The Mummy June o9, 2o17

The Mummy

Yes, I’m a stubborn idiot, a contrary. When people tell me something, when they make some sort of arguable statement about anything, I always feel obligated to defend the opposite opinion. My friends have diagnosed this inability to agree with anything they say as being a hypersensitive manifestation of the not uncommon American disease: Assholitis. I prefer to think of myself as more of a freethinker than an A-hole, an individual, a man who does not follow the herd, and not a diseased riddled cranky old gasser. So, when I heard all the disparaging words from my friends about the movie, The Mummy (2017), I, of course, had to go and see for myself. I mean, I saw all the trailers for it, and the trailers (there were a lot of them for a very long time, I think) where exciting, full of action. It seemed like watching The Mummy would a nice way to pass a warm, spring afternoon in Norman, Oklahoma. But none of my friends or relatives was of the same opinion. NO ONE would go with me, and since I don’t drive and the weather was too hot for me to tootle my bike 4.5 miles to the local theatre, I was stuck. No Mummy for me. Fortunately, my friend, David, saw the forlorn look on my wrinkled face, that desperate sadness I exude whenever I don't get my way. He offered to take me to see The Mummy, BUT he wouldn’t watch it because he doesn’t like Tom Cruise. So, he dropped me at the Regal 14 and he drove off to get his car serviced. AND I got a ticket, walked into the already dark theatre because the movie was starting, grabbed a seat and . . . had a hell of a good time.

So, I’m sorry my friends, but my Assholitis is still running its course through my crumbling body, and I'm telling you that The Mummy is a damn good action/horror film. Yes, it is more Mission Impossible than it is The Mummy’s Hand (1940), but it still contains that old Universal Studios' popcorn movie magic. And yes, there’s no slow movin’,  mummified Kharis sneaking up on people and politely chocking them to death, oh hell no! The new and improved mummy is an ass-kicking, murdering, energy stealing (sucks the “life force" out of any man who gets close enough to her mummy mouth!), psychopathic witch-mummy played with excruciating evilness by the lovely and wickedly talented Sofia Boutella.

And the special effects and action sequences? Forget about it! Some of the best action scenes ever filmed. The plane crash scene (which was mostly filmed using the plane that astronauts use for zero gravity training) was spine rattling! CGI use was brilliantly blended with life action . . . almost flawless. There’s a scene where Mummy attacks Cruise’s character (Nick Morton) with a ton of nasty black rats that swarm all offer him; it gave me the hibbie-jibbies and I don’t hibbie- jibbies that easily. And there’s nothing nastier than watching Mummy suck the life out of the guys who get in her way. I’ll never French kiss again!

Sure, there are a few glitches. Cruse’s Nick Morton character is a fast talking, cowardly klutz that sort of reminded me of a very muscular Lou Costello. The character is really affective as a morally corrupt, spineless dope that just finds himself in a mess in which he has to be the hero. And Cruise doesn’t always get the comic timing right but it’s a minor enough fault that it doesn’t slow down the overall great acting job he’s doing. And the scenes which feature Russel Crowe as Dr. Henry Jekyll, the leader of a secret government organization that it is bent on destroying all monsters and humans that get in his way,  just seems thrown in there for no real reason other than to maybe tie this movie to future Dark Universe movies. And Crowe seems to be only going through the actor motions like he was sitting in some bar when all of a sudden some casting director came up and said, “Want to be in a movie? RIGHT NOW!” The secret society thing just doesn’t feel right within the context of the rest of this flick.

So, I know, no matter what I say most of you are still gonna think The Mummy (2017) is an awful movie and there is no way in hell you’re going to go see it. And you may well be right. It’s possible that I “wanted” to like this movie only because everybody says “It’s horrible! It’s got Tom Cruise in it.”

Wonder Woman June o2, 2017

The most exciting thing about the Wonder Woman movie is all the pseudo controversy stirred up when  the Alamo Drafthouse Cinema  decided to have a “Women Only” opening night showing of the film. The movie itself, well, it’s not the worst superhero flick ever made, but it’s definitely not the best. It’s just . . . sort of okay. I know, I’m going to be in a lot of trouble with my friends over this, but just because the producers of Wonder Woman (2017) want to advertise it as a “breakthrough” for women’s rights in the film industry . . . it really doesn’t even discuss women’s issues except for making a few comments about a “woman’s place” in English society during WWI.

The best part of Wonder Woman happens in the very beginning scenes with a very young Diana running through the streets of the mythical city-state, Themyscira, the capital of the Amazon peoples’ government. She’s stops at the top of a hilltop and looks down on a pristine beach where the great Amazon Warriors sharpen their fight skills. Diana wants nothing more than to become an Amazon Warrior but her mother, Queen Hippolyta, tries to keep her away from becoming a warrior because Diana is just too young. However, young Diana will not be denied her rightful place as a warrior, and with the help of her aunt, General  Antiope, she trains in secret the sacred skills of the Amazonian fighter. And what a warrior she becomes! And then . . . Well, this is where the movie veers off course and becomes just another action packed, CGI infested comic book movie.

The Horrors of War

It’s not that this movie doesn’t try to mean something, it just doesn’t do it well ,depending on rather cartoonish CGI gunfire and explosions and a slight tip of the hat to The Horrors of War. There’s a scene where Wonder Woman and her band of hero-outlaws head for the “front lines” of WWI. On their way they run into a group of wounded soldiers heading towards the field hospitals . . . and Wonder Woman's shocked and sadden to see the carnage left behind by human warfare. At the front lines, Wonder Woman sees a crying woman holding her child and the woman tells WoWo how the Germans have stolen ALL their food, and Wonder Woman has a Popeye moment, “That’s all I can stands ‘cause I can’t stands no more!” and she runs into no man’s land and takes out a machine gun nest (single handedly) and moves on to Amazonian ass-kick every German soldier she can find.

If you want to make a statement about the horrors of war you must create scenes that not only force the Wonder Woman character into taking action.  The scenes also must move the audience. There are many, many movies, Saving Private Ryan ( 998), Hacksaw Ridge (2016) and even Captain America: Civil War (2026) show extremely moving, unique  images that depict The Horrors of War. Unfortunately, Wonder Woman doesn’t.

Love is Never Having to Apologize for Blowing Yourself Up

Today, my friend told me that the reason I don’t get the love connection between Wonder Woman and Steve Trevor is that, “You don’t understand love, and you don’t understand woman.” Well, I can’t fault her for that. I sure don’t know nothing about love or women. However, when we saw the scene where Trevor proclaims his love for Wonder Woman and then goes off in a plane full of poison gas and in midair blows himself AND the plane up, my friend and I wondering where the hell did that come from? I mean, yeah, Steve and WW flirted with each other but where the hell did that love all of a sudden come from? There was absolutely no “love connection” between the characters. I never saw it. My friend never saw it. All this lovey dovey stuff was created out of nothing to supply a ‘'good reason” for Steve to commit suicide. And hey, no better reason than love to off yourself, right? 

So,Yes. Wonder Woman is an “important film” that finally gets us away from the male superhero image and finally gives a woman the lead role in a major superhero movie. And yes, It is a big movie for DC Comics, and I wish them all the success in the world. However, as iconic as the Wonder Woman movie might be, it’s still a flawed and only a slightly above average superhero movie.

Guardians Of the Galaxy VOL. 2 May 5, 2017

Guardians of the Galaxy VOL 2

So, here’s my pet pisser: Star Trek Beyond (2016), The Fate of the Furious (2017) and Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 play around with the meaning of the  word “family” but never really explore the concept of family. Why? I mean, why just pay lip service to it if you’re really not going to do some extra, super-duper deep soul searching and exploration as to what the hell having a family really, really means in human terms? Granted, Guardians Vol. 2 does take it farther than Beyond or “Fate of the Furious”  but it still seemed a bit surface to me, more a shallow attempt at a plot device than an honest exploration of what I always have heard is a human necessity, the family.

Having got that out of my system, I gotta say Guardian is an eye popping, ear blasting megaton bomb of fun!  Yeah, it’s silly, it’s stupid, it has the emotional and intellectual depth of a teaspoon of water but it is . . . FUN! How do I describe the sensory, mind blowing world of GG Vol. 2? I know. It would be like you took a hit of Windowpane (if you don’t know what Windowpane is, you’re too young to read this review.), jumped into a time machine to 1975 (or there about) and went to a full-tilt Disco party! Yeah that’s it!

Chris Pratt (Star-Lord) and Zoe Saldana (Gamora) are a solid good at portraying the mom and dad of this dysfunctional galactic family of misfits and outlaws. But the real “heroes” of this movie are the supporting characters. Dave Bautista as the socially inept Drax the Destroyer is wonderfully funny. Yeah, he’s totally someone you don’t want to invite to a party because he would insult everyone  . . . but it’s fun to watch him “accidently” destroy the self-esteem of everyone around him. Pom Klementieff  as Mantis, the snail girl with the ability to feel the emotions of other is both charming and creepy at the same time! But the real star of this amazing piece of cotton candy is “Baby” Groot (voice and motion capture performed by Vin Diesel). Dude, BG is one of the funniest, heartwarming characters to come around in a long time. And he really does capture our heart! We’re sad for him when he’s mistreated by the “adults,” and we genuinely fear for his wellbeing whenever he is put in harm’s way! Baby Groot rules.

Like Kong: Skull Island (2017), Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 is a great “popcorn” movie and is totally enjoyable. It’s so good that I didn’t really care if it had any intellectual meaning. And that, to me, really says something about this movie.

John Wick: Chapter 2 February 10, 2017

John Wick: Chapter 2

or

Shaken But Not Stirred

It’s difficult to write an objective review about a movie that’s a sequel to an iconic movie. And even more difficult (for the producers) is to make a sequel that can at least equal the original. The production team has to make a movie that stands on its own conceptually, but at the same time, throws a few bones to the fans of the first one by including elements from the first film. Unfortunately, John Wick: Chapter 2 doesn’t quite pull it off. Don’t get me wrong. JW:C2 is a good movie, but all the way through it I kept thinking, The first John Wick was better.

There are some well-crafted scenes in this film, but a lot of them don’t feel quite right. A few of the minor characters are a little flat like they were added to the world of Wick as an afterthought.  That was one of the magical things about the original JW. ALL the minor characters from Charlie the Cleaner to Francis the Doorman seemed to be three dimensional, human beings. Sure, they didn’t have all that much screen time, but the characters felt right as if they had a life that extended beyond the scenes they were in. However, in JW:C2, the gun shop owner and the Italian tailor character just seemed out of place like the characters were written right before the director shot the scene. All the minor characters felt more like caricature rip-offs from the glamorous world of James Bond and not the earthy, fully realized characters that populate the seedy, underworld of John Wick.

And the fight scenes that were spectacular, extremely well crafted to fit the environment in which they were being fought in JW1, looking more like extended games of WAC-A-MOLE. The Catacombs of Rome scene where John Wick battles a billion bad guys (it seemed like a billion), was nothing more than a first-person shooter game with the “bad guys” lining up and strolling through the combs just for the pleasure of being shot to death by the title character.

And the bad guys? Here’s the thing. In the first movie ALL the bad guys who fought with John Wick seemed to be good at killing other people; John Wick was just way, way better. In JW:2 the bad guys seemed to be unqualified. After watching bad guy after bad guy run into an open area and get shot down by John Wick,  I started to wonder how in the hell did they get their bad guy jobs? They sure as hell don’t know what they’re doing. I mean, come on! In one of the final shootouts, a tweet-bounty is put on Johnny boy’s head (Hey, didn’t they do something like that in the first one?), and every hit man on planet Wick answers the call. Not one looked at the tweet and thought, “Are you crazy? You want me to go up against Baba Yaga, the guy you send to kill the fucking boogeyman; you want me to go up against him? No way, José Ferrer!"

There are a few sequels that in my mind equal or maybe even surpass the production quality of the original films: Aliens (1986), Godfather II (1974) and recently, The Lego Batman Movie (2017). No, I won’t argue about which was better than the original they were based on, but they all are at least as good as their original while being an “original” in their own right.

GRADE: 86 points out of 100 = 86% = B+