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.

The Black Phone.

Review #1856: The Black Phone.

Cast: 

Mason Thames (Finney), Madeleine McGraw (Gwen), Ethan Hawke (The Grabber), Jeremy Davies (Terrence), E. Roger Mitchell (Detective Wright), Troy Rudeseal (Detective Miller), James Ransone (Max), Miguel Cazarez Mora (Robin), Rebecca Clarke (Donna), J. Gaven Wilde (Moose), Spencer Fitzgerald (Buzz), Jordan Isaiah White (Matty), Brady Ryan (Matt), Tristan Pravong (Bruce), Jacob Moran (Billy), Brady Hepner (Vance), Banks Repeta (Griffin) Directed by Scott Derrickson (#874 - Doctor Strange)

Review: 

Every now and then you need a good scare, particularly one that tries to draw upon the 1970s in terms of stranger danger. One good thing that came out of Scott Derrickson leaving the production of Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness (2022) is that he was thus free to start production on this film rather than wait until after trying to cobble a sequel, which was shot in 2021 with a debut screening in September before eventual release this month. The Black Phone is based on the short story of the same name written by Joe Hill (who served as a co-executive producer), which had been included in his collection 20th Century Ghosts; the story is mainly focused on just the lead child character trapped in the basement (the story apparently ends right after a call comes in for the killer). Scott Derrickson and C. Robert Cargill (collaborators on films such as Sinister (2012), which also featured Hawke in a lead role) were thus tasked with writing a screenplay that extended the material beyond just the short story. One might be thinking of familiar things when it comes to a 70s tale involving a clown that traps children or with a phone that has the voice of dead kids, or with a secondary lead that may or may not have psychic abilities. Well, Hill is the son of Stephen King, so that might help things, since King described the movie as "Stand by Me in Hell". 

Technically speaking, the movie isn't as particularly dark as the story, but I do think the movie will work most people's taste in horror, particularly in terms of execution. One doesn't get taken for a fake-out ride or confronted with incessant horror tricks. I'm not going to go out on a limb and say it is one of the scariest films of the current decade, but I will say that it is one of the best executed features I have seen in quite a while, a solid period piece with a suitable cast and staging that never wavers in its building of terror in 103 minutes. It helps that the movie is lifted by solid performances from both kids and adults. Thames never wavers from the degree of believability required from a "kid gets spooked" movie while McGraw has sharp presence and timing on the other side of the pursuit coin. The belt scene with Davies (solid in scuzzy screen presence) might be the most striking scene with any of them outside the parts when Thames is paired against Hawke. Hawke apparently had reservations about playing the character because of how evil it was, but he reconsidered by saying "Villains might be my future." He does really well here in playing a pillar of evil that is confined to wearing a mask (each designed by Tom Savini) for all but one scene, doing so with a voice that pierces through with sneaking terror that is never overplayed for one second. I especially like the sequence where he turns on Thames in the midst of a dark street and reveals his complete nature with a few quiet words for tenseness. The sequences leading up to the main kidnapping are fairly solid building blocks in making one care for our lead besides just throwing them into danger right from the get-go (which works best in a short story rather than a full-fledged story), as it lends time to let one absorb the atmosphere of what is shown without leaning into complete reference-preaching to the choir. One just watches a movie about a phone with the voices of dead kids without needing to think hard about why this is happening, with one appreciating the guidebook approach in an escape attempt. Granted, it is more of a coming-of-age movie rather than a straight descent into abject terror, but it does so with solid conviction that makes one curious for what Derrickson wants to show in horror on a certain scale with suitable timing and framing that makes for a clever and anxious ride.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Toy Story 4.

Review #1238: Toy Story 4.

Cast: 
Tom Hanks (Woody), Tim Allen (Buzz Lightyear), Annie Potts (Bo Peep), Tony Hale (Forky), Keegan-Michael Key (Ducky), Jordan Peele (Bunny), Madeleine McGraw (Bonnie), Christina Hendricks (Gabby Gabby), Keanu Reeves (Duke Caboom), Ally Maki (Giggle McDimples), Jay Hernandez (Bonnie's dad), Lori Alan (Bonnie's mom), Joan Cusack (Jessie), Bonnie Hunt (Dolly), Kristen Schaal (Trixie), Emily Davis (Billy, Goat and Gruff), Wallace Shawn (Rex), John Ratzenberger (Hamm), Blake Clark (Slinky Dog), June Squibb (Margaret the Store Owner), and Carl Weathers (Combat Carl) Directed by Josh Cooley.

Review: 
I do admit to having feelings of trepidation when I heard that this film was announced. The first three films are great movies, filled with plenty of entertainment, charm, wonderful animation with a solid foundation that would be expected from Pixar. Next year will be the 25th anniversary of the release of the first film, so one would wonder exactly how long can a saga like this can really last, particularly one about sentient toys and the actors that accompany them (there are even cameos from Mel Brooks and Carol Burnett at one point). One would've thought it would've ceased after the last one nine years ago, and one could even make the case that it could've just ended with the second one with no hesitation. Each of those films close themselves out leaving the audiences (and corporate overlords, if one is to be cynical here) satisfied for the time - these films are accessible for everyone, young and old. With this film, the best thing that can be said is that I can't really fault the filmmakers for wanting to make another story with these characters - the result is not a disturbing cashgrab (unlike certain productions of the past decade), but it is a compromise that works hard at trying to justify its existence with quality cast, animation, and a fairly competent foundation to make it mostly worth it. After all, there are plenty of writing credits to go around, such as a screenplay by Stephany Folsom and Andrew Stanton but eight credited for story (John Lasseter, Rashida Jones, Will McCormack, Josh Cooley, Valerie LaPointe, Martin Hynes, Folsom, and Stanton), so that sure makes for plenty of hands to go around.

It isn't so much the worst of the Toy Story films as it happens to be the one that doesn't have as many flawless features - this makes it harder to say it is entirely necessary to view, which reminds me more of Pixar's recent sequels such as Finding Dory (2016) or Incredibles 2 (2018) - both fine follow-ups that don't soil the memory of the original, and this likely falls in the middle between those in scale of quality (the less said about Pixar's other certain sequel in the decade, the better). As before, there certainly are interesting new characters to view upon the ones we know and appreciate - the existential crisis of a utensil toy sure does make for an intriguing one, with Hanks and Hale being up to the task of playing off each other with purpose and charm. The cast sure does pull plenty of charm and fairly timed laughs, even if it has to split them into segments just to try and keep things threaded - at least until its climax, anyway. Hanks of course does just as well anyone can do with a role he fits perfectly for, full of passion and leadership that is easy to follow with as before, such as when trying to help a newly created utensil toy find himself as more than just "trash". Allen has his moments to shine when its wants to be on him (with one recurring gag to follow along with, much like the last one), handily fitting into the role and its final sequence without hesitation. Potts, last in the role two decades (and two films) ago, is just as able to jump right back into things with relish, capable as can be with what the film wants to do with her role without making it like a fractured portrayal, and the chemistry between her and Hanks goes seamlessly enough. Hale is quirky yet fairly amusing enough to hold the ranks as the resident new toy on the block with his own interesting personality and design that keeps up with the others without becoming just another gag on the wall. Key and Peele make for a few laughs when the light needs to shine on them, and Reeves is just as charming (who can resist a toy stuntman of Canada?). Hendricks makes for an engaging part of the film, offbeat in sinister nature yet fairly capable of being vulnerable that falls alongside the lines of other character types from the previous films without being a complete copy. The others of the cast don't have as much to really do, but they make their time count just fine. A 100 minute run-time makes for a finely paced film that doesn't linger too much of stringing all its threads to a complete stop nor leave the viewer hanging for too much time, even if its finish is just fine with where it closes as opposed to simply just great. Its outcome may prove a bit more fit for a discussion than a real out-pour of emotions (if that's your sort of thing from animated movies, I guess), but at least its character arcs do make it all fairly worthwhile. The animation is wonderful as to be expected, capable at holding to standards one would expect from before that has evolved with the times in the past decades, holding balance with when it needs to be light or darkly-lit as such. On the whole, I do appreciate that the people who crafted this film tried their hardest to make a story worth viewing one again through these characters without trashing what made them so compelling in the first place all those years ago; it may not be the most necessary film of the saga, but it surely will prove just as well in entertainment for people that yearn to seek out where it lands itself this time. Whether there is another one of these films or not, it sure has been quite a fun time to see these films play out beside the toybox over the years.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.