markkbranson Reviews

The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai Across the 8th Dimension (1984)

Enjoy this PostModern Romp!

[9/10 · 21 June 2021]

I have seen "BB" probably 15 times and I love it. Let's see what it has going for it;

(1) strong cast. We have Peter Weller as Buckaroo-multi-talented and fighting alien invaders. Weller is just super cool here and deserves applause for pulling this role off with just a slight smirk. Jeff Goldbloom is one of the many Cavaliers and he solves the riddle of the Orson Welles Mars invasion from 1938. Great fun to see Goldbloom in full cowboy dress! Ellen Barkin is the live interest and is simply wonderful. John Lithgow is simply a joy as an alien invader who has taken over his consciousness. And this list can go on and on.

(2) great writing. Now this movie is not "Citizen Kane" but the story has wonderful post modern depth and self-referral (look for the comic book scene).

(3) fun direction. Watch for the unravel of the aliens who look like every day Americans. This camera cuts are right in target. We see what the characters in the movie see: what better example of post modern film!

To he frank, this film held up for me better than I thought it would. Other that Mrs. Johnson's big T-shirt and the obvious youthfulness of Weller et al, this doesn't seem nearly 40 years old.

I hate there was no sequel/pre-quel as we get them today, but that might add to the shelf live if this movie. For a mind blowing trip to a comic book universe, switch over the Prime and indulge for an hour and a half. It is worth your time!

Priest (2011)

This Movie Takes on a Different Meaning in Post-Trump Era

[8/10 · 18 February 2021]

I know--just as President Biden said last week--it is fresh to not hear about Trump and his self-aggrandizement. I know that many of us are glad that he is gone--at least from Twitter and from other main-stream social media. However, this film underscores how powerful a big lie can be, especially when it slips underground and becomes the fringe. Because it is the fringe, we have to depend on others or what we see ourselves in the fringe media. All of this information is designed to offer a fresh perspective on this under-rated sci-fi thriller.

Let's consider this plot frame: the Church has defined an evil force that is threatening the people. The Church has called on a special group to fight this evil. Once the evil is contained, the Church perpetuates this lie about the evil and control the population with the idea that ONLY the Church can keep people safe against this evil.

Does any of this information ring a bell about recent history? Does any of the information resonate with your observations over the last 4-6 months? If for no other reason, you MUST see this movie from the post-Trump world we live in today and be vigilant about the power Trump and his minions (just read "the Church" here) have over us and our perceptions.

If you don't want the political reading, then read this movie as a vamp reboot of John Ford's "The Searchers" or the first trilogy of "Star Wars."

What recommends this reading of the film is its effects and fast pace. So if you want to see something that offers a pleasant way to spend an evening with COVID, then enjoy. Tho' I recommend the political reading!

Viking Blood (2019)

Watch "Fist Full of Dollars" Intead

[2/10 · 27 May 2020]

As others have noted, the plot of "Viking Blood" (2019) is ripped from Leone and Kurosawa. I would argue this film owes more to Leone for several reasons:

First, if you have 90 minutes to kill, attend to the close-ups. Straight from Leone's playbook.

Second, the plot element are identical: two sides of a town fighting for control. "The Stranger" (e.g. "The Man with No Name") moves back and forth beteen these two side, enriching himself along the way.

Third, tho' note as compelling, the soundtrack is a pale echo of Ennio Morricone. However, if you are struggling thru this film, note how the score is used. It appears at just the ket times, just as in Leone's work.

Besides this obvious and painful debt to Leone, there are others things that are disturbing about this film:

This work is clearly exploitive to ride the tide of the TV series "Vikings" which is far more superior in plot, acting, set design than "Viking Blood."

Consider in this film the cheesy costuming. Clearly it looks to me as tho' the designer raided the 'Party Store" at Halloween time.

At about one hour into this abysmal movie, catch the sequence where "The Stranger" is crawling away in the dark. Damn, this director even stole the plot boards from Leone!

Lastly, I can't help but wonder about where this film was shot. I swear that in the Christian enclave there are bamboo plants clearly waving in the breese.

Bottom-line: you must clearly have been in COVID isolation too long (like me) if you bother to watch this piece. It might be worth it to show how powerful Leone is with film making, but otherwise, I would suggest not to bother.

Babylon Berlin (2017– )

Insight into Early 20th Century? Insight into Today!

[10/10 · 5 March 2020]

I have just finished the third season of "Babylon Berlin" and WOW! This series does it all with wonderful acting, engaging plot-lines, effective direction, and drawing undeniable parallels between 1929 and the 21st century.

OK: I do watch the dubbed version, and, as one user noted, this dubbing is awful. What is said often disagrees with the subtitles. But I mitigate this sin because I am often doing multiple things and this dubbed version allows me the keep up with what is going on while I do my other tasks.

The acting--as I noted above--is superb. Volker Bruch (Detective Rath) and Liv Lisa Fries (Ms. Ritter) are wonderful playing off one another and managing the mayhem of their personal and political lives. Benno Fürmann (Wendt) sports his scarred face to reflect the truly evil that lies inside. Other actors--whether those who work with Bruch and Fries in "The Castle" or the young woman (Leonie Benesch) who is accused of the murder--are all engaging and call for us to respond.

The plot lines are a challenge here. There are several balls "Babylon Berlin" tries to manage at the same time and I am willing to allow slight gaps. If nothing else, stare with Bruch under Berlin city once the stock market falls in October 1929 and tell me what you see!

The direction helps us to manage the various plot lines. The opening of the third season is where we end in episode twelve and we have some degree of things being wrapped up. But since this series is a series, we have something to bait us for season 4!

I won't go into the obvious parallels between Berlin 1929 and today, but trust me--there are many in terms of personal, social, and political issues. Watch and see for yourself. This series is a great show and I encourage all of you to check it out!

The Man Without Gravity (2019)

Super Fun Film and also a Primer on Magical Realism

[10/10 · 13 February 2020]

I have taught English language and literature for over 40 years. One thing that has always challenged my students is the concept of "magical realism." With "The Man Without Gravity," I have a tool that makes teaching this genre (perhaps??) easier and FUN to do.

I happened onto this by pure accident, but from the opening sequence, I was immediately struck by how this film echoes of Márquez's story, "A Very Old Man with Enormous Wings." Yes--the conceit is similar: a man can "fly." But both reveal deep concerns about "normalcy" and how we are afraid of things that are outside the narrow and "prestige" defined range.

What works in this film? First, the plot is magical: we see an infant born float from his mother's birth canal toward the ceiling attached to "earth" only through the intact umbilical cord. That image was compelling. But we move forward to where this boy meets and falls in love with a girl. Circumstances separate them, but they are reunited for a happy ending. OK--I'm a sucker for this plot device, but the way we are led through it is compelling.

The acting is lots of fun. The two leads: Elio Germano (Oscar, the protagonist) and Silvia D'Amico (Agata, his love) are fun to watch and we pull for them as children and as adults. They have an innocence in their faces which I relish and which compels my empathy and joy for them.

The directing is OK, too. This film could easily have gone overboard, but it depends on simple SFX that work and also maintains the focus on the two central characters. Marco Bonfanti-who also contributed to the story-manages the pace and images to keep engaged with our characters. One quick reference: see the scene where Oscar and Agata are running thru the umbrella shrouded streets. It is a joyous sequence.

Lastly, I refer once more to the magical realism. Tho' I am aware of some films that have attempted this concept, I believe this one carries it off extremely successfully. We are invited into a world where we accept that marvelous things can happen. And ultimately, the marvel is young love growing into mature and lasting love.

Take an hour and a half and relish this movie. Some who discard it, perhaps, don't realize how magical realism is an important 20th century genre and that this film does a great job of showing us the magic and the realism of love.

Horse Girl (I) (2020)

"Horse Girl"--If You Watched "Joker" (2019), You HAVE to Watch This!

[10/10 · 12 February 2020]

I accidented into this movie. I thought it was some serial TV show at first. At this movie evolved, I was struck by how I had been drawn into the character's world and was struck by how effectively and unaware I was! Please see this movie and disregard those who have trashed it for its slow pace or absence of action. Let this movie work its charm and you will be enriched in ways you may not fully know at first.

The action is slow. The film opens with two women talking in a craft store and one of the two notices a horse's haunches past by the window. Don't worry about it. The plot evolves from that point into a world where we are beginning to question everything and every relationship. That is OK and let this happen to you.

The acting is adequate: Paul Reiser is one face you may know, but he is in nearly as a cameo. Alison Brie--whom I did not recognize--has a captivating look and presence that carries the movie until it somewhat awkward ending (again, don't worry about that plot element). John Reynold is the erstwhile boyfriend of Brie and his awareness of what is going on helps us to begin to see how we have been led into this world so easily and so carefully and so engagingly. (I know that this last sentence is awkward, but I want you to realize that we are brought into this world--of which--I do not want to give away any spoilers.)

Jeff Baena's direction deserves accolades because it does not bring attention to itself. I have seen and relish "Joker" (2019) but the directing (e.g. the staircase used by Arthur) brings attention to itself. Only the last scene is distracting because it is--seemingly--obvious.

If nothing else, see this movie to develop a sense of empathy which we so need today. Brie's character compels us to care and that is good for us all.

Domino (I) (2019)

I'm a Fan of De Palma, but Don't bother

[4/10 · 8 January 2020]

I did not know up front that this was directed by de Palma. In fact, I though he had essentially retired. But as I was watching this film, certain scenes--camera angles--and characterizations started to seem familiar. I went to IMDB and saw right away that de Palma was directing. I was hopeful, but disappointed at the end. So don't waste your time.

It is rare for me the endorse a "don't bother" approach to films. I believe there is something worthwhile in nearly anything. Perhaps if de Palma wasn't at the helm and I did not have such high hopes, I would not be as harsh. However, a viewer of "Carrie" (1976), "Blow Out" (1981), and "Body Double" (1984)--and a fan of each and everyone of these--my expectations simply were not met. Here are some reasons why I am harsh.

Partly, I am fatigued by the painting of Palestinians as "evil." Partly, this position is simply indefensible, and partly I was enthralled by a recent Netflix offering, "Messiah" (2020). This later event is a wondrous show and underscores that we are all human beings with wants and dreams that bind us and do not separate us.

Secondly, the camera angles and effects are close to self-parody. A quick example: the denouement were a suicide bomber is smashed by a drone that was to capture this live video event of self-destruction is clearly de Palma parod

Thirdly, the acting is sort of humdrum. Whether we are to engage with the Danish detective or laugh at the CIA operative or empathize with the pregnant lover--none of this talent really captured me.

So bottom line: if you have a de Palma itch you cannot scratch, go back to "Body Double" (or watch the unedited music video by Frankie Goes to Hollywood, "Relax") and don't waste your time here with "Domino."

It Comes at Night (2017)

Is Horror "Gore" or Psychological? This Film Answers the Question

[8/10 · 17 December 2019]

OK: This film is different from many horror films you may know. There are few "jump scares. There are no severed limbs. There is little blood.But the film succeeds in horrifying viewers because it does what horror is supposed to do-scare us.

How does this film scare us? One way is the low key lighting. A time tested strategy and it works here. Why does it work? Because we-as viewers don't know and can't see what might be there.

Secondly, this film scares us because we know that nothing is more scarey than human beings, particularly strangers that we might marginally trust and that trust seems violated.

What else works: the pacing is slow which ratchets up our anxiety. There is little music to underscore how we SHOULD feel. The director uses lots of close shots which limits our vision field which also creates anxiety.

I know some where disappointed. But give this film a chance to work for you and on you. Let it happen and you will be fine!

The Man in the High Castle (2015–2019)

This Last Season is a MUST

[9/10 · 11 December 2019]

At least through this episode (episode 4), you have to watch this season. It is slow paced, I acknowledge that. It is more characterization and less action, I acknowledge that. The narrative jumps across lots of time and place (violating Aristotle's unities) and I acknowledge that.

So why bother? Because this season shows us how easily we can be lied to and how easy it is for deep fakes to provide us with images so that we begin to question everything. And when we question everything, nothing is left for us.

This season's themes are ripped right from today's (i.e. December 2019) headlines: we have liars who keep telling us that all we need to do is believe them. We have deep fake images that perpetuate alternative "facts." Even our own congressional reps no longer engage in actual, verifiable facts--instead they want to argue processes.

This season is horrifying, particular the scene where Julianna time and space shifts and the Lincoln Memorial is demolished before our eyes. We have a president who was promoted into politics because he supported a false narrative that Obama should not be our president because he was not a US citizen and because he was secretly Muslim.

We are living this show and we must decide what we are going to do. We can go the route suggested by this series or we can live up to the values that Julianna shows us. Are we simply going to continue to turn a blind eye and deaf ears to those who support conspiracy theories which have no basis in fact? These lessons are what "The Man in the High Castle" encourages us to learn and live.

The Irishman (2019)

It IS Long, but Well Worth the Time

[9/10 · 3 December 2019]

I understand that when you see the running time is over three hours, you are going to say, Hell no." Please stop and think and then watch this film. It is slow, it is not action-packed, it is nearly 100% characters. But as you watch De Niro and Pesci and Pacino and Romano and the brief appearance of Keitel, you know that you are watching master-craftsmen doing some of their best work and showing you some history that too many of us have forgotten.

I know that 21 century film goers want a breakneck pace with something happening every 3-4 second and with lots of jump cuts to maintain the unbearable space. Scorsese takes us back to a time when we wanted a break and the escape movies give us. This movie--if nothing else--is a master class in the older film-making techniques with some CGI added in. Watch the extra clip with DeNiro, Scorsese, Pesci, and Pacino talking about the effects used and the directing insights required as the stars age from their 30s and 40s into their 80s. Then watch the movie to relish this experience even more.

Pesci is the real draw for me in this film. He plays against his manic type and come across as the wise mobster who know the ways of the world and can simply get action by saying, "That's the way it is."

I have loved De Niro's work since "Taxi Driver" (1976) and "Raging Bull" (1980). He does not disappoint us as he ages before our eyes and we realize that his amazing talent will be gone from us at some time in the future. That realization saddens me, but this same realization intensifies my viewing this opus and others from De Niro.

Pacino's work for me has ben on and off over the years. I appreciate his performance is "The Godfather" saga. I like his work as the devil (aka John Milton) in "The Devil's Advocate" (1997). Other things are sleepers for me ("Heat" (1995) and "Dick Tracy" (1990) are two quick examples.) Here he shows us Jimmy Hoffa--whom, I know, most of you have never heard of. He brings his larger than life persona to the fore here and it works.

To confess, I have not been a fan of Ray Romano. I believe my father in law's 24/7 watching of "Everybody Loves Raymond" is responsible for my negative viewing of his work. But here--he plays a lawyer with a verve that is making me reconsider my prejudice and encourages me to see more of his work.

Keitel is one screen way too little in "The Irishman." From "The Mean Streets" to The Wolf in "Pulp Fiction" to George Baines in "The Piano," I admire his work and was pleased when I saw him here. Regrettably, his time was too short.

I can't help but think of what Scorsese is doing with the last scene. De Niro is bound to a wheelchair and he has been visited by a priest. As the priest leaves, De Niro asks him to leave the door open a bit. The camera cuts to a long shot of De Niro sitting there then go to black with end credits. I see in this short an echo of the closing shot of John Ford's "The Searchers" (1956). There, John Wayne is outside but the door closes on his face and closes on the end of the vision of the American West. Is Scorsese, likewise, suggesting a potential end of an era here? Please watch "The Irishman" and post your assessment here. If you don't post, see "The Irishman" and relish this opportunity of experiencing great art!

Lost Girl (2010–2016)

"Lost Girl": Fun for Those Who Might Appreciate Fantasy and Linda Hamilton

[8/10 · 27 November 2019]

OK: I might have caught you attention with "Linda Hamilton" in the title, particularly now that the last reboot of "Terminator" is making its rounds in theaters. I'm not baiting; Linda Hamilton DOES do several guest appearances in "Lost Girl" and she never once makes a reference to "Terminator" (unlike her guest shots in another fun series, "Chuck"--see my review elsewhere of this one).

So why do I mention Linda Hamilton in my title, as well as "fun" and "fantasy"? Well all three are true: this series is lots of fun from the plot evolution and characters to the witty writing; it also plays a great deal with fantasy--from fae lore to Greek gods. And Linda Hamilton: well, read on to see this point.

There is lots of fun here. We have kooky character Kenzi (Ksenia Solo) who is a simply joy to watch. There are traditional stand-ins: Dyson (Kris Holden-Ried) who is a male love interest and Lauren (Zoie Palmer) the female love interest--both for our heroine: Bo (Anna Silk). If nothing else, these character move back and forth with the tongue in cheek humor and with the fluidity of there gender performance with such elan.

Fantasy is the second point for recommendation to you. Many of the fae references are simple to Google and find out the story behind them. There is, obviously, Valkyries. Mesmer is an allusion to Franz Mesmer, the "inventor" of hypnotism. We already now about shape-shifters (remember "True Blood"?) Sirens. . .Mermaids. And then, of course, in the last season, we encounter Hades, Persephone, Hera, and Zeus herself (with a great nod to the post-patriarchal writers). Oh, I don't want to forget Hephaestus--the ugliest of the gods and the blacksmith. He is clearly one and not the other!

Which brings us the Linda Hamilton. Unlike her appearance in the most recent iteration of "Terminator," there is no CGI here. She is pretty much shown as her age: wrinkled, but bright; aged, but clear eyed; mature, but mischievous. I relished seeing her as the former Valkyrie teacher of Tamsin (Rachel Skarsten) . What really surprised me was Hades played by Eric Roberts. He captures all senses of the Lord of the Underworld: seduces and murders, tells the truth, but not completely, and is father/betrayer of Bo. Roberts brings a rich sense to this character that I really enjoyed.

So why 8? The series isn't perfect, which is suggested by a 10. There are gaps in the plot on occasion which keeps this from a 9. This countdown leads me to 8: well above average with keen writing and fun acting. I appreciated the numerous post-modern references from Cyndi Lauper to the final play with "The Wizard of Oz." But more than anything else, I loved the idea of family--how in the 21st century, family is just not blood lines, family is those people who love us for who we are and tho' we my argue and even hurt one another, the love always pulls this unit through. Family. Watch and enjoy an anti "Father Knows Best" (and it is about time!)

DC's Legends of Tomorrow: Night of the Hawk (2016) Season 1, Episode 8

Not a lot to Say

[6/10 · 17 October 2019]

This series is a pleasantly mind numbing. I don't mean that as an attack. I mean this term as a compliment in that I know many watch series such as "Legends" to escape the everyday (e.g. the never-ending saga of Trumpism being touted through every possible media system). This episode is kind of cute and at least eased the pain I felt toward "Rip" in the previous one ("Marooned.")

So what can I say about this episode: we learn about the sexual repression and liberation of "Sara" (Caity Lance); we learn that there are cheesy effects; we learn that there can be some action (I don't want to ruin anything); we learn that "Savage (don't you love the pun of his name)" (Casper Crump) is slippery than s---well you know how he is; and lastly we learn the writers do not do their research since "ninja" was not used in American English until 1964--6 years after the time of this episode (at least according to Merriam-Webster).

For mindless escape, join in the fun!

El Camino: A Breaking Bad Movie (2019)

"El Camino: A Breaking Bad Movie": Perhaps for our Current World

[8/10 · 15 October 2019]

I know that this title is ambiguous or confusing for you. I don't want it to be, but it is the only title that accurately reflects my thoughts: "Perhaps" because I am so unsure about this experience and "Current World" because we are in such a morally ambiguous world which is exactly this world of "El Camino."

I certainly enjoyed Cranston and the the rest of the crew in "Breaking Bad." Like many, I believed that there were some things left unsaid. "El Camino" picks up at that point and I applaud those who want to add this next chapter to the series.

But after this statement of affirmation, I have to explore the key terms of my review title. Let's start with "Perhaps."

"Perhaps" reflects how I have tracked the morally ambiguous world of film starting with my fascination for "film noir" and punctuated by Steve McQueen's character in "The Getaway" (co-starring Ali McGraw) when it showed on TV in the early 1970s. The Motion Picture Code went apesh#t over the bad guy getting away with his crime.

Fast forward 20 years to 1992's Academy Award winning "The Unforgiven" which had the tagline "Deserves got nothin' to do with it." This Clint Eastwood opus bothered me from the first time I saw in the theaters and the numerous times I've watched it since.

Another time jump brings us to "Breaking Bad" in 2008. I understand how film work has a wide range of subject matter and I appreciate this look at we humans in our ambiguous selves. We are neither sinners nor saints. I know this. But I still wrestle with blatant moral ambiguity in art, particularly when art is presented as escapist fare. I believe that is the reason for "Perhaps" in the title: I am wrestling with this morally bankrupt world where I appreciate the honesty of the characterizations but appalled by the depiction of a ant-hero we really believe we should admire.

Which propels me the the latter part of the title, "Current World." We all know the cliche of art replicating life" after watching "El Camino" I could not help but turn the cliche so that we see life replicating art. We are in the world depicted in "El Camino": a world of lies, of deceit, of violence, of greed, of just wanting more for myself and mine.

Trump's world has simply copied from Gilligan's script. If you doubt this assertion, look at the two former Russians who were arrested at the DC airport with one way tickets out of the country and who are acquainted with Rudy Giuliani who is the personal lawyer of Trump! Isn't this story straight from today's "escapist" media?

Aaron Paul is great. The pacing is on target. The surprises in casting are just that. surprises (particularly the last cameo before the credits role). Certainly watch this, but then think about it. What does this film tell us about the world we inhabit today? Are we happy that "Breaking Bad" or "El Camino" is playing out in real time in the White House?

Perhaps you may pause and consider, "perhaps."

Bonding (2018–2021)

"Bonding" Is NOT What You Think

[8/10 · 12 September 2019]

OK--this title is ambiguous, just like this show. Ambiguous is exactly the right word for this show, for my commentary, and for the world we live in today. Let me explain.

I understand "ambiguous" to suggest multiple meanings. Certainly we see this all over the place today--from lying Trump to our growing understanding of the fluidity of gender. With the show "Bonding" we are plunged into this ambiguity and I believe you will relish this ambiguity. Here are some of the reasons:

First, the writing it top-notched. Second, the acting: Zoe Levin and Brendan Scannell (Mistress May and Master Carter) are wonderfully engaging in this series and demand our attention (sorry about this pun, but it just happened). Third, the direction and cinematography are wondrous for the small screen and for the brief running time (episodes are usually 15 minutes or less). Fourth, the theme of love in all of it ambiguity is compelling. The last episode of this season is remarkable in its blending of shots and the theme revealed in the last scene.

OK--there are some sequences that might make some viewer uncomfortable, but keep in mind that we are living in an ambiguous world and we have to let go of some of the old "absolutes" that have really gotten us into the divisiveness we all know today.

And perhaps this last point is the key selling point of "Bonding": put all the sides to the side, and dive into this world where people are wonderfully complex and ambiguous and that all the traditional notions of male, female. right, and wrong no longer exist. Perhaps, ironically, "Bonding" lets us be free for a time.

Watch this show. Relish it and its characters. Take a break from the binaries that we are eventually seeing have screwed us up!

Carnival Row: Some Dark God Wakes (2019) Season 1, Episode 1

I've Just Started and I'm Hooked

[8/10 · 9 September 2019]

I own that I am a sucker for fantasy and/or sci-fi. I own that I'm a fan of Orlando Bloom. I own that I relished period pieces (even tho' this one is in a tome long ago and far away).

But the real reason why I'm hooked on "Carnival Row" is it's obvious political parallels to our sole today. This first episode makes this political/cultural connection explicit.

There are numerous parallels to American in a post-Trump world and Brexit England. Just for a few examples: xenophobia, a mindless war, mass immigration, prejudice, class conflict... the list goes on and on. But identifying these and relishing the commentary is the joy here!

Join me and watch this show and you will have a grand adventure and serious thoughts about our world today!

Mindhunter (2017–2019)

Come On Netflix: We Need Season Three of "Mindhunter"

[9/10 · 22 August 2019]

I've watched both seasons, the last one in three days. With the teaser(S) at the end of Season Two, there has to be a third season. Why? Well, I will explain:

First, this series is solid because of the acting across the board. I hadn't noticed in season one, but two of my favorites from the "Fringe" series are here: Anna Torv and Michael Cerveris. The others, particularly Groff (Holden Ford) and McCallany (Tench) are great as the FBI agents who founded the unit.

Second, the writing is wonderful. I particularly enjoyed the interview with Charles Manson, as well as the other "serial" killers. The writing staff is superb in the way they have taken characters from our collective consciences and given then a character we begin the understand.

Third, there are too many shoes left to drop: What is going to happen with Wendy (Torv)? What is Tench going to do about his son? What is Ford going to do? And what about this one guy with a mask we have seen throughout this season??

I could go on and on, but Netflix has an obligation to us to bring some sense of closure to this series and it can't be left hanging like this. Come on Netflix; announce the third season coming in 2020!

Yesterday (III) (2019)

Short note that says Must See!

[8/10 · 21 July 2019]

There are several real surprises in this film but o will only say Ed Sheeran makes a great appearance as himself. The others I don't want to ruin for you.

Lots of fun and great storyline. Must see this summer!

Hap and Leonard (2016–2018)

Watch and then Lament it is NOT Renewed

[9/10 · 1 May 2019]

Great acting is obvious across the board. The stories are timely in this post-Trump America. The direction is seamless and the characterizations are a joy to watch unfold.

With all this going for it (as well as this show being the highest rated of Sundance TV), then why isn't this show renewed? May be that Sundance is too niche. May be that the plots make some people feel uncomfortable. I believe it is because the leads are middle aged and simply don't draw viewers that way other shows do.

It is a shame that I other network wants to pick this show up. Watch, enjoy, then lament your loss.

Hostiles (2017)

This One is NOT a Popcorn Movie: It Asks You to Think (and I Love it!)

[9/10 · 20 March 2019]

If you have seen my reviews, you know I like a free-refill popcorn movies as much as anyone. But as "Hostiles" (2017) is asking us and like my students will tell you, I also love movies that challenge my cognitively and emotionally. If you are game for this type of film and you are willing to relish the pacing, then come along for this Neo-Western that offers some of the same traditional Western images but in an emotionally charged and cognitively engaging manner.

Certainly Scott Cooper's direction is schooled in the greats: John Ford (pick any he did with John Wayne, tho' clearly Cooper is playing with "The Searchers") and Sam Peckinpah (how can anyone ever forget the bloody, slow-motion images of 1969's "The Wild Bunch"?). If you are a fan of westerns, watch for the grad vistas. the rugged looks (consider, for example, Christian Bale's wrinkles around his eyes and brown leathery skin in some of the close-ups), and the random violence.

If you are NOT a western fan, there are things to consider too: look at the camera work, particularly early on where Cooper is using low key lighting for a chiaroscuro effect (think Da Vinci, Vermeer, and Rembrandt). The themes are right out of today's headlines (note the image of the children being incarcerated in the first part of the film; the sexual violence against women; white entitlement to property, and so forth).

For me, two things are extremely compelling: first this film is a story of humanity searching for redemption. Humans are far more complex than we want to believe. This complexity is played out throughout this film: Bale seems a bigot, but he is seeking redemption. Rosamund Pike experiences unbearable horrors but stills feels something for others. Wes Studi has exacted revenge, but wants reconciliation and to die at his home. These questions are difficult to ferret out, but the film allows the time for the characters and the viewers to wrestle with these complexities.

The other compelling idea is how Cooper et al takes John Ford's "The Searchers" (1956) and turns the film on its head. First, you cannot forget the opening epigrams from D.H. Lawrence about the violence in the American psyche. This point is driven home with a retelling of the opening scene in Ford's film. Throughout, we see this growing tension about violence. But at the end, unlike Ford's classic, we don't see the violence "driven out" like the door closing on John Wayne's face, we see redemption, but with an asterisk. Redemption is granted, but it acknowledges the violence instead of rejecting it like Ford.

This latter part is hard to wrap one's head around: how can we be redeemed and be violent at the same time? That is the challenge of this film, so be forewarned that this movie is really wanting you to think. It does not offer the mythological past; it is a mirror held to our faces and asking us: "what do you do?" If you are willing to take this challenge, then come along and enjoy this long mental experience. If you are not, then load up "The Wild Bunch" and get your gore fix, which is what I might just do this weekend myself. See how complex we humans are???

Apollo 18 (2011)

This "Found Footage" Film Worked for Me

[7/10 · 19 March 2019]

I watched this film partly because my daughters have been nagging me very recently that Armstrong's moon landing in 1969 was all "fake." I have asserting that is was real and I recounted to them my staying up until 2 PM to see Armstrong take the first steps.

When "Apollo 18" popped up on my feed as I was preparing for a long air flight, I thought, "What the hell." I found this film worked for me on lots of levels: partly nostalgia, partly the cinematography, partly the plot, and partly the overall design.

OK--I am a "Baby Boomer" who is 66 years old and I confess to this right up front. When I see anything about lunar exploration, it pulls forth my early teen romance about America technology and its full potential. I know that the technology is a two edged sword and we are seeing how we have screwed up over and over. However, I cannot escape this sense of magic that moon explorations specifically and space, in general, generate for me.

I believe the film work is great. I saw in the trivia section that some of the film work was through 1970's lenses. If this statement is factual, that might help explain my fascination. On the other hand, digital work is also impressive today. I also appreciated the framing of the shots to create the claustrophobic sense for these astronauts. Lastly, the part building up to the "discovery" of the Russian with the flash effect I thought worked well in building suspense.

I thought this plot worked. Viewers have the great mix of home film work inter-cut with "documentation" of the mission. The color home shots counter the grayed out "mission footage" which builds more a sense of foreboding for me.

My assertion up front about how the overall design worked for me emerges from the points I've already laid out: great camera, great set design, great plot, and the last part I've not mentioned: no musical score. There are some musical notes (like that pun?) in this film, but they are explained by the plot elements. Thus we do not get any musical overlay which I thought added extremely well to the overall effect of the film. Remember, "In space no one can hear you scream" and no one hears the sound track.

If you have a Friday or Saturday night, buy some beer, pop some corn, load this up and take a trip back to a time when some Americans believed in the magic of human endeavor. And enjoy the intensity of the realization that these endeavors have costs we did not fully understand.

The Umbrella Academy (2019–2024)

Watch this and be Hooked!

[9/10 · 26 February 2019]

OK--I confess to enjoying films from graphic novels. Also, I confess to alternative universe themes and general sci-fi. And I love post-modern work. Well if you like any of these aspects, tune and get hooked!

There are lots of references to the graphic novel series that gave rise to this work, There is the back story that we anticipate in a graphic novel. There are tons of special effects (for example, the world faces at least two, perhaps three apocalypses across the first season). And best of all, look for how the title, "The Umbrella Academy," is worked into each episode. It's pure joy to see that twist.

I was sold on "12 Monkeys" (the movie) when a friend loaned me his Motion Picture Academy nomination copy. "The Umbrella Academy" takes the idea of alternative universes and raises the ante to wonderful heights. The only caveat is the alternative universe ending which compels me to have to wait until the next season is released.

Sci-fi: there is a robot "Mom" (Jordan Claire Robbin) (I don't even know if "robot" is correct), a chimpanzee "Alfred" (think Batman), mysterious pneumatic tubes that appear from nowhere to deliver messages, and interactions with the dead. WOW!

My favorite part is the post modern aspect of the series. First, time is manipulated in many ways from flash backs to flash forwards. Title cards are used, which add even more to the self-referral aspect of this show. There is never-ending pastiche nearly every time Klaus (Robert Sheehan) is on screen. There are gender reversals and LGBTQ nods. And the one that really rocked my world is Hazel's referral to "No Country for Old Men" (2007) (Episode 3).

If, however, you are more of a romantic: Hazel (Cameron Britton) falls in love and Luther (Tom Hopper) and Allison (Emmy Raver-Lampman) have a great dance number late in the series as well as a compelling moment in a telephone booth (you know why this scene HAD to happen in a telephone booth, don't you?)

I don't want to tell you too much more, so I apologize for the understatement. But I don't want to give away any spoilers. I recommend binge watching, but I have to give you a caution: there are only ten episodes and that can easily be digested in a weekend (e.g Friday and Saturday night). Then you have to wait--perhaps until 2020--for Season 2 to emerge, assuming Netflix chooses to make a second series! So you decide: gobble it and savor the memory OR stretch it out over weeks to relish every moment of this wonderful, character rich series.

Ánimas (2018)

I don't know how typical this really is

[7/10 · 22 February 2019]

As you look over the IMDB comments about this movie, you may note that some liken this film to a "common theme." I am not convinced of this idea. Yes, the idea is referenced with the "Pyscho" poster toward this films denouement. But there are other things at play with this film that I suggest you consider before writing it off completely as "rehash."

I am struck by the surreal images of this film--from the curious lighting which seems to suggest something about characters to doors in the floor and the ceiling. The entire film has images that echo Dali's dream sequence in Hitchcock's "Spellbound. " Nearly every frame of "Animas" has this dream/nightmare sense to it and it is because of this visual clueing that I recommend you check this movie out.

I need to own up to you readers that there are flaws in this film. Tho' I appreciate the actors here--Clare Durant (Alex), Iván Pellicer (Bram), Ángela Molina (Bram's doctor), and Chacha Huang (Bram's lover), they are not really used to drive the story and Durant's eye wrinkles make her seem miscast as "Bram's" childhood friend. Some have applauded the music, but it seems out of place--unless there is some ironic intent that might reveal itself on a second or third viewing. And the end title image of Bram's being bullied in the playground seems confounding: is it Bram being beat up? Has Alex come to rescue some other poor child? Is this entire film caught in some time loop where we end where we began? This image just bothers me because if brings up questions that I thought had been put to rest.

If you like surrealism; if you like compelling dream imagery; if you enjoy subtle plot shifts that might catch you off-guard (and I can guarantee you that there is one plot the element that WILL surprise you), then you really need to check this film out.

(PS: I have to pose a question: Why is Durant's character named "Alex"? There are thousands of names that could have been selected but this one is used. Could it be a reference? Does it play on the etymology of the name itself? Does is suggest some gender ambiguity? If you find these questions curious, please check it out and let me know!)

Z Nation (2014–2018)

You HAVE to See Season Five

[8/10 · 18 February 2019]

OK: I've been watching "Z Nation" since the beginning. I have been 'on again, off again" for five years. I saw Netflix had the fifth and final season, so I started watching it. It is the best of the series, it stands alone, and if you are living in America today, you have to watch this!

I know that this series is campy. i know that it is over the top with acting, writing, and effects. This last series, however, is head and shoulders over the rest. Maybe it is because there is really serious talent with Mario Van Peebles in the opening. Maybe that the team has decided they want to end this with a bang! Maybe it has taken the talent--both actors, writers, directors, the crew--to grow completely into their roles. Whatever the reason, this season certainly suggests you have missed something if you have not seen it.

This last season stands alone. If will confess you will miss the joy and laughs of the other seasons, but if you have time for only one, watch this one. Flashbacks help you know what you need to know. Characters reveal themselves. The only tricky part is with Murphy (Keith Allan) whose "existence" drove the plot for several seasons may seem a challenge. with that one caveat, plunge on into this series because the blood is always warm here!

Most importantly, you have to see this season because it is clearly a thinly veiled parable of where we are in America today. Whether it is the destruction of knowledge, collusion, discrimination, holding onto the norms of our democracy--all of these themes are at play and are clearly calling Trump out for the liar he is. It is fitting that the two central characters--Lt. Roberta Warren (Kellita Smith) and George (Katy O'Brian)--are women trying to make some sense out of the world men have really screwed up!

So pop the popcorn, grab your favorite beverage, fire up your streaming system and settle if for a fun ride. You don't have to worry about what you might have missed; just relish this as escapist fare OR as the clearly political play it is. Enjoy and let me know your reaction.

Russian Doll (2019–2022)

You Have to Watch This Series

[10/10 · 15 February 2019]

Rarely do I go "whole hog" and award 10 stars. "Russian Doll" is worthy of 11 or 12. It is well paced, well acted, strong talent, and an engaging story. Don't buy into this series being a re-working of Bill Murray's "Groundhog Day." Tho' there is a slight echo of waking up and "reliving" a day, these two films are light years apart in quality and concept.

Pacing: there are the directors and Natasha Lyonne--who is the lead, Nadia--only directed the first one. This continuity helps with how the story evolves. This series is dense with characters and with setting. Yet the time flies by and I truly felt emotionally attached to each one, even those that were playing "dicks" (Mike and John played by Jeremy Bobb and Yul Vazquez respectively). I don't have any guess about the Netflix investment in this series, but the directing and editing are dead on (I am not apologizing for that pun) and were worth every cent.

If I were going to liken this series to anything it would be "Seinfield." Why? Well clearly the setting and the characters are reflected here in "Russian Doll." Natasha Lyonne is the archetypal New York woman: brash, independent, troubled, yet circled by many friends who seem to care for her in ways we may not fully understand. Charlie Barnett starts as a naif and matures throughout the series into someone I cried for in the last episode for fear that things might take an extremely wrong turn. Elizabeth Ashley is the grand dame of this series and there is a camera pan across her living room with photos from her history (I appreciated the one with George Peppard). She is nearly worth the admission. The list goes on and on. Each character is realized and worthy of our attention.

Engaging understates my reaction to this narrative. I accidentally stumbled onto this and watched all episodes in two sittings (I do work and have a life outside this commentary world, so this anecdote speaks volumes.) Each episode explored more fully characters I was vested in. Each episode compelled me to click onto the next to see what next is happening to these people I cared about. I don't want to give anything a way and if you want more assurance, then looks for reviews that have spoilers.

I do have on think to ask Netflix: ask the writer for something else. Please don't spin out a season two. Tho' I love these characters, I don't know where else this could go and I don't want to see this golden moment deteriorate for money. Please just leave this series and ask the writers to do something else for you.

If you have not been following my comments, then look at this because of my 10 stars. If you are skeptical, read some reviews. But I can tell you that if you don't watch this (preferably on a Friday and Saturday night), then you will have missed a golden moment in media history. Please give this series a try.

The Bad Batch (2016)

Assess your values before you watch this movie

[8/10 · 12 February 2019]

My title may seem confusing so let me explain it: if you are a person who sees the glass as half empty, then you will see this movie as weak, escapist, cannaibilism movie with a tweak of revenge. If, on the other hand, you see your glass as half-full, you will see a deeply complex political parable about the world we live in today even tho' this is set in a dystopian future. So think a few minutes before you dive in and certainly before you post your comments.

I have thought about this film for some time and decided that I had to share this point of view for you. I like dystopian feature films so that was the first reason I jumped in.

I do NOT like cannibal films and when Suki Waterhouse lost her arm and leg, I was ready to bail. Later, when Jason Moma was dressing a person he had killed in preparation for grilling, I was soooo soooo close to simply shutting dow this show.

Then it hits me that Jim Carry is the Hermit; then Suki Waterhouse has a look which encouraged me to keep watching as she takes on the daughter of Moma; then there is Moma's character which compells me try a ferret out--is he good or is he bad.

As with my last review, "Hold the Dark," I began to see textture and characters and themes which encouraged me to stay and watch and enjoy.

Then, of course, there are huge plot holes that drive me crazy: How does Keanu Reeves have this great place in the Waste Land where the "bad batch" are exiled? How do the dreamers have noodles to eat? What is the exchange rate? Where does Waterhouse get the gun she uses? How do the dreamers have access to electricity for the rave scene? I didn't see any explanation for these, as well as others!

So I scored this an 8--its theme is well worth suffering through various atrocities and plot holes. The acting of Moma is worth watching. Waterhouse's long look after her action poses real soul searching. The final scene--I'm not going to give anything away--is provocative. Bottom line: answer the questions above--or at leat think about them--then you see what you think you see.