rating: *****
the story: A struggling musician suddenly finds himself in a world that doesn't remember the Beatles, and so begins claiming their songs as his own work.
review: The critics are idiots. There's been a vocal effort to dismiss Yesterday on the basis that the specific conditions that created the success of the Beatles has to be taken into account in any attempt to sell their songs on their own merit.
Yeah. The film does that. But that's not even the point, is it? The Beatles attained success, initially, as the quintessential boy band. They wrote songs that drove the girls wild. And then they just kept evolving, and their work became wildly praised. And then they ended, after about a decade's work.
Today, we still have boy bands. BTS, the current model. One Direction, started out in a reality show singing competition as individual competitors. None of them was good enough to win on their own. Then they were strung together, and the rest is history. And these are just recent examples.
Jack Malik finds initial success "stealing" the Beatles with their ballads. Love songs are universal. That's kind of the point. And the Beatles wrote some damn good ones. And not just "some." The success of the Beatles, again, was in their ability to keep producing at a high level, and at an increasingly high level. That was kind of the whole point.
But he doesn't find immediate success. His own parents treat "Let It Be" as just another cute example of their son's hopeless delusion, won't even let him get past the very beginning of the song. And his first gig playing Beatles songs is no more successful than his previous existence clinging to material like "Summer Song" that only his good friends care anything at all about.
But then someone hears him. Asks him to record in a tiny private studio. And then Ed Sheeran hears him. And then suddenly he becomes a full-blown phenomenon.
The fact is, Yesterday is a hugely honest (until, maybe, the part where Jack decides to just walk away, regardless of circumstances, but this is gooey romance, after all, at its heart) depiction of what it takes to succeed. It takes being noticed. And that's not easy. And then not just being noticed but becoming something that's easy to sell. Such as the fact that he "writes" so many instantly fantastic songs, which is what wows Sheeran (whose career the film takes for granted but may not be familiar to everyone), and what the major studio that signs Jack uses as his key selling point. Every major act has a key selling point. That's what sets them apart. It might even be argued that it's not the songs themselves that suddenly makes a success of Jack, but that he knows what to do with them.
But yes, it's also a gooey love story, which is writer Richard Curtis's trademark (I don't watch a lot of this kind of movie, but About Time is pretty magical, too), so it's really about Jack and his longtime not-quite-girlfriend Ellie. Where Jack is played by relative unknown Himesh Patel, Ellie is portrayed by Lily James, the biggest name actor in the movie, with the possible exception of Kate McKinnon, who has been a standout in Saturday Night Live for years and has been appearing in various movies, too (probably best thing about the 2016 Ghostbusters). Oh, and in an uncredited, brilliant cameo role as John Lennon, there's also Robert Carlyle.
The director is Danny Boyle, with a long and storied career behind him. For me, Yesterday is a particular triumph in relation to Boyle. I still don't know the best way to describe Slumdog Millionaire that doesn't draw uncomfortable memories of British interests in India. But Yesterday doesn't have that problem. Jack's ethnicity is never really dwelt on; he's just another Brit who grew up a big fan of the Beatles, and happened to be in the right place at the right time to capitalize on that. This is "colorblind" casting at its best. Patel didn't get the gig, presumably, to diversify the story, but because he was the best option to play Jack. And he can sing the hell out of the Beatles, yeah.
Where 2018's A Star Is Born felt artificial, Yesterday feels organic, not because I already knew the songs, but because the artistic journey doesn't feel forced. It doesn't hurt that the results celebrate the enduring legacy of the Beatles, and in fact that aspect of the film was largely responsible for me wanting to see the movie at all. The movie itself rewards the premise, and moves beyond it. What more can you ask? This is a great film.
Sunday, July 28, 2019
Sunday, July 21, 2019
Doctor Strange (2016)
rating: ***
the story: An arrogant doctor loses the use of his hands, but his mind becomes greatly expanded.
review: The MCU Avengers cycle is a full-blown phenomenon that has come to define the modern cinematic era, and the twenty-three movies to date that comprise it have seemingly explored just about every kind of superhero movie imaginable. Doctor Strange did it with magic (although it's also one of the few outright examples of superpowers in the franchise, too). That's the main calling card here.
A lot of fans saw too many parallels between Stephen Strange and Tony Stark. One of the few criticisms fans have leveled against these films is that the plots tend to be the same: brilliant individual has a fall, builds themselves back up, defeats villain in spectacular fight. And the villain tends to be fairly uninspired (with a few exceptions). But you can level the plot critique against just about any story. I tend to think the specifics are worth considering. Strange and Stark are only tangentially worth comparing at that level. Stark may be a tech genius, but he's also building on a family legacy. Strange is a brilliant physician. They both may possess out-of-control egos, but Strange is far more likely to use his skills to actual benefit than Stark, who initially just wants to make easy money, without caring about the consequences. For Strange, he may alienate colleagues, but he's undeniably saving lives. He believes he can save more lives if he can just perform his research undisturbed. Essentially, Stephen Strange is House on a grander scale. (It's really hard not to envision the producers using the Hugh Laurie breakout role as a pattern for Strange, and how they determined Benedict Cumberbatch to be the best pick for the role.)
Then Strange goes on the journey to becoming Doctor Strange, and the visuals take over. Clearly the movie itself was inspired as much by Inception as the Harry Potter films, and letting the blend of them run wild. Too wild, really, however awesome the results. The characters never really treat them as anything but meaningless backdrop. They're audience eye candy, nothing more. But still hugely notable.
Doctor Strange is the "Sorcerer Supreme," but he is also, essentially, a superhero wizard. And that's the role he fills in the MCU. The ending features a nifty time-repetition that the character's later crucial appearance in Avengers: Infinity War suggests is how he discovers the only way to beat Thanos (in all fairness, that's probably the best sequence of this film, watching Strange repeatedly confront what is otherwise a pointless CGI effect just as doggedly each time, so it would probably have been just as pointless to repeat the sequence, especially when we know Strange can't win this time).
Cumberbatch has a meaty role to play in this appearance (he doesn't have nearly as much to work with in later appearances to date), and is once again thoroughly Cumberbatch. Rachel McAdams is probably the most credible female supporting player, having often played this type where others in the MCU felt hamstrung in similar roles. Tilda Swinton is perhaps about as perfectly cast as she's ever been as the Ancient One, Mads Mikkelsen letting his eyes do all the work in the way he so creepily often does. Benedict Wong is the kind of actor who doesn't need much to make an impact. Benjamin Bratt has a tiny role that makes you kind of wonder why they even bothered. Chiwetel Ejiofor is the most baffling case. He went from starring in the highly acclaimed 12 Years a Slave to this rather than, say, Black Panther (who instead is played by Chadwick Boseman, who is an utter charisma void). I don't get it.
This is not a movie that expects much from its audience, and so it doesn't really try much, aside from visually. It slides by on mumbo jumbo. Why Strange is as good at magic as he is at surgery, not particularly explained. It just sort of happens. But if you don't care, you get a movie that does just about what it needs to. And at that, it's about as good or better than the average MCU film. It knows what it really needs to accomplish, and at least nails that. Knowing what Strange does in other movies is just kind of icing on the cake.
the story: An arrogant doctor loses the use of his hands, but his mind becomes greatly expanded.
review: The MCU Avengers cycle is a full-blown phenomenon that has come to define the modern cinematic era, and the twenty-three movies to date that comprise it have seemingly explored just about every kind of superhero movie imaginable. Doctor Strange did it with magic (although it's also one of the few outright examples of superpowers in the franchise, too). That's the main calling card here.
A lot of fans saw too many parallels between Stephen Strange and Tony Stark. One of the few criticisms fans have leveled against these films is that the plots tend to be the same: brilliant individual has a fall, builds themselves back up, defeats villain in spectacular fight. And the villain tends to be fairly uninspired (with a few exceptions). But you can level the plot critique against just about any story. I tend to think the specifics are worth considering. Strange and Stark are only tangentially worth comparing at that level. Stark may be a tech genius, but he's also building on a family legacy. Strange is a brilliant physician. They both may possess out-of-control egos, but Strange is far more likely to use his skills to actual benefit than Stark, who initially just wants to make easy money, without caring about the consequences. For Strange, he may alienate colleagues, but he's undeniably saving lives. He believes he can save more lives if he can just perform his research undisturbed. Essentially, Stephen Strange is House on a grander scale. (It's really hard not to envision the producers using the Hugh Laurie breakout role as a pattern for Strange, and how they determined Benedict Cumberbatch to be the best pick for the role.)
Then Strange goes on the journey to becoming Doctor Strange, and the visuals take over. Clearly the movie itself was inspired as much by Inception as the Harry Potter films, and letting the blend of them run wild. Too wild, really, however awesome the results. The characters never really treat them as anything but meaningless backdrop. They're audience eye candy, nothing more. But still hugely notable.
Doctor Strange is the "Sorcerer Supreme," but he is also, essentially, a superhero wizard. And that's the role he fills in the MCU. The ending features a nifty time-repetition that the character's later crucial appearance in Avengers: Infinity War suggests is how he discovers the only way to beat Thanos (in all fairness, that's probably the best sequence of this film, watching Strange repeatedly confront what is otherwise a pointless CGI effect just as doggedly each time, so it would probably have been just as pointless to repeat the sequence, especially when we know Strange can't win this time).
Cumberbatch has a meaty role to play in this appearance (he doesn't have nearly as much to work with in later appearances to date), and is once again thoroughly Cumberbatch. Rachel McAdams is probably the most credible female supporting player, having often played this type where others in the MCU felt hamstrung in similar roles. Tilda Swinton is perhaps about as perfectly cast as she's ever been as the Ancient One, Mads Mikkelsen letting his eyes do all the work in the way he so creepily often does. Benedict Wong is the kind of actor who doesn't need much to make an impact. Benjamin Bratt has a tiny role that makes you kind of wonder why they even bothered. Chiwetel Ejiofor is the most baffling case. He went from starring in the highly acclaimed 12 Years a Slave to this rather than, say, Black Panther (who instead is played by Chadwick Boseman, who is an utter charisma void). I don't get it.
This is not a movie that expects much from its audience, and so it doesn't really try much, aside from visually. It slides by on mumbo jumbo. Why Strange is as good at magic as he is at surgery, not particularly explained. It just sort of happens. But if you don't care, you get a movie that does just about what it needs to. And at that, it's about as good or better than the average MCU film. It knows what it really needs to accomplish, and at least nails that. Knowing what Strange does in other movies is just kind of icing on the cake.
Stardust (2007)
rating: ***
the story: A young man seeks to win the heart of a beautiful woman by seeking a falling star.
review: The idea of new cult movies seems to have fallen by the wayside in recent years, possibly because the MCU Avengers cycle has effectively made geek cinema mainstream in just about every iteration imaginable. But Stardust is about as liable a contender as anything that's been released in the last fifteen years, in large part to a cast that has kept on giving, and a writer and a director whose legacies keep expanding.
The cast. Oh, the cast! You've got Charlie Cox as the lead character, Tristan. Cox eventually found another spotlight in the Netflix series Daredevil. Henry Cavill, in a much smaller role as Tristan's romantic rival (in Tristan's imagination, anyway, insofar as Tristan ever really had a chance), is perhaps the biggest easter egg in the movie, nearly unrecognizable as a fop with blond hair. He would, of course, later take on the role of Superman. Ian McKellen, at this point only a few years removed from his career-defining role as Gandalf in Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings trilogy, is narrator. Mark Strong, who would become a much better recognized supporting actor across a dizzying array of films, plays a would-be king. Rupert Everett is in there, unrecognizable. Ricky Gervais is easier to spot. Claire Danes is the falling star. Michelle Pfeiffer is the witch who wishes to be young again. Sienna Miller is the girl Tristan thought he deserved (an oddly low key role, considering this was Miller's heyday). Peter O'Toole, looking surprisingly frail, is in there. And Robert De Niro.
Ah, De Niro. This was the period where De Niro was finally coming to grips with his father. Robert De Niro, the most famous tough guy of modern cinema, was the son of a gay man. He'd directed The Good Shepherd (2006), a kind of allegorical film about his father, and then appeared in Stardust as a pirate who is secretly gay. The gay aspects of the character are kind of parody, but the role is unexpected for De Niro, so seeing him this way is itself kind of reason enough to see Stardust. I suspect part of the cult appeal for it comes from the LGBTQ community.
The writer of the book from which Stardust is derived is Neil Gaiman, who also wrote the epic Sandman comic book series. Stardust was his first major screen adaptation. The director is Matthew Vaughn, whose geeks credentials have expanded since.
The results aren't as magical as all that. You'd want a contender for The Princess Bride, but it just isn't there. The presence of all those stars is just about enough compensation, though, with De Niro leading the pack. McKellen sets the tone with his storybook narration. Princess Bride is a storybook that spirals hilariously out of control. Stardust remains storybook. But it's still a good modern storybook. Few enough elements compete with De Niro. One is the collection of dead brothers. The other is the goat who becomes a man (somewhat unconvincingly). There's also Strong's undead duel with Tristan. If there had been more of that, there'd be a better chance at truly comparing the results to Princess Bride.
Not that there has to be a comparison. As its own thing, Stardust lightly sparkles. And then, again, you see yourself drawn to all those stars...
the story: A young man seeks to win the heart of a beautiful woman by seeking a falling star.
review: The idea of new cult movies seems to have fallen by the wayside in recent years, possibly because the MCU Avengers cycle has effectively made geek cinema mainstream in just about every iteration imaginable. But Stardust is about as liable a contender as anything that's been released in the last fifteen years, in large part to a cast that has kept on giving, and a writer and a director whose legacies keep expanding.
The cast. Oh, the cast! You've got Charlie Cox as the lead character, Tristan. Cox eventually found another spotlight in the Netflix series Daredevil. Henry Cavill, in a much smaller role as Tristan's romantic rival (in Tristan's imagination, anyway, insofar as Tristan ever really had a chance), is perhaps the biggest easter egg in the movie, nearly unrecognizable as a fop with blond hair. He would, of course, later take on the role of Superman. Ian McKellen, at this point only a few years removed from his career-defining role as Gandalf in Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings trilogy, is narrator. Mark Strong, who would become a much better recognized supporting actor across a dizzying array of films, plays a would-be king. Rupert Everett is in there, unrecognizable. Ricky Gervais is easier to spot. Claire Danes is the falling star. Michelle Pfeiffer is the witch who wishes to be young again. Sienna Miller is the girl Tristan thought he deserved (an oddly low key role, considering this was Miller's heyday). Peter O'Toole, looking surprisingly frail, is in there. And Robert De Niro.
Ah, De Niro. This was the period where De Niro was finally coming to grips with his father. Robert De Niro, the most famous tough guy of modern cinema, was the son of a gay man. He'd directed The Good Shepherd (2006), a kind of allegorical film about his father, and then appeared in Stardust as a pirate who is secretly gay. The gay aspects of the character are kind of parody, but the role is unexpected for De Niro, so seeing him this way is itself kind of reason enough to see Stardust. I suspect part of the cult appeal for it comes from the LGBTQ community.
The writer of the book from which Stardust is derived is Neil Gaiman, who also wrote the epic Sandman comic book series. Stardust was his first major screen adaptation. The director is Matthew Vaughn, whose geeks credentials have expanded since.
The results aren't as magical as all that. You'd want a contender for The Princess Bride, but it just isn't there. The presence of all those stars is just about enough compensation, though, with De Niro leading the pack. McKellen sets the tone with his storybook narration. Princess Bride is a storybook that spirals hilariously out of control. Stardust remains storybook. But it's still a good modern storybook. Few enough elements compete with De Niro. One is the collection of dead brothers. The other is the goat who becomes a man (somewhat unconvincingly). There's also Strong's undead duel with Tristan. If there had been more of that, there'd be a better chance at truly comparing the results to Princess Bride.
Not that there has to be a comparison. As its own thing, Stardust lightly sparkles. And then, again, you see yourself drawn to all those stars...
Saturday, July 13, 2019
2019 Favorites So Far
- The Man Who Killed Don Quixote - The long, long awaited Terry Gilliam film. To my mind, well worth it.
- Detective Pikachu - Brilliant repurposing of an existing franchise (even if technically it was based on one of the many games). Continues Ryan Reynolds' penchant for playing with identity.
- Serenity - It's not really a twist ending when most of the movie explains that it's part of the narrative.
- The Standoff At Sparrow Creek - I've waited a long time for a James Badge Dale spotlight. It delivered.
- The Man Who Killed Hitler and Then the Bigfoot - Mesmerizing portrait on aging.
- Glass - A fitting finale for the Shyamalan trilogy.
- Dumbo - Playfully subversive family film from Tim Burton.
- The Upside - Sort of instantly, for me, the best material featuring Kevin Hart and Bryan Cranston.
- Hotel Mumbai - Chilling portrait of modern terrorism.
- Captain Marvel - One of the best MCU movies.
- John Wick: Chapter 3 - Parabellum - It's like the Fast & Furious movies all over again. The longer the series continues, the more awesome it becomes.
- Fighting With My Family - Very much a movie version, but still fun to have an actual wrestler's journey (WWE's Paige) documented, with Dwayne Johnson getting to immortalize The Rock in film.
- Dark Phoenix - The X-Men saga comes to a moody conclusion.
- Avengers: Endgame - It's like watching Lord of the Rings: Return of the King all over again. For a lot of folks that's a good thing. For me, not as much.
- Secret Life of Pets 2 - Saw this thanks to my niece.
2018
Viewed/Ranked
- Isle of Dogs
- The Death of Stalin
- Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald
- The Old Man & The Gun
- Solo: A Star Wars Movie
- Damsel
- Super Troopers 2
- The Favourite
- Dark Crimes
- Gringo
- Tag
- Holmes and Watson
- The Yellow Birds
- Woman Walks Ahead
- Sicario: Day of the Soldado
- The Girl In The Spider's Web
- Can You Ever Forgive Me?
- Vice
- Widows
- Stan & Ollie
- Ant-Man and the Wasp
- Mission: Impossible - Fallout
- Avengers: Infinity War
- Venom
- Aquaman
- Deadpool 2/Once Upon a Deadpool
- Teen Titans Go! To The Movies
- Early Man
- Tomb Raider
- Black Panther
- Robin Hood
- Skyscraper
- Death Wish
- The Sisters Brothers
- Mary Queen of Scots
- Paul, Apostle of Christ
- Annihilation
- You Were Never Really Here
- Son of Bigfoot
- Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse
- A Star Is Born
- BlacKkKlansman
- The Happytime Murders
- Dr. Seuss' The Grinch
- Ready Player One
- The Hurricane Heist
- A Quiet Place
- A Simple Favor
- Bad Times At The El Royale
- Bohemian Rhapsody
- Boy Erased
- Bumblebee
- Crazy Rich Asians
- Creed II
- Green Book
- The House With A Clock In Its Walls
- Incredibles 2
- Jurassic Park: Fallen Kingdom
- Mary Poppins Returns
- The Meg
- The Mule
- Ocean's 8
- Peppermint
- The Predator
- Ralph Breaks the Internet
- Sorry To Bother You
- Upgrade
- Welcome To Marwen
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)