Silkwood.

Review #1299: Silkwood.

Cast: 
Meryl Streep (Karen Silkwood), Kurt Russell (Drew Stephens), Cher (Dolly Pelliker), Craig T. Nelson (Winston), Fred Ward (Morgan), Diana Scarwid (Angela), Ron Silver (Paul Stone), Josef Sommer (Max Richter), Charles Hallahan (Earl Lapin), Tess Harper (Linda Dawson), Sudie Bond (Thelma Rice), Henderson Forsythe (Quincy Bissell), and Bruce McGill (Mace Hurley) Directed by Mike Nichols (#175 - Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?, #550 - The Graduate, and #637 - The Birdcage, and #1157 - Wolf)

Review: 
On November 13, 1974, a chemical technician was killed in a car collision in Crescent, Oklahoma is what is believed to be an accident. Karen Silkwood, of course was more than just a blurb on the newspages, since she was an activist who was investigating wrongdoing into the plutonium plant that she worked in, for which she had been contaminated. Her death inspired a lawsuit against the plant she worked for, which had two trials before a final settlement in 1986, with the closure of the nuclear fuels plant having occurred the year after Silkwood's death. In any case, it does seem interesting to make a biopic drama based on her short life that attempts to stick to a group of the basic facts alongside movie-magic that conjure some ambiguity that goes off mostly without a hitch. Perhaps it proves a bit too long at 131 minutes, but one that can't really be denied is that the movie has a well-picked cast to ready its ship along when it is required to. The cast really does seem to seep right into these ordinary folks without trouble, really, where even knowing the fate of its focus doesn't make for much predictability, one who has a bit of tunnel vision for what she believes is the imperative thing to do. This is key with Streep, who pulls in a tremendous performance, filled with spark of persistence and warmth that make her story flow for its audience that makes her interesting enough to follow with. Russell, in a departure from the usual action genre roles, pulls off a rugged turn that seems just as down-to-earth as the lady he acts opposite with, and they do share some casual chemistry together whenever he is on screen. It shouldn't prove too surprising that Cher was suited for an understated yet fine performance here. In her second film since venturing back into acting (after starring in Come Back to the Five and Dime, Jimmy Dean, Jimmy Dean on stage and screen the previous year), she seeps right into an unassuming role and does just fine with making the right impression with just being oneself. The rest of the cast does alright with filling out this world with no big troubles, where one doesn't need a clear villain or hero to really drive the facts along (McGill does play his role pretty adversarily, but not at the expense of realism). Is our focus a martyr or someone who got caught up in their own moral imperative? However one feels about the muddled circumstances of her ultimate fate, one cannot say that the film isn't still compelling through and through its real-life surroundings that will provoke at least some discussion when it comes to whistle-blowing and what proves to be the right thing to do, no matter what the risks could prove. In that sense, this proves to be a decent piece of entertainment headlined by Streep and her cast to go along with a well-run story from the headlines.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Poltergeist II: The Other Side.

Review #1198: Poltergeist II: The Other Side.

Cast: 
Craig T. Nelson (Steven Freeling), JoBeth Williams (Diane Freeling), Heather O'Rourke (Carol Anne Freeling), Oliver Robins (Robbie Freeling), Zelda Rubinstein (Tangina Barrons), Will Sampson (Taylor), Julian Beck (Rev. Henry Kane), and Geraldine Fitzgerald (Jessica Wilson) Directed by Brian Gibson.

Review: 
The original Poltergeist (1982) was an entertaining supernatural horror film that had plenty of chills and atmosphere within direction from Tobe Hooper with a story from Steven Spielberg. Four years later, a sequel followed, albeit with some differences. Hooper and Spielberg did not return, although the two writers that helped co-write the screenplay with Spielberg (Michael Grais and Mark Victor) did return, and they also served to produce the feature. Most of the family cast (except Domnique Dunne, who was murdered months after the original film's release) return this time around along with Rubenstein. Admittedly they do try to make the material seem passable and not too hokey, but the film as a whole isn't quite up to par with generating scares. Nelson and Williams seem to just go with the flow, for better or worse. O'Rourke and Robins are fine to watch as well. Rubenstein doesn't have too much to do, with Sampson (in his second-to-last role before his death in 1987) taking the role of "spiritual advice", which he does fine with. The film is best at showing how hard it is to make a horror sequel, particularly one that tries to build on the plot from the previous film, particularly with its main terror of The Beast. It was described in the first film as a "terrible presence...So much rage, so much betrayal." 

Now the Beast is explained to be a cultist preacher. Beck, a co-founder of The Living Theatre in his final role before his death from stomach cancer in 1985, is an okay villain, but I feel that the ominous presence from the original delivered more effective chills than having to rely on one singular figure, although at least the porch scene is a bit creepy. I do find it amusing that they turned the old house location into a paranormal digging excavation, alongside the fact that traveling to the other side apparently made the mom and the daughter clairvoyant. In trying to build and follow the original, this sequel feels flat and not too particularly interesting, not having as many dark elements that resonate while feeling a bit silly with some of its motivations. The only real memorable sequence involves a worm, brought on by drinking of a certain substance that the Beast somehow possesses, which makes for a slightly disturbing (if not also slightly ham-handed) sequence with a big ugly worm.  It may have less of a run-time than the original, but it somehow still feels a bit sluggish. The film had an original running time of 131 minutes before being edited down to 91 minutes. It isn't too hard to see elements of a rushed production from Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, particularly with the final battle, which last all of two minutes that serves to bring the whole film to a letdown. On the whole, there just isn't much of a spark to drive this film towards suspenseful entertainment, serving as the kind of horror sequel that in attempting to build on previous foundation manages to flounder too many times to really work out. It isn't the kind of film you would regret ever watching, but it also isn't one that really merits too much curiosity unless you are really big on supernatural stories with occasional scares.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

Incredibles 2.

Review #1097: Incredibles 2.

Cast: 
Craig T. Nelson (Bob Parr / Mr. Incredible), Holly Hunter (Helen Parr / Elastigirl), Sarah Vowell (Violet Parr), Huck Milner (Dashiell "Dash" Parr), Eli Fucile (Jack-Jack), Samuel L. Jackson (Lucius Best / Frozone), Bob Odenkirk (Winston Deavor), Catherine Keener (Evelyn Deavor), Brad Bird (Edna Mode), Jonathan Banks (Rick Dicker), Sophia Bush (Karen / Voyd), Phil LaMarr (Krushauer and Helectrix), Isabella Rossellini (The Ambassador), John Ratzenberger (The Underminer), and Bill Wise (Screenslaver / Pizza Guy) Directed by Brad Bird (#083 - The Iron Giant, #128 - Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol, #153 - The Incredibles, and #158 - Ratatouille)

Review: 
I figured that the best way to get myself prepared for a sequel after 14 years of waiting was to re-watch the original Incredibles film, and it was a refreshing choice to do so since I have fond memories of how entertaining it was. Naturally, it still held up well as as entertaining superhero film that doubled as a family movie with the styling of a retro age in terms of its heroes and spy elements that is best suited for its cast and makers that I find myself adoring each time I watch it. With the decision to follow up directly from the first movie (complete with a sequence teased at the end of the other one, drawn out to its conclusion here), this is a sequel that undoubtedly relies on nostalgia in more ways than one, but it also has enough heart and care in making a quality piece of entertainment that ultimately succeeds. It isn't as exceptional as the original, but there are enough pieces in its 118 minute run-time that fit correctly.

The family dynamic isn't lost here with the main group of five (baby included, naturally), with the group of Nelson-Hunter-Vowell-Milner-Fucile proving to be adept at having their own moments to shine, the first two especially. The structure is flipped a bit on its head from the previous one, but Nelson handles it fairly well, having some amusing moments while also still having the strong spirit that made him easily watchable all those years ago without resorting to cliches. Hunter also does a fine job in elevating her role and making her character feel fresh and interesting to follow throughout most stretches of the film. Vowell and Milner aren't as prominent, but they do manage to contribute with making their plot-lines resonate well enough to what the film wants, for the most part. The parts involving Fucile and the baby are pretty amusing and interesting to watch play out without being typical fare resorting to playing down to the audience. Make no mistake, this is a movie for any type of audience, and it is nice to see that it is a film that doesn't pander to anyone - whether to kids or adults, which the original also shone well at. It manages to rise above being just a "greatest hits" kind of sequel to something different nature.

Other returning members such as Jackson and Bird are nice to see again for their time on screen, having a few laughs that work out fine. Odenkirk and Keener round out as the most important of the new additions to the cast. With Odenkirk, he does a fine job with his character, capturing an earnest yet endearing spirit that is charming if not amusing at times. It reminds me of how the first film also had its own variation of the fanboy with regard to superheroes, and while they certainly have key differences, it is nice to see where the films have their divergences. Keener is okay, showing her differences in her style of her interaction with the plot and the heroes (in contrast to her brother), even if she sometimes feels like she falls into the background at times (which you could say about others, too however). There are a few heroes introduced here that share some time on screen, particularly around the climax, with Bush coming out the best in being pretty interesting in sticking out. Admittedly, the weakest part of the movie is the villain, although it isn't for lack of trying. The Screenslaver is sometimes interesting to see on screen (although some will likely have trouble with the flashing lights that encompass the movie at times), and there are some relevant points that come along with dealing with the nature of society and its role with what superheroes mean to that world. However, I feel that it falls a bit short (and for some a bit predictable) with where it ultimately goes, and while the basic nature of the villain can work, I just don't think it really worked as well as it probably could have. It's hard to say how that it could've worked better without spoiling the fun, but I'll just say that it is a bit hard to follow up a threat as interesting as the original film's villain was without falling prey to comparisons, as one would probably expect. While I can't say that the adversary is great, I can see why the choice was made to do so and at least see some of the motivations for said villain.

The animation and style is beautiful to look at once again, and there are enough jokes and riveting action sequences to make this good entertainment. It never gets to a point where things are too bright or dark or glossy, and there a few touches that will certainly check well with people. What we have here is a movie that manages to deliver in the right places in its characters, action, and story to be a welcome piece of entertainment for audiences in any kind of year beyond summer. In a sea of sequels over the past few years, this one manages to stick itself just fine, especially for animation standards. Maybe there will be another one, maybe not, but at the very least it is nice to say that there is more than one movie involving this interesting family of heroes. It may not be purely incredible, but it is purely worth it.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Poltergeist (1982).

Review #348: Poltergeist.

Cast
Craig T. Nelson (Steven Freeling), JoBeth Williams (Diane Freeling), Heather O'Rourke (Carol Freeling), Dominique Dunne (Dana Freeling), Oliver Robins (Robbie Freeling), Zelda Rubinstein (Tangina Barrons), Beatrice Straight (Dr. Lesh), Martin Casella (Marty), Richard Lawson (Ryan), James Karen (Mr. Teague) Directed by Tobe Hooper.

Review
When I think about it, there are some films I watch and have an expectation for, and with Steven Spielburg contributing to the story and screenplay and with Tobe Hooper directing, what could go wrong? The only thing that happen to be wrong was in my assumptions. The film frightfully exceeded my expectations and turns out to be one of the best film in the decade of the 1980s. The acting works very well, especially from Nelson and Williams, given that the pairing of them comes off strong, always keeping the tension going, along with O'Rourke. The best part though is the story and the effects. Oh boy, those effects. The story works well, and it even manages to pull a twist at the end. The effects do provide scares, especially in the middle and at the end as well. It's a film that provides all the perks of a classic with good atmosphere and chills to go with it. Countdown to 350 Reviews: 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2...

Overall, I give it 10 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: The Incredibles.

Review #153: The Incredibles.

Cast
Craig T. Nelson (Bob Parr/Mr. Incredible), Holly Hunter (Helen Parr/Elastigirl), Sarah Vowell (Violet Parr), Spencer Fox (Dashell Parr), Samuel L. Jackson (Lucius Best / Frozone), Jason Lee (Buddy Pine / Syndrome), Brad Bird (Edna Mode), Elizabeth Peña (Mirage), Bud Luckey (Rick Dicker), Wallace Shawn (Gilbert Huph), and John Ratzenberger (The Underminer) Directed by Brad Bird (#083 - The Iron Giant, #128 - Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol, and #158 - Ratatouille)

Review
A long time ago, I had mentioned this film in another review (#011 - Fantastic Four), basically comparing the two because it seemed to have taken the dynamics of this film and used in their own, mediocre way. The Incredibles works better then Fantastic Four because everything feels real, it feels perfectly natural as opposed to the other's mediocre way of doing dynamics. This film is wonderful in so many ways, from the nice animation to the cool soundtrack. The writing is good, as I've stated before. The cast is perfect, especially Craig T. Nelson, who just makes this movie his own. This is another hit by Pixar (I refuse to call it Disney•Pixar), as this film has more then fun, it also has charm.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.