One Movie Punch

Hi everyone!

Welcome to Year Two! Exactly one year ago I posted the first of what would become 365 daily movie reviews, an extension of the former #DLMChallenge to watch 365 movies in 365 days. Over that time, our listenership has grown steadily, and I’ve had the pleasure of working with a number of collaborators to create their own short reviews. Today begins Year Two, and will bring with it a number of important changes to the podcast, including bringing on some of the guests from last year for their own regular movie reviews. The biggest change, however, is that all reviews will be spoiler-free going forward, if they’ve been released in the past three years. We’ll still warn you if we do, but the default will be no spoilers, including today’s film. So, this year, if you haven’t yet, head over to onemoviepunch.com and subscribe to the daily podcast, then follow us on Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram for all the latest as it debuts. We’re looking forward to this year as much as you are!

And now...

Today’s movie is “Aquaman” (2018), the latest DCEU installment directed by James Wan and written for the screen by Will Beall and David Leslie Johnson-McGoldrick, based on a story developed by James Wan, Will Beall, and Geoff Johns, and the characters created by Mort Weisinger and Paul Norris. The film follows the past, present, and future of Arthur Curry (Jason Momoa), as he is called back to Atlantis in the wake of the events from “Justice League”, with the hope of deposing his half-brother, King Orm (Patrick Wilson) before he can unite the ocean kingdoms to bring war to the surface-dwellers.

No spoilers!

The DC Extended Universe has been struggling since the critical flop of “Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice”, which also drew the ire of a number of fans, not a few of which reside in the murky recesses of toxic fandom. One day, the events behind the scenes at Warner Bros will make a great documentary, from the bizarre and extensive reworking of the DCEU in the wake of “Dawn of Justice”, to the tragic tale of Zack Snyder’s departure and its effect on the direction of the franchise. Despite having the greatest Batman fight scene ever produced, and the introduction of a very well-depicted Wonder Woman, the film felt like a mockbuster version of the polished and nearly perfected Marvel Cinematic Universe. Of the three films between “Dawn of Justice” and “Aquaman”, “Suicide Squad” was another critical flop, “Wonder Woman” was really quite good, and “Justice League” was all right in my book. And whatever the critics and viewers might be saying, the films continue to gross well at the box office, with “Aquaman” on track to reach $1 billion (with a B), which will make it another financial success. So, despite what any critics or viewers might say, we’re going to get more of these films, and with it, wave after wave (no pun intended) of pre- and post-criticism, some of which is quite valid, others that are just more garbage hot takes from folks looking for attention. And while today’s film could be better, if we’re going to get more DCEU films, I will take “Aquaman” over most of the rest of the canon.

“Aquaman” (2018) is the first of another creative reboot of the franchise, coming out about a year after “Justice League”. James Wan was a welcome and surprising choice, given his filmography, but not his natural talent behind a camera. I could really see a different influence on the entire film, casting off most of the dark and gritty, fairly pretentious messaging of the previous franchise for a more humorous, straightforward storytelling approach. Aquaman, as a character, does have his loyal fans, but has also been the butt of many superhero jokes over the years. Casting Jason Momoa, probably the sexiest man to ever walk the face of the planet, helps a lot, especially with his natural charisma, bad boy attitude, and superhero physique. I liked his debut in “Justice League”, even when the story and effects weren’t up to the same level. He’s also a safe bet for the box office, especially after “Game of Thrones”, even though I’ve been a fan since his role on “Stargate: Atlantis”. He even makes the power to talk to the ocean creatures look badass. Once we can take Aquaman seriously as a character, then we can take the extensive dive into the Aquaman canon seriously as well, including not just his origin story, but also the rich, complex history of the seven kingdoms, and with that, the potential to tell some of the larger stories within the DC Universe, like Flashpoint or Injustice. The special effects are top notch, bringing the seven kingdoms to life, and simulating some pretty great underwater fights and battles. It’s a huge success for this creative reboot, but it also comes with some noticeable, if forgivable flaws.

The major weak point for the film is the script, which seems to be the source of most criticism. “Aquaman” has too much story for an initial film, giving the impression the franchise is still trying to catch up to the Marvel Cinematic Universe, although the 2h23m running time didn’t feel excessive at all. I really enjoyed the inclusion of Black Manta (Yahya Abdul-Mateen II), especially the origin of the comically large helmet, but his inclusion in the film took away from the larger story. I would have preferred a subtler inclusion, as with Dr. Stephen Shin (Randall Park), even though the fight scene between Black Manta and Aquaman is great. The dialogue could use a lot of work, often used as the major conduit for injecting humor, even when some scenes may not have needed it. I also really wish the film stuck with the awesome score used for Atlantis throughout the film rather than trying to inject or create songs that feel made for selling soundtracks, no matter how appropriate they might be for an individual scene. The soundtrack feels like a decision made by a committee, not really designed for telling the best story, but for making the most money, and without the creator-driven and story-embedded genius of James Gunn’s “Guardians of the Galaxy”. 

“Aquaman” (2018) is a strong entry into the DC Extended Universe, successfully integrating a long-dismissed character as a core part of the expanding film universe. James Wan breathes fresh air into a critically struggling franchise, with a strong assist from Jason Momoa and a high profile supporting cast. Anyone wondering if there’s hope for the DCEU should definitely check out this film, and especially any fans of Aquaman, new or old.

Rotten Tomatoes: 64%

Metacritic: 55

One Movie Punch: 7.6/10

“Aquaman” (2018) is rated PG-13 and is currently playing in theaters.

Hi everyone!

Well, I made it. 365 podcast reviews in 365 days. We’re closing out with the 155th Netflix Original film I’ve reviewed this year, nearly all of which were released this past year. And let me just say that Netflix sure knows how to close out a year. I’ll be posting some top lists from the year next week, but if you want to read or listen to all of them, head over to onemoviepunch.com and search on the Netflix Original blog tag. And for the podcasters out there, if you’re interested in talking with someone who has viewed them all, reach out over social media and we can line something up in the new year.

And now...

Today’s movie is “A Twelve-Year Night” (2018), the Netflix Original historical drama written and directed by Álvaro Brechner. The film follows the twelve-year, nearly continuous solitary confinement of three Uruguayan political prisoners: Eleuterio Fernández Huidobro (Alfonso Tort), Mauricio Rosencof (Chino Darín), and José Mujica (Antonio de la Torre), who would later go on to be president at 75 after his release. 

Spoilers ahead.

I can’t think of a worse torture than solitary confinement, even for someone like me who has a lot of trouble peopling most days. I was horrified when I learned two decades ago that solitary confinement was still being used as a punishment in United States prisons, because the effects on people are so harmful, both psychologically and physically, the former multiplying the effects of the latter. The reason is because the torture comes from ourselves as much as it comes from the detaining authority. Political prisoners often have it even worse, necessarily isolated from general population either to inflict more harm, or to stop them from organizing a prison resistance. Now, take this documented form of torture back almost fifty years, and into the hands of the Uruguayan dictatorship, and you have the story of today’s political prisoners, kept from assassination only because they feared what their martyrdom might bring within the largely supportive public. I would be one of the first to say that this couldn’t possibly be translated effectively to film, and let me also be one of the first (based on the critics) to say that I would be incredibly wrong.

The magic of “A Twelve-Year Night” (2018) is that Brechner captures the right mix of emotions and events over the twelve-year imprisonment to communicate the sheer horror of solitary confinement. Right from the beginning we are shown an example of just how horribly they were treated as prisoners, tortured physically and psychologically first for information about their fellow revolutionaries, then seemingly for the sheer principle of the matter. However, the film is not torture porn in the slightest, also including some of the incredibly humorous and Kafkaesque events that took place along the way, along with some deeply emotional moments as well. All three leads do an incredible job showing three very different versions of what solitary confinement can do to a person. Brechner also flashes back to events before their confinement, showing the circumstances under which they were captured pretty clearly, and some madness-tinged memories that we’re never quite sure are real, even if they might be real to the prisoners.

In fact, those madness-tinged memories, along with some great camera work in tight spaces really helped to demonstrate the toll of long-term solitary confinement on a person. I found the montages to be as important as the rest of the film, never feeling like filler, and always moving the story along. The set choices and costumes were well-chosen, fitting the dingy color palette effectively throughout. But most importantly, I found the film to be an important cautionary counterpoint to most tales of grassroots revolution, not showing the glories of battle so much as the unspoken costs of failure, particularly against a military regime backed by the United States. The costs of revolution are often higher than the film industry depicts, but not with today’s film. And that ending... a perfect way to close out the year of Netflix Originals, and perhaps one of the most emotional endings I’ve seen all year.

“A Twelve-Year Night” (2018) is an emotional and historical dive into the imprisonment of three political prisoners, lead by three incredible actors portraying the protagonists, and spanning one of the darkest times in Uruguayan history. Álvaro Brechner captures the madness induced by long-term solitary confinement, and tells a larger story about the consequences of revolution. Historical drama fans, or folks who might want to learn a lot more about the era, should definitely check out this film. It is probably one of the more important films made this year.

El pueblo unido jamás será vencido.

Rotten Tomatoes: 88%

Metacritic: NR

One Movie Punch: 9.6/10

“A Twelve-Year Night” (2018) is rated TV-MA and is currently streaming on Netflix.

Hi everyone!

I was cruising along great, getting the podcast wrapped up for the year, and sitting down to watch tomorrow’s movie, “A Twelve-Year Night” (Episode #365) to close out the year, and what do I see, but today’s film now available. I’m pretty sure there’s no one at Netflix watching this podcast to try and trip me up from seeing every Netflix Original film this year, but stuff like this makes me wonder. So, I rearranged the order for this week to make sure this got reviewed. Nice try, Netflix.

If you want to see my other reviews for every Netflix Original from 2018, head over to onemoviepunch.com and search the Netflix Original blog tag. I’ll be posting my top lists early next year, based on a variety of metrics. If you have any favorites from this year, let me know at the website or reach out over social media.

And now... 

Today’s movie is “When Angels Sleep” (2018), the Netflix Original modern noir film written and directed by Gonzalo Bendala. The film follows Germán (Julián Villagrán), an insurance company executive who is travelling home while extremely fatigued. When he nods off on a country road, he strikes a young woman named Gloria (Asia Ortega), which is witnessed by her coked out friend Sílvia (Ester Expósito).

Spoilers ahead.

During the pre-code era in Hollywood, directors were fond of writing and directing movies that tantalized the adult audience, often with explicit reference to drugs, violence, and the darker side of humanity. In fact, it was this fascination with film that lead to the production code, which greatly sanitized the film industry, and leaving darker tales for the future rise of independent horror and action films, which would, of course, lead to the MPAA rating system after everyone realize the money to be made. And now, we’re experiencing another renaissance in noir film making, sometimes a throwback to days of yesteryear, sometimes a dark and gritty reboot of a previously sanitized intellectual property, and sometimes, like today’s film, a modern tale of good people driven to bad deeds. See what I did there?

“When Angels Sleep” (2018) is definitely a modern noir film, with Germán representing the upstanding, overworked and underappreciated father, whose job frequently requires (or at least bullies) him to work during important personal events. I actually identified with Germán at the beginning a lot, having worked as a traveling consultant, and later in an understaffed office, and having to give up more than one weekend for the sake of the job, and missing more than that from dealing with the stress. I also identified with him drifting off at the wheel, which I’ve done exactly once, and stopped driving immediately after realizing what happened. I’ve been close a few times as well, and for everyone listening, if you feel that happening, just stop, take a nap, do whatever you can to avoid what Germán faces. I may have identified with his character, but I certainly don’t approve of his escalating series of bad decisions that happens afterwards.

Everything leading up to the accident is really well done, but then everything afterwards begins to fall apart pretty quickly, not just for the characters in the story, but for the film overall. Sílvia is convinced that he’s a murderer, and Germán make a lot of bad decisions for someone who works within insurance, which even plays into the story later on. Bendala does an interesting job showing just how close all the events are to one another, with more than a few close calls that bordered on the unrealistic. The film boils down to Germán trying to track down Sílvia over a variety of country terrain and abandoned houses, and culminates in his realization that there’s only a few ways where he doesn’t go to prison, and a cringe-worthy climactic sequence that left me sick to my stomach. On the one hand, I can appreciate a story that shows just how far a good person has to be driven to perform bad deeds, but I also thought the religious messaging was completely lost by the ending, no matter how realistic it turns out to be.

“When Angels Sleep” (2018) is an extremely dark modern noir film, that takes a simple premise and escalates it into an emotionally and thematically conflicted film. Bendala’s ultra-realistic approach has some great camera work, but fails to have a meaning to make the horror worthwhile. Fans of films with few redeeming qualities in their characters may want to challenge themselves, but otherwise, I would suggest anyone not up for that to take a hard pass.

Rotten Tomatoes: NR

Metacritic: NR

One Movie Punch: 5.4/10

“When Angels Sleep” (2018) is rated TV-MA and is currently streaming on Netflix.

Hi everyone!

Welcome back to another Netflix Original documentary, the last one for 2018, and produced in part by Leonardo DiCaprio. For the other Netflix Original documentaries from this year, check out “Seeing Allred” (Episode #041), “Take Your Pills” (Episode #081), “Mercury 13” (Episode #116), “The Rachel Divide” (Episode #123), “Recovery Boys” (Episode #186), “The Bleeding Edge” (Episode #214), “City of Joy” (Episode #256), “Reversing Roe” (Episode #266), “Quincy” (Episode #270), “Two Catalonias” (Episode #277), “Feminists: What Were They Thinking?” (Episode #291), “Shirkers” (Episode #305), “They’ll Love Me When I’m Dead” (Episode #312), and “The American Meme” (Episode #357). I can think of a few of those that will probably make the Oscar nominations for Best Documentary, although my money is on “Won’t You Be My Neighbor?” (Episode #193). Still crying over that one. 

And now...

Today’s movie is “Struggle: The Life and Lost Art of Szukalski” (2018), the Netflix Original documentary directed by Ireneusz Dobrowolski and written for the screen in collaboration with Stephen Cooper. The film follows the odd tale of Stanislav Szukalski, a Polish sculptor whose life took one unexpected turn after another. His work was recently rediscovered by art critics and collectors, especially Glenn Bray. The film was produced by Leonardo DiCaprio, known art lover, and includes multiple interviews with his father, George DiCaprio.

Spoilers ahead.

Surrealism is one of my favorite art styles. Of course, everyone knows Dali, and a host of other high profile early surrealists, but the genre has exploded over the years to include modern talents like Murakami, d’Holbachie, and Ryden. In fact, Leonardo DiCaprio has one of the largest collections of Mark Ryden’s pop surrealist work, which I had the pleasure to see on display a few years back at one of the trendier art spaces around Hollywood. There are also many forgotten surrealists, and few with the weird kind of life that Stanislav Szukalski knew, and the weird kind of effect he had on the world, both then and now. In fact, the title work, Struggle, is shown in high detail from multiple angles, using a similar method to display the fashions in “McQueen” (Episode #235). A hand in a clutched position, with the tips of the digits formed into the heads of fantastic creatures, fighting against each other. It must be seen to be believed, and it was one of his few works to survive to the modern day.

Szukalski’s life must also be seen to be believed, especially as someone who wrestled with the meaning of patriotism and national heritage. Patriotism and nationalism are two sides of the same coin, each speaking to a dangerous form of identity that has historically lead to some of the most heinous acts performed by humanity. His own struggle with the concept lead Szukalski’s work to be exploited by Polish nationalists in the lead up to World War II, much in the same way that Nietzsche’s philosophy was exploited by the Nazis. And as we learned in the documentary, some of the symbols created by Szukalski are still being used by the far-right Polish nationalists of today, groups that Szukalski would denounce as fiercely as he did the Nazis, both before and after the invasion of Poland. I’m not entirely convinced that we should separate the artist from the art, but I do think we should separate the art from the exploiters whenever possible, because guilt by association helps no one. Especially when his strange life continued to evolve even further.

Szukalski spent a great deal of his life coming to grips with his beliefs after fleeing Poland. Beginning in 1940 after settling in Los Angeles, he worked on a massive idea known as Zermatism, which was a pseudoscientific-historical analysis that posited all humans come from post-deluge Easter Island, and that humanity is locked in an eternal battle with the descendants of the Yeti. Yes, that’s right, Bigfoot. It’s an idea that dovetails nicely with another pseudo-scientific historical idea of the lost continent of Mu, the Pacific Ocean counterpart to Atlantis proposed by James Churchward, who suggested that it was also the location of the Garden of Eden, along with a lot of thinly-veiled racist ideas about its inhabitants. The major difference between the two, however, is that Szukalski saw his theory as uniting all of humanity whereas Churchward used it to “prove” (in heavy quotes) the primacy of Europeans. While the ideas may be absolutely bonkers, the imagery Szukalski used in his drawings during this time became the inspiration for a number of the underground artists interviewed in this film, all of whom would humor Szukalski with his beliefs while being absolutely enthralled with his output. Between his artwork, his beliefs, and his life story, you really come to realize that Szukalski saw himself as a man apart from everyone else, and who brought incredible insight and vision to his work. 

“Struggle: The Life and Lost Art of Szukalski” (2018) is an amazing documentary about an incredible artist, examining his life and art that was almost lost to the dustbin of history. While every viewer may not appreciate his artwork right away, I suspect everyone who marvels at his life story will come to appreciate his art as well. Fans of surrealist art, or fans of the underground Los Angeles comic art scene, should definitely check out this film, then learn a whole lot more about his life and art afterwards.

Rotten Tomatoes: NR

Metacritic: NR

One Movie Punch: 9.8/10

“Struggle: The Life and Lost Art of Szukalski” (2018) is rated TV-MA and is currently streaming on Netflix.

Hi everyone!

We’re back with another Netflix Original film, this time with a screenplay by Eric Heisserer, writer for the award-winning “Arrival” and also writer for another Netflix Original, “Extinction” (Episode #209). Today’s film hasn’t been doing well with the critics, but did it land well with me? I’ll let you know in a minute, but if you are looking for a review of any of the Netflix Original films released this year, head over to onemoviepunch.com and search on the Netflix Original blog tag. If you think we’ve missed one, let us know using the contact form, or reach out over social media.

And now...

Today’s movie is “Bird Box” (2018), the Netflix Original dystopian thriller directed by Susanne Bier and written for the screen by Eric Heisserer, based on the novel by Josh Malerman. The film follows Malorie (Sandra Bullock), and her two children, in the wake of an unknown effect that causes an unprecedented wave of suicides. Now the three of them must travel upriver wearing blindfolds in order to reach safety, while not succumbing to the phenomenon.

Spoilers ahead.

I don’t think there’s any question that this film will suffer with both the viewers and the critics because of the incredible work with sensory deprivation horror in “A Quiet Place” (Episode #127). The two films have too many similarities to work any other way. We have creatures that use sensory input or output to track a vastly depopulated world, in a mostly forested area, involving children and unexpected sacrifice, not to mention harsh consequences for not following the rules of survival. We also have two major protagonists arguing over the value of survival if a person cannot truly live. And let’s face it, comparisons to “The Happening” are also inevitable, what with an unknown phenomenon causing people to commit suicide. I can only imagine what was going through Josh Malerman’s mind, what with finishing his rough draft of the novel right as “The Happening” made it to theaters, and with the release of “A Quiet Place” earlier this year. It’s tough, sometimes, in the marketplace of ideas. However, imagine a world where there wasn’t a single zombie story after Legosi in “White Zombie” or Romero’s “Night of the Living Dead”, or no more serial killer slashers after “Halloween”, or any other seemingly specific horror premise. The trick, of course, is to bring something new to the premise, and “Bird Box” does do that, although not without some problems.

The structure of “Bird Box” flips back and forth between two main storylines. We begin right away with Malorie instructing the children about the rules while they head down the river towards a sanctuary, approximately five years after the phenomenon began, setting a harsh, serious tone. And then we’re back to when The Problem (as it’s referred to in the novel) begins causing mass suicides for most folks, resulting in a very pregnant Malorie holing up in a suburban home with a bunch of other refugees. The structure means we know a few things: first, that Malorie is definitely going to survive, and that another pregnant woman will at least give birth, and that most of the people we see in that home are likely not going to survive at all. It’s not a great start to a survival horror film, but everything begins to unfold after that pretty well. Most of the story is told within the suburban home, its own kind of bird box for the humans, and touches on the usual survival needs, most especially food. We also learn that not everyone is affected the same by The Problem, and that creates another kind of horror to deal with as well. 

The cast is pretty great, especially Bullock, John Malkovich as the cagey asshole named Douglas, and B.D. Wong provides his usually exceptional support as Greg, Douglas’ gay neighbor. If anything, the sheer number of characters made the rest of an incredible cast feel underutilized. In fact, as compared to the novel, there is so much story left untold to fit a feature film. We learn that Malorie and Tom (Trevante Rhodes), along with the two children, live together for about five years after they flee the suburban home, an opportunity for more story development not really explored by either medium. I also thought the blindfolded camera perspectives didn’t adequately capture visually on film what the imagination might create reading the novel, which is also why sound depravation works so much better for “A Quiet Place”, although the simple effects to represent the invisible creatures becoming present were well used in “Bird Box”. I also really liked the score from Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross.

“Bird Box” (2018) is a gripping post-apocalyptic sensory-deprivation survival horror film, which feels like a combination of “A Quiet Place” and “The Happening”. Overall, it’s pretty good, but also lacks enough to keep a good movie from being a great movie. Fans of survival horror films, or fans of post-apocalyptic films, will definitely enjoy this film.

Rotten Tomatoes: 66%

Metacritic: 50

One Movie Punch: 7.0/10

“Bird Box” (2018) is rated R and is currently streaming on Netflix and playing in selected theaters.

Hi everyone!

Welcome back to the podcast, as we switch from movies on HBO to a few more Netflix Originals. By the end of the year, I will have managed to watch and review every Netflix Original released in 2018. You can find a list of those reviews by heading over to onemoviepunch.com and searching on the Netflix Original blog tag. If you see any I’ve missed from this year, let me know using the contact form, or reach out over social media. Netflix shows no signs of stopping given their lineup for January 2019.

And now...

Today’s movie is “Bad Seeds” (2018), the Netflix Original French comedy written and directed by Kheiron. The film follows Wael (Kheiron), a small-time scam artist who manages a small criminal enterprise with his adopted mother. However, when he becomes a mentor for a group of troubled youth, Wael suddenly begins to find redemption, for himself and his charges.

Spoilers ahead.

I recently saw a meme on a friend’s timeline that said folks living in ghettos are suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder, a combination of the lack of affordable living conditions and all forms of violence. The term ghetto is often used pejoratively now, one of the ultimate forms of social privilege, to describe something as lesser in some social, cultural, or economic way. But ghettos are real, and the levels of violence and repression in their communities are equivalent to a war zone. One could make the argument they experience violence on a much smaller scale, but on an individual level, the effects are indistinguishable, especially for children and adolescents. Talking heads love to blame these victims of their environment, often for thinly-veiled racist or sexist reasons, using terms like “bad seeds” for the ghetto and “troubled youth” for everyone else. It also doesn’t help when Hollywood tries to profit from this condition, especially with films like “Dangerous Minds” and “Higher Learning” perpetuating victimhood while only paying lip service to the conditions that give rise to the ghetto. No matter how well educated someone might become about the psychological, sociological, political, economic, and philosophical aspects of the ghetto, if you haven’t grown up in a ghetto, you simply cannot know its effects. But when someone has lived the experience, they can bring clarity to the rest of us who haven’t, and today’s movie makes that happen.

Kheiron’s family fled to France after the fall of the Shah in Tehran in 1979, one of many Persian expatriates to leave the country after the US-backed leader was deposed. Many fled with almost nothing, and ended up in ghettos across the world, or imposing on other communities abroad. His story is the basis of his first feature film, “Nous trois ou rien” (2015), and he brings the same combination of dark comedy and deadly seriousness to “Bad Seeds”. The lead character, Wael, is someone who has lived both in a war zone and in the ghetto, and the story bounces between Wael as a child learning to survive at all costs, and Wael as an adult living the result of those experiences with his adopted mother Monique (Catherine Deneuve). It also makes the character well-suited to help troubled youth, and exemplifies the shared effects of living in a war zone and living in a ghetto. Violence, hunger, exploitation, abuse... all factors that come up throughout the film. Wael helps each charge with their issue in surprising ways, as the film cuts back to a similar experience from Wael’s childhood, no matter how difficult the topic. And it can be difficult, from Wael’s village being shot up by military in the beginning to the fate of his Christian friend at the orphanage.

The supporting cast of adolescents are well chosen, each one believable even if we can’t delve too deeply into their stories. I was left with a lot of unanswered questions, wanting to see more follow up than possible in a feature-length film, although I wasn’t disappointed in the least bit. The combination of light-hearted comedy and serious themes can make for a difficult watch, but it also worked for me in the end. I could easily see other viewers being turned off by what is advertised as a comedy. However, I don’t think anyone with a heart will be able to resist how charming this odd combination can be, nor fail to identify with at least one of the characters, short of growing up in privilege all of one’s life. Great cast and direction. Better script and location choices. But a top-rate meaning and message, especially as we grasp with lifetimes of suffering caused by powerful people.

“Bad Seeds” (2018) is a dark, but surprisingly heartwarming comedy, which explores the connection between the trauma experiences in war zones and ghettos. Kheiron delivers a second film full of heart and new perspectives, even while traversing a somewhat overused premise. Fans of redemption tales, or fans of dark comedy, should definitely check out this film, but be ready for some really difficult themes. 

Rotten Tomatoes: NR

Metacritic: NR

One Movie Punch: 8.8/10

“Bad Seeds” (2018) is rated TV-MA and is currently streaming on Netflix.

Hi everyone!

Welcome back to another review for a film streaming on HBO. It’s one of many solid comedies that have come out this year. For a few others, check out “The After Party” (Episode #237), “The Happytime Murders” (Episode #239), and “Game Night” (Episode #355). And if you have any suggestions for comedies from this year, let us know at onemoviepunch.com or reach out over social media.

And now...

Today’s movie is “Blockers” (2018), the hit comedy directed by Kay Cannon and written for the screen by Brian Kehoe and Jim Kehoe. The film follows three parents: Lisa (Leslie Mann), a single mother; Mitchell (John Cena), a sports-oriented jock father; and Hunter (Ike Barinholtz), a divorced father. On Prom Night, their three daughters make a pact to lose their virginity, driving all three of their parents into a desperate quest to stop it from happening.

Spoilers ahead.

It has been said that the best kind of genre films are able to weave other genres into their stories, some pairings of which have become their own genres, like romantic comedies or dramedies or romantic dramedies. Science fiction, horror, action, adventure... all are arguably at their best when they transcend the narrow confines of their own genre. However, when it comes to comedy, the best films often stay well within the comedy genre, which may inhibit a comedy film’s ability to find critical acclaim at the award shows. The last few years have seen an explosion in comedy films, most of which have steadily increased the raunchiness of their themes, as once taboo themes about sex and violence have been liberated, and new taboos have rightfully been placed on a great deal of the racist, homophobic, and misogynistic humor of yesteryear. It’s an exciting time for comedies, especially when a film like today’s rises to the top, despite every sign to the contrary.

“Blockers” is a film for two audiences. Obviously, the film will appeal to suburban teenagers, often now self-educated on sex and drugs, and increasingly ignoring MPAA-ratings. I actually think my daughter will love the film, even if she would be as uncomfortable watching the film with me as I would be with her. The other audience, though, is comprised of middle-aged parents coming to grips with their own children’s sexuality. I’ve been wrestling a lot with the same issue, and when I discuss the conflict with other people, I get a wide variety of views and opinions, some very self-assured, some with their own doubts and concerns. Comedy, as a genre, is made for this kind of quandary, because we can play out the scenario to its end, with the story smoothed along by well-time jokes. And much like Greek comedies, we can create characters who represent the various cultural and social viewpoints around the main theme. The goal, of course, is to understand the issue a little better, and “Blockers” delivers.

Brian and Jim Kehoe develop an outrageous premise into a surprisingly heartwarming comedy, using well-crafted characters and scenarios that only lets up towards the very end. Kay Cannon takes an excellent cast through the breakneck tale, directing the characters well, and knowing how to drag every second of awkward discomfort out of some very graphic, but also very funny scenes. Practical effects are all great, especially the anatomical effects, and I loved the costumes for nearly everyone involved. But the film really brings it home at the end, as each parent finally catches up to their daughter, and both of them learn a lot about themselves and each other in the process. All three parents actually ended up voicing a lot of my own unspoken concerns, and with surprising clarity. I wouldn’t have guessed the film would have that effect on me, and I suspect it will similarly affect others middle-age parents of teenagers.

“Blockers” (2018) is a hilarious and raunchy comedy about parents struggling to accept their children’s sexuality, as told by a solid cast and at a breakneck pace. While it is a strong comedy, it is also surprisingly heartwarming, a testament to great writing, effective direction, and a wonderful cast. Comedy fans who don’t mind very explicit sexual references should definitely see this film, especially if you’re a middle-aged parent.

Rotten Tomatoes: 83% (CERTIFIED FRESH)

Metacritic: 69

One Movie Punch: 8.2/10

“Blockers” (2018) is rated R and is currently streaming on HBO.

Hi everyone!

Merry Christmas to all of those who celebrate out there, and a Happy Holidays the rest of you. We’re continuing to crush our way through some recent offerings on HBO, with today being a different kind of superhero film, one that I would love to see a whole lot more of on the big screen. Only six more episodes for the year, before we begin our transition to the new, expanded format. We’ve been delivering daily podcasts for almost an entire year, available freely to the universe. If you are interested in giving back, however, head over to patreon.com/onemoviepunch to sign up as a monthly sponsor. If you need that money, though, then just drop us a review wherever you subscribe to podcasts, or share this episode with your friends and family. Anything you can do to support the podcast is appreciated.

And now...

Today’s movie is “Sleight” (2017), the BH Tilt and WWE Studios superhero film directed by J.D. Dillard and written for the screen in collaboration with Alex Theurer. The film follows Bo (Jacob Latimore), a Los Angeles street magician by day, and a small-time drug dealer by night, struggling to make ends meet to support his little sister Tina (Storm Reid). When he finally gets in too deep with his boss Angelo (Dulé Hill), he must use all his skills to rescue himself and his sister.

Spoilers ahead.

Hollywood has been on a spending spree, vacuuming up intellectual properties for media development, most especially superhero properties in the wake of the immense success of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. From the greatest and most popular heroes with special powers in the skies to the grittiest, low-tech vigilantes on the street, each story echoes the mythological stories of old gods and protagonists, and the incredible ability for science and technology to extend our own capability to influence the world. The major publishing houses now have shared universes, with more on the way, and it leaves the idea of an independent superhero film somewhat of an oddity, mostly because they tend to either modify another intellectual property enough to call it their own, or at least in part because they can’t leverage a shared universe of content to maintain a relationship with the audience. It takes a lot to create a truly unique superhero film, and I believe J.D. Dillard did just that with “Sleight”.

One of the ways to create a unique superhero story is to work with various trends within society, which contain ideas that may never have existed previously. Body modification as a concept has been around for a long period of time, but technological body modification is a relatively new concept. Everything from embedding RFID chips to open doors, to today’s self-made superhero Bo, who used his electrical engineering skills to implant an electromagnet into his shoulder and run it down to his hand, which enables him to perform amazing magnet feats in addition to the usual up close sleight of hand card tricks. The practical effects on the modification are well done, along with the special effects used to show the tricks. Both sets of skills have been used by previous superheroes, but we drop Bo in the middle of a way more realistic Los Angeles, well used as a location in the film. A single bullet can stop Bo, or as many superhero stories have explored, the lives of those around him. Despite the incredible power and skills he might have, Bo is just as weak and vulnerable as anyone else, and we feel that tension the whole way through the film, even as it draws towards its climactic scene.

Another refreshing aspect of “Sleight” is that we’re not dealing with a world-threatening situation or some elaborate supervillain, but someone who is a clever young man just trying to survive day to day. The supporting cast also feels incredibly real, and also struggle in their day-to-day lives to be something else, creating a very shared experience among all the characters, as opposed to the “man apart” tendency of some superheroes, both a part of and outside the community. Jacob Latimore make Bo believable, as the character grows out of his own rut and towards a new life. A vague stinger scene suggesting new powers, along with the obvious loose ends left by this initial story, beg for a sequel to be made, especially if it can keep to the same relatively small scope. We need more street-level superhero stories, from a diverse cast of voices, and J.D. Dillard makes that happen.

“Sleight” (2017) is a refreshingly unique voice for the superhero genre, one that eschews worldwide peril for a down-to-earth origin story, which tells a surprising amount of story in a relatively short amount of time. Jacob Latimore carries the lead character through a dangerous story, one that pushes the boundaries of the street-level superhero genre. Superhero fans, or fans of original superhero work, should definitely check out this film. Now, if you’ll excuse me, I must get back to Tomb Raider.

Rotten Tomatoes: 76% (CERTIFIED FRESH)

Metacritic: 62

One Movie Punch: 8.4/10

“Sleight” (2017) is rated R and is currently streaming on HBO.

Hi everyone!

It is a Christmas Eve tradition in the Dobzynski household to watch “Die Hard”, as it is the best and most perfect holiday movie of all-time. However, today I’ll be reviewing another beloved franchise, one that has successfully rebooted and modernized itself in the video game world. But does it translate well to the big screen? I’ll let you know in a minute, but before we move on, if you ever thought about giving back to the podcast, head over to patreon.com and become a sponsor of the podcast. Our formal campaign will debut next year, but for a few dollars a month, you can force me to review “Die Hard” or whatever movie you would like. And if a monetary donation is too much, head over to your podcatcher of choice and drop us a review, or just share this episode with your friends. Thanks for all you do to support the podcast so we can continue to provide daily movie reviews for currently playing, newly streaming, classic and cult movies.

And now...

Today’s movie is “Tomb Raider” (2018), the film franchise reboot directed by Roar Uthaug, and written for the screen by Geneva Robertson-Dworet and Alastair Siddons, using a story by Geneva Robertson-Dworet and Evan Daugherty, based on the incredibly successful video game story by Susan O’Connor and Rhianna Pratchett. The film follows Lara Croft (Alicia Vikander), whose explorer father Richard Croft (Dominic West) has been missing for seven years. After receiving a puzzle while finalizing paperwork for his death, she discovers a potential lead on an uncharted island, and sells all she has to search for him.

Spoilers ahead.

Tomb Raider is easily one of the most successful video game franchises of all time, a landmark title within the first-person adventure genre, containing a smart mix of action, exploration, stealth, and puzzles. The initial title debuted in 1996 on consoles and PC, and spawned a number of sequels and offshoots over the next seven years, and a remastered reboot trilogy to take advantage of the many advances in technology. The franchise also had its problems, not the least of which was the unrealistic body ideal and personification of Lara Croft, likely born of a pool of brogrammers, a perception not helped by Angelina Jolie’s portrayal of Lara Croft in the previous two films. So, Crystal Dynamics went back to basics, bringing in female writers and designers, but also elevating the game with motion capture using an actual model performing the moves, and with a body type and costume that makes physical and social sense. The result was the first entry in the latest video game reboot franchise, and its smash sequel, both of which I have played to 100% in the adventure mode, even after waiting a full year to get the sequel, thanks to whatever dump truck of money was backed up by Microsoft. So, it was clearly time to attempt another film franchise, and they get it about half right.

The real success of the most recent video game franchise series boils down to two main factors. The first was already mentioned, the massive leaps in video game technology, which not only makes regular game play absolutely incredible, but can use the latest in graphics and animation to develop amazing action scenes that delight, from the iconic rusted out plane on the waterfall scene, to some truly exquisite escape runs from collapsing tombs. The film, in my opinion, recreates these scenes very well, almost too well in some cases such that it ruined the surprise of the scenes for video game players. The second main factor was the depth to the story that was developed, which not only mined the extensive and disparate stories of the original franchises, but also delved deep into the story of Himiko and the island of Yamatai. You didn’t start this Tomb Raider as an accomplished adventurer, needing to just find the right equipment to conquer the enemy. No, you begin as an overly ambitious and wholly unskilled Lara Croft, full of hubris and privilege, that immediately finds herself over her head, quite literally, and must take action over a fairly long time period to discover the truth of Yamatai. I probably spent forty hours playing the game, tracking down all the lore bits that delved deep into the history of the island, and trying to grab all the trophies I could. It’s this aspect of the success for the reboot that the film simply fails to capture.

“Tomb Raider” doesn’t have time to really develop Lara Croft as a character, even with the thirty minute quasi-prologue, and certainly not in the same way that playing as Lara Croft in the video game can. Alicia Vikander is the best and most believable Lara Croft yet, but there’s just not enough time to build an attachment to the character. The action scenes really are great, capturing a lot of the more iconic parts of the video game, but the story has been stripped down so much, and moves too fast. I’ve said it a lot, lately, that some films have too much story to fit into a single film format. I would hope that the folks who own the franchise rights might consider a television show instead. I would most definitely watch a first season set on Yamatai, that delves into the four different time periods in the lore, with the expanded cast of characters, and with intense action scenes similar to Daniel Wu’s work on “Into the Badlands”. One or two seasons, then move to the next location for a couple more seasons. We could grow with Lara Croft on the island, and develop a more faithful adaptation of the incredible franchise. Oh yeah, and make it TV-MA or for mature audiences. I want to see Lara Croft get way more realistically violent. 

“Tomb Raider” (2018) struggles to adapt the long, rich story from the video game reboot franchise into an effective feature length film, even while capturing some well-choreographed action scenes. Alicia Vikander is the best Lara Croft to date, although her performance was limited by the need to tell a stripped down story over a short period of time. Franchise fans, or adventure fans in general, should definitely check out this film, but don’t expect it to be more than the format allows. Now, if you’ll excuse me, I’m going to bed early to see if see if Santa brings me the third volume in the trilogy tomorrow morning.

Rotten Tomatoes: 51%

Metacritic: 48

One Movie Punch: 7.2/10

“Tomb Raider” (2018) is rated PG-13 and is currently streaming on HBO.

Hi everyone!

Welcome back to another week of podcasts, another selection of Netflix Original movies, and movies currently streaming on HBO. One Movie Punch is transforming behind the scenes, as we’re bringing on a team of correspondents/reviewers to offer more insightful and hilarious reviews. We’ll still be reviewing the Netflix Original movies, but we’ll also start picking up more theater and film festival releases as time goes on. If you haven’t yet, head over to onemoviepunch.com to subscribe to the daily podcast, and connect with us on social media at Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram. We could make you, like, totally famous!

And now...

Today’s movie is “The American Meme”, the Netflix Original documentary written and directed by Bert Marcus. The documentary analyzes the concept of the social media star, from their origins and meteoric rise, to the current state of the social media industry, and most importantly, the long-term effects on multiple social media stars.

Spoilers ahead.

Whole generations now have grown up with social media as a constant presence in their lives, arguably with the social importance of the Internet which houses the networks, and the electricity that powers the servers and infrastructure to deliver it. I’m not referencing any particular social network, as each has their pros and cons, but the very idea of social media. It certainly revolutionized the way I kept in contact with my high school and college friends, in both good and bad ways. It has also dramatically changed how we project ourselves into society, from finding the most flattering photo angle for a selfie to selectively posting positive aspects of our lives. It’s a tool like any other, and depending on how it is used, it can harm others, or bring people great success, and in the case of some social media stars, both.

Bert Marcus interviews the A-list of social media stars, each of whom came to social media from different circumstances, and each of whom has found some level of success. Paris Hilton, Josh Ostrovsky, Brittany Furlan, Emily Ratajkowski, DJ Khaled, Kirill Bichutsky. Each one of them has used social media to either launch or extend their career, dominating entire platforms for a time. It’s not a list of individuals I would normally care to learn about, mostly because deep down I think we all know it’s ridiculous that social media stardom can land such big paychecks. However, each interview provides a great deal of hidden insight into their careers, sometimes showing the inability to grasp the level of privilege they hold, sometimes showing the very shrewd and almost pathological business savvy. And better yet, when Bert Marcus puts their considered interviews up against the same person’s social media persona, you see just how well they have learned to play the part. Laugh at their antics all you want, but some of them now control major businesses. Josh Ostrovsky is now the biggest producer and distributor of Rosé wine. DJ Khaled continues to bank millions of dollars using Snapchat as a side hustle. And Paris Hilton, the godmother of social media stardom, has turned her overcovered life into her own billion dollar line of products. Oh yeah, and was savvy enough to make herself a producer on this very documentary.

It’s not all fun and games, though, and the documentary also serves as a cautionary tale for aspiring social media stars, particularly when your fame runs out, or the lifestyle catches up with you. We see the dramatic rise and slight fall of Brittany Furlan, who became the target of a great deal of criticism because of her Vine videos, and a great deal of online bullying and abuse by the worst the Internet offers. We also see the rise and current struggle of Kirill Bichutsky, as he realizes social media stardom is not only terrible for his body, but doesn’t have a long-term game. In fact, nearly everyone interviewed acknowledged that the days of social media stardom, as an exclusive means of finding a career, will end, and the perks which had been available to anyone who could gather a large enough audience will revert back to the celebrities followed by the entertainment gossip shows and websites. I would argue this is the greatest lesson to learn from this documentary, especially for a world where a very large majority of high school students list their primary objective after school to become a social media star.

“The American Meme” (2018) is an insightful documentary into social media stardom, comprised of a series of interviews with A-list social media stars, along with the footage and posts that brought them to stardom. Rather than exemplify the unattainable image often portrayed on social media, Bert Marcus dives headfirst into the nuts and bolts, along with a more realistic representation of social media stardom. Documentary fans, and social media star fans and haters alike, should definitely check out this documentary, and maybe show it to any children who have dreams of following the same path. 

Note to self: Schedule second viewing with teenage daughter.

Rotten Tomatoes: 96%

Metacritic: NR

One Movie Punch: 8.2/10

“The American Meme” (2018) is rated TV-MA and is currently streaming on Netflix.