The Cabin in the Woods.

Review #2302: The Cabin in the Woods.

Cast: 

Kristen Connolly (Dana Polk), Chris Hemsworth (Curt Vaughan), Anna Hutchison (Jules Louden), Fran Kranz (Marty Mikalski), Jesse Williams (Holden McCrea), Richard Jenkins (Gary Sitterson), Bradley Whitford (Steve Hadley), Brian White (Daniel Truman), Amy Acker (Wendy Lin), Sigourney Weaver (The Director), and Tim de Zarn (Mordecai) Directed by Drew Goddard.

Review:

" I’m going to leave that to others to decide. If subversion comes along, so be it. I just love that we’re throwing the ultimate horror party. And really, we’re telling stories about why we tell stories, with what the characters go through. That’s the nature of creation."

Well, it was bound to happen someday. Drew Goddard started off as a production assistant before eventually becoming a staff writer for Buffy the Vampire Slayer (2002-03), which you might remember was created by Joss Whedon. Goddard wrote his first film screenplay with Cloverfield (2008). The movie came out from a desire of Goddard to work with Whedon on something, which went from brainstorming an outline to eventually getting down to writing a first draft in the span of three days. According to Whedon, he envisioned the film as one that would be a "serious critique of what we love and don't about horror movies", one that would have what they liked in being scared along with making light of what they didn't care for recently while Goddard once called it as "more a critique of society" in posing the question about why one feels the need to marginalize youth on screen. The movie was originally slated for release by MGM...in 2009. Financial difficulties with the studio eventually led to it being released by Lionsgate years later (it was first screened in 2011 before release in March of 2012). Based on a promo campaign that pushed for as little spoiling as possible, the film was a fair hit with audiences. Goddard has continued to write in television and film (while directing once more with Bad Times at the El Royale [2018]).

Sure, maybe there is a worthwhile metaphor worth holding up for this film. Sure, maybe this is your ideal horror movie for its era that holds up well in an era of references and other things. But man, I really, really did not care that much for this movie as much as other people seem to vaunt it as a cult classic, particularly with its ending. In trying to make a "loving hate letter" to the horror genre, all I found that doesn't even have a payoff on the levels of Scream (1996). In trying to present that the monster is basically interchangeable, all I got out of that was a movie that is exhausting more than clever. The acting tries to have people play both "character" and the "archetype" to decidedly mixed results, because if you're going to play homage and parody with the slasher, you better have something charming brewing beyond Kranz being the standout. Get it? Our five guys to follow up (spoiler: not actually five) are not actually the cliches you think they are but are still pretty one-note anyway? Get it? Call me crazy, but you know what was more fun? Watching the strange charm of seeing Jenkins and Whitford together basically watching the build-up for people dying because, and I say this sincerely, they actually are funny. They may reflect the viewer when it comes to viewing our leads and waiting for things to play out (or in an amusing moment, watching them scoff at the failure of a certain horror scenario play out) but honestly, I would probably rather watch them play out for the whole film. Of course, perhaps I am not the kind of person to really understand "meta" or whatever but consider that some have seen plenty of horror films that actually let you think about its cliches and don't come off as exhausting. The Deadly Spawn (1983) wasn't much more than its effects sequences, but I was more interested in where it was going to end up in its house-bound locale than here with its attempts at playing on the joke (it also didn't have an ending that made me roll my eyes). Hell, Shaun of the Dead (2004) just shut up and rode its romcomzombie foundation for a consistent ride that commented on the old stuff but actually was worth its stuff in the elements. But, well, I can at least say it isn't on the level of The Blair Witch Project (1999) in being overrated? You want horror movies with "meaning"? Then give me something worth its salt to actually hold up beyond essentially chuckling at itself. Time will surely give credit to this film for its playing with the tropes of horror, but I'm not going to lose any sleep in calling it average. It has a few interesting moments in curiosity in actual violence, specifically a moment of release to build-up the actual reveal, and it sometimes is funny when it comes to looking at them beyond cliches. But as a whole, it manages to overwhelm and underwhelm itself in misplaced ideas about horror and youth for overall execution that makes it just average in the long run. Go into the film with as little expectations or knowledge as possible and see for yourself, for better or worse.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Next up: two better horror movies with elements of humor, and the first is Braindead.

Adventures in Babysitting.

Review #2047: Adventures in Babysitting.

Cast: 

Elisabeth Shue (Christina "Chris" Parker), Keith Coogan (Brad Anderson), Anthony Rapp (Daryl Coopersmith), Maia Brewton (Sarah Anderson), Penelope Ann Miller (Brenda), Bradley Whitford (Mike Todwell), Calvin Levels (Joe Gipp), George Newbern (Dan Lynch), John Chandler (Bleak), Ron Canada (Graydon), John Ford Noonan ("Handsome" John Pruitt), Albert Collins (Himself), and Vincent D'Onofrio (Dawson) Directed by Chris Columbus (#038 - Percy Jackson & the Olympians: The Lightning Thief, #117 - Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone, #118 - Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets, #304 - Home Alone, #310 - Home Alone 2: Lost in New York, and #831 - Mrs. Doubtfire)

Review: 

I do try to keep up with as many filmmakers as possible, particularly in tracking debut features. So here we are with Chris Columbus. Born to a coal miner and a factory worker in Spangler, Pennsylvania (but raised mostly in Ohio), he grew up with an interest in books, comics, and movies, which honed to his modest living. He studied at New York University but learned his key lesson due to a mistake that had him work in a factory for a summer that drove him to write above all else. He started to write screenplays in the 1980s, and Reckless was the first one bought for a director to make, albeit one that was a flop. However, his next script in Gremlins (1984) was a major hit that saw him receive further work for screenplays that led to The Goonies and Young Sherlock Holmes (both 1985). Adventures in Babysitting (1987) was written by David Simkins, and Columbus picked the script from the countless ones he read because he was fine with the small sense of scale it had. After the release of the film, he would follow it up with Heartbreak Hotel (1988), which was not quite as successful as this film with audiences, but then came an offer from John Hughes to direct a Christmas comedy with Home Alone (1990), and I think you know the rest (which included him later co-founding his own production company). 

If you want, you could do an entire game of how many things seemed ripe for sitcoms. You've got 24-year-olds meant to be playing high school seniors (one of whom gets mistaken for a Playboy model for a few jokes, because, well...?), folks getting into wacky hijinks in tall buildings, a chase to fool the parents, and so on and on. The fact that the movie is set in Chicago as a presentation of folks from the suburbs getting into the big city all by themselves is probably the least surprising thing ever to happen in one of these teen comedies. Shue is at least delightful in the lead role, warm and engaging that suits the need of the film in the most basic element in engagement. Granted, her (and Whitford, most significantly) is probably a bit too close to the edge of being "young" enough to play high schoolers, but at least she makes the most of being the heart of the film in the ways that matter. The trio of Coogan-Rapp-Brewton is at least decent enough as kids to go along with Shue, in terms of trying to sell such cheap gags. The less said about the totally-hilariously panicky Miller, the better (oh look, a young Vincent D'Onofrio!). The film badly needs a more prominent threat than Chandler, who might as well be ripped from some other film about the city, which goes for Levels as well. I think your enjoyment of the film will depend on just how many twee things you can take for something that would make Weird Science (1985) blush in how average it all ends up being, right down to its climax involving a drawn-out sequence involving heights. I wish I could embrace the film, but there is something so corny about its entanglement that makes me reluctant to give credit beyond a few decent performances that come with hit-and-miss gags. It reminds me of the kid in the back of the classroom: it doesn't matter if he can sit still or not, the attempts at making a joke are going to feel the same no matter what the time of day it is. The most interesting sequence might be a blues one involving Albert Collins that sees an impromptu song that makes the most of being just as silly in setup as everything else by that point. Writing about the film and its runtime of 99 minutes seems fruitless in trying to beat down the point that it doesn't have enough foundation to back up its ambitions. It reminds me of Footloose (1984) in that regard. Columbus shows some promise with his first time here, but there are better ways to spend looking at someone's first film.  As a whole, it lacks that certain type of magic beyond the paint-by-numbers stuff to make it worthy to recommend beyond for folks who are pretty familiar already with the time it was made for.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

Godzilla: King of the Monsters (2019)

Review #1227: Godzilla: King of the Monsters.

Cast: 
Kyle Chandler (Dr. Mark Russell), Vera Farmiga (Dr. Emma Russell), Millie Bobby Brown (Madison Russell), Bradley Whitford (Dr. Rick Stanton), Sally Hawkins (Dr. Vivienne Graham), Charles Dance (Colonel Alan Jonah), Thomas Middleditch (Dr. Sam Coleman), Aisha Hinds (Colonel Diane Foster), O'Shea Jackson Jr. (Jackson Barnes), David Strathairn (Admiral William Stenz), Ken Watanabe (Dr. Ishirō Serizawa), Zhang Ziyi (Dr. Ilene Chen and Dr. Ling), with T.J. Storm (Godzilla) Directed by Michael Dougherty.

Review: 
It's about time for this one. Perhaps this review may prove a bit too long - but I wanted to have some fun with saying as much as I could with a film I really did anticipate - after all, I didn't cover four Godzilla movies for nothing, so here's a Godzilla-sized review for the hell of it - 1,000 words for your enjoyment. 

Five years can certainly pass by when it comes to movies. Godzilla (2014) was a fine movie that worked to get out of the shadow of doubt that an American adaptation of Toho's monster franchise couldn't actually succeed. I really can't say I have too many memories of the film, but I might as well just snatch some words from way back when:

"The cast isn't bad (though I wish there was more Bryan Cranston in it), our main character is okay even though it seems the cast get more screen time then the monster himself, Godzilla. The movie seems to want to build tension and wait, so it cuts the first two monster fights (along with waiting an hour to show Godzilla) so we don't see much and then relents and shows the final fight, which is fantastic."

Of course, I also don't remember giving it a 9, but yet here we are. The only other Godzilla film that I had covered at the time was the original Gojira (1954). I hadn't (and still haven't) even touched the 1998 American attempt at Godzilla, with me just going in cold for some big monster action. Actually, I haven't returned to the 2014 Godzilla since I saw it in the theater all those years ago, perhaps since I don't usually re-visit each film I go see on the big screen. In the five years since its release, Toho re-started the series with Shin Godzilla (2016) while Legendary Pictures continued their pursuit of a "MonsterVerse" with Kong: Skull Island (2017). Just three cast members (Watanabe, Hawkins, Strathairn) return for this one, with a few references included throughout while doing a bit of ret-conning and changes in tone that make for a fairly decent if not perhaps as challenging monster movie. The first film had a screenplay by Max Borenstein and a story by David Callaham, while this one has director Dougherty as co-writer and co-screenwriter while retaining Borenstein for the screenplay once again alongside Zach Shields. It lingers a little too long at 132 minutes (eleven minutes longer than its predecessor), but I felt that I enjoyed a good majority of what I saw on screen, albeit more when it focused of its monsters than its cadre of characters. The quirk of the original having its only interesting character being wasted midway through is modified by this film having a quirk of having sprinkles of just mildly interesting characters. This film is basically a re-imagining of Ghidorah, the Three-Headed Monster (1964), albeit with a somewhat developed foundation of human characters that makes for a less silly experience. Honestly, as long as there is an entertaining monster mash somewhere in its run-time that isn't overshadowed by something else, you have my vote, and this one gains that vote for the most part. This is a $200 million CG spectacle with monsters that takes itself mildly seriously - once a year is just enough for my standards, really, even if I am aware of the prevailing tastes for other kinds of action films for the summer.

It is a loud and sometimes dumb movie, but I can't help but adore its ambition at spectacle. Each monster, from Godzilla to King Ghidorah, is rendered really well, looking quite crisp that retains the characteristics from before (like the latter and its three heads) while making sure they stand out in their own ways, which proves to be a fairly done strategy. While I do wish there was a bit more emphasis on shown spectacle of distraction (as opposed to just showing things already being destroyed), at least I can say that this one manages to retain most of the wrath that nature can bring onto us if not careful from the earlier movie. I never feel lectured or bored when it comes to trying to peddle some plot threads on me, with the parts involving specific frequencies for the monsters faring best over parts involving discussions in rooms over what to do. The cast does what they can, some faring better than others. Chandler is fine to follow around with, straight-laced yet completely willing to go along with what occurs on screen without seeming like a drag on what occurs in the basis of a monster movie. Farmiga does fine as well, with the focus on her and Brown being fairly subtle. Brown shines just as well when shown on screen. At least the family angle the film pushes is okay, since the film can't just be all on the monsters and their ties to myths and legends from yesteryear. Whitford and his attempts at being comic relief (by being the equivalent of someone on the Internet lecturing you on "uberscience lol" at 8am) come off as a bit tepid, although Middleditch doesn't fare too much better. Dance comes off as ridiculous as the human adversary - I don't care too much about the eco-terrorism angle, but the parts involving trying to restore a sense of balance in the world with Titans (as opposed to the previous film's classification of the monsters of MUTO)  Not having too much to do with Hawkins is a bit disappointing, although at least Watanabe gives the film some sense of emotional depth. Rounding out the cast is passable performances from Hinds, Jackson and Ziyi. With all of that mind, where else did I find time to show some joy besides seeing a bunch of occasionally creative fight sequences and a bunch of CGI in the dark? I found some fun within Bear McCreary and his music, taking some inspiration from previous music beats from the Godzilla series from Akira Ifukube - any time you do a cover of a Blue Oyster Cult song (particularly "Godzilla") gets a nod from me as well. With a looming sequel in Godzilla vs. Kong next year, this is a movie that succeeds in garnering interest to see some more monster mashing without regret. It proves as a worthy follow-up to its predecessor while also living up to the standards of other Godzilla films before it without too many stumbles yet having plenty of thrills to make one satisfied.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Get Out.

Review #909: Get Out.

Cast:
Daniel Kaluuya (Chris Washington), Allison Williams (Rose Armitage), Bradley Whitford (Dean Armitage), Catherine Keener (Missy Armitage), Erika Alexander (Detective Latoya), Caleb Landry Jones (Jeremy Armitage), Lil Rel Howery (Rod Williams), Keith Stanfield (Andre "Logan" Hayworth), Stephen Root (Jim Hudson), Lakeith Stanfield (Andre Hayworth / Logan King), Erika Alexander (Detective Latoya), Marcus Henderson (Walter / Roman Armitage), and Betty Gabriel (Georgina / Marianne Armitage) Directed by Jordan Peele.

Review:
Get Out is certainly a movie that interested me when I first saw the trailers for it a few months ago, in part because of how strange and alluring it looked, without reminding me too much of the tropes that plague horror films (overuse of fading to black, premises that inspire laughter over fear, etc). In any case, I wanted to see this on opening weekend because I figured that it was the best chance I would get to see it, and I guess seeing it with a crowd helps. At the end of the day, Get Out excels at how it is crafted by writer-director Jordan Peele, who makes a movie that is thrilling along with being funny.

It never comes off as boring, with every scene having a purpose while also being crafted in terms of the acting and pacing. Kaluuya and Williams have fine chemistry together, having some charming lines together along with being good at adapting to the tension the movie builds over time. The characters are introduced neatly, with every character having a purpose and no sense of irritating factor to them (okay, maybe Jones' character, but it makes sense). Whitford and Keener are also pretty good as well, giving off the right kind of vibes that don't border on ridiculousness nor unbelievability. Howery is fun to watch, having good timing along with being more than just a comic relief, with an edge of casualness along with competence. Root doesn't get much time on screen, but he certainly helps in making an already tense mood a little bit weirder. The movie presents itself and its themes well, with everything crisply lit and crisply set up. There isn't a time when the movie is being unintentionally hilarious when dealing with horror nor un-entertaining when having humorous lines. I don't want to spoil the plot away. especially a climax that is rich in delivering a great payoff along with irony. The ideas the movie presents have a degree of familiarity and inspiration, but inside this movie is a careful sense of precision, where the plot does not bend to any sort of cliche (such as dream sequence fake-outs). However, I can definitely say that while it may have a bit of a reliance on jump scares, it certainly has a good enough of chills and thought-provoking ideas to make for a really entertaining film.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Billy Madison.

Review #887: Billy Madison.

Cast:
Adam Sandler (Billy Madison), Darren McGavin (Brian Madison), Bridgette Wilson (Veronica Vaughn), Bradley Whitford (Eric Gordon), Josh Mostel (Principal Max Anderson), Norm Macdonald (Frank), Mark Beltzman (Jack), Larry Hankin (Carl Alphonse), and Theresa Merritt (Juanita) Directed by Tamra Davis.

Review:
Let me get this out of the way early: I don't like this movie. And yet somehow, this manages to be the kind of movie that is digestible, even if it is made of some sort of junk. Much like the other Sandler films done on this show (#045 - Just Go With It and #345 - Happy Gilmore), the gags miss more than they hit (at least for me anyway), though at least this one (like the latter listed) is watchable at 89 minutes. Sandler plays a character with some sort of idiocy that can be endearing, I suppose. I'm just not a fan of his kind of shtick, which just feels tired after a few minutes. McGavin is pretty endearing, probably more than Sandler, despite not having too much screen time. Whitford is somewhat enjoyable as the villain (in a snarky way), because it's like seeing a race for weirdest character, though he loses that to Mostel, playing a school principal...and a wrestler. They are occasionally funny, somehow. Sandler and Wilson have a chemistry (in that it is a word) that sort of helps the movie have some sort of human element. It isn't charming, but it is something. There is a plot, and at least it's one that doesn't hurt the senses. Obviously this isn't a movie for me (or anybody looking for some comedy without easy gags with varying levels of body humor), but I can't really get too worked up about it. Who am I to judge a movie about people who act like fools? The movie flows the way you'd expect, with lame gags and being about as harmless as someone with too much caffeine. Would I recommend it? Of course not. But I can't stop you.

Overall, I give it 5 out of 10 stars.

Redux: RoboCop 3.

Redux Review #006: RoboCop 3.

Cast
Robert John Burke (RoboCop / Alex J. Murphy), Nancy Allen (Anne Lewis), Remy Ryan (Nikko Halloran), Rip Torn (OCP President), John Castle (Commander Paul McDaggett), Jill Hennessy (Dr. Marie Lazarus), Mako (Kanemitsu), C. C. H. Pounder (Bertha), Felton Perry (OCP Vice President Donald Johnson), Robert DoQui (Sgt. Warren Reed), Bruce Locke (Otomo), Bradley Whitford (Jeffrey Fleck), and Mario Machado (Casey Wong) Directed by Fred Dekker.

Review
Welcome to a Redux Review of the original RoboCop 3 film, which is a revised review meant to say more about the movie as a whole. The rating will stay the same, but I feel that this Redux is necessary (which I could say for a good deal the original batch of reviews). Not to worry, there will be new reviews on the way, but I feel that the upcoming Redux Reviews are necessary to help better the evolution of Movie Night, and to help alleviate the unintentional month long hiatus. Enjoy. 

Yes, RoboCop 3. If you've seen the other two Redux Reviews, I went into a good amount of words to express a variety of opinions for a movie that was really good...and the one that was a disappointment. With this, it's not hard to say why this movie isn't good, or even passable, though the younger me kinda thought it was okay (still, I gave it a 5, but even a mediocre movie can be enjoyable at times). With the third movie, the expectations are extremely low, and the fact that the movie was actually shelved (according to the 1992 copyright) due to the bankruptcy of Orion Pictures. In fact, the movie was filmed in buildings slated to be torn down for the 1996 Olympics (if there's an irony, I hope you find it) in Atlanta. Peter Weller did not want any part of this movie (deciding to do Naked Lunch and not have to deal with the bulky suit once again), and Nancy Allen did the movie only on the condition that she would be killed off (and probably some money too, but hey, I can't imagine why). There is also no more Dan O'Herlihy as the head of OCP, instead being replaced by Rip Torn. The makers decided to make the movie PG-13 oriented (because of the belief that kids were part of the fanbase - which I believe in the sense that kids watched because of their parents) instead of R, which meant lowering the amount of violence (in a sense). Once again, Frank Miller returned to write the story and screenplay (along with Dekker), but it doesn't matter all too much. Despite all of this...I can't say I hate this movie.

Don't get me wrong, it is a movie dead on arrival, with no chance at being anything but a lackluster movie made to try and make money (and failing)...but still. This is a movie where RoboCop not only fights robot ninjas, but also flies in a jet pack for the climax of the movie. I can't even be angry at the nondescript villain (easily the worst villain in the trilogy), because this is a movie that has nothing going for it. Burke is not exactly miscast as RoboCop, but after two movies with Peter Weller that were probably one of the best aspects for both movies, Burke comes off as less memorable and more robotic sounding. and he doesn't have much time to develop any chemistry with any of the characters. Rip Torn doesn't get much to do, but he is at least amusing in a thankless role. C. C. H. Pounder is mildly enjoyable, and Felton Perry does a reasonable (if not brief) performance once again. Of all the actors that had been in the other movies, Robert DoQui is my favorite, and I guess its probably because he just seems more at ease with being in these movies, whether good or bad. Mako is indeed in the movie...for maybe 5-10 minutes. Seriously, he says a few lines about how he will send his robot ninja (Otomo) to deal with the Resistance problem, and he bows to RoboCop at the end of the movie. I had forgotten about Remy Ryan and her computer whiz kid character...at the age of 8. Clearly, it was a preparation for Anakin Skywalker in The Phantom Menace, and I can't figure out which is worse. Naturally there's a character named Lazarus, because either a 9th grader thought of the name after learning it in English class, or because it sounded cool (you decide). Hennessey is okay, but no good (or great) performance can save a movie that looks destined for TV-movie status.

And yet, I can't help but laugh at the ridiculous aspects. For example, the jet pack scene. There had been foreshadowing (or outright hints) of it throughout the movie, and though it is first used as a way for RoboCop to charge himself (not as a phone, mind you), you just know it is coming. When it does happen (in the midst of a battle between OCP and the Resistance/cops), RoboCop takes his sweet time in getting to the crux of the fight (which already had punk mercenaries and a granny packing an Uzi)...and he promptly fires a rocket into an OCP tank that blows it up (and fires a few shots at some mercenaries), which apparently wins the battle. But my particular favorite is his confrontation with not one, but two ninja robots (because one's not enough, and I guess Kanemitsu sent 3 robots and not one as it implied)...and the kid programmer and Lazerus program two robots with swords to chop each other off in a matter of seconds. Remember how I said logic is dead? RoboCop 3 resurrects it, then it kills it all over again, complete with 90's cheese. Afterwards, RoboCop has to escape the self-destruct that activated when the two robots destroyed each other (okay), and the villain is stopped...by the flame discharge by the jetpack, which means he can't stop the self-destruct. The fact that this villain is such a non-threat that never comes off as having any sort of personality or brutality in him means you can barely enjoy his defeat.

Basil Poledouris does at least return to score the music, and while a good chunk of it is from the first film, it is refreshing to hear that main theme once again (after RoboCop shoots up his roof with his gun - yes I'm serious), even if the movie has no sense of emotional depth. At least it doesn't reset RoboCop to having to find his human side again, but I'm amazed at the ineptness of OCP still having to get Delta City off the ground, but the idea of a Resistance fighting off against corporate bad guys is exactly what you think it is. I can understand someone really hating the movie, but for me personally, it's a stupid (but silly) movie.

And so ends my Redux Recap Trilogy on the three RoboCop movies. I hoped you enjoyed the reviews, and I promise you there will be more material (including Redux Reviews on another famous trilogy covered once before), but especially new reviews, coming soon. Stay tuned.

Overall, I give it 5 out of 10 stars.