Author: thedudeabidesinsouthflorida

Superhero Suffering: Logan


Logan is the second R-rated comic book film from Fox, studio of the X-Men, following up on the success of Deadpool last year. Logan is also said to be Hugh Jackman’s last outing as Wolverine after doing eight films as the character, to which Robert Downey Jr flexes his muscles and says, You gotta be kidding! Whimp. I’m just getting started.

Full disclaimer, I have not seen any of the other X-men movies (I know, crazy!). However, I knew enough solid facts about Wolverine going into Logan to not be lost. I would suggest anyone who wants to see the film and hasn’t seen the others, do at least a quick scroll through Wikipedia before diving in.

Logan starts in the year 2029. The mutants are almost extinct. Logan is working as a chauffeur and is caring for an elderly Charles Xavier, who is suffering from a brain disease. After a deal goes wrong, he learns about an underground human experimentation group called Transigen that has created a group of child mutants, including a young girl named Laura with the same powers as him. He, Laura, and Charles Xavier go on the run to take Laura to a place called “Eden,” where she swears she and the other mutant children will be safe. Logan is reluctant, but right now he’s only living for Charles, who insists Laura and the other mutants are the future.

This was my first rated R film in theatres, and I saw it with my dad. Near the very end, as a character’s chest gets driven into a wooden spike for the second time, my dad turned to me and asked,

“Are you okay?”

“Yeah,” I said, as I adjusted my hands over my eyes. “I can handle it.”

“I don’t know if I can.”

So it’s not a kid’s movie. If you’re the parent who took their kid to see Sausage Party because it was animated and Deadpool because it had a guy in a red costume, please take my warning and at least look at why something is rated as it is. Unless you’re training your child to be a doctor and want to expose them early to brain matter and gaping wounds, in which case I have some questions, please wait, no matter how great this film is.

And why is Logan great? Because it introduces new elements to the superhero genre that haven’t been done before.

Logan has some uncanny similarities to last month’s release, The Lego Batman Movie. While I won’t be reviewing it because its window has passed, I really enjoyed it. Both films are about tough, individualistic, rugged macho men learning to care about other people and let them in. They both find themselves in a parental role, and become great mentors and teachers in their own rights. While one has a climax that ends with a problem being solved by the power of abs and friendships, and the other is a more depressing look at age, alcoholism, immigration, and inner demons, both represent a new turn in franchise filmmaking.

In both Logan and 2015’s Mad Mad: Fury Road, the hero who has been the center of a film series for years gives their mantle to someone who represents the future. In Fury Road, it’s Furiosa and the Wives. In Logan, it’s Laura and the other mutants. This idea of passing the mantle to the future generation, which in both of these films are represented by female/minority/immigrants, is a striking commentary. Logan and Fury Road have also been critical hits, which might mean that more highbrow blockbuster films will follow the same path.

Logan is able to balance action and character, all within its Western feel. The film revels in being able to use Wolverine’s claws to their full effect. It doesn’t just stop with slashes, though. It innovatively incorporates the settings and locations to make unique action sequences.

But it is the quiet moments in the film that pull it into great territory. Watching Logan have to carry Charles Xavier to bed, hearing Charles rage at him in his senile moments about how much of a disappointment he is, bonded me to the characters, even though this is the only film I’ve seen them in. This film is a gift to Hugh Jackman and Patrick Stewart, giving them an opportunity to strip down their characters, build them up, and then set them in stone.

Now, most of us know that Patrick Stewart and Hugh Jackman can act. It’s Dafne Keen as Laura/X-23 that stuns and amazes. She not only performs her action sequences to a professional degree, but she is able to build up her own character’s legacy in a short amount of time. I can’t wait to see more from her.

Ultimately, what Logan does that is revolutionary is this: It has consequences, stakes, and follows through with them. That is something no major franchise is doing right now. Maybe it’s because of Logan’s finality, or the creative forces of director James Mangold and Hugh Jackman, but Logan’s greatest accomplishment is that it is okay with ending.

Except I enjoyed the film so much, I didn’t want it to.

-Madeleine D

A Screenwriter’s Guide to Female Characters

Dear Aspiring Screenwriters,

As a respected screenwriter, I have decided to pass on some of my knowledge to the newest generation of screenwriters. Hollywood is a hard business, and you’ll need all the help you can get.

One of my biggest achievements is being praised for my Strong Female Characters. In this day and age, my fellow writers, we can’t afford to be lazy in writing female characters. The Social Justice Warriors are rampant. In fact, they stand outside your homes and plot to kidnap you if you do one thing wrong. We can no longer go back to the glory days of Hollywood where there were all-male casts. Now there are films being made with almost half the cast being female! Between you and me, I understand how ridiculous and unfair this is, too. But alas, the times are changing, and we must adapt with it. Luckily, I have some tips to help you navigate these tricky new waters.

There are three types of women you can write, because there are only three types of women in the world. The Strong Female Character Who Fights, The Strong Female Character Who Cries, and the Strong Female Character Who Nags. They all must be Strong Female Characters, because if you don’t make sure to include that when you introduce them, people will crucify you on Twitter. But just so you know, Strong Female Character doesn’t require much, so don’t worry.

strong-female

The Strong Female Character Who Fights is a very popular character right now. She is a warrior goddess. She is thin, wiry, and white (occasionally can be something else, see below). Make sure to have her introduction scene be awesome, like, about half the quality of the Main Hero Man’s action scenes. She has to fight people by wrapping her legs around them, or another fight method that could be interpreted as being seductive, and she has to show the Main Hero Man how better she is than him. That way, no one can call you un-feminist. After that, you can ignore her as much as you like, because if people ask why she loses her fighting ability in the next scene, just remind them how awesome she was in the first scene. People will forget.

Make sure that if you have a Strong Female Character, make her natural. Men like natural women. Now, of course she has to wear makeup and tight leather, which I’m sure is easy to fight in, but never show her doing anything to her appearance. That’s girly and not at all Strong. Make sure she has witty, yet flirtatious comebacks. If she is in a group, she must be the only female character. A ratio of 1:5 is good. Remember: male audiences cannot relate to women on any level, so make sure they have plenty of diverse male characters to relate to. Also make sure that the Main Hero Man and Strong Female Character Who Fights get together in the end. It doesn’t matter if you haven’t set the relationship up. They have both punched people before, so their connection is obvious.

If your Strong Female Character Who Fights is going solo, be careful. Make sure that her motivation is strictly from either a bad relationship (women get emotional about that kind of stuff) or the death of a family member, particularly the men or children in her life. Women do not have the same inherent sense of justice that men to, due to them probably never being a victim of injustice (like men often are) and so everything about them must be attached to a relationship of some kind. Plus, this will add to her Layered Personality.

If you choose to have any of your main female characters be black or any other ethnicity, make sure to get the actress to be as light-skinned as possible, to make sure everyone is comfortable. And remember- it doesn’t matter if your female character doesn’t look like she could lift a stick. If you have a curvy or overweight actress, then you are glorifying obesity and will make the character a bad role model to young girls. On a side note, feel free to cast anyone from Chris Hemsworth to Jonah Hill as your Main Hero Man.

The Strong Female Character Who Cries used to be called the Romantic Interest, but social media doesn’t like that term anymore, so describe them with words like “Complex” and “Vulnerable.” She’s the character who stays at home and supports the Main Hero Man from a distance. She cries a lot, and hugs her children even more, because she is vulnerable and complex. You don’t need to show deep reasons for her pain. People will just get it, and the actress will probably get nominated for Best Supporting Actress. If you really want to make this character more interesting, have her be a victim of violence (if you want to go for the edgy Oscar, show this scene in grotesque detail without sympathy for real-life victims. Claim it is for the purposes of Art). Then the Main Hero Man will have a reason to fight besides his inherent sense of justice. You don’t need to examine the character’s growth after the violence occurs. Just make sure the Main Hero Man has righteous anger. If you’re afraid people will criticize you for the character, have her punch someone, cut her hair short, or say a curse word to secure her inner strength.

The Strong Female Character Who Nags includes girlfriends who want the Main Hero Man to marry them already, any Latina women, wives, grandmothers, mothers, mothers-in-law, and really any character that displays any distinctly feminine traits or have children (save for the Strong Female Character Who Fights, who only has dead children). Remember, for women to be strong and likeable, they need to be more masculine. Don’t even try to incorporate interesting observations on gender politics. Have a women punch a bad man in the face, and everyone will be happy.

Remember that in press interviews, refer to your female characters as Female Characters, and male characters are just characters. There is a distinct difference. Keep in mind, also, as you write that audiences are easily confused. Making your female character funny, or evil, or conflicted on any issues beside which shoes to buy, may confuse them, especially target-audience teenage boys who don’t regularly engage with girls and therefore don’t need to know about them.

Don’t forget this extra pro-tip: women love to use their sexuality as their first tool. Make sure your Strong Female Character That Fights uses her seductive powers in situations where her pre-established ability to fight could come in handy. It will appeal to every audience.

Keep writing, dear fellow screenwriters. I know it’s tricky new terrain, but using these easy tips, I think you will all be successful in creating an exciting and original career!

Sincerely,

A Hollywood Vet

The Sanctity of Martian Life: The Space Between Us

space-between-us

It’s hard to be a teenager. Gardner and Tulsa would know best. Tulsa’s a foster kid, about to age out of the system. She’s counting down the days until she can be free. The only person who makes her feel less isolated is her email pen-pal Gardner.

Gardner feels the same way. Nobody understands him. He’s stuck in his room all the time. He doesn’t have any friends his age. The only confidant he has is a scientist and a robot. He’s completely isolated. It’s like he lives on Mars.

Wait-

he does… live…. on Mars.

The Space Between Us tells the story of Gardner, who, after his astronaut mother gives birth to him on Mars, is sent back to earth when he’s old enough. When he gets down to Earth, he finds out his body can’t survive on Earth for long. He’s told by the founder of the program that sent his mother into space in the first place, Dr. Shepard (Gary Oldman and his long, luscious locks, possibly the greatest strength of the whole movie), that he has to go back.

So Gardner escapes. He breaks out of the NASA facility and finds Tulsa (who for some unforgivable reason does not, in fact, live in Tulsa), who at first doesn’t believe him. But when she gets pulled along onto his fugitive adventure to find his father and experience Earth for the first time, they both discover what is so magical about our world.

The most glaring flaw in The Space Between Us is its identity crisis. The film is torn between being an interesting blockbuster, a genre-twisting space movie, and a Nickelodeon teen romance with a big budget. One minute, Dr. Shepard is talking about the importance of space and exploration. The next minute, Tulsa and Gardner are making out. Then, in the next scene, Gardner is reflecting on the importance of living life to the fullest and about the beauty around us. Then, the film steals from the Me Before You playbook with an on-the-nose song about mutual pining.

You could say this is brilliant screenwriting. Gardner is torn between what he is. Is he a marvel of modern science, or a boy who just wants to be normal? Maybe there is a bigger, deeper meaning to this flip-flopping picture!

Or, you know, it could just be bad screenwriting.

The film, to its credit, does a pretty good job with both of its identities. The Mars setting, despite shots seemingly ripped straight from The Martian, is nicely realized. The discussion about Gardner and the ethics of his situation are clearly explained. I can understand both sides. It may be a little talky, but creating a dilemma where I can empathize with everyone involved is sophisticated.

The film takes place in a distant future. It’s the optimistic future portrayed in The Martian, and after a few too many Hunger Games and Divergences, I’m happy to say I’d be content if that is where our future is headed.

As for the teen romance/ road-trip-for-freedom movie embedded in here, it’s impossible to dislike, unless you don’t have a heart. Or, you are are a NASA scientist. This is where Asa Butterfield and Britt Robertson shine. They take two-day romances and make them feel real. I felt the chemistry even in the stalest of lines. Britt Robertson, in particular, is able to take a role that could have easily rolled into Mary Sue and unlikable territory and keeps it real. It’s what she did in 2015’s Tomorrowland, and she does it again here, and I’m continually impressed.

One of the best aspects of the film is its messages. The tagline of the film- “What is your favorite thing about earth?”- gets repeated several times by the characters. It’s got all the nuance of that pesky feather from Forrest Gump. Except, maybe during a time when a lot of people are feeling anxious and scared, remembering the wonderful things in life isn’t a bad thing.

The other message besides the obvious one is something I think is maybe even more powerful. The Space Between Us has a very compelling pro-life message. It starts right from the get-go. Gardner’s mother knows having her baby is a risk. Yet she chooses to have him, at the cost of her own life. Then the NASA scientists have a choice: risk the boy’s life in order to bring him to earth to do some PR, or leave him up there. Then throughout the whole movie, every single character’s mission is the same thing: Save Gardner.

As Gardner embarks on his road trip, he impacts every person he meets, because he  has a love of life that he spreads. His life is valuable, and so is theirs. I would go so far as to say that Gardner could be seen as a metaphor for special needs children. Life is precious, and it should always be protected. Often people like that are the ones that show it best.

That is a message we need. The film isn’t on the nose, or obvious about it. It may not have even had the intention of it. But a message that is more timely than, remember what is good in your life, is, remember who is worthy of life. Everyone. And we have to band together, like the characters in this movie, to make sure that we protect this right, for every single person around us.

For me, this message, and me being an absolute sucker for so many things in this film (the actors,  finding your father storylines, road trips) make it a lovely movie. Yes, it is flawed. Yes, it has an identity crisis. And yes, it is not the next Citizen Kane. But it falls in the same category as last year’s Now You See Me 2. It made me happy. It made me smile, and I would watch it again in a heartbeat.

So grab your moon shoes and enjoy this space-movie renaissance! See you at Guardians of the Galaxy 2, Alien: Covenant, Life, Star Wars: The Last Jedi, Intelligent Life, and many more to come.

-Madeleine D

City Of Stars: La La Land

For this review, I’m going to use the IO9 format for reviews, a Q&A Style.

la-la-land

Oohh! La La Land! That movie I’ve been hearing a lot about!

Yep. The musical-romance starring Ryan Gosling and Emma Stone as a down-on-his-luck jazz musician and wannabe actress in L.A. Directed by Damien Chazelle of Whiplash. It just won a ton of Golden Globes.

Do you think it was a masterpiece? Truly the best film of the year?

Maybe. It certainly is one of the best films of the year.

You’re not just going to praise it?

No, I think we should discuss it and explore the nuances of it. I don’t believe in blindly accepting a critic’s every word.

That’s what I do with your reviews.

I’m the exception. You can trust me.

Okay, so first off, how is the music? Can Emma Stone and Ryan Gosling really sing?

They both do nice jobs with their singing! It’s obvious they are not professionals, but at least they are doing their own singing. After the film I went home and listened to the soundtrack again. I’m sure an original song nomination will come during the Oscars.

For someone who likes musicals too, it was hard after the movie to not want to get up and sing.  Maybe I left the theater humming. Maybe I did a little dance with my sister in the lobby of the theater. You don’t know. You weren’t there.

(There’s your shout-out, Eliza, I hope you’re happy)

Is the acting good?

Absolutely- the hype is valid. Emma Stone in particular is able to show her entire range, and everyone does a good job. It truly is an actor’s film, and I’m sure the academy will reward it for that, along with other things it sets bait for.

Sets bait for… wait, are you saying this is an Oscar-bait movie?

Well, to be fair, most movies that come out around this time are looking for an Oscar, and it’s no secret that everybody in Hollywood wants one. Why not try for one? But in La La Land’s case, there are two trains of thoughts on this.

First, director Damien Chazelle wrote the script for La La Land in 2010, before he thought he would have a chance in the business and before Whiplash fame. He wrote it out of love for old movies. Therefore the use of Cinemascope, allusions to films like Singin’ in the Rain, Top Hat, Rebel Without a Cause, and The Umbrellas of Cherbourg, the soft lighting, dusk-hour shots, and the underlying theme of sacrificing for your art, came from his heart. Those things came from his desire to make a film that is a modern masterpiece. And if he wrote and made the film because he truly loves it, then great!

But here is what bugged me as I watched it: First off, the Academy Awards love movies about movies and about working actors. The Academy loves to justify their own careers and flaunt their own success. And La La Land does that. Using the techniques that La La Land uses- obviously with the intention of replicating the masterpieces it is referring to- made me feel like I was being goaded at the whole time. The film seemed to keep on asking, Do you like me? Do you like me now? How about this? This is pretty cool. Look at this! Remember that old classic? We’re alluding to it here. Is it good? Do you like it?, knowing that the critical audience for this film- people who love old movies and musicals- couldn’t resist it.

So you don’t like that it tries to be a good movie? What’s wrong with you? Plus, it’s not just a celebration of old movies. It’s a romance between Emma Stone and Ryan Gosling, and that appeals to the public.

Thinking back to other movies that I have liked this year, like Fences, Hidden Figures, Sing Street, Zootopia, and others, I think that all the stories of those films have an urgency and importance to them. They are fresh, have something to say, and have a message that can resonate on some level with everyone. La La Land lacks that. A story of two dreamers who are insecure about their dreams is something I’ve seen before. Ryan Gosling and Emma Stone have been in two other movies together before, although this problem has nothing to do with the characters- both Mia and Sebastian are flawed with full character arcs. But I’ve seen the crazy, tortured soul artist before, and a lot of movies take place in L.A. and romanticize it.

Now I should add, to be fair, maybe I didn’t “get” La La Land to its full extent because it’s a movie made to replicate the emotion of being in love, and to my parents’ enthusiasm, I’m young and have never been in love before. But the story seemed to service the technique and medium, instead of the other way around.

So, because you don’t love the ordinariness of the story, does that mean you didn’t like the movie?

Absolutely not! I said it was one of the best films of the year, and it makes my top ten list. With all that I’ve said critically, La La Land makes some of the best uses of the film medium I have ever seen. I would say the film almost shines more than its actors.

Something striking about the movie is how it uses the musical format to emphasize the main characters. Maybe it’s just me (although I sure hope not) but I sometimes have moments where I imagine there is a movie playing out around me, starring me. The spotlight goes on. Everything in the background fades out. There is a sweeping pan of my surroundings. La La Land replicates this feeling by actually doing it to the characters. It takes “being the hero of your own story” to a whole new level, in only a way a film can. By combining song, dance, acting, dialogue, camera angles, long takes, lighting, locations, and score, La La Land is an achievement in every meaning of the word.

Should I see it?

Absolutely. It’s a beautiful mix of many genres, so even if you aren’t a musical person, I think you would still enjoy it. The film is for the romantics, the cynics, and artists, the realists, and everyone in between.

It may not be the most thought-provoking or important of the films offered up this year. But its influence on film, particularly movie musicals, might be one of the most lasting, and the joy it conveys onscreen, along with the nuggets of truth and honesty, are too tempting to resist.

-Madeleine D

Dumbfounded White Faces: Hidden Figures

hidden-figures

Don’t you know that we’re able? Pharrell Williams sings in the soundtrack of Hidden Figures, based on the true story of the black women who worked at NASA leading up to John Glenn’s historic 1962 launch into orbit. Katherine Johnson, Mary Jackson, and Dorothy Vaughan all want to see their country win the space race as much as any other American, and they are prepared to use their skills to do it, no matter what roadblocks are put in their way.

Katherine (Taraji P. Henson) is a genius mathematician, allowed to work with the core group of engineers and scientists leading the mission. Mary (Janelle Monáe) is working to become the first female engineer, and is attempting to cross the color barrier at a white university to do so. Dorothy Vaughan (Octavia Spencer) is empowering fellow black female computers (mathematicians), while trying to achieve the title of supervisor that she deserves.

Don’t you know that we’re able? Yes, but how long will it take for that to translate into respect? For these women, it looks further away than landing on the moon.

Hidden Figures is a woven tapestry of the experiences of these women, from their work, to their personal lives, to their cultural and social experiences at the height of the Civil Rights movement, demonstrating the balance these women had to achieve, and presenting the challenges they faced, without ever making it seem so hopeless that it wasn’t worth it. The realness of the main women (powered even further by the strong performances from all the main actresses), from their mannerisms, to their relationships, and their simple desire to do good work, is striking. Watching multiple scenes with three women- women of color no less- laughing with each other, going to church together, raising their children and going to work side by side is something I have rarely seen in movies, or entertainment in general. It reminds me that the normalities of my life are the same ones the women who have and will shape the world have.

With the recent explosion of experimental and powerfully subtle biographies and historical dramas (Selma, Lincoln, Jackie, The Theory of Everything, Suffragette, The Imitation Game, etc) Hidden Figure’s on-the-nose-iness and guileless inspiration sometimes is jarringly amateurish. Moments like Mary Jackson telling a judge, “Sometimes you just have to be the first. I want to be the first so others can come after me,” make the film seem more like a TV movie- one that has a message and is afraid you might not understand it unless it says it out loud.

But then there are moments that encapsulate abundances of truth that shock you by their authenticity. Kirsten Dunst’s Mrs. Michaels telling Dorothy Vaughn, “Despite what you might think, I really don’t have anything against you people,” and Dorothy responding with, “I know. I know you believe you don’t.” Moments like Katherine walking into a white man’s room and the quiet that settles over it, as people look at each other, trying to navigate their social norms into this seemingly earth-shattering moment. Moments like a police officer pulling up to the three women when their car is broken down, and they immediately start having to question their own innocence, and then having to prove it.

These moments prove that Hidden Figures isn’t ashamed of being a heartwarming, honest, earnest, and truly inspirational film. It isn’t here for bravo or self-congratulations. It isn’t here to woo the critics (not to say it isn’t award-worthy, it just isn’t showy). It is audience friendly because it’s here to speak to the Black girl sitting in the theater; the White, Latina, Indian, Native American, Asian, any girl, sitting in the theater. It’s here to reach the boys and the men and the women and everyone who has ever felt unappreciated, or who has ever been discouraged from pursuing his or her talents and dreams. It is for the people who love America and want to make it better, and aren’t afraid to examine its past for the good and the bad.

That is what makes Hidden Figures a fantastic movie. It restores history to a disenfranchised group, confronts the reasons why that group has been disenfranchised, and sets the story straight. It does that all while being incredibly timely to now, without sacrificing its warmth, humor, toe-tapping soundtrack, and flawless performances.

Hidden Figures is for everyone, and celebrates the achievements of everyone who has worked hard and fought for what was right. That’s an achievement, and if the movie tells us anything, it should be recognized as such.

-Madeleine D

“I’ve Been Standing With You”: Fences

fences

Troy Maxson can’t accept who he is and where he is in life.

After overcoming a troubled childhood and young adulthood and a stint in prison, he’s a settled family man in Pittsburgh. It’s the 1950s, and he’s a black man, but he’s doing his best. He gets a promotion at his sanitation job. He has his wonderful wife, Rose (Viola Davis), of eighteen years.

But he can’t be satisfied.

His 17 year old son is wanting to go into sports, something he could never pursue himself because he was black. Sports will let his son down like they let him down, Troy rationalizes. So he puts a stop to it. Like a good father would.

His wife isn’t giving him everything that he wants, either. You can’t fault a man for wanting to feel full, Troy rationalizes. So he finds another woman. Rose should be able to understand.

Life hasn’t given Troy what he wants, and it keeps giving him things he can’t accept. Things that remind him of his past failures. Things that leave him bitter.

So what do you do with things you can’t accept? You lock them out. You lock the things you want in. Maybe you build a fence around them.

Accepting circumstances and people is one of the many themes reflected on in Fences, directed by and starring Denzel Washington, based on the Pulitzer Prize winning play by August Wilson. Going into the film, I only knew that Fences was a famous play, and both Viola Davis and Denzel Washington had played the parts on Broadway. I didn’t know the story, and that made the experience much better. I wasn’t focused on how the play translates to screen. I was completely engaged in the tumultuous story playing out before me.

Fences is one of the deepest character studies I have ever seen. Troy and Rose Maxson became as real to me as my family beside me. The slow reveal of Troy’s conflicted personality and motivations made me jump from sympathy to rage to sadness- sometimes all in the same scene. Rose’s sentiments were real and her journey was one that is universal for so many, yet equally as complex and conflicting. Confronting her husband and his selfishness- “I’ve been standing with you. I gave eighteen years of my life to stand in the same spot as you!… What about my life?” will stay with me more than any line I’ve heard from a film all year. All the side characters feel lived in and dynamic. That’s purely from the writing, not to mention the acting (which we’ll get to later).

Simply put, there is a reason this play won a Pulitzer. Don’t just take my word for it. See it yourself.

Denzel’s directing here is never flashy. The film, honestly, doesn’t take full advantage of its cinematic medium. This was a story made for the stage, and the film simply cannot shake that. Yes, the close-ups on the actors do make the story more intimate. But the film still takes place in no more than four locations, and if you aren’t prepared to basically watch a play when you sit down in the theater, it might surprise you how theatrical the film plays. So while there might not be a real justification for putting this story to screen, it does mean the story is being exposed to more people, which makes it worth it. I, for one, am grateful.

Saying Denzel Washington and Viola Davis are fine actors is kind of like saying the sun will rise today, but great work should be recognized, and they do great work here. They have both had the advantage of playing these characters before on the stage, so I’ll let the Academy decide if that is grounds for denying them Oscar nominations. If you only consider their performances, though, Oscars for both.

Watching their performances, each time a new revelation was made (and trust me, there are plenty), I waited in tense anticipation for what the character’s reactions would be. Each time, they were realistic, one I could imagine myself having, and yet astonishing to me at the same time. The sheer volume of their emotions carried me to the finale that is a poignant reflection on legacy.

I can’t say enough good things about Fences. I can’t stop thinking about it either. I urge everyone to see it. It is a tour de force on numerous levels, and one of the most human stories put to screen this year.

-Madeleine D

Let’s Put on a Show: Sing

sing-movie

Buster Moon. Showman. Owner of the grandest theater in town. Suave businessman. Charmer. Koala Bear, in this land of anthropomorphic animals.

Also, broke.

After a string of misfires and bad shows, Buster Moon (voiced by an admirably passionate Matthew McConaughey) only has one more chance to save his theater. He’ll do anything necessary to pull off his wild, crazy, totally unique idea.

A singing competition! You aren’t sick of those yet, are you? I didn’t think I would be when I sat down to watch Sing. Okay, maybe a little. I stopped watching “American Idol” and “The Voice” long ago. But I’m a fan of Illumination Entertainment, the studio behind Despicable Me and this year’s earlier The Secret Life of Pets. The trailers looked cute, the cast looked promising, and I was sure a good studio like this one could elevate the concept.

Sing, in its defense, is heartfelt. As heartfelt as a movie that pushes every successful, money-making kids movie button it could press can be. The cast (a lot of them unrecognizable in their voice roles) especially put a lot of effort into it, and I have no doubt director Garth Jennings poured his heart into the film. It simply cannot escape one thing: it always stoops to the lowest common denominator.

When discussing pop music on the radio once, my mom told me that most songs talk about love and sex and romance because they are the things everyone has in common. Mass appeal.  A good artist can elevate those concepts. Bad artists just talk about them in unoriginal, common ways.

Sing is like its unoriginal soundtrack, full of the most over-used and basic songs you could possibly choose for its audience. It always chooses the least original way out. Need a gag for not really any reason? Fart joke. Need to make it obvious who is a girl and who is a boy in these animal animated movies? Sexualization of cartoon animals, check. Need to pack as many songs in for promotional appeal? Skim through that playlist like you’re David Ayer editing Suicide Squad. Need rational explanation for events? Don’t bother! It never reaches for anything higher, and never pushes itself to be funnier or nicer or more well animated or better in anything.

Sing is not the first movie to do this, of course. Some of my favorite animated movies have some of these problems. But this one especially disappoints, because I hoped this film would be better, and it includes all of these elements without much to redeem it.

That said, it isn’t devoid of funny moments. It has nice messages about working hard and enjoying being a performer because you love it, not for the glory or fame. If you take little kids to see it (and that’s about the only audience who will really love it, unless you’re raising young movie reviewers, in which case, congratulations! And they’ll probably be unimpressed too), they could learn some good things. Having a conversation afterwards about talent and doing things that scare you would be a good use of time.

“You know the great thing about hitting rock bottom?” Buster Moon asks his assistant, Miss Crawley (director Garth Jennings), during the film. He stands on a stage prop- a big crescent moon- and it ascends upwards. “The only place to go… is up!”

Sing however, never lifts off the ground

-Madeleine D

When We Go To War: Rogue One

rogue-one

***Huge spoilers below!

Why would the Death Star, the killing machine from Episode 4, A New Hope, have a fatal flaw? Fans for years have asked that question, as episode after episode of the Star Wars franchise came out. Some forgave, some let it go.

But real Star Wars fans never forget.

Rogue One, or Episode 3.9, tells the story of the rebels who stole the Death Star plans for Princess Leia. The team is led by Jyn Erso (Felicity Jones), who is not Rey’s mother, for all you conspiracy theorists out there. She is, though, the daughter of the man whom the Empire forced to build the Death Star, Galen Erso (Mads Mikkelsen). Abandoned as a child and raised by a mad-man extremist, Jyn has resolved not to care about the Empire, the Rebellion, or anyone except herself.

Until the Empire, the Rebellion, and people with issues like her pull her back in.

There are half a dozen main characters in Rogue One, and none of them get the time they deserve, even though the whole cast is likable and obviously could do more with the roles if given the chance. Jyn seems pretty much personality-less, and falls into the sole-lady-of-the-team cliche. She’s Rebellious™, and Abandoned™. Cassian Andor (Diego Luna) is Morally Ambiguous Hero™ and Courageous™ and Handsome™ and… that’s it. Chirrut Imwe (Donnie Yen) is Blind Wise Chinese Ninja Man™. Baze Malbus (Jiang Wen) is Snarky Wing Man™. Bodhi Rook (Riz Ahmed) is Quirky Space Nerd™. K-2SO (Alan Tudyk) is Sarcastic Robot™. There are some other characters too, but you probably won’t remember their names. Just remember there is an Evil Dude in White™, Farmer Scientist Dad™, and Metal Forrest Whittaker.

If Rogue One deserves any praise in the area of character, it is that Rogue One is a better Suicide Squad movie than the actual Suicide Squad movie and a better Magnificent Seven movie than the actual Magnificent Seven movie we got this year. But those are low standards.

The first part of the film moves surprisingly slow compared to its exciting finale. Being slow is one thing, but having scenes that could easily be cut to make time for character development is a problem. However, as the team gathers and completes mini-missions leading to the actual stealing of the Death Star, director Gareth Edwards continues the breathtaking world-building of the Star Wars universe. Several planets are displayed, populated by new people and creatures. It feels less modern than some parts of The Force Awakens and the purposely low-tech look of some scenes adds to the feeling of it being pulled out between the prequels and originals.

The film shines the brightest in the end. The decision to kill all the main characters threw me off when I went in. I respect it, and am glad they did it for creative reasons and to stay with the continuity of the series, but in a Marvel/DC world, I had forgotten that was actually an option. The finals shots of all the characters, even though I had forgotten half of their names, did get to me. If you didn’t/don’t get shivers up your spine with the ending Darth Vader and Princess Leia scenes, you’re not enough of a nerd.

I want to make this comparison when thinking about the merits of the new generation of Star Wars movies. The Force Awakens was criticized for having a plot that basically copied A New Hope, but it was almost universally agreed that it had wonderful characters that have even more potential. As a character over plot person, I want to spend more time in the timeline of The Force Awakens. Not so with Rogue One. Maybe that’s because we all knew we’ll never see these characters again. This is a stand alone film. In cinematic universes nowadays, the characters have to last multiple movies (think Tony Stark- this summer’s Spiderman: Homecoming will be his 7th film appearance in 9 years). With this standalone movie, though, there are very few boxes to check (although there is shameless nostalgia and beloved character cameos). In the end, Rogue One has all the strengths and weaknesses of a standalone film in a great franchise.

The two main characters- Jyn Erso and Cassian Andor don’t really have emotional arcs at all. The fact that they are the rebels, and we know their fates, is the emotional hook for the audience. That’s a hook based on nostalgia, and I would make the case that it’s worse than any The Force Awakens nostalgia. At least with that film, the characters had emotional arcs for the hook. This film’s whole reason for existing and for us caring about the end is because of A New Hope.

While watching the end of the movie, in the company of 13 Jr. High girls and a couple beside me furiously making out (because what sets a romantic mood better than everyone dying on a screen in front of you, and 13 people dying beside you, but for very different reasons), I was trying to make sense of what about Rogue One didn’t engage me like I wish it had. The movie had a darker tone, and I liked that. There were a couple of moments that seriously sent shivers up my spine. The movie is well-crafted technically and from a story perspective (again, well-woven plot). The final battle is good. Just swell. I really did enjoy a lot of the film.

I wish I could hyperbolize and say, “This is the best movie ever,” or “This is the worst movie ever.” It’s much easier to say that. Instead, I’m a bit at a loss for words. There isn’t a specific thing about it that I didn’t like, except the lack of deep characterization. It just didn’t speak to me and the things I like to see in films. I also like, but am not an avid fan, of Star Wars.

So if you want to see Rogue One, go forth and spend your money in happiness. If not, that’s okay, too. If you like it great, if not, great. It’s the season of spreading joy and cheer, and the last thing we need is to get in debates whether this movie is good or not.

We’ll save that argument for some 2017 movies.

-Madeleine D

Not a Revolution, but Maybe a Revelation: Moana

MOANA

What makes the perfect Disney movie?

Disney is probably the most mainstream of corporate media companies, and their films represent the times perfectly. So what do the great Disney films of each generation say about that generation? And what makes them great?

If it’s the animation, Moana is certainly at the forefront. The hair animation alone is breathtaking. The technical achievement is obvious from even the trailers.

So is it the music? Disney is known for its songs. Well, have no fear. While there might not be any Let It Go’s in the Moana soundtrack with Lin Manuel Miranda (disclaimer, I’m a huge Hamilton fan), the music hits the right beats and leaves a few memorable tunes in your head. (Although, side note- Moana not rapping in this movie, with music by Broadway’s rap king, is one of the biggest let-down of the years. And this is 2016. That’s a low bar.)

The plot? Moana does boast a fun adventure movie about a girl and a demigod teaming up to save the girl’s people from famine and destruction of their land. There are battles, heartfelt Life of Pi-esque moments on a boat, and an uplifting coming of age story. The finale is even really unique. Then again, other Disney movies have had great plots, too.

So those are staples of a Disney movie. But what makes it iconic? A classic? The originality?

Going into Moana, I had heard all sorts of things. Most were positive, and along the lines of, Moana is the most unique Disney princess movie I’ve seen. I’ve never seen the “earnest girl teams up with a scoundrel with a heart of gold” before.

flynn maui

kristoff aladdin

Moana looks so different from the other Disney princesses!

moana-2

Well, I guess unique is a strong word.

I really don’t want to rag on Moana. There are a lot of good things about her. My problem is when I see other reviews with titles like, “Moana is the anti-princess,” or “Moana is not like anything I’ve ever seen!” Disney cannot physically make the anti-princess. They have created our idea of what a princess is, and furthermore, they aren’t going to radically change what a princess is. Moana isn’t even really a princess-princess, but because they need to market her as a princess, they have a character in the movie call her a princess, to remind us that she is one, so go buy her Halloween costume already. To make an anti-princess would mean to not make a female character a princess, and heaven forbid we not have an animated leading lady that isn’t a princess.

So Moana isn’t an anti-princess. She fits into the Disney Princess spunk like a glove. She’s got the big eyes, flawless hair, and perfect physique (that’s right, nice try Disney, but I’m not going to congratulate you just for making her waist bigger than her neck. I don’t applaud fish for swimming.) She has an earnest heart, a sense of adventure, and courage.

Even though I don’t think Moana’s personality is drastically different from other princesses, she is undeniably likable. She’s more flawed than just being clumsy like Anna from Frozen, and she’s more three-dimensional than Elsa. She has a relationship with her family (both parents live! yeah!) and we get to see her do something no other Disney princess has ever done- actually rule her kingdom and interact with her subjects. That’s right, being in a leadership position actually requires something out of you. Who knew?

Moana is voiced by newcomer Auli’i Cravalho, who deserves all the credit for making Moana likable and complex. Moana’s coming of age story is made powerful by Cravalho’s emotions, and I hope she does a lot more work in the future.

Now we can’t have a movie without a macho dude character to bring in the boy audience. We get that macho dude in Maui, a shapeshifting demigod, voiced by the closest thing we have to a real demigod on earth- Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson. Maui, like Moana, isn’t a character we haven’t seen before, but Johnson brings warmth to the role, and while I hope one day I can see a movie with the roles reversed, Johnson and Cravalho do a great job with their chemistry and banter.

Moana is a fun movie. It will scratch a Disney itch. It would even be fair to call it a great movie. But I would hesitate to say it is groundbreaking. It is a step in the right direction though, and I think it has the Frozen-effect. With Frozen (in my humble opinion), so many people fell in love with what the movie was supposed to be, what it stood for, rather than the actual film. I think Moana is much better than Frozen, even though they both stand for the same ideal. I think one day there will be a movie that will achieve what a lot of people are looking for- a thoroughly modern, feminist, game-changing fairy tale. So no, Moana is not a revolution, but it is a revelation.

One last note- I went to see this with my sister and a friend. As the movie closed, I looked over and saw that my friend was teary-eyed. She told me it was because Moana was her. No, my friend isn’t a pacific islander, nor does she really have much else in common with Moana, although they both have long, crazy hair. But Moana has that adventurous spirit, that drive, that sense of purpose that my friend has and felt she had never seen on screen in a relatable way. Moana was the Disney Princess she had been waiting for.

So, while Moana is not the Disney Princess I’ve been waiting for, she may be the one you’re waiting for, and that’s awesome. She’s accompanied by a great movie.That is something Disney can pat themselves on the back for.

Okay, okay, that’s enough, Disney. Get back to work. You’re not out of the woods yet.

-Madeleine D

 

Magic is Not Enough: Fantastic Beasts and Where To Find Them

fantastic-beasts

I remember fondly my first Harry Potter experience. I was in third grade, and I picked up Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone because I was bored and didn’t have a book to read during independent reading time. Within two pages I was hooked. My dad started reading them at the same time, so we raced to finish the series. I beat him (sorry, dad, for hiding your books) and I earned the right to watch the movies. My favorite characters were Sirius Black and Hermione Granger.

I think a lot of people have that feeling of nostalgia, excitement, and glee when they hear the words “Harry Potter.” Even the words “J.K Rowling” can whip up a firestorm of emotions for die-hard Harry Potter fans.

But this isn’t a Harry Potter movie. This is a movie about a young Magizoologist named Newt Scamander, and his adventures in the American magic world. Can he wiggle his way into our hearts the same way The Boy Who Lived did?

The answer is no.

The weakest part of Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them are the characters. Now I know, these characters are going to be around for four more movies. But even in Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone, the first movie/book, you already knew various things about each character. Harry was brave, rash, and kind, and curious. Hermione was not just smart but courageous, stuck-up, and loyal. Ron was funny, insecure, and refreshingly average. But these characters? I only know one or two trait for each. Newt (Eddie Redmayne) loves animals, and has hair that has more personality than he does. Tina (Katherine Waterston) is like Hermione… but more unappreciated? Queenie (Alison Sudol) is blonde. Jacob (Dan Fogler) is overweight. The orphanage lady (a wasted Samantha Morton) is secretly (and stereotypically) cruel.

That’s it. Those are all the endearing characteristics of the characters (some of whom) I have to spend four more movies with. Oh, and none of these characters develop. In fact, there is really no message or moral at all to the story, beside general goodness and please keep your animals in your cages. There is a background political message about fear and tolerance, but it doesn’t get the screen time it deserves and the message is what we’ve seen from the Harry Potter series.

The relationships don’t build at all- Newt takes to Jacob because he’s.. Dumb? And nice? And bakes stuff? And Queenie falls in love with Jacob because he’s dumb? And nice? And bakes stuff? And Tina and Newt become good pals because after Tina tries to arrest them he realizes she is actually nice? And pretty? And uses magic to bake stuff?

Those are too many questions to have for a two hour movie that has a middle section that feels like four. The film doesn’t feel long because there are a lot of good scenes, it feels long because all the long scenes are spent on dumb scenes. There is not a single full scene explaining Credence’s (Ezra Millers) backstory and connection to Graves (Colin Farrell), but there sure is one of Eddie Redmayne trying to seduce a Fantastic Beast and at that point I’m asking, Where do I find the exit?

If these characters are still appealing to you, though, there is hope. The plot is surprisingly well constructed, and I applaud J.K Rowling for taking to screenwriting so well. It isn’t easy to jump mediums. The different storylines weave together by the end to a finale I could enjoy, but still felt unsatisfied with because I never got to understand these characters. Only feeling superficial empathy for them, I didn’t feel any urgency with what was supposed to be dramatically high stakes.

One thing to note about Fantastic Beasts is that it has some darker elements that resemble the last few Harry Potter movies. Heads up for parents- young children might get scared at several parts. The magic here isn’t always light, with references to various subjects, including crazy religious fanatics, Salem witch hunts, child abuse, mental illness, and a magical form of the death penalty.

At first I was really excited that the film was going to take a dark turn. The last Harry Potter movies/books were able to take a darker tone and enhance the story. An entire quintet of dark magic movies sounded awesome. Then Fantastic Beasts let me down, because simply having those elements doesn’t make the film any more mature or thoughtful. To make those dark subjects work, you have to do an arc that explores the subject and gives it the weight and levity it deserves. Fantastic Beasts just throws them in there, making the film even more crowded and shallow.

Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them looks great on paper. There are inventive things on display here. But the whole film is weighed down with a feeling of lifelessness that it can’t escape. One of the film’s biggest selling points was its setting in the American Wizarding World. When I saw it, though, I never got the feeling of being in America. I got the impression it was London, trying to replicate America, by just adding American accents and the Statue of Liberty and a bald eagle. The sense of greater world-building that came from the Harry Potter movies, built from a firm novel foundation, is lost here. Fantastic Beasts is obsessed with trying to be magical and whimsy and fun, but by trying too hard, it loses it completely.

In the end, magic is not enough to make Fantastic Beasts a good film. Sure, it may be fun sometimes. If you love Harry Potter and understand its mythology deeply, I can understand how wonderful the potential for Fantastic Beasts is, and I wish I had that same enthusiasm. For someone who enjoyed Harry Potter in a more casual way, the experience of watching Fantastic Beasts was kind of like going to a party where you don’t know anyone. Go ahead and dance, but it’s nowhere near as fun as being with friends, or in this case, characters you care about.

-Madeleine D