Star Trek Beyond - Movie Review by Jeff Mitchell

‘Star Trek Beyond’ does not go beyond or even reach expectations  

Directed by: Justin Lin

Starring:  Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto, Karl Urban, Simon Pegg, Zoe Saldana, John Cho, Anton Yelchin, Idris Elba, and Sofia Boutella

“Star Trek Beyond” – The Star Trek phenomenon is a beloved science fiction entity with five television series and 13 feature-length films under its collective celestial belt.  Personally, I am a pretty serious Star Trek fan.  Now, I have never dressed up in a Federation uniform for a Comic-Con convention, but – admittedly – I have donned a Jean-Luc Picard costume for at least two Halloweens.  Those, however, are stories for another time.  I enjoy Star Trek for many reasons, and the crews’ comraderies and the engaging narratives that successfully balance logic, science and humanity are the two central motives for my fondness of the series and films.

“Star Trek Beyond” – like the last two movies – completely captures the charisma, tension and comedic interplay between its crew members.  Catching up with Kirk (Chris Pine), Spock (Zachary Quinto), Uhura (Zoe Saldana), Bones (Karl Urban), Scotty (Simon Pegg), Sulu (John Cho), and Chekov (Anton Yelchin) on the big screen is a wonderful, warm reunion between fans and characters which should happen more frequently than once every three or four years.

Unfortunately, director Justin Lin crashes a surprisingly lackluster and – at times – nonsensical story coupled with haphazard visuals and some bad judgement.  In spite of the wonderful crew chemistry and a couple spectacular sequences, this film disappoints by not offering an engaging narrative on few levels, but let’s level set.

The year is 2263, and the USS Enterprise is traveling in deep space on the third year of a five-year mission.  The crew is adjusting to their lengthy journey but also looking forward to some rest and relaxation on the Yorktown, a highly-sophisticated space station nearby to Parts Unknown to us, the audience.   The Yorktown is an impressive self-run facility which has the urban density of a Xandarian city in “Guardians of the Galaxy” (2014) with the vulnerable glassiness of Elysium in “Elysium” (2013).

The Enterprise is docked for seemingly five minutes, when they are called back out into space to rescue the crew of a crashed ship on a desolate planet.   Life becomes massively problematic for Kirk and the Enterprise, when everyone needs to abandon the ship and escape to the same desolate planet.   The antagonist opposite the Enterprise – and who caused their current strife - is a warlike, malevolent alien named Krall (Idris Elba), and he desperately searches for an ancient artifact that Kirk has in his possession.

Our Trek heroes are separated on this seemingly inhabitable mass of dormant, volcanic rock and must use their Starfleet training with limited communications to find one another, get off the planet and hopefully stop Krall and his unspecified plans.

Five writers (including Pegg) penned lots of entertaining dialogue between the leads, including a smart decision of pairing up Spock and Bones, as they trudge across the strange terrain and bicker and bond to the delight of both fans and nonfans.  Meanwhile, Scotty meets a technically-savvy warrior named Jaylah (Sofia Boutella).  She is a solid addition to the cast and humorously and repeatedly refers to Scotty as “Montgomery Scotty”.

One of the problems, however, is that no one can really infer who Krall is or his motivation outside of wanting this ancient artifact.  The script does not give us much opportunity to learn about him or his backstory throughout much of the picture.  Now, he absolutely does a destructive number on the Enterprise with his can opener-like, swarming tiny ships known as “bees”.  We also know that he is menacing, but he is unfamiliar in the Trek universe, and the script hardly devotes any time to reveal what makes him tick.

When the movie does reveal some mysteries from “behind the curtain”, it unfortunately feels preposterous, as the writers suffered from a case of trying to be too smart for their own good.   His motivations are not terribly believable either, and when a science-fiction movie’s villain is flawed, the overall product will suffer in some way.

Speaking of ways, many times I lost my way during the dizzying action sequences.  The designs of the Yorktown and the catacombs of the fractured Enterprise are impressively intricate, but they are also overwhelming.  As Lin’s cameras spin, dart and track through countless half-destroyed Enterprise hallways and the Yorktown’s wildly sophisticated urban structures, railways and passageways, I found myself losing perspective of where I was.  Lin does not explain how the Enterprise crew and Krall’s team are supposed to physically move from points A to B to C to D.  Instead, Lin just presents constant movement through a never-ending abundance of technology and alchemy, and so these colossal, time-consuming scenes lose their sense of tension and danger.  To put it simply, they were over-engineered.

The one exception is Krall’s initial attack on the Enterprise.  It transfers extraordinary amounts of helplessness from the screen to the audience, as his swarm looks like vicious nanotechnology attacking on a grand scale.  Regrettably, there are plot holes which puzzle on grand scales as well.  For instance, Jaylah found a crashed ship in which she now calls home and keeps it invisible to Krall, but he lived on the planet long before she arrived, so how would he not know that it exists?

Also, the Enterprise crew may have found a way to battle Krall’s bees, but their methods do not make any logical sense, and they rival Jeff Goldblum’s (character’s) inane computer virus idea in “Independence Day” (1996).   There are certainly more moments like the previously-mentioned two, and overall, the film seems too contrived, as the plot plods along from scene to scene on the planet’s surface and during some limited time in space. “Star Trek Beyond” feels like amateur hour, and that is ironic when considering the film’s extravagant heaps of special effects.

There are a few special human moments, such as the tributes to the late Leonard Nimoy and Anton Yelchin.  Also, during the movie’s first 10 minutes, Kirk mentions that he wonders about his life’s purpose and offers thoughts about his deceased father.  For some reason, Lin and company never revisit this seemingly important setup for Kirk, but my guess is…it will be part of the next film.

Good or bad, I’ll certainly spend two hours to see it, just like this movie.

That’s what Star Trek fans do. (1.5/4 stars)

Cafe Society - Movie Review by Jeff Mitchell

Allen’s ‘Café Society’ is not a golden film, but it is a valuable one  

Written/directed by:  Woody Allen

Starring:  Jesse Eisenberg, Kristen Stewart, Steve Carell, Blake Lively, Corey Stoll, and Parker Posey

“Café Society” – During woeful times, Americans tend to turn to movies for escape, and the Great Depression is a prime example.  This marriage between big screen entertainment and the economically-challenged general public soared in the 1930’s, and it is no coincidence that Hollywood’s Golden Age began during this time.

Bobby Dorfman (Jesse Eisenberg) – an eager 20-something - is experiencing woe of his own.  Wanting to leave his father’s struggling business in New York City, he packs his bags and looks to Hollywood for hope.  Actually, Bobby is looking for his Uncle Phil (Steve Carell) for hope, help and a job, or at least some contacts, to start a new life in the City of Angels.   Phil is a wealthy and connected Hollywood agent, and after some prodding, he hires Bobby as his assistant, and this young New Yorker immediately experiences the glitz and glamour of Tinsel Town.

Writer/director Woody Allen opens the door to this world in which everyone dresses for success and speaks at the top of their game with an “elevator speech” ripely prepared for anyone and everyone at a poolside party, a private film screening or a high-powered lunch.  Allen establishes and captures a clear sense of this tone with absolutely beautiful settings within the playgrounds of the rich and famous, and he also plays with colors and lighting.  For example, at one of Phil’s daytime events, everyone in attendance wears some form of yellow, gold or mustard, and at an evening event, the entire posh backyard environment carries a cool, but inviting, shade of electric blue.

The film is pleasing to the eye and so is a budding romance between Bobby and Phil’s secretary, Vonnie (Kristen Stewart).   Vonnie gives Bobby ample warning about her heart beating for another fella, but he does not surrender his efforts, and Allen captures some simple and sweet moments of an imperfect connection.   Allen’s writing connects during Bobby and Vonnie’s conversations and also between bit players and family members as well.  Bobby’s mother (Jeannie Berlin) and brother (Corey Stoll) are especially good and offer several comedic high points in the picture.

It is a little puzzling, however, that during the first half of the movie, Allen spends a significant amount of time on Bobby’s family back in New York, when the focus should be in Los Angeles.  The reason becomes clearer well into the second act, but the film suffers at times during the first hour, because it feels like meandering storytelling.   From a storytelling perspective, Allen takes up the narration, so his actual voice appears in the film, as well as his figurative one through the lead, Bobby.  Eisenberg successfully carries the director’s torch with this character’s combination of anxiety and hope towards a potential path of career and romantic attainment.  A budding career in California and soulful relationship with Vonnie could be in the cards, but they both will not be easy to reach.

Bobby’s brother-in-law quotes Socrates and says, “The unexamined life is not worth living, but the examined one is no bargain.”

For all the levity that the film brings, Allen slyly inserts emotional gravitas around this specific comment and offers something deeper than initially meets the eye.  One could argue that 2016 is a time of woe as well, and Allen’s film delivers some mild escapism and an unexpected reminder of an important life lesson.  “Café Society” may not be a golden film, but it is a valuable one.  (3/4 stars)

Jeff – a member of the Phoenix Critics Circle – has penned film reviews since 2008 and graduated from ASU’s Walter Cronkite School of Journalism.  Follow Jeff and the Phoenix Film Festival on Twitter @MitchFilmCritic and @PhoenixFilmFest, respectively.

Lights Out - Movie Review by Monte Yazzie

Lights Out  

Director: David F. Sandberg

Starring: Theresa Palmer, Gabriel Bateman, Alexander DiPersia, Maria Bello, and Billy Burke

Who’s afraid of the dark? It’s a fear that still motivates a genre of writers and filmmakers to create all manner of ghost, monster, stalker, demon that are living under the bed, inside the closet, or outside the front door. It motivated director David F. Sandberg to make one of the best short films in some time, a film that functions on the simple premise of lights on and lights off. “Lights Out” was the name of the short film and remains the name of the feature length studio film hitting theaters this weekend. And it’s sure to make a whole group of people think twice before they turn the lights out.

Martin (Gabriel Bateman) is a young boy living with his mother Sophie (Maria Bello), but everything isn’t all right. Whenever Martin turns off the lights a shadowy creature appears, when he turns the lights on it disappears. Every time he does this the creature gets closer and closer. This leads to Martin keeping the lights on and not sleeping while his mother continues to grow more distant and more consumed by her depression.

After Martin falls asleep in class, and his mother does not respond to calls to pick him up, his older sister Rebecca (Theresa Palmer) gets involved. Rebecca does not have a good relationship with her mother and wants to keep Martin away from her. Unfortunately this does not work out and Martin returns home with his mother and the closing grasp of the shadowy creature that lives in the dark.

If you are a horror movie fan there isn’t much here that you haven’t already seen, but that’s not necessarily a bad thing. This is the kind of horror film that many people will love because it incorporates much of the same material that makes horror fun for general audiences; especially those that love a summer scare. “Lights Out” is a mix of effective jump scares, it offers a story that doesn’t hide the twists and turns that are coming up, and it provides an atmosphere that continuously plays with the expectations of the viewer. Still, while these techniques work very well within this specific film, the 80 minute running time helps immensely, they are also the reasons why the film quickly becomes a monotonous caricature of other films.

Again, this technique is nothing new in horror. Influence is important in keeping the genre fresh and finding new creative ways to make familiar material unique. The strongest influence for “Lights Out” is the simple scary movie premise of the fear of the dark and director David F. Sandberg, kudos to the production company for letting the creator of the short film direct the feature film, shows some accomplished skill in setting up a scare. A scene with a police officer shooting a gun at the creature is especially amusing and there are more scenes that are equally fun to watch.

Unfortunately the script is filled with head shaking character clichés and unoriginal setups that grow increasingly dull as the film progresses. As the origin unravels the film progresses into a third act that loses the entire earned atmosphere and effective frights that it incorporated early in the film. While there is nothing wrong with offering an explanation in a horror film sometimes it’s better to keep the monster in the dark, to let the monster retain some of the power that it holds over the story. “Lights Out” doesn’t do this and all the time spent crafting such a good monster is lost, taking with it all the scary strength. It’s unfortunate because there is a tremendous amount of quality material that could have been utilized to deepen the fear imposed by the creature, aspects associated with maternal qualities, the connection to mental illness, and the maturing child in peril are all places the script could have emphasized to provide the film with good structure without having to explain the monster.

“Lights Out” is the kind of horror film that many genre fans love to watch, it’s also the kind of horror film that many genre fans will be indifferent about, if not outright dislike. Still, there is a place for well-honed scares that serve no other purpose than to make someone jump out of their seat. And there is something to be said about a horror film that makes you, even for a small moment, question turning off the lights.

Monte’s Rating

3.00 out of 5.00

Absolutely Fabulous - Movie Review by Kaely Monahan

Lulu and Lumely Remain Fabulous By Kaely Monahan

British comedy holds a unique place in the psyche of many Americans. The often dry, stodgy English pathos is up-ended by ridiculous circumstances, witty banter, and posh accents (at least to our ears). As such, it’s no surprise that Absolutely Fabulous: The Movie did “absolutely” well with American audiences.

The film more or less picks up where the beloved TV show left off. And don’t worry if you haven’t seen the original series, the film introduces you to Lulu (played by Lulu, birth name Marie McDonald McLaughlin Lawrie) and Patsy (Johanna Lumley)—two old birds who constellate around the fashion scene as PR reps. They’ve struck a bit of a dry spell and are looking for their next big client, who will ostensibly bring them back to the top so they can continue living their over the top lifestyles.

When it comes out that supermodel Kate Moss got rid of her PR person, Lulu and Patsy jockey to get her as a client. However, things don’t go according to plan as Lulu accidentally knocks the model into the Thames river during a fashion event. The beloved supermodel disappears, and Lulu and Patsy become the two most hated women in Britain, prompting them to flee the country to France.

There is actually a remarkable cast in this film including the ridiculously talent Mark Gatiss (one of the masterminds behind Sherlock and Doctor Who); Gwendoline Christie (Game of Thrones), Graham Norton, Jennifer Saunders, and of course, Kate Moss.

The film runs like a series of TV episodes stitched together. The plotline is stretched thin like a piece of canvas. However, Lulu and Lumley’s charm keeps the film going. Both women are hilarious and endearing. Neither of them shies away from crude jokes or exploring “taboo” subjects for older women. These are not neutered females going calming into dotage. Rather they are sexually alive, zestful powerhouses that aren’t afraid to be silly.

One of the best scenes in the whole film involves them getting high off weed and ending up in Lulu’s granddaughter’s room. Lumley even dons a ridiculous onesie nighty and parades about like a girl of 16.

The jokes keep coming and that’s what sustains the film. And it’s a good introduction to a classic TV series. For those who know and love the original show, the film will go one of two ways: you’ll either love it or hate it. Regardless, it’s great to see Lulu and Lumley together on screen once more.

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

Ghostbusters - Movie Review by Monte Yazzie

Ghostbusters  

Director: Paul Feig

Starring: Kristen Wiig, Melissa McCarthy, Kate McKinnon, Leslie Jones, and Chris Hemsworth

“Awful”. "Terrible". "Disappointed". These were the overwhelming sentiments from social media and entertainment sites concerning the trailer for the rebooted “Ghostbusters” film well before it was set to arrive in theaters. Things got worse as some criticized the film’s decision to utilize an all-female cast of lead characters. Cue the release of a poorly updated rendition of the Ray Parker Jr. theme song for this film, by none other than Fall Out Boy and Missy Elliot, and everything looked bleak for the reboot of the beloved 80’s film. Paul Feig’s “Ghostbusters” is far from terrible, in fact there are some really good moments supported by the cast of truly comedic women and some ingenious fan service offered throughout the film, but unfortunately it’s also far from impressive.

It’s not the same as the 1984 film but that doesn’t keep it from trying to be. Erin Gilbert (Kristen Wiig) is on the cusp of getting tenure at the college that she teaches at, however an early career as a paranormal scientist disrupts this. Erin is forced to visit an old friend and colleague, Abby Yates (Melissa McCarthy), after a book the two them authored surfaces under strange circumstances. The investigation of an apparition leads to the formation of a team, adding Abby’s assistant Jillian (Kate McKinnon) and a subway worker named Patty (Leslie Jones), which is quickly dubbed the Ghostbusters.

Much of the success of the first film rested in the capable casting and subsequent chemistry of the leading stars of the film, Bill Murray, Harold Ramis, Dan Aykroyd, and Ernie Hudson. Mr. Feig has done an exceptional job of organizing some of the most talented, funniest women working in film today into this project. Unfortunately these exceptional women are not always utilized in the best ways, particularly in ways that make them endearing throughout the film. Melissa McCarthy has a few funny moments but is very much restrained here, Kristen Wiig is impeccably awkward in the best way possible, Leslie Jones has a majority of the best punchlines, and Kate McKinnon gives a performance that you will either love or completely hate. Chris Hemsworth is also involved, playing a dimwitted hunk of a secretary who garners some great laughs. Individually these characters would not work but strangely enough, amidst some flaws, they become the driving force that keeps everything flowing in the right direction. Regardless of how poorly composed they may be, they are consistently amusing to watch on screen.

A majority of this film is dedicated to fan service, providing enough winks and nods to the original film that all the nostalgia can come back in a positive way. While some of the subtle moments of reflection work extremely well it also feels forced at times, especially when it comes to the more obvious callbacks. Still, there are some great surprises that will undoubtedly please those fond of the original.

The narrative is a quick mix of highlight, exposition, and tech talk. Do we really know how all this technology works? No. Do we need too? Absolutely not. That doesn't keep the film from rambling along with a rhythm of science words, a nice touch dedicated to the original film.

What hurts the narrative is inconsistency; the plot never seems to extend beyond the simple aspects of ghosts and ghostbusters, we are given one scene that provides very little background into the nature of these characters passion for the unknown, and the antagonist mumbles something about an evil vortex but never achieves any real purpose besides wanting to destroy humanity.

These are all criticisms about a film that seems more interested in pleasing the various expectations of the viewer, to the point that as long as the film is meeting the big complaints found on the Internet everything will be okay.  Is it still entertaining? Yes. Will it stand the test of time and become as beloved as the original? Not likely. So enjoy the reboot for what it is, an entertaining escape that provides quite a few laughs and will entice you to rewatch the original film that made you love the 80’s horror comedy.

Monte’s Rating

3.00 out of 5.00

Captain Fantastic - Movie Review by Kaely Monahan

Captain Fantastic is unexpectedly charming and delightfully entertaining By Kaely Monahan

It’s not another super hero movie. Captain Fantastic is about a man and his six children and their wild lives. They live sustainable lives out in the woods of Oregon that would make any modern eco-conscious hipster jealous. Viggo Mortensen stars as devoted father Ben. He teaches his children not only survival skills like hunting and gathering, but also martial arts and high intellectual concepts. This family derides the consumeristic world of 1970s America. (Instead of Christmas they celebrate Noam Chomsky Day.) The children are walking-brains that would make the rest of us feel lacking in intelligence.

Their idyllic lives are disrupted after finding out that their mother, Ben’s wife—(played by Kathryn Hahn), committed suicide. She was being treated for mental illness when it happened. Her parents—namely her father—tell Ben he is not welcome to come to her funeral. However after prompting from his children they hit the road on their bus named Steve and head to New Mexico.

The film is written and directed by Matt Ross, who is known for the addictive TV show American Horror Story and the side-splittingly funny Silicon Valley. Ross’ script and direction save this story from soapbox evangelization about the horrors of modern life, and turn it into a real study between living off the grid and living with it.

There’s a moment when one of the kids, Rellian (Nicholas Hamilton) sprains his wrist while rock climbing. Instead of rushing to help the boy, Ben essentially tells him to pull himself up by his bootstraps. It’s a moment that would make and modern parent cringe. However, Ben fully realizes later in the story that he has been putting his children in danger. It’s a hard realization and he is wracked with guilt and questions his entire life.

Captain Fantastic doesn’t shy away from exploring both the good and bad of society—be it on or off the grid. Yet the glue that holds this film and carries it to a brilliant conclusion are the actors. Mortensen is known for being highly selective in his film work. A bit of recluse himself, he seemed to inhabit Ben fully to the point where it was hard to separate the character from the actor.

Mortensen is one of those actors who reaches inside your soul and twists it with his performances. The cast is stacked with brilliant child actors as well including George MacKay (Pride, Defiance, and How I Live Now), Samantha Isler (Grey’s Anatomy and Supernatural) and Annalise Basso (Bedtime Stories and Oculus). Each child had personality and depth to them but their individual stories didn’t slow down the plot.

In all, Captain Fantastic is masterfully crafted and a worthy summer film.

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

Captain Fantastic - Movie Review by Jeff Mitchell

Fantastic is a perfect way to describe ‘Captain Fantastic’  

Written/directed:  Matt Ross

Starring:  Viggo Mortensen, George MacKay, Frank Langella, Ann Dowd, Kathryn Hahn, Steve Zahn, and Trin Miller

“Captain Fantastic” – According to the U.S. Department of Education, 3.4 percent of American children are homeschooled.  Over the years, advocates and opponents of the practice have enjoyed a healthy debate between its pros and cons, and from a layman’s perspective, I have always seen both sides of the argument.  In “Captain Fantastic”, Ben (Viggo Mortensen) and Leslie (Trin Miller) introduce their six children to the ultimate homeschooling curriculum by taking their entire family “off the grid” and living off the land in the Pacific Northwest.   Their views of education and parenting are certainly unique in the face of 2016’s creature comforts and luxuries, and writer/director Matt Ross delivers an emotional story in an appropriately organic way.

The movie does not begin fantastically but dangerously and viscerally in a primal display of nature’s order, namely, man over beast.  Ross dramatically and immediately knocks you back in your theatre seat and sets an early tone regarding this family’s living arrangements.  Now, rather than continuing to focus on the initial savagery, the camera – instead - lightly dots all over their camp in which three boys and three girls manage watering schedules, prepare meals and start campfires.  They orchestrate their work - accompanied by the film’s beautiful new age soundtrack (which frequently and welcomingly appears throughout the picture) - but these activities are balanced by later reveals of textbook learning, Zen-like discipline and physical training.   These children - ranging from (roughly) six to 18 - are living and breathing renaissance beings who impress us with their physical prowess, mastery of multiple languages and vast knowledge of abstract concepts and philosophies.

Ben and Leslie wanted to raise their kids in a completely natural and unspoiled environment.    Ross, in turn, introduces us to this family’s world and succeeds in placing the audience on a mental pendulum between deciding if this unprocessed lifestyle is actually good for the children or not.  Most of the time, I was fairly supportive of Ben and Leslie’s methods, and especially when the kids frequently displayed their inquisitive instincts and intelligence by – for example - critiquing the novel “Lolita” or explaining the “Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission” U.S. Supreme Court decision.  At one point, Ross adds Ben’s sister (Kathryn Hahn) and her family into the mix, and their contrasting, suburban inclusion helps give an ironic, healthy credence to Ben and Leslie’s nonconformist methods.

On the other hand, the eldest, Bo (George MacKay), suffers through a painfully awkward life lesson due to his extreme naivety of the outside world, and his episode will make every man shudder in embarrassment for him.  True doubt certainly creeps into Ben’s worldview and set of mores.  There is no denying, however, this family’s love and refreshing support for one other, and the effect is most impressive and ultimately pleasing.   The child actors offer convincing performances by bonding with their characters’ whip-smart personas and emotive cores.

The movie easily flows due to the kids’ believable efforts, but Mortensen’s terrific performance is central in harmonizing the picture with an earthy, grounded strength woven into an unorthodox point of view.   Ben is not infallible, however, and Ross smartly presents his vulnerability and struggles by literally placing him underneath a gorgeous waterfall and an average showerhead in helping him cope with two crises.   We see that Ben raises his children the best way that he knows but – even he – does not have all the answers.

I believe they call that parenting.

“Captain Fantastic” is a film bathed in eccentric thinking, but - at its core - is simply about love, kinship and family.  It strikes affecting chords with, admittedly, familiar themes but in a wholly unique narrative and into one of the most memorable and satisfying films of 2016.   (4/4 stars)

The Infiltrator - Movie Review by Kaely Monahan

Cranston shines as the good cop in The Infiltrator By Kaely Monahan

The Infiltrator is a complete 180 for Breaking Bad star, Bryan Cranston. In a story “based on real events,” Cranston plays with the white-hats in the 1980s drug war. Directed by Brad Furman, the film follows the story of Federal agent Robert Mazur (Cranston) who goes undercover to take down an international money laundering scheme.

You might recall Colombian drug lord, Pablo Escobar who, in the ‘80s, was sending several tons of cocaine through Miami and into the U.S. Mazur goes undercover as Bob Musella—with “ties” to the New York Mafia. Through careful maneuvering and trust building, he works his way through the network of drug lackeys until he finally meets and befriends one of Escobar’s top lieutenants: Roberto Alcaino (Benjamin Bratt).

The film follows a familiar true-crime story arc but is nonetheless compelling. Mazur is a man who has to learn how far he’ll go to get his perp. All the while he must balance a wife and kids and keep them safe.

Along the way, he is aided by the streetwise Emir Abreu (John Leguizamo), who gets him inside with the Miami cocaine scene and Kathy Ertz (Diane Kruger) who plays his faux wife.

The Infiltrator is not a gory film, but watching it feels like a loose slowly tightening. Cranston seems to relish Mazur’s conflicting desires. Mazur can’t resist getting into the game, even when he has the chance to retire. Yet he is conflicted by the need to protect his family. (There are several nail biting moments when ask yourself, “Why didn’t he put his family in hiding?”) At the same time, he can’t stop pulling on the thread that leads him closer and closer to the prize.

The Infiltrator is classic movie-making. Furman keeps the plot going with expert direction and editing. The film moves slowly, but it works. In a day and age of high-action, saturated special-effects, it's refreshing to watch something that inches towards a highly effective climax.

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

Hunt for the Wilderpeople - Movie Review by Eric Forthun

Hunt for the Wilderpeople   

Starring Julian Dennison, Rachel House, Sam Neill, and Rima Te Wiata

Directed by Taika Waititi

Rated PG-13

Run Time: 101 minutes

Genre: Comedy/Drama

Opens July 8th

By Eric Forthun of Cinematic Shadows

Hunt for the Wilderpeople is a pleasant comedy propelled almost exclusively by dry, character-driven humor. That's a refreshing characteristic in a summer landscape bloated with contrived, action-heavy blockbusters and gross-out comedies led by men and women alike. Writer-director Taika Waititi is a creative force that will be increasingly nitpicked, considering his next film is Marvel's Thor: Ragnarok; independent filmmaking terms will be applied to his work in order to pinpoint how exactly his films can function across all budgets and scopes. Quite simply, he crafts stories around characters and understands their vitality in making a narrative work. While Hunt for the Wilderpeople is a bit too light and skippy to be a truly affecting and essential piece of filmmaking, it still presents an unique and often dry-as-a-corkboard funny vision of two lost souls after tragedies strike them.

The film follows Ricky (Julian Dennison), a child that has flown between foster families often into his teenage years. He is labelled as troublesome, violent, and mischievous, with increasingly stretched reasoning provided by Paula (Rachel House), the social worker in charge of him. He is placed in the care of Aunt Bella (Rima Te Wiata) and Uncle Hector (Sam Neill), a couple living in the hills of New Zealand. Aunt Bella, as the audience learns, is probably the first person to ever show Ricky genuine care and hospitality. He changes in demeanor, begins behaving responsibly, and takes initiative; it's amazing what proper parenting can accomplish. Yet circumstances arise where Ricky and Uncle Hec are paired together and forced to travel through the wild New Zealand bush alongside their dog companion and the other animals inhabiting the forests. A national manhunt begins to find Ricky and bring him back to the foster service, after which he will probably be jettisoned to juvenile detention.

Comedy functions in numerous ways: as observation, as tonal shifts, and often times as a form of tragedy. Waititi's vision relies almost exclusively on tonal shifts, varying widely from character drama to action backed by a percussion-heavy soundtrack to slapstick comedy. These shifts often happen within the same scene to surprisingly strong effect. They not only place the audience on its feet in terms of expectation, but also allow the audience to move through the character's insights and actions while discovering their own approach. The most impactful element of the film is Dennison's committed performance; it's often difficult to distinguish proper acting within a young newcomer, but his comedic timing is undeniably top-notch. His thick accent further helps the dryness of the material. Some audiences will find the humor off-putting or simply not funny, particularly since dry jokes often bring together or isolate audience members. Hunt for the Wilderpeople should do the former and allow for an easy connection with these characters; if it doesn't, at least there is a wonderful appearance by an unforgettable character named Psycho Sam. Waititi is a talented director, and the acting here is strong, particularly from Dennison and Neill. Their chemistry produces some truly affecting scenes, even as the film relies on conventions to move its narrative forward. Hunt for the Wilderpeople is still a delightful romp.

Wiener-Dog - Movie Review by Jeff Mitchell

‘Wiener-Dog’ sometimes barks up the right tree   

Written/directed by:  Todd Solondz

Starring:  Julie Delpy, Greta Gerwig, Danny DeVito, Ellen Burstyn, and Kieran Culkin

“Wiener-Dog” – Growing up, I regularly enjoyed trips to my grandparents’ house in rural Pennsylvania.   On any random Sunday, Grandma would whip up a Thanksgiving Day-like feast, Grandpa would make us laugh, and they both let my two brothers and I make liberal – and sometimes admittedly careless - use of their pool table.  Best of all, we played with their dachshund named Samantha.

Samantha was fairly overweight and constantly barked like a dying seal, but there is something about dachshunds that make them completely loveable.  Perhaps, it is because their bodies – with long torsos and stumpy legs - are so utterly impractical that we feel more of a parental bond with them.   Plus, they are so darn cute!

Well, writer/director Todd Solondz pulled together a movie which showcases a very cute dachshund over the course of her life, as she moves between four different owners.  Solondz is known for creating provocative, sarcastic and dark – but comedic - material within the confines of a dysfunctional American experience, and “Wiener-Dog” is no exception.   In this case, the tricky proposition is to insert this loveable pet into the mires of her owners’ depressing and maladjusted lives.

This odd combination of positive and negative charges within various households carries the potential for intriguing cinema and conflict, and in spots, “Wiener-Dog” is successful.  The four stories, however, do not adhere nearly enough connective tissue, and the picture’s overall narrative becomes muddled.  Muddled is an accurate way to describe the attitudes of Wiener-Dog’s owners.  Solondz introduces us to a loveless married couple (Julie Delpy and Tracy Letts) in which cynicism dominates every inch of their gorgeous, modern home, a directionless vet assistant (Greta Gerwig), an aging professor (Danny DeVito) whose ambition left him decades ago, and a sullen grandmother (Ellen Burstyn) living in her not-so-golden years.

For some reason, Solondz does not show, nor explain, the pet handoff between the four households and simply inserts the dog into the individual stories.  It is a purposeful and tactical script decision, but part of the fun of a compilation piece (like this) is to physically see how the dachshund travels from house to house and therefore, not experiencing these transitions feels like a missed opportunity.  Secondly, although the dog (named Wiener-Dog in one story and Cancer in another) is obviously included in each of the four tales, but she only feels integral in the first one.   As the film moves forward, Wiener-Dog or Cancer just seems like window dressing, as the real focus falls upon the depressing pet owners.

Depressing does not necessarily mean uninteresting, because all of the owners generate some thought-provoking moments due to the cast’s cinematic gifts and Solondz’s skilled writing.  As the characters spew acidic feelings, woefully choose the nearest person as a mate, mire in self-pity, or reflect on massive regrets, Solondz peaks our interest into how each individual arrived at these points.  Which wrong life-turns led them to their current state of being(s)?  While we speculate on their past mistakes, the film helps us reflect on any past missteps of our own and immediately want to correct them!

The movie is not a complete downer, however, because it includes some highly engaging visual treats, like carefully-chosen moments of slow motion, one three-minute shot of Wiener-Dog sitting in a glass pen and the pink attire of an unusual artist named Fantasy (Michael James Shaw).   Referring back to his writing, Solondz also does pen some hilarious moments amongst the toxicity, because in this bungled world view of America – complete with convenience stores and nondescript apartment complexes - we have no choice but to laugh.

I did laugh and reflect and also left the theater thinking that humans are not always capable owners who our pets truly deserve.  Perhaps that is the connective tissue between the four stories, but I am just guessing.  Unfortunately, “Wiener-Dog” does not gel into one holistic movie experience.  (2.5/4 stars)

The Secret Life of Pets - Movie Review by Monte Yazzie

The Secret Life of Pets  

Dir: Yarrow Cheney, Chris Renaud

Starring: Louis C.K., Eric Stonestreet, Kevin Hart, Jenny Slate, Ellie Kemper, Albert Brooks, Lake Bell, Dana Carvey, Hannibal Buress, and Bobby Moynihan

I once watched my family dog, Shadow, chase his own tail for nearly five minutes. Shadow would stop momentarily to watch the reactions from the family, we were all laughing loudly, and then continue with the same act. I’m still not sure who was more fascinated with the other; in hindsight Shadow was probably wondering how long the humans would watch his foolish behavior. “The Secret Life of Pets” is the newest animated feature to hit theaters this weekend, animal lovers will be thoroughly entertained but it will also provide sufficient amusement for children and offer a somewhat satisfying time-out for parents during these longer summer days.

Max (Louis C.K.) is a friendly terrier living the good life in a Manhattan apartment complex with his owner Katie (Ellie Kemper). Unfortunately Max’s life is turned upside down when Katie brings home a new dog, a stray mutt named Duke (Eric Stonestreet) who quickly makes himself comfortable in Max’s space. Things get further complicated when Max and Duke become lost in the big city. In order to find their way home the two unlikely partners must cooperate with a group of rogue animals led by an aggressive bunny named Snowball (Kevin Hart).

There is much to like about this film. The humor is especially good, a mix of silliness for the kiddos with a few targeted jokes just for the adults. Helping this aspect is the voice cast, mostly comedians, who each offer a little of their own brand of humor to make things interesting. In the lead is Louis C.K. as Max, while the comedian's brand of dark and painfully honest humor may be significantly subdued throughout this family film, the delivery and execution of the comedic material is very much Louis C.K. Another highlight comes in the form of Kevin Hart as the fluffy, frenzied bunny Snowball. Mr. Hart is unleashed throughout this film, seemingly given freedom to develop a joke and adlib material at will. Snowball many times in the film steals the show with a mix of cuteness and comedy.

It’s unfortunate that the story is many times a dull, reused list of ideas taken from other animated films. The well-developed characters support the “lost animals” story angle but there are times when the narrative operates at such a sluggish pace that nothing seems interesting. There are a few scenes that invigorate the story, like a right-of-passage ceremony orchestrated by the rogue pets involving a scary animal or a chase scene in the busy New York City streets, however the film never reaches the potential the premise invites. The secret enticed in the title has already been revealed, composed better in a film that was released just a few weeks ago “Finding Dory”.

I had the opportunity to watch this film with my 4-year-old and based on the laughing and excitement displayed during the screening it’s fairly easy to say that there is a high recommendation for this film from my little one. While there isn’t much to separate it from other films like it, the voice cast is exceptional and the laughs are enough to tolerate 90 minutes for an enjoyable summer cartoon escape.

Monte’s Rating

3.00 out of 5.00

The Purge: Election Year - Movie Review by Monte Yazzie

The Purge: Election Year  

Dir: James DeMonaco

Starring: Elizabeth Mitchell, Frank Grillo, Joseph Julian Soria, Betty Gabriel, Edwin Hodge, and Mykelti Williamson

Turn to any television network over the next few months and the height for political dissension in America will be at its most aggressive levels. It’s during these specific times that my frustration with the political machine turns the most negative and disheartened, making a film like “The Purge: Election Year” seem more true-to-life rather than a work of fantasy. It’s this aspect, along with a clever marketing campaign utilized during the election year, which makes this third installment in the franchise far more interesting than it otherwise might have been.

Social commentary in genre films is nothing new, George Romero, director of “Night of the Living Dead”, has done it exceptionally well in his zombie trilogy. While “The Purge: Election Year” squanders many opportunities to provide insight through its exploitation, the moments that it does utilize connective social commentary are effectively startling and stimulating. Director James DeMonaco, who has directed all three of the films in the franchise, has grown his dystopian vision from a small home invasion film, into a full blown city of chaos, and finally into a global conspiracy at the highest levels.

The Purge, a night where all criminal activity - including murder - is allowed, is a coveted right for Americans but also a death sentence for those not privileged with affording protection. Senator Charlie Roan (Elizabeth Mitchell), who has a tragic connection with The Purge, is now the leading Presidential contender with a strong anti-Purge movement to follow. Leo Barnes (Frank Grillo), returning from the second installment of these films, is now in charge of protecting Senator Roan so that she can make it to election day. Members of The New Founding Fathers of America (NFFA), the people who established the annual Purge event, conspire to eliminate the Senator. This leads Leo and Senator Roan, along with a market owner named Joe (Mykelti Williamson) and his employee Marcos (Joseph Julian Soria), into the streets of Washington D.C. on the deadliest night of the year.

“The Purge” is a cat-and-mouse home invasion film that very quickly became a by-the-numbers slasher film, the most interesting aspect of that film was wondering what the world looked like outside of the barricaded door. “The Purge: Anarchy” worked significantly better than the original film because of the expanded world that it showcased; it also embraced the more extravagant exploitive attitudes which made it feel more like something made in the 1980’s from the Cannon Group studio. “The Purge: Election Year” takes a little from both of these films while attempting to add some socially aware narrative points that most often work best when utilized as imagery rather than banter. Whenever the group is journeying across the city, the film makes a point to display the madness happening in the streets. Violent scenes that emulate the progression of violence throughout history are displayed. These depictions are unsettling because the acts are so recognizable; whether the use of guillotine in an alley way, the fighting pit of street gladiators with swords, or the hanged corpses swinging from trees, these moments reflect the bedlam of another scene involving a blood stained Lincoln Memorial. Unfortunately these effectively startling scenes are undercut by a narrative that never gets a grasp of what it wants to say but instead boldly embraces the sentiment that violence is bad only to then utilize violence to make amends. The film would have done better to completely embrace its exploitation and subsequent provoking imagery, allowing the audience to make connections far deeper than the simplified back and forth justifications of political figures, one that is yelling “peace” and another yelling “purge and purify”.

“The Purge: Election Year” never finds that middle ground where it can be an entertaining exploitation fantasy and also a reflective commentary on the reality that we live in. Some may contest that the latter in the previous comment is unfairly asking too much from a film like this. I may agree with that assessment because calling your film “Election Year” provokes the sentiment that one will make their decision based on external extravagance and some will make their decision based on what is being represented underneath. Happy election year.

Monte’s Rating

2.50 out of 5.00

Swiss Army Man - Movie Review by Jeff Mitchell

‘Swiss Army Man’ uses many gadgets but does not connect  

Directed/written by:  Dan Kwan and Daniel Scheinert

Starring:  Paul Dano, Daniel Radcliffe

“Swiss Army Man” (2016) - In “Cast Away” (2000), Chuck Nolan (Tom Hanks) found himself stranded on a deserted island.  Now, human beings are social creatures, and the interaction with others is a vital need that life took away from Nolan on that isolated place.   In order to fill the void, Nolan famously gave a random volleyball the name, Wilson, and it was the only “person” that he talked with on the island.  In “Swiss Army Man”, Hank Thompson (Paul Dano) is isolated on an island too, and like Chuck Nolan, he has fallen victim to loneliness, until he spots something on beach.  That something is a dead body (Daniel Radcliffe).

Hank – who is unshaven, sunburned and desperate – suddenly discovers another person to converse with, but yes, this individual happens to be dead.  From the minds of writers/directors Dan Kwan and Daniel Scheinert, they conjure up a tale from the point of view of Hank’s hallucinating mind, because Manny (Radcliffe) – a dead man - speaks to him.

Dano is so good at playing off-center characters, and Kwan and Scheinert perfectly cast him here.   Dano’s Hank is a disheveled mess who is in dire need of a friend, but after many exchanges with Manny, the audience discovers that – in the real world – acquiring friends was massively problematic for him.   He shares stories of past failures, bad family relationships and his inability to engage in conversation with pretty girls, and Hank’s current seclusion is probably not terribly different than his previous life.   The script and Dano properly establish the character, and they do garner sympathy for him, but Hank’s eccentricities and repetitive fixations of a mysterious girl riding on a bus make it difficult to emotionally connect with him.

That’s a problem.

Hank, however, does emotionally connect with Manny in two ways.   First, Hank’s conversations with him are not one-way.  Obviously, a two-way dialogue (even if Hank is hallucinating) provides a much better experience for the audience, but Hank also teaches life lessons to Manny.   Although Manny is in his mid-20s, he seems to have no memory of his two and a half decades of existence, and therefore, Hank develops into his mentor.  Manny becomes the perfect sounding board while also offering naïve opinions based upon the limited information which Hank provides.   The actors nicely play off one another and generate some hilarious, vulnerable and gracious moments.

The friendly chemistry – under odd on-screen circumstances – between the two leads is only topped by the film’s hook:  Manny becomes Hank’s Swiss army man to survive the great outdoors.  In a host of eye-popping visuals, Manny’s dead body has a surprising array of functions.  He can cut thick logs with one karate chop, fire a metal crutch from his mouth (which is used as a grappling hook) and expel an exorbitant amount of flatulence to create a motor for a human jet ski.  These images (probably) have never graced movie screens before, and each new discovery offers fantastical wonders for the audience.   Although, Kwan and Scheinert “go to the well” too many times with repetitive fart jokes, most of the gadgets emanating from Manny’s multiuse body are the highlights of the film.

While Hank navigates through his sequestration in the wild - with a dead guy who doubles as his best friend - the movie moves towards a few possible directions in the third act.  Unfortunately, the film chooses a direction which unnecessarily advances the story another two plot points farther than it needed to go.   For the audience, the last act feels manufactured, cheap and too smart for its own good.  Worse yet, it feels implausible, and quite frankly, that is vastly difficult to achieve, because we already bought the fact that Hank is best friends with a talking dead person throughout most of the movie.   I believe “Swiss Army Man” wanted to deliver some important messages about the human condition, but it just feels like a bungled experiment.   I do appreciate the ambition and thought placed into Manny’s character, but looking back 16 years, I invested a lot more emotion into a volleyball that Chuck Nolan accidentally lost in the ocean.  (2/4 stars) 

Jeff – a member of the Phoenix Critics Circle – has penned film reviews since 2008 and graduated from ASU’s Walter Cronkite School of Journalism.  Follow Jeff and the Phoenix Film Festival on Twitter @MitchFilmCritic and @PhoenixFilmFest, respectively.

The Legend of Tarzan - Movie Review by Kaely Monahan

Tarzan swings…and misses  

Kaely Monahan

Like a thick jungle mist, rumors surrounding The Legend of Tarzan were abundant and ominous. Perhaps the biggest question around this movie was “why?” Why another Tarzan movie? Does the world really need another one?

Apparently Hollywood thought so. Harry Potter director, David Yates led the charge into wilds, taking the well-trodden story and attempting to imbibe it with some fresh movie magic. To start, the film is visually stunning. Yates makes copious use of color to tell Tarzan’s story, which begins, not in the rainforests of Africa, but in London.

Stripped down and dreary, the opening of the film is anesthetized and sterile. So too is the dialogue. The story begins in the middle, with Tarzan/Lord John Clayton running his family estate. A beefy Alexander Skarsgård plays the domesticated wild man who seems intent on fitting in with English society. Even if it means his face looks constipated throughout most of the first act.

The question of how to get Tarzan back from the civilized Clayton is resolved when the American George Washington Williams (Samuel L. Jackson) convinces him to take up an invitation to return to the Congo. George is apparently on some sort of undercover mission and needs Tarzan to take him into Africa.

Margot Robbie plays the token character of Jane. Bright eyed, blonde and superficial in her character development, she forces Tarzan to take her with him. Her role is hardly imaginative and is unfortunately but not unexpectedly rote.

Once in Africa, the world bursts with color. Tarzan is greeted by tribes and CGI beasts. The story itself is predictable. Christoph Waltz plays white man baddie, Leon Rom whereas Djimon Hounsou plays evil tribal baddie. There’s a forced feeling of conflict that is faintly reminiscent of Blood Diamond (you may recall Djimon was also in that film also). White man wants to pillage and rape the land of its resources (including humans).

Of course, all Tarzan stories have the man-v-nature element and this film doesn’t disappoint. The battles are brutal in the extreme and actually choreographed quite well. If the bear scene in The Revenant made you cringe, you might grimace at the gorilla smack down in this movie. Tarzan is in no way superior to his ape counterparts, which is a nice surprise. He is in no way the king of beasts.

However, this film just ends up falling flat on its face. The CGI animals are impressive but there is still something off about them. Much like The Jungle Book earlier this year, the animals look great until they start moving about. (Seems like CGI animation has yet to catch up with animal realism.)

When it comes to storytelling this film just disappoints on every level. Jane inevitably gets kidnapped. The pathetic smear of her character development is so bad it might as well have not been there. White man is evil and greedy while the noble-savage trope is flung carelessly around.

And then there is the strange and uncomfortable relationship between Tarzan and George. Tarzan is the consummate jungle master in Africa, while the African American is portrayed as a bumbling fool. There’s something awkward about it and subconsciously racist. Perhaps Yates with Yates being British, he didn’t catch the undertones of bigotry, but out of all the failings of The Legend of Tarzan this one stings the most.

The only thing this film has going for it is the visual direction—even if Tarzan swinging on a never-ending vine is still as ridiculous as its first iteration in 1918.

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

The BFG - Movie Review by Kaely Monahan

Big, Friendly, but not so giant a hit The BFG is entertaining but not memorable

By Kaely Monahan

The BFG is a film which will either delight or disappoint. Die-hard fans of Roald Dhal’s book will (unsurprisingly) be in the disappointed camp. However, fans of Steven Spielberg will probably enjoy his adaptation. While not certainly the best to come out of Spielberg’s imagination, the film does harken back to joyful movies like The Goonies, Hook and even a bit of Indian Jones.

Starring the Oscar-winning Mark Rylance as BFG and Ruby Barnhill as Sophie, the story closely follows the book. However, it runs into some pacing issues. The story kind of stalls out in certain parts. Even so, it feels that it has less to do with the film and Spielberg and more to do with the source material. There are long scenes with very little action and mostly dialogue—which can be boring for kids.

The way the BFG speaks is also a problem. While cute, perhaps on the page, it loses its cuteness after thirty minutes. The other giants, which get more play in the book, are hardly on screen and the sense of danger they bring is more a shadow than a real threat because of it.

However, in true “Spielbergian” fashion, The BFG excels in sets, props and character. Mark Rylance is the heart and soul of the film and despite his characters “mubbly-wubblings” he is brilliant. His double performance of voice and live-action capture is something to see. Strangely, in this instance CGI animation works. Despite the caricaturization of Rylance, there is a level of realism that works. Perhaps it is the slightly goofy appearance that works in BFG’s favor as a CGI character.

Barnhill is overshadowed by Rylance but she does bring the necessary cute factor. Earnest-eyed and precocious, she is a nice change from Spielberg’s usual hero archetype. (The last time he directed a female-led film was 1985’s The Color Purple.)

What truly makes this film great are the visualizations. BFG’s house is a wonderland of weird vegetables and oversized everything. There’s a cringe-worthy moment when Sophie crawls inside one of BFG’s ugly cucumbers to hide from the other giants which is fun. However, most visually stunning is the dream tree sequence. It’s an enchanting scene that you’ll wish to watch over and over again.

The film puttered out, however in the third act. Again this is more due to the source material than Spielberg or the script. The single highlight is the breakfast scene, which is another delightfully visual and funny moment.

In the end, The BFG is geared towards children—which heartily enjoyed the film at my viewing. But it will leave parents and lovers of Dahl’s book with lackluster feelings.

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

Neon Demon - Movie Review by Monte Yazzie

The Neon Demon  

Dir: Nicolas Winding Refn

Starring: Elle Fanning, Jena Malone, Keanu Reeves, Christina Hendricks, Karl Glusman, Bella Heathcote, Abbey Lee, and Desmond Harrington

117 Minutes

Amazon Studios

“Beauty is in the eye of the beholder”. This statement could not be truer for Nicolas Winding Refn’s new film “The Neon Demon”, a stylish, patient, perplexing, frustrating, arduous journey into the world of an aspiring 16-year-old model in Los Angeles. “The Neon Demon” is unlike any other film playing in the theater this summer, the fact that this film is getting a wide release is fantastic because it should be seen in the theatrical presentation but it’s also a little troublesome because this is NOT a film for the everyday film fan. I also don’t believe that it is a film for every Nicolas Winding Refn fan.

Mr. Refn’s last film “Only God Forgives” seems to have been a practice run for this film. And while both films offer some of the best photography and overall design seen in recent films, they are also equally experiments with varying degrees of success. And while I completely agree that pushing the boundaries and challenging the limits of the film form are the only ways to expand the art of filmmaking, this also comes with a heavy risk. What people connect with from a film like this, one that requires a fair amount of patience during extended/slow building scenes, one that portrays topics like cannibalism as metaphorical and melodramatic, one that shows you the grotesque side of beauty through the eyes of an underage teenager, these elements all compose diverse results as displayed by the screening audience that was a mix of walk-outs, angry Refn fans, confused cinephiles with equal amounts of positive and negative feedback. The beauty here is clearly found with the individual.

The story on the surface is very basic. A young girl named Jesse (Elle Fanning) arrives in Los Angeles, no detailed backstory or purpose is given, she just arrives in a big city with aspirations of becoming a model. Like an innocent sheep wandering alone in dangerous territory the wolves quickly sense her intrusion. Here the wolves are abundant in the form of an amused makeup artist (Jena Malone), two established models (Bella Heathcote and Abbey Lee), and an aggressive hotel manager (Keanu Reeves).

What is this movie about? The loss of innocence? The corruption of fame? The desire to be admired? The obsession with image and beauty? A coming-of-age film aimed at the peak of misguided influences for young woman? Yes, it's about all of that and more. What Mr. Refn does with "The Neon Demon" is more spectacle and less story, he looks at obsession through slow motion scenes that are drawn out to frustrating levels, he blatantly and viscously paints exploitive scenes of sex and violence influenced by Alejandro Jodoworsky, he dabbles with pacing and atmosphere in the ways David Lynch has perfected, he would much rather push the viewer towards annoyance than offer an easy answer for the style and contorted substance. It achieves moments that are grandiose and grotesque, playing with film techniques and genre applications with equal parts feeling influenced by a master of the craft and a student of the form. There were moments when I absolutely admired what I was watching and times when I strongly questioned why things were happening.

Elle Fanning transforms throughout the film in the lead role, her movement is at one moment timid and then suddenly assertive. Ms. Fanning’s performance, along with a confident Jena Malone, completely supports all the artistic paths ventured throughout the film.

“The Neon Demon” is an artistically absurd, stunningly rendered film that will find both high praise and harsh criticism from those that watch it. Regardless of the sentiments that it provokes, it is still a daring, bold, and clearly uncompromised film from a director pushing the limits of the film art form.

Monte’s Rating

3.50 out of 5.00

The Shallows - Movie Review by Jeff Mitchell

‘The Shallows’ works until the script drowns in the last act  

Directed by: Jaume Collet-Serra

Starring: Blake Lively, Oscar Jaenada

“The Shallows” (2016) – In March 2016, I joined my brother’s family on their Florida vacation, and we took in many of the sights that Walt Disney World has to offer, but we spent one day at New Smyrna Beach on the Atlantic-side, just south of Daytona.   My brother and my 9 year-old niece were the only ones (of us) swimming in the ocean, but I noticed that they would continually rush in and then rush out of the water.  When they finally returned to “home base” – which was our collection of sprawled out beach towels - I asked him if they had fun.

“Jeff, every time I was waist deep in the water, my daughter pleaded with me to move to dry land or the sharks would eat me.  This went on for an hour.  Oh, it was great,” my brother sarcastically laughed.

Well, after sitting through “The Shallows”, I can categorically state that my 9 year-old niece will not be watching this movie anytime soon, and for two reasons.   One, a shark terrorizes an unsuspecting surfer (Blake Lively) for most of the film’s 1 hour 27 minute runtime.  Given my niece’s apprehension for these predators, the first reason is obvious.  Second, the movie devolves into cartoonish lunacy in its last act, in which the shark in question seemingly develops a personal vendetta against the surfer (Lively).  You see, my suspension of disbelief sometimes drowns when movie animals attempt to settle humanlike scores with human antagonists.

Even though the film’s final 20 minutes fall apart for me, the first hour and seven minutes clearly work.

“The Shallows” stars Ms. Lively, and although her figure is suited for a bikini wardrobe in a surfing movie, she certainly has the acting chops to carry a film, and in this case, she spends almost the entire picture alone on the big screen.   Director Jaume Collet-Serra sets up a small, personal story in which Nancy (Lively) travels to Mexico to surf at a gorgeous beach, a place where her mother discovered she was pregnant with her 25 years ago.    Everything about this isolated, sandy cove – actually filmed in Australia – feels rich with beauty and wonder.   It seems like a perfect spot for surfing or just soaking up some rays, and Collet-Serra and cinematographer Flavio Martinez Labiano gloriously capture this wonderland like a surfing documentary.   When Nancy paddles towards the massive waves facing her, she purposely dives underneath the incoming tides, and the camera follows her underneath the surface and then on top of the water on the other side.   In addition, Collet-Serra films Nancy from overhead, and many of these pre-surfing and surfing moments take your breath away on the big screen.

This trip in paradise, however, falls prey to a shark who snacks on a dead whale carcass about 500 yards from the beach, and Nancy inadvertently swims into its saltwater crosshairs.    In a fight to survive, she finds some refuge in the cove but is stranded hundreds of yards from safety.  The narrative turns into a figurative cat and mouse game, and Lively sells Nancy’s terror like a beer salesman at a Cleveland Browns football game.    In other words, we buy it.  The shifty and nifty camerawork further induces fear, as the audience collectively lifts their feet to avoid many shark bites which plainly do not exist in an air-conditioned movie theatre.

“The Shallows” initially works because we like Nancy and then feel real sympathy for her.  Her situation feels plausible.  She is alone in this precarious deathtrap, and Lively’s on-camera skills humanize her character.  She refers to a lonely seagull with a damaged wing as “Steven Seagull”, emotionally records a last video conversation for her family and taps into a spiritual connection with her mother, and all of it leads the audience towards our on-going support.

Unfortunately, and as previously mentioned, the movie falls apart when – who knows - writer Anthony Jaswinski, perhaps, did not know how to end the film and decided to give the shark “super skills” to up the thriller-ante.   In the last 20 minutes, some laws of physics and reason are tossed overboard, as the film turns into a twisted mosh of woman vs. shark.   This movie – which previously felt authentic – now becomes a “Fast & Furious 7” (2015) car chase sequence, and the narrative loses all of its built-up credibility.  It is disappointing, because the first hour truly offers plenty of shark-induced scares with carefully crafted tension.

Now, I suppose if my niece does stumble upon - and watch – this film without her parents’ knowledge, they (and/or I) should just inform her that there is no reason to be frightened.   It’s just a movie.   Then again, my sister-in-law did a Google search after our trip and told me that New Smyrna Beach is also known as “The Shark Bite Capital of the World”.

Um, I guess my niece’s warnings last March were rightly justified.  Do me a favor…please don’t mention it to her.  (2/4 stars)

Jeff – a member of the Phoenix Critics Circle – has penned film reviews since 2008 and graduated from ASU’s Walter Cronkite School of Journalism.  Follow Jeff and the Phoenix Film Festival on Twitter @MitchFilmCritic and @PhoenixFilmFest, respectively.

The Music of Strangers - Movie Review by Jeff Mitchell

‘The Music of Strangers’ hits some high notes  

Directed by: Morgan Neville

Starring:  Yo-Yo Ma, Kayhan Kalhor, Cristina Pato, Kinan Azmeh, and Wu Man

“The Music of Strangers:  Yo-Yo Ma & The Silk Road Ensemble“ - In 1936, Hiao-Tsiun Ma, a violinist and music professor, moved from China to France to fuse Chinese music with French composing, but I wonder if he envisioned his son’s grander experiment, taking place 64 years later?   In 2000, Yo-Yo Ma - a master class cellist who played for Leonard Bernstein and President John F. Kennedy - blended together several cultures of music into an ornate and beautiful orchestra called, The Silk Road Project, which eventually became The Silk Road Ensemble.

They have recorded six albums and performed in front of 2 million people in 33 countries, and this documentary covers the history and inner workings of the orchestra and tells the personal stories of some of its key performers.  Director Morgan Neville devotes ample amounts of camera time to Yo-Yo (U.S.A.), Kayhan Kalhor (Iran), Cristina Pato (Spain), Kinan Azmeh (Syria), and Wu Man (China), as we learn about their struggles, triumphs and, of course, their expertise on their chosen instruments.

Some of their instruments, like a clarinet or a set of bagpipes are commonplace, but I did not recognize - let alone remember the names of – others, but with a simple plucking of their delicate strings, they offer lovely sounds to enjoy.  The selected musicians’ stories are intriguing, and Neville interviews them in the U.S. and follows them to their homelands as well.   While the ensemble’s music combines a host of cultures, these quiet moments in Iran, Spain, Syria, and China provide perspective into individual heritages and a small window into their lives.  The film does not tell their stories – or the group’s story – in a linear fashion but instead, in an organic way.

The narrative continually flips between Yo-Yo, Kayhan, Cristina, Kinan, and Wu Man, without seemingly much rhyme or reason, but by the end of the picture, the audience receives clear portraits of these remarkable musicians through cinematic osmosis.  Kayhan and Kinan’s lives are particularly heartfelt, as each man struggles with difficult political climates in their respective countries but seem to manage their internal challenges through teaching and playing music.

The two featured, female maestros – Cristina and Wu Man - are conversely more free-spirited and offer warm smiles, as they blazed their own paths towards Yo-Yo’s orchestra though immense talent and strong independent streaks.  No fear best describes Cristina and Wu Man, and the only trepidation from any of these musicians was the original uncertainty if this concoction of cultures would gel back in 2000.

They obviously survived those initial fears and built something completely new and unique.  Some of the movie’s most enjoyable moments are when this group spreads its collective peacock wings and performs, and the film offers clips from about five of their concerts, including a mesmerizing opening number on a pedestrian street during a pleasant morning.

“The Music of Strangers” delivers more than pleasantries.  More importantly, it explores big ideas placed into action, but as the movie ended, I still had plenty of questions.

How often do they tour? How frequently do the lineups change?  Do they change?  How do audiences and the featured performers feel about the ensemble?

The documentary, unfortunately, does not address these inquiries and instead, focuses on the ensemble’s history and then deeply dives into the five musicians’ lives without a complete and holistic picture of the band.  On the other hand, a moviegoer should walk away with new life lessons and good feelings about The Silk Road Ensemble’s musical union of diverse cultures.

Wu Man mentions, “There is no east and west.  There’s just a globe.”

Well said.  (2.5/4 stars)

Finding Dory - Movie Review by Monte Yazzie

Finding Dory  

Directed by: Andrew Stanton and Angus MacLane

Starring: Ellen DeGeneres, Albert Brooks, Hayden Rolence, Eugene Levy, Diane Keaton, Kaitlin Olsen, Idris Elba, Dominic West, Ty Burrell, Ed O’Neill, and Sigourney Weaver

When I was in the third grade I wandered away from my parents in a department store. Fearing they had left without me I went into the parking lot to look for them. Panic and fear immediately set in as I roamed the parking lot looking for anything that looked recognizable. It was an early, authentic moment of fear that led to a significant moment of relief and love when my parents found me.

In “Finding Nemo”, Pixar’s beloved 2003 film, a young clown fish named Nemo was lost in an immense ocean and left to fend for himself. Conquering fears, becoming independent, making difficult decisions, being confident, and understanding the importance of family were all themes utilized in the original film. “Finding Dory”, a charming and heartfelt if somewhat familiar and repetitive tale, explores many of these same themes except from the perspective of the lovable and comical Dory voiced by Ellen DeGeneres.

The film takes place about a year after the events of “Finding Nemo”. Dory is living with Marlin (Albert Brooks) and Nemo (Hayden Rolence) in the corals. Marlin is still a nervous wreck, Nemo is still adventurous, and Dory is still dealing with short-term-memory-loss. However, she begins to remember more about her past, specifically the family that she lost. This leads Dory across the ocean and into an aquarium in search of her parents with Marlin and Nemo in tow to find her and new friends Destiny (Kaitlin Olsen), a nearsighted shark, and Hank (Ed O’Neill), a grumpy octopus looking to escape to Cleveland, along to assist.

From the first moments of the film the directing team of Andrew Stanton and Angus MacLane get you reacquainted with the quirks and charms of the characters while also offering some information about the past and how it has influenced Dory into the forgetful character we know. The setup becomes a little repetitious, Dory goes missing and an adventure to find her ensues. It’s basically the same execution from the original film but it also happens rather quickly getting the viewer into the location where a majority of the film takes place, an aquarium filled with an amusing array of environments and the recognizable voice of a famous actress.

This narrative shift was a welcome change; the inclusion of a new environment allows the film to build some necessary momentum that keeps everything in the story exciting, even if the exciting parts sometime stray beyond the scientific marine biology realms. Also the added animal characters, like a pair of sunbathing sea lions voiced by Idris Elba and Dominic West but also an amazingly animated octopus named Hank voiced by Ed O’Neill, add some humorous moments and some sincere ones as well. Hank plays a great counterpart to Dory; his cranky attitude is consistently undercut by his growing concern for Dory’s plight. The themes of family and the dynamic relationship seen within families are woven throughout the interaction of the characters in the film. It’s never forcefully implied that these themes are key factors in composing the foundation of the story, but you can easily recognize it. Probably the best of the themes found within the film comes in the composition of Dory and Nemo, two characters dealing with being different from everyone else yet still displaying powerful traits that make them unique. It’s the most obvious of the themes but it is done exceptionally well, this is a quality that many Pixar films excel at over other animation studios.

“Finding Dory” is good film to take the family to. Kids may get a little squirmy with the 100-minute running time but there is more than enough excitement to attract their attention throughout the film. While it may not be as memorable as some of my favorite Pixar films, “Wall-E”, “Up”, and “Inside Out”, it is still a good sequel and will more than likely please fans of the original film.

Monte’s Rating

3.50 out of 5.00

Genius - Movie Review by Jeff Mitchell

Memorable performances make ‘Genius’ a smart choice  

Directed by:  Michael Grandage

Written by:  John Logan

Starring:  Jude Law, Colin Firth, Nicole Kidman, and Laura Linney

“Genius” (2016) – “Genius is one percent inspiration and ninety-nine percent perspiration.” – Thomas A. Edison

In 1929, genius enters New York City’s Charles Scribner’s Sons publishing house in the form of a novel.  This book – which actually is a monstrous stack of unbound pages – sits upon Max Perkins’ (Colin Firth) desk, and he picks up “O Lost” and intently reads this story about life in Asheville, NC in his office, on the train bound for home, in his living room, and deep into the night.  The next day, Thomas Wolfe (Jude Law) - the unkempt, emotional and spirited author of the previously-mentioned novel - steps into Max’s office to thank him for reading his story and appears resigned for another rejection, when Mr. Perkins says that he wishes to publish the book.    In this moment, the unlikely two-person team of Max and Thomas is born.

Director Michael Grandage conducts this engrossing tale of Mr. Wolfe’s bio, but truly, this picture’s main scope is the friendship between Max and Thomas over a number of years, as they attempt to edit and publish two books.  On the surface, editing books might seem like a boring proposition as a fulfilling movie experience, but Firth and Law’s splendid performances engage the audience, and “Genius” becomes a celluloid page-turner in the form of a two-person, character-driven story.

The two are polar opposites in a multitude of ways, and at a foundational level, Max is a family man with a wife (Laura Linney) and five daughters, while Thomas is not the settling-down type, and instead, has taken up a relationship with Aline Bernstein (Nicole Kidman), a married woman who left her husband.  Thomas carries a strong zest for living, and his passion for life pours into his books, while Max leads his family and work with a quiet and strong hand.   Max certainly totes zeal for his life as well, but in a controlled, stable and common-sense fashion.   Nearly the entire film narrows its focus with this responsible editor catching a tiger by the tail and attempting to tame him by editing his first and second books, but Thomas becomes ferocious at the prospect of Max trimming his mountain of pulp.

Edgy and entertaining results ensue as Law’s Thomas argues his case for every page inclusion like a stoked lawyer crouching down his knees and spiritedly pleading – with a slurred, alcohol-induced cadence - towards a jury of one.   Max has previously worked with the greats, like F. Scott Fitzgerald and Ernest Hemingway, but he calculates the cost/benefit analysis of collaborating with this eccentric human being, and the results seemingly always fall on the positive-side of the ledger.

The two workaholics also need to balance their singularly-focused project with the women in their lives, and Louise (Linney) and Aline (Kidman) take vastly different approaches to vie for more attention.  Linney is very good as the dutiful - but growing impatient - wife and strikes a nice balance with Max’s conformist demeanor.  Meanwhile, Aline and Thomas’ relationship seems born out of toxicity, and Kidman’s effective performance best compares to a vampire whose fangs can no longer extract blood and therefore, lashes out like an ineffectual - but sometimes sympathetic - monster.  Her important supporting performance helps justify Thomas’ increasing leanings towards Max as a father-figure or friend.  Since Max does not have a son of his own, he reciprocates in kind.

The movie properly clarifies their working relationship, but it purposely films with a smoky lens throughout much of the 1 hour 44 minute runtime.  Grandage and cinematographer Ben Davis get the look and feel of the 1930s right from a multitude of New York City’s slates, tans and browns on the streets and inside offices to Max’s gray fedora, in which he almost always sports.

“Genius”, unfortunately, does not give the audience a sporting chance to absorb the details of Wolfe’s novels, and other than some narration (within the film’s first 15 minutes) and some casual mentions, it is difficult to comprehend why they were so successful.   Although, that is not the point of the film.

Instead, when the movie ends, we successfully and organically recognize that Mr. Edison’s definition of genius is probably right.  (3/4 stars)

Jeff – a member of the Phoenix Critics Circle - has penned film reviews since 2008 and graduated from ASU’s Walter Cronkite School of Journalism.  Follow Jeff and the Phoenix Film Festival on Twitter @MitchFilmCritic and @PhoenixFilmFest, respectively.