Glass Onion

A few years ago, it seemed like Daniel Craig was certain to be remembered as a guy who played James Bond. Maybe that still holds, but a couple more of these films—we're at three as of this writing—and it may no longer be a sure thing. His Benoit Blanc is arguably a more memorable character, and you can’t deny that it is a persona that is truly Craig’s own, rather than a borrowed or inherited legacy. It helps, too, that these Knives Out movies are good, entertaining, fun and funny, and blessed with a lot of current (at least) cultural currency. In this edition, the story works well, and the cast and setting have plenty of interesting facets (though here the collected characters border on caricature). The fly in this ointment lies in the focus on—and critique of—the ultra rich and their natures. The view has merit and the parody pulls few punches, but it means spending a lot of time with some really unpleasant characters, even if just representations thereof. That aspect of the story does get a bit distracting, one might say…though one can argue the critique is not so much a distraction as the point of the presentation in the first place. I guess it depends on how much you care about the mystery aspect of a mystery, versus character, setting and mood. Me, I’m not so much on the whodunnit angle, so my viewing mind tends to shift towards the other story elements. It works here, though I’m not sure it would in every story. As it is, you can just focus on Craig and let him be your guide to a decent way to kill a couple of hours. I guess this movie doesn’t exactly shatter any expectations, but the fact that it works overall is crystal clear. 

Asteroid City

See, this is why artsy types get beaten up. Wes Anderson’s flamboyant use of artifice and affectation keeps growing ever more out of control with every movie he makes, to the point now where a former fan such as myself is forced to ask, is all the weirdness for the sake of weirdness a strategy to hide behind? Or is it a means to hide the simple fact that there’s actually no there there? I’m not ready to declare Anderson a total fraud—I think he does still have interesting stuff on his mind—but it is less and less evident that he can be successful in putting said ideas on the screen. This film serves as a model for that problem: everything is so unusual, and seemingly without much point to it, that it’s hard to give this work credit, even though there’s enough going on to hold the viewer's attention throughout (even when the story drags a bit). Put together, you get a movie that is not bad so much as it is baffling, even for a viewer who wants something more sophisticated than cookie-cutter entertainment. It is also worth noting that this film’s huge ensemble cast works against it; the audience is so wrapped up in noticing who is on the screen to pay as much attention to what is actually happening. (Apparently, there’s a reason for the typical “two stars plus a cast of minor players” movie formula.) It would be nice to see this auteur return to his earlier standards of work, but at this point it seems like he is too lost in his own head to ever connect with a broader audience again. Talk about being lost in the stars.

Motherless Brooklyn

This outing poses an obvious question: who made the mistake in making the lead character a Tourette's-afflicted gumshoe? Was it Edward Norton the writer, or Norton the director, or Norton the actor? Amazingly enough, the auteur gets off the hook, as the condition comes from the source book, and was simply carried over into the movie. I suppose it would have been impossible not to do so, as the character's affliction is a signature mark of the work, but the device probably works better in print--where the reader has a certain amount of control over distraction--rather than on screen, where it becomes a one more layer of opacity in a complex story. Some of the story gets away from the viewer, which adds a demerit to an otherwise solid effort. So too with Norton's penchant (typical in an unproven director) to try to be a bit too gimmicky in the presentation; sometimes it works, other times keeping it simple would have served better. Those flaws are mostly outweighed by the overall skill, which is well employed in creating a solid, neo-noir environment that is one of the real joys of the film experience. It's hardly perfect, but this piece is perfectly watchable, and promise even better works to come.

Isle of Dogs

Some dogs are cute and engaging; some movies, too. That's enough to make some people fall in love, with the dogs at least. I'm not sure this flick is love worthy, but it is a pretty enjoyable bit of work. It's probably not everyone's cup of tea, given it's a Wes Anderson film; Anderson probably lays on the preciousness just brushing his teeth in the morning, and this outing certainly delivers its share of the auteur's characteristic style. But the somewhat affected style is not an insurmountable obstacle; Anderson takes it right to the edge, but doesn't fly over the rim into an abyss of cutesiness. That balancing act is helped considerably by a terrific voice cast, who deliver--in English and Japanese--a pack of spot on performances. The foreign setting (to yours truly, at least) is a strength of the story; the language barriers help give the sense of a lack of communication that must by typical of people and their pets (whatever folks may believe to the contrary). And no, this cat lover didn't mind the movie's notion of feline villainy. All in all, every dog movie has its day, and you can give this outing its day--or at least a couple hours of your time.

Moonrise Kingdom

More cinematic mischief from the Quirkmaster General. Like other Wes Anderson movies, this film should be too precious and self-aware to be impressive, yet once again the final product is not just offbeat, but funny, charming, and highly entertaining. And if that’s not enough, this flick would be a delight based on its brevity alone--the end comes long before you’re ready for it. Most definitely worth a look.

The Italian Job

Maybe there should be a Theory of Devolution, too. I don't know from the original, but this version of The Italian Job leaves you wondering why it needed to be remade. They certainly packed an awful lot of dumb in these two hours. Sure, the action sequences are technically proficient, but man, "Teh stupid, TEH STUPID! AUGH!"

The Illusionist

A terrific film of subtlety and intelligence. Most of the pleasure comes from watching two masters, Edward Norton and Paul Giamatti, perform the difficult work of creating memorable characters while making the task seem effortless. Not to be missed.

American History X

A hard ride. This one's probably too intense for most folks, and that's a shame, because there's a really good movie here: a good story, well-told, with an important message; strong performances by all of the principles; and some solid moviemaking technique as well. If you give it a look, brace yourself, but it will be worth it.

25th Hour

Probably the best movie Spike Lee has ever made, and that's saying a mouthful. Not one of the movie's characters--particularly Edward Norton's busted drug dealer--would normally generate much sympathy, yet the presentation of the story is so effective that the viewer can't help but go through the emotional wringer with them. Add to the effective story and wonderful performances a brilliant, haunting score, as well as the raw-nerve backdrop of immediate post-9/11 New York City, and the sum yields a magnificent piece of cinema. A "Best Of All" inductee.

Death to Smoochy

A printed chart of this movie's laugh meter would show a lot of spikes along the scroll; when the laughs come--and they do, frequently--they are high register indeed. Overall, it's a well-done black comedy, for the most part maintaining an acerbic tone that most movie comedies never even try to attain. Unfortunately, this one does pull its punches towards the end. Nevertheless, it's still a curmudgeonly hoot most of the way through. And its commentary on the commodification of children in this society and its attendant hatefulness--though couched in a heavily comedic and satirical presentation--is dead on.

The Score

A qualified approval: it's well done, but it doesn't quite have that spark. It's nice seeing some classy actors do their thing (DeNiro, Brando, Norton), but with a movie like this you expect the dialogue to crackle a little bit more.

Fight Club

It's tough to trust this movie at first, but it sure does reel you in by the time the fists start flying. Excellent story (with a twist), excellent performances, and a great ending. A "Best Of All" inductee.

The People vs. Larry Flynt

Between his passion for hemp and other assorted weirdnesses, it's sometimes easy to forget that Woody Harrelson is actually a pretty good actor. He shows his chops here as the sleazy but entertaining pornographer Flynt. It's less an homage to Flynt and more an exposé of how asinine his enemies were (including that idiot Jerry Falwell)--and presumably still are.