The Irishman - Movie Review by Monte Yazzie

During a break in the trial of Jimmy Hoffa, Chuckie O’Brien (Jesse Plemons), Bill Bufalino (Ray Romano), Frank Sheeran (Robert De Niro) and Hoffa (Al Pacino) are shocked at the news of JFK’s assassination. © 2019 Netlfix US, LLC.

Dir: Martin Scorsese
Starring: Robert De Niro, Joe Pesci, Al Pacino, Harvey Keitel, Bobby Cannavale, Jesse Plemons, Anna Paquin, Kathrine Narducci, Stephanie Kurtzuba, and Ray Romano

A deliberate camera wanders elegantly through a nursing home, down hallways and past medical staff, finally coming to rest in a cold and lonesome room where one single old man sits, almost waiting for the arrival of someone to engage his company. This all happens as “In the Still of the Night” by the Five Satins sets the mood for the story about to be told, a tale of murder and mobsters, tough guys with tough tales, with both the known and unknown elements of history equally famous and infamous supplying influence.

“The Irishman”, from director Martin Scorsese, is another gangster story from the auteur many would identify as the curator of the modern mob movie. Films like “Goodfellas”, “Casino”, and “The Departed” all tackled stories of money, power, respect and the violence, arrogance, and betrayal that permeates those areas. “The Irishman” sets a different mood, the familiar elements are all still present but the emotion and intention are different this time around. Scorsese tells a tale that focuses on loss and remorse, decision and intention; it’s a three and a half-hour long cinematic achievement from one of the greatest film directors of all time. 

Frank Sheeran (Robert De Niro) is the Irishman and also the lone elder waiting in the nursing home to tell a story about his life. Frank, after being a soldier in World War II, made a living as a truck driver in Pennsylvania, but after a chance meeting with a local gangster named Russell Bufalino (Joe Pesci), Frank takes a role as “the muscle” for the Philadelphia mob. It doesn’t take long for Frank to impress the higher-ups, opening an opportunity for him to work with James Riddle Hoffa (Al Pacino), president of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters. 

The plot for “The Irishman” is an interesting device, told with voice-over narration from Frank, who is in the nursing home, and with the same emphasis that old men recall stories about long-forgotten fishing trips or family vacations from the past. Frank looks back on the past, recalling the events that will eventually lead to the disappearance of Jimmy Hoffa while taking moments to talk about other gangsters, family life, and historical events pertinent to Frank and his journey through time. With such an extensive running time, it might seem like all these elements would become convoluted or muddle the emotion for the characters. It’s the exact opposite, the deliberate pacing and extensive time spent wandering through time with Frank and other associates helps in establishing the conflict Frank develops as elements of betrayal and loyalty arise throughout his life. It’s less about the history of things or the structure of the mob and more about the emotion of everything that happens to the characters. 

The script allows so much for the cast to work with, it’s a beautiful thing watching these amazing actors work in this film. De Niro is fantastic throughout, offering a character that starts as a loyal soldier who matures into a leader who is conflicted yet still devoted to his superiors. It’s a fascinating transition for the character, but also, transformation as De Niro and others in the cast are digitally de-aged for the film, an effect that is strange at first but quickly dissipates. Al Pacino plays Hoffa with a combination of big bold swagger when in the public eye but also sensitivity in smaller scenes when he and Frank are sharing hotel rooms or having ice cream with the family. Joe Pesci completely captivating here; the actor, who hasn’t been in much on the silver screen since the ’90s, composes a quiet character, doing more with subtle glances and small expressions than big dialog moments or boastful gangster antics like we’ve seen in the past. 

The look of the film, photographed by Rodrigo Prieto, is stunning at times. The film seems to glow during flashbacks and slowly desaturate as Frank and Russell make a fateful road trip with their wives. The beginning long, continuous shot is beautifully composed and a scene involving a big celebration for Frank looms with ominous intentions.  

“The Irishman” comes at an interesting time in the career of Martin Scorsese who recently has come under criticism from some film fans concerning his views on the state of cinema and the connection to Marvel comic book movies. Film is a subjective art-form, but if anyone has the right to make comments on the art of cinema, it’s Martin Scorsese. If the auteur’s past catalog doesn’t prove that point, “The Irishman” displays all the reasons why cinema should be regarded with the kind of seriousness Scorsese commands.  

Monte’s Rating
4.50 out of 5.00

Waves - Movie Review by Jeff Mitchell

Kelvin Harrison Jr.; left, and Sterling K. Brown in “Waves.” (A24)

‘Waves’:  An explosive and hypnotic domestic ride

Written and directed by:  Trey Edward Shults

Starring:  Sterling K. Brown, Renee Elise Goldsberry, Kelvin Harrison Jr., Taylor Russell, and Lucas Hedges

“Waves” – Writer/director Trey Edward Shults’ vibrant and explosive film is about families.  Fathers and sons.  Mothers and daughters.  Parents and children.  

Actually, it’s about one family, and no matter how much love and guidance that Ronald (Sterling K. Brown) and Catharine Williams (Renee Elise Goldsberry) openly bequeath to their kids Tyler (Kelvin Harrison Jr.) and Emily (Taylor Russell), open lines of communication between generations are sometimes impossible to find, even when a father, stepmother, son, and daughter live under one roof, frequently within whispering distances.

First definition of a wave:  Move to and fro with a swaying or undulating motion while remaining fixed to a point.

Ronald and Catharine Williams created a world of support for Tyler and Emily in the Miami suburbs.  They work hard and expect a lot from their teenage children, although the focus these days is squarely on Tyler.  Tyler is the older sibling, and Ronald seems to relish pushing him to excel, especially on the high school wrestling mat.  He even trains with his son, and they frequently lift weights without their shirts and flex in front of the mirror, which pushes their collective macho-quotient to 11.  Despite having a tight, ever-present rein on Tyler, Ronald has no idea that his son is stressed about two massive issues.  

Second definition of a wave:  a long body of water curling into an arched form and breaking on shore.

Tyler and his girlfriend Alexis (Alexa Demie) enjoy a carefree, loving relationship, and Shults introduces the audience to the happy couple with dazzling camerawork, as the two zip along the highway.  His camera somehow swivels and spins in tight quarters, and modern, pulsating beats are in sync with the kids’ laughter and smiles, as their heads and limbs sometimes extend outside the open windows.  With passion in the hearts and nothing but time on their hands, Tyler and Alexis perfectly capture the joy of youth in just a minute or two of screen time. 

Shults presents similar movements at the kids’ high school, as he dives and darts in the weight and wrestling rooms, but also outside on green football fields where cheerleaders practice.  Libraries and books aren’t particularly featured, but we get a first row seat into this aforementioned celebratory fervor.  School, however, is also noticeably separate from the rigidity of Tyler’s and Emily’s home life, so a clear divide between parents and kids exists.  

Third definition of a wave: a sudden occurrence of, or increase in, a specified phenomenon, feeling or emotion.

Unfortunately, the exuberance of youth can spill into immaturity and irrationality.  This fragile combination can quickly manufacture unexpected consequences, and not even the strongest parental foundations can prepare for them. 

It’s difficult to prepare for a couple key moments in “Waves”.  It’s a film that tests our limits.  It throws the audience into a meat grinder, but then opens up hypnotic spaces to help us cope.   It feels organic.  Then again, Shults’ direction is certain and unmistakable, and we are powerless to course correct.  Thankfully, we can regain autonomy after the movie, and the best course of action is to search for those evasive lines of communication in our own lives.  In the meantime, waves are always crashing against the shore.

(3.5/4 stars)

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

A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood - Movie Review by Ben Cahlamer

Tom Hanks and Matthew Rhys star in TriStar Pictures’ ‘A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood’. Photo Credit: Lacey Terrell

Directed by: Marielle Heller

Written by: Micah Fisteman-Blue and Noah Harpster

Based on: “Can You Say… Hero?” by Tom Junod

Starring: Tom Hanks, Matthew Rhys, Susan Kelechi Watson, Chris Cooper, Enrico Colantoni, Maryann Plunkett

As Marielle Heller’s “A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood” unfolded in front of me, it was difficult not to compare my own childhood experience of seeing Fred Rogers appearing on the television, talking directly to me.

I get misty eyed just thinking about it.

Tom Hanks’s nearly pitch-perfect performance has something to do with my misty eyes. However, it is the way Ms. Heller used the script from Micah Fitzeman-Blue and Noah Harpster to define the well-nuanced layers of the story.

More importantly, their script and Ms. Heller’s treatment of the script relies on the audience being open to what the film’s message is truly about, which is to say that Fred Rogers is telling Lloyd Vogel’s (Matthew Rhys) story as if it were another of the 895 episodes that Rogers produced between 1968 and 2001. The film opens to Vogel giving yet another award-winning speech, laced with sarcasm, but we can tell from the onset that there is a lot of pain.

The film is set in 1998 and follows the cynical Vogel, who at the time was writing for Esquire Magazine when he was asked to do a profile on Mr. Rogers. There’s a scene early in the film in which Vogel is sitting in his editors’ office and she reminds him why this assignment is being pushed in his direction. It’s a darkly humorous moment which begins a journey of change.

When Mr. Rogers and Lloyd first meet, there’s a playful banter between he and Lloyd; sitting just off the set, Lloyd begins a series of questions, but the focal point is the bandage across Lloyd’s nasal bridge. Within that moment, something brilliant happens as their conversation reaches through the cinema screen with that endearing trait that Mr. Rogers was known for – his ability to get people comfortable enough to open up.

Ms. Heller also buoys that sequence with Lloyd’s arrival on set – a child who is suffering is willful and disrespectful as his parents try to get him to calm down. While the parents scramble to control their child, Lloyd is having a conversation with Bill Isler (Enrico Colantoni), the President & CEO of Family Communications, Fred Rogers’s production company. Isler comments on the quality of Vogel’s articles, saying that he had Rogers read every article they could find written by Vogel and that Vogel was someone who Rogers loved to work with. Incredulously, Vogel asks Isler, “why, because I’m broken?”

The story’s conflict is one of family; a distanced father, Jerry played by Chris Cooper and an isolated, but understanding wife in Andrea (Susan Kelechi Watson) along with a son, Gavin. It is also about perspective and that’s something that Rogers thrived on – changing perspectives through gentle probing questions. There is never malicious intent in their interactions.

This thesis is supported through a scene about midway through the movie where, following a traumatic argument with his dad, Lloyd returns to Mr. Rogers as a way of escape. They meet in an Asian restaurant and through their conversation, Lloyd admits to certain things. Mr. Rogers asks Lloyd to take a moment of silence, seeking out all the people who love him. The low hush of dishes clattering in the kitchen and other diners’ conversations comes to a halt; the passersby outside the restaurant and the traffic just completely stop. It’s a moment of pure serenity as just a simple exercise and taking a moment to stop and realize just how much support we all really have was amazing.

As I think about it, Hanks flourished in bringing his own iconic mannerisms to another icon while keeping within the boundaries of who Fred Rogers was. Rhys had a conviction about himself that his cynic side was his driving force. There was a stoic side to him, but he always had a twinkle about him as if he was ready to laugh.

There’s a natural symmetry and flow to the story. Nothing ever really feels forced about the way Hanks portrays Rogers. In fact, the primary method of Rogers’s outlets for his anger and rage, for which he was known for having a temper, is beautifully contrasted with the opening outlet for Lloyd.

“A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood” does not pander. It doesn’t suggest that change can happen immediately; that the change within ourselves is a constant battle. But, given the circumstances of the story, the speed with which that change happens quickens in the second half of the film and I think that pace weakens the film just slightly.

One might be inclined to think that change isn’t possible, that we’ve gone down a dark path and that we can’t change our ways. The world thrives on failure and “A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood” reminds us that we are each of us, special in our own unique way and that we can be loved just for who we are.

3 out of 4 stars

Honey Boy - Movie Review by Ben Cahlamer

Shia LaBeouf plays his own father in his film ‘Honey Boy’.

Directed by: Alma Har’el

Written by: Shia LaBeouf

Starring: Shia LaBeouf, Lucas Hedges, Noah Jupe

I remember watching the Disney movie “Holes” on DVD in the late 90’s and the young actor at the center of the film, Shia LaBeouf was dramatically captivating. He went on to other roles, but his biggest performance has been his fall from Hollywood’s grace over the years.

His prophetic screenplay for “Honey Boy,” Alma Har’el’s directorial debut, serves as much of a release from his own internal pressures as much as it is an apology letter to his fans and his colleagues for his transgressions.

The story starts in present day as Otis Lort played by Lucas Hedges enters rehab following a DUI. He doesn’t believe he has a problem, but he does have Laura San Giacomo’s Dr. Moreno to talk about his challenges. The story is predicated on this DUI and his visit to a rehab facility as being his third strike.

The stakes for Lort have never been more serious and through Hedges’s expert performance, he simply doesn’t care. At the beginning.

Har’el takes us back to when Otis was a lad. Noah Jupe plays the younger Otis. In the opening scene, Jupe is set against a pitch black background and a cream pie just hits him perfectly square in the face – the joke’s on him. We quickly realize he’s a child actor and his father, James (LaBeouf) is his manager.

We can tell from James’s reaction to the production running later than scheduled, that there’s a lot of pent up anger. James teaches, or remind Otis to mind his manners and his place. We know that young Otis is a playful soul; one that is not being let out, so acting is his release.

Although we know that “Honey Boy” is autobiographical in nature, the way the film switches from young Otis to present day Otis doesn’t give the film an autobiographical feeling, allowing Hedges and Jupe to naturally progress through the opposite ends of one personality. Jupe is the standout here, showing a range of emotions, eventually taking control of his own life from his abusive father.

Adding a rich context to the characters is the court motel outside L.A. that James has them shacked up in; a home to prostitution and drugs and not exactly the best way to raise a son. LaBeouf’s performance as his own abuser is some of the most powerful acting I’ve seen this year – it is truly a release for him to finally acknowledge his own pain and to deal with, but it is Jupe that truly supports LaBeouf’s transformation.

Hedges, who is having yet another amazing year in 2019 stands out as the result of all the abuse. More importantly, the character realizes that his outlet is just an escape, something his father did to himself as well – life father, like son, until they both eventually become drifters; there is a lyricism about the way in which they drift, the powerful music from Alex Somers drives the characters toward their destinies.

As strong as the performances are, Natasha Braier’s cinematography must not go unnoticed: her work during the modern day settings with lots of natural sunlight flowing through the interior spaces, suggesting, in fact encouraging an open place in which to share our darkest fears contrasts with dingy, cramped surroundings of the motel young Otis and James lived in. Braier’s exterior shots are all about the gorgeous sunsets, the golden halo that permeates the Los Angeles Basin punctuating the dreams with which Otis has for his life, but his father can’t see.

LaBeouf has continued his acting career even through his recovery period and his performances get deeper and deeper; “The Peanut Butter Falcon” from earlier this year is a shining example.

As a screenwriter, even if he focuses on down and out recovery type characters, he has a future as a screenwriter. “Honey Boy” proves the exception to LaBeouf’s rule and I, for one, hope he continues to write as well as act.

3.75 out of 4

Marriage Story - Movie Review by Jeff Mitchell

Adam Driver and Scarlett Johansson star in Noah Baumbach’s heartfelt drama ‘Marriage Story’. Photo Credit: Wilson Webb

Baumbach’s ‘Marriage Story’ vows to leave a mark

Written and directed by:  Noah Baumbach

Starring:  Adam Driver, Scarlett Johansson, Laura Dern, Alan Alda, Ray Liotta, and Julie Hagerty

“Marriage Story” – “We were perfectly happy until we decided to live happily ever after.” – Carrie Bradshaw, “Sex in the City”

“Marriage is compromise and hard work, and then more hard work and communication and compromise.  And then work.  Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.” – Gillian Flynn

If the weather doesn’t comply with your family’s proposed weekend plans, a most-reliable backup is always at your disposal:  start a pot of coffee, make some sandwiches, open a box of cookies, and reach into the hallway closet and pull out Monopoly.  During blustery weekends, millions of families stay inside, huddle around a squared-circle chock full of streets, railroads and utilities, and giggle, argue, buy properties, pay rent, get rich, and go broke.  Oh, temporary incarceration is also a frequent fact of life too, but it’s just a game.

In the pleasing, breezy and soulful opening minutes of writer/director Noah Baumbach’s “Marriage Story”, he – in a most unique way – introduces Charlie (Adam Driver) and Nicole (Scarlett Johansson) and their life in New York City with their elementary school-age son Henry (Azhy Robertson).  Charlie is an avant-garde playwright, and Nicole stars in his live theatrical constructions.  They work together very well, recognize each other’s strengths and vulnerabilities, and live symbiotically.  Baumbach also includes some footage of a lively Monopoly match, which is one of many, many small moments that help tether this very likable family to our own.

We want Charlie and Nicole to continue to thrive for the next 60 years, but as Ms. Bradshaw and Ms. Flynn opined, sustained marital success is not a certainty.  

Other than co-writing “Fantastic Mr. Fox” (2009), Baumbach isn’t particularly known for depicting healthy relationships in his films, which are evenly mixed with comedy and misfortune.  Just look to “The Squid and the Whale” (2005), “Greenberg” (2010) and “While We’re Young” (2014) as prime examples.  No, “Marriage Story” does not run victory laps in celebrating a healthy partnership for 2 hours and 16 minutes, because Charlie and Nicole are in crisis, and talking-it-out with a soft-spoken third party in a comfortable office at 200 dollars a click probably won’t solve it.

“It is personal,” Baumbach said in an August 2019 interview.  “As a teenager, my parents divorced, and then I went through a divorce as an adult.”  

He adds that he used elements from his own experiences, but he wanted to broaden the film, because it’s such a huge subject.

Baumbach does this figuratively, but also literally, as this family’s journey volleys between New York and Los Angeles, and the movie proudly celebrates these coastal locales while shutting out the flyover states.  Still, the film’s threads champion the universality of Splitsville, which is familiar in every community, coast to coast.

With plenty of space and time, the razor-sharp, perceptive script covers a lot of ground, like personal negotiation, lawyers knowing what’s best, distance making the heart grow less-fonder, and the impact on children.

Baumbach, however, regularly checks in with Charlie, as this character’s universe seems to ever-so-slowly evolve into a place that he no longer recognizes.  Even though “Marriage Story” frequently poses as Charlie’s Story, Nicole isn’t a villain.  The two are just guilty of being human, and Laura Dern and Alan Alda don’t break laws when playing lawyers, but they steal every on-screen moment by delivering levity through absurdity in a system that defies logic.

“Marriage Story” rarely gets explosive, except one signature scene that channels Richard Linklater’s “Before Midnight” (2013).  Otherwise, the simplicities of imperfect-but-agreeable bliss seem to constantly and painfully shift into something else. 

Something more distant.  More clinical.  More transactional. 

Although a failing marriage can go to a thousand places, one thing is certain:  a lazy Sunday filled with coffee, sandwiches, cookies, and stops at St. Charles Place, Vermont Avenue and Boardwalk is not one of them. 

(3.5/4 stars)

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

Frozen II - Movie Review by Monte Yazzie

‘Frozen 2.’ Photo: Walt Disney Pictures

Dir: Chris Buck and Jennifer Lee

Starring: Kristen Bell, Idina Menzel, Josh Gad, Jonathan Groff, Sterling K. Brown, Evan Rachel Wood, and Alfred Molina

Happily, Ever After. Disney has used this sentiment to build an illustrious career of animated feature films filled with fairy godmothers, poison apples, singing mermaids, and, in the case of “Frozen”, a magical snow queen. All these stories come with enchantment, romance, and their fair share of evil villains, but they also have near-perfect happy endings.

“Frozen”, released in 2013, ended with two sisters reunited, the kingdom of Arendelle saved from eternal winter, the snowman Olaf finding a family, and every young audience member singing “Let it Go” for the next 6 years. It was as perfect an ending as one would expect from Disney.

So why continue the story of Elsa and Anna? “Frozen II” doesn’t need to exist but it does, and the result is a better than expected tale of growing up, becoming mature, and dealing with change.

Arendelle has found peace with Queen Elsa (Idina Menzel) in power, Anna (Kristen Bell) and Kristoff (Jonathan Groff) are growing closer in their budding relationship, and Olaf (Josh Gad) is soaking up human life while learning as much as possible. But Elsa’s magical power grows stronger and echoes from the past start to call for answers. Arendelle is threatened and Elsa, Anna, Kristoff, Sven, and Olaf must travel to an enchanted kingdom to find a solution.

“Frozen II” does a great job of utilizing its strongest assets which is the cast of characters. The story makes that a point of emphasis, initially, by focusing on the interconnected storylines the characters all have with one another. Specifically, Elsa and Anna’s connection as sisters, but also as powerful women in leadership positions, is more prominent throughout the film. Olaf, who mostly plays the comedic relief, is also provided with more matured character traits that assist in both offering levity but also insight with the characters along their journey. Even Kristoff is provided with more to do to assist Anna and Elsa through the major changes happening in the film.

The narrative works best when the theme of dealing with change is at the forefront. Sequels struggle with showing how characters grow, we become so familiar with great characters in the first film that often the sequel fails to offer the conflict that allows the characters to mature and handle change. “Frozen II” keeps that in mind as Elsa searches for answers about her past and gaining an understanding of how to handle her powers. The real admirable focus, surprisingly, is the development of Anna who must handle the more realistic, world-weary struggles of growing up and taking control of the complications that arise in life.

Unfortunately, the general journey of the story, the trip into the enchanted autumnal land with walking giant stone people, progresses in dull and predictable ways. While this shouldn’t be a surprise for an animated Disney feature, the progression just falls flat as the story follows the same familiar fairytale formula. Also, the plot introduction of an indigenous forest group in the enchanted land, who were betrayed in the past, offers an opportunity to introduce elements associated with the trauma found throughout history (heavy material but important subject matter conversations for young viewers) but it never follows through on these points. However, the composition of these environments, the dense fog-laden forest and one exquisite scene involving a water horse, keep the story interesting to look at.

There is a lot for young people to enjoy in “Frozen II”, while many of the songs don’t reach the heights of “Let it Go”, there are few notable songs, specifically a number that feels straight out the ‘80s, that will please. Still, the heart established by the characters and the focus on maturity and change keeps this sequel interesting and enjoyable.  If “Frozen” was about gaining the confidence to “let it go”, “Frozen II” is about the process of “letting go” and grasping the change that is in front of you. That’s a good lesson to share.

Monte’s Rating
3.25 out of 5.00

Interview of ‘Frozen II’ Animator Justin Sklar by Jeff Mitchell

“Frozen II” is flying into theatres on Friday, Nov. 22, so Disney animator Justin Sklar flew into Phoenix for press interviews and appearances on Nov. 15.  Justin sat down with the Phoenix Film Festival for a fun and insightful one-on-one interview, and we talked about his start with Disney, his influences and naturally, his work on “Frozen II”.

Disney animator Justin Sklar started his career as a trainee for “Wreck-It Ralph".

PFF:  You were a Disney trainee on “Wreck-It Ralph” (2012), and the studio promoted you to a full animator for “Frozen” (2013).  That’s like being a first-round draft pick and then winning the Super Bowl during your inaugural season.  How was that experience, and is “Frozen II” like coming home?

JS:  For sure.  I definitely got lucky, and I showed up (at Disney) when everything started to be awesome.  The way the training program normally works is you roll into crowds, and by the end of “Ralph”, I started doing a couple shots.  They try to give you one or two by the end of the movie, but “Frozen” was my first real (chance) to animate the whole show.  Obviously, at that time, none of us thought, “Yea, ‘Frozen’ is going to make a billion dollars.”   

And does it feel like coming home?  Yea, there’s an interesting thing that happens for animators.  (We think) sequels are cool.

(Normally,) we spend a year animating these characters, and by the end of that year, you (say), “Yea, I finally figured out who they are,” but you never get to animate them again.  Now, we can come into “Frozen II” with all that (past) knowledge.  (We can) really focus on honing the details that (we) didn’t get to do in the first movie.  It’s definitely cool to do “Frozen II”.

PFF:  In “Frozen II”, you worked on Kristoff (Jonathan Groff) and Mattias (Sterling K. Brown).  How closely did you work with Jonathan and Sterling?

JS:  We use all of what they do in the booth.  We look at all of their recordings, Mattias in particular.  We changed stuff in the model and a bunch of things (on) how Mattias moves, and (he) is heavily based on Sterling.  There are a lot of choices that we made with his mouth and jaw that are based on how Sterling not only looks, but how he talks and moves. 

A lot of that (work) is cool and interesting, but we have so many animators, (so) it really helps to ground the performance and (point out) something specific (about a character).  When you have 90 people animating every character across the whole movie, (you want Mattias to) feel like one character and not the work of 90 people.

Justin Sklar in Phoenix for “Frozen II’.

PFF:  I understand that the team used old-fashioned keyframing for the character Gale, who represents wind. 

JS:  The way that Gale works - because we are animating wind - is we hand-animate most of the leaves in Gale.  We get a leaf and then pose it per frame, until we get the motion that we want.  In the case of Gale, we (did) five or ten of those, and then (the Effects Team) will then duplicate them and spread them out.  So, you get this feeling that there’s (a) whole sweep of leaves, but we had to do a lot of work to animate those individual leaves to just set all that up anytime Gale did anything. 

PFF:  “Frozen” is about discovery, and “Frozen II” seems to be about maturity.  Do you think that there’s a parallel between the film and the audience?  Kids discovered “Frozen” six years ago, and now they are a bit older.

JS:  For sure, I think it’s a combination of things.  There’s plenty of stuff for the younger audiences, but I think “Frozen II” is talking to an older audience, and the filmmakers have matured as well.  Movies that directors would have made 10 years ago (are different than) the movies that they make now.  They have kids who are growing up, so we’re starting to see those experiences (playing) out on screen, and it’s lining up with the maturity of (our) audience.

PFF:  I read that you drew massive charcoal drawings in high school.  How big did they get, and were you influenced by certain artists?

JS:  I did a series (during) my senior year, a bunch of 6-foot by 4-foot portraits, and I think I had an 8.5-foot by 6-foot drawing.  They were pretty big.  (I did) a lot of portraiture, but mixed with the fact that we were all in high school, there were a lot of drawings of friends.  Ha ha.   

I’m trying to think who I referenced a lot.  Eric Fischl.  Chuck Close is an interesting person to me, but I wouldn’t say that he had a lot to do with the work that I was doing.  Euan Uglow!  Those are good ones!

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

The Warrior Queen of Jhansi - Movie Review by Ben Cahlamer

Devika Bhise in the movie “The Warrior Queen of Jhansi.” (Nick Wall / Roadside Attractions)

Directed by: Swati Bhise

Written by: Swati Bhise and Devika Bhise

Starring: Devika Bhise, Rupert Everett, Derek Jacobi

As I recount my experience watching “The Warrior Queen of Jhansi,” I couldn’t help but think of two important things. First, the quote, To the Victor go the spoils. Although the native peoples of India that suffered at the hands of the British in the late 1850’s, many noble souls were brave enough and courageous enough to rise above the situation with a voice louder than their oppressors.

The second thing that Devika Bhis’s performance as the Rani of Jhansi reminded me of, was that of William Wallace of “Braveheart” fame or of General Maximus of “Gladiator” fame, of which Derek Jacobi, who plays Lord Palmerston of the British East India Company in “The Warrior Queen of Jhansi”. Both characters, although men, represent a similar uprising for which they are standing up to foreign aggressors who underestimated their targets.

Swati Bhise’s direction is methodical, treating the British incursion from the perspective that they were not going to win. The story telegraphs this point, diminishing the historical narrative. However, in its defense, this also serves to allow Lakshmi Bai (Devika Bhise) to play to the characters’ strength as someone who earns the respect of her people, even in the face of her greatest counsels’ advice that they are beaten by the British.

Within the conflict, there is dissention among the various factions, with infighting on the rise, In order to be one voice and to outsmart the British, the Rani puts pride aside to bring her people together, much like the sword she would yield on the battlefront.

The British are no less formidable as a result of the story’s vantage point.Rupert Everett as Sir Hugh Rose pushes his legions to press forward, even as the doctors are telling him that the wounded cannot press on in their condition.

There is a modern day parallel to this theme that is not lost on this critic. At the same time is a love story brewing with Major Robert Ellis (Ben Lamb); something forbidden by the ongoing conflict. As she realizes the higher road, you can see the pain in Ms. Bhise’s performance. It something that reminds us to be courageous and just when a decision requires a hard stance.

The story issues aside, the film has a ‘television-movie-of-the-week’ quality about it as simplistic visuals compel you to see the story unfold with the characters and performances driving the story forward.

Mr. Jacobi’s performance is that of man desperate to quell the uprising at any cost, and history was not favourable toward his position. The scenes between he and Queen Victoria (Jodhi May) were shot in a way that carried his desperation and that of a Queen who had sympathies for the resistance where she too needed to balance out her duties with her desires.

There were no real victors in this conflict. Many died, but it is the voice from the grave that rose up against the oppression that gives rise to “The Warrior Queen of Jhansi.”

2 out of 4 stars

Radioflash - Movie Review by Ben Cahlamer

Brighton Sharbino and Dominic Monaghan in the thriller “Radioflash.” Photo courtesy of IFC Midnight.

Directed by: Ben McPherson

Written by: Ben McPherson

Starring: Brighton Sharbino, Dominic Monaghan, Will Patton

As recently as “Terminator: Dark Fate,” our future is unknowable; we cannot control it. Similarly, our futures are dictated by choice with Ben McPherson’s “Radioflash” sitting somewhere in between.

Radioflash is the former term for a nuclear electromagnetic pulse (EMP) in which a burst above the surface of the earth would fry every electric circuit, essentially sending humanity back into the Stone Age.

In the case of McPherson’s film, Reese (Brighton Sharbino) is a resourceful young lady living with her dad, Chris (Monaghan) in Seattle while Frank (Patton) lives off the grid. We learn quickly in the early parts of the story that Frank Chris’s ex-father in law.

McPherson sets up Reese’s backstory through flashbacks of her mother being wheeled into a hospital, being bedside as she dies. This gives rise to a totemic symbolism of death that permeates their journey to escape the pandemonium that ensues as people who are reliant on technology now scramble for anything that will keep them alive.

McPherson does a solid job of keeping the panic to a minimum, allowing Reese’s resourcefulness to stand out. The characters we meet along the way blend into the off-the-grid style of living that the migrating public of our expansion westward experienced back in the 1930’s. There is even a specific mention of the Dust Bowl.

Reese is someone of both worlds - that of a technophyte because she knows how to use radios and understands the limitations of the technology. She also has the patience to wait out a situation before taking action. Monaghan has a smaller role in the film, but is just as fundamental in giving Reese what she needs to survive. Their relationship was a parallel to the radioflash in a small way, giving her the energy she needed to move forward.

The cinematography by Austin F. Schmidt is the film’s highlight, Using the rocky terrain in the Washington mountains really heightens the sense of danger as Reese tries to find her grandfather.

The scenes in the cabin with a wheelchair-bound Maw (Fionnula Flanagan) were some of the most tense because of the closer quarters as Bill (Michael Filipowich) relentlessly chases after Reese as if she will go to the authorities for discovering them. Reese also discovers Quinn (Kyle Collin), someone who has been held captive. McPherson telegraphs the outcome, but maintains the tension just long enough to question the outcome - again a reflection of the fact that our choices dictate our future.

The dystopic nature of the story is, thankfully, not lined with zombies, although the look and feel of the film very easily could have supported it. Instead, “Radioflash” is a reflection on our reliance on technology and a look at how we would survive, or not survive without it and that understanding our history will give way to our future survival.

2.5 stars out of 4

The Good Liar - Movie Review by Jeff Mitchell

Helen Mirren and Ian McKellen star in ‘The Good Liar’

‘The Good Liar’:  Mirren and McKellen are terrific, but seeing this movie once is plenty.  No lie.

Directed by:  Bill Condon

Written by:  Jeffrey Hatcher, based on the novel by Nicholas Searle

Starring:  Helen Mirren and Ian McKellen

“The Good Liar” – “It’s weirdly difficult to lie on screen.  As an actor, you really have to believe that you are telling the truth.  In reality, you know that you aren’t telling the truth…but you have to utterly convince yourself, as the character, that you’re telling the truth.”  - Helen Mirren

“What’s trickier than straight-forward lying is the lying being badly done.” – Ian McKellen

Betty McLeish’s (Helen Mirren) husband died within the last year, but she feels ready to start dating again.   It’s 2009, and she embarks on a path like most singles do: online dating.  

She likes Roy Courtnay’s (Ian McKellen) dating profile, and whoo hoo, the feeling is mutual.  Their first date goes well, and before you can say, “Second date,” Betty invites Roy to move in, and he suggests that they form a joint checking account. 

Say what?

Her grandson Steven (Russell Tovey), however, is the voice of reason, and he believes that she is moving way too fast.  Oh, he’s not feeling the warm fuzzies for Roy either.  With good reason, because we discover very early in the first act, that Roy is a con man.  He’s a professional swindler who invites marks into his fake real estate schemes, and his partners and he run away with easy six-figure scores.  

For Roy, life is good, and he’s a good liar.  Now, he is setting a trap for Betty to embezzle her life savings, worth over 2.5 million British pounds. 

Director Bill Condon splits his time between making substantial, weighty dramas like “Mr. Holmes” (2015) and “Kinsey” (2004) and fluff pieces like the two-part series finale “The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn” (2011, 2012), so he falls somewhere in between with “The Good Liar”.  This is a light thriller, a con artist picture with two masterclass thespians.

McKellen seems to be having a ball as Roy.  His character – with sociopath tendencies - pretends to have affections for Betty in one moment, and then calculates his hopeful windfall in the next.  He’s a total creep, however Betty is easily fooled, as she drops all defenses and openly lets this wolf into the hen house.  Mirren perfectly plays a damsel void of distress, although the script and its pacing undermine her efforts.

The film is based on Nicholas Searle’s novel, and one might imagine that the author builds Roy’s trap over a couple hundred pages, but in the film, Betty drops her aforementioned resistance within the first 30 on-screen minutes.  One moviegoer might be caught up in the drama, turn to their friend or date and say, “Has Betty lost her mind?”

For others, her extreme naivety may not believable, and they could opine, “It’s so stupid that Betty is this stupid.”

In any film adaptation, jamming a novel’s narrative into a 100-page screenplay can be a daunting challenge, and writer Jeffrey Hatcher cannot quite get this one to fit, especially when the happy couple takes a holiday to another European city, and suddenly, a flashback into the way distant past seems like we’ve been shuttled to another movie entirely.

Quite frankly, this film does not play fair, but admittedly, it is a joy to see Mirren and McKellen figuratively dance around, with and through Roy’s lies, and since this is a con artist film, expect the unexpected.  Condon and Hatcher leave us some clues, but it might take a second viewing to catch them.   Then again, seeing this movie just once is plenty.  No lie.

(2.5/4 stars)

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

The Report - Movie Review by Jeff Mitchell

Adam Driver in “The Report”. Photo Credit: Atsushi Nishijima

‘The Report’ is an important 21st century history lesson

Directed and written by:  Scott Z. Burns

Starring:  Adam Driver, Annette Bening, Jon Hamm, Linda Powell, and Ted Levine

“The Report” – Director/writer Scott Z. Burns’ film is not a political thriller. 

It is a history lesson. 

A thorough history lesson that chronicles the ugly, horrific events perpetrated in the shadows of the U.S. government – at the direction of some forces within the Central Intelligence Agency, to be exact – but it also rightfully champions a man who cast a light on the said injustices in the form of a landmark report. 

A 6,700-page report with 38,000 footnotes. 

In 2009, the U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee discovers chilling details about the CIA’s detention and interrogation program, and chairman U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein (Annette Bening) asks one of her staffers, Daniel J. Jones (Adam Driver), to lead a broader investigation into the agency’s tactics and operations.  Little did Sen. Feinstein and Jones realize that a long, exhaustive search into the facts would lead to the darkest corners of the human condition. 

Daniel and his team made a Herculean, tireless effort over a length of time that will not be revealed in this review, but if one calculates the number of days, weeks, months, etc. it would require to compile a report with 38,000 footnotes, well, a three-day weekend won’t cut it.

Burns found superhuman strength of his own.  You see, the majority of Daniel’s waking hours - over an inordinate amount of time - were spent in a nondescript, windowless, antiseptic office in an ordinary government building, and he and his team poured over mountains of documents.  Not only is sifting through the aforementioned paperwork a mundane, thankless task, but the said material delves into countless departments’ and people’s actions through a maze of notes, memos, minutes, messages, and letters. 

In other words, the raw narrative is inherently confusing, extensive and dry, but – remarkably - Burns translates and condenses the facts into a cohesive 1-hour 59-minute movie that is free from misunderstanding, and it holds our interest.  Certainly, as an audience, we have to pay close attention, but Burns eases our burden by creating composite characters, clearly marking the bad actors and giving us enough information to comprehend the CIA’s overall downward path without overwhelming us.  

Along the way, the film frequently visits the past and into Black sites, where Middle Eastern men were tortured.  The trips into these retaliatory years after 9/11 have a grimy, yellowish tinge, as CIA-hired contractors James Mitchell (Douglas Hodge) and Bruce Jessen (T. Ryder Smith) attempt to extract information through extreme methods, called enhanced interrogation techniques (EITs).  These EITs, however, are not improvements in gathering important intel, and in fact, they have the opposite effect. 

These moments of brutality – that include waterboarding - are tormenting for the audience to watch.  It gets very, very ugly.

During these scenes, the camera focuses more on the men delivering the torture rather than the captives receiving it, and in my Nov. 2019 interview with Burns and Jones, the director explains this choice:  “It’s more about us, then it is about the people who were subjected to (torture).”  

Daniel discovers villains from the past, but also adversaries in the present, who don’t necessarily want the CIA’s mistakes revealed to the public, and they possess the power of the pen - in the form of redaction - and simply power, in general. 

Driver presents Daniel’s industrious drive, a diligent, singularly-focused intensity towards finding answers, but he contains his motivation within a professional decorum that allows him to open doors within Washington’s bureaucratic networks.  He isn’t Jack Bauer.  Daniel is a professional, who passionately asks questions, and documents his findings for 14 or 16 hours a day, while relationships, holidays and creature comforts fall out of his purview. 

We, however, don’t get a whole lot of insight into Daniel’s personal life or feelings outside of his work, but Driver does convey the man’s passion for the job and the inherent pain that comes from unearthing an incalculable number of acts of violence.  Actually, Daniel did count the number of times that the U.S. tortured its detainees.

One can also count the number of political players on-screen including, George Tenet (Dominic Fumusa), Sen. Mark Udall (Scott Shepherd), White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough (Jon Hamm), CIA Director John Brennan (Ted Levine), and, as mentioned earlier, Sen. Feinstein.  For the record, Bening is uncanny as the California senator and seems to almost channel her, like Cate Blanchett’s portrayal of Katharine Hepburn in Martin Scorsese’s “The Aviator” (2004).  Bening is that good here.

It’s difficult to have good feelings coming out of “The Report”.  The film opens old wounds that we thought were completely healed.  On the other hand, it does provide relief, because Daniel J. Jones’ tenacity offers an encouraging statement for 2019 and beyond, and that makes “The Report” an important history lesson.

(3/4 stars)

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

An interview with Scott Z. Burns and Daniel J. Jones from 'The Report' by Jeff Mitchell

Our very own Jeff Mitchell had an opportunity to sit down for an on-camera interview with Scott Z. Burns and Daniel J. Jones from “The Report”.

Scott Z. Burns is the director of the film, and Daniel J. Jones is the former U.S. Senate Interrogator who wrote the actual report on the CIA's detention and interrogation program after 9/11.

The movie stars Adam Driver, Annette Bening and Jon Hamm. “The Report” will be released in theatres nationwide on Friday, November 15th.

Doctor Sleep - Movie Review by Monte Yazzie

Ewan McGregor as Dan Torrance in ‘Doctor Sleep’. Photo Credit: Warner Bros. Pictures

Dir: Mike Flanagan
Starring: Ewan McGregor, Rebecca Ferguson, Kyliegh Curran, Cliff Curtis, Zahn McClarnon, and Emily Alyn Lind

Author Stephen King published “The Shining” in 1977 and director Stanley Kubrick would adapt the book into a film three years later in 1980, turning it into one of the seminal horror movies of all time even though Stephen King has made public statements of how much he dislikes it.

King would continue to look into the past for influence on his 2013 book “Doctor Sleep”, a sequel to “The Shining” which follows young Danny Torrance after the events at the Overlook Hotel and into complicated adulthood that details struggle with addiction and the continuation of evil in different forms.

Director Mike Flanagan, who last helmed the fantastic Netflix series “The Haunting of Hill House” and another King adaptation the impressive “Gerald’s Game”, takes an interesting approach to “Doctor Sleep” by crafting a film that pays special attention to King’s source material themes, both in vague and specific ways, while offering a superb homage to Kubrick’s iconic film.

Danny Torrance (Ewan McGregor) has been haunted by the events that occurred at the Overlook Hotel when he was a child, the memories and ghosts of that day continue to follow and torment him. However, Danny further develops his special ability, which he calls “the shining”, with the help from the ghost of his old friend Dick Hallorann (Carl Lumbly playing the role made famous by Scatman Crothers from “The Shining”), which allows him to trap the spirits around him inside his mind.

Danny grows up, troubled with addictions, and wandering through different towns until he winds up in a small New Hampshire town where he finds peace, along with sobriety, with the help of a kindly friend named Billy (Cliff Curtis).

Things aren’t safe for Danny, along with other people who can “shine”, as a murderous roaming caravan of people who feed off those that shine is hunting a young girl named Abra (Kyleigh Curran) who Danny has developed a friendship with.

“Doctor Sleep” has a lot of story to tell here, a lifetime in the case of Danny Torrance who experiences so much trauma as a young boy and then grows into adulthood with the scars of that event still very much healing, sometimes still bleeding when a ghost comes wandering back into his life. Director Mike Flanagan taps into this character, utilizing a subdued and affected Ewan McGregor to make this character the emotional core of the film.

Stephen King crafts the novel with an approach that is far less of a supernatural tale and one that is more of the horror that happens in everyday life, the evil that exists without ghosts or paranormal monsters. Flanagan focuses on this narrative element, crafting tension with the roving group of killers led by the wicked Rose, played fiercely by Rebecca Ferguson, and orchestrating some disturbing elements involving children. One of these specific scenes is extremely hard to watch, a moment played to increase the peril which is effectively done right before Abra becomes a target for the group.

Flanagan clearly understands and respects the vision of Stephen King for this story, but also the vision from Stanley Kubrick who turned “The Shining” into one of the best-regarded genre films in history. There are moments within “Doctor Sleep” where Flanagan recreates scenes, characters, and designs from “The Shining”, they are amazing and utilized so effectively to accommodate the tone of this film.

“Doctor Sleep” has some minor pacing issues, which makes the story feel like it may have been better suited for an extended series to provide attention for all the characters and the journey Danny takes. Still, these are minor issues for a film that feels so accomplished in its vision, even when it’s working hard to honor the themes of the source material and the artistic style of Stanley Kubrick’s film. Mike Flanagan has demonstrated with his recent films, and specifically with “Doctor Sleep”, that he is truly the current master of horror.

Monte’s Rating
4.00 out of 5.00

Proxima - Movie Review by Jeff Mitchell

Eva Green in “Proxima”. Photo courtesy of TIFF.

‘Proxima’:  This astronaut-daughter story successfully floats and soars with gentle, nuanced tones

Directed by:  Alice Winocour

Written by:  Alice Winocour, Jean-Stephane Bron, Marcia Romano, and Nynne Oldenburg

Starring:  Eva Green, Matt Dillon, Lars Eidinger, Zelie Boulant, and Sandra Huller

“Proxima” – “Behind every working woman is an enormous pile of unwashed laundry.”  - cartoonist Barbara Dale

“It’s not difficult to take care of a child.  It’s difficult to do anything else while taking care of a child.” – Julianne Moore

Sarah (Eva Green) is a mom.

She is a working mom. 

She is an astronaut.

Director Alice Winocour’s film takes on the well-documented tug-of-war between motherhood and the workplace, because while Sarah looks to the stars, she also feels the pull on Earth in the form of her elementary school-age daughter Stella (Zelie Boulant).  Despite the potential for a troubling, space-age drama, “Proxima” floats and soars with gentle, nuanced tones.  The picture’s fulcrum remains with mother and daughter, but Sarah’s training for her extended business trip on the International Space Station is the device to emphasize the aforementioned eternal struggle. 

Green - who might be best known for her femme fatale roles in “Casino Royale” (2006), “300: Rise of an Empire” (2014) and “Sin City: A Dame to Kill For” (2014) – takes a subtle approach here as Sarah, a Frenchwoman, who carries a deep, tranquil strength.  She has the capacity and smarts for CEO-like leadership, but instead focuses her talents on her out-of-this-world profession with proficiency and grace. 

Winocour and Green do not insist that Sarah needs to work twice as hard as a man, but the film demonstrates that she needs to always maintain a calm aura of professionalism in a most stressful work environment.  She’s part of a three-person, space-traveler team, but her American colleague Mike (Matt Dillon) seems to constantly test her with sometimes-overt, sometimes-understated sexist comments.  Some evolved men might think such behavior has been left behind in the 20th century, but ask any woman if sexism is dead, and she might say that chauvinism is a zombie that will never perish.

Meanwhile, Mike can freely express concern for his family or proudly parade them at a press conference or networking event.  He’s the all-American type who radiates machismo.  Mike will grill hot dogs with his wife and kids, and isn’t afraid to proclaim – to a group of eager reporters - that Sarah is a great addition to the team, partially because her French culinary skills will be most useful in space.  Meanwhile, her family is in a state of repair, as she shares custody of Stella with her ex-husband (Lars Eidinger). 

Winocour – who cowrote “Mustang” (2015), a story about five Turkish sisters facing the nauseating prospect of arranged marriages during their teen years – is not dealing with such extremes here, but her refreshing perspective carries weight when chronicling Sarah’s journey.

Sarah internalizes everything and appears to not only feel eyes gazing upon her within the story, but also with theatre audiences too.  Still, she pushes hard with her training, while attempting to maintain an equilibrium between work-life and home-life that just might not be possible.   The film refrains from emotional extremes and trauma, but Sarah’s never-ending balancing act is a very real and primal burden.

These messages ring true for her and probably with working moms everywhere, whether an office commute is five miles on the freeway or 254 miles straight up.

(3.5/ 4 stars) 

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

Playing With Fire - Movie Review by Ben Cahlamer

Keegan-Michael Key and John Cena in “Playing With Fire.” Photo Credit: Doane Gregory/Paramount Pictures

Directed by: Andy Fickman

Screenplay by: Dan Ewen and Matt Lieberman

Story by: Dan Ewen

Starring: John Cena, Keegan-Michael Key, John Leguizamo, Brianna Hildebrand, Dennis Haysbert, Judy Greer, Tyler Mane

With the recent wildfires in California, we really only see the physical part of what a fire fighter, any kind of fire fighter does for a living; they put themselves in harms’ way to protect us and, if they can, our property. One would also think that with “Paul Blart: Mall Cop 2”, that Andy Fickman’s resume is not exactly what one looks for when thinking about “Playing with Fire.”

However, the marriage between these two polar opposites couldn’t be further from the truth.

Sure, Dan Ewen and Matt Lieberman’s script, from Ewen’s story, doesn’t exactly ring a three-alarm wrangling to the movie theater: a group of wildfire fighters in the Sierra Nevada’s rescues a group of children from a fire.

The embers of the simplistic story keep glowing with a strong cast of characters. John Cena, who turned wrestling pro into actor, plays Jake “Supe” Carson, the station supervisor. He is a tough-as-nails, by the book leader, following in the footsteps of his father. Trying to crack his shell is Mark played by Keegan-Michael Key. If Key was this hilarious when he played with Peele, then I need to revisit their show. John Leguizamo plays Rodrigo the station’s chef and boy, does he love his Spam. Tyler Mane is Axe, the silent giant with, well, an axe.

Fickman smartly expands the reach of the story just enough to start “Supes” heroism out on the right foot – with an environmental concern. As the firefighters rush off to douse a burning home, which just happens to contain Brynn (Brianna Hildebrand), Will (Christian Convery) and Zoey (Finley Rose Slater), they also grab a bucket of water from a lake being monitored by Dr. Amy Hicks (Judy Greer).

The crew manages to save the children from the fire and an effort to return them to their parents proves a hilarious, and a sobering challenge. At the center of the story really are themes of family and trust; each of the actors plays into this with all their heart.

The key to the antics lies squarely on Mark’s feet. Mark is constantly putting subliminal reminders into Jake’s field of view in camera as a way to break his impenetrable force field of sheer will and determination. Yet, we know from the way the kids were rescued from the fire, that the story is going to take a predictable turn.

I’m used to seeing Brianna Hildebrand as Negasonic Teenage Warhead (“Deadpool”). Here she sheds most of the boldness from that role, but none of the brashness as Brynn. We know from the way the story telegraphs the importance of the children’s presence, that not everything is as it seems with these children. Hildebrand’s performance as Jake-lite was endearing, reminding me of a mother bear protecting her cubs, clawing out at anything or, anyone, who gets in her way. Jake, wanting to do the right thing, stumbles on to the real story behind the kid’s presence in the forest.

Dennis Haysbert, who you probably know better from the Allstate Insurance commercials, plays Commander Richards. Like a parent, and ironically like a good neighbor (but wrong insurer), Richards checks in on the stationhouse.

And just when we think the party’s over, Carson and Fickman turn over a new leaf. “Playing with Fire” has a lot of heart, reminding me of Vin Diesel’s “The Pacifier” from 2005. “Playing with Fire” isn’t going to win any awards and its over simplistic story has more fun than it is serious, but it tugs at our heart strings and that’s okay.

2.5 out of 4

Midway - Movie Review by Jeff Mitchell

Nick Jonas stars as ‘Bruno Gaido’ in “Midway”. Photo Credit: Reiner Bajo

‘Midway’ is an okay telling of an extraordinary battle

Directed by:  Roland Emmerich

Written by:  Wes Tooke

Starring:  Patrick Wilson, Ed Skrein, Woody Harrelson, Dennis Quaid, Luke Evans, Mandy Moore, and Nick Jonas

“Midway” – Midway Atoll sits in isolation in the Pacific Ocean, about 1,400 miles northwest of Honolulu, and the expression “blink, and you’ll miss it” certainly applies to this tiny island.

Ironically, this diminutive locale played host to one of the biggest WWII battles.  Six months after the Japanese Empire bludgeoned the American Navy at Pearl Harbor, the U.S. hoped to halt Japan’s momentum at Midway on June 4, 1942. 

Director Roland Emmerich proudly stands by his big budget, special effects pictures, but for every “Stargate” (1994) or “Independence Day” (1996), he badly misses twice as often with mindless, overcooked action films like “Godzilla” (1998), “10,000 BC” (2008), “2012” (2009), and “Independence Day: Resurgence” (2015). 

Emmerich is Michael Bay-light in a way, except he’s – thankfully - more judicious with his runtimes.  Well, most of the time.  Refined moviegoers are still kicking themselves for accidentally picking “2112” at their local cineplex and suffering through 2 hours and 38 minutes of utter nonsense. 

In 2019, instead of churning out a disaster, monster or alien-invasion movie, Emmerich - armed with a 100 million-dollar budget - turns to the history books with “Midway”.

True to form, Emmerich overwhelms the movie screen with infinitely-busy special effects, and this begins straightaway with the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor.  As countless planes dive, dart and ram through the unsuspecting aircraft carriers, their gunfire and bombs trigger massive explosions and mountains of black smoke, as twisted metal remnants of these proud ships sink into shallow waters. 

The level of destruction may trigger anger or sorrow, but quite frankly, the visuals seem a little cartoonish, so apathy might be your co-pilot.

For instance, when a Japanese plane finds and flies into an empty space between two American ships - like the Millennium Falcon squeezing into tight quarters inside a Death Star in “Star Wars: Return of the Jedi” (1983) - the impact has all the gravitas of a video game.  This could have been a “game over” for the rest of the film, but Emmerich, costume designer Mario Davignon and cinematographer Robby Baumgartner collaborate to offer an appealing look of the period by paying meticulous attention to attire and grayish, yellowish camera filters that create a time warp back to the early 1940s. 

The big battles may not look authentic, but everyday moments of exposition and banter between the characters (mostly) feel genuine.   Although Emmerich overwhelms the screen with action at times, he introduces a manageable number of characters – who are also real-life military men - for the audience to follow. 

Lt. Dick Best (Ed Skrein) and Lt. Commander Wade McClusky (Luke Evans) reign the skies as two lead fighter pilots. 

Adm. Chester Nimitz (Woody Harrelson) and Vice Adm. Bull Halsey (Dennis Quaid) move chess pieces on ground.

A few younger “kids” fill in some spaces, like Nick Jonas who delivers a surprising macho turn.  His character Bruno Gaido doesn’t fear death because, “You never know what’s going to get you, so why worry about it?”

The script offers healthy servings of action and exposition, and for the latter, Patrick Wilson’s turn as codebreaker Edwin Layton is the most intriguing character, as he and his team frequently decipher Japanese communications.  These are important history lessons, and the movie shows admiration for the men who fought and lost their lives.  The audience also learns Japan’s perspectives as well.  This doesn’t mean that “Midway” is a great movie, because it’s not.  It’s cliché and carries one too many win-one-for-The Gipper moments.    

On the other hand, it – thankfully - does not embrace countless scenes of romance, as a few critics mentioned after the Tempe, Ariz. “Midway” screening.  Romance might have been tricky anyway, since Dick Best’s wife Ann (Mandy Moore) and Edwin Layton’s wife Dange (Rachael Perrell Fosket) look like clones, and it will take about eight seconds per appearance to decipher if Ann or Dange is gracing the screen. 

No, Emmerich’s picture is not “Pearl Harbor” (2001), but it’s not “Flags of Our Fathers” (2006) either.  Maybe somewhere in the middle.  You know, somewhere…

(2.5/4 stars)

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

Terminator: Dark Fate - Movie Review by Ben Cahlamer

Arnold Schwarzenegger stars in Skydance Productions and Paramount Pictures’ "TERMINATOR: DARK FATE."

Directed by: Tim Miller

Screenplay by: David Goyer, Justin Rhodes and Billy Ray

Story by: James Cameron, Charles Eglee, Josh Friedman, David Goyer, Justin Rhodes

Based on Characters by: James Cameron and Gale Anne Hurd

Starring: Linda Hamilton, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Mackenzie Davis, Natalia Reyes, Gabriel Luna, Diego Boneta

If you’re reading this, it’s likely that you either enjoy the “Terminator” series of films and you either want to see how they dig themselves out of the debacles that were “Terminator 3,” “Terminator Salvation,” and “Terminator Genisys.” On the other hand, you might want to enjoy an early Awards season spectacle that might just knock you off your feet again.

Either way, you’ve left your chances to “Terminator: Dark Fate” to decide which choice Tim Miller’s (“Deadpool”) film answers.

The short answer is that it does both, but not necessarily in a good way.

The fifth film in the franchise sees James Cameron return in a producer and co-writer capacity, but the film feels like his prints are all over it, which is a good thing. His presence gives the story elements of what made the first two films so enthralling: the presence of mind to know that technology was, then and is now ruling our lives.

Mackenzie Davis plays Grace, solider from the future sent back to protect Dani Ramos (Natalia Reyes). Gabriel Luna plays Rev-9, an amped up version of Robert Patrick’s T-1000 from the 1991 “Terminator 2,” of which “Dark Fate” is a direct sequel.

The story by David Goyer (“Batman Begins,” “The Dark Knight”), Justin Rhodes and Billy Ray (“Gemini Man”) uses the same tropes that defined “The Terminator” and “T2” and almost too excessively. Miller directs the new cast to some of the same beats as “The Terminator,” partly to establish who each of the new characters are in relation to their counterparts from the original films, but also to assure us that this film belongs in the same universe and that we can . . .  conveniently . . . forget the three films that sit in between this film and “T2.”

Admittedly, as much as the rehashing of what’s come before grated on my nerves, there is a touch of sentimentality that I don’t mind, especially when Linda Hamilton steps on to the screen as Sarah Connor.

Her presence and in particular her introduction into the story feel very “Logan”-esque. Miller gives her space to work her magic and it was nice to see her on the screen again as she tries to stay off the grid. There’s a lot of humor to her role as she reflects back on “what if.” The story doesn’t give Sarah much room to integrate with either Grace nor Danni, and that’s a shame because as much as this is Sarah’s story, it really isn’t.

It focuses too much on the technology and the struggle to survive in not only the future, but in our current environment as it touches on drone warfare, immigration and economics.

It isn’t until Arnold Schwarzenegger makes his half John Matrix, half T-900 return to the role that the movie picks up much steam. Schwarzenegger enjoyed hamming it up and his interactions with Hamilton did make me smile.

Miller does an expert job at handling the action, something we’ve seen with “Deadpool” and it’s hard to realize that this is his sophomore directorial effort, until you realize that Cameron is really behind the final shaping of the film, wich is why it feels like warmed over “Terminator” rather than something completely new.

Skydance, et al were wise to hold this movie back until early Awards season and it will be interesting to see how it plays the box office game with “Joker” amongst other films.

Just because its “Terminator: Dark Fate” doesn’t mean you’re not going to have fun with it. Tim Miller’s essence is still on the film and he does an excellent job bringing the past together with the future so that we all can experience a new fate.

Just that it happens to be, well, dark.

1.75 out of 4

Motherless Brooklyn - Movie Review by Monte Yazzie

Edward Norton and Willem Dafoe in “Motherless Brooklyn”. Photo Credit: Warner Bros.

Dir: Edward Norton
Starring: Edward Norton, Alec Baldwin, Gugu Mbatha-Raw, Ehtan Suplee, Dallas Roberts, Bobby Cannavale, and Willem Dafoe 

A lone New York gumshoe exits the darkness of a side alleyway, a fedora casting a shadow over his eyes as steam rises from a manhole nearby. “Motherless Brooklyn”, directed, acted, and written by Edward Norton, tackles the crime film noir genre with aggressive style and impressive performances from a group of exceptional actors placed in roles that allow them to flex and chew scenery in unique ways. It’s a movie that doesn’t often get made in today’s sequel-heavy, superhero influenced atmosphere, the fact that it understands film noir characteristics and narrative themes keeps this film thought-provoking and engaging throughout.

In 1950’s New York, Lionel Essrog (Edward Norton), sometimes known as Brooklyn and often self-described as Freakshow, works for a private investigation company run by Frank Minna (Bruce Willis). Lionel is an orphan who grew up rough, Frank protected him when he was younger, keeping others from taking advantage of him. Lionel has a condition, he says his “brain is all messed up”, that accompanies physical twitches and involuntary verbal bursts. But being in the investigation business, this condition has an advantage as Lionel has a photographic memory.

Frank arranges a setup with a group of mysterious guys, bringing Lionel and another one of Minna’s Men (Ethan Suplee) along to watch his back. Things go bad and Frank is shot, leaving Lionel to piece together a scheme of corruption beyond the private sector, but rather into the realms of New York politics, greed, and murder.

“Motherless Brooklyn” is an interesting piece of noir cinema, it feels unusual yet refreshing to see a film like this on the big screen, which is where this film should be seen. Edward Norton, wearing the director’s hat, does a great job of combining familiar genre characteristics from crime films from the past, bringing a shadowy and hazy atmosphere to New York City while also showing the contrasting beauty of the city’s architecture and landscape both in bright sunlight and the dark of night. It feels, in very specific moments, like John Alton’s style of noir composition with films like “T-Men” and “He Walked By Night”, with deep shadows and pinpoint lighting style.

The cast is an ensemble of great actors who all contribute nicely with characters, some who control the screen with glee. Take for instance Alec Baldwin playing a forceful businessman in a politician’s disguise. Baldwin’s introduction in the film finds him bursting through doors, feet and fist stomping, into a celebratory meeting that immediately stops.

Minna’s Men, Bobby Cannavale, Ethan Suplee, and Dallas Roberts, have the fun task of playing the many different versions of noir detectives we’ve seen from the past. The tough guy, the playboy, the family man…each in search of a different reason for being a detective.

Edward Norton’s character is the most complex, the most intricate and the most unlike the standard stereotype found for this character. At one-point Lionel, seemingly shedding his persona to look more like something more familiar, picks up a trench coat, fedora and a holster with a gun, putting on the uniform of the determined gumshoe. Norton is doing so much with the character, consistent twitching and verbal rhyming spells, more flair than vulgar, that become more prominent when he is agitated or, in the one instance, grooving to jazz music in a smoky night club.

The narrative weaves a nice who-dun-it but delves into over explanation too often, with flashbacks that assist the mystery in ways the audience is already keen to. The primary story conflict is that of power, and throughout the film this aspect is what gives the movie its motion, it what keeps you engaged to see how the sympathetic Lionel will best the bad guy. This drives the film until, in the final act, it shifts into a story about protection of the past, present, and future. It works in pieces.

“Motherless Brooklyn” is inspired by so many great things, “Chinatown”, classic film noir, jazz (the score and accompanying music from an amazing group of artists like Thelonious Monk and Charlie Parker, Wynton Marsalis, Thom Yorke, and a score by Daniel Pemberton), and New York City. While the narrative encounters a few bumps, the film does a great job of organizing an intricate and interesting noir film. 

Monte’s Rating
4.00 out of 5.00

Frankie - Movie Review by Jeff Mitchell

Marisa Tomei and Isabelle Hubbert in “Frankie”. Photo Credit: Sony Pictures Classics

‘Frankie’ serves too many ordinary slices in this slice-of-life picture

Directed by:  Ira Sachs

Written by:  Ira Sachs and Mauricio Zacharias

Starring:  Isabelle Huppert, Brendan Gleeson, Marisa Tomei, Greg Kinnear, and Vinette Robinson

“Frankie” – Lush and picturesque, Sintra is a luxurious destination city and filled with beautiful views and rich history.  Located in the Portuguese Riviera, it’s a coastal home to royal palaces and castles, and after a few days, tourists might feel like kings and queens.   

Francoise Cremont (Isabelle Huppert) – known as Frankie to everyone – is not a queen but a famous actress.  She also proudly carries the title of matriarch and calls her family to the aforementioned community for a reunion of sorts.  She has her reasons, and director/co-writer Ira Sachs will reveal them, but other than the eventual audience-clarity of Frankie’s motivation, this movie - unfortunately - is a nonevent. 

This comes as a total surprise, because Sachs recently delivered an involved, layered tale of friendship in the New York City drama “Little Men” (2016), and his new picture attracts a terrific ensemble cast with Huppert, Brendan Gleeson, Marisa Tomei, Greg Kinnear, and Jeremie Renier.

Taking place over one day, “Frankie” is a slice-of-life film that doubles and triples down on its everyday-event concept.  Despite Sachs teeing up several appealing characters, they simply converse about their issues, and the screenplay rarely advances towards any resolutions. 

Moviegoers are left with 98 minutes of mundane exposition with no oomph to push the narrative forward.  Every character seems terribly bored, and the mood may become contagious in a theatre near you. 

Although, the film feels just fine at the very beginning.  It’s early morning, and Frankie jumps in a swimming pool.  After happily discarding her top, she feels free from concern, a moment of contentment.  Such moments, however, are extremely few and far between for Frankie or anyone else in this picture.

Frankie’s stepdaughter Sylvia (Vinette Robinson) has marital problems. 

Our lead protagonist asks her hairdresser/make-up artist Ilene (Tomei) to fly to Portugal in the hopes of setting up her single, detached son Paul (Renier).  Since Ilene was unaware of Frankie’s matchmaking attempts, she brought her boyfriend Gary (Kinnear) along, but after a few hours, she wishes that she hadn’t. 

Meanwhile, Frankie’s husband Jimmy (Gleeson) seems distracted, and her first husband Michel (Pascal Greggory) makes the trip to Sintra too. 

Sachs hops between the various characters, as they drone on about their problems and wander about the resort and surrounding city.  Sometimes Sachs takes advantage of the setting, as Sylvia’s daughter Maya (Sennia Nanua) heads to a beautiful beach, and Frankie hikes on a winding, unpaved path through a heavily wooded forest.  In fact, Huppert pulls off quite a feat:  she treads along the turns, inclines, slippery branches, and leaves in high platform heels with the greatest of ease. 

Perhaps, Frankie was a runway model in a past life? 

Well, Isabelle did have some notable, model-like costume changes, as Frankie wore a rainbow-striped top in the morning, a long, shiny purple skirt in the afternoon and an orange one in the early evening.  Frankie’s outfits really popped, so credit Isabelle’s costume designer Khadija Zeggai for her sense of fashion. 

Then again, if Frankie’s attire is the most provoking element of the movie, that’s a problem.

(1.5/4 stars)

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

Harriet - Movie Review by Ben Cahlamer

Cynthia Erivo stars as Harriet Tubman in HARRIET, a Focus Features release. Credit: Glen Wilson

Directed by: Kasi Lemmons

Screenplay by: Gergory Allen Howard and Kasi Lemmons

Story by: Gregory Allen Howard

Starring: Cynthia Erivo, Leslie Odom Jr., Joe Alwyn, Janelle Monae

History has a way of repeating itself. Particularly now.

As the generations behind me struggle to clean up the messes left by the generations in front of them, there is a desire to free those who live in tyranny. Whether you’re thinking politically about the current Administration or you’re thinking of those who are mistreated by the law and seek to be equal, the fight that abolitionist Harriet Tubman started in 1849 still lives on today.

As Harriet, Cynthia Erivo (“Bad Times at the El Royale,” “Widows”) is absolutely dynamite; the look in her eyes as she squares off with Joe Alwyn’s Gideon Brodess, or William Still (Leslie Odom Jr.), the film treats Ms. Tubman as free. She knows better and the intelligence behind the character’s eyes are a direct reflection of co-writer and director, Kasi Lemmons (“Eve’s Bayou”).

There’s a sense of urgency from the opening frame as Harriet tries to free herself and her husband, John (Zackary Momoh) along with her father Ben (Clarke Peters) and mother, Rit (Vanessa Bell Calloway). There’s an equal sense of energy coming from their slave owners, who seek to keep them exactly where they are.

Erivo channels the energy given by Lemmons and co-writer Gregory Allen Howard to break free. The night scenes during her escape are treacherous as cinematographer John Toll (“Legends of the Fall,” “Bravehart”) captures the essence of her energy to escape.

Leaving her family behind, she makes her way to Philadelphia where she meets Mr. Still and Marie Buchanon (Janelle Monáe). Though there are moments of tenderness as she realizes she is safe, the character’s altruistic nature wants to get right back in to action to free her family.

Lemmons had all the right ideas about how to present Harriet to a modern audience who might not remember her efforts to free slaves. Erivo carries the manifestation of the risk and the danger Tubman put herself through to ensure that those who could be saved were saved.

“Harriet” strives too much to be about Harriet’s journey that the story loses sight of why her journey was such an important point in our collective history. In fact, I learned a thing or two, so it gets points for that.

Ms. Erivo, whose grace and poise on the screen impressed last year not once, but twice, does it a third time. While “Harriet” does justice her legacy, the story seemed generic enough that it pulls away from what it set out to do, though Ms. Erivo’s performance is a strong reason to see the film in theaters.

2 out of 4