Frida.

Review #1822: Frida.

Cast: 

Salma Hayek (Frida Kahlo), Alfred Molina (Diego Rivera), Geoffrey Rush (Leon Trotsky), Mía Maestro (Cristina Kahlo), Ashley Judd (Tina Modotti), Antonio Banderas (David Alfaro Siqueiros), Edward Norton (Nelson Rockefeller), Diego Luna (Alejandro Gonzalez Arias), Margarita Sanz (Natalia Sedova), Patricia Reyes Spíndola (Matilde Kahlo), Roger Rees (Guillermo Kahlo), and Valeria Golino (Lupe Marín) Directed by Julie Taymor.

Review: 

If one wants to hear about an entertainer director that made marks in both film and stage, Julie Taymor would be a useful start. Born in Massachusetts, Taymor developed an interest in theatre from a young age, complete with study with L'École Internationale de Théâtre Jacques Lecoq before moving onto Oberlin College (where she studied mythology and folklore). She honed her interests through masks and dance while first serving as director in New York theatres in 1974. She would make a variety of plays such as Shakespeare productions before having her prime moment with her production of The Lion King on Broadway, which was one of the most popular productions of its day in 1997, complete with Tony Awards for Taymor. Meanwhile, Taymor also did ventures into filmmaking, having her first directorial effort with an American Playhouse-produced film with "Fool's Fire" (which both premiered at the Sundance Film Festival and aired on PBS). Her feature debut was Titus (1999), which received fair marks (particularly with costume design). In her film career, she has made five films in over two decades of work. You might be surprised to hear that this film went through a lengthy development hell, with a plethora of considerations considered that involved Madonna, Jennifer Lopez, and Robert De Niro at different points. Hayek (who had slowly built a presence in Hollywood in the mid-1990s) had been interested in doing the role for a number of years, and by that time the works of Kahlo was attracting further interest from art folks, but it only came around in 2001 with Miramax alongside a variety of producers (seven credited) and four credited screenwriters (Clancy Sigal, Diane Lake, Gregory Nava, Anna Thomas) that listed Hayden Herrera's Frida: A Biography of Frida Kahlo as adaptation material, as championed by book editor/literary agent-turned-executive Nancy Hardin.

Admittedly, I had considered watching this film for a number of years, if only because one is always curious about art (no matter how "mediocre" or bad one is at it, as I can attest to). I think most of us at least know about the works of Frida Kahlo (born of German and Mexican heritage), if only because of how striking her art is. With a runtime of 123 minutes, I think the movie does a spectacular job in capturing the artist with enough strokes in style and engagement to make a solid biopic, one that runs through a number of interesting events in the life of Kahlo (and Rivera) with useful patience that never seems to collapse into easy generalizations. It captures the essence of someone with growing pain and talent for a fitting capture of an artist with such a vibrant personality that honors the art without falling into hagiography. With a useful ensemble like this, it should only make sense that Hayek (who received a plethora of award nominations for her role) leads the way with suitable timing, having a burning sense of self that lives through two great accidents (a trolly and Diego Rivera) with honesty. The chemistry between her and Molina sears through with confounding energy, one that endures with the quality of a bird and an elephant that is endearingly watchable, and Molina makes a good showman to pair with Hayek. The rest of the group come and go with varying strokes that hone interest for what is needed when looking upon history with general interest, with Rush and Norton probably being the most notable of the historical presences that compare interestingly when played against Hayek (of course, Golino is quietly effective in small moments spent with Hayek too). The clash of visions (ideological or not) collides for an engaging movie that elevates its subject (complications and all) for a curious biography worth watching from a director engaged with making entertaining projects with style to accompany it.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Next Time: To end our month of Women Directors...we end with Marie Antoinette (2006).

Spider-Man 2.

Review #1695: Spider-Man 2.

Cast: 

Tobey Maguire (Peter Parker / Spider-Man), Kirsten Dunst (Mary Jane Watson), James Franco (Harry Osborn), Alfred Molina (Otto Octavius / Doctor Octopus), Rosemary Harris (May Parker), J. K. Simmons (J. Jonah Jameson), Donna Murphy (Rosalie Octavius), Daniel Gillies (John Jameson), Dylan Baker (Dr. Curt Connors), Bill Nunn (Robbie Robertson), Elizabeth Banks (Betty Brant), Elya Baskin (Mr. Ditkovitch), Mageina Tovah (Ursula), Ted Raimi (Hoffman), with Willem Dafoe (Norman Osborn), and Cliff Robertson (Ben Parker) 

Directed by Sam Raimi (#611 - Spider-Man, #1296 - The Evil Dead, #1483 - Evil Dead II, #1495 - Darkman)

Review: 

“I just tried to get even more in touch with the things that I loved about Stan Lee’s great character Spider-Man, and a lot of writers throughout the 40 years at Marvel have contributed to Spider-Man. All the things that I loved about all of their stories, I tried to really get deeper into and connect on a deeper level with the actors, and make it more about the characters and their interaction with one another. I tried to get to the core of what I loved even more.”

It must be amazing to think of an era where superhero movies did not in fact rule the Earth, really. But the dawn of the 21st century shows that they merely lurking in the shadows of entertainment, when you think about it. There is not a long line to get from something like this film to Iron Man (2008) when it comes to adaptation of something from the world of Marvel Comics, much less when it comes to movies beyond just an one-off. Spider-Man (2002) was the sixth feature film adapted from a Marvel character (as created by Stan Lee and Steve Ditko in 1962), coming off the heels of previous works such as Blade (1998) and X-Men (2000), which like this film came from years and years of development (among quite a few scripts); naturally, this film follows along the sequel line among those aforementioned movies (Blade II, X2), and it likely stands as one of the best superhero sequels of its time. It is interesting to note that the first film actually had the character of Doctor Octopus as a secondary villain before Raimi dropped him in order to focus more on the dynamic between the title character and the villain. At the helm for the screenplay was Alvin Sargent (near the end of a lengthy career of writing, which included un-credited work on the first film) while the story came from Michael Chabon, Alfred Gough, and Miles Millar (the latter two are mostly known for their development of the show Smallville; obviously, the movie is a hodgepodge of ideas from each writer - Chabon's proposed script apparently had a love triangle involving Doctor Octopus). 

Most superhero sequels generally tend to raise the stakes by adding villains to the pile for the hero to fight that make the challenge seem tighter (i.e. more than one villain, which was present in more than a few superhero films beyond the Marvel line, such as with the Batman series). And yet, here we are with a movie that has quite a controlled focus with consistent stakes and drama that improves on the original without being as hamstrung by the little things as had been the case with the original Spider-Man (which was a pretty decent effort from a director who clearly appreciates the material). It carries itself with enough weight in responsibility to deliver entertainment with meaningful power and meaningful moments to see and hear. Of course it isn't just an effects show, even though one can be impressed by the crew of John Dykstra, Scott Stokdyk, Anthony LaMolinara and John Frazier (among others) when it comes to the tentacles for its villain that prove a blend of computer effects with puppetry (alongside a harness of course) that definitely serves an improvement when compared to the sequences involving the Green Goblin from before. Maguire (who was nearly replaced by Jake Gyllenhaal because of a near-serious back injury) leads the cast with worthy presence once again, maintaining the sincerity and vulnerability depicted before without seeming generic in his charm or being overshadowed by others too much (heroes get overshadowed by the villain in a handful of films anyway). Dunst matches well with snappy chemistry that balances scenes spent either with Maguire or Gillies.  Franco works with the gradual moments with bitter righteousness that still seems like a worried child when it comes to obsession and taking the mantle his father held (which I guess works pretty well in its little imitation of Hamlet, but seeing Dafoe again is a worthy bonus). Molina proves a worthy adversary, one struck by fate that is quite sardonic in his menace that draws you in from the very first moment with him on screen (at least if you compare him with his scenes spent with Murphy with his time with the AI arms); in other words, he makes for a fun villain that improves upon the dynamic seen between the lead and the adversary from before in terms of showing the nature of power and responsibility. Closing out the cast is a few brief-scene wonders from before with the bright nurturer in Harris and the wonderful blustering comic relief in Simmons. At any rate, the film proves efficient at 127 minutes in balancing its spectacle with effective characterization that draws upon the comics without being beholden to too much cheese or being a show for overdrawn spectacle - Raimi honed his craft with the hero film in Darkman and he has merely improved upon the human aspects of what makes a thrilling and poignant movie that happens to have folks in costumes that builds on the curiosity left by its predecessor while setting its own stage for another adventure without too much trouble.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Rango.

Review #1557: Rango.

Cast: 
Johnny Depp (Rango), Isla Fisher (Beans), Abigail Breslin (Priscilla), Ned Beatty (Tortoise John), Alfred Molina (Roadkill), Bill Nighy (Rattlesnake Jake), Harry Dean Stanton (Balthazar), Ray Winstone (Bad Bill), Timothy Olyphant (The Spirit of the West), Stephen Root (Doc / Mr. Merrimack), Maile Flanagan (Lucky), Alanna Ubach (Boo Cletus / Fresca / Miss Daisy), Ian Abercrombie (Ambrose), Gil Birmingham (Wounded Bird), and James Ward Byrkit (Waffles) Directed by Gore Verbinski (#140 - The Ring)

Review: 
“I always wanted to do an animated movie. I find it to be incredibly liberating as a way of telling a story. It lends itself to more surreal concepts because you’re limited by expectations of total reality and I just think you can have a conversation with a peanut butter sandwich or Miyazaki turns the parents into pigs. You’re limited from the conventions of live action.”

There can be quite a dual nature to the art of finding a way into filmmaking, which is equally appropriate for Gore Verbinski. His first profession was in music, participating in a variety of rock band in Los Angeles as a guitarist. He sold his guitar for a film camera and found himself taking direction for music videos and eventually commercials (you may or may not recognize one of his ads involving frogs for Budweiser). He made his directorial debut with Mouse Hunt (1997) and has continued on with a variety of genres and general use of visual effects, whether that involves horror with The Ring (2002) and A Cure for Wellness (2016) or adventure epic with the first three Pirates of the Caribbean films (2003, 2006, 2007). There are a variety of films that this film took some inspiration from, ranging from films from Chinatown (1974) to El Topo (1970) to The Shakiest Gun in the West (1968). This was the first animation effort from Industrial Light & Magic, who you will have recognized from several films over the years (such as the Pirates of the Caribbean films), with Hal Hickel as animation director. The interesting thing is that Verbinski wanted to capture something "kinetic" with the performances, which involved having the actors perform with costumes and sets to have them feel like they are part of the Wild West, with the audio being lifted for the film, which he aspired to do as a "small" film when compared to his previous features.

A group of Westerns in the era after its golden age of the past try in some way to borrow some of the characteristics from before with their own spin on what the frontier of the Old West means. In this sense, we have a film of identity that draws upon quite a few Westerns in some sensibility that generally works itself out handily in entertainment with some finely-tuned animation and a cast worth following along with in this tale of critters in the desert. It has a strange touch that will appeal fairly equally for adults and children (more so older than younger) without becoming tacked and tacky in execution and charm. Depp is precisely the voice one could want for such an intriguing title character - amusing, wonderful and quite adept at following along in growing confidence as the unlikely sly lizard of the moment that gives a good push without seeming like an eccentric bit for the sake of it. Fisher follows along with capable drive and a zippy rapport with Depp for some moments, while Breslin adds some familiar curiosity in parts. Beatty proves quite enjoyable with a familiar kind of schemer with a folksy voice suited for what is needed to hear on screen. Others prove just as useful, such as Molina or Nighy, while Stanton and Olyphant bring a worthwhile chuckle. On the whole, it generally works out with its humor without seeming too much for whatever particular audience it aims for, finding its stride in a search for identity with interesting animation and a game cast to make a 107 minute adventure that I can recommend without hesitation for some fun.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Ralph Breaks the Internet.

Review #1167: Ralph Breaks the Internet.

Cast: 
John C. Reilly (Wreck-It Ralph), Sarah Silverman (Vanellope von Schweetz), Gal Gadot (Shank), Taraji P. Henson (Yesss), Jack McBrayer (Fix-It Felix Jr.), Jane Lynch (Sergeant Calhoun), Alan Tudyk (KnowsMore), Alfred Molina (Double Dan), Ed O'Neill (Mr. Litwak), and Bill Hader (J.P. Spamley) Directed by Rich Moore (#386 - Wreck-It Ralph and #782 - Zootopia) and Phil Johnston

Review: 
Wreck-It Ralph (2012) was a fine film for entertainment, certainly seeming different from other Disney films, and it is not too surprising that a sequel would occur, although I imagine it wasn't supposed to take six years for said sequel to happen. I will admit that the idea of bringing these characters up to date with the Internet seemed like an interesting idea, particularly since Reilly and Silverman made for a fine duo to play off each other in the first film. The fact that the film focuses on their reactions to their encounter of the Internet and how their friendship changes accordingly is a fine centerpiece for a movie that tries to balance that with a mashup of gags and an overload of product placement that nearly collapse the experience into a big mess. It sure is strange how the film reminded me of Ready Player One (2018) with its collection of references and flashy colors, although I will say that at least this film actually aims to be funny on purpose, and it works more often than not with making jokes, along with a few songs to go with it. The animation is nice to look at, bright and colorful without overloading the senses too much, having numerous set-pieces that certainly stand out well from one another.

Reilly shines once again with big-hearted charm and some interesting moments that manage to make him feel fresh and not tired. Silverman shines again with a fun sense of humor and a curiosity that drives the film well enough, and the song she sings alongside Gadot (called "A Place Called Slaughter Race", of course) is fine to hear. Gadot is a welcome addition to the cast, showing some charm in her gritty world she occupies. Henson, playing an algorithm, plays the role with a bit of pomp and flash that makes for occasionally amusing points. It's a shame that McBrayer and Lynch don't have much time on screen, although I suppose the focus on Reilly and Silverman and their characters' story meant that anyone not on the Internet wouldn't have too many moments. Or perhaps having a B-plot would've made the film (with a run-time of 112 minutes) felt longer. Tudyk and Hader give off amusing moments whenever each is on screen, representing their parts of the Internet (for better or worse) just fine. On the whole, the movie works best when it tries to just have fun with casual gags about the Internet, or more specifically when the film isn't trying to make so many references within Disney itself. The part with the Disney Princesses are okay, but the movie as a whole feels like it nearly collapses into self-parody near the second half, where it almost falls into the trap of pandering without substance. Honestly, the fact that the film doesn't have a villain is a bit surprising, but at least the movie has a climax and a message that makes the experience worth it without becoming too ham-fisted or over indulgent. The film has enough charm and fine moments to make up for the occasional slip-up, and I'm sure kids will do just fine with it and the adults will tolerate it alright. The film isn't anything great by any means, particularly if compared to recent Disney films or the original film, but it is at the very least fine entertainment that will work just alright for its audience.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Maverick.

Review #619: Maverick.

Cast
Mel Gibson (Bret Maverick), Jodie Foster (Annabelle Bransford), James Garner (Marshal Zane Cooper), Graham Greene (Joseph), Alfred Molina (Angel), James Coburn (Commodore Duvall), Geoffrey Lewis (Matthew Wicker), Paul L. Smith (The Archduke), and Max Perlich (Johnny Hardin) Directed by Richard Donner (#355 - Lethal Weapon, #356 - Lethal Weapon 2, and #547 - Superman)

Review
The movie is based off the classic television show of the same name, which also had the late great James Garner in it. The movie uses a trio of actors that manage to do a great job together, especially Gibson and Garner, they share a really good act with each other and Foster is also excellent, very clever and very intriguing to watch. But what makes the movie just so awesome is how it manages to be not only a fine action movie, but also a good comedy as well, making for a really entertaining film. The supporting cast is delightful to watch, especially Molina and Coburn. They're practically irresistible to watch, even Coburn's beard. The card games are interesting to watch, even the riverboat is great to look at, it just looks so beautiful. This is a Western that just has fun, and it's a pleasure to see Garner and all of his charm in a film like this. It's a fantastic film that manages to not just a other adaptation of a TV show, it's a movie of its own that is just so fun.

On a sadder note, I would like to say rest in peace to James Garner, who died just two days ago. We will all miss James Garner, but we will always have movies (#559 - Grand Prix, The Thrill of It All, The Great Escape, Space Cowboys, etc) and TV shows (The Rockford Files, 8 Simple Rules) to remember him for, with his charm being especially one that will last forever.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.