent spirit in England.

Let’s get this out of the way, “The Conjuring 2” will make you jump, it made me jump a few times. When you can evoke this quality for a horror fan, many followers of the genre can spot a jump scare coming a mile away, you've achieved something special. James Wan has been doing this for years. Mr. Wan is an excellent director who understands the composition of horror films, who understands how genre characteristics work with one another, who understands that in order to trick the intelligent horror fan he needs to do things differently. That was makes Mr. Wan so good at his craft, he pays attention to the little details and puts as much effort into the small elements as he does the big ones. In this regard “The Conjuring 2” does a lot of things really well.

Unfortunately Mr. Wan has also gone bigger and bolder with his visions as his film career has expanded. Perhaps this is what makes him a good choice to direct something like DC Comics upcoming “Aquaman”. However in this horror film, one that states that it is "based on a true story" and grounds itself firmly in the reality of this family from England, there are quite a few moments that don’t seem to fit the construction of the world crafted. The use of a walking CGI scare element, a character similar to one seen in the film "The Babadook", is out of place as are some of the scares that will provoke a jump but quickly begin to replay themselves without much effectiveness. And at over 2 hours in length the film begins to feel more drawn out than dialed in. Still, during this time Mr. Wan gives us sights, specifically a nun character, that is bound to be seen walking the neighborhood at Halloween this fall.

"The Conjuring 2" is a worthy sequel, that's a hard accomplishment to achieve in this genre. While the film will undoubtedly have some audiences squirming with frightful anticipation, these scares are great in the moment but won't last long after viewing like they did with the first film. While some will appreciate the vagueness of the story elements, some will be asking for more details; regardless the film does a good job of creating drama with the characters and displaying the dynamics of a family and married couple struggling to comprehend the unknown. Director James Wan is doing a lot of familiar things very well in "The Conjuring 2", providing a little bit of everything to cover all tastes returning to the haunted house.

Monte's Rating

3.25 out of 5.00

Now You See Me 2 - Movie Review by Jeff Mitchell

‘Now You See Me 2’ conjures too much silliness to believe its magic  

Directed by: Jon M. Chu

Written by: Ed Solomon

Starring: Mark Ruffalo, Jesse Eisenberg, Woody Harrelson, Dave Franco, Lizzy Caplan, Daniel Radcliffe, and Morgan Freeman

“Now You See Me 2” - “Generally, magicians don’t know what to say, so they say stupid and redundant crap like, ‘Here I am holding a red ball.’” – Teller

After sitting through over two hours of “Now You See Me 2”, the magicians on hand definitely know what to say, but, unfortunately, they are conversing and performing in the confines of a silly, uninspired and sanctimonious story.   Atlas (Jesse Eisenberg), Jack (Dave Franco), Merritt (Woody Harrelson), and Dylan (Mark Ruffalo) are back for a follow-up to the commercially successful 2013 flick.

Altas, Jack and Merritt are three of the original team who called themselves The Four Horseman, but alas, Henley (Isla Fisher) decided to ride towards greener pastures.   Within the first 10 minutes of this picture, however, the film introduces us to a sassy and wisecracking replacement named Lula (Lizzy Caplan), and hence a new Girl Horseman squares up this magical quartet.   Now, the Horseman have been in hiding for a few years, but they reappear at a phone app (OCTA) launch in New York City and are poised to sabotage it.  Apparently, the OCTA app will do very bad things to your phone and tap into photos of your Great Aunt Alice’s cat and nab your 401K’s account password.

Since The Four Horseman are a team of do-gooders who follow orders from a mysterious, Illuminati-like group called “The Eye”, they are set to expose the truth and prevent a horrible wrong.  Their plans, however, fall sideways and so do their bodies (literally), as they materialize into the lair of a young entrepreneur who forces them to commit an impossible-to-fathom heist.

“Now You See Me 2” is a polarizing film in which one either buys into the action, intrigue and big sequences or one does not.  Please place me in the latter category.

Director Jon M. Chu and writer Ed Solomon certainly offer big ideas and magical eye candy, including the aforementioned heist of a paper-thin computer card.  The 10 to 15 minute caper offers a dazzling sleight of hand as the Horsemen flip, dip and slip the card between themselves under the watchful eyes of several security guards.  Even though the card defies all physics logic and flies with the help of obvious CGI, the wild sequence does evoke intrigue and tension.

For me, this card-flipping scene and the final trick were the high points of the film, and everything else pushed the narrative to absurd heights.

We get a flashback to Dylan’s childhood, constant references to the ever-present - but never seen - Eye, a leadership tug-of-war between Dylan and Atlas, and lots of quips between the magicians, which are much more amusing to them than the audience.  Iongs Magic Shop in Macau garners lots of play and Merritt’s evil twin brother - also played by Harrelson - makes some dastardly appearances as well.  Chu places all of Solomon’s ingredients into this very busy and showy soup, and rather than handing us a spoon, he tosses us a funnel to ingest the concoction.

The screenplay wants us to simply guzzle the cinematic junk food while ignoring the shredded narrative threads. The inviting A-list cast, dazzling tricks and fancy locales look and feel good at the moment, but the end results and big reveals do not offer much sustenance or satisfaction.

“Now You See Me 2” is not (completely) stupid or (entirely) filled with redundant crap.  I just did not believe in it, and believability is a very important ingredient for an effective magic trick...and a winning movie.  (1.5/4 stars)  

Now You See Me 2 - Movie Review by Kaely Monahan

The Four Horsemen return at more of a trot than a gallop. The sequel to “Now You See Me” tries to capture the magic but fails to capture the thrills of the first film. Most of the cast returns. Noticeably, Isla Fisher, who played Henley, is gone. Replacing her is Lizzy Caplan as Lula—handpicked by Mark Ruffalo’s Dylan Rhodes. The film starts with a young Dylan watching his father perform his final trick. The tragedy is a stark contrast to the previous “Now You See Me.” The emotionally heavy introduction feels out of place and probably should have been left as subtext, like in the first film.

Return to present day, “Now You See Me 2” shows the idle existence of Jack Wilder (Dave Franco), Atlas (Jesse Eisenberg) and Merritt McKinney (Woody Harrelson). They have been forced into a year of hiding by underground magic organization The Eye. The three men are itching to get out in front of an audience once more but none more so than Atlas.

He resents Dylan’s leadership and seeks to take over the Horsemen as ringleader. The setup is rather “blah” and reminiscent of one too many teen-angst films. Meanwhile, Morgan Freeman reprises his role as the magic buster Thaddeus Bradley. And he has a bone to pick. He still maintains that he was framed.

The troop, now with Lula, get their first gig at last. Once more they are using illusion to bring down a baddie—one who is able to get people’s private information. There’s a back and forth throughout the entire film between privacy and the public space. The topic is fascinating, but ill-handled in by writers Ed Soloman and Pete Chiarelli.

The new heist to overthrow the baddie fails and the Horsemen find themselves part of a magic trick. They end up in China and come to meet the real villain. A delightfully narcissistic Daniel Radcliffe as Walter. (Evil Harry Potter?) Walter intends to use the Horsemen to do some stealing for him.

More heists, more angst, all culminating in a citywide trick on New Year’s Eve in London. The problem with “Now You See Me 2” is there is so much chatter. The characters spend more time talking than performing magic, which is what we’re here to see. While not an outright awful film, it could have had tighter character arcs and sharper dialogue. It tried to grasp at relevant topics such as privacy but that ended up bogging the action down.

The film fails to capture the thrills of its predecessor, but if anything redeems it, it’s Daniel Radcliffe.

• Kaely Monahan is an entertainment reporter and creator of the film review podcast Popcorn Fan Film Reviews.

Warcraft - Movie Review by Jeff Mitchell

Despite impressive visuals, ‘Warcraft’ loses its way  

Directed by:  Duncan Jones

Starring: Travis Fimmel, Paula Patton, Ben Foster, Dominic Cooper, Toby Kebbell, and Daniel Wu

“Warcraft” – Life on the Orcs’ world of Draenor seems pretty difficult.   Brutal wind storms plague the rocky and arid terrain, a place that makes the setting in “Mad Max: Fury Road” (2015) look like a tropical paradise.  Draenor is a dying planet, and the Orcs need a new place to call home.  Fortunately (for them), Gul’dan (Daniel Wu) knows some horrible magic tricks, and he summons energy - by stealing the life forces from thousands of prisoners in one massive swoop - to open a cosmic portal to a beautiful, green planet called Azeroth.  This is the framework of an animated movie based upon a video game with the same name, “Warcraft”.

Admittedly, I never played “Warcraft”, but I imagine that fans of the game hold an abundance of anticipation and excitement over a feature-length film experience.  For me, I blindly walked into this movie.   My eyesight very much appreciated the effort expended into creating incredibly intricate set designs and detailed animated characters, and the overall narrative felt straight forward, but the individual subplots were very confusing and nonsensical.  Clocking in with a runtime of 2 hours 3 minutes, the film unnecessarily meanders through about a half dozen threads that appear to be edited with a meat cleaver.   As an unbiased, but also uniformed, viewer, the film feels like a four-hour story ratcheted down to 123 minutes, and several pieces in this cinematic puzzle seemed blatantly missing.

For instance, Lothar (Travis Fimmel), a battle-tested knight, falls for Garona (Paula Patton), who is half-human and half-Orc.  In the movie’s last act, the script implies that they have a deep connection, but it comes as a surprise to the audience, because they do not share much quality screen time.  Well, I guess that they must have had an off-screen romance.

In another scene, an ambush takes place in a large canyon, but suddenly, one of the groups intended for the trap safely sits on the summit’s peak and away from the danger without any explanation.  I suppose their ascent up the rocky ledge found itself on the cutting room floor, or they developed a teleportation device so cunning, not even the audience saw it.   Personally, I’m betting on the former.

Now, I commend director Duncan Jones for the film’s visuals and the “Avatar”-like spectacle in IMAX 3D.  The special effects team impressively created the film’s creatures, like the Orcs, and they seamlessly move like real beings throughout the picture. The Orcs, in particular, are massively intimidating.  Standing approximately 8 feet tall, bulging with Hulk-like muscles and welding stone hammers to smash their enemies’ heads like helpless watermelons, Orcs terrorize their opponents like a fictional fight between UFC’s Brock Lesnar and Sheldon (Jim Parsons) from “The Big Bang Theory”.

They simply present a wildly insane physical mismatch, and individual confrontations and large-scale battles impress even the most layman of “Warcraft” viewers.   Jones also features Durotan’s (Toby Kebbell) personal story, and even though this Orc is part of the Horde, he is a family man too and simply wants a better life for his wife and son on Azeroth.

On the other hand, the Orcs invade Azeroth and are bound and determined to conquer kingdoms run by humans, dwarfs and other races similar to those from “The Lord of the Rings” (2001).  As previously stated, the overall narrative between Azerothians and Orcs is clear, but the actual ground-level developments are not only confusing, but repetitive as well.  We endlessly shift from little-explained places like The Guardian’s (Ben Foster) Tower of Babel to Llane Wrynn’s (Dominic Cooper) castle to some random fights in woody surroundings, and this cycle repeats without much apparent thought until the eventual final encounter.

It is all a bit perplexing, but interestingly enough, after the first 15 minutes of “Warcraft”, one could walk out of the movie theatre, return to one’s seat an hour later and not really miss any advancement of the plot.    In other words, attempting to analyze the choppy scenarios or just turning one’s brain on autopilot will yield the same result for the moviegoer.  Yes, life on Draenor proves to be difficult, just like my first “Warcraft” experience.  (1.5/4 stars)

Me Before You - Movie Review by Jeff Mitchell

Clarke’s bright star turn lights up ‘Me Before You’  

Directed by: Thea Sharrock

Written by: Jojo Moyes

Starring: Emilia Clarke, Sam Claflin, Janet McTeer, and Charles Dance

“Me Before You” (2016) - Sunny days do not usually reign over the United Kingdom, and the lack of ample amounts of sunshine can potentially sour anyone’s mood.   For Will Traynor (Sam Claflin), a wealthy 31-year-old with the rugged good looks of an Abercrombie & Fitch model, he suffers from a steady diet of gloom, but not because of the weather.  Two years earlier, a traffic accident left him paralyzed from the chest down, and his parents, Camilla and Stephen (Janet McTeer and Charles Dance), now care for him.  Will lives in their mansion in Wales adjacent to Pembroke Castle in the lap of luxury, but without the ability to waterski, jump off of a rocky cliff, run, or simply walk to the bathroom, he feels lost, a shell of the person that he once was.

Enter Louisa (Emilia Clarke).

Camilla hires her to help look after Will from Mondays through Saturdays, 8am to 5pm, but without any formal care worker training, Louisa feels woefully ill-prepared for the job.  Fortunately, Will’s full-time nurse, Nathan (Stephen Peacocke), explains that she just needs to be his friend.

Now, writer Jojo Moyes adapted her novel for the screen, and director Thea Sharrock and she bring “Me Before You” to life, but it is the 29-year-old Clarke who brings so much heart and soul to the movie.  The camera loves Emilia and her character, Louisa.  Almost always bathing in eternal optimism and wearing a radiant smile which sometimes crinkles her eyes nearly shut with happiness, Louisa could lighten anyone’s spirits.  Her radiant charm force can only be matched by her offbeat and colorful wardrobe, complete with butterfly blouses, heart-covered dresses and flowery heels, and after months of daily visits, she seemingly never wears the same outfit twice.  I might be as fashion illiterate as the next American male, but even I noticed that Louisa’s vibrant apparel matched her engaging personality, and Will gradually warms up to her peachy appeal.

Even though their slow-building romance is soaked with predictability, Clarke’s innocent allure and onscreen chemistry with Claflin help us ignore the familiar storyline.  Less familiar - at least to American audiences - are the natural and manmade surroundings that Pembrokesire, Wales certainly offers, and Sharrock does a beautiful job of capturing its natural and manmade surroundings.

Under an unusual multitude of bright days, the rolling and green landscape also carries a stark contrast between the have and have-nots, as an imposing ancient castle props itself above the modest housing below.  Not unlike the feudal systems of centuries past, the film highlights the lifestyle contrasts between Louisa and Will’s families.  Both households provide love and support to their respective children, but Louisa’s father delivers slight verbal jabs in her direction.  He probably does not even realize it, but they seem to contribute to her lack of initiative.

Louisa worked as a waitress at The Buttered Bun for six years, and if not for slow business, she probably would have labored there for 30 more.  Will does notice her self-imposed limitations and encourages her to fly away from the mundane and break the cycle of “just getting by”.  You see, Louisa’s gifts of kindness, virtue and warmth are (finally) reciprocated by Will in the aforementioned ways, and Louisa responds in kind.

The narrative dances with these exchanges throughout much of the movie, and it hits its best moments when both boy and girl grow as human beings while sharing their genuine love affair.  Of course, one problem certainly exists, and it is Will’s paralysis.  Will’s physical state of being is non-issue for Louisa, but he views it as a horrible stumbling block from which he cannot figuratively or literally dodge. The film’s third act effectively follows this one-sided argument to one of two possible conclusions, while Will and Louisa continue to show their affectionate harmony.

In addition, Sharrock does not hurt her film’s cause by placing the leads in gorgeous locales like a posh music hall and a tropical paradise.  These locations and Will’s paralysis help disguise the fact that a love story between two people from very different backgrounds has already been told in thousands of movies, but – as previously mentioned - I became blind to the similarities because of Emilia Clarke’s bright star turn.  Inside or outside the UK, I foresee many sunny days in her future.  (3/4 stars)

An interview with Elyse Steinberg, one of the directors of Weiner by Kaely Monahan

A politician exposed: Behind the award winning Weiner.

By Kaely Monahan

Sex. Scandal. Politics. The life of Anthony Weiner is now an infamous character in American politics. His sexting scandal brought down the ax on his rising political career in Congress. Two years after the shameful incident he decided to begin again—this time throwing his hat into the ring for the mayor of New York.

Weine" won critical acclaim and Sundance’s U.S. Grand Jury Prize for the documentary genre. It's a well-deserved win. Rarely has a documentary peered into the life of a politician so seamlessly. Some praise must be given to Weiner himself. It was bold of him to allow documentarians nearly unlimited admittance to his life.

Directors Josh Kriegman and Elyse Steinberg were with Weiner for four months during his run for mayor. They captured Weiner at his most candid, illuminated his character so that we could truly see what a complex man he is. There is no judgment in the film, yet what is captured is a rare glimpse into the life of a man who seems to perpetually shoot himself in the foot.

The opportunity to film Weiner's story came about through a cordial acquaintance between Kriegman and Weiner.  Kriegman worked for him during his 2005 mayoral campaign. During that time, they got to know each other and talked about the possibility of doing a documentary one day. Things all clicked into place in 2013 when Weiner was running for mayor again.

Yet a question remains: Why did he allow the documentarians to shoot his campaign? The question grew all the more glaring as another sex scandal broke during his mayoral bid.

“It is a question we wondered about ourselves,” Steinberg said.

The film poses the question as well, but she points out that at the end Weiner confesses that he wanted the world to see him for who he is—the real Anthony Weiner. Not the figure dragged through the mud by the media.

“That was our intention as well with the film,” Steinberg said. “He had been just ridiculed and judged and become a caricature.”

She and Kriegman said they wanted to show both the private and the public life of Anthony Weiner. He is both a public figure and a family man. He has good intentions and terrible vices. In effect, he is a tragic hero. And it's impossible to not watch with some horror as he ruins himself all over again.

“Two different stories emerge and that was our hope with telling this film,” Steinberg said. “You also see a very relatable couple. They’re living in New York, raising their kid, and you get a fuller look at them then what was playing out on the cover of the New York Post.”

At the time filming began, no one knew what would happen the filmmakers said. At first, Weiner was soaring in popularity. He had the comeback story—a man redeemed and worthy of a second chance. It looked like he was going to win.

At his side the entire time was Huma.

“She is obviously more quiet than Anthony, but I do think she shares some of his desire of wanting a more fair and complete story told,” Steinberg said.

However, as the film progresses the strain of another scandal, the grinding pace of the campaign, the battles with the media and, perhaps, the presence of the filmmakers wore them both down into raw and reactive individuals. There are moments where you can clearly see Huma change from the strong supportive wife to one who is aghast and humiliated. Though not intrusive, the filmmakers captured the painfully raw moments which make you want to look away. Yet you’re unable to.

Steinberg and Kriegman manage to capture the full reality of Weiner’s demise. We see him at his best and worst. We see him performing and as a husband and father. The film also reveals a man who appears obsessed with his own story, and rightly or wrongly Weiner tries to tell it.

• Kaely Monahan is a entertainment reporter and creator of the film review podcast Popcorn Fan Film Reviews.

Weiner - Movie Review by Jeff Mitchell

‘Weiner’ unbelievably captures a disastrous political train wreck  

Directors:  Josh Kriegman and Elyse Steinberg

Starring:  Anthony Weiner, Huma Abedin

“Weiner” (2016) - “The name of a man is a numbing blow from which he never recovers.” – Marshall McLuhan

This quote from Mr. McLuhan appears on the screen during this documentary’s opening moments about a former, seven-term U.S. congressman, and - in some ways – it obviously fits, but Anthony Weiner’s actions, not his name, delivered a fatal blow to his 2013 campaign to become New York City’s mayor.

Directors Josh Kriegman and Elyse Steinberg probably believed Weiner’s shenanigans were behind him when they began filming a behind-the-scenes mayoral election run, but they stumbled into one of the most infamous train wrecks in modern political history.   In addition to providing a first-hand look at the inner workings of a large scale political campaign – complete with pushing signs, making phone calls and deliberating communication strategies -  it offers a clear and transparent view into the devastating consequences of betraying the trust of coworkers, staff members, supporters, and most of all, one’s spouse.  Make no mistake, this film – at times – is very painful to watch, but it presents a fascinating, disastrous reality show that truly is difficult to fathom.

Well, the movie documents Weiner’s experience in running for mayor, 13 weeks out until Election Day.  At first, Kriegman and Steinberg refreshingly find that voters climbed on the bandwagon, rather than anticipating a future train wreck.   Weiner conveyed honest, public contrition about sending salacious – although clothed – photos to a few women over social media back in 2011, and, after plenty of counseling, his wife, Huma Abedin, forgave him.

We see Huma stand with her husband at a fundraising luncheon, and she states, “I love my city, and I believe in my husband.”

Although the overall pleasantries look appropriate and cordial, one notes that Huma did not say that she loved her husband, and this public statement “miss” – deliberate or not – presents a bit of unfortunate foreshadowing.

New York City voters, however, seem behind him, as the camera picks up Weiner darting through city streets at midday and high-fiving hundreds of people like a pro wrestler running around a ring before his match.  Small groups and large crowds offer him smiles, acceptance and – most importantly – a second chance.    His popularity actually is a feel-good story, because a sizable portion of the public seemingly has forgiven him.  With about eight weeks until Election Day, the polls have him leading the crowded race, when without warning, disaster strikes.

New personal and more explicit photos of him appear everywhere on the news, and Anthony Weiner suddenly has to explain his behavior all over again.   The press and general public alike believed all of the vulgar pictures, texts and chat room material were previously flushed out, but new evidence of additional chicanery dramatically changes the mood of the previously-mentioned entities.

The film shows entertainment and news personalities like Bill Maher, Stephen Colbert, Lawrence O’Donnell, and the press, in general, immediately pounce, as Weiner’s 2011 fall from grace repeats itself in 2013.

Weiner takes countless questions – whether in person, over the phone or on television - such as, “Are more women going to come forward?”, “What are you hiding today?” and “What’s wrong with you?”

Not unlike the Looney Tunes’ Wile E. Coyote holding onto an ACME anvil and falling (and crashing) from a rocky ledge over and over again, he has no choice but to stand there and take his beatings.   His constituents rightfully are not in a forgiving mood either, and they throw their collective hands up in disgust.

“Fool me once, shame on you.  Fool me twice, shame on me.”

Kriegman and Steinberg’s cameras catch Weiner stoically stewing and suffering during private moments in the bare, white and impersonal campaign rooms and in various places in his apartment.  The point is that Weiner has no escape hatch, but neither do his friends, colleagues and wife, because emotional collateral damage does not discriminate.

Huma suffers the most indignation and humiliation during the entire downfall, and she communicates her pain and disgust in mostly nonverbal ways.   During the film’s last hour, the words, “that poor woman” scream in our brains, as we see her reactions to this horror show of past poor judgment play out publicly - and amazingly - in front of a pair of documentarians in her own home.

Mr. McLuhan could be right, but I do not know if Huma will ever recover.  As a viewer, it will be a while before I do. (3.5/4 stars)

Maggie's Plan - Movie Review by Jeff Mitchell

Make casual plans to check out ‘Maggie’s Plan’  

Writer/director: Rebecca Miller

Starring: Greta Gerwig, Ethan Hawke, Julianne Moore, Bill Hader, Maya Rudolph

“Maggie’s Plan” - New York City is known a “city that never sleeps.”   Since Maggie (Greta Gerwig) is a New Yorker and has 24 waking-hours per day at her disposal, she finds time for not one plan - as the film’s title suggests - but two.  Gerwig is experienced and so proficient at playing quirky, well-intentioned - but also a bit chaotic - urban dwellers, and see “Frances Ha” (2012) and “Mistress America” (2015) for a pair of prime examples.  She offers a similar performance here, except this time, her character, Maggie, is more mature and enjoys a fulfilling career.

She creates business plans for talented artists and teaches at a nearby college, and although monetary security is a non-issue, she does not believe that romantic security and children are in her future.  Maggie exclaims that men lose interest in her only after a few months, so her best chance to raise a child is not through a life partner but via artificial insemination, aka her first plan.   Now, I chose to ignore that Rebecca Miller’s film is numerically misnamed, because, namely, “Maggie’s Plan” owns eccentric charm.

The film - like a Woody Allen picture - invites the audience into the lives of some New York intellectuals whose biggest problem is their over or under analysis of their own relationships.   Miller introduces us to the aforementioned individuals, as they point out their partners’ shortcomings or grumble about living sans a spouse while also casually mentioning their background in art history or research in fictocriticism.

Maggie clearly is the most likable, as the others carry around their own personal gray clouds above their heads, but the very talented supporting players - including Ethan Hawke, Julianne Moore, Bill Hader, and Maya Rudolph - balance their characters’ semi-gloom-and-doom with amusing subtleties.   Moore steals nearly every scene as Georgette, a self-absorbed professor with a thick Danish accent.  Others - including her husband John (Hawke) - demonize Georgette as an overly-pragmatic, unfeeling opportunist.   Once we finally see her on-screen, she certainly possesses these unflattering qualities, but Moore skillfully delivers them with welcoming, comedic charm while also generating some surprising sympathy for her character.

Maggie elicits sympathy too.  As she makes headway with her first plan, she unexpectedly falls in love as well, and as the collective-they say, “the best-laid plans of mice and men often go awry.”   Hence, Maggie dreams up a second plan to untangle her way out of her first.   Gerwig owns the cinematic chops to carry the film’s narrative to a logical conclusion, but while watching “Maggie’s Plan”, it is nearly impossible to not compare her character to her work in the previously-mentioned New York City comedies.

In “Frances Ha” and “Mistress America”, her characters make clumsy mistakes, but they bounce back with youthful exuberance while simultaneously processing their miscalculations.  Here, Maggie is also aware of her missteps but is more victimized, in an emotional and neglectful way.  Gerwig makes it a breeze to root for Maggie, but we, the audience, comply under a more concerning eye, and these emotions bruise the comedic tone into something more subjugated.

Luckily, the second half of picture takes a major turn towards John and Georgette, which smartly diverts from Maggie’s romantic difficulties and the somewhat heavier spirit.  On the other hand, this change also meanders, and the movie ends up feeling like two hours when its actual runtime is just 98 minutes.

Although the excitement admittedly wanes at times, Moore, Gerwig and the rest of the cast hold our attention towards this small group of New Yorkers and their relationship problems.  Maybe their lives would be better served if the city garnered a least a couple hours of “figurative sleep” each night.  Well, sleep or no sleep, as we all know, issues of the heart are universal.   (2.5/4 stars) 

X-Men: Apocalypse - Movie Review by Monte Yazzie

X-Men: Apocalypse  

Dir: Bryan Singer

Starring: James McAvoy, Michael Fassbender, Jennifer Lawrence, Nicholas Hoult, Oscar Isaac, Rose Byrne, Evan Peters, Josh Helman, Sophie Turner, Tye Sheridan, Lucas Till, Kodi Smit-McPhee, and Olivia Munn

Director Bryan Singer is one of the early creators responsible for the superhero movement in filmmaking, an explosion that currently floods the market. Way back in 2000 Mr. Singer directed "X-Men" with exceptional success, bringing together a team of mutant heroes with extraordinary powers that includes the adamantium clawed fan favorite Wolverine, still played by Hugh Jackman today. The franchise has had its share of ups and downs. Still, even at the low points fans were still lining up for the next installment in the series. Just when it seemed like everything was heading towards a dead-end, "X-Men: First Class" retooled the story and recast the film bringing a new aspect to the franchise with fresh faces mixing in with franchise familiar ones. Building upon this success "X-Men: Days of Future Past" was released and crafted one of the best films in the history of the franchise.

The X-Men have a villain to fight against, the ancient mutant named En Sabah Nur, otherwise known as Apocalypse, played in heavy make-up by Oscar Isaac. Apocalypse has been trapped underneath a pyramid but has been released; his mission is to annihilate the world with an army of powerful mutants, one of which is Magneto played again by Michael Fassbender. Magneto tried to live a peaceful life in Poland, with a wife and child, but a heartbreaking tragedy turns Magneto hate-filled once again. Charles Xavier (James McAvoy) is running a school for gifted students, taking in a young Jean Grey (Sophie Turner) and Scott “Cyclops” Summers (Tye Sheridan), both characters you will remember from the first movies. Apocalypse recruits his team of extraordinary individuals to destroy the world and it’s up to the X-Men to stop them.

There is a whole lot of movie going on here but with a running time of 144 minutes there is ample time to tell this extensive tale. Unfortunately filling the time with a good story and engaging characters doesn’t seem to have been high on the list for the creative team here. “X-Men: Apocalypse” isn’t terrible, in fact there are quite a few moments that are actually very good. There is another entertaining slow-motion scene with Quicksilver (Evan Peters), the connections to the original material and the groundwork established through the entire franchise make for some interesting moments, and there is even a small cameo from a franchise favorite that sets into motion a really exciting story arc. So what’s the problem? Aside from the final minutes of the film and an occasional moment from Apocalypse, we’ve seen this all before. As mentioned before Quicksilver steals the show with another slow motion scene, Magneto returns to Auschwitz in an almost pointless scene, and a majority of the dramatic action moments move and operate in the same way that it always has. It’s old material just repackaged in a new movie. It may be stated by some keen film fans out there that this method is what most films do anyway, remake, reimagine, and repackage properties. However there are moments in this film where the only new aspect is a new character.

Still, there are moments when the film simply functions as a vehicle of pure entertainment. Most of this sentiment is due to the efforts of the talented cast; even the small characters seem to fit their role especially well. James McAvoy and Michael Fassbender are again good; they have built chemistry over these films that displays their character’s admiration and disdain for one another, similarly to the former two actors playing these roles Patrick Stewart and Ian McKellan. Newcomers to the franchise Sophie Turner and Tye Sheridan are good also, even when they get lost in the mix of characters on display here. Unfortunately Olivia Munn, playing Psylocke, is reduced to standing around and making her best superhero pose behind Apocalypse.

“X-Men: Apocalypse” has a few high points that are sure to entertain and excite fans of the franchise, however it also has quite a few low points. At times it feels like a really long and cluttered setup to another story coming in the future, hopefully the next outing will spend more time creating a narrative that makes the viewer care about these characters again.

Monte’s Rating

2.75 out of 5.00

The Nice Guys - Movie Review by Kaely Monahan

‘The Nice Guys’ takes the buddy-cop genre to another level By Kaely Monahan

It’s becoming exceedingly rare to find films that aren’t franchised yet are still good. In an age of superheroes, space adventures and reboots, it’s refreshing to come across a film that is doing something different, yet familiar. “The Nice Guys” proves that there is still room—and a need for—other types of films beyond spandexed heroes and over CGI’d effects.

Billed as a hilarious buddy-cop film, “The Nice Guys” stars Ryan Gosling and Russell Crowe as a pair of mismatched private eyes who have to solve a disappearance of a young woman. As rote as the premise is, Shane Black's script and direction take the story down strange, funny and at times, very dark roads.

Gosling’s Holland March is a drunk, single father with no sense of smell. (A strange yet revealing character flaw.) He is more than ready to give up his clients if it means avoiding confrontation. His daughter, Holly (Angourie Rice) is a with-it pre-teen who is a better sleuth than her father. Their bond is bitter-sweet and a surprising addition. Black gives just the right amount of attention to the relationship so it makes sense for it to be there.

It's a strained relationship. March's drinking does play a significant role but the reason for his alcoholism is actually addressed and handled with real sensitivity. But it doesn't bog down the story or drag March's or Holly's characters. They are cute and sweet as much as heart-wrenching.

Jackson Healy (played by an overweight Crowe), is an amateur hitman with a surprisingly strong moral center. Not that he adheres to it consistently. He’s more than happy to beat the crap out of someone if he’s paid to do it. He takes his jobs seriously, whereas March is dismissive and calculating, despite the alcohol fog he inhabits. Healy is a perfect role for Crowe, who would probably have a hard time playing an outright comedic role. Healy is instead a straight man—and the perfect opposite to Gosling's March.

The detectives start off on the opposite sides of the missing girl case—Healy is out to protect her from “stalkers” while March is trying to track her down on the behalf of a distraught aunt. The case grows more intricate and complicated forcing the two team up, however reluctantly. March’s daughter finds a way to get involved as well, and it’s really her who finds the missing girl.

For every moment that feels predictable, director Shane Black turns the situation on its head. The dialogue is smart, fluid but grounded. Gosling and Crowe make a fantastic comedic duo. From the first meeting where Healy breaks March’s arm to the final scene in a backwater L.A. cantina, they make you laugh and grimace.

Black hits all the right beats with “The Nice Guys.” However, what makes this film stand out from the norm is the amount of violence. People die in this film. Parts get really dark and emotional. It’s a rousing twist on the buddy-cop genre.

This shouldn’t be surprising from a director like Black. He is, after all, considered one of the “pioneer” action film screenwriters—at least according to his IMDB page. Although anyone who wants to disagree should look at his long list of hits including “Lethal Weapon” and “Iron Man 3.” This latest film fits nicely into his oeuvre.

If anything is lacking, it’s that this film wasn’t as funny as the trailers make it out to be. Don’t go in with high expectations of continuous belly laughs. There’s a few really good ones but there are just as many cringe-worthy scenes as well. This is a comedy with real substance and grit.

• Kaely Monahan is a entertainment reporter and creator of the film review podcast Popcorn Fan Film Reviews.

The Nice Guys - Movie Review by Monte Yazzie

The Nice Guys  

Director: Shane Black

Starring: Ryan Gosling, Russell Crowe, Angourie Rice, Matt Bomer, Margaret Qualley, Keith David, Beau Knapp, and Kim Basinger

116 Minutes

Warner Bros.

The beginning musical notes and title font of director Shane Black’s crime-noir-comedy “The Nice Guys” lets the viewer know we are taking a trip back to the 1970’s. The nostalgia of the era, the film takes place specifically in 1977, flows through every frame as Mr. Black fully presents his love for noir detective procedurals and buddy cop films. “The Nice Guys” is a rather funny comedy with crime-noir elements strung throughout. It’s a none-to-serious film, slapstick and silliness with high amounts of violence, which works remarkably well because of the commitment of the fabulous cast, Ryan Gosling, Russell Crowe, and Angourie Rice. Director Shane Black has crafted an entertaining comedy that plays the 1970’s era in all its nostalgic glory for a good-natured, adult laugh.

Private investigator Holland March (Ryan Gosling) is examining the case of the apparent suicide of a famous porn star. March is a single father to a young girl named Holly (Angourie Rice); the two have a strained yet loving relationship with one another. Jackson Healy (Russell Crowe) is a punch first, ask questions later private eye who crosses paths, brass knuckles on hand, with March; the two agree to work together to find a girl named Amelia who recently went missing. The case leads the two men into a dangerous situation with political powers, mobsters, and a hitman.

There is a crime afoot in “The Nice Guys”, one that leads the team of March and Healy on a wild goose chase of sorts throughout Los Angeles. The era specific details of the costumes and locations provides for some entertaining moments, like a party with a digital “Earth, Wind, and Fire” providing on-stage entertainment.  The blending of these historical pieces into the structure of the film is achieved quite nicely. While the film details the crime of a murdered porn star, a political conspiracy, and a case of mistaken identity, these themes never move into any significant dramatic territory because the film rarely ventures far from the comedic tone it establishes. While it may not feel like other retro-noir films like the serious and dramatic “L.A. Confidential” or the clever and bizarre “Inherent Vice”, “The Nice Guys” delivers a polished comedy that pulls distinguishable elements from crime and noir films. There are a few times when the story doesn’t live up to the execution that composes it, for all the era rendering and attention to detail the narrative never comes around to being all that engrossing but instead exists as a vehicle to watch great actors compose great characters.

Mr. Black establishes great chemistry within his characters in this film; Ryan Gosling and Russell Crowe play off each other quite well. They are the quintessential embodiment of the phrase “we can do this the easy way or the hard way”. Mr. Crowe and his grouchy, grumpy Jackson Healy prefers the hard way, usually a fist to the face of degenerates he has been hired to hurt or, in the case of his would-be partner, a broken arm and bloody nose. Ryan Gosling and his laid-back, sometimes sleazy, mostly bumbling Holland March prefers the easy way, usually a half-hearted investigation to gather just enough information to swindle old women out of more cash to find their loved ones. However opposite once these two characters get together they accommodate one another, Mr. Crowe and Mr. Gosling are easily one of the most entertaining duos on-screen in some time. However, while these two actors are great it’s the relationship of Holland March and his daughter Holly that offers the most balanced heart and humor. Angourie Rice plays Holly naïve and inquisitive, a young woman who is more similar to her father than she’d like to let on. Whether her sneaking along on an investigation to an adult entertainment party or applying her father’s blundering investigation strategies into her own skillset, young Ms. Rice holds her own very well.

Director Shane Black understands this genre; one should watch his exceptional neo-noir film from 2005 “Kiss Kiss Bang Bang” for proof. “The Nice Guys” utilizes the 1970’s era to build an interesting atmosphere to accommodate the comedic structure, while the narrative is somewhat underwhelming Ryan Gosling and Russell Crowe are worth the price of admission. “The Nice Guys” is an enjoyable film, definitely one of the funniest of the year so far.

Monte’s Rating

4.00 out of 5.00

The Lobster - Movie Review by Jeff Mitchell

Reach out and grab ‘The Lobster’, the best film of 2016 (so far)  

Directed by: Yorgos Lanthimos

Starring:  Colin Farrell, Rachel Weisz, John C. Reilly, Lea Seydoux, Ben Whishaw, Ashley Jensen, and Jessica Barden

“The Lobster” - On an ordinary, overcast day in the British Isles, David (Colin Farrell) checks into a 5-star, countryside hotel.  His stay will be far from predictable, and in fact, under a most bizarre scenario, David has 45 days to find love.  If he succeeds, he will discover happiness forever, but if he fails, the people running the hotel will turn him into an animal, literally an animal.  Luckily, David gets to decide which animal he could become (how novel, right?), and out of all the animals in the universe, he chooses to (potentially) be a lobster.  It seems like a strange choice, but he explains that they live for a hundred years, remain fertile for their entire lives, and plus, he loves the sea.

Quite frankly, all 1 hour 58 minutes of director Yorgos Lanthimos’ picture seems like a strange choice.  Yes, “The Lobster” is a wonderful, inspiring, hilarious, and frightening choice, and - led by a highly inventive screenplay and a purposely subdued performance by Farrell - it is, without question, the best movie that I have seen (so far) in 2016.   Set in a present day, parallel universe or next decade’s dystopia, Lanthimos chooses muted colors and gray palettes to paint this world and successfully sets an uncomfortable and uncertain mood.

The setting looks like a typical 2016 day on Planet Earth, but everyone’s behavior and internal logic is off-kilter.  Part of the film’s magic is the big (and small) discoveries of this world’s misaligned ideals and mores.  By revealing them in this review, I would be performing a massive disservice to you, the viewer, so I won’t.  Just know that the picture divulges them in uproarious, shocking and sometimes perverse ways and, in the process, raises excellent questions about romantic relationships.

Why do we choose a specific mate?  What do we sacrifice when we form a partnership?  Are we honest with - and do we remain true to - ourselves?  Is a chosen partner a true soul mate or someone who simply fits a need?

Through David’s (and other characters’) experiences in the hotel, it attempts to answer these questions, while it entertains in an oddball manner.  I would compare this film’s experience to a Wes Anderson picture with oodles of visual eccentricities and quirky individuals but with a more forlorn feel.  It is difficult to find a happy character on the screen, but these desperate singles certainly look for comfort and joy.  A terrific array of actors like Ashley Jensen, Jessica Barden, John C. Reilly, and Ben Whishaw play these unattached, “despairing” beings, and the screenplay does not provide them names, and instead, we know them as Biscuit Woman, Nosebleed Woman, Lisping Man, and Limping Man.

Meanwhile Farrell – who is somewhat unrecognizable with a 70s haircut, rimless glasses and a Tom Selleck-like mustache - is completely fascinating as a restrained, introverted architect who seems to have let life dictate his path for him.  Farrell’s David meanders through this “new path” and attempts to find the right key to someone’s heart before his six-week and three-day journey reaches its curfew.  With the clock ticking, he needs to take a stand and fight for his destiny, and it might arrive in the form of a pretty, short sighted woman (Rachel Weisz).

Then again, perhaps searching for a lifelong love under duress or societal ideals might be a short sighted endeavor.

Well, just be aware of those literal and figurative lobster nets in the sea and onshore, respectively.  (4/4 stars)

Neighbors 2: Sorority Rising - Movie Review by Jeff Mitchell

‘Neighbors 2: Sorority Rising’ hosts a less funny, more vulgar block party  

Director: Nicholas Stoller

Starring: Seth Rogen, Rose Byrne, Zac Efron, and Chloe Grace Moretz

“Neighbors 2: Sorority Rising” – In today’s housing market, home prices have steadily risen, and thankfully, millions of previously underwater homeowners are now treading water or happily swimming in the financial black.  Even more thankfully, for those looking to buy a home or refinance their current one, interest rates sit at near record lows and are basically dirt cheap.   Although “Neighbors 2: Sorority Rising” - the sequel to the very funny 2014 Seth Rogen/Zac Efron comedy - does not hit record lows, it feels cheap.

In “Neighbors” (2014), Mac and Kelly Radner (Seth Rogen and Rose Byrne) and their baby fought with wild fraternity members who lived next door.

The Radners won!

The sequel picks up a few years later, and Mac and Kelly live next to a vacant and quiet fraternity house.  With another baby on the way, they decide to buy a bigger house in the suburbs and accepted an offer on their current home.  As long as their place passes inspection and the new owners are satisfied by the end of the 30-day escrow period, Mac and Kelly are “home free”.  Very soon after – in the most unfortunate timing that can only exist in the movies – three girls rent the former fraternity house to start their new sorority, Kappa Nu.  Now, the previously happy couple must begin a new struggle (although just a 30-day one) against loud college kids, and the “twist” is that they declare war on coeds.

After sitting through this 1 hour 32 minute picture, the movie’s nuance seems infinitesimal, and “Neighbors 2: Sorority Rising” feels like a lazy, less funny and more vulgar repeat of its predecessor.    First of all, the sequel recycles the overall narrative and individual plot points, as the Radners and kids predictably volley between point and counterpoint, and once Mac and Kelly cause financial hardships for the sorority, tensions escalate into some ugliness

Obviously, Mac and Kelly feel weary about figuratively duking it out with another set of college-aged neighbors.  Despite some admittedly entertaining moments involving a plan to steal a giant stash of pot, Efron’s amusing return as Teddy and a few likeable girl-power sequences with Shelby (Chloe Grace Moretz), Beth (Kiersey Clemons) and Nora (Beanie Feldstein), I was tired of (and bored with) the same exact story as well, and – although I did not count the jokes - the movie simply felt less funny.   Now, “The Hangover Part II” (2011) is probably the worst offender – in recent memory - of repeating its original film’s story arc, but this movie is a close second.

Hence, the script turns unnecessarily distasteful at random times that beg for – the aforementioned – cheap laughs.  For instance, in the opening scene, Mac and Kelly are having sex, and she feels a bit nauseous.  Their moment is ruined when she throws up all over his face.  The five writers – including Rogen and Evan Goldberg – could have concocted a dozen ways to stifle the intimacy, but they chose vomit, because vomit is funny.  (Well, not at that moment, actually.)  The script also calls for two wholly unflattering shots of male nudity and the partial birth of a newborn that probably meant to elicit laughter but instead, generated plenty of groans from the audience.

I am perfectly fine with vulgarity and far from a rated-R killjoy, but the movie delivered these scenes like a real estate agent pushing a house with an outdated kitchen, faulty foundation and old roof.  I should not discount the entire film, because if you have not seen “Neighbors” (2014), this movie might certainly feel fresh and original, and it is good to see cinematic, female leads stand up for themselves.

If you have seen “Neighbors” - and you must see this film - maybe wait until “Neighbors 2: Sorority Rising” hits the rental market or finds itself on the movie channels.  Hey, it takes one to know one, and you’ll be getting off cheap.  (1.5/4 stars)

A Bigger Splash - Movie Review by Jeff Mitchell

‘A Bigger Splash’ does not reach its thirsty audience  

Director:  Luca Guadagnino

Starring:  Tilda Swinton, Matthias Schoenaerts, Ralph Fiennes, and Dakota Johnson

“A Bigger Splash” – Marianne Lane (Tilda Swinton), one of the most popular singers on the planet, regularly performs in packed football stadiums, and fans recognize her wherever she travels.   Thus, getting away to a remote coastal town in Italy for vacation seems like an appropriate retreat to recharge her batteries.  Actually, she needs to recharge her vocal chords, and her doctor gave her strict orders to refrain from speaking, let alone singing, for a while.   Well, Marianne is with her boyfriend, Paul (Matthias Schoenaerts), and they enjoy swimming, relaxing and lounging around naked under the warm Mediterranean sun.

Without much warning, however, Harry (Ralph Fiennes) and his 22 year-old daughter, Penelope (Dakota Johnson), decide to drop in on the happy couple and interrupt their stay of solitude.  Since he is Marianne’s ex-music producer/boyfriend, Paul and she entertain the idea, but with appropriate reservations.

Director Luca Guadagnino guides this reserved picture with the potential for explosive results.  Unfortunately, its potential is not quite realized.   Guadagnino paints four interesting characters on a canvas of close quarters and attempts to charge up the sexual tension with taboo possibilities of mixing partners.   Marianne leads an iconic music career, but Paul carries a subdued persona, and the two have recently flown through a trying period.  Meanwhile, Harry, a free spirit, beams flamboyance and excitement and still carries a torch for his ex.   He is the 50 year-old party boy that we all unfortunately know, who is afflicted with a sizable case arrested development and is always ready for a trip to Vegas.   Whether spinning a random Rolling Stones’ record, ordering a round of drinks or dancing and jumping into the swimming pool in his birthday suit, Harry is constantly searching for a good time.

Penelope is the last ingredient in this toxic brew - complete with an aloof guise (and a probable trust fund) - and casually mentions, “I fall in love with every pretty thing.”

This combustible blend of personalities promises fireworks, but instead the narrative – through most of the 2 hour 4 minute runtime - simply trudges along like a slow walk on the beach.   Now, slow walks on beach can be pleasant enough, but with Harry predictably and painfully courting Marianne and Penelope offering forbidden fruit at a long-drawn-out pace, I felt very little anxiety.   Hence, the picture inadvertently lulls us into ambivalence about any probable repercussions.

Guadagnino does offer many effective flashbacks into Marianne, Harry and Paul’s history, but the three leads seem much more captivating many years ago.  These peeks into the past gives us opportunities to see and hear Marianne hold conversations, sing in the studio and stand in an obscenely large rock venue, but in the present day, she can barely whisper.   Quite frankly, that’s how I felt about the story:  it mostly whispered.   Certainly, Guadagnino is a talented filmmaker, and he does provide some compelling visuals of the beautiful Italian countryside and offers some nifty work on a winding roadway and also on an off-camera drone during an actual big splash in a swimming pool.   Some impressive shots and a talented acting ensemble keep us somewhat curious, but ultimately, the uninspiring adult frolic does not hold enough intrigue for the film’s ultimate payoff.

It makes me wonder if the gorgeous locale distracted the filmmakers into taking a vacation during their working shoot, like that random guy who preoccupies himself with social media on his phone during a live rock concert.   Hey, Marianne Lane supposedly delivers a killer show, but “that random guy” missed it.

Yea…so did the rest of us.  (2/4 stars)

The Man Who Knew Infinity - Movie Review by Jeff Mitchell

“Patel plus Irons equals a gem in ‘The Man Who Knew Infinity’”  

Written/directed by:  Matt Brown

Starring:  Dev Patel, Jeremy Irons, Toby Jones, Devika Bhise

“The Man Who Knew Infinity” (2016) – Look into any high school science curriculum, and most assuredly, Sir Isaac Newton and his Law of Universal Gravitation are mentioned.   Newton – born in 1642 and a Trinity College alumnus – “discovered” gravity when an apple allegedly fell from a tree and hit him on the head.   “Schoolhouse Rock!”, the beloved animated series, even remarks on Newton and his famous red fruit, but another off-the-charts brilliant mathematician - who you probably have never heard of – also attended Trinity College, and his story is infinitely intriguing as well.

Srinivasa Ramanujan (Dev Patel) worked as a modest clerk in Madras, India, but through a well-placed letter to Trinity’s G.H. Hardy (Jeremy Irons), Ramanujan found a place to potentially publish his work and study with his new English mentor.   In 1914, his journey to one of England’s most prominent universities was literally and figuratively arduous, and writer/director Matt Brown’s biopic effectively and painfully captures Ramanujan’s challenges in his new British surroundings.

After traveling 6,000 miles and leaving his new wife, Janaki (Devika Bhise), behind, Ramanujan was also fiercely challenged by institutional racism in many corners of Cambridge.  Whether an instructor declaring that Ramanujan does not belong at Trinity or a group of WWI veterans beating him and calling him names, India’s warm weather and Janaki’s even brighter smile might as well be 6 million miles away.  In addition, Brown smartly captures one of the most affecting sequences in the picture when Ramanujan stumbles into a room with life-sized statues and stained glass windows, and all of the faces in the artwork are a colorless white.

Fortunately, Hardy, professor Littlewood (Toby Jones) and a few faculty members provide some sanctuary for him and do not hold bigoted feelings, as they embrace his genius and accept him like any other student.   On the other hand, the relationship between Hardy and Ramanujan is contentious in a different way.   While this prodigy can scribe absurdly implausible calculations and theories which could unlock answers to the impossible, Hardy repeatedly demands proof of the formulas because “intuition has to be held accountable” in order for Ramanujan’s work to be widely accepted.

This sometimes volatile teacher/student dynamic combusts at times and slow burns in others, and Irons pulls his highly-trained thespian levers to capture Hardy’s marvel and admiration for Ramanujan while also conveying his character’s inherent limitations of compassion and open communication.   Hardy deeply cares about Ramanujan but does not know how to express it.  Although Irons makes it awfully difficult to find fault with Hardy, because at the turn of the 20^th Century, how many middle-aged men knew how to express warmth or feelings?   At the same time, Patel emotionally projects Ramanujan’s mental and physical churn, but, like Hardy, his character does not always communicate the way he should.

Now, no matter how an audience member feels about math, Brown presents the material in a curious way for even the most arithmetic-challenged layman.  We do not visually see Ramanujan’s calculations dance on the screen, while he processes his thoughts, like John Nash (Russell Crowe) in “A Beautiful Mind” (2001).   Rather he passionately states his ideas or presents pages of handwritten equations, and the screenplay allows Hardy to judge their validity for us.  Since the frequent exchanges of (and how to package) these ideas reside with the two leads, the audience does not need to struggle with comprehending the meaning or interpreting the exceptional concepts.  Rather, the picture thankfully allows us to simply and easily absorb the dynamics between two fascinating characters and their relationship, and Patel and Irons rise to the task in grand fashion.

Trinity College is certainly fashionable and elegant, and Brown cinematically captures a worldly environment where cultured men proudly walk in green courtyards and sit on rich mahogany, but cigar-smoking elders broker backroom deals too.  It is far away from Ramanujan’s humble beginnings and his caring wife, but Trinity College is a place where he makes history.  The kind of history that you discover in textbooks.  (3.5/4 stars) 

Captain America: Civil War - Movie Review by Monte Yazzie

Captain America: Civil War  

Directed by: Anthony Russo and Joe Russo

Starring: Chris Evans, Robert Downey Jr., Scarlett Johansson, Sebastian Stan, Don Cheadle, Anthony Mackie, Elizabeth Olsen, Paul Bettany, Jeremy Renner, Chadwick Boseman, Paul Rudd, Tom Holland, William Hurt, Emily VanCamp, and Daniel Brühl

A splash page in comic book terms is a full page, sometimes two page, illustration that is meant to set the mood and grab the reader's attention. These iconic images would often show the hero meeting the villain for the first time or introduce the reader to a new world in a far off planet or alternate dimension. However, none grabbed my attention more than the images of hero verse hero altercations and few were as effectively captivating as Marvel Comics "Civil War" saga that set an entire team of heroes against one another.

The Marvel cinematic universe has crafted an exceptional world were all their superhero characters can coexist with one another if the setting calls for it. While inviting more people to the party has potential to confuse elements, Marvel's world has taken meticulous steps to establish all the characters and their motivations, we know who and what Captain America stands for, we know how Iron Man will respond to conflict; this is one of the primary reasons a film as jam packed with characters and storylines like "Captain America: Civil War" is works so well.

The Avengers have battled hordes of flying aliens and a powerful living automaton. They have prevented the world from coming to an abrupt end numerous times; though in the process have left a trail of damage, destruction, and devastation. After a recent battle to prevent another weapon of mass destruction from getting into the wrong hands, significant collateral damage in Lagos, Nigeria provokes the action of world leaders to put limitations and stipulations on the activities of The Avengers. Steve “Captain America” Rogers (Chris Evans) is conflicted with the decision to comply with these measures while Tony “Ironman” Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) is assured that the actions of The Avengers have consequences and they need to held accountable and regulated. This becomes a significant rift within the team, placing allegiances on the side of Captain America and Ironman. Further complicating the situation is Captain America’s old friend Bucky “The Winter Soldier” Barnes (Sebastian Stan), who reappears as the primary target in a deadly explosion.

The superhero film continues to get bigger and bigger, packing more action and more characters into their films in a consistent game of movie one-upmanship. However, Marvel has taken their time, over many years now, establishing these characters. Ironman has three standalone films and Captain America has two, the viewer has an in-depth understanding of the history shared individually and between each of these characters, which is why the subsequent battle brings about as much emotion as it does. It should be stated that for those coming into this film without any prior Marvel character film knowledge may have a difficult time keeping up, however the film does its best to try and explain the events that have led up to this point.

While this film may have a primary emphasis on Captain America this is very much an Avengers film. Most of the team is here, with the exception of Thor and Bruce “The Hulk” Banner, but there are also some new recruits. The Black Panther (Chadwick Boseman), the prince and protector of the fictional African nation of Wakanda, joins the team to capture the wanted Bucky Barnes. In a clever addition directors Anthony and Joe Russo give a refreshing spin to the familiar Spiderman (Tom Holland) story. In every scene the teenage Peter Parker, with a finally recognizable New York accent, adds a youthful comedic charm to cut into the serious tone just when it seems to be taking over. Even the recurring characters have their place in the film; Natasha “Black Widow” Romanoff continues to play a critical role within the team structure of The Avengers, Wanda “Scarlett Witch” Maximoff (Elizabeth Olsen) and Vision (Paul Bettany) have an interesting chemistry, Sam “Falcon” Wilson (Anthony Mackie) and Clint “Hawkeye” Barton (Jeremy Renner) have some good moments with Captain America, and Scott “Ant-Man” Lang (Paul Rudd) steals every moment in his small cameo in the film. Again, just reading these last few lines may call out warning signs to some viewers thinking that this many characters all in one film would be a mess, they are all utilized effectively and play their role, big or small, within the film excellently.

We’ve talked about a wealth of heroes, but what about the villain? Here lies the small issue with “Captain America: Civil War”. Talented actor Daniel Brühl plays Zemo, a mysterious terrorist with an equally mysterious motivation. Mr. Brühl is hardly utilized and the villainous plot that he puts into action doesn’t make a whole lot of sense. It’s not hard to question the lack of attention paid to this aspect when the whole reason for this film is to see Team Ironman faceoff against Team Captain America. And once the amazing, jaw-dropping action scene everyone is waiting for happens at an airport, it becomes much harder to pick out the flaws when you just watched a comic book splash page come to life, however once the dust of settles questions arise.

“Captain America: Civil War” is an enjoyable and fun experience even though the film tackles more serious subject mater this time around, you can sense darker days on the rise for the characters in the future. While some narrative points, specifically those concerning the villains, don’t completely connect one action to another in the long run, the superhero franchise at work here has established enough confidence throughout their film journey that they can pull off a showcase this complicated with ease. While “Captain America: Civil War” may not be the best film in the Marvel cinematic universe, it is definitely one of the best ensemble superhero films the studio has put together so far.

Monte’s Rating

4.00 out of 5.00

Sing Street - Movie Review by Jeff Mitchell

“’Sing Street’ is a wonderful ‘80s music, coming-of-age road trip”  

Writer/Director:  John Carney

Starring:  Ferdia Walsh-Peelo, Jack Reynor, Lucy Boynton, Mark McKenna, Ben Carolan, and Kelly Thornton

“Sing Street” (2016) - “The girl.  It’s all about the girl, isn’t it?”

Ask most 15 year-old boys that question, and they will probably answer, “Yes!”

In “Sing Street”, for Conor (Ferdia Walsh-Peelo) – a 15 year-old Dubliner - the answer to his older brother’s (Jack Reynor) inquiry is also a strong affirmative.   You see, Conor falls hard for a pretty, but aloof, brunette named Raphina (Lucy Boynton), and he figures the way to her heart is to form a band and feature her in their music videos.

An average high school boy chasing a beautiful girl is a classic story, and writer/director John Carney’s (“Once” (2007), “Begin Again” (2013)) wonderfully entertaining, music-filled, coming-of-age picture looks back at an inspirational time for modern rock, the 1980s, to tell it.  Now, inspiration in 1985 Dublin might seem hard to come by, on the surface.  During very trying economic times, the movie mentions that many Irish people were searching for jobs – and better lives - by hopping on ferries and moving to England.  For Conor’s parents, Robert (Aiden Gillen) and Penny (Maria Doyle Kennedy), they are not leaving Ireland anytime soon, but they face the strong prospect of leaving one another, and their current financial dilemma is not helping their domestic issues.

Unfortunately, Robert and Penny’s constant fighting affects Conor - and his siblings, Brendan (Reynor) and Ann (Kelly Thornton) -  and to make matters doubly-worse, he’s bullied at his new school by a mean-spirited student and the headmaster, Brother Baxter (Don Wycherley).

In a recent interview, Carney mentioned that music became a place of solace when he ran into difficult periods in his life, and Conor looks for the same medium for comfort and, of course, to get The Girl.

The film does a colorful job of painting Conor’s school, Synge Street, as a ragtag, juvenile – and sometimes comedic - asylum of sorts, where adolescent boys attempt to reach for clarity, but their judgment becomes stymied and clouded by mad rushes of testosterone in the crowded and chaotic hallways and courtyards.

Fortunately, Conor finds an ally in Darren (Ben Carolan), a short red-headed kid with braces who carries handmade business cards on small rectangular cardboard pieces.  Darren agrees to manage Conor’s new band, even though neither one knows the first thing about playing an instrument or writing songs.  With terrific instincts, Carney pulls a hilarious ode to the Irish musical “The Commitments” (1991), as the boys go door-to-door to recruit their brothers-in-music for a hopeful trip to superstardom.   Along their journey, the conversations between the kids have a “Sandlot” or “Goonies”-feel, except they enjoy a tighter camaraderie, as they nearly always work together towards a common goal: creating their own music.

Conor’s closest friend is the musically-gifted Eamon (Mark McKenna), and Carney hits the right notes during several scenes when the two teens write songs.  The audience does see and hear the fruits of their labor, as Sing Street (their band) ambitiously records their own music videos.   Their songs are very catchy and rightfully capture an ‘80s feel, and some classic tunes from the decade – from The Cure, The Clash, Duran Duran, and more - are peppered into the film as well.   Magically and organically, Carney piles us into his time machine and sends us on a nostalgic and passionate trip to the sights, sounds and styles of the early music video era.

Sure, 1985 was a unique time, but Carney explores other themes that are timeless, namely the previously mentioned coming-of-age narrative.   Brendan plays an important part in Conor’s life, and he could figuratively and literally put his arm around his little brother or emotionally and physically shove him (as brothers sometimes do).   You have to see the movie to discover which method of brotherly bonding that Brendan chooses, but let’s just say that certain moments of their together-screen time are key to the movie.

Just like stacks of amplifiers and speakers, “Sing Street” carries lots of weight, and its mix of fun pop music with an exploration into the unfair stage of life called the teen years completely satisfies.  I can - just about - guarantee that this movie will bring a warm smile to anyone’s face, because “Sing Street” is about The Girl…and so much more. (3.5/4 stars)

Sing Street - Movie Review by Kaely Monahan

Charming, delightful and genuine, Sing Street is a must-see   By Kaely Monahan

Music is, once more, the centerpiece of John Carney’s newest feature Sing Street. The Irish filmmaker, known for the heart warming Once, proves yet again his best work shines when the core of the story is music.

Set in the mid-1980s in Dublin, Sing Street introduces Ferida Walsh-Peelo as Conor. A 15-year-old who's life is flipped completely sideways. His parents, played by Adrian Gillen and Maria Doyle Kennedy, are separating. His music obsessed, pot-smoking older brother, Brendan (Jack Reynor) is defiantly resigned and unplugged for all intents and purpose. The underutilized Kelly Thornton plays the sister Ann.

In the midst of the family upheaval, Conor is forced to leave his school to attend the less than distinguished Catholic school that's both rougher and cheaper than his former institution. Bullied by both teachers and students, Conor has to navigate a tumultuous home life as well as school. (The headmaster forces him to go about in his socks when he fails to show up wearing the requisite black shoes.)

But Carney doesn’t allow the film to bog down in melodramatics. There’s enough situational humor and clever scripting to lift the heavy themes up. Each character is lively and well fleshed out (except poor Ann).

Enter in the bodacious 16-year-old Raphina (Lucy Boyton). Conor sees her across the street from his school and is instantly star struck. She's unlike any girl he’s ever seen. His one friend at school reveals that she doesn't talk to anybody and there's no use in him trying to chat her up. But Conor is undeterred. Not to mention he's a clever lad. He comes up with a scheme to entice the elusive self-described model into meeting up with him. He tells her he has a band and they’re looking for a model to be in their music video.

The only problem is he doesn’t have a band. But that doesn’t stop him. He gets one together which includes the nerdy, rabbit loving, but music savvy Eamon (Mark McKenna) and the entrepreneurial Darren (Ben Carolan)—plus the only black kid in school (or all of Dublin)—Percy Chamburuka as Ngig. A few more boys round out the band, which has yet to figure out what kind of band they want to be.

They explore sounds, try their hand at covers and try to come up with a name. Their sound is truly awful at first, but utterly hilarious despite that. It’s eventually decided that they are “futurists.” It’s vague enough to be impressive without having to be specific. They call themselves Sing Street.

What starts off as a ploy to win the girl begins to evolve into something more for Conor. Guided by Brendan, Conor begins to truly craft himself into first a believable and then authentic artist. The band develops its unique style and improves. Raphina becomes the star and muse of the band, at least in Conor's mind.

As he dives further into his music, Conor begins to broadened his understanding of the world. He starts to notice all the little tragedies of other people, not just his own: Raphina as the orphaned, abused and misguided girl; Brendan as the musician who gave up on his dreams; his parents who married for convenience and are now breaking each other; the bully at school and his troubled home life—Conor begins to see that life is what you make of it and if you have a dream you have to chase it—whether it's getting the girl or running away to London.

Sing Street feels like Carney is revisiting the past through his characters. He invites the audience to do much the same, reliving all the hit music, MTV, the social and cultural upheavals (this is a time when divorce was not allowed in Ireland), and fashions trends. Even for those who didn’t grow up in the ’80s there is a strong sense of nostalgia running through this film.

At its core, Sing Street is a love story. It touches the heart so deeply and yet gently. Despite the heavy themes, the film is light and delightfully funny and—personally speaking—this is my new favorite John Carney film.

• Kaely Monahan is a journalist, graduate of City University London and the creator of Popcorn Fan Film Reviews. Follow her @PopcornFans and @KaelyMonahan.

The Meddler - Movie Review by Jeff Mitchell

“Sarandon extends a warm invitation to ‘The Meddler’”  

Written and directed by:  Lorene Scafaria

Starring:  Susan Sarandon, Rose Byrne, J.K. Simmons, and Jerrod Carmichael

“The Meddler” (2016) - According to the dictionary, a meddler involves oneself in a matter without right or invitation.  Many times, parents appropriately intervene in their children’s lives when their offspring mess up or about to make a life mistake.   What about when children are grown?   Once a parent, always a parent, right?  Granted, I’m not a parent, but I have earned plenty of experience in shunning my mother’s “advice” after my 18^th birthday.  Sorry, Mom.

Marnie (Susan Sarandon) is a mother to Lori (Rose Byrne), a beautiful, 30-something TV show writer residing in Los Angeles, and mom decided to move from New York City to the City of Angels after her husband passed away.   Marnie loves living in Southern California and enjoys the gorgeous, year-round weather, shopping at an outdoor mall called The Grove and spending time with Lori.  Actually, spending time is an understatement and obsessing over her daughter seems more accurate.  Marnie repeatedly calls Lori, routinely stops over at her house unannounced, warns her about the latest serial killers on the news, and badgers her about getting back with her ex-boyfriend.   Lori loves her mom, but with the constant smothering, she needs a break.

Marnie somewhat gets the message and begins a journey of self-discovery in writer/director Lorene Scafaria’s (“Seeking a Friend for the End of the World” (2012)) film.  With Marnie’s husband passing away almost two years ago, Sarandon’s character feels highly relatable for millions and millions of widows and widowers who try to find their place in the world minus their lifetime partner.   With her wide-open, New York persona, Marnie tries to make new friends and does so rather easily, as she befriends a Genius Bar worker from a nearby Apple store (Jerrod Carmichael), Lori’s close pal (Cecily Strong) and an elderly woman at the hospital (Jo Jordan).  They do not seem to mind Marnie’s enabling behavior and unfiltered advice (and probably because they are not related to her).  You see, Marnie’s heart is always in the right place, and admittedly, her recommendations usually prove right, even if her methods are over-the-top.

Scafaria plays out the scenarios in cartoonish - but in believable and comedic - ways, as we cringe when Marnie suggests to throw a wedding for her daughter’s aforementioned friend, Jillian (Strong), without even running it by Lori first.  I remember mumbling “Oh no” a number of times throughout the 1 hour 40 minute runtime as Marnie steps where she does not belong, but she is attempting to fill a void and find value in herself, and there is a certain beauty in that.

Speaking of beauty, “The Meddler” is a terrific vehicle for Sarandon, and the camera captures Marnie’s gentle spirit for long stretches.  For instance, she breaks out of her comfort zone and dates a retired cop nicknamed Zipper (J.K. Simmons) and the next morning, turns to the kitchen and prepares an egg and a slice of toast.  We see the crack of the egg and the popping of toast, and then Marnie just spends a quiet minute eating her morning creation while smiling and soaking up the moment.   This is just one of many instances when Scafaria gives Sarandon the time and space to simply act without saying a word.

From strictly a narrative perspective, the movie is not particularly remarkable or ground-breaking, and a similar tale from 2015 starring Blythe Danner called “I’ll See You in My Dreams” worked a bit better.  At times, “The Meddler” meanders through plot points like a Saturday afternoon, Lifetime movie, but its strength is with the characters, both main and supporting.   Sarandon shines in the lead, and Byrne, Simmons and Carmichael deliver rich, genuine performances, as their characters maintain or build relationships with Marnie.  Whether or not Marnie learns from the past, she is a person worth knowing, and as an audience member, I was grateful for the invitation.  (3/4 stars)    

Papa: Hemingway in Cuba - Movie Review by Jeff Mitchell

“’Papa: Hemingway in Cuba’ is important but not quite a cinematic page-turner”  

Director:  Bob Yari

Starring:  Adrian Sparks, Giovanni Ribisi and Joely Richardson

“Papa: Hemingway in Cuba” (2016) – In two ways, “Papa: Hemingway in Cuba” feels like an important event.  First of all, director Bob Yari’s film is allegedly the first American movie shot in Cuba since 1959, and he captures several memorable and gorgeous shots of the Havana skyline and various neighborhoods for the audience.  As the movie played, I felt fortunate to witness it.  The Cuban backdrop becomes a brand new, wondrous discovery for the audience, and I imagine that it is not unlike one peeking into East Berlin (in person) just after the wall came down in 1989.

Secondly, the movie chronicles the experiences of a journalist named Denne Bart Petitclerc’s who befriended Ernest Hemingway, beginning in 1957.  Petitclerc’s extraordinary opportunity to meet this literally legend provides the audience the same chance through this movie.  Petitclerc is actually named Ed Myers in the film and is nicely played by Giovanni Ribisi.  Hemingway (Adrian Sparks) and his wife Mary (Joely Richardson) take to Myers right away, and the movie volleys between Miami and Cuba as Ed travels back and forth to the Hemingway “compound” for multiple visits.

Ed gravitates to Hemingway like the father he never had, because his dad orphaned him when he was only four.  Ironically, Hemingway’s friends nicknamed him “Papa”, which seems utterly appropriate on a personal level for Ed.  During the first few scenes between Ed and Ernest, Sparks’ on-screen portrayal of the man appears spot-on.  He is wise and thought-provoking, and Ed listens to every one of Ernest’s casual words, because the chance of something completely profound might be spoken while conversing about fishing, women or travels.  These are some of the best exchanges in the movie.  In fact, at one moment, Ernest pulls a miraculous trick for Ed by writing down an entire story with just six words on a cocktail napkin.

Speaking of cocktails, Hemingway also presents his less than glamorous-side, as he displays his appetite for drinking too much, arguing with Mary and delving into paranoia.  Many of these sequences get nasty and unpleasant, but the collective they usually say: don’t get too close to your heroes, because you may not like what you see.  At the house, poet Evan Shipman (Shaun Toub) mentions to Ed that Hemingway can be – at times – “the meanest son of a b*tch you’ve ever seen” but also is a loyal and gentle friend.  Shipman adds that Hemingway is a genius, so one cannot expect that he should act like an ordinary man.

Unfortunately, as the narrative plays on, the movie feels rather ordinary and a bit of a soap opera.   Hemingway’s behavior becomes increasingly erratic, and although the movie does reveal some insight into the darkness of his personality, less and less of his reflective philosophy appears on the screen.  These might be shades of the man, but frequent and ugly verbal quarrels with Mary do not translate into an overall satisfying experience.   Still, “Papa: Hemingway in Cuba” has a lot to offer, especially for anyone curious about Cuba or Petitclerc’s experiences, but the film is not quite a cinematic page-turner. (2.5/4 stars)