Showing posts with label Linda Cardellini. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Linda Cardellini. Show all posts

May 8, 2023

Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3.

Review #2006: Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3.

Cast: 
Chris Pratt (Peter Quill / Star-Lord), Zoe Saldaña (Gamora), Dave Bautista (Drax the Destroyer), Karen Gillan (Nebula), Pom Klementieff (Mantis), Vin Diesel (Groot), Bradley Cooper (Rocket Raccoon), Will Poulter (Adam Warlock), Sean Gunn (Kraglin), Chukwudi Iwuji (the High Evolutionary), Linda Cardellini (Lylla), Nathan Fillion (Master Karja), Sylvester Stallone (Stakar Ogord), and Maria Bakalova (Cosmo) Written and Directed by James Gunn (#626 - Guardians of the Galaxy and #932 - Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2)

Review: 
"In the end, my love for Rocket, Groot, Gamora, Star-Lord, Yondu, Mantis, Drax, and Nebula—and some of the other forthcoming heroes—goes deeper than you guys can possibly imagine, and I feel they have more adventures to go on and things to learn about themselves and the wonderful and sometimes terrifying universe we all inhabit."

Admittedly, the first Guardians of the Galaxy (as adapted from the second incarnation of the comic series of the same name, which was created by Dan Abnett and Andy Lanning) was a nice surprise when it came out in theaters in 2014. Sure, the Marvel push for a cinematic universe was already nine films in when it came out, but it wasn't hard for me to be surprised that a director I had not heard of managed to make a really neat adventure. Who wouldn't want something that sounds like a space epic ensemble? Of course, it's hard to not respect a director who also writes their own stuff, as was the case with James Gunn's prior two films with Slither (2006) and Super (2010). It set up other possible ideas for, well, other things, but the important thing that I remember most is that it had a sense of effervescent fun to it that was interesting without running into a joke just for the sake of it, with Gunn having an evident appreciation for these characters. The second film, released in 2017, was probably a sidestep direction in quality, but it did exactly what was required from a sequel in consistency (besides, as a resident Kurt Russell spokesman, I enjoyed him playing a villainous planet - such is life). Six years and appearances in varying quality and quantity (Avengers: Infinity War (2018), Avengers: Endgame (2019), Thor: Love and Thunder (2022), and The Guardians of the Galaxy Holiday Special (2022) - look I can't watch everything), here we are with a third and final film with this dynamic of Gunn and company. Oh, and it is one of the films in Phase F-Oh hell, if you care about cinematic universes (or making fun of streaming like I do), go ahead, I'm just here for the fun.

I suppose the quality of the film depends on just how much imagination one has in comparison to the director when it comes to seeing the culmination of various stories that have come with these characters over the past nine years. As the longest of the three films at 150 minutes, it tries to cover as many bases as it feels it needs to do in the idea of finding new horizons without turning into the longest group hug ever, complete with stakes that are more emotional than grand. In short: it is a clever way to tie things around when it comes to the stories of these characters without making it a goodbye show or just a vehicle of over-spectacle. It does have a few moments that could be considered disturbing, but one will likely be ready for anything if they have seen enough films with the middle-ground rating of "PG-13", you might say (personally, I fall on the side of not criticizing movies that dare to push a bit when it comes to that rating that lets the audience decide rather than go trying to recommend coddling, but whatever). Besides, if you can handle the influx of staged sequences of action where people are getting beaten a bit, I think you can handle animals in a cage. When it comes to performances, each get their own respective moments to shine besides the influx of scenes spent with talking animals (these scenes of Rocket are voiced threefold, incidentally, with Cooper doing adolescence, S. Gunn doing the young version, and Noah Raskin doing him as a baby) that loops right in to one last ride for a number of folks. Of course, the fact that Gillan has had an arc that saw her go from a second-tier adversary in the first film to an actual fledged member of the team with worthwhile time to follow along with in levity that fits quite well. Bautista, to the surprise of nobody, still provides the warmth required to balance the ensemble in timing and physicality in what makes for a worthy endnote (who among us would want to put on so much makeup forever, I suppose), which naturally makes for amusing banter with Klementieff and her useful timing again. Cooper carries the film along with pathos that makes it more than just a voice on motion-captured animation, one that makes it clear just how integral he has been to the series. The flashback sequences build that climax to where it has to go, and Cooper helps that make sense. Saldana does fine in essentially playing the straight one among the folks (while reminding of the middling idea of resurrecting her character from the dead in the first place), while Pratt holds his own with self-interest and charm, one that reminds me that just knows how to time things with general presence. Poulter makes for an amusing adversary when it comes to the mannerisms that come from a flying gold painted, uh, doof. 

Do I regard the movie as the best of the three? Well, that is an interesting point of discussion, because it probably has the best villain of the three films, that is for sure. Iwuji plays it exceedingly well in the art of irredeemable villainy that is compelling to see in all of his brilliant decadence without any ploy of sympathy or false note, which is necessary when it comes being more than just a villain who likes to pick on animals. His pursuit of perfection in the face of reality and the things around him is far more interesting when it feels in sync with no pretenses (so yes, sometimes you can have villains who might seem sympathetic, but this is not one of those days, thank heavens). It is a movie with worthwhile staging when it comes to action (such as one longshot scene) along with dialogue that works in tandem with the music choices to make a vibrant film that is more a resolution to new things rather than just a definitive be-all end-all film, which leaves the folks in a comfortable spot without playing it too safe (aside from maybe one post-credits scene). In the end, the movie is pretty good in the ways you would expect from a third film in a series that closes the loop on what had started in 2014 that will make most of the folks happy (or sad if you really get into it) with what they've seen over the years, whether that is warm enjoyment in the characters or in general.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

September 20, 2018

A Simple Favor.


Review #1134: A Simple Favor.

Cast: 
Anna Kendrick (Stephanie Smothers), Blake Lively (Emily Nelson), Henry Golding (Sean Townsend-Nelson), Andrew Rannells (Darren), Ian Ho (Nicky Townsend-Nelson), Joshua Satine (Miles Smothers), Linda Cardellini (Diana Hyland), Rupert Friend (Dennis Nylon), and Jean Smart (Margaret McLanden) Directed by Paul Feig.

Review: 
What makes for a good mystery thriller film? Is it a commendable cast? The fun in where it can go with its story threads? Or competent craftsmanship? Perhaps it is a combination of these categories that apply to making a mystery thriller worth watching, and this is apparent with this film as well. Based on the novel of the same name by Darcey Bell, A Simple Favor aspires to throw in as many thrills and twists wrapped with bits of humor that makes this a satisfying piece of entertainment. It certainly comes off a surprise, since I hadn't heard about this movie until roughly a week ago, but the real surprise is how weird the film gets itself with the cliches of a thriller that manage to come off positively, where it never devolves into trying to get cheap laughs or not lose charm by twisting itself too thin. At the heart of the film's success is its cast of characters and its main duo of Kendrick and Lively. Kendrick is fun to watch, having an energetic and capable nature to her, having a spunky charm while also being interesting to follow in her pursuits throughout the film, inspiring attention and occasional laughs. Lively does well at playing a character best described as an enigma in a suit, having a biting wit that certainly fits with what the film wants to be, wrapped in mystery and bonkers nature that goes just fine with a film like this. Kendrick and Lively have a fun charm together in their scenes together, whether while drinking or dealing with the twists that go on. Golding does pretty well in his time on screen, having a fair charm to him that goes along with the main duo at times. The rest of the cast don't have too much time on screen, but they do fine with keeping the flow of the film going at a fair pace, with Cardellini standing out with a rough amusing charm for her one scene on screen. At 117 minutes, I didn't mind its length too much, particularly since the film takes a bit of a turn half-way through, throwing a few twists that makes this come off as a bit campy, but I enjoyed where it wanted to go, even if it may (amusingly) remind me of a Lifetime movie - for better or worse. The screenplay from Jessica Sharzer (writer for a few episodes of American Horror Story and Nerve from 2016) is executed well by Feig to make a film that doesn't relent on its mystery and thrills while not devolving too much into farce or being too complex. It's a weird and wild mystery thriller that will surely prove itself well for its audience looking for a fun time.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

July 27, 2014

Movie Night: Scooby-Doo.


Review #621: Scooby-Doo.

Cast
Freddie Prinze Jr (Fred Jones), Sarah Michelle Gellar (Daphne Blake), Matthew Lillard (Shaggy Rogers), Linda Cardellini (Velma Dinkley), Rowan Atkinson (Emile Mondavarious), Neil Fanning (Scooby-Doo), Isla Fisher (Mary Jane), and Scott Innes (Scrappy-Doo) Directed by Raja Gosnell (#495 - Home Alone 3)

Review
Scooby-Doo was at always at least somewhat enjoyable, Scooby-Doo, Where Are You! was fine for all its flaws (the laugh track, the questionable animation), and it is probably the show most remember of the 11 shows that have been broadcast in nearly 45 years, and so they made a movie. Let me clarify that, they've made a few direct to video films (22) and telefilms, but then there's the two theatrical films, but we're only covering the first film tonight. So...yeah, what about this film? It's like the movie can't decide on what it wants to be, does it want to make fun of the show or does it want to just embrace the show and its quirks? Part of the problem is that the movie is unbalanced, it just doesn't have a proper focus, though I guess it is sometimes fun, it has it moments, the climax is actually decent, even if Scrappy-Doo is in it. The CGI is weird, maybe it's the fact that the demons look like weird stick figures, and their weakness to the sun doesn't help much. This is a movie where you really can't care if it stinks because it's not like you were expecting anything special from a movie with a competition of burping and farting between Scooby and Shaggy. The acting is fine, but the movie neither benefits nor suffers from the actors, it's just an average movie that while sometimes fun, isn't anything special. Watch at your own risk.

Overall, I give it 5 out of 10 stars.