One Movie Punch

Hi everyone!

Let the Netflix queue clean out begin! We got so behind on Netflix Originals here at One Movie Punch that I just decided to take the furthest one back we haven’t reviewed and just start there. It’s going to be a fun variety of films this week, including today’s film which sits somewhere next to “The Favourite” (Episode #379) (and be sure to check out Ryan’s review) and “The Little Hours” (Episode #100), although definitely closer to the first film.

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 “Lady J”, the Netflix Original French historical dramedy written and directed by Emmanuel Mouret, based on the novel by Denis Diderot. The film follows Madame de La Pommeraye (Cécile de France), who learns that her lover, the Marquis des Arcis (Edouard Baer) grows tired of their relationship. To exact revenge, she works with Mademoiselle de Joncquières (Alice Isaaz), and her mother (Natalia Dontcheva), to trick the Marquis into an undesirable relationship.

No spoilers. 

Today’s film is set in France during the 1770s, just over a decade before the French people would rise up and drag large swaths of the French aristocracy to the guillotines. It was a time of great upheaval, but afterwards the Romantic era came to France, taking the ideas of the Enlightenment and using them to reshape their view of the world, both publicly, and within the literature of the time. The literature was often created by former lords, who embedded a great deal of chivalry and social mores to their work, leaving a lot of false, or perhaps sanitized impressions of the wealthy, as if the actions of those in power were separate from the people they affected with their privilege, especially as the new aristocracy formed from the previous feudal structure in France. Historical films are best when they strip away these sanitized impressions and expose the period for how it actually was, as in the case of “The Favourite” last year, and as it was perceived to be, as in the case of “Lady J”. 

The film has a three-act structure. First, the courtship between Madame de la Pommeraye and the Marquis des Arcis, which starts despite the Marquis being up front and honest about his past lovers and shifting affections, and ends when, unsurprisingly, the Marquis’s passions fade. Madame’s revenge comprises the second act, as she recruits the Madame de Joncquières and her daughter to tempt the Marquis into marriage, which is followed by a third act that examines the fallout of the revenge, until the somewhat abrupt ending. At the start, most viewers will side with Madame de la Pommeraye, feeling her distress, no matter how predictable, and cheering on whatever revenge might be in store, at least while we feel the stakes are low. But as the film goes on, and the Madame’s revenge becomes more clear, most viewers will begin to question their loyalties, especially as we watch the Mademoiselle de Joncquières used as a pawn, first by her mother, then by the Madame. I came to find the whole situation socially disturbing on multiple levels, and instead of trying to pick a side, found myself rooting for the revolution to begin. There’s even a scene with a torch-wielding crowd, but alas, no guillotines!

Story and themes aside, the film has a lot of strengths. Cécile de France is delightful as the Madame de la Pommeraye, relatable at the beginning, and deliciously evil towards the end. Edouard Baer, as the Marquis, plays his character in the opposite direction, aversive at the beginning, and strangely relatable towards the end. And as for the Joncquières, they play supporting roles, with Natalia Dontcheva as the mother feeling very realistic, and with Alice Isaaz as the daughter feeling very innocent despite their circumstances. The costumes and settings were well chosen, with nothing glaringly anachronistic within the backgrounds. The film does run a little long, however, and the ending is, sadly, unfulfilling, leaving a lot of questions about the characters, and not providing a whole lot of answers, or frankly, justice.

“Lady J” is a French historical dramedy revolving around a scorned lover within the French aristocracy and her attempts at revenge. While the film does a great job with historicity, and asks some interesting questions, it also fails to provide those answers at the end, despite an enjoyable ride to get there. Fans of historical dramas should definitely check out this film.

Rotten Tomatoes: 83%

Metacritic: NR

One Movie Punch: 7.6/10

“Lady J” (2019) is rated TV-14 and is currently playing on Netflix.

Hi everyone! 

Welcome back to another week of reviews. This week, we’re switching back to Netflix, with five Netflix Original reviews, including the return of One Movie Spouse checking out that other Brie Larson film available right now. We’ll also have our weekly Fantastic Fest feature from Andrew Campbell, back across the pond again for some Swedish science fiction weirdness.

And I thought today, I’d go back and see what was going on a year ago. And yikes, was I surprised by what I saw! When it comes to Nicolas Cage, you get a lot of movies. Some of them good. Most of them not so great. Last year we were blessed with two Cage gems, including “Mandy” (which I have yet to see, because I haven’t yet subscribed to Shudder) and today’s film about what happens when human parents are induced to savage their children. Now, I fully admit today’s film is not for everyone, but it is cathartic for any parent who has, in a moment of frustrated weakness, thought about harming their children. It also sits at a 74% Certified Fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes and a love it or hate it 59 rating at Metacritic. And you can catch it streaming on Hulu, if you dare. I certainly did. 

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 “Mom and Dad” (2018), the horror comedy written and directed by Brian Taylor. The film follows Carly (Anne Winters) and Josh (Zackary Arthur), who return home to their parents, Brent (Nicolas Cage) and Kendall (Selma Blair), on a day when a mass hysteria overcomes all parents driving them to try and kill their children. Yes, you heard all that correctly.

Spoilers ahead.

Situational horror films have become more prevalent in recent years, especially with the success of “It Follows”, “Don’t Breathe”, “Get Out”, and most recently, “A Quiet Place” (more on that tomorrow). In some respects, all horror films have situational elements, but only recently have those situations extended past one or two awful people to include new world rules, as in “The Purge”, “The Belko Experiment”, and most famous of all, “Night of the Living Dead”. The real challenge is being able to balance the story so that it isn’t simply a concept film, but also has something of a larger message to be communicated based on the situation.

“Mom and Dad” is quite literally a savage film, in that a mysterious and unexplained signal is transmitted through radio and television static to reverse the parenting impulse, an effect in overcrowded domestic pig farms known as savaging. Strangely enough, this effect only makes parents target their own children, and not children in general. And let’s face it, there’s not a parent on this planet who hasn’t had a thought of harming their child, and in some places, some folks still practice “spare the rod, spoil the child” kinds of child-rearing practices.

So, how well does the film stack up? It ends up being mostly a concept film, cramming in almost every possible scenario into two hours, including what happens right after giving birth to a visit from the grandparents. Cage and Blair are really evil, and while the kids are a bit meek, they feel pretty realistic, despite some outlandish twists and turns to shoehorn in some much needed comic relief. Brian Taylor takes this concept as far as it will go, riding a line between comedy and horror, and using some flashbacks to demonstrate how creepy some parental behavior can be to children.

“Mom and Dad” (2018) is not for the faint of heart, exploring a truly awful concept in a fun, if distributing sort of way. It stays away from making any larger points, though, even as the script is peppered with everyday sayings and actions that should make parents reflect on their own behavior. Horror fans and parents with strong stomachs should enjoy this film, but be ready for extremely dark comedy and horror.

Hi everyone!

The HBO Queue cleanout continues. Confession time. I have had a DVD copy of today’s film in my possession for about eight years, and had never watched it. Apparently, that’s too much effort now that I have streaming services. Amazing how things have changed, isn’t it? At least in this version of reality. Be sure to check out my throwback review for “Dunkirk” (Episode #468) from earlier this week, and I plan on rotating in more Nolan from here on out.

Subscribe to the podcast for the latest reviews.

Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation.

Here we go! 

/////

Today’s movie is “Inception”, the science fiction detective thriller written and directed by Christopher Nolan. The film follows Dom Cobb (Leonardo DiCaprio), a near-future tech thief adept at stealing secrets from people within dream-sharing technology. After being caught for his actions, he’s given at chance at redemption by planting an idea into a CEO’s mind using the same technology.

No spoilers. 

I think every film fan has a few blind spots when it comes to their favorite creators. I’m not talking about the hard-to-find short films shown twice in a theater class. I’m talking about feature films that every fan in their right mind should have seen, yet somehow has managed not to see. “Inception” has been one of those films for me, one that I missed in the theater during a theatrical dry spell while I volunteered for the union. I joked earlier about having the DVD and not bothering to watch it, but that was because it was one of my last physical media purchases, as we were building up our Blu-Ray collection, and I started to realize the bottomless well of content that would be available on streaming services. New content, recent content, old content, forgotten content. No shortage of content on any one paid service, and no shortage of content on any advertising-driven services. Oh sure, I thought about popping the disc in and watching it, but either the film would become a popular meme again, or someone would make an Inception reference, and I would want to wait again before seeing it. But now I have seen it, and while I wish I had seen it sooner, I’m glad I haven’t waited any longer.

Prior to being offered the opportunity to reboot and reinvent the Batman franchise, Nolan had two films that I enjoyed seeing very much. “Memento”, the story told in reverse, plays with time in some mind-bending ways, which I discussed in my review for “Dunkirk”. However, “Insomnia”, which is set in northern Alaska when the sun doesn’t set for over two months, plays with reality. Both films are not only insanely well produced, but do a great job of engaging and manipulating the viewer. “Inception” manages to do both simultaneously, in the form of a corporate espionage thriller on the edges of reality, and through some excellent world building that reconfigures the rules behind the somewhat played out “dream within a dream” trope used in many previous movies. Nolan doesn’t recycle the idea, but explores the details and extends the framework, even while adding other limitations.

The manipulation of time opened up even more possibilities. Cobb explains pretty early on within the film that time slows down every time you start another dream within a dream. Nolan then demonstrates this principle as they delve into the target’s mind, needing to move three dreams deep to plant the idea, then uses Cobb’s own experience with this phenomenon to give the viewer a much needed perspective check when one goes too deep and experiences too much time. The time shifts in storytelling would be used later on in “Interstellar” as the astronauts land on planets revolving near a black hole named Gargantua, but the layering would be a feature for telling the entire story of “Dunkirk”, covering three separate timeframes thematically. And it makes me wonder what kind of craziness that Nolan might be bringing to his super-secret upcoming project in 2020.

“Inception” does have some rough spots, despite its incredible concept and structure. I thought the acting worked pretty well, although I thought the cast never really jelled for some reason. Perhaps it was the uneasy feeling to the entire film. Perhaps it was intentional given the different stakes for each character. The ending is famously polarizing, for those who could understand it, and while perfect to cement the feeling of uneasiness that permeates the film, also seemed like the obvious way out. That’s admittedly a personal criticism, though. I wanted something more, but it takes absolutely nothing away from the film as a whole. Insert a respectful slow nod, possibly combined with a single, upraised eyebrow.

“Inception” is a corporate espionage thriller set within the land of dreams, nestled within a well-constructed world which extends the “dream within a dream” concept to exciting new territory. The film builds off the groundbreaking work in his previous films, and echo quite directly into the films which came afterwards. If you haven’t seen this film, and you don’t mind stretching your imagination a little bit, then you should definitely check it out, preferably with a friend to chat about it afterwards.

Rotten Tomatoes: 86% (CERTIFIED FRESH)

Metacritic: 74

One Movie Punch: 9.2/10

“Inception” (2010) is rated PG-13 and is currently playing on HBO Now.

Hi everyone!

We’re back with another Fantastic Fest review from Andrew Campbell. I’m stoked for his review, as I share his love of Kusama’s work on “The Invitation” (2015), and I also loved her work on “Aeon Flux” (2005), despite its story flaws. For a few other recent Fantastic Fest reviews from Andrew, check out his reviews for “The Guilty” (Episode #453), “Climax” (Episode #459), and last week’s review for “The Quake” (Episode #466). You can check out all his reviews by searching the Fantastic Fest blog tag at onemoviepunch.com. I’ll put a link in the show notes.

Link: onemoviepunch.com/home/tag/fantastic%20fest 

Subscribe to the podcast for the latest reviews.

Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation.

Take it away, Andrew!

/////

Hello film fans!

Andrew here, back this week with a modern noir film from a director with an interesting career arc. Karyn Kusama made her directorial debut almost 20 years ago with “Girlfight”, the story of a young female boxer, notable for being the acting debut of Michelle Rodriguez. The film went on to win the Grand Jury Prize at Sundance, but Kusama has only made a handful of films over the last two decades. 2005’s “Aeon Flux” based on the MTV cartoon was a critical bomb that struggled to recoup its large budget at the box office. After Diablo Cody penned “Juno”, Cody’s next screenplay for “Jennifer’s Body” was directed by Kusama in 2009. Starring then it-girl Megan Fox, it recouped its low budget as such horror films often do, and has become a mini cult favorite in the years since. In 2015, Kusama directed “The Invitation” and won me over with one of my favorite horror/thrillers of the last ten years. It’s streaming on Netflix now and gets my highest recommendation. When I saw that her newest film was debuting at Fantastic Fest, I was pretty stoked.

Today’s film is “Destroyer”, written by Phil Hay and Matt Manfredi, and directed by Karyn Kusama. “Destroyer” made its Texas premiere at the 2018 Fantastic Fest starring Nicole Kidman as Erin Bell, a grizzled, aging detective who was once a young, undercover officer. The film opens with a struggling, intoxicated Bell showing up at a murder scene in an L.A. spillway (think of the bike scene from “Terminator 2”). The on-scene officers clearly don’t want her help, but she walks away telling them that she knows who killed the guy. Having recognized the deceased as a career criminal from her undercover days, the film unfolds, with Bell facing her past through visits to old associates and current informants, with flashbacks spliced in throughout. 

The elephant in this room is the casting of Nicole Kidman as a sharp-tongued, world-weary detective. It’s perhaps her darkest role since playing Suzanne Stone in Gus Van Sant’s blackly comic crime tale “To Die For” nearly a quarter century ago. She’s a versatile actress to be sure with a career full of memorable performances. The Golden Globes adore her with 14 career nominations, and her four Oscar noms led to one win for “The Hours” in 2003. And here, just like with her portrayal of Virginia Wolfe in “The Hours”, she has undergone a striking visual transformation. The results are mixed. In the flashbacks she is convincing, portraying an untested undercover cop, who is in turn playing a young woman mixed up with some career criminals. The present-day version of her character systematically leans on a half-dozen of these unsavory types, as she hunts down information on the recently resurfaced man who has turned up dead. When she’s interrogating crooks, I just didn’t buy into the physicality of these scenes, nor the manner in which she delivered the dialogue, which I found took me out of the film.

The other big challenge with this film is the shifting timelines as several stories with multiple characters begin to pile up. Young Kidman is clearly heading for problems as the crew she runs with begins plotting a bank robbery. Older Kidman can barely keep herself together as she tears through the LA underworld, a story which might be taking place over just one long day or maybe it’s several weeks; it’s just not clear. We also see Kidman dealing with her teenage daughter and her far older boyfriend as she, too, starts racking up poor decisions – Kidman’s absentee parenting and alcohol abuse issues are no doubt a factor. With all the shifting, it’s hard to grab onto any one story and really dig in. It felt like work trying to wring enjoyment out of each dark scene, but I remained optimistic that Kusama could bring it all together and make it worthwhile. 

What makes “Destroyer” fantastic?

Well, if you can slog your way through ninety gritty minutes of hard-boiled detective work that is occasionally repetitive and often slow-paced, the film does stick the landing. The movie ends with a decent twist that functions as a mini-revelation and serves to re-contextualize the story that just played out (and I promise this isn’t a spoiler.)  The payoff made this film worth watching despite some dull moments – and if you end up digging the main story more than I did, you’ll have high marks for this one. 

“Destroyer” (2018) is a challenging but engrossing L.A. story, that harkens back to television and film police procedurals of the 70’s and 80’s. Fans of street-level stories featuring cops of questionable morals, such “Serpico” or “Training Day”, will enjoy this film. 

Rotten Tomatoes: 74% (CERTIFIED FRESH)

Metacritic: 62

One Movie Punch: 7.2/10

“Destroyer” is rated R and available for streaming on Hulu.

Come back next week when I’ll be reviewing “Border”, a new film out of Sweden that is a work of fantasy, set in modern-day reality. It sits at a robust 96% on Rotten Tomatoes and just hit Hulu last week. Come back next Friday and I’ll tell you if this one is worth adding to your watchlist. I’ll see you then.

Hi everyone! 

Welcome back to the podcast. I’m continuing my HBO queue cleanout with the Lego movie that couldn’t quite keep up with the rest of the franchise, at least at the box office, which also seems to be the case with “The Lego Movie 2: The Second Part” (Episode #452). You should definitely check out Keith’s review for that film. I’ll get around to reviewing the other two films at some point, but will have some thoughts on both later in this review.

Subscribe to the podcast for the latest reviews.

Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation. 

Here we go! 

/////

Today’s movie is “The Lego Ninjago Movie”, the third film in the Lego film franchise, directed by Charlie Bean, Paul Fisher, and Bob Logan; and written for the screen by Bob Logan, Paul Fisher, William Wheeler, Tom Wheeler, Jared Stern, and John Whittington; based on a story by Hilary Winston, Bob Logan, Paul Fisher, William Wheeler, Tom Wheeler, Dan Hageman, and Kevin Hageman. I think I found the first problem right here.

No spoilers.

When the original “The Lego Movie” was announced, I was pretty excited as a fan of Legos growing up, and as a fan of stop-motion animation in general. The best part about Legos for me were the lack of boundaries. My family couldn’t afford to buy the multiple playsets, so I had a combination of two starter sets and some leftover Legos from other children who had outgrown them. No boundaries, the story could be anything I wanted, and it was amazing. As you could imagine, I loved the first film, and the same spirit they brought to the spinoff for “The Lego Batman Movie”. I even loved the painfully constructed positive messages at the end of each movie. And unlike today’s film, I didn’t think like I was being sold anything.

“The Lego Ninjago Movie” attempts to bank on the franchise’s momentum, restricting itself to the Ninjago brand within the Lego empire. The playset franchise already found success with the “Ninjago: Masters of Spinjitzu” animated television series, so it made a lot of business sense to head in this direction. This film recycles the playset story and setting, ending up a video catalog for the franchise, complete with character and power overviews along the way. Instead of the everything goes, imaginative approach of the previous two films, we get the more formalized and generic narrative of saving the city from destruction, told within the format, thematic structure, and comedic styling of the film franchise. It is exactly what you might think “The Lego Ninjago Movie” would be if the committee of story writers, screenwriters, and directors put a film together.

Of course, the film has all the limitations you would expect when developed, shaped, and produced by committee within the constraints of the playset franchise. Humor that hit well in the previous two films is recycled to fit this film, and it hits, but not as well. The film still speaks on both the figurine level and the human level, with an admittedly hilarious bridge between the two in the monster that wreaks havoc on the Ninjago City. But despite the additional limitations brought by focusing on the Ninjago franchise, the film lacked a consistent feel, as if portions were assigned to various writers, and thematic conflicts were smoothed over with self-referential humor, a wink and a nod to the audience from recycled storytelling that also undercuts themselves in the process a few times. It’s not something that most children, the target audience, will notice, but the adult audience will, as the franchise finds more limitations at the end of this experiment with focusing on one franchise. It seems to bear out at the box office as well, with the latest installment, “The Lego Movie 2: The Second Part”, returning to form and set to likely double the revenue of today’s film.

“The Lego Ninjago Movie” is the third film in the Lego movie franchise, narrowing the focus to one playset franchise, and translating its story to the Lego movie format. The film will hit well with its target audience, but also finds new limitations within the franchise, that may not bode well for other playset franchises. Fans of the Lego franchise as a whole will enjoy this film, but may also find it running out of steam.

Rotten Tomatoes: 55%

Metacritic: 55

One Movie Punch: 7.4/10

“The Lego Ninjago Movie” (2017) is rated PG-13and is currently playing on HBO Now.

Hi everyone!

Today’s film has been on my list for a while, after receiving high praise from many of my fellow podcasters out there. It’s been a great thing to see the explosion in mainstream LGBTQ films, both inside and outside the United States. For a few other reviews, check out “Moonlight” (Episode #037), “Alex Strangelove” (Episode #160), “Professor Marston and the Wonder Women” (Episode #163), the incredible “BPM” (Episode #185), and “Disobedience” (Episode #248). You can check out all our LGBTQ films by searching on the LGBTQ blog tag at onemoviepunch.com. We’ll post a link in the show notes. 

Link: http://onemoviepunch.com/home/tag/lgbtq

Subscribe to the podcast for the latest reviews.

Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation. 

Here we go!

///// 

Today’s movie is “Love, Simon”, the romantic dramedy directed by Greg Berlanti and written for the screen by Elizabeth Berger and Isaac Aptaker, based on the novel “Simon vs. The Homo Sapiens Agenda” by Becky Albertalli. The film follows Simon Spier (Nick Robinson), who hides the fact that he’s gay from everyone in his town, including his family. When he falls in love with a boy named Blue online, he must come to terms with himself, his family, and his friends, before he’s outed by a fellow student with ulterior motives. 

No spoilers.

I believe we’re heading towards a more pluralistic and accepting society, despite all the evidence to the contrary. I know we have a long way to go, but I think we’re getting there slowly and surely. Thirty years ago, hateful language about LGBTQ individuals was a social norm, and even media acceptance of the LGBTQ community has recently emerged from the permissive tokenism of most LGBTQ roles on the big and small screen. One way I know we’re heading in the right direction is the explosion of films about the LGBTQ experience with real, complex, and relatable characters, exploring multiple facets of the life and community, from both the inside and the outside. The films show, on the one hand, how normal life is for most LGBTQ individuals, who aside from their form of sexual attraction, or sexual expression, live generally normal lives. And on the other hand, how the lives of some or all LGBTQ individuals is radically different, whether that’s the uniqueness of local communities like San Francisco and Denver, or the unique struggles of homophobic violence, or the unique real or perceived need to come out to the community about their sexual preference or expression.

“Love, Simon” tackles this last cultural rite with a brilliant montage of Simon’s friends coming out as heterosexual to their parents, each expressing a reaction that mirrors the multiple ways that parents react to LGBTQ children coming out. I loved that perspective as much as I loved a similar segment in last year’s “Alex Strangelove” (Episode #160), which asked why someone needs to identify as either completely gay or completely straight, instead of bisexual or pansexual. It makes me wonder, as we move towards that more pluralistic society, whether the whole genre of coming out movies and films containing coming out scenes will seem old-fashioned and outdated, not because we’ll be living in some sort of sexual paradise, but that we won’t expect teenagers and young adults to fit some perceived notion of sexuality. I look forward to the day when we don’t need coming out stories, but until then, I hope to see many more stories like today’s film.

I’m a huge fan of Greg Berlanti. My television queue has every show he’s currently producing for the CW, including the expanding and changing Arrowverse, and the edge-pushing reboots of “Riverdale” and “The Chilling Adventures of Sabrina”. With the last two in particular, Berlanti has found a way to target two generations of audiences, including today’s teenage youth and their parents, with inspirational casting like the late Luke Perry and Molly Ringwald recalling their own youth, at least for suburban kids of the time. It’s a scale that has earned him one of the largest paychecks in the television business, and Berlanti brings this same brilliant fusion to “Love, Simon”.

I’ve watched countless teen dramedies in my years, everything from the films of John Hughes through to the latest crop of Netflix Original films clearly not intended for my generation, although my daughter tends to love them quite a bit. Berlanti translates the adapted source material into a film that echoes previous films, blending in today’s musical hits when appropriate, but also using generation-spanning scores during classic shots like pulling up to school or picking up friends or the inevitable house party. It can feel a bit derived at times, but that’s going to be necessary to speak to multiple generations.

Berlanti doesn’t stop there, though, and keeps a very safe tone throughout the entire film. Simon’s coming out remains the focus, and while it is a very difficult issue for him to deal with, the environment around him feels incredibly safe. Jennifer Garner and Josh Duhamel are excellent, loving, and accepting parents, who might make mistakes, but whom we can never mistake their love for each other and for their children. His friends Leah (Katherine Langford), Abby (Alexandra Shipp), and Nick (Jorge Lendeborg Jr.) are perfect supports, each playing a different role to help Simon navigate his self-discovery, and being rightfully angry when Simon presumes too much, or sacrifices his principles to save himself embarrassment.

And let’s not forget about Nick Robinson’s performance as Simon, who shows just the right amount of anxiety, and never, ever falls into tokenism, whether that’s stereotypes about being a gay male, or the portrayals of the almost neurotic behaviors of closeted individuals. There might be conflicts, but you never feel like they wouldn’t support Simon until the day he dies, and especially through his rite of passage. If we’re going to still expect this rite of passage for our children, then I hope everyone has the same kind of safe environment in which to express themselves, especially when it comes to something as important as one’s identity.

“Love, Simon” is an excellent coming out story, adapted from an excellent novel, and speaking to multiple generations effectively. A well-chosen cast maintains a safe atmosphere, as the lead character navigates a difficult rite of passage. Fans of LGBTQ films, or folks looking to understand the suburban coming out experience in a safe environment, should definitely check out this film.

Rotten Tomatoes: 91% (CERTIFIED FRESH)

Metacritic: 72

One Movie Punch: 9.4/10

“Love, Simon” (2018) is rated PG-13 and is currently playing on HBO Now.

Hi everyone!

Our family subscribed to HBO last year, partly to pick up a host of Oscar nominated films to prepare for year two, partly to start binging “Game of Thrones”. I was one of those fools waiting for the last book to come out before watching the show, but as we all know, whether you want to or not, the book will be out *after* the story’s told. I’m still going to read it, but it meant One Movie Spouse and I had to binge like never before.

Anyway, this week, I’m cleaning out the movies in the HBO queue, including today’s remake of the Romero classic. As you know, I love zombie films. For a few other zombie films, check out “Ravenous” (Episode #066), “Cargo” (Episode #139), “Day of the Dead: Bloodline” (Episode #140), “White Zombie” (Episode #152), “Overlord” (Episode #316), “The Night Eats The World” (Episode #372), Stephanie Campbell’s sneak attack review for “Anna and the Apocalypse” (Episode #425), and last week’s review for “Land of the Dead” (Episode #462). 

Subscribe to the podcast for the latest reviews.

Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation. 

Here we go!

/////

Today’s movie is “Dawn of the Dead”, the 2004 remake of the George A. Romero classic, directed by Zack Snyder and written for the screen by James Gunn, based on the original story by Romero. A disparate group of survivors flee from a worldwide plague of aggressive zombies into a shopping mall. Now the group must learn to survive against the zombies, and from each other. 

No spoilers.

The 2000s were full of reboots. Everything from Tim Burton’s 2001 remake of “Planet of the Apes”, perhaps one of the worst, all the way through to Christopher Nolan’s 2008 franchise hit, “The Dark Knight”, arguably one of the best. Video stores began hitting their peak, with the cost of home entertainment shrinking, and a host of older previously unavailable titles began hitting rental and retail shelves. The major studios and intellectual property owners began mining their reserves for content, as the Internet identified previously forgotten audiences, and began revising older content for newer audiences. Sometimes they brought forward a story in time and technology, like Disney’s “Treasure Planet” in 2002. Sometimes they took an outdated property and made a parody of it, like the ill-fated “Dukes of Hazzard” in 2005. But one of the largest prevailing themes was an obsession with the dark and gritty reboot, taking a story into more realistic and generally more violent territory, and upping the ante in suspense and terror.

The intellectual property rights for the “Night of the Living Dead” franchise has a turbulent history. The original film, due to a technicality, ended up in the public domain. The next couple of films took a while to happen, and John Russo went on to start another franchise called “Return of the Living Dead”. Romero attempted his own quasi-reboot with the 1990 remake of “Night of the Living Dead”. And then, in 2002, Alex Garland and Danny Boyle deliver the next evolution in zombies with “28 Days Later”, with the invention of the zoombies. So, how does Zach Snyder and James Gunn attempt to reboot Romero’s sequel? By upping the ante in practical effects, peppering the story with darker, grittier situations, and transforming the shuffling walkers into aggressive runners.

The film begins with a pretty intense cold open, establishing the setting and tension with news reports, and beginning with the pure nightmare around Ana (Sarah Polley), as she escapes from her suburban home towards the main setting for today’s film, the Crossroads Mall. Along the way, she connects with other refugees, and they adapt to living trapped within the mall. The cast is excellent, including Ving Rhames, Jake Weber, Mekhi Phifer, and Ty Burrell playing an almost perfect asshole named Steve. Everyone struggles to trust each other, conflicting over survival issues, until they hit upon a plan to escape. It’s a fairly thrilling ride, with just the right survival rate to maintain interest. And the practical effects are generally excellent.

However, it doesn’t have the same messaging as the original film, which was my favorite part. Romero’s shuffling zombies, when splayed against the mall storefronts, turns the zombies into a clear metaphor for mindless consumerism, something we only really get from a throwaway line in this remake. Romero’s original story showed the way that humans seem to destroy themselves in the face of a larger threat, whereas today’s film is focused on reacting to unexpected events and ideas. It’s the problem I have with most reboots, when they play fast and loose with the source material. Today’s remake seems to take the premise and setting and abandons the rest for new territory.

It’s not a bad remake, though. It’s pretty amazing that Zach Snyder’s directorial debut was written by James Gunn, for a Romero remake nonetheless. The production quality is far superior, with excellent effects and edge-pushing content of the sort that would get Gunn in trouble later on. I thought the characters were enjoyable, particularly Burrell’s performance, and there was just enough camp to stop it from being a gore fest. But it’s not Romero’s film, and despite all its great qualities, feels like another reboot and/or knock-off of Romero’s groundbreaking work.

“Dawn of the Dead” is a darker, grittier remake of Romero’s 1978 classic, keeping the premise and setting, but reworking the story in new directions. While the production quality is far superior, and the acting perfect for the genre, the film also suffers from a glut of zombie films, and a better zoombie film in 2002’s “28 Days Later”. Zombie film fans, and fans of either Snyder or Gunn, should definitely check out this film. Everyone else, just know it’s going to be gory.

Rotten Tomatoes: 75% (CERTIFIED FRESH)

Metacritic: 59

One Movie Punch: 7.5/10

“Dawn Of The Dead” (2004) is rated Rand is currently playing on HBO Now.

Hi everyone!

Okay, so, today might run a little long. Maybe not three hours long, but definitely a little longer than normal. And there may or may not be spoilers, depending on your definition, and depending on how well you shielded yourself from spoilers and media and the rest of humanity. Shielded, get it? Anyway, I’m giving everyone two chances to tap out on this review.

For a few other reviews in this vein, just head over to onemoviepunch.com and search on the Marvel Cinematic Universe blog tag. I’m leaving a link in the notes. We’re upgrading our website as time permits, so please bear with us.

Link: onemoviepunch.com/home/tag/marvel%20cinematic%20universe

Subscribe to the podcast for the latest reviews.

Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation.

But before we get started, here’s a familiar voice with a quick review.

Hi everyone!

This is One Movie Spouse with a kiss and tell mini-review! MWAH!

Avengers Endgame is an amazing film! Fans of the Marvel Cinematic Universe films will NOT be disappointed. No spoilers, because I’m not a jerk like that, but you will laugh and cry throughout this EPIC three-hour emotional rollercoaster. I need some recovery time, but look forward to seeing it again soon.

Hmmm, maybe that will be the start of our Mother’s Day plans!

You have my vote!

Here we go! 

/////

Today’s movie is “Avengers: Endgame”, the capstone of the first major storyline of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, directed by Anthony and Joe Russo, and written for the screen by Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely, based on the characters created by Stan Lee and Jack Kirby. The film picks up in the aftermath of “Avengers: Infinity War”, as the Avengers regroup from Thanos’ act of balance, taking half of the entire living population of the universe. Will the group recover from such a powerful enemy? YOU BET YOUR ASS THEY WILL! 

No spoilers. Or at least I’ll do my best. If you’re worried, this is your second warning to pause and come back to the review after seeing the film. 

I want to start by talking a little bit about the Marvel Cinematic Universe as a whole, to set the stage for reviewing today’s film. It began with a unique idea: taking the leftover Marvel characters whose rights weren’t currently controlled by other studios, and create a series of films that bring the heroes together in a cinematic team-up to top all other superhero films. A risky proposition for any studio, given the immense budgets needed for each film, ranging from $140 million to $220 million for the Phase One films. Each film would have to not only make enough to pay back the costs, but also enough to help fund the next films in the franchise. And they did extremely well with Phase One, with “Iron Man” turning a $140 million budget into $565 million worldwide, helping to cover the next films, and turning a combined $1.1 billion in production costs into $3.8 billion at the box office, not to mention all the incredible merchandising and home media.

The sky was the limit, with plans to expand the slate of films, and to invade the small screen via two networks, with “Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.” and “Agent Carter” debuting on ABC, and a small universe of New York based shows beginning on “Netflix”. Anything that wasn’t under the exclusive control of another studio became fair game, and Marvel has one of the deepest benches around. The success was so immense that both Sony and Fox rebooted their ailing Spider Man and X-Men franchises, and Universal sat on any possible exclusive Hulk films to the present day. I’ve seen nearly all the content, with the exception of some of the shorts, and each film or show integrated itself within the universe to a different degree, with varying levels of success. “Avengers: Endgame” acts as a semi-capstone to everything, and does so in probably the best way possible. 

It’s going to be difficult to discuss this film without spoilers. I went back to watch all the trailers and television spots to make sure I knew what I could and could not talk about. It is impressive how well the creators hid key aspects of the plot and characters in the marketing leading up to the premiere. We enter the film days after the snap, with the world still in varying states of chaos. As the trailers suggest, the remaining team members, with the recently introduced Captain Marvel (Brie Larson), are attempting to locate Thanos (Josh Brolin), and more importantly, the Infinity Gauntlet, to reverse all the devastation. And just like that, we’re off on an opening sequence that works as the missing epilogue to “Avengers: Infinity War”, before our heroes realize just how impossible the task is going to be. The viewer also realizes that most of what was in the trailers, featurettes and interviews was in the first thirty minutes of the film, leaving two hours and thirty minutes of surprises. We know what the story is going to be, but now we have no idea how it’s going to work. 

It’s at this point that I have to stop discussing details and start talking around the story. Here are a few vague statements that won’t spoil anything. I found the film to sit very well within the Marvel Cinematic Universe, working with continuity in the absolutely best ways, while recognizing just how fast and loose they play with concepts and ideas to make the impossible possible. The film finds exciting and hilarious new ways to play with the remaining characters, making me laugh out loud multiple times, and gave incredible respect to the characters who will not make it out alive. Or at least characters who are now as dead as any comic book character ends up being. I laughed, I cried. I felt hope and sorrow and fear and anger and love. And never did I feel like it was three hours, even while sitting to process everything as the credits ran. I was absolutely riveted. 

By the end of the film, I realized just how far ahead Marvel has placed themselves in the shared universe franchise game. While other franchises are struggling to find their legs, Marvel just moved ahead a few lengths in capping off their first major wave of films. And despite the body count within the film, still contains the promise of many more films in the second wave, although very little but rumors and announcements to go on, and no major hints given during the credit sequence. A host of television shows are planned for Disney+, reprising a number of supporting characters, that will hopefully have some attachment to the larger universe.

And speaking of that larger universe, I’m curious what, if anything, will happen with the various television shows that have maintained a connection with the movies. “Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.” and “Agent Carter”, along with the ill-fated “Marvel’s Inhumans” shows, maintained direct ties back to the movies. The Netflix shows are being cancelled, which is a convenient escape hatch (and personally speaking, a devastating loss of mostly excellent characters). Where will up and coming shows like Hulu’s “Marvel’s Runaways” and Freeform’s “Marvel’s Cloak and Dagger” integrate into the events of “Avengers: Endgame”, especially since most of these characters were absent? And perhaps the biggest question, how do the brand new toys acquired in the Fox / Disney merger get integrated going forward? Because I definitely want to see either Avengers vs. X-Men, or Secret Wars, or even Deadpool’s Secret Secret Wars! I mean, it’s like they want us hanging on and waiting for more, or something! 

“Avengers: Endgame” is a truly unique film, one that weaves together twenty-one different films worth of content and promise into a stunning capstone conclusion. It is definitely a film for the fans and will hit best with those who’ve kept pace with the franchise, but it is a shocking good payoff for the massive investment to get to this point. Now, if you’ll excuse me, I have about a million reviews I have to go read now. Whatever it takes, right?

Rotten Tomatoes: 96% (CERTIFIED FRESH)

Metacritic: 77

One Movie Punch: 10/10

“Avengers: Endgame” (2019) is rated PG-13 and is currently playing in theaters.

Hi everyone!

We’re back with another week of reviews, including a spring cleaning of my HBO queue, another Fantastic Fest review from Andrew Campbell, and a review for a small film from this weekend called, and let me check my notes here, yes, “Avengers: Endgame”. I’ll give you my thoughts on this niche film tomorrow with a special Matinee Monday review. 

So, obviously to get ready for this film, todays classic review will be... “Dunkirk”. I shot myself in the foot last month recycling “Avengers: Infinity War” to prepare for “Captain Marvel”. But I’ll let you all in on a little secret. I’m reviewing “Dunkirk” today because this Saturday I’ll be reviewing a movie within a movie within a movie, asking questions like “Am I Chuang Tzu dreaming I am a butterfly, or a butterfly dreaming that I am Chuang Tzu?”. Like whoa, right? 

“Dunkirk” maintains a 92% Certified Fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes and an incredible 94 Must See rating at Metacritic. You can check it out streaming exclusively on MaxGo, or by rent and purchase from most digital outlets. Highly recommended for war film fans.

Subscribe to the podcast for the latest reviews.

Connect with us over social media to continue the conversation.

Here we go!

/////

Today’s movie is “Dunkirk” (2017), the Oscar winning drama written and directed by Christopher Nolan. The film follows an ensemble cast of characters during the World War II evacuation of Dunkirk. The film was nominated for eight Oscars and won three for Film Editing, Sound Editing, and Sound Mixing.

Spoilers ahead.

Christopher Nolan really knows how to make a film, and I’m not saying that because he made one of my favorite films of all time, “The Dark Knight”. At least not just because of that. I’ve been a fan since checking out “Memento” in college, having my mind melt as the story progressed backwards, knowing I had seen something that will be studied in a few decades. And sure enough, my daughter is studying that film in her high school TV & Film class, along with “Exit Through The Gift Shop” (Episode #060) and “Dear Zachary: A Letter to a Son about His Father” (Episode #095). We both kind of laughed that she was studying two films I had reviewed earlier this year. And while I haven’t yet seen “Inception” (I know, I know...), I was excited to see this, and now that I finally have, really regret not seeing it on the big screen. Because damn.

I was impressed by structure of the script, splitting the story into three separate stories with different timelines, converging at the end with the final rescues and aftermath. I was a little worried at the start, wondering if it would be too confusing, but Nolan does a great job using thematic storytelling for the film, keeping the right tension across the stories, even as they are converging. It is the same kind of scripting genius that drew me to “Memento”, and has brought me back ever since. The thematic storytelling only works with the right composition, though, and here again, Nolan weaves the sights, sounds, score, and performances to drive home the meaning of Dunkirk, both the reality of the day, and the inspiration later drawn from it to continue fighting the fascists. Top film, which definitely earned every Oscar for film and sound editing. 

The cast is a great ensemble, including Aneurin Barnard, Barry Keoghan, Harry Styles, Mark Rylance, Cillian Murphy, James D’Arcy, Will Attenborough, and Kenneth Branagh. I don’t think anyone turned in a bad performance, and nearly all of them were in top form. War films that involve major battles almost require having large casts, to create the necessary realism, as opposed to the World War II films of yesteryear that relied heavily on small casts and large backdrops, like the film about Dunkirk being shot during World War II in last year’s “Our Finest”. We expect a lot more since “Saving Private Ryan”, and Nolan delivers.

“Dunkirk” (2017) is a sweeping tale of one of the greatest and most miraculous evacuations of all time. Nolan constructs an amazing script using thematic storytelling across converging timelines, showing three separate aspects of the event that inspired the United Kingdom to continue fighting, even in their darkest hour. Everyone has likely already seen this, but I would definitely recommend it to just about everyone, especially with the PG-13 rating.

Hi everyone! 

Closing out the week with a film that I couldn’t get One Movie Spouse to watch if I tried. And that’s probably just as well, because it quickly descends into some bizarre territory. For a few other Japanese films I *could* get her to watch, check out “After the Storm” (Episode #031), “Oh Lucy!” (Episode #219), Keith’s review for “Shoplifters” (Episode #394), and Keith’s review for “River’s Edge” (Episode #443).

Subscribe to stay current on all our reviews. Connect with us on social media to continue the conversation.

Here we go!

/////

Today’s movie is “Before We Vanish”, the Japanese science-fiction thriller directed by Kiyoshi Kurosawa, and written for the screen in collaboration with Sachiko Tanaka, based on the play by Tomohiro Maekawa. The film follows three alien invaders who merge with the bodies of Shinji Kase (Ryûhei Matsuda), Akira Tachibana (Yuri Tsunematsu), and Amano (Mahiro Takasugi). The three set about reconnecting to trigger the invasion, with the unexpected aide from those they encounter.

No spoilers.

Body snatching films are another favorite genre of mine, not just because of the tension they can bring to film-making, but because the idea really gets at the heart of the mind/body connection, one which has plagued philosophy since Aristotle said that because we perceive and think, we must therefore exist, or perhaps more famously and succinctly by Rene Descartes’ “Cogito ergo sum” or “I think, therefore I am”. We still don’t understand the mind-body connection, and as neuroscience continues to expand, we seem to struggle with more questions than answers. Both body snatching films and possession films play with that connection, considering worlds where the two can be broken, and minds can inhabit other bodies. A concept that comes with big ideas, but today’s film goes one step further, as we learn quite quickly that the aliens snatching bodies are here to understand human concepts, and when they harvest these concepts from another human mind, the victim loses all memory of that concept, and change their behaviors accordingly, which plunges the city into a bizarre form of chaos.

The three don’t come together right away, spending the first half of the film attempting to find one another. Two come together pretty quickly, thanks to a reporter named Sakurai (Hiroki Hasegawa) looking to get the scoop. Shinji is aided by his separated spouse, Narumi Kase (Masami Nagasawa). Both guides struggle to believe the situation, until they see enough proof, from the aliens themselves and from the ever-escalating military/government presence. The film score, during the first act, leans heavily on the science-fiction scores of the 1950’s and 1960’s, both the fledgling Japanese film industry of the time, and the plethora of US and UK science-fiction films, with sparse and exotic tones from physical instruments. Very well composed. 

The second act accelerates the film, showing the breakdown in society from people forced to abandon long-entrenched social notions like work and possessions and love, a delightfully subversive film for capitalist society in general, and even more so for the socially structured Japanese culture. The guides struggle with helping to begin the invasion and working to stop it, even when it seems futile, and builds towards a pretty awesome final act with great practical and interesting special effects. By the end of the film, I found myself reconsidering a lot of notions we share in society, and came to appreciate how Kurosawa was able to make perfectly normal parts of our society suddenly feel alien. To top it off, the film has one of my favorite gun punches of all time. And you know how much I love punching!

“Before We Vanish” is an exciting body snatcher invasion film, that takes advantage of modern advances in society and film-making, while maintaining classic common elements from previous works. Kurosawa makes the mundane seem alien by exploring the larger concepts at play, and keeping the right momentum. Body snatching and alien invasion film fans should definitely check out this film, but know going in that the film definitely gets philosophical, in all the right ways.

Rotten Tomatoes: 78% (CERTIFIED FRESH)

Metacritic: 64

One Movie Punch: 8.5/10

“Before We Vanish” (2017) is rated Rand is currently playing on Hulu.