Showing posts with label Norman Reedus. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Norman Reedus. Show all posts

June 21, 2025

Ballerina (2025).

Review #2388: Ballerina (2025).

Cast: 
Ana de Armas (Eve Macarro; Victoria Comte as young Eve), Anjelica Huston (the Director), Gabriel Byrne (the Chancellor), Lance Reddick (Charon), Norman Reedus (Daniel Pine), Catalina Sandino Moreno (Lena), Ian McShane (Winston Scott), Keanu Reeves (John Wick), and Sharon Duncan-Brewster (Nogi) Directed by Len Wiseman (#320 - Live Free or Die Hard, #1916 - Underworld)

Review: 
Even with the marketing calling it "From the World of John Wick: Ballerina", I was at least semi-interested in seeing what was under the hood of trying to a spinoff of a series that I assumed was staying quiet (this is me pretending that the idea of making a fifth John Wick movie when the fourth's ending already exists). I didn't even realize they utilized the "branding" for a prequel TV show two years ago, incidentally. Apparently, the genesis of Ballerina came around because of seeing a trailer. Shay Hatten wrote a spec script that was inspired by seeing the trailer for John Wick: Chapter 2 [2017] that was acquired by Lionsgate. The script was a sendup of action movies and even had a counter to keep track of the lead character's kills as they went into conflict with secret society assassins in Switzerland and a retirement home. Sure, it was re-tooled extensively, but you might remember that Hatten was brought in to do some writing for the third and fourth John Wick movies. Evidently, the time from development led to several people being credited for "Additional Literary Material: (not on-screen)" in Rebecca Angelo, Lauren Schuker Blum, Emerald Fennell, Michael Finch and Len Wiseman. There were apparently reshoots of the film done in early 2024 by producer Chad Stahelski that was either months of stuff or just a few weeks of additional photography (one sequence cited was the extending opening that apparently wasn't initially filmed due to budget limitations) that was overseen by Stahelski and Wiseman. You might remember that Wiseman was the director for two of the first Underworld movies but had not directed a movie since Total Recall in 2012.

Honestly, I liked the movie fine, but many of my statements about the movie will make it seem like it is a bad thing to be a mediocre spinoff movie. If there was a tinge of amusement to be had at the growing absurdity that comes with one man against the whole band of killers to go alongside a good deal of stakes and danger in those aforementioned movies, you might find a part of that still present here. There is at least enough here for de Armas in shall we say, "killer instinct" to make things stay watchable without turning into a fest of staleness or to laugh at it. The flamethrower sequences in particular work best for the movie for shall we say, "slap-bang enjoyment", one is particularly enjoyable in the nitty-gritty feeling one gets in seeing just what that type of weapon can do and the methods that arise in trying to combat it. Besides, with a movie trying to play with resilience in "fight like a girl" but taking it seriously, as long as one is believing the material enough to not call it slop, it will coast enough for at least the idea of checking it out for 125 minutes. Armas plays it fast and loose in lethal grace that does manage to balance the tightrope of kicking ass without merely resembling a video game character in terms of the action sequences, anyway. Sure, the character probably has the gleam of being pushed and pulled by a few too many writers. Sure, the cult stuff is probably a bit too vague, but it is serviceable in the same sense that it feels like an old pair of shoes, and I suppose that works for Byrne to approach things with some creep factor. Huston accompanies the proceedings mostly to go around with a small bit of charm, which goes fine when it feels like most of the scenes take place in a chair. Obligation or otherwise, it is nice to see McShane and Reeves around for a bit in those vital doses of familiarity. Reedus might be worth talking about if he didn't have a significant amount of time between scenes to actually cite, but so it goes. It isn't too complicated a movie to either buy into or discard, and I found it works just enough to buy into, although I don't exactly expect too many more spinoff attempts*.  In the end, it probably is a bit sloppier than the original script envisioned in executing mayhem, but it is relatively satisfying enough for me to at least say the journey was worth it to get there.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

*It amused me to get a trailer for Nobody 2, the sequel to the movie written by John Wick creator Derek Kolstad during this.

February 11, 2019

Blade II.


Review #1188: Blade II.

Cast: 
Wesley Snipes (Eric Brooks/Blade), Kris Kristofferson (Abraham Whistler), Ron Perlman (Dieter Reinhardt), Leonor Varela (Nyssa Damaskinos), Norman Reedus (Scud), Thomas Kretschmann (Eli Damaskinos), Karel Roden (Karel Kounen), Luke Goss (Jared Nomak), Matt Schulze (Chupa), Danny John-Jules (Asad), Donnie Yen (Snowman), Marit Velle Kile (Verlaine), Darren "Daz" Crawford (Lighthammer), Tony Curran (Priest), and Santiago Segura (Rush) Directed by Guillermo del Toro (#425 - Pacific Rim and #1061 - The Shape of Water)

Review: 
The cheapest way I think I could describe the film would be that if you liked the first film, you'll be fine with the sequel. It isn't wrong, however. It's a movie that has plenty of loud action, ridiculous moments, and a continuing winning combo of Snipes and Kristofferson. Its plot and some of its characters may be a bit shaky, but in the long run there is just enough here to make something worth a watch for entertainment. It isn't a particularly great comic book film, but it tries to have a balance of action and horror that makes it stick out a bit, not being too much of a copy from its predecessor, which was also written by David S. Goyer. I can't really say it is a better film, in part because of the story, which is okay in getting to its spectacle parts but sometimes ridiculous when giving deep thought to some of its motivations. The initial idea of the film (which sounds like Blade crossed with the Dirty Dozen but with vampires that call themselves the Bloodpack) is a curious one, although it is amusing in execution, since if this so-called pack were trained to supposedly terminate Blade at some point in time, I imagine they would've probably been beaten senseless in less than a hour. Obviously the movie doesn't reply on the ability of this pack to be able to beat Blade, but their lack of characterization besides Perlman and Varela, with the others feeling like fodder. Even though they do fine jobs, they are characters who can sometimes feel one-note, with the former being a bully with watchable qualities and the latter being okay but not invoking as much interest when it comes time to the plot or when with Snipes. Reedus is okay and charming, and Kretschmann is occasionally creepy, but these are cursory moments. Even Goss can't really deliver too much as a villain, perhaps because he doesn't really have much to say (which doesn't help when compared to Stephen Dorff and his villain from the original), and the Reapers (as interesting as they look) seem a bit muddled when compared to Blade; the action is fine and dandy, but after a while the film can't quite find a way to wring itself to anything other than just going through the motions between going from one dialogue piece to another before an action sequence comes in. At least it doesn't feel like an endless cutscene (although the CGI can be a bit dodgy sometimes). The climax is alright for spectacle, although it doesn't really have too many surprises. The film suffers a bit when comparing it to the first film, which felt more flexible with balancing its action and mythology without too much trouble. As okay as the film is with its execution, it still invites curiosity for anyone looking for some vampire action horror that can deliver in the end.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Special Note for 2019 only: In an error best described as "counting sheep wrong", the review count for Movie Night had been miscounted since review #1168, which was Firewall (2006). Somehow, it was never properly cataloged into my records (which I keep for things such as ratings of each film, release year, etc), while the reviews that followed were. The numbering was done correctly for #1169 (About Schmidt), but the next review of Futureworld was mislabeled as #1169 instead of the correct #1170. This means that the reviews that followed up to now were the wrong number. The review numbers have been corrected and things are fixed, but I wanted to make sure that there is no confusion. Enjoy.