One Movie Punch

Hi everyone!

Today, we’re welcoming back Garrett Wright of the Two Views Movies podcast for another review, this time a Certified Fresh Netflix Original from Australia. Garrett’s been busy finishing up 100 episodes of Two Views Movies, along with multiple guest appearances on other podcasts. For a few other reviews from Garrett, check out his very first review at One Movie Punch for “Creed II” (Episode #335), his excellent review for “Spider-Man: Into The Spider-Verse” (Episode #381), and his most recent review for “Apollo 11” (Episode #507).

Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases.

Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation.

Take it away, Garrett!

/////

>

/////

Hey everybody!

My name is Garrett Wright and I co-host Two Views Movies podcast along with my friend Carson Graff. We are a spoiler-filled podcast by two guys who love watching movies almost as much as we love arguing about them. Our weekly podcast features reviews of new releases, retro reviews of older favorites, obscure top 5 lists, and our two views of all things movies. You can find our podcast on all major platforms and at TwoViewsMovies.com, where you can also find spoiler-free written reviews of the movies we watch. You can follow me on Twitter @TwoViewsGarrett and the podcast as well on Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram at the username @TwoViewsMovies.

Today’s movie is “I Am Mother”, the Netflix film directed by Grant Sputore and written but Michael Lloyd Green. “I Am Mother” follows a teenage girl who is raised underground by a robot “Mother”, designed to repopulate the earth following an extinction event. But their unique bond is threatened when an inexplicable stranger arrives with alarming news.

All spoilers were killed in the extinction event, so keep on listening today as we are spoiler-free.

The mere mention of a sci-fi movie from Netflix about artificial intelligence is enough to elicit an epic eye roll from most anyone. Netflix’s track record for original movies is far from stellar and adding in a well-worn plot device like artificial intelligence is going to lead to a lot of people scrolling or swiping past “I Am Mother”. Thankfully, first-time director Grant Sputore delivers futuristic visuals worthy of the big screen, while writer Michael Lloyd Green keeps the plot twisting and turning so that it never feels fully like something that’s been seen before. 

Relative newcomer Clara Rugaard, known simply as Daughter, is tasked with carrying the vast majority of the film on her shoulders and never falters. With a performance that will draw valid comparisons to Sam Rockwell in “Moon” and Mary Elizabeth Winstead in “10 Cloverfield Lane”, it is safe to assume that we will be seeing more of Rugaard soon. Especially considering that she holds her own in every scene that she shares with two-time Academy Award winner Hillary Swank, who delivers a strong performance that reminds us of why she won those two Oscars. And lastly, there is Rose Byrne providing the voice acting for the Chappie-esque Mother. Though not a wholly notable performance, it is certainly a dynamic one. Byrne manages to strike the right balance in the Mother character depending on what the script is calling for while never dipping into an uncanny valley area of robotic voice work. 

Fans of science fiction movies will surely enjoy “I Am Mother”.The bleak post-apocalyptic visuals, futuristic technology, and stark landscapes found in this film are all sci-fi staples. And there’s an endless supply of influences at work here. From “The Matrix” to “Ex Machina” to any of the aforementioned films. But Sputore and Green weave them into the film subtly and inevitably craft something that feels familiar, yet new. If Netflix can deliver more films like this, they may just save themselves from the upcoming streaming apocalypse.

“I Am Mother” is a well-crafted science fiction movie with enough twists to keep a potentially tropey plot feeling fresh. It is worthy of the big screen and as far as Netflix originals go, is a must watch. 

Rotten Tomatoes: 91% (Certified Fresh)

Metacritic: 64

One Movie Punch: 7.3/10 

“I Am Mother” (2019) is currently available on Netflix.

Thanks for listening to my review here at One Movie Punch. If you like what you heard – or didn’t – reach out to me on Twitter @TwoViewsGarrett and let me know. I’ll be back soon with more reviews on One Movie Punch, but you can always find me on the Two Views Movies podcast.

I will catch you next time.

Hi everyone!

Welcome back for our third Certified Fresh film this week, this time from IFC Films, one of our favorites here at One Movie Punch. We haven’t reviewed many of their films, which we should definitely remedy, but for a few other films from IFC, check out “The Thin Blue Line” (Episode #021), “Into The Abyss” (Episode #053), and Mike Bales’ review for “The Man Who Knew Infinity” (Episode #317). If you have any recent suggestions from IFC Films, let us know!

Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases.

Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation. 

Here we go! 

/////

Today’s movie is “Diane”, the IFC Films drama written and directed by Kent Jones. The film follows Diane (Mary Kay Place), who has spent her life reaching out to her drug-addicted son, and filling that void by helping others. However, when both parts of her life start to lose their hold over her, she finds herself considering her past in difficult ways. 

No spoilers.

It’s our third character study this week, a fact I only began to realize somewhere between writing the review for yesterday’s episode and watching today’s film. It was by no means intentional, and in some strange ways, I like the stark differences in each character. Monday’s episode for “The Man Who Killed Hitler And Then The Bigfoot” (Episode #533) featured a slightly satirical, slightly surrealistic look at the honorable alpha male character in the lead played by Sam Elliott. “Woman At War” (Episode #534) featured a definitely satirical, definitely surrealistic look at the ecoterrorist or ecowarrior, whichever term suits your fancy.

But “Diane” is definitely not satirical or surrealistic, aside from a couple dream sequences. Instead, “Diane” is a very realistic look at aging, how one finds meaning in life, and the patterns and habits we adopt in the process. Rather than having a straightforward narrative, we’re brought directly into Diane’s life, learning about her character through her actions, and making many assumptions that are delightfully upended throughout the film.

Mary Kay Place is impressive as Diane. Much like Sam Elliott, Mary Kay Place has had an extensive and wide-ranging career, playing multiple roles over forty-six years, glimmers of which appear throughout the film as we learn more about Diane. We’re presented with an overly-protective mother concerned with her drug addicted son, active in her church community, and doing her best to deal with her cousin dying of cervical cancer. It seems like a regular suburban existence for the older generation, and this is but the first of many assumptions to be challenged, especially as we get to know the characters around her.

Diane moves between her son and her cousin, caring unceasingly for each of them. They suffer in different ways, one through disease, the other through opioid addiction, but both conditions are slowly killing them and cause them to live in immense pain when not medicated. Diane is actually feeding off both people, living in her own kind of pain, caused by her addiction to helping her son and trying to come to terms with a hidden past, both of which are slowly killing her. And soon, both problems are resolved, leaving a huge void in her life and the inevitable struggle for meaning in that void.

In this void, however, we are also given more insight into Diane’s previous life, and most importantly the sins of her past, which affected both her cousin and her son, in different but connected ways. We’re also treated to more artistic direction and editing, as Diane herself is attempting to find the creative part of her life again, even while struggling with the effects of aging in big and small ways. The director takes more chances as Diane takes more chances. Each turn in the last half of the film forces us to reassess Diane, and the people around her, and in some ways, our cultural notions of our more puritan elders. It’s not something you can really understand until you reach that age. It’s only something I’m beginning to understand at forty, but it’s clear it is something that Mary Kay Place understands and delivers.

“Diane” is a moving study of the titular character, expertly performed by Mary Kay Place, and well composed, written and directed by Kent Jones. It’s not a feel-good story, but it does feel true, and is sure to make you feel that truth as well. Fans of character studies of aging characters will enjoy this film, and apparently the other two films so far this week. Everyone else, be prepared for a more depressive, reflective film.

Rotten Tomatoes: 93% (CERTIFIED FRESH)

Metacritic: 86 (MUST SEE)

One Movie Punch: 8.8/10

“Diane” (2018) is not rated and is currently playing on Hulu.

Hi everyone!

Welcome back for our second Certified Fresh film this week, this time a feature from Iceland, along with the French and Ukraine film scenes. We don’t get many films from Iceland, but they are generally very good. For a couple others, check out “22 July” (Episode #286) and “And Breathe Normally” (Episode #373). If you have any suggestions from Iceland, let us know by any means possible! We’re always interested in exploring international cinema!

Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases.

Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation. 

Here we go!

/////

Today’s movie is “Woman At War”, the Icelandic activist drama directed by Benedikt Erlingsson and written for the screen in collaboration with Ólafur Egilsson. The film follows Halla (Halldóra Geirhar∂sdóttir), an environmental activist intent on shutting down a local alumninum plant infringing on the highlands. However, when the offer to adopt a child comes into her life, she must reevaluate her passions and her priorities. Apologies in advance for my Icelandic pronunciations.

No spoilers. 

When I’m setting the schedule for One Movie Punch, I like to check out Certified Fresh films that become available on streaming services, especially those with limited showings at the theater. I don’t mind paying full price at the theater based on a consensus score like Rotten Tomatoes, because it supports the local business. But it gets more difficult justifying a $6 rental based on scores alone, not because there aren’t any choices, but because there are too many. Ideally, I’d like to rent them all, but choosing among them is difficult. And there are so many freely available on the major streaming services. So, when I stumble across a film like today’s, it feels like finding a buried treasure, one I would have happily paid to see in the theaters, and would recommend to anyone who enjoys movies.

Writer/director Benedikt Erlingsson, with co-writer Ólafur Egilsson, have created something truly unique, a surrealistic look at the modern day, based on a plausible story, and delivered with excellent composition and bold style choices. Throughout the film we’re brought through a world full of beautiful landscapes and strong characters, presented with excellent framing and filters. The music is excellent as well, but I don’t want to spoil how it plays into the film. I will say, however, it is one of two pins that hold this entire film together.

The other pin is Halldóra Geirhar∂sdóttir, playing both the protagonist, Halla, and her twin sister Ása, who has a supporting role. From the very beginning, we know everything we need to know about Halla. Her ethos. Her mission. Her style and grace and intelligence and charm. All told within a short time, in a classic opening mission for any war film. Halla is obsessed with fighting a war against climate change, on the small scale by preventing a foreign corporation from taking control of the local aluminum plant, with the hopes of shutting it down completely if possible. Her entire journey, in her war against the plant, and her hopes of becoming a mother via adoption, feels genuine and natural. It’s only much later that we’re introduced to Ása, and every time except the last time, she acts as both a mirror and a sounding board. Ása, her twin sister, is focused more on herself, as a yoga teacher and spiritual mentor, believing that by changing herself, she can change the entire world. They present two very different looks at the problems of today. They also represent the struggles some of us have within ourselves, between wanting to be selfish and self-indulgent, but also wanting to help our families, communities, and even the world if we can. Geirhar∂sdóttir is excellent in both roles, and Erlingsson uses excellent editting to capture both characters on screen, and convincingly conversing with one another, so much so that I thought they had to be two different actors.

The film is more than another character study, however. Erlingsson and Egilsson clearly have a lot to say with this film. While Halla and Ása represent our internal conflicts, the world around them represents the larger external conflicts and threats to our present and future. Erlingsson makes great use of space and place, using television broadcasts to magnify larger themes, the Icelandic countryside for gorgeous shots, and an excellent epilogue that ties everything together, and is a foreboding look at one possible future. And all told with a wry smile the entire way through. 

“Woman At War” is a surrealistic look at the climate crisis, as told through one woman’s quest to fight back against the forces destroying the environment. Halla is excellent as both the lead and a supporting role, committing to each character well, while director Erlingsson composes a unique and engaging film-making style you have to see to believe. Fans of films about the climate crisis, or fans of stories with just enough surrealism, should definitely check out this film. Now if you’ll excuse me, I need to break out the old sousaphone! 

Rotten Tomatoes: 97% (CERTIFIED FRESH)

Metacritic: 81 (MUST SEE)

One Movie Punch: 9.4/10

“Woman At War” (2018) is not rated and is currently playing on Hulu.

Hi everyone!

Welcome back for the first of five Certified Fresh films this week, starting with an absolutely irresistible title for someone who loves killing Nazis, cryptozoology, and intentional film-making. It is truly a film like no other, but for a few others that might be close, check out “Mohawk” (Episode #370), “John Wick – Chapter 3: Parabellum” (Episode #490), and “The Highwaymen” (Episode #493). All three involve hunts of their own sorts, although sadly none have a sasquatch.

Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases.

Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation.

Here we go!

/////

Today’s movie is “The Man Who Killed Hitler And Then The Bigfoot”, the RLJ Entertainment adventure film written and directed by Robert D. Krzykowski. The film follows the life of Calvin Barr (Sam Elliott), a retired military officer who secretly killed Adolf Hitler during World War II as a younger man (Aidan Turner). Now in his later years, he is pressed into service again to hunt down a sasquatch ravaging the Canadian forest, all while reminiscing on his life and its worth. And it totally works. 

No spoilers.

Picture it. A conference room. Robert D. Krzykowski, writer/director of the 2016 short “Elsie Hooper” walks in, sits down with a completed script, and begins the pitch by saying this film has two things everyone should love: killing Nazis and Bigfoot, but as a character study of the man who killed both. On the surface, it is a total B-movie script idea, that feels like more of an absurd dare than a serious pitch, something more akin to Troma or The Asylum. But as you listen to Krzykowski, he weaves a very serious tale about the costs of war, the complicated nature of the world’s problems, and a surprisingly down-to-earth protagonist dealing with pedestrian issues by comparison. He makes them not just believe the story, but believe in the story, because it’s not a story about Hitler or The Bigfoot, but The Man who killed both out of duty, not pleasure. And you know it will work, once you see the cast.

Sam Elliott is a huge part of the success of today’s film. He’s the driving force of the main story, set in the 1980s, and the lens through which we consider his younger days. Elliott’s over fifty year career, in both leading and supporting roles, on both television and in film, brings more experience and talent than precious few in the business, and he brings all of that into the role of Calvin Barr, to make him a sympathetic character in present day, which feeds the narrative and performance of his younger self by Aidan Turner. Elliott must have seen the same potential that the producers did, which explains how seriously he took this role. Even the obviously satirical or over-the-top scenes had a proper seriousness to them. It should be an award-winning performance, although it will probably be overlooked based on the title alone.

Outside of Elliott’s performance, the rest of the film has an almost surreal, perhaps Kafkaesque sense of seriousness in all of its characters. In addition to the character study of Calvin Barr, there are many other themes, mostly centering around modern day hero myths, conspiracy theories, and urban legends. We’re often thrust back into Barr’s past while the present-day story is progressing, which works most of the time to support the narrative, and only a few times felt intrusive or jarring. My major complaint was the ending, which felt rushed and somewhat perfunctory, especially after Barr kills the sasquatch. Not really a spoiler, is it? It’s right there in the title.

“The Man Who Killed Hitler And Then The Bigfoot” is an excellent character study deftly hidden inside a b-movie premise. Robert D. Krzykowski delivers a great debut feature thanks in large part to Sam Elliott’s remarkable performance. Fans of character studies, critiques of the alpha male hero, killing Nazis, or cryptozoology should definitely check out this film. Everyone else, if you’re willing to take it seriously, then you might find a surprisingly good time.

Rotten Tomatoes: 74% (CERTIFIED FRESH)

Metacritic: 51

One Movie Punch: 8.6/10

“The Man Who Killed Hitler And Then The Bigfoot” (2018) is not rated and is currently playing on Hulu and Hoopla.

Hi everyone! 

Welcome back for another week of reviews. This week, we have five, count ‘em five, certified fresh films for your consideration, all of which are available on streaming services, including reviews from Garrett Wright of Two Views Movies and our good friend Andrew Campbell. We’ll also finally hear that postponed review from Amy Dobzynski, aka One Movie Spouse towards the end of the week, another Bollywood feature, which brings us to today’s feature.

If you’re wondering why I would re-run today’s film, you would need to thank the audience that supported the film on this very podcast. Last year, “Lust Stories” easily became our most popular episode ever, download over 6,000 times. Yes, that’s right, roughly one in every five downloads for the podcast. I won’t lie, when it happened, I thought this was it! We’re finally breaking out! And I rode that high all the way until we went back to regular download numbers. It still receives double digit downloads per month, and if any of you want to download it again, I won’t mind!

“Lust Stories” currently sits at 100% on Rotten Tomatoes, and has not yet been ranked by Metacritic. You can catch the film streaming exclusively on Netflix, along with their growing catalog of Netflix Original Bollywood features.

Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases.

Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation.

Here we go!

/////

Today’s movie is “Lust Stories” (2018), the Netflix Original Hindi anthology film dealing with love, sex and relationships in modern India. The film is a sequel to “Bombay Talkies” (2013), which is currently available on Netflix. Zoya Akhtar, Dibakar Banerjee, Karan Johar, and Anurag Kashyap direct the four shorts.

Spoilers ahead.

Anthology films can be hit or miss. It really all depends on what the goals of the anthology are. Some are pretty apparent, like going to see the collected Oscar shorts. Clear reason, clear expectations. Sometimes they are interconnected, other times completely separate stories but a shared theme. An anthology film works by fulfilling those goals, but they excel by finding the right combination of films that both compliment and contrast one another. “Lust Stories” does just that.

The theme is exploring the role of sex and relationships in contemporary India, an intersection of traditional and changing values about both topics. The United States experienced the same process, albeit from slightly different traditional values, and over a longer period than folks imagine. People often look to the 1960s and 1970s as the confines of that transition, but I grew up in the 1980s and 1990s in rural America, and I was surprised by how familiar these stories felt at times. 

The trailer sold this anthology film as being about sex, but it also covers the variety of emotional effects on people and relationships. Each director has their own distinctive style and story to tell, simple in premise, but complicated in presentation. All four are well done, but I really enjoyed the comedy and frankness in Karan Johar’s finishing story. I also really enjoyed the camera work in Zoya Akhtar’s segment, using great stationary camera tricks to rapidly move the story along.

“Lust Stories” (2018) is a great anthology film that is sure to spark a great number of discussions in India. Each segment covers topics including open relationships, class differences, infidelity, premature ejaculation, and masturbation, some formerly taboo, others quietly permitted. Fans of anthology films, and folks interested in the changing landscape regarding sex and relationships in India, should definitely check out this film.

Hi everyone!

I’ll let you all in on a little secret. We were originally going to have a Netflix Original movie for today, and while it is still on the docket for an upcoming review, we had to make a last-minute switch. No, not because Pixar released yet another film and it was scoring well with the critics. At least not just because of that. Once we left the theater after “Midsommar” (Episode #527), One Movie Spouse needed something to cleanse the palette, and I couldn’t think of a better film that would be the complete opposite of Ari Aster’s latest film. Be sure to check out her other, way more light-hearted reviews for “The Perfect Date” (Episode #524), “Wine Country” (Episode #502), and “Homecoming: A Film by Beyoncé” (Episode #488).

Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases.

Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation. 

Here we go! 

/////

Hello, it’s me Amy, AKA One Movie Spouse. ::mmmmwwaah::

Happy summer vibes to all who tune into One Movie Punch! I’ve been in the theatre for THREE films during the long holiday weekend. That’s a lot of popcorn, free a/c and time well spent with my family. I could have done without the earthquakes, though.

Today’s movie is Toy Story 4 (2019), the animated family film directed by Josh Cooley and written for the screen by Andrew Stanton and Stephany Folsom. Woody (Tom Hanks), Buzz Lightyear (Tim Allen), Jessie (Joan Cusack), and the rest of the gang find themselves on a road trip with their beloved child Bonnie, and her newest handmade toy, Forky (Tony Hale). However, at a rest stop, the toys are separated, and once again, no toy is left behind!

No spoilers!

It’s hard to believe that we were first introduced to Sheriff Woody, Buzz Lightyear, and the rest of the gang in 1995. Toy Story 2 (1999), led viewers on an adventure to rescue Woody from a greedy toy collector. In 2010, “Toy Story 3” had viewers seeing Andy off to college and the toys dropped off at a daycare center and needing rescue from Lotso, a mean teddy bear in charge of all the toys. And let’s not forget... “the claw!” and those adorable little green aliens. I had two questions going into this film: Is the fourth “Toy Story” film worth seeing? And what story is left to tell? Buckle up everyone, it’s time to listen to our inner voice!

Pixar designers have outdone themselves with the animation of this film. From high-fives to action scenes, you forget that you are sitting in the theatre watching just an animated kids’ film. The special effects are amazing, better than some of the live action films I have seen this summer. Seriously! Pixar’s incredible attention to detail draws the viewer into the characters, helps develop the plot, and animates amazing action scenes. I can’t give specifics without spoilers, but I can say WOW! We can chat via Twitter after you’ve seen the film.

The voice talents of this cast are dynamic. We welcome back our favorite toys and meet new toys in the process. It’s part fantastic script writing and part excellent personalities coming together to work on this film. Annie Potts returns as Bo Peep. Keegan-Michael Key and Jordan Peele play Ducky and Bunny, who have some awesome plans of their own. I was roaring with laughter in more than one part of the film, only to be shushed by our teenager daughter. Oh yeah, and can Keanu Reeves make any movie more fantastic this year? Yes he CAN-ada!

So, back to my questions. It is absolutely worth seeing this film, and as long as there are toys to be played with and children to enjoy them, there will always be more “Toy Story” stories to be told! Younger fans will relate with the kids in the film, and will allow older fans to experience life from their perspective, likely feeling nostalgic. Definitely pack a few tissues in your pocket as well for the more emotional scenes.

“Toy Story 4” is atruly delightful film in the continuing “Toy Story” saga. Disney/Pixar once again gives us the perfect blend of comedy and drama, for young and old fans alike.All is all, I LOVED this film, and aside from the original, this may be my favorite one yet!This happy gal is ready to re-watch the previous films and catch this one again once it hits streaming services.

Rotten Tomatoes: 98% (CERTIFIED FRESH)

Metacritic: 84 (MUST SEE)

One Movie Punch: 9.0/10 

“Toy Story 4” (2019) is rated G and is currently playing in theaters. 

Catch you next week for my delayed review of “Music Teacher”, another Bollywood release currently streaming on Netflix. See you then!

Hi everyone!

It’s Friday, so that means another review from our good friend Andrew Campbell. I forgot to thank him last week for missing a whole week of work to liberate me from the bunker. He hasn’t had a good run of films lately, if you’ve been following his Twitter account. Will today be better? You’ll find out in a minute, but be sure to check out his recent reviews for “The Man Who Killed Don Quixote” (Episode #523), “The Nightshifter” (Episode #515), and “The Perfection” (Episode #508).

Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases.

Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation.

Here we go! 

///// 

Hello film fans!

Andrew here, back this week with... a tricky one: a gothic horror film set in the snowy Alps of 15thcentury Germany. The trailer promises ominous forces and palpable dread without delivering a single word of dialogue other than [SOUND] which translates from the German to [SOUND]. Much like the trailer, I, too, was rendered nearly speechless after watching this film which, for better or worse, doesn’t provide much to chew on. This may be a quick one.

Today’s film is “Hagazussa: A Heathen’s Curse”, written and directed by Lukas Feigelfeld, which made its world premiere at the 2017 Fantastic Fest. In the opening act, a young girl named Albrun (Celina Peter) lives in an isolated one-room cottage nestled in a snow-covered forest. Albrun and her mother are suspected by the townspeople of being witches and are terrorized by some of the men. After her mother passes away under strange circumstances, Albrun is left to raise herself alone, through her teenage years and twenties, as the story flashes ahead fifteen years. The older Albrun (Aleksandra Cwen) remains alone in her cottage, now raising a newborn with no explanation offered as to the father’s name or whereabouts. Albrun is shunned by the townsfolk before striking up an awkward friendship with another young mother. Will she be accepted into the community or will the people be justified in their suspicions?

This film essentially combines a specific subgenre – “historical folk horror” - with a specific filmmaking style - “decompressed storytelling”.  Neither the genre nor the style have much commercial appeal on their own, so when writer/director Feigelfeld jammed them together, he was likely aware of the limited audience such a film would garner.

When it comes to folk horror, it just so happens that one of the best films since the original “The Wicker Man” (1973) was just released last week with Ari Aster’s “Midsommar” (Episode #527). Both of those films excel in revealing the cultural motivations of their people (as disturbing as those may be), as well as introducing individual characters and positioning them within their society. They also provide a very clear sense of geography, taking place within the discrete setting of a small village. With “Hagazussa”, all we are given is that people believe this family of women to be witches, and that they live segregated from the town, but perhaps within walking distance. The vagueness is relentlessly frustrating. 

“Decompressed storytelling” is just a fancy way of saying a film or television show moves slowly, which means you may be staring at some long scenes with very little dialogue to help you pick up on what the story is trying to convey. I don’t have a ton of patience for films that go this route, but there is one director that has mastered the artform. Danish director Nicolas Winding Refn gained acclaim for the “Pusher” trilogy and what was perhaps Tom Hardy’s breakout role with 2008’s “Bronson”. He later found his muse with Ryan Gosling, and knocked out a couple decompressed crime films with “Drive” and “Only God Forgives”. Most recently, June saw Amazon release his first television series “Too Old to Die Young” which includes several episodes pushing an hour and a half in length. The show is moody, slow and downright inaccessible to mainstream audiences, but every shot is composed with the touch of an artist. “Hagazussa” attempts this same style, but the locations are so dreary and the seldom bursts of plot so dry, that it’s just too difficult to enjoy much of the scenery.

What makes “Hagazussa” fantastic? At this point, it will shock you to hear me say this, but [SOUND] “not much”.  I can see what the director was trying to pull off with the story and he is certainly capable of working a camera. However, I just can’t pin down any one truly memorable component of this film; and the alchemy it seeks to achieve by combining elements from other works does not yield any gold. 

“Hagazussa” (2017) is a slow burning piece of historical terror that doesn’t promise much and succeeds only in fizzling out. Fans of “The Witch” may be tempted to give this one a try, but Black Phillip The Goat thinks you should give this one a pass.

Rotten Tomatoes: 95%

Metacritic: 72

One Movie Punch: [SOUND] 5.2/10 

“Hagazussa: A Heathen’s Curse” (2018) is not rated and is currently streaming on Shudder and Amazon Prime.

Come back next week and we’ll try to bust out of this two-week slump with “The Standoff at Sparrow Creek”. The premise promises a unique approach to the tried and true “dirty cop” story. The trailers give off a vibe similar to Jeremy Saulnier’s “Green Room”, which also features a standoff of sorts. Sounds promising. I’ll see you then.

Hi everyone!

Welcome back for another film I was able to watch while trapped in the bunker. Last year’s “The Predator” (Episode #260) was on my must-see list, despite its lackluster performance with the critics and moderate haul at the box office. I was stoked when today’s film became available to me, since I had missed its theatrical release, and just never got back around to seeing it. Did it live up my expectations? You’ll find out in a bit. In addition to “The Predator”, you may want to also check out Shane Hyde’s review for “Starship Troopers” (Episode #447), “Venom” (Episode #281), and Shane Hyde’s review for “Event Horizon” (Episode #254).

Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases.

Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation. 

Here we go!

/////

Today’s movie is “Predators”, the 2010 alien slasher film directed by Nimród Antal and written for the screen by Alex Litvak and Michael Finch, based on the characters developed by Jim and John Thomas. The film follows a group of nine individuals who wake up while parachuting into a mysterious jungle. After banding together, the group find themselves being hunted one by one by an alien race, while discovering a great deal more about their surroundings.

No spoilers.

It’s no surprise that I went to see “The Predator” (Episode #260) last September in the hopes of seeing another classic franchise get the film it deserves. I’m a long-time fan of the franchise, and especially the comic books, which you can hear me talk about in that review. While other critics were mostly down on the film, I didn’t think it was too bad, and was just frankly happy to see another Predator film being made. So, of course, I put “Predators” onto my radar for the next time it became available, because I felt that my disconnect with other critics might be explained by what I missed. I was quite happy to finally see “Predators”, and now I get what other folks were talking about. Because everything that “The Predator” did right last year was already done better by “Predators” in 2010.

“Predators” is actually a genius way to revive a franchise which initially collapsed under the failure of “Predator 2” in 1990, which gambled too much developing a near-future vibe in 1997 that looks nothing like the year I graduated from high school. The semi-reboot in “Alien vs. Predator” further confused any hopes of continuity, which treated the Alien franchise like canon, and the Predator franchise like kindling for the fire, with all the grace and subtlety of 2003’s horror showdown “Freddy vs. Jason”. The genius of 2010’s “Predators” is going back to the original film, distilling the essence of it, and extending the film enough to create a franchise path, while keeping the story in another, even more remote location. Much like last year’s “Halloween” reboot (Episode #302), the franchise would be able to prune off failed sequels and crossovers, and carve out another path. And it can easily remain within any Predator canon should Disney decide to throw more money at the franchise, or even reboot it a third time.

“Predators” has problems, though. Some pretty big problems that seem to have prevented it from getting more traction back in 2010. Yesterday I spoke a lot about my disdain for alpha-male driven action films, and the group of nine that find themselves hunted in the jungle all fit the stereotype, even Alice Braga’s character Isabelle. Adrien Brody plays the lead protagonist, Royce, and he simply cannot carry the performance. Some of the other characters are quite good, like Louis Ozawa Changchien’s yakuza enforcer, Danny Trejo’s cartel enforcer, and Topher Grace’s mysterious Edwin. Other characters are full-on caricatures, the worst of which is sociopathic death row inmate Stans (Walter Goggins), who was meant as a dark comic relief, and ended up just being a patently offensive rapist. 

A mixed cast doesn’t help the formulaic slasher story, either, retreading the original film sometimes too much, increasing the cast/body count and the number and strength of the hunters. “Aliens” was able to effectively do this by changing up the setting and the situation, leaning more into action and away from horror. “Predators”, unfortunately, goes right back to the alpha-male formula, mistaking more for bigger and better, and while it makes for an enjoyable movie, all things considered, it also dead-ends the franchise once again, despite the hope for more sequels in the wake of its release. I’m also not encouraged by the current franchise direction, either, because now “The Predator” feels like a distillation of “Predators”, which was a distillation of “Predator”, and much like a copy of a copy, the quality is decreasing despite the many advances in special effects. It doesn’t bode well for the franchise, but I still have hope.

“Predators” is a decent attempt at a Predator franchise reboot, extending the strengths of the original film with mixed results. While the story is clever enough to weave itself into future franchises, it is also limited by its mediocre cast performance and lack of future options. Franchise fans should definitely check it out, as it is probably the best film in the series after the original, but everyone else needs to decide if alpha-male action slashers are interesting to them.

Rotten Tomatoes: 65%

Metacritic: 51

One Movie Punch: 7.2/10

“Predators” (2010) is rated R and is currently playing on HBO.

Hi everyone!

Here’s one of two films I was able to watch in the bunker, especially given the amazing cast, and in particular Iko Uwais. He’s definitely a favorite of mine ever since seeing “The Raid: Redemption” (Episode forthcoming), and the sequel, “The Raid 2” (Episode also forthcoming). For a couple other films, check out “Mile 22” (Episode #232), which has a few stylistic similarities to today’s film, and the incredible and brutal “The Night Comes For Us” (Episode #295). I also can’t wait to see what happens with “Wu Assassins” when it debuts on Netflix.

Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases.

Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation.

Here we go! 

/////

Today’s movie is “Triple Threat”, the multi-lingual actioner directed by Jesse V. Johnson, and written for the screen by Joey O’Bryan, Fangjin Song, and Paul Staheli. The film follows Payu (Tony Jaa), Long Fei (Tiger Hu Chen), and Jaka (Iko Uwais), who while meeting under horrible circumstances, must team up to take down an assassination squad intent on murdering a billionaire’s daughter.

And there’s punching. Lots of lots of punching.

No spoilers.

In my recent review for “John Wick: Chapter 3 – Parabellum” (Episode #490), I talked about two kinds of action films I had growing up: alpha-male driven actioners and poorly-dubbed imported Asian martial arts films. I also talked about how the fight choreography of the latter group transformed the films of the former group, advancing the genre as a whole, by combining likeable (and believable) leads using cutting-edge hand-to-hand and weapons-based fight choreography and situations. We expect a lot more from our action heroes than just looking impressive, and we’re willing to forgive sketchy plots as long as the action is worth it. So, if you take three of the top-billing action stars in the business today, and combine them into one film, along with a host of decent supporting actors, you should have high expectations. And while this film is all right, it can’t fulfill those expectations. 

If anything, today’s film felt like a throwback to those alpha-male driven actioners of the past, right down to multiple displays of physical intimidation and aggression. The film also makes the same mistake those actioners did in the past: relying on the mere presence of major names to carry poor and overused plots. You can’t just put Tony Jaa, Iko Uwais, and Tiger Hu Chen on the screen and call it a day. We need them to have reasons to fight, and then we need to see them fight. A lot. The story doesn’t have to be complicated, nor does it need a lot of useless dialogue. And yet, today’s film has an overly complicated, unnecessarily mysterious, and distracting plot chock full of played out dialogue, most of which eclipse the action scenes.

Speaking of the action scenes, they were all right. I wasn’t a huge fan of the bullet-soaked firefights involving the assassination squad. I don’t want to see how well they can pull triggers. And the hand-to-hand combat was relatively standard, with a few nice sequences, but nothing to justify putting the top three on screen together, not even the final (and wholly expected) two-on-one boss battle. I had resigned myself to “Triple Threat” never being as good as my expectations, but I didn’t expect it feel as underwhelming as it was. 

“Triple Threat” is a pretty standard actioner that cannot deliver on the promise, nor fully utilize the talent, of its cast. The film’s overly complicated plot and bad dialogue often get in the way of its mostly decent action. Fans of standard actioners, or any of the cast, should probably check out the film. Everyone else, be ready for ninety minutes of posturing and bullets.

Rotten Tomatoes: 67%

Metacritic: 60

One Movie Punch: 5.0/10

“Triple Threat” (2019) is rated Rand is currently playing on Netflix and Hoopla.

Hi everyone!

Welcome back for our second Certified Fresh film this week, Ari Aster’s “Midsommar”, his follow-up to last year’s “Hereditary” (Episode #525), which we re-ran earlier this week. Just when you think horror has found all its limits, new voices come forward to push the boundaries a little bit more, and we all get to reap the rewards. Well, all of us except most of the protagonists who don’t make it. For a few other films in this same vein, check out “A Dark Song” (Episode #489), “The Ritual” (Episode #045), and “Cthulhu” (Episode #444). All three treat ritualistic magic in interesting ways. 

Subscribe to stay current with the latest releases.

Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation. 

Before we start, this film comes with multiple trigger warnings, including multiple depictions of suicide, episodes of emotional abuse and manipulation, graphic gore, and very explicit sexual content. If any of that is too much, definitely pass on this film, and possibly the review.

Here we go! 

/////

Today’s movie is “Midsommar”, written and directed by Ari Aster. The film follows Dani (Florence Pugh) and Christian (Jack Reynor), an American couple having relationship trouble and dealing with family tragedy. When Christian and his friends decide to head to a remote Swedish village for a summer festival, Dani invites herself along and things go very, very wrong. 

No spoilers.

Critics are approaching “Midsommar” for Ari Aster like they approached “Us” (Episode #449) for Jordan Peele this year. Both creators have pushed the boundaries and perspectives of horror in the past three years, and both have put out their second film, which were both highly anticipated after major successes with their first film. It’s probably the worst place to be for any breakout film-maker, because you have the hype and the loaded expectations surrounding that hype, whether you want it or not. Some directors in this situation have failed spectacularly, but I’m happy to say that Ari Aster, like Jordan Peele, has come through with another excellent film.

Why? I think both are quite aware of their strengths within their first pictures, which will hopefully evolve into the particular style of each director. Peele’s “Us” continued with themes involving identity, particularly black identity, and how society uses identity to determine class. Aster, in “Midsommar”, takes another look at ritualistic magic, keeping the same well-researched approach to the lore, and perfectly aligning the cinematography, art direction, costumes, and sets to the story, and taking the subject matter very seriously.

“Midsommar” compares and contrasts two very different worlds. Dani, Christian, and their friends represent the modern industrial world, roughly middle class, and very individualistic. Pelle (Vilhelm Blomgren), along with his fellow Hårga, represent a more idyllic world, classless and communally organized. It’s also about the two very different worlds that Dani and Christian are living within, as we find out in the horrific cold open. Dani is holding on to whatever she can in the midst of a family crisis, and Christian looking to bail at the next opportunity, which is postponed after the tragedy, even as their relationship shows clear signs of strain, especially regarding the trip to Sweden. This puts Dani in a vulnerable situation, looking to escape a life and relationship laden with depression and anxiety, and finding a paradise, at least on the surface.

In “Hereditary”, Aster’s protagonists are discovering hidden secrets within familiar surroundings, in a way reminiscent of Stephen King’s small-town horror. In “Midsommar”, however, we’re discovering the entire society of the Hårga along with our protagonists, which is what drew Christian and his friends as anthropology students to the festival in the first place. The visitors participate in an informal initiation ritual before arriving, involving magic mushrooms and the midnight sun. Aster’s effects team simulates the experience with incredible psychedelic editing that pulses and transforms the surroundings, some of the best effects editing you’ll ever see. 

And... do you feel that? 

Quick story. One Movie Spouse and I went to see the film almost immediately after I was freed from the bunker. It was right around the psychedelic initiation ritual that the 6.6 earthquake hit in California, which began shaking our theater. The sparse crowd of fifteen or so of us started looking around the theater, and we confirmed that yes, we were all feeling that. Oh yeah, and to the family that brought their pre-teen kid, what were you even thinking?!

Because “Midsommar” opens up the audience to new experiences, new cultures and insights. Like Dani, we are lulled into a fascination with the Hårga, built from ancient Scandinavian naturalistic religions with as much detail as the demonology within “Hereditary”, and told over a lushly detailed set with gorgeous costumes. It’s a beautiful tapestry over which to tell a progressively more gruesome story as the festival continues, one that challenges notions about suicide, community, meat pies, mating, child-rearing, and tradition, first in minor ways, then in major ways, as the visitors begin disappearing in broad daylight, and Dani and Christian find themselves swept up into other, more controversial rituals. 

The more controversial parts were part of my criticism for the film. Not for their subject matter, but that they tended to linger a little too long, almost feeling exploitative, including another few examples of Aster’s fascination with gruesome heads. The other criticism had to do with the comic relief. “Midsommar” has more humor than one might expect, especially from Mark (Will Poulter), Christian’s friend who lacks any sense of cultural sensitivity or possess a filter. In nearly all cases, the humor is brilliant, cutting just enough tension to give us a break and take our guard down. But in a few cases, the comedy cuts too much tension, leaving a few scenes vulnerable for misinterpretation. Both criticisms are minor, but they’re noticeable.

“Midsommar” is a stunningly beautiful and traumatizing horror film, well-researched and well-constructed, which tells the story of both the modern age and its ancient origins. If you can manage all the trigger warnings at the top of the review, and you like horror films made with incredible care and detail, then you should definitely check out this film. However, some of the content is extremely gruesome and sexually explicit, so maybe not the pre-teen kids, mmmkay?

Rotten Tomatoes: 83% (CERTIFIED FRESH)

Metacritic: 72

One Movie Punch: 9.6/10

“Midsommar” (2019) is rated R and is currently playing in theaters.