Month: July 2018

Released: July 2018

Director: Christopher McQuarrie

Rated PG-13

Run Time: 147 Minutes

Distributor: Paramount Pictures

Genre: Action/Adventure

Cast:
Tom Cruise: Ethan Hunt
Simon Pegg: Benji Dunn
Henry Cavill: August Walker
Ving Rhames: Luther Stickell
Rebecca Ferguson: Ilsa Faust
Sean Harris: Solomon Lane
Alec Baldwin: Alan Hunley
Angela Bassett: Erica Sloane

There have been a lot of spy and espionage films over the past 50+ years.  Atomic Blonde, Red Sparrow, Man from U.N.C.L.E, and Kingsman are just some of the more recent thrillers to have come out.  But for most people, the most popular spy has been James Bond.  It’s not hard to see why.  The character has been in 25 official movies with another one on the way starring Daniel Craig in what may be his last outing as the British spy.  But the other one was Mission Impossible.  Now, Mission Impossible started out as a TV show during the 60s and 70s.  It featured spies that would use masks to disguise themselves to blend in with whatever organization they were fighting, which was The Syndicate, the Mission Impossible-equivalent of S.P.E.C.T.R.E.  The first actual film in the franchise was released back in 1996 starring Tom Cruise, Ving Rhames and Jon Voight.  Since then, the franchise had gotten even more popular with more sequels, some of which were not as good as others(I’m looking at you, Mission Impossible III!).  But even at their worst, they could still be incredibly entertaining, and a lot of that has to do with the main star, Tom Cruise.  It’s been a pretty strong year for big-budget action flicks, so with the new Mission Impossible: Fallout hitting theaters this weekend, how does it stack up with everything else?

Mission Impossible: Fallout begins as IMF agent Ethan Hunt and his team are attempting to retrieve three containers of weapons-grade plutonium before they can be turned into nuclear weapons when something goes horribly wrong and they end up losing the plutonium.  After the team’s failure to retrieve the plutonium, they’re informed that a weapons-dealer known only as the White Widow has somehow gotten her hands on these items to sell to the highest bidder.  Before, they are allowed to leave, the head of the CIA, Erica Sloane makes the team take Agent August Walker along for the mission.  Over the next few days and several close calls, Ethan Hunt and his team come face to face with an old enemy, Solomon Lane.  The overall plot is very similar to other entries in this franchise and as such, we have an idea of how it turns out.  It’s still a pretty good and entertaining story, but it’s not the destination that matters, it’s the journey.  The last two films have been amazing in that they’ve managed to change things up by subverting audience expectations.  You think a situation is gonna go one way, but the movie pulls a switcheroo and it ends up being something different.  There is stuff that is a little predictable, but overall, I have to say that Fallout does a really good job of keeping me on my toes when it comes to suspense.  It’s not something that a lot of movies of this kind are good at, but director Christopher McQuarrie pulls it off beautifully.

The acting here is top-notch with everybody just hitting it out of the park.  Obviously, Tom Cruise as back and is as bad-ass as ever as Ethan Hunt.  Simon Pegg returns as Benji and plays the resident tech-geek turned field agent.  Ving Rhames has been a part of the film franchise from day one, so it’s no surprise that he’s back.  He’s fantastic.  Jeremy Renner didn’t return for this entry because he was busy filming the next Avengers film.  Sean Harris returns as the villain from the previous entry, Solomon Lane.  He makes for a fantastic bad guy.  Very understated, not over-the-top and ruthless as hell.  Alec Baldwin returns as Alan Hunley, the guy that oversees the IMF organization.  Baldwin is always fun to watch.  Rebecca Ferguson once again plays British agent Ilsa Faust who is on a mission of her own.  A few new faces show up this round.  Man of Steel’s Henry Cavill shows up as CIA agent August Walker and is absolutely fantastic.  I always thought that Cavill did a fantastic job as Superman, but I really do like it when he plays a non-superhero character.  He’s fantastic.  Angela Bassett plays Erica Sloane, the head of the CIA.  Just like the story, the players in the film also have their own twists and turns and it keeps it somewhat unpredictable.

The action in this film is completely off the charts.  With each entry into the franchise, Mission Impossible has always upped the ante when it comes to action and stunt-work.  Fallout is probably the most ambitious of the bunch in this regard.  The action sequences are mind-blowing and most of them are generally done without the use of  CGI.  Almost everything here is done for real.  It also helps that the main star of the film does his own stunts.  If you’ve ever seen a Tom Cruise action flick in the past 25 years, you know that he does his own stunts, and this is no exception.  In fact, he goes even further with this film.  Towards the beginning of the film, he and Cavill’s character do a HALO drop from 25,000 feet.  HALO stands for High Altitude, Low Open.  Here’s the thing:  Cruise trained for this and when he jumps out of the plane, that’s not a stunt double doing that.  That’s Tom Cruise jumping out of a plane at 25,000 feet.  That’s just the start of it.  Most of the car chases has him in the driver’s seat and the climactic helicopter chase sequences has Tom Cruise actually piloting the chopper and doing crazy things with it.  Say what you will about Tom Cruise as a person, but you can’t deny his dedication to the craft.  Every movie that he has done, Cruise puts in 150 percent.  He puts everything on the line to make it as authentic as humanly possible.  There aren’t many actors past or present that go to the lengths that Tom Cruise does to entertain the audience.  Cruise is pushing 57 and he’s putting most stuntmen half his age to shame.

For a film of this magnitude, there are bound to be a few issues here and there, but thankfully, for Fallout, they’re not deal-breakers.  For one, the film runs a little too long.  At almost 2 and a half hours long, I think the film could have been trimmed by at least 10 or 15 minutes and still be as fantastic as it is.  Also, some of the twists in the film are a little predictable.  At the end of the day, however, Mission Impossible: Fallout is as smart as it is fun.  I think this is easily one of the best action films of the year.  This is easily the best film in the franchise by far, and you don’t even have to see the other ones to follow it.  While the James Bond films have been around for over 50 years, Mission Impossible is not only a viable competitor in the spy film genre, Fallout manages to be better than the last two Bond films put together, and I don’t say that lightly.  So….do I recommend this film?  Hell, yes, I do!  It’s awesome.  You’ll definitely have a great time and it’s definitely worth seeing on the big screen.

My Final Recommendation:  Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to go see this film as soon as possible.  This message will self-destruct in 5 seconds…..okay, not really, but you get the idea.  9.5/10.

Released: February 2018(USA)

Director: Dante Lam

Run Time: 140 Minutes

Not Rated

Distributor: Well Go USA(USA)

Genre: Action/War

Cast:
Yi Zhang: Yang Rui
Johnny Huang: Go Shun
Hai-Qing: Xia Nan
Jiang Du: Xu Hong
Luxia Jiang: Tong Li
Fang Yin: Li Dong

I’m a huge fan of war movies.  Why?  I like history, particularly military history which includes war.  It gives you a glimpse into that particular period in history and to me, it’s very interesting to see how the world worked at that time.  Some of my favorite war movies include Saving Private Ryan and Glory.  One of the reasons why I like those movies is the attention to detail and the reality of war.  Saving Private Ryan changed the way war movies were done.  Instead of romanticizing war, Ryan gave us a very brutal look at how terrible war truly is.  The opening D-Day invasion was one of the most gut-wrenching, gruesome and brutal sequences I’ve ever seen in a movie.  It wasn’t just to shock you, but it was meant to show you the sacrifices and the challenges that our soldiers had to go through to save the world from tyranny.  However,  a lot of the war movies that I enjoy are from the perspective of a Westerner.  We generally don’t see war from the perspective of another country, and that’s why I try to find war movies from other countries including Russia, Japan, or anywhere that isn’t the United States or Western Europe.  One of the more interesting war films to come out in the last year or so was a little flick called Operation Red Sea from Hong Kong.  Does this film stack up at all with OUR war films?  Yes.  Yes, it does.

Loosely based on the evacuation of Chinese citizens from Yemen during the Yemeni Civil War in 2015, Operation Red Sea opens as the Chinese Navy is engaging a group of pirates that have hijacked a frigate.  Successfully freeing the ship and arresting the pirates that attacked, one of the navy’s soldiers is critically wounded in the fight and has to be replaced.  Shortly after, they are informed that Chinese citizens in the fictional country of Yewaire are caught in the middle of a vicious civil war between insurgents and the country’s rebels.  Ordered to evacuate the citizens, the Chinese Navy heads towards Yewaire.  Meanwhile, a reporter on the ground in the country discovered that the insurgents have managed to locate large amount of material that can be used to create “dirty” bombs.  A number of folks have criticized movies like Wolf Warrior and Operation Red Sea as “propaganda” films.  I definitely noticed that in the first Wolf Warrior picture, but it seems to have been toned down a bit for Operation Red Sea.  It’s still there, as there is still quite a bit of patriotic imagery, but it’s been balanced out by some pretty brutal and violent imagery.  Some critics have compared this film to something like say Saving Private Ryan or Black Hawk Down.  I would say the film is more comparable to Black Hawk Down as it deals with a very different kind of war than what you see in Saving Private Ryan.  The story is nothing new and it is based on an actual event, but thankfully, Dante Lam keeps the story right to the point and it works very well for this film.

If you’ve come to this film for the action, then I am pleased to say….HOLY SHIT.  From the opening attack on the hijacked freighter, the movie kicks into high gear and it rarely slows down.  I’m not kidding, when the boots hit the ground in Yewaire, the action goes straight to 11.  In a lot of action movies these days, there would be a ton of shaky cam and other nonsensical camera-work that would distract you from what’s going on.  Not here.  There is definitely some shaky-cam going on, but it’s done to elevate the realism of the situation and gets you more involved in what’s happening on screen.  I’m actually very surprised at how violent this film is.  Operation Red Sea doesn’t screw around and it doesn’t pull any punches.  Yeah, you’ve got really big explosions and amazing gun fights, but the film doesn’t shy away from the gore or putting innocent people in the crossfire.  Again, the purpose is to highlight the ugliness of war and the crap that was going on in Yemen was brutal.  Nobody is safe in this film and it keeps you guessing until the end on who survives and who doesn’t.  In terms of the violence and the scope of the film, I’m pleasantly surprised that this film manages to hold its own against some of OUR war movies.  That’s not an easy thing to accomplish, yet director Dante Lam has done just that, especially when it comes to the action.  It’s visceral to the point of being almost callous, but that’s not necessarily a bad thing.

This movie is absolutely insane, especially in terms of its pacing.  Once it starts, it rarely slows down.  The stunts that come later in the film are absolutely incredible.  There is a sequence in which some of the soldiers use wing-suits to reach a particular location and it’s one of the most thrilling sequences in the film.  The whole movie appears to have been shot on location in Morocco, so the lack of green screen is very much appreciated.  Shooting on location, especially in a war movie, is very important.  It adds to the grit and the realism so that the tension is hightened to white-knuckle status.  Operation Red Sea had me on the edge of my seat throughout the entire picture, and I have to commend the film-makers for that.  There are some downsides to the film.  The main characters really aren’t fleshed out and there’s no single protagonist/antagonist.  So, you’re kind of not attached to anybody, with the exception of the reporter.  This isn’t necessarily the worst thing, as there are some pretty horrific acts of violence that are happening in the film.  The acting is still really solid, so you still get a little invested, but this a movie where the action takes center stage.  There’s also the occasional CGI explosion, but for the most part, the effects are mostly practical, especially the gore.  I was genuinely surprised at the amount of gore in this film.

Now, concerning the “propaganda” aspect of the film, you have to realize that when it comes to the military, the Chinese government takes the portrayal of their armed services very seriously.  So, you don’t see the Chinese military portrayed in a negative light in a Hong Kong production very often.  The Chinese government also has some….issues with reporters and journalism that doesn’t acquiesce to their point of view.  That being said, Operation Red Sea does a very good job at portraying the horrors of war and how sometimes journalists can help.  It has its moments of propaganda, but it doesn’t shy away from being anti-war, considering how it affects everybody involved from the soldiers that are fighting, to the innocent people that get caught in the middle.  I, for one, am really glad that this movie was made and that it has earned its place in my collection.  If you really like war movies, Operation Red Sea is a must-watch.  Highly recommended.

My Final Recommendation: 9.5/10.  No snark or snide comment this time, just a solid recommendation.

A while back while I was talking to someone about a movie jumping the shark, they asked me what that meant exactly.  My initial response was that it was the moment when something goes wrong.  However, to discuss what “jumping the shark” means, we have to discuss where the phrase comes from.  The phrase, “jumping the shark” has its origins in an episode of Happy Days when Henry Winkler’s character, The Fonz is water-skiing and uses a ramp to literally jump a shark.  This is the scene in question:

Jumping the shark is usually described as the moment when things take a turn for the worse.  In the case of films and television, it is the moment when the audience’s suspension of disbelief is completely wrecked and they are taken out of the moment and reminded that they are watching a television show or movie.  This scene that I pointed to is part of an episode that most people point to when asked when Happy Days started going downhill.  It was ludicrous and completely silly.  Because of that, the phrase “jumping the shark” came into existence.  Over the decades, it’s been used as a term to describe moments in movies where a moment is so ridiculous it basically ruins the rest of the experience.  The Dallas TV show back in the 70’s jumped the shark because of how the show ended.  The ending of the show pretty much negated the entire final season.  Now, the moment when a show or film “jumps the shark” is entirely subjective, because some people are better at suspending their disbelief than others.

One of the more recent examples of this phrase being used was when the character of Indiana Jones survived a nuclear explosion by hiding himself in a refrigerator in Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull.  At this point, a lot of people were aware of the phrase “jumping the shark,” but Crystal Skull gave rise to a new variation: Nuking the fridge.  Honestly, it was a silly moment, but the entire Indiana Jones series were littered with silly moments.  That’s what made them fun.  The moment that took me out of Crystal Skull was the whole “swinging with monkeys” moment towards the end of the film.   That was just stupid.  Now, when a moment in a film or TV show ruin the rest of the experience?  Not necessarily.  When it comes to Crystal Skull, I can look past the monkey business and enjoy the film for the entertaining ride that it is.  That’s not to say that there aren’t moments in other shows and films that ruin the experience.  For a lot of people, especially with The Last Jedi, they felt that the series jumped the shark because of how Luke Skywalker was portrayed in Episode VIII.  It’s one of those things that is subjective, but I can understand how people feel that way.  When it comes to Star Wars, my suspension of disbelief was shattered when Jar Jar Binks showed up in Episode I.  While I have softened on the character over the past few years, the character rubbed a lot of people the wrong way, and most will point to Binks as the character that made the film jump the shark.

Jumping the shark can refer to either a very small moment that just seems out of place, to an entire film or show that screws up so badly in its execution that there is no way to suspend your disbelief.  X-Men Origins: Wolverine is notorious for jumping the shark on so many levels.  From the writing to the horrendous special effects, the film was littered with moments that really took you out of the film.  The CGI claws were absolutely terrible and the characterizations that weren’t Wolverine were genuinely awful.  Ghostbusters 2016 is another prime example of a film that jumps the shark.  Why?  Anytime the film stops and basically yells, “Hey, look at me:  I’m a Ghostbusters movie!” is a moment that grinds the film to a halt.  The cameo by Bill Murray basically ruined the whole thing for me.

Now, can the phrase be used as a positive instead of a negative?  The answer……is yes.  A lot of my favorite comedies tend to work because of this.  Deadpool is an action-comedy that takes moments that would take you out of the film and has fun with it with multiple fourth-wall breaks with the character addressing the audience directly.  It has to be written in such a way that it feels appropriate for the film or show for which it is intended.  A lot of my favorite moments in film are ones that would feel out of place in other films.  For example.  In Army of Darkness, Ash has to find the Book of the Dead in an ancient graveyard and when he screws up the incantation, he’s attacked by multiple skeletal arms from the ground.  Here’s the clip in question:

In other horror movies, a scene like that would ruin the moment and experience, especially with the cartoon sound effects.  For Army of Darkness, it’s perfect, because the tone of the film is more slapstick comedy than horror, so such moments don’t take you out of the film.  You expect stuff like that.  Same thing goes for movie spoofs like Airplane! and Spaceballs.  Those movies are built around those moments of silliness.  The only way that those films could jump the shark is if the tone suddenly jumps from slapstick comedy to dead serious drama.  It’s not appropriate for the film and the sudden shift in tone could throw people for a loop.  You really don’t want to do that.  You have to try and maintain a consistent tone throughout.  You can have various moments of seriousness or comedy, but overall, you have to stick with one or the other.  Otherwise, your film will end up “jumping the shark.”  Well, that’s my interpretation of the phrase and how it is used.  So….what moments do you guys think that “jump the shark?”

Released: June 2018

Rated R

Run Time: 122 Minutes

Director: Stefano Sollima

Distributor: Sony Pictures

Genre: Action/Thriller

Cast:
Benicio Del Toro: Alejandro
Josh Brolin: Matt Graver
Isabel Moner: Isabel Reyes
Jeffrey Donovan: Steve Forsing
Catherine Keener: Cynthia Foards
Matthew Modine: James Riley

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again:  I don’t mind sequels or re-makes as long as they bring something new to the table instead of rehashing whatever came before.  There have been many sequels that have done that: Godfather Part II, The Empire Strikes Back, Aliens, and The Dark Knight just to name a few.  They took what everybody was familiar with in the previous and they expanded on it in multiple ways: Story, character development, setting and themes.  Then you have the films really don’t do anything new and are just…there.  When Denis Villaneuve’s Sicario was released back in 2015, it became a highly-regarded thriller that didn’t pull any punches.  It wasn’t a straight-up action flick, but there was tension from beginning to end, because it was unpredictable, gritty, and brutal.  The film’s ending had a sense of finality and it really didn’t seem like there was anywhere else they could go with that.  It was self-contained.  Apparently, somebody somewhere thought that Sicario would make a decent franchise, even though it didn’t need to be.  Now, we have Sicario: Day of the Soldado, and all I have to ask is: Who the hell green-lit this?

The film opens as three men walk into a local supermarket and blow themselves up.  As a result, the US government has decided to classify the Mexican drug cartels as terrorist organizations.  CIA agent Matt Graver is tasked with heading into Mexico and starting a war between the cartels so they can wipe each other out.  To do this, he has to kidnap the daughter of a notorious cartel leader.  He enlists the aid of attorney-turned-hitman Alejandro to start to shake things up.  That’s the gist of it.  It had an interesting angle, but the whole terrorist aspect felt like it was dropped about 30 minutes into the movie.  Instead, it became more of trying to get this girl and high-tailing it back to the US.    The first film took us to the front lines of the America’s war on drugs on our southern border, and it left the audience wondering what it would actually take to win that war.  This story in the film feels like a distraction from the actual conflict.  It went off in another direction and it just doesn’t work.  It also doesn’t help that Soldado sets up another film, although I won’t say how.  Spoilers and all.  From a story-telling standpoint, Day of the Soldado feels like a cheap imitation of the original film.

Don’t get me wrong:  There’s definitely stuff here to enjoy.  For one, Josh Brolin and Benicio Del Toro are at the top of their game.  Josh Brolin has been having a stellar 2018 with films like Deadpool 2 and Avengers: Infinity War.  He’s come a long way since Goonies.  He plays a character whose ethical compass seems questionable even though he’s clearly willing to do his best to protect his country.  Benicio’s character of Alejandro is still fairly enigmatic, but he’s a character that’s willing to walk up to anyone in the cartel and take their head off and get away with it.  Benicio’s performance is amazing.  The character of Isabel is also pretty good, even though she’s a kid, but she’s not annoying.  The cinematography is top-notch and is stunning to look at.  The action hits hard and fast.  It’s okay, but it doesn’t have the same kind of gritty realism that the first movie had.  Unfortunately, the entire film feels more like an action film than a full-blown thriller like the first film.  Sadly, when the action stops, the movie grinds to a halt.  I honestly don’t know what the director had in mind, but the film’s pacing feels completely off.  It’s like the movie doesn’t know what it wants to be.

That also leads into another problem I had with the movie:  It’s characterization.  While I appreciate the performances by Brolin and Del Toro, we barely learn anything more about their characters that we didn’t already know from the first Sicario.  We know that Del Toro’s character was a former attorney-turned-hitman when his family was murdered by the cartels and that Brolin’s character is a government agent.  We don’t know anything more about these characters other than what they here to do and to be.  That frustrates me to no end.  Honestly, the film could have spiced things up by showing us some flashbacks of Alejandro’s past, which could’ve given us more insight into what makes the character tick.

The first Sicario was amazing because it was built around some very strong characters and themes that included the blurring of the line between doing what’s right and what’s necessary.  I didn’t get anything like that from Day of the Soldado.  This is a movie that actively works against itself.  Yeah, some of the performances are pretty good and the action scenes are pretty decent, but the pacing and execution of the film doesn’t really gel with what the movie was trying to accomplish.  The director, Stefano Sollima, took the reigns from Denis Villaneuve, and boy does it show.  Stefano lacks the experience and expertise that Denis showed in the first film.  Day of the Soldado isn’t the worst sequel I’ve seen, but it’s one of the most disappointing, mostly because it exists.  Sicario didn’t need a sequel and I have to be honest, you’re not missing much if you skip this one.  The first film, I definitely recommend, but not this one.

My Final Recommendation: Toss this one in a vat of acid. 4/10