Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny

A climax that is somewhat anticlimactic. That’s not really a pan; this film is nowhere near the disaster it could have been. But it does come across, ultimately, as something not quite. The action is good, in some sequences great, and the characters live up to the legacy that they’re trying to fulfill. The story is fine, if a bit predictable, while the writing is mid-grade; you get the sense throughout the movie that the dialogue misses some opportunities to be really clever (or, dare I say it, whip-smart). But all in all, this ends up being an acceptable, entertaining, and to a certain extent even surprisingly poignant way to wrap up one of filmdom's greatest adventures. The tale of the man who swashbuckled through history is now history itself. Sounds about right.

Raiders of the Lost Ark

You know what this movie gets wrong? The opening credits. They’re sometimes difficult to read, and not particularly a good fit for the rest of the movie, stylistically or creatively. That’s it. The rest is perfect, a masterpiece of the cinematic art of action and adventure. Beyond that, there is little more to say; the thing speaks for itself. No wonder this is a Best of All inductee and ranks No. 2 on this author's all-time Top Ten list. If you are one of the few people on earth who has not yet seen this flick, then set aside a couple of hours and watch one of the finest works in all of filmdom.

The Call of the Wild (2020)

Having never read London's book, I'm restricted to commenting on this film in relative isolation. That said, I have trouble believing that the author intended his story to be a comedy. There's a lot of playing for laughs in this movie, early on in particular, which means there are some jarring shifts in tone throughout, especially in the latter half. Also, this is Disney, so things are highly bowdlerized. The most problematic aspect may be in the character of Buck himself (and the other animals as well). Considering the "call of the wild" strongly implies a move towards something natural, it is then somewhat incongruous--if not absurd--to have CGI animals displaying very anthropomorphic actions, sensibilities, and even facial expressions. All in all, this flick is strictly for kids; no viewer with an adult's vaguely critical eye will not find that eye rolling at any number of points throughout the movie. The film earns a MEOW--no species-ism from the Bad Cat--for being technically well done, but conceptually this work leaves a lot to be desired.

American Graffiti

This flick was made as a nostalgia piece back when it was first released; imagine then how out of touch with the present it is today. It is a strange experience watching this one in light of what has gone on in the last in the last 46 years. There is still the time-traveling interest that comes from seeing how the world—or at least, in this case, Turlock, California—looked back in the day. And the adventures of the principle characters are not without a certain amount of entertainment and charm. But what’s striking about this film is how utterly trivial these events seem in comparison with the world that teens today have to navigate; the concerns of the present are profoundly deeper than what seemed so important for high school grads in 1962. (Or, at least, what a filmmaker in the early 70s thought mattered to kids a decade previous). You also can’t help but watch this movie without being profoundly aware of everything these now very famous people did after this picture was made. Lastly, as a piece of cinema, it must be noted how slow this movie seems compared with the hyperkinetic films generally popular today. That’s not necessarily a complaint; a change of pace is good once in a while. But combined with the relative lightness of material, watching this flick can come across as an exercise in next to nothing. Overall, this is a textbook case in how the passage of time can fundamentally alter the way a work of art is perceived—often to its detriment, and not necessarily of its own fault.

Blade Runner 2049

The dystopian future is approaching at breakneck speed, and apparently--paradoxically--it will be very languid. I don't especially mind a movie with a measured pace, particularly if the film is filled with interesting details, visuals, and information. I'm not sure that description applies here. There seems to be some biological/biomechanical dilemmas posed by this outing that don't really jibe with what has gone before it (both in the original Blade Runner and in android/replicant rules as understood in the Alien movies). Plus, on top of all that, if you view the universe from a common aboriginal point of view--that all things in nature, even rocks and trees and whatnot, have souls--then a lot of the philosophical undercurrents of these films kind of goes down the drain, or at least gets muted somewhat. I can't say I ever really got bored with it, but I just suspect this movie could have been a lot better.

42

The great strength presented by this film is its dogged determination to be authentic. The recreations of the old stadiums--based upon images that hardcore baseball fans such as myself have seen dozens of times--look to be spot on and pixel perfect. Several of the actors turn in performances that are less acting and more meticulous impressions of the real-life characters they are portraying...or at least they seem that spot on, given what we know today about the people being represented. This is especially so for some of the supporting cast, in particular John C. McGinley, who does an uncanny impersonation of Red Barber's old radio calls. Certainly, Harrison Ford submerges himself in the role of Branch Rickey, in one of the finest performances of his career. Ironically, the one actor who winds up not being the spitting image of his character is Chadwick Boseman as Jackie Robinson; Boseman lacks Robinson's high-pitched voice and thus doesn't quite fit the bill. Which is not to say that he does a poor job in the role; Boseman was asked to perform the almost thankless task of portraying an icon at his most iconic, and he acquits himself well at the job. All in all, the result is a fine sports drama that tells a great story without falling too far into the well of sports movie cliches. If it's not a home run, this movie at least comes out ahead at the end of the game.

Blade Runner: The Final Cut

I’m pretty sure I’ve seen BR before, in one of its many incarnations, but I never remembered it enough to have much of an opinion on it. Hence this viewing of what it supposedly director Ridley Scott’s preferred version of the movie. The verdict: it’s pretty good; not spectacular, just pretty good. The film certainly scores by the questions it raises; not so much “Is he or isn’t he?” as “What does it mean to be human? To have a life? To be?” Beyond its philosophical implications, this movie holds up rather well for a sci-fi flick; its vision looks less dated and more like just an alternate version of the future. There’s just a little something lacking; hard to say what’s the fault (story? characters? action?). But some crucial element is just not quite there. Ultimately, a decent diversion, but not really a monument in filmmaking history, whatever anyone tells you.

Star Wars: Episode VII--The Force Awakens

Those of a cynical mind might view the derivative nature of this outing--it is an almost blow by blow remake of the original 1977 story--as purposeful exploitation of a) an older, captive fanbase audience, and b) a new, younger generation of potential audience members who don't know from the original anyway, and won't be able to recognize the recycling. It is very likely that that cynical view is 100% true, but that does not necessarily toss this film onto the trash heap. The characters old and new are engaging (the newcomers acquit themselves very well), the movie looks beautiful, and at no point did I find my attention wavering during its relatively long running time. Ultimately, one should probably take this installment for what it is: a decent "soft" reboot of the franchise that, perhaps, raises a new hope for better things to come.

Ender’s Game

I guess some folks thought this was going to be really big. For that to happen, it would have had to have been really good--and it’s not. Which isn’t to say it’s bad; the movie works on its own level, it’s entertaining and well-paced, most of what you see is visually impressive. There’s just something missing, a deficit that keeps this flick from making that jump into the stratosphere of big-time sci-fi hit. Perhaps it's too intellectual at its core; that might work in a book--this film is famously based upon a book--but a blockbuster action movie needs a little more "duh" in it. Maybe. You can still get a couple of decent hours out of watching it; it's just not "all that."