Ice Road: Vengeance

That title? Kind of dumb. The rest of the movie? Well, I wouldn’t say it’s smart, per se. It’s formulaic, not especially creative, lacks any really memorable moments…but that doesn’t mean it’s bad. The movie certainly accomplishes what it sets out to do, which is put Liam Neeson in yet another in an endless series of situations that require action action action. Neeson can do this stuff in his geriatric sleep by now, so there’s no problem with that. What’s encouraging and a bit charming about this flick is that Liam here gets to share the load; there’s ass-kicking aplenty for the locals to enjoy as well as the star's usual share of the fun and games. As action pics go, the attitude towards the foreign types shown here is almost enlightened. That, plus the battles, plus a few hair-raising moments on those crazy Himalayan mountain roads, plus some truly gorgeous scenery (maybe real, maybe matte or CGI) all add up to a decent time at the direct to home viewing. (The internet claims that this is actually a sequel to another movie that apparently has nothing to do with this storyline. No wonder the full tableau seems a bit weird.) Now if only someone had come up with a title that made a lick of sense. 

Invasion of the Body Snatchers

Genuinely creepy, scary and intense. This movie is not scary like a slasher pic, with seat-jump surprises, but instead it works its effect through suggestion and atmosphere. The score helps the cause considerably, producing viewer anxiety through sound cues throughout the plot's advancement through scenes of ever-rising stakes. The visual direction is artful as well, using all the tricks of light and shadow, uncomfortable closeups, and visual scale to emphasize the scope of the danger. Truly one of the best sci-fi/horror films to come out of the 1950s, and maybe even one of the best of any genre. It has been remade multiple times, but in this case you should accept no, um, substitutes. 

I Capture the Castle

Sweet and charming, if not all conquering. The greatest strength here is the performances, particularly from lead Romola Garai, who is thoroughly appealing in her role as narrator and lead character in a coming of age story that runs the full gamut of firsts. Rose Byrne and Henry Thomas are also good in supporting roles, the former as the pretty and vivacious older sister who is the object of everyone’s passion—well, almost everyone—while the latter provides a strong, understated performance that demonstrates that the talent he displayed in early roles was no fluke. Just as important to the appeal of the film is the English (or rather, Welsh) country setting, including an actual castle, which lends everything an air that is rustic, archaic and mildly magical all at the same time. The only quibble here is that the tale sinks into a bit too much heaviness towards the end; that weight dulls the sense of delight that permeates the rest of the story, though I suppose heartbreak is life’s invariable, inevitable result. Overall, the fun and charm are enough to achieve victory. To the winsome go the spoils. 

Inside Out 2

This movie is kind of unfair. How can the viewer watch it with a critical eye when Riley is exactly the kind of girl whom the viewer wishes could be his own daughter? It says here the scale has a thumb on it. No matter—you watch the movie they show you, and in this case, as with its predecessor, you get a pretty good one. Anyone with an ounce of human spirit has to feel sympathy for a young person suffering the pangs of puberty—we’ve all been there—so we can all laugh, cry and cringe as our girl stumbles through one particularly fraught weekend. The Emotions are back and their usual selves, though now augmented by the addition of several newcomers—perhaps even one or two too many new characters, though the story is dominated by Anxiety, so the plot doesn’t really get too crowded. Again we have some very clever visual metaphors for the inside of the human mind, many of which are highlights of the film's mostly gentle humor,  plus at least one visual pun that is, in its place, laugh out loud funny. The only real flaw may be that the characters, who are personifications of Riley’s emotions, do not always stay true throughout to their essential selves (by the end Lewis Black's Anger is uncharacteristically happy and practically gushing). I guess it’s impossible to fully carry the metaphor all the way through, but that’s really just a quibble. You will be okay if you keep this one in the front of your mind; it just might help you build a better you—something a lot of us could work on.

IF

The premise is its problem. Because this script focuses so strongly on suspension of disbelief, such as comes naturally to a child, it gets lost in that focus and expects a child’s reaction from everyone in the audience—even the adults who are watching with a substantially more critical eye. That primal flaw spawns others, including a weak storyline that renders much of the movie a pastiche of loosely related scenes that have more cutesy to them than anything else. You get the sense that the filmmakers expect the viewer to look at the imaginary characters (such as Steve Carrel's Blue) and think, “He’s delightful,” when in reality the reaction is more like, “He’s annoying.” Meanwhile, the main plot point is so telegraphed that when the crisis arrives, you’ve already seen it coming a mile away—and then the story chickens out and doesn’t follow through to the logical—but probably too upsetting for the target audience—conclusion. And the twist at the end is predictable, too—otherwise, you wouldn’t have spent most of the running time wondering just what was the deal with that character anyway. (That twist is also a gigantic violation of the story’s own rules, which indicates a lack of attention to detail.) Really, much of these proceedings feel like cheap setups to produce cheap, unearned sentiment. Perhaps all that’s just my cynicism talking. For sure, John Krasinski has made better and more interesting films in the past, and he has built a reserve of goodwill from previous works, so I don’t want to be too harsh; it would be churlish to direct a hiss towards what is essentially a children’s movie (though one I’m not sure a lot of kids would actually enjoy it, even with its bevy of CGI characters). I’ll leave this one in MEOW territory, and let myself imagine that it deserves that such credit.

Incredibles 2

Kind of a weird mishmash of several films that explored the “virtues/vices of superheroes” theme—the Dark Knight movies and Watchmen immediately spring to mind—except in a kids’ version. (Some of the MCU movies cover the question as well, but they’re really already for kids.) Unlike those antecedents, this one plays it mostly for chuckles, and draws its conclusions in a largely facile fashion—nothing dark and brooding here. Ultimately, the product is enjoyable and fun, if lightweight and not particularly impactful. Incredible? Not really. Watchable? Certainly.

Inside Out

Much as with the structure of this movie itself, you have to get behind the facade to see what’s really going on here, and to find where the thing is most effective. The overarching metaphor is so prominent, so flamboyantly at center stage in how the story is presented, that the viewer must make some major effort to form a connection with the main character—in this case, the girl Riley, not the representations of her emotions. That connection is always the core of what makes an effective film. Once you find that very human link, and allow the artifice to shift more into the background where it belongs, then this story begins to have its intended impact. In this viewer's case, the connection was more than just an abstraction. I, too, moved from a cold weather location to the San Francisco area, at right about the same age, and as a big hockey fan, no less; certain parallels really hit home for me. (Alas, I never was able to adjust. Then again, I never learned to skate, either.) It goes without saying that some story elements here—particularly the loss of early memories, and even parts of one’s earliest self--can be triggers for some deep ruminations about just how one's life has worked out (or not). While some aspects of this script may be too cloying or simplistic, there is just enough humor, wit and wisdom in these scenes to lift the overall rating into something positive, entertaining, and even touching in the end. We’re all big bundles of emotions, after all, so everyone can relate with this work, at least a little bit. I’ve got a feeling … that this one is worth a look.

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.

In the Heights

True fact: most "heights" back east aren't really all that high--ones in New York City included. There's already an interesting dynamic swirling around this film, which I should probably avoid in this review--not because it's third-rail stuff (it's mostly just stupidity), but because I prefer to judge films simply on their own merit (as best that can be achieved) within their own context (ditto). Here goes: we have real strengths in this flick, mostly in the talented, charismatic presences of the principle leads: Anthony Ramos, Melissa Barrera, Corey Hawkins (who may be the most talented actor on the scene today) and Leslie Grace more than acquit themselves well, giving inspired performances both musical and dramatic. That's the good. The "not exactly bad but troubling enough to keep popping into mind during the running time" part lies in a certain incongruity between the message of most of the movie and its ultimate conclusion, especially in terms of the former being expressed throughout in the sentiments of the characters. That's a bit complicated, I know, but watch it and you'll get what I mean (trying to avoid spoilers). Also, there's definitely a vibe here--mentioned before in this space in other contexts--of people who think problems can be solved simply by dancing. They can't. So in a superficial sense, there's a rollicking good time here, along with a few moments of major pathos, that many will enjoy without a critical thought. But you have to wonder, ultimately, if these people really have their minds made up about their situation, or if it's just an infinite loop that holds them (literally) in place. Thus, "heights" perhaps, but hardly Olympian in stature.

If Beale Street Could Talk

Movies like this give "prestige" cinema a bad name. I desperately wanted to like this movie, out of respect for its source--it's based on a James Baldwin work--as much as anything else. Then I pressed the 'play' button. What exactly is this film? Is it a romance? Apparently, as it spends about half the running time mooning over a young couple. What's so special about them? Nothing, as far as the viewer can tell; they just happen to be there. Is it a drama about societal injustice? It sure has that aspect of it, in bursts, though I'm not sure I'd say it pulls that off very effectively. What one can say most accurately about this flick is that it's as dull as dishwater. Nothing ever really sparks in the story, the pace is languid in the extreme, and it feels more like a lecture than a tale, without necessarily being educational. Many complain about the "tent-pole" takeover of modern cinema, but when this is the alternative, you can hardly blame the hoi polloi for gravitating towards the empty--but at least engaging--spectacles. This street, all in all, had very little to say.

The Inventor: Out for Blood in Silicon Valley

"Cute blonde girl." I state those words here because, astoundingly, amazingly, no one ever speaks them during the full length of this movie--even though that phrase most perfectly summarizes the clearest answer to the question, how did all this happen? The Theranos/Elizabeth Holmes story is an archetypal example of the power of appearances, and (probably not incidentally) how much effort people make to avoid acknowledging that reality. The fact permeates every minute of screen time here, not least because documentarian Alex Gibney uses a tremendous amount of footage of Holmes herself in this presentation. One wonders how he got it--if he was using footage from his own interactions or else the by-product of an intended puff piece that blew up when everything went so far out of the purported genius' control. However it was acquired, the testimony provided by Holmes's presence here is quite effective in making the case against her, in tandem with the more direct accusations supplied by other interested parties. Apparently, a lot went wrong with what was supposed to be so right with Theranos: bad ideas from the start, mistaken mentality all along, as well as the problematic aegis provided by the usual-suspect rich sleazebags (this country's ruling class never seems to meet a grift it doesn't like). But this viewer simply kept returning to the obvious visual quality "the inventor" presented to the world, and how far she could go based largely on that and just a little bit more. If that's all it takes to destroy the careers and credibility of any number of people in this world--and there's plenty of reason, here and beyond, to believe so--then God or something help us all.

I, Frankenstein

You know why we love movies? Because it's in movies where a smokin'-hot, blonde, twentysomething chick can be a world renowned scientist. Yeah, this is that kind of movie. Not necessarily a bad movie; it's certainly watchable enough. But it aims for low-hanging fruit, so it isn't really a win when it gets a handle on anything. The pluses are some good actors who don't particularly shame themselves, and the fact that the writers get a lot of the backstory right. (Attention to detail matters, folks.) And the silliness isn't so silly that you can't just hand-wave it away and get on with watching the flick. Also, brevity helps. The downsides are the aforementioned silliness, plus the musical choices. (Movies like this are like a jobs program for heavy metal bands.) Overall, the balance sheet barely reaches up toward the positive. Not worthy of a PURR, but hey, it could have been much, much worse.

I, Tonya

OK, maybe blondes don't always win. But I'd still make them the betting favorites in most scenarios. It takes a lot of negatives imposed upon the flaxen-haired to hold them back; apparently, Tonya Harding lived under a rain of negatives (not unusual in the Pacific Northwest--certainly the rain part). This film makes a fairly convincing case that she achieved something of a miracle to accomplish as much as she did. That message, if it is an intentional argument of this movie, barely comes through, thanks to one huge filmmaking mistake: a lot of distractingly untimely music on the soundtrack. If you were alive back then, it's pretty easy to notice and glaringly obvious that none of the "needledrops" are contemporaneous with the story. In most cases, that would be a minor issue--but here the music is so front and center that you have to think it's intentional, and that some message is meant by it. If it's trying to appeal to a certain demographic, that seems rather pointless, and undercuts any sense that this story could have a universal appeal. If it's trying to tell the story through the music--there's reason to believe that--the effect comes across as less clever and insightful and more clumsy. The whole issue obscures a movie that could have relied upon its host of strong performances; all of the principals acquit themselves quite well, and the tale itself does have broad interest woven into its very fabric. But the ultimate impression is one of filmmakers who didn't really trust their own story--and thus, as a viewer, you're left to wonder how much trust and interest you should invest in these proceedings. Ultimately, they didn't even nail the compulsories, let alone the artistic program. Not bad, but not on the medal stand, either.

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.

Icarus

Yes, this doc won the Oscar for the "real reel" category, and I'm not saying it isn't good. It is. The story is absorbing and convincing; you get a real sense that the Russians, from the top on down, have been up to no good for a long time. But...I have a suspicion that the award was awarded as much for the fact that this film makes a strong case for the evils of Vladimir Putin--which, apart from being factual, has become dogma for "resistance" types, especially deep left-wing Hollywood types--as for the actual quality of the film-making. Also, one seemingly important question was left unanswered: just why the hell did director Bryan Fogel get involved with this doping stuff in the first place? It seems like that was the focus of the effort in the first place, but that gets buried once the skull and dagger stuff starts about a third of the way into the film. There's something weird about it. Not necessarily something discrediting; just weird. So the cat gives this a qualified PURR, because it's certainly a film worth watching; I'm just not sure exactly what to make of it.

I Am Not Your Negro

Some voices cannot be silenced, by time or fashion or even through death. James Baldwin's analysis of the American condition remains powerful and important, and--as demonstrated by the seamless integration of today and yesterday displayed in this documentary--as timely as ever, even long after the author left this world thirty years ago. There's much here to think about, most assuredly for white American viewers, but also black Americans as well. It's hard to name someone who approaches the topic of race and American society today with the clarity, intellectual rigor, and convincing eloquence that Baldwin showed throughout his career; one walks away from this movie thinking that, if enough young black Americans could see this film and be inspired to follow in Baldwin's political, intellectual, and scholarly footsteps, they could be powerful weapons against the injustice that continues to plague this society. Not to be missed by anyone who wishes to recognize the uncomfortable truths about the U.S.A.

The Invisible Man

This film seems to succeed despite itself. Early on, today's viewer can't help but focus on some of the truly horrible acting being delivered by some of the cast. It's almost like they were trying to camp it up (and who knows, with James Whale at the helm, maybe they were). Speaking of acting, Claude Rains is the certain star of this show, even though he never really appears until the end. His performance is more akin to the voice acting done by today's animated feature stars, or perhaps more like Andy Serkis' work as the motion-capture actor extraordinaire--but in Rains' case, done decades before that tech ever came to light. That fact means Rains is almost, in a sense, wasted here; his use of expression and subtle gesture, so evident in the best of his work, is basically absent here, and his character is thus played in broader strokes. Yet, for all that which seems to work against it, the film works on the most basic level of being entertaining and a good time with a good story--not to mention what were, at the time, eye-popping special effects. It's a classic, to be sure, though not a total monument to brilliance--just a testament to the kinds of things that, in the long run, were able to make cinema something really special, even if done just for the sake of a fairly lowbrow story.

The Ice Storm

A film with a measured pace, to say the least. Makes you want to scream at the screen, "Somebody please do something!" And really, who gives a shit about suburban angst in the '70's anyway?

I Am Legend

There’s an awful lot of stupid in this movie. It’s (probably) not Will Smith’s fault; the first half of the movie, when it’s mostly just him (and the dog) doing his thing--really, carrying the action--the film is quite good, almost fascinating. But then things really start to go south about two thirds of the way through...and, as it is with most of life, the problem is other people. Compound the OP problem with some really bad storytelling turns that ultimately make no sense at all, as well as a major, last-shot logical blunder, and you wind up with a movie that feels much worse than it actually is. Ultimately, it’s just a real lost opportunity. Hardly legendary stuff.

The Interview

You have to give Seth Rogan and James Franco credit for being willing to look really ridiculous for their art. The farce here is so broad that it’s probably stretching it to call this movie ‘art,’ but it delivers enough laughs that I suppose the guys should be given the benefit of the doubt. The only weird thing is, for all of its comedic intent, the film actually veers into some pretty violent territory now and then--a jarring lack of consistency which demerits the project overall (and may have been the reason that some people took the thing a little too seriously back when the movie was about to be released). Overall, this is a pretty good, funny movie; a little refinement would have gone a lot further.