Black Phone 2.

Review #2445: Black Phone 2.

Cast: 

Mason Thames (Finney Blake), Madeleine McGraw (Gwen Blake), Ethan Hawke (the Grabber), Demián Bichir (Armando), Jeremy Davies (Terrence Blake), Miguel Mora (Ernesto), Arianna Rivas (Mustang), Anna Lore (Hope Blake), Graham Abbey (Kenneth), and Maev Beaty (Barbara) Directed by Scott Derrickson (#874 - Doctor Strange, #1865 - The Black Phone, #1905 - Sinister)

Review: 

You might remember that The Black Phone was released just a few years ago, first premiering in the festival circuit back in 2021 before Universal Pictures eventually got on actually releasing the movie to theaters in 2022. Scott Derrickson and C. Robert Cargill cultivated a story based on Joe Hill's short story of the same name with a good deal of inspiration from people Derrickson knew when he was younger, which differed from say, the "Spielberg Amblin suburban middle school life": there were obviously a handful of differences between story and movie, most notably that the sister was actually the older one along with having calls from just one person in the story (who actually does tell him to fill the phone with sand as a weapon) and, well, the story ends right as one is trying to escape the house all while the phone is ringing* In 2023, Derrickson and Cargill worked on "Dreamkill", a segment for the found footage horror anthology movie V/H/S/85 that dealt with a cousin of the Blake family with their own psychic ability. Derrickson and Cargill wrote the script just as they did for the previous film, although Hill apparently came up with an idea ("The Grabber calls Finn from hell") for the sequel.

It probably was spooky to watch a movie where you see people in a film just yanked out of the blue that won't come back and will stare at nothing for the rest of time. Sure, a good chunk of the last Black Phone movie was basically an escape room, but it had an interesting performance in Ethan Hawke to go along with a few unsettling moments with a person who clearly had the headspace of wanting to win his own game (whether that involves his brother or not) while wearing such a strange imposing mask. Sure, the movie didn't outright show much in terms of gore, but I think you get the creeping factor that could come in what might happen if one in fact can't just stay dead with a sequel. This is a lot of words for me saying I really wished that I liked the movie, because it is quite ridiculous, when you get down to it (I will try to not spoil anything too specific unless you scroll down below for notes). Let's start with some praise first. McGraw does manage to shine the best among the cast in terms of evoking interest in vulnerable. And I do like Thames reasonably well in his burrowing evolution from the point of "what next?", for the most part. Hawke does still have an unsettling presence here, even if a good chunk of it is really just a voice more than anything (the not-quite spoiler is that being dead means not being able to just take your mask off). The 114-minute runtime can only go so far when having ideas of trying to ape A Nightmare on Elm Street (as I recall, the climaxes for 3 and 4 dealt with resting bones and a soul revolt, respectively), although I imagine someone would argue it might have had a bit of inspiration from Friday the 13th with its camp scenario. But you can only do so many things involving dreams. To put it mildly, there are quite a few scenes now spent in Super 8-filmed dreamland that takes things to new levels convenience. Since the Grabber is basically only around in the dream world (or when he calls Finn because, obviously), it means a good chunk of time is spent in going from thing to thing because the movie can only maneuver itself forward within dreams, particularly when the movie doesn't have as much urgency as you wish it would have. For a movie that tries to be "Good vs. Evil", you can only go so far before you start to wonder if "Black Phone: Rocky Vacation" would've been a more apt title, complete with clunky dialogue all in its midst. I sometimes felt like I was back in It Chapter Two (2019) territory, for whatever reason.

Three ideas popped into my head about what the movie could've been: Finn trying to actually cope with his survivor's guilt, or lurking further with what the Grabber is beyond being a "bottomless pit" of sins, or maybe asking aloud if Gwen actually is going nuts (okay maybe everyone starts to believe something is up when being levitated in the air, but, well). Instead, it goes for lurking in dreams again and again and again until it eventually reveals the last card that comes with things that either could be thought of as a blessing or a curse*. It can only go so far when trying to make the Grabber a thing because you can only go so far in the first place* before it all becomes too goofy for words. You might say it isn't advisable to judge a movie on what you want it to be rather than what it actually is, but for me, there is a uneasy feeling of being underwhelmed by what I was watching by the time the film stumbles to the climax. It already felt sluggish for its first half, but it just doesn't stick the landing all the way through. You can say that it isn't a slasher movie and that it is supernatural and yea, okay, the first movie was about dead kids calling someone, but now we are talking about once-dead beings skating on ice as if they were the Invisible Man, so keep trying to say "atmosphere, atmosphere"- yadda yadda yadda. Some might find it spooky, other might just find it only mildly involving. In trying to justify its existence, it only ends up feeling like an epilogue. As a whole, I wanted to like the movie beyond tagging it as just mildly disappointing but didn't quite find what I was looking for. It's just too average to really love. The tough situation of having voices of the dead be the one point standing between a trapped person and a kidnapper seemingly turned on to playing a game with a stacked deck is now just a rocky mountain adventure. The movie accomplishes a good chunk of its goals but doesn't really pull the punches that were as apparent in the first film. You might think of it as a solid sequel, and that's fine with me. 

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

*Apparently, the short story (30 pages) is available on the Wayback Machine. To prove that, the first words of the story: "The fat man on the other side of the road was about to drop his groceries."

*Okay, one spoiler: Imagine, if even for a second, that Gwen was actually just going a bit crazy, rather than just being The Most Correct Person To Ever Live. But nah, she even gets to be the one who mom talks to on the phone at the end. Sucks to be you Finn! And don't tell me that is supposed to be an emotional hallmark, you already make it so the mom did not in fact kill herself (ITS ALL CONNECTED AHHHHHHH), do you need closure on closure too? I wanted to know if the religious parents died in the ice or not, by the way.

*Addendum: Technically, the movie has no actual body count. Sure, you are told about a few more dead kids from the 1950s, but really: is a movie spookier when you are told about something or when you actually see it? You can't introduce three new characters to join the proceedings and then basically not have any of them deal with mortality. And no, the mom doesn't count, that's just retconning/cheating.

Godzilla vs. Kong.

Review #1672: Godzilla vs. Kong.

Cast: 

Alexander Skarsgård (Dr. Nathan Lind), Millie Bobby Brown (Madison Russell), Rebecca Hall (Dr. Ilene Andrews), Brian Tyree Henry (Bernie Hayes), Shun Oguri (Ren Serizawa), Eiza González (Maia Simmons), Julian Dennison (Josh Valentine), Lance Reddick (Guillerman), Kyle Chandler (Dr. Mark Russell), Demián Bichir (Walter Simmons), and Kaylee Hottle (Jia) Directed by Adam Wingard.

Review: 

"It’s a massive monster brawl movie. There’s lots of monsters going crazy on each other, but at the end of the day I want there to be an emotional drive to it. I want you to be emotionally invested in them. I think that’s what’s going to make it really cool."

I want to go on record by saying one "fan" statement in that I figured Godzilla was going to win this time around. I mean, we are talking about a radioactive giant lizard that breathes atomic breath at provokers, while Kong (who I guess just isn't a king yet) is an ape that is really tall (this isn't judging the quality of the films, remember). However, I can also go on record for the fact that I did not in my wildest dreams envision a "MonsterVerse" when Godzilla (2014) came out in theaters. Honestly, I am still a bit skeptical at the idea of a shared universe of monsters, mostly because the thought that comes to my head when it comes to these movies is "entertainment", not "narrative cohesion". Seven years has resulted in four features, each with different directors and combinations of writers. This film has five writers with the story done by Terry Rossio, Michael Dougherty, Zach Shields while Eric Pearson and Max Borenstein did the screenplay (all except Rossio and Pearson had written Godzilla: King of the Monsters (2019), and Borenstein has written for each of the MonsterVerse films). They also have distinct casts, since only five actors have even appeared in more than one of these features. In a strange sort of way, it must make sense when it comes to monster movies, but they certainly have attempted to evolve in their balance of monster and human drama...or whatever you want to call it. The film, as you likely know, is the first film to feature both Godzilla and Kong since King Kong vs. Godzilla (1962), although it isn't a remake. Aside from injecting satire in the form of the TV industry of Japan, the one defining trait of that feature is that the feature didn't exactly have a clear-cut winner - sure, King Kong comes out of the duel from the water, but one could think of it as ambiguous (particularly if one is thinking of box office dollars like Toho...). With this one...oh hey, do you really expect a clear winner? Do you really think it is going to go the way you think, pedantic-in-me be damned? While it certainly may pack a surprise or two when it comes to a certain idea and presence, it only seems to keep the door for further looks into the world of titans of nature open ever so slightly. Would it have been better if it was definitive? Probably, but it was evidently the intent all along by the writers to go in that direction. Wingard has stated that the series is at a "crossroads", where it relies on the audience being vocal about wanting more (currently, the movie is an audience hit with theaters and streaming; incidentally, the deal between Legendary Pictures and Toho for Godzilla ended with this film, in which Toho couldn't do a live-action Godzilla movie but instead did an anime trilogy...and apparently Toho wants to get in on the shared universe thing). This is the tenth feature film from Wingard, who directed his first film with Home Sick (2007; paradoxically, the fourth director of a series spanning seven years has is the more experienced director of the bunch), with the Tennessee native specializing in the horror and action genres.

As I recall, the first film of this series dealt with the slow burn of a great terror in Godzilla within the human element of folks that I honestly can't remember that much about (except for Bryan Cranston, but I'm sure you know that), complete with adversaries that were called "MUTOs"...and its sequel decided to roll with just using the term "Titans" instead, paced with a story that somewhat followed up that movie. In between those movies was the movie about Kong on Skull Island as the last of his species that has those elements of Moby Dick with creepy crawly creatures. Now, we have a movie that is the sequel to two movies with two plotlines that hinges more on Kong alongside its first main trick: a hollow Earth. I suppose if anything is possible, one could use an idea prevalent in folklore for centuries (alongside scientific theory for a time). I guess it really would be hard to hide monsters for very long, wouldn't it? The movie wants to move along with technobabble without choking too much before it gets back into setting the monster fights. In that sense, the movie continues the trend of action sequences that override the rest of the venture that work to the varying degree of folks who want one or both in an effects adventure. The effects do seem to look a bit clearer this time around, likely because there is at least a little bit more day-time shots when it comes to Godzilla, and the effect for Kong has evolved for the better - if you didn't think so, consider the fact that he gets to hold a big ax. At 113 minutes, it is the shortest of the four films, although there can be two lines of thought when it comes to it being a bit longer/trimmed down.

Consider the human element in other movies...if the 1954 film was most memorable for its terror shown on screen as a metaphor for nuclear weapons, Akihiko Hirata managed to shine through with his memorably troubled performance in the struggle for doing the right thing. The aforementioned King Kong vs. Godzilla didn't have great acting, but its idea of a satire of the TV industry within the monster mash is at least different. Invasion of Astro-Monster went to space and saw aliens trick us into loaning Godzilla to them. Ebirah, Horror of the Deep tried to do a pseudo James Bond film with a squid for a villain. While I have only seen the first few films in the original series, I know the storylines go to a variety of interesting places, revolving from smog monsters to the horrors of bureaucratic red tape while Godzilla attacks, so one can only imagine exactly what seems so different in enjoyment when it comes to this film. For a movie that has two storylines, they only really converge on exactly one point through the whole movie (and as far as I know, they don't even meet), which makes for a really strange structure for a film that wants to have two stories but only really works within the pursuit of a giant ape to home (who I suppose has evolved to the level of Koko the gorilla with the use of sign language). Tell me if this seems like a minor gripe: How does one have six total main characters and find time to not lend one iota of a chance for one of them to be sacrificed at the end? It seems like the movie really needs someone to take a chance on the dustbin for this to really need stakes to be raised, particularly since the main presence in each storyline have that instinct of "for the greater good" to begin with. Skarsgård actually does fine with this lead role, mainly because even a generic monster hero is better than one with too much snark or seriousness. It is a shaky confidence, but it isn't a real step down from what one has seen from MonsterVerse leads. Henry has the strangest role, in that it is either meant to be taken seriously as the voice of reason in a sea of doubt (and monsters)...or taken as seriously as Dale Gribble. It is a weak role that leads to a middling performance, because who really needed a conspiracy lead? Who goes into a film talking about monsters and Monarch and whatever and thinks, gee, I need a skeptic. Leave the skeptics to have to run away from the monster. At least Hall does fine with her role in matching up as the other adult in the room, level-headed without becoming overwhelmed by what is going on. If there truly is a market for designating screen time to younger adults, one could do better than having Brown and Dennison, because you could nearly trim one out completely and lose exactly nothing, and the former is only spared heated skepticism because at least we've seen her before. Actually, it might be a compliment to say that Hottle is the most interesting presence of the leads, one who has a link with Kong that actually could've been the real focus of the film entirely, since it is mostly devoid of yammering and babble (instead, it is told through the face and language). Bichir and Oguri are the adversaries for a movie that needs to be weirder without having villains beyond a hint of hubris (the latter character is the son of a character that reminds me that normal movies actually use continuity to make for more interesting villain turns).

I do enjoy the fights, particularly since there is a nice mix of having at least one fight take place within the day, since the last of these films could be thought of as a bit murky. The fight near the end within a neon-lighted city is pretty interesting, and I will admit that the build to the climatic ending is at least somewhat clever (at least more so when it comes to shoehorning something from the past, which was done a bit haphazardly in that last one). For basic enjoyment, I will give it credit. The ending is a bit more difficult to go with, however. You could call it "cheap", you could call it "resourceful", but I will just settle with ridiculous. You can't say a titan will fall and then say "unless..."; regardless of how much the film slants itself for one titan. I still can't believe that Wingard actually thinks one could cry at the end of this film (it may or may not be literal, but having it on record does matter). I can't speak for everyone, but I'm sure that this next statement could apply to a bunch of you folks: I am not 12 years old, and even then it is doubtful that one would even cry for a monster mash at that age (on the other hand, if I had a premonition about one of my sports teams winning a championship before I die, I might actually shed a tear). A monster mash can be fun, but don't stiff out on a real ending, man. I'm not saying I want them to basically just fall into the deep earth and end abruptly, but your mileage will vary depending on tastes (namely in how much one takes this aspect of the film seriously from the others). The real demand that fans should be doing is not for more of these films in the MonsterVerse but instead to have a plot that actually works out to the monster fights with consistency (which start with cast continuity). It is perhaps fitting that the series managed to get to this point, one where its monster fights have shone over all other aspects that have made decent experiences that will either want folks curious for more or desire the original source material (as I would hope for), although one could understand the burnout. While the movie has visible faults that hinder what could have been a quite entertaining culmination to a modern monster mash series, I certainly found enough here to enjoy, so I suppose that makes it enough in the end.

411 days later, the Theater Saga returns for #103. This was the longest time between trips to the theater in my adult years, and we all know the reason for that. However, I felt it was finally time to make a trip and do so while staying safe (namely by wearing a mask the whole time) and support a local place - HBO Max may be the right thing for certain folks who like streaming, but as you might already know, I personally would rather eat lead than do that. At any rate, I am looking to plan a few more trips to the theater over the next few months while adhering to caution and such (getting the vaccine will be done when the right time comes). I hope you folks enjoyed this review, and I hope you stay safe.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.