Spectre
Dir. Sam Mendes
Watch Trailer
Warning: This review contains some character-related spoilers - ye be warned!
Since the series was "rebooted" in 2006 with Casino Royale, James Bond has perpetually gotten more and more serious. Gone are the days of the campy, fun Bond of yesteryear; I'm pretty sure Daniel Craig is the most joyless version of the character yet, as all of his films seem to ask the question: why is Bond still relevant? Spectre is Sam Mendes' follow-up to Skyfall, which is undoubtedly one of the best-looking Bond films and among the best in the series overall. But it too at times fell victim to the "I'm still here!" idea of James Bond trying to keep up in a world dominated by cyber attacks and anonymous hackers; a quick fistfight or a car chase seems irrelevant when the worst baddies can control the world behind a keyboard. But whereas Skyfall managed to weave in an intriguing relationship between Bond and M (Judi Dench) and presented a chilling villain in Raoul Silva (Javier Bardem), Spectre pretty much lacks any human-feeling qualities, and its villain(s) are terribly disappointing. Add to that an infuriatingly overused plot of a mysterious crime ring that controls everything (we literally just saw this in Mission Impossible: Rogue Nation), a few slick, yet uninteresting action setpieces, and a really drawn out run time, Spectre is a pretty big disappointment.
The story is your typical spy movie prototype: Bond receives a cryptic message that sends him on a continent-jumping action-filled journey to find and kill a man associated with SPECTRE, a sinister organization that not only controls everything, but is also run by Ernst Stavro Blofeld (Christoph Waltz), who Bond finds out has personally been the "author of his pain" during all of his adventures; this is essentially a quick and lazy way to connect this villain with the three other Craig Bond films, making it seem like he was the "big bad" all along, like the spy version of Thanos from the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Along the way, Bond also brings along the daughter of one of his old enemies (Léa Seydoux), because you just need an arbitrary Bond girl, right? Their romance is completely dry and unearned - they literally know each other for about a DAY!
I don't care what anyone says - Daniel Craig is my least favorite Bond. He has absolutely no charisma, and besides being able to pull off the stunts, you might as well have a wooden plank with a face painted on it play the role since he just has no screen presence. There's helicopters about to crash into a crowd, a building about to blow up, etc, but it looks like he's just sleepwalking through all of it. You're playing James Bond, man! Put some personality into it! The rest of the ensemble cast is completely wasted as well. Léa Seydoux and Monica Bellucci are seemingly added solely for their "exotic" beauty, and Christoph Waltz is totally under-utilized. Seriously - can anyone other than Quentin Tarantino give this phenomenal actor a great role? His Blofeld is so cliche and old-fashioned - which is surprising given how the "Craig" Bond films have been trying extremely hard to separate themselves from the earlier Bond movies. In a post-Austin Powers world, it's hard to take Blofeld seriously, even with the sexy cinematography and dour aesthetic.
I do have to say though, the opening credits sequence was fantastic, with Sam Smith's "Writing's on the Wall" literally giving me chills (I hadn't heard it prior to watching the film) and creepy octopi floating around - I daresay it's one of my favorites in the series. Some of the setpieces are interesting as well (the obvious highlight being the "single shot" sequence at a Day of the Dead parade), but the hollow plot, the wooden acting, and the uninteresting look of the film just made this 2.5 hour movie feel extremely drawn out. It just takes itself so damn seriously. It seems like the whole movie everyone is frowning. Even when they're smiling it's like they're frowning. I'm not saying every spy flick needs to be a fun romp like Mission Impossible, but Sam Mendes and co. take the material so seriously to the point where it's like they forgot they were making an action-adventure movie.
Rating: C-
The Peanuts Movie
Dir. Steve Martino
Watch Trailer
Just a disclaimer: I hold no real nostalgia for the original Peanuts cartoons. I'm aware of their famous "moments" and the characters and such, but as a kid it just wasn't in my wheelhouse. That being said, if you love the original cartoons or comics, you're probably going to love this movie, despite its aggressive use of Meghan Trainor's grating and inevitably-going-to-date-this-movie pop songs littered throughout. The plot is refreshingly simple for an animated film made today: good ol' Charlie Brown develops a crush on a new red-haired girl in school, trying and failing to work up the courage to talk to her. All the while there's a fantasy subplot involving Snoopy chasing after the Red Baron - which is a totally superfluous way of adding "action" to a non-action film, but it sure looks great!
This is such a quaint little movie! The jokes do skew a bit younger (it's definitely more juvenile than your typical Pixar joint), but I think The Peanuts Movie gives a wholesome message in the end, and the animation style is simply STUNNING. In my mind, this honestly might be one of the most visually interesting movies of the year; the film combines 3D animation with the Peanuts' traditional 2D style, which sounds odd conceptually, but somehow Blue Sky pulls it off in spades. It's exactly the right mix of "old with the new" and although I can't claim to be an expert, the film does seem to honor the spirit of the beloved source material. So if you're a fan, you really need to see this! Good grief!
Rating: B
Experimenter
Dir. Michael Almereyda
Watch Trailer
As explained in every Intro to Psychology class ever, in 1961, social psychologist Stanley Milgram conducted a series of experiments relating to free will, conformity, and conscience. He had his test subjects believe they were delivering electric shocks to a stranger strapped in a chair in another room. For each question the stranger "got wrong," the test subjects were supposed to give incrementally higher levels of voltage. Eventually the stranger (actually a recording) starts begging for the experiment to end, but the test administrator just tells the subject to continue with the experiment - and most of the time they went "all the way" to the highest voltage. It's scary, but perpetually relevant, as society seems to LOVE following the orders of whack jobs! The film tells the story in a somewhat experimental way in itself - with Milgram himself directly addressing the camera like a smug and professor-y version of Rod Serling, and strange, obviously fake, dream-like backgrounds, with intentionally horrible green-screens and random elephants walking down a hallway.
This flick is a real odd duck, and I'm not quite sure what to make of it. It's certainly interestingly put together in that I wonder what exactly Almereyda was getting at with these quirky flourishes, but ultimately I thought this fell as flat as the cans of Coke all lined up for a perfect product placement in one random scene. There were many strange casting choices as well; I was shocked (pardon the pun) to see Jim Gaffigan play the "stranger," and Winona Ryder coming out of nowhere to play Milgram's wife. Peter Sarsgaard is a little dry as Milgram, despite his impish fourth-wall-breaking interludes, but that's probably how his real life counterpart actually talked.
I find the real-life experiment endlessly fascinating, and seeing it played out with some recognizable actors (like John Leguizamo) was interesting, but I think the film struggles to justify its "moviedom." Everything outside the actual experiment sequences (which is the majority of the movie), focusing mostly on Milgram's personal life, just isn't inherently cinematic, and though I commend the ways in which Almereyda tries to make it interesting, I couldn't make myself care. The whole film felt a bit stiff to me and I admit my mind was wandering during certain scenes...maybe I was the one who needed some voltage.
Rating: C+
No comments:
Post a Comment