Reviews

I rarely write reviews for films on here with the exception of two cases: when a movie is really bad or when a movie needs defending from a vocal minority that trash it. First, I'll review the film like I would any other and then I'm going to try and reason why audiences are reacting negatively to the film. I'm not sure if Hereditary is the greatest horror film ever but I certainly felt like I was watching my generation's Exorcist or Rosemary's Baby. The movie borrows heavily from those two films right down to the final scene. Despite this, it feels new and dangerous. I had no idea how the movie was going to play out which is a criticism I have with a lot modern horror/thriller movies. This in large part has to do with the marketing campaign but more on that later. I feel the term slow burn has a negative connotation associated with it and prefer to call this movie tense. It doesn't really on jump scares that plague a lot of modern horror and chooses tension and imagery to scare the audience with slow camera panning and fantastic cinematography, a nervous score, and great performances. Toni Collette gives and incredible performance as a manic mother who is mourning the loss of a parent. The supporting cast is fantastic as well and they all have a time to shine at some point in the movie. The movie is also challenging in its themes with relationships between parents and their children always in the forefront. The human drama of this movie far exceeded my expectations and is worthy viewing in its own right.

To try and explain why audiences are trashing the film through some mediums (not as much on IMDb, see CinemaScore, Rotten Tomatoes for example) I think it is important to understand that we live in an impatient culture. Many horror classics of the past like the two I mention earlier weren't fast paced and instead lingered on images and favored slow paced horror. I think the modern horror audience can get restless when presented with a movie like this. I don't think Rosemary's Baby or the Exorcist would review very well with broad audiences if they were released today. Secondly, I think the film has succeeded in making people uncomfortable by questioning parent's feelings for their children and how they are displayed. This movie is complex and has a lot to say. Comparing this film to another fantastic horror movie from this year, A Quiet Place, offers a great juxtaposition of this idea. One is very simple in it's premise that quickly gets to the scares while the other takes it's time to build to a climax that may or may not be worth the wait depending on the viewer. Overall, Hereditary offers plenty of horrific imagery and supernatural scares that work as a deeper examination of familial relationships rather than being a string a horror movie cliches.

9/10 - excellent

To begin with, the three men who performed this act of courage deserve all the praise and honor they have received. They stood brave in the face of evil and terrorism and managed to prevent disaster.

With that aside, this is truly one of the worst films I have ever seen. There is a scene that takes place in early on in the film that features posters of two of Eastwoods earlier works, Jersey Boys and Letter from Iwo Jima, as well as Stanley Kubrick's Full Metal Jacket. My advice, spend your money renting one of those movies before shelling out the money for a movie ticket for this latest hiccup in Eastwood's otherwise remarkable filmography. It starts with acting and to put it simply, it's just abysmal. Right from the start, the children playing the young heroes just aren't at the quality of what you would expect. The wooden writing doesn't help and plagues the film with countless cringe moments throughout its runtime. Then we move to the heroes themselves, who would have been better served working as consultants for the film to ensure authenticity. They simply aren't good, and nearly every line they delivered was met with a few chuckles from the nearly capacity crowd at my showing. Even if the three were replaced with trained actors, it's hard to see how that would substantially improve the product. The film acts more like a buddy adventure movie for the better part of it's runtime, rather than the heroic thriller that was being advertised. It's incredibly misguided and marks an unfortunate low point in Clint Eastwood's remarkable career. You are better served reading an account of the event than wasting time and money on this dud of movie. A few stars go to the admittedly tense train sequence that serves as the basis for the film and commitment to authenticity that seems to have been maintained based on press tour comments from the actors.

3/10 - Very Bad

I didn't think I would come out of the theater from Homecoming with the thought in my mind that this movie features the most effective plot twist of any movie this year. I certainly won't spoil it because it makes the movie and is so perfectly done that it was enough to bump this movie up to a 10/10. Tom Holland does amazing work as Peter Parker/Spiderman and is most certainly the most believable and effective actor to portray the actor on the big screen to date. We knew he was good from Civil War but a standalone feature of his own really allows him to embody the geeky and reckless side of the character. This Spiderman isn't very good at his job initially, but develops into an effective Avenger with the hilarious guidance of Tony Stark/Iron Man. Michael Giachinno's score is excellent as always and the action sequences are your typical web-slinger fair. Michael Keaton is probably the stand-out newcomer in the movie who delivers the most effective portrayal of a comic villain since Heath Ledger's legendary performance as joker, seriously, Keaton is that good. I could not recommend this movie enough to anyone looking for a good time at the theater and eagerly await Holland's return to the character in the upcoming Avengers: Infinity War.

Monster's was shot out of the back of a van for three weeks in Mexico and Central America. Three of those seven were director Gareth Edwards (Rogue One, Godzilla) and our two stars, Scoot McNairy and Whitney Able. What these three and the remaining crew have produced is something of a miracle. I was interested in finishing of Edwards filmography in preparation for the release of the Star Wars spin-off Rogue One, having already seen 2014's visually dazzling, if not to a fault, Godzilla. I can report with utmost confidence that Monsters is the far better film, bringing a human element to the monster genre like very few films of its kind. Maybe the most impressive aspect of the story is its politics, which, while Edwards said wasn't the intention, is a striking commentary on U.S./Mexico immigration. One could argue their is a clairvoyance to this movie.

The U.S. has erected a wall that is meant to keep out alien invaders that have crash landed over Mexico during a NASA mission to affirm the existence of extraterrestrial life on one of Jupiter's moons. With that, we meet Andrew Caulder (McNairy), a broke photographer sent by his boss to find his daughter somewhere in southern Mexico. We meet the daughter Samantha (Able) and follow the two on their tumultuous journey back to the United States. While the twos' performances won't win any awards, they are serviceable enough to convincingly move along the plot which relies heavily on human interaction and relationship rather than the tentacled monsters for which the film was named. On their journey, the two bond with each other, both engulfed in family problems back home. In the films most beautiful and allegorical moment, Sam and Andrew climb to the top of a ruined pyramid from a civilization long past as they catch view of the towering border wall, reminiscing on how different their lives will be on the other side of the wall, free from fear and back to a normal routine. It is really quite moving and Edwards captures some stunning shots with his minimal equipment that rival anything released in 2010 (and that's saying something since Inception released the same summer). I would be remiss not to mention the titular space creatures. They really are only seen in a scene or two throughout the film and take a backseat to the human drama playing out. The ending scene is cinema perfection and Edwards deserves all the credit for self-animating the aliens using purchasable software in his bedroom. Also, a shout out to the many extras who were all natives of the country in which filming took place, they provide some of the most organic moments of the film and deserve praise. If Monsters tells me anything, it may be time for Edwards to return to low budget fare, where he gets the most of what he has available without being dragged down by the burden of franchise filmmaking.

Climate change is real. It is happening faster than scientists predict, and if society doesn't take action then we will assuredly leave this earth a worse place for our posterity than we inherited it. Before the Flood makes a passionate attempt to convince the public that action needs to be taken. Many will debate its effectiveness, and I'm here to say it probably won't change any minds if they haven't been convinced already. Leonardo DiCaprio's turn as world traveling climate investigator is certainly a reason to tune (the full film is available on YouTube). DiCaprio undoubtedly has passion for the subject and, as we will come to find out, a somewhat negative view on the outcome of climate change. It's hard to blame him. The films most important moment was Leo's interview with an Indian climate scientist. She makes the case that the US is all talk, no action when it comes to climate change. It's hard to debate her. Leo struggled to offer an opposing view. The film features many similar interviews, all begging for humanity to take action. Unfortunately, the film offers little advice as to how everyday American citizens can do so. Many of the solutions presented here focus on industrial and political change. Which brings me to my main criticism of this documentary, its politically charged nature. While it is no doubt astonishing that so many US politicians deny climate change as fact, condemning them and those who elect them is no way to court every citizen. The decision to include a certain presidential candidate (whose initials are DT), will no doubt polarize the viewers who align with his candidacy. It lacked alternative suggestions for those who work in the fossil fuel industry. While our dependency on fossil fuels is very unhealthy, how are we to change the minds of workers in that industry who rely on their jobs to provide for their families? Certainly, Beyond the Flood offers a slightly updated message from An Inconvenient Truth (2005), but the overall sentiment remains the same, we are in trouble.

I have to admit, I wasn't The Conjuring's (2013) biggest fan. The film felt like yet another possession story that has been told in a very similar way since The Exorcist (1973). The jump scares were there and provided everyone in the theater a good spook, but the cliché nature of the film prevented from rating it anything other than O.K. James Wan's The Conjuring 2 is very much a story told in the same way as the previous film. Ed and Lorraine Warren are once again sent on task to aid a family being haunted by a truly terrifying demon. There are far more twists and turns to this iteration in The Conjuring series than its previous entry., but the most amusing part of this film is Wan's wonderful recreation of 1970's England. The Hodgson family is in great distress by the time the Warren's arrive, and sure enough, this films demonic presence doesn't like it. What transpires is a jumpy and at times horrific demon tale that is far from original.

The movie progresses very much like the first entry and the acting throughout the film is serviceable if not mediocre at times. Thankfully, Wan pulls us into the horror immediately, leaving us on pins and needles for the films surprisingly lengthy run time (2+ hours). You are definitely getting a lot of scare for your buck, which is arguably the films greatest accomplishment. Many modern horror films run under 90 minutes, so a lengthy ghost tail is a treat. While the demon possession story has been told many times, the consistently ominous tone of the film is no joke. Wan's camera-work is wonderfully traditional for a horror film, full of close ups and some well planned continuous shots. The film ends abruptly and without much resolution, its hard not to wish there was a bit more put into the concluding moments. I don't how many more of these films in The Conjuring series can be made before they are cast aside a repetitive, but as long as Wan is behind the camera, its worth giving it a try

7/10 - Good