One Movie Punch

Hi everyone! 

Welcome back for our continued catchup of Netflix Originals this week, this time with a film coproduced by Mexico and the Netherlands. For a few other Netflix Originals from either country, check out “Sun Dogs” (Episode #107), “The 4th Company” (Episode #108), “The Motive” (Episode #234), and “The Resistance Banker” (Episode #258). And if you have any suggestions from either country, let me know at onemoviepunch.com or reach out over social media.

And now...

Today’s movie is “Time Share” (2018), the Netflix Original drama directed by Sebastián Hofmann and written for the screen in collaboration with Julio Chavezmontes. The film follows two family men, one a visitor with his family to a time share resort, the other a long-term employee for the same resort, who both become convinced the new owners are trying to take away their loved ones. Now, as the warnings signs grow, they join forces to prevent what may only be happening inside their minds.

Spoilers ahead.

I have only been to a handful of resorts in my life, generally as part of business trips as a consultant, and once as a ten-year wedding anniversary trip with my spouse. I know a great many people are in love with resorts, judging from the many people I know who have purchased time shares, and I can understand the appeal, even if I don’t share it. It’s nice to know there’s somewhere to go to get away from the daily grind, and for some folks, it’s wonderful to have all your needs fulfilled... as long as you can afford them. Two weeks where slaves can feel like masters, an ongoing corporate Saturnalia festival, except instead of the billionaires doing the work, they hire other, much lower paid people to fulfill those dreams. After all, the owners are living that life every day. Most of us can just buy a taste, which is where we enter the story for today’s movie.

We begin with a short prologue for one half of our duo, Andres (Miguel Rodarte), the resort worker, who five years ago suffers an anxiety attack working at the resort, and we come to learn, is prescribed a regimen of medicines and regular therapy to help deal with the consequences of that attack. And then we meet Pedro (Luis Gerardo Méndez), who has arrived at the time share with his son and his wife Eva (Cassandra Ciangherotti) to help his family reconnect. Of course, we also learn that the time share has been overbooked, and their family will have to share the villa with another family, who want to get a little too familiar. Andres acts as the inside perspective, and Pedro acts as the outside perspective, and we watch as their stories unfold during the resort ownership transition, being led by a corporate drone named Tom (RJ Mitte), who is selling both employees and customers a better future. It’s a wonderful setup for telling a human story and delivering a social critique of time shares in general.

Hofmann takes us all over the resort, among the time share owners, and behind the scenes in the industrial parts of the resort, showing up a very different story of resort life. Innocuous scenes are endowed with meaning by adding the right filters or accompanying score to help build tension. Hofmann and Chavezmontes also leverage the very real tactics used by time shares, including training their sales associates to lie to make the sale, and using dossiers with private information for each family to hit the right emotional triggers. Andres believes his wife Gloria (Montserrat Marañon) will leave him for a better future as a sales associate, which is a promise Tom has made her should she make the sale. Pedro believes the resort is trying to manipulate him, and quite frankly, he’s right, although not in the ways he believes. I felt paranoid and unsure the whole film, but also entranced, like a progressively stranger acid trip. It’s the same feeling I’ve felt at other resorts, and when that clicked, I realized just how much I enjoyed this film.

“Time Share” (2018) is a paranoid look into time share resorts, told through two different perspectives, and exploring the weird social ecosystem surrounding their properties. Hofmann and Chavezmontes craft a script which the cast carries to its intriguing and socially cathartic end. Fans of the surreal, looking for an interesting social critique, should definitely check out this film.

Rotten Tomatoes: 94%

Metacritic: NR

One Movie Punch: 8.6/10 

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

Hi everyone!

Welcome back to the podcast, as we get caught up on the recent Netflix Original offerings posted in the last couple weeks, this time from France. For a few other recent French Netflix Originals, check out “Blockbuster” (Episode #026), “I Am Not An Easy Man” (Episode #110), “To Each Her Own” (Episode #199), “The Crew” (Episode #321), and a recent favorite, “Nothing to Hide” (Episode #336). And if you have any suggestions from the French film scene, let me know at onemoviepunch.com or reach out over social media.

And now...

Today’s movie is “The World is Yours” (2018), the Netflix Original French crime comedy, directed by Romain Gavras and adapted to the screen in collaboration with Karim Boukercha and Noé Debré. The film follows Farès (Karim Leklou), a Parisian drug dealer who wants to get out of the game, and is forced to take on one final job before doing so. However, when things start to go wrong, he turns to his mother Danny (Isabelle Adjani), despite every reason not to.

Spoilers ahead.

I love when films find the perfect tone, complimenting the story, and brought to life by a combination of direction, performances, sets, score, and soundtrack. Everything resonates on the same frequency, strengthening the engagement of the viewer, and creating the greatest of all film emotions, anticipation. It’s the harder way to create anticipation, maybe the hardest way for a crime film with yet another “one last job” premise. And yet, “The World is Yours” does just that, elevating the overused premise with a smart story, excellent characters, and consistent composition driven by an infectious musical score and soundtrack from Sebastian Akchoté and Jamie XX. A crime film for crime fans. 

“The World is Yours” is driven largely by the failings of its characters. Farés has dreams of pursuing a legitimate business opportunity and a normal life, away from the life of crime he was born into. He’s probably the most level-headed character, but also places too much trust into the people around him, which places his promising business opportunity into jeopardy. Isabelle Adjani is hilarious as Danny, who has gambled away money Farés was saving for his escape. His older partner in crime, Henri (Vincent Cassel), can’t see a future outside of his life unless it’s romantically involved with Farés’ mother. And his love from another time, Lamya (Oulaya Amamra), seems to lack the ability to reciprocate Farés’ trust. A fun supporting cast creates a web that begins untangling itself during the final job, with a surprising showdown in a beachside resort town.

Romain Gavras takes a stylistic approach that echoes parts of Tarantino’s “Jackie Brown”, using grainy filters, muted colours, and most importantly, a killer soundtrack. Every transition in the film is exquisitely scored, crossing a number of genres to fit each moment, but somehow having a consistently washed out and retro feel. It doesn’t just look good, but sounds good, and the two elements create a feedback loop that creates the perfect tone. I was never quite sure where it was headed, but I was excited to get wherever it was going.

“The World is Yours” (2018) is an exquisitely crafted, dark comedy crime film, with a host of interesting characters and unexpected events. Romain Gavras elevates the “one last job” premise into something much more, bringing together all the elements into a stylish film, one that looks as good as it sounds. Crime fans, or dark comedy fans, should definitely check out this film, as well as anyone who is a fan of music. 

Rotten Tomatoes: 100%

Metacritic: 74

One Movie Punch: 8.4/10

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

Hi everyone! 

We’re back today with another Netflix Original film, this time another offering from India, part of Netflix’s initial six feature deal with the country. For the other offerings from earlier this year, check out “Love Per Square Foot” (Episode #052), “Sometimes” (Episode #136), “Lust Stories” (Episode #168), and “Brjj Mohan Amar Rahe” (Episode #220). And if you have any suggestions from Bollywood, let me know at onemoviepunch.com, or reach out over social media. 

And now...

Today’s movie is “Rajma Chawal” (2018), the Netflix Original Indian dramedy directed by Leena Yadav and written for the screen in collaboration with Vivek Anchalia and Manu Rishi Chadha. The film follows Raj (Rishi Kapoor), a technology-ignorant father attempting to repair his relationship via social media with his millennial son Kabir (Anirudh Tanwar), after moving back to Old Delhi from their more affluent neighborhood. However, after his initial friend request was rejected, he creates a female profile, and feels connected, until it all comes apart.

Spoilers ahead.

I’m not as well versed in Bollywood films as I should be. My wife absolutely loves the lighter output from the film scene, and there are plenty of great storytelling opportunities with so many cultures and changes in one place. I’m also a huge fan of Indian cuisine, so today’s film titled after a red kidney bean curry dish, itself a sort of mélange of flavors and cultures, seems like a no brainer to watch. “Rajma Chawal” is a film about that convergence, not just of cultures as in Old Delhi, but between generations, changing as fast as technology can alienate us from one another. And the film opens up, appropriately enough, with a conflict between Raj and Kabir over his desire to eat rajma chawal with a spoon instead of with his fingers as is traditionally done. It’s a nice setup that we watch unfold over the course of the nearly two hour film.

Now, don’t get me wrong, parents catfishing their children, even adult children, is a very bad idea. It sets up a weird dynamic that continues throughout the film, with Kabir finding a connection with a woman, and developing false emotional attachments. And in Old Delhi, where literally anything could happen, of course Kabir finds the woman whose photo was used to set up the account, named Seher (Amyra Dastur), and things get even more complicated, especially as Kabir is learning to love Old Delhi as much as his family, and forming a new band to replace the one which broke up with their move. Dramedy is the best descriptor, actually, because it is more drama than comedy, often, and all put together with that classic Bollywood film-making, putting the right emotion into every scene even if it clashes with the overall tone.

I think the most distressing thing about the film was that most of the music was so clearly lip-synced, and that’s a big problem for a protagonist that is supposed to be a musician. I loved the music, but it had all the believability of George Clooney in Episode #322 (“O Brother, Where Art Thou?”). It also writes itself into a corner towards the end, blowing up everything, and creating space for a rushed, but satisfying ending with some muddled messaging in the resolution. The cast is pretty solid, and the costumes and sets are great. It’s fun, but it has its flaws.

“Rajma Chawal” (2018) is the fifth Netflix Original Indian film for this year, a family dramedy that begins with a father catfishing a son, and ends with family finding love and meaning in their lives. It has its problems, but it also has its strengths, and will be sure to entertain fans of Bollywood or family dramedies in general. It may also make you stupid hungry for curry, which I’m putting on the calendar for next week.

Rotten Tomatoes: NR

Metacritic: NR

One Movie Punch: 7.8/10

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

Hi everyone! 

We’re back on format today, after getting caught up from the wildfire evacuation, and revealing how the podcast will be changing for next year. And while we’re caught up on episodes, we’re not caught up on Netflix Original movies, especially after Netflix dumped five international films at the end of November. So, this week, we’ll be getting caught up on those films, along with a few others which have been released recently. Got any suggestions? Let me know at onemoviepunch.com, or reach out over social media.

And now...

Today’s movie is “Happy as Lazzaro” (2018), the Netflix Original Italian drama written and directed by Alice Rohrwacher. The film follows Lazzaro (Adriano Tardioli), a peasant boy in the village of Inviolata, who is cajoled by the local nobleman Tancredi (Tommaso Rango), to aid in his own kidnapping. During the false kidnapping, his fellow village dwellers are taken away, and Lazzaro makes a bizarre journey to reunite with them. The film won best screenplay at this year’s Cannes Film Festival.

Spoilers ahead. 

And I mean it, this time, as talking about this film requires talking about some key plot twists.

I’m a huge fan of religious imagery, as I think understanding the various religions of the world helps us understand society’s origins and its current state, for better or worse. I’m not really talking about the latest wide distribution religious films being funded by far-right religious organizations, that inject religious messaging with all the subtlety of a fart in church. I’m talking about films using religious imagery to tell very human stories. This film is stuffed with imagery, partly because of its initial locale of Inviolata, and partially because of the weird left turn it takes that sets Lazzaro on a saint’s journey. The last film I saw with this much religious imagery, and that hit in the same way, was Episode #182 (“The Ornithologist”), so if you end up digging this film, check out that one as well.

“Happy as Lazzaro” is a film in two parts. The first part introduces us to the village of Inviolata, located somewhere in the high hills of Italy, where sharecroppers from an unknown time period are harvesting for their lord, the Marquesa Alfonsina de Luna, who is coming for a yearly visit. We learn quickly, however, that something is not right, as the family arriving has modern technologies, and when a call is made for the police to assist in finding the purported missing nobleman, they uncover that this kind of sharecropping arrangement has been illegal, not to mention the conditions in which they were living in the abandoned village. However, Lazzaro falls off a cliff, and they end up leaving him behind. I would have been fine with just this story, but then things get weird.

Lazzaro awakens, and after learning the village had been abandoned, begins a very long journey on foot to reunite with his family and Tancredi. We join this peasant boy as he walks past cell towers, modern farms, and finally full urbanization, the direct opposite of where he awoke. It’s also many, many years later, and Lazzaro is clearly out of his element in the modern world, especially as things get weirder and weirder. The whole film is an allegory for the transfer from feudalist to industrialist societies, for better or worse, much like religion. Despite the weird turns, the film keeps a great pace, even with the time jump, and all the sets, urban and rural alike, were incredibly well chosen. Adriano Tardioli carries Lazzaro well, never breaking his saintly character, even as the film draws to a close. I didn’t really know what to expect, and I left the film enjoying every second.

“Happy as Lazzaro” (2018) is Alice Rohrwacher’s third feature film, a religious allegory about goodness and a symbolic story about industrialization. Adriano Tardioli plays the lead role well, carrying Lazzaro’s story through both strange and well-traveled terrain. Fans of religious imagery or social allegory will definitely want to check out this film, but be ready for a strange tale.

Rotten Tomatoes: 90%

Metacritic: 86 (MUST SEE)

One Movie Punch: 9.4/10

“Happy as Lazzaro” (2018) is rated PG-13 and is currently streaming on Netflix.

Hi everyone!

Welcome back to the podcast. We’re finally caught up, with today’s episode, from the time lost during the wildfire evacuation. I’ll be talking about how the podcast will be changing in the coming year, but if you haven’t heard the earlier segments, hit pause, then go back to my review for “Outlaw King” (Episode #314) for the first segment, then listen every episode after that for another installment. Let me know you’re listening by sharing this episode with #WelcomeBackOMP. 

So, here’s the big reveal. First, let me tell you how the podcast will stay the same. We’re still planning on having a daily podcast with a short three-to-five minute review. It’s a format you all seem to enjoy and has been manageable, barring the occasional wildfire evacuation. Easily digestible, easily binged. We’re also going to continue to review currently playing, newly streaming, classic and cult movies. But we’re also going to make a few changes, some larger, some small.

First off, we’re going to be spoiler-free for any movie released in the last three years. We’ll still warn you if an older film review will have spoilers, but our goal will be spoiler-free reviews. We’ve noticed people do stop listening if they have an interest in the film, and you should be able to listen to the entire review.

Second, we’re going to create new and exciting ways to engage our audience, and the growing community around #FilmTwitter. Regular polls, film challenges, reading reviews, reading comments, trial subscription challenges, and perhaps even the occasional listener review.

Third, we’re going to make sure we keep reviewing all the Netflix Original films, along with other direct-to-streaming offerings from the major providers. So much content to help folks decide among, and a good excuse to try new things. 

Fourth, we’re going to work behind the scenes on some limited series podcasts, focusing on a single director or franchise or theme, with extended discussions. Imagine a complete series dedicated to Troma Films or Quentin Tarantino or the eight versions of “Perfect Strangers” (2016).

And finally, we’re going to stop using the royal we and start meaning an actual we here at the podcast. You know what my favorite part of this podcast has been? Working with other film reviewers and fans, especially with Takeover Tuesday. So, consider this your invitation to join the One Movie Punch podcast as a regular contributor. We’re looking for other contributors, willing to create regular reviews for One Movie Punch. Weekly, every two weeks, monthly, or even one-off collaborations. A few of our previous contributors are already on board, but if you want to join the fun, let me know. We’re even looking at doing a monthly backchat podcast for patrons and sponsors, looking at the past month and planning for the next month. Want more details? Reach out to me on social media, or using the form at onemoviepunch.com.

That’s it! We’ll be releasing more details as time progress, but for the rest of the year, expect daily reviews focused on streaming offerings while we gear up for next year. Thanks for taking this journey with me.

Today’s movie is “Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri” (2017), the Oscar winning dramedy written and directed by Martin McDonagh. The film follows Mildred (Frances McDormand), whose daughter was murdered without any leads on a culprit. She constructs three billboards to publicly shame Chief of Police William Willoughby (Woody Harrelson), and draws the ire of his second-in-command, Officer Dixon (Sam Rockwell). The film was nominated for seven Oscars and won two for Best Actress for Frances McDormand and Best Supporting Actor for Sam Rockwell.

Spoilers ahead.

I missed both opportunities to see this film in the theaters, during the initial run and during its encore run around Oscars season. Last November, during its limited run, I was busy writing a novel and had just started my Aikido practice, so getting to a theater was difficult. After that, I had started the podcast, and was busy trying to figure out exactly what I had gotten myself into. I was also being rather protective of my belief that “Get Out” was the best film of 2017, and that if I simply didn’t watch this film, that “Get Out” would somehow win Best Picture. Silly, I know, but true. The past few weeks have been a blast for me, actually, catching on great 2017 films I missed, and I’m finally glad to see this film, because it was as good as all the Oscar nominations suggested.

“Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri” doesn’t have a standard story arc, as most real-life stories do not. We have a slate of incredible, deceptively simple characters who react to Mildred’s billboards, which make a promise that this action will help solve her daughter’s rape and murder case, despite any evidence being available. We might initially identify with Mildred and against the other characters, especially with their latent and overt racist leanings, along with other forms of bigotry, but we also come to learn the impossible task of solving cold cases, especially with the limited (and unmotivated) police resources that are available. We also see much deeper relationships that have existed in that small town before her daughter’s death, and eventually, just how flawed Mildred is as a character. In fact, just about every character in this film is delightfully flawed, in ways that help us identify with them, if we’re being honest with ourselves.

The film, as a whole, is really well done, although the strength is in the script, the cast, and the overall message, or lack thereof. I did have a few criticisms, though, the toughest one to reconcile being the racism exhibited by the characters. I often struggle with films that use overt racism or other bigotry in comedic ways, because it feels like the ultimate form of white (or other) privilege, and it’s enough to be off-putting to more than a few people, and let’s face it, bring secret smiles to a few other folks out there as well. The other criticisms aren’t really worth mentioning, as they get into the weeds of what I would have wanted to see, as opposed to what Martin McDonagh had in mind, and as far as the latter goes, he delivers.

“Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri” (2017) is a look into rural America via a controversial premise and a series of interesting events that follow. Martin McDonagh crafts something excellent, spurred to greatness by an amazing cast, and worthy of every Oscar nomination, including two for Best Supporting Actor. Movie fans who can stand comedic racism, or films about tough subject material, should definitely check out this film, but may want to avoid rural Missouri after that.

Rotten Tomatoes: 91% (CERTIFIED FRESH)

Metacritic: 88 (MUST SEE)

One Movie Punch: 8.8/10 

“Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri” (2017) is rated R and is currently streaming on HBO.

Hi everyone!

Welcome back to the podcast. This will be the second of two episodes today as we’re in the final stretch of getting caught up, both on episodes and what was happening while the podcast was offline. It’s also the last double up day. I’ll be continuing my story in a minute, but if you haven’t heard the earlier segments, hit pause, then go back to my review for “Outlaw King” (Episode #314) for the first segment, then listen every episode after that for another installment. Let me know you’re listening by sharing this episode with #WelcomeBackOMP.

Last segment, I was talking about getting back to work, and that required watching a lot of movies. Thanksgiving Day, a friend came to visit, and after we put down an immense dinner mostly cooked by my daughter, we sat down for the beginning of a crazy movie marathon, two that evening, and then an average of two to three per day after that for me. I watched a few movies before restarting, but once I got back into my groove, it felt great to write and produce again, especially with the new segments. I love doing it, but if you want to help out financially, head on over to patreon.com/onemoviepunch to become a regular contributor. We’ll be revising our contribution levels as the podcast evolves, but everything goes to help maintain the podcast, with everything else coming out of my own pocket. Any amount is appreciated, and we’ll soon have exclusive content for supporters.

We’re caught up tomorrow. I’ll be unveiling more about how the podcast will be changing next year. And how you can get involved.

Today’s movie is “Godzilla: City at the Edge of Battle” (2018), the Netflix Original and TOHO Animation film directed by Hiroyuki Seshita and Kôbun Shizuno, and written for the screen by Gen Urobuchi, within a series composed by Gen Urobuchi, Sadayuki Murai, and Yusuke Kozaki, based on the iconic character and universe created by Ishirô Honda. The film follows up on “Godzilla: Planet of the Monsters”, as the squadron meets a new indigienous humanoid population, and run across the remains of a 20,000 year old anti-kaiju technology known as Mechagodzilla.

Spoilers ahead.

Trilogies are a huge gamble for any filmmaker, and that’s doubly so for animated films. It is true that you can reuse a great deal of the work from film to film with the right amount of abstraction and layering, but there’s a much larger investment that needs to go into the effort, and it only takes a bad first movie to stop it dead. Hollywood is littered with prematurely cancelled franchises nowadays. But today’s film, the second in the trilogy, is one of those increasingly common instances where the sequel surpasses the original, and in all the right ways, not only drawing in more elements from the source material, but also expanding the universe to open up new possibilities, and by extension, new conflicts. Especially with the inclusion of Mechagodzilla, the original anti-kaiju technology, but this time a failed solution suggested by one of the humanoid races attempting to resettle the planet.

The second film in a trilogy is often considered a bridge film, usually eschewing the standard narrative patterns in lieu of maintaining the second act feel. We learn more not just about the changed planet, but also about the two races that coexist with humans in space. The Exif are the remains of another civilization, who had also created a similar being to Godzilla through their hubris, and roam the galaxy trying to unite the intelligent species. The Bilusaludo are the remains of another civilization, who boast about having the technology to defeat Godzilla, but failed in that mission. Between the three humanoid species, we get a philosophical overview of the difference between humanoids and the kaiju, and whether humanoids are to forever be ruled by the kaiju, or will need to become monsters to defeat the monsters. And we get to see this all unfold when the landing team runs across the old facility that housed Mechagodzilla, made of nanometal that has also continued evolving and multiplying over the years, and offers another possible solution to the true Godzilla, revealed at the end of last film, but at a great cost.

I couldn’t tell which direction the film was going to take, which was refreshing, even with replaying a classic Godzilla trap gambit within this new world. Seshita and Shizuno keep the same great pacing, and work with an army of animators to keep bringing the world to life. This animation has the same quality as the previous film, with the same blending defects every now and again. But it doubles up on the philosophy, and much like how the first film teased the presence of an indigenous humanoid race, this second film tease the existence of an even more dangerous kaiju, a space-faring beast known as King Ghidorah, a long-time staple of the Godzilla franchise and a perfect new archenemy to flesh out the remainder of this trilogy, with a bunch of potential origin stories and metaphors to adapt into this world. I wish I lived in Japan right now, because I could catch “Godzilla: The Planet Eater” in theaters, but I’ll have to wait until it makes its way here via Netflix. Maybe next month? Only time will tell!

“Godzilla: City at the Edge of Battle” (2018) is the second film of the animated series, expanding and evolving the reimagined take on Godzilla, 20,000 years into the future. The viewer is treated to the aftermath of the first film, the expansion of the second, and the setup for the third, all with the same characteristic style and direction. Godzilla fans, or Japanese animation fans, should definitely check out this film, but only after seeing the first one.

Rotten Tomatoes: NR

Metacritic: NR

One Movie Punch: 8.6/10

“Godzilla: City at the Edge of Battle” (2018) is rated TV-14 and is currently streaming on Netflix.

Hi everyone!

Welcome back to the podcast. This will be the first of two episodes today as we’re in the final stretch of getting caught up, both on episodes and what was happening while the podcast was offline. I’ll be continuing my story in a minute, but if you haven’t heard the earlier segments, hit pause, then go back to my review for “Outlaw King” (Episode #314) for the first segment, then listen every episode after that for another installment. Let me know you’re listening by sharing this episode with #WelcomeBackOMP.

Yesterday, I was talking about a wall leak that had its own surprising twist and thankfully, most of a resolution. It was the last of the distractions that kept me away from getting back to the podcast. After the leak was finished, I took my plan of action from a few days ago, got everything mapped out to get caught up, then got to work, first finishing the episodes I had in progress, but only after going back and adding the story segments, itself a learning experience. And the rest, from the day before Thanksgiving until just a few days ago, it’s been grind, grind, grind to research, watch, write, record, produce, post, and promote the episodes. Each episode takes about four hours to produce, or about 28 hours a week, and getting caught up was going to take a great deal of time. And a few willing participants on Thanksgiving Day.

Two more episodes left to get caught up. More from Thanksgiving Day next time, then I’ll reveal how the podcast will be changing next year, and how you could get involved. 

Today’s movie is “Godzilla: Planet of the Monsters” (2017), the Netflix Original and TOHO Animation film directed by Hiroyuki Seshita and Kôbun Shizuno, and written for the screen by Gen Urobuchi, within a series composed by Gen Urobuchi, Sadayuki Murai, and Yusuke Kozaki, based on the iconic character and universe created by Ishirô Honda. The film is set far into the future, after humanity left Earth with two other humanoid races in search of a new home twenty years ago. However, with supplies failing and no great prospects for survival, the races return to Earth via warp-drive, taking them an instant, but placing them 20,000 years from Earth’s perspective, in a world transformed by Godzilla’s existence.

Spoilers ahead.

I missed this one last year, placing it in my queue for later this year, as both the second film “Godzilla: City on the Edge of Battle” and the final film “Godzilla: The Planet Eater” were set to be released this year to round out this trilogy of animated films. I was going to review all three, but it appears that the third film will be delayed, so instead of waiting even longer, I figured it was time to dive into both films. Everyone is going nuts right now for the live-action sequels being produced, myself included, but there are plenty of other adaptations being done with the Godzilla intellectual property, and this trilogy of films are definitely a worthy entry into that canon of work. Oh, and as an aside, this season’s “DC’s Legends of Tomorrow” just did a great episode involving Ishirô Honda, where the heroes just happen to give him the inspiration for Godzilla. Fun episode if you can find it, especially if you are a Godzilla fan.

“Godzilla: Planet of the Monsters” returns us to Earth after the presence of Godzilla has radically transformed the planet. Other lifeforms, in order to survive the effects of radiation, have adapted, or perhaps adopted, Godzilla’s unique traits, and a thriving new ecosystem has developed. A squadron is sent down to try and stop Godzilla, identified by probe, and this first film covers that effort, from touchdown, to dealing with the new world’s lifeforms, to tracking and luring the beast into a confrontation that could mean the return of humanity, and their two companion races, to the planet, full of natural resources, now replenished after the humanoid exodus. All the many themes of the entire series are now explored from this unique vantage point, and asking many questions, like whether the planet is now better off, and whether humans can ever regain our place in the universe after creating monsters even we cannot defeat. Japanese animation is perfect for this version of the story, because anything can be imagined, and the pacing allows for more philosophical bridges that a standard live-action, rubber-suit monster film generally makes. 

Hiroyuki Seshita and Kôbun Shizuno make a great pair of directors for this film in particular. The film keeps good pacing, reveling in each unfolding of the universe being created, and focused on a tight story arc that gives us what we want to see: humanoids trying to defeat Godzilla. The voice talent is great, and the animation is spectacular, although you can see a few blending issues between the computerized animation of Godzilla and the more classic Japanese animation style of the humanoids. And without giving too much away, things don’t quite go according to plan, if the presence of a second and third film didn’t suggest that. In fact, the ending of this film gets us set up for the second film, which I’ll be reviewing in the next episode.

“Godzilla: Planet of the Monsters” (2017) is a neat variation on the Godzilla property, using Japanese animation style and a story set 20,000 years in the future. While reusing the same monster and themes, the trilogy offers a unique perspective on both, and this first film is a wonderful introduction to this new world. Godzilla fans, and Japanese animation fans, should definitely check out this film, along with any science fiction fan that is somehow not a Godzilla fan.

Rotten Tomatoes: 80%

Metacritic: NR

One Movie Punch: 8.2/10

“Godzilla: Planet of the Monsters” (2017) is rated TV-14 and is currently streaming on Netflix.

Hi everyone!

Welcome back to the podcast. This will be the second of two episodes today as we’re in the final stretch of getting caught up, both on episodes and what was happening while the podcast was offline. I’ll be continuing my story in a minute, but if you haven’t heard the earlier segments, hit pause, then go back to my review for “Outlaw King” (Episode #314) for the first segment, then listen every episode after that for another installment. Let me know you’re listening by sharing this episode with #WelcomeBackOMP. 

Last segment, I was talking about a wall leak that was fixed, but there wasn’t any hot water. I called back the guy, and he said that he must have forgotten to pull the hot water handle. Or something. I’m not a plumber. He walked me through it over the phone, and I climbed up on the water heater to pull the lever. And when I did, one of the pipes came apart, and a second seep immediately began. Water was now spraying everywhere, not just misting out of the pipe. I reapplied the hot water handle, then pulled the water main again. He definitely had to come back out.

And he did about thirty minutes later, and began diagnosing the problem. Turns out one of the parts he used was stripped, so he left to get a replacement. I worked on the podcast while he was gone, after mopping up as much water as possible from the garage floor. He returned from the big box hardware store, letting me know that many of the particular part had the same problem, which felt like little time bombs waiting to go off, like mine. The plumber handled it, and we tested everything in the house this time before he left. We still have a hole in our interior garage wall, which needs to get patched, but we no longer had a leak. And when I went back to continue working on the podcast, decided that I probably had had enough for one day.

More on the upcoming changes to the podcast in the next three episodes, then we’ll be back to regular format. Until we’re not.

Today’s movie is “A Christmas Prince: The Royal Wedding” (2018), the Netflix Original and MPCA holiday sequel to last year’s “A Christmas Prince”, directed by John Schultz and written for the screen by Nate Atkins, based on characters developed by Karen Schaler. The films rejoins Amber (Rose McIver) and now King Richard (Ben Lamb), about one year later as they prepare to get married on Christmas Day. However, not everyone accepts Amber, nor King Richard’s modernization efforts, and multiple conflicts ensue, along with their expected resolutions.

Spoilers ahead.

When this sequel was first announced, I joked a lot about having to watch the first film, “A Christmas Prince” (Episode #338), so I wouldn’t be confused about the story. It’s another MPCA production with a “made for television” feel, so we don’t really get a challenging set of mysteries and conflicts to resolve. But while it’s not required to watch the first film, I’m glad I did, for the sake of this review, so I could compare and contrast, or in this case, compare and compare, the two films. And while doing some further research for both reviews, compare these films to other holiday royalty fairy tale films. 

“The Royal Wedding” follows nearly all the rules of sequels, expanding the cast of characters, reusing all the segments and themes that landed well, and fulfilling any promises made in the first film. The cast has returned, mostly intact, with a jarring switch for Amber’s father Rudy, who was played by Daniel Fathers in the first film, and John Guerrasio in the sequel. Rudy has a much more important role in this film, handling the role of bringing sense to the royals, so that Amber can not only challenge protocol for the wedding, but also help King Richard’s modernization effort succeed. Amber deals less with the dress and more with investigating why the kingdom is hemorrhaging money. Heart-warming and hilarity ensue.

“The Royal Wedding” is structurally and thematically nearly identical to the first film, sometimes recreating entire scenes from the first film, such as a tobogganing scene with the full royal family, or the fascination with archery, or a surprise twist that brings the thief behind the program failure to justice. And, of course, we get the wedding, which is quickly staged, rushed, and marks the end of the promise during their reception, where protocol is freely discarded, and they conga into the night. Not much in terms of wrap-up, because let’s face it, “A Christmas Prince: The Royal Baby” is probably in the works right now for next year. And I’ll review it. Probably.

“A Christmas Prince: The Royal Wedding” (2018) is the heartwarming sequel to “A Christmas Prince” (2017), following the royal couple during the chaos leading up to their wedding. It continues and expands the franchise, evolving the characters just enough to maintain the charm of the first film, not to mention the promise of more to come. Holiday film fans, and fans of the first film, should definitely check out this film. Anyone else, just know you’re in for yet another holiday fairy tale involving royalty.

Rotten Tomatoes: NR

Metacritic: NR

One Movie Punch: 6.6/10

“A Christmas Prince: The Royal Wedding” (2018) is rated TV-PG and is currently streaming on Netflix.

Hi everyone!

Welcome back to the podcast. This will be the first of two episodes today as we’re in the final stretch of getting caught up, both on episodes and what was happening while the podcast was offline. I’ll be continuing my story in a minute, but if you haven’t heard the earlier segments, hit pause, then go back to my review for “Outlaw King” (Episode #314) for the first segment, then listen every episode after that for another installment. Let me know you’re listening by sharing this episode with #WelcomeBackOMP. 

Last segment, I was talking about another project I started before this podcast and my intention to continue work on that once this podcast is caught up. Today, over the course of both episodes, I wanted to tell you about the last delay in getting back to the podcast. Once I wrapped up the loose ends on that project before the evacuation, I took a break and vowed to get back to the podcast the following day. Which is when I noticed water where it shouldn’t be, slowly seeping from underneath our water heater. I thought the water heater may have overflowed, so I ran the pressure release and put some towels down to catch the small amount of water I saw.

Of course, waking up the next morning, ready to get to work on the podcast, I went out to the garage to check it out and saw water all over the place. Moved the soaked towels to a bucket and threw down more towels, and shutting off the water to the house. So much for getting to work on the podcast. The good news is that the father of our host family from the evacuation was a contract plumber, who we called to come and figure out what was going on. Fleeing from fire, choking on air, and now, dealing with a flood of sorts. All I needed was an earthquake to round out the elements. He cut out chunks of the dry wall, looking for the leak, and eventually isolating and resolving the problem. He took off and I went to wash my hands. No hot water. Guess I’ll have to call him back. 

Stay tuned next episode for the second part of the wall leak. More on the upcoming changes to the podcast tomorrow.

Today’s movie is “A Christmas Prince” (2017), the Netflix Original and MPCA holiday film directed by Alex Zamm and written for the screen by Karen Schaler and Nate Atkins. The film follows Amber (Rose McIver), who is flown to the kingdom of Aldovia to cover the story of playboy Prince Richard (Ben Lamb), who is returning home to accept the crown. After being mistaken for an American tutor for Princess Emily (Honor Kneafsey), she works undercover to get the story of a lifetime, and ends up finding much, much more.

Spoilers ahead.

The Motion Picture Corporation of America has a real fascination for holiday television movies, especially those involving European royalty for some reason. If you take a look at their recent catalog, you won’t just find this film, but a host of films, mostly made for the Hallmark Channel. It’s quite the shift in direction for a production company that once made “Dumb and Dumber” and “Kingpin”. It’s Netflix acquisitions like this film, and its sequel, that make me realize just how popular these films are, and how much people love to watch them, or love to hate watch them, if you’re my daughter. And let’s face it, like holiday music songs and albums, there’s stacks of cash to be made.

The first thing I noticed about “A Christmas Prince” is just how similar the story is to “The Princess Switch”. Aldovia versus Belgravia. A small child who is in on the subterfuge. A prince who isn’t sure what he wants, and a practical career woman who finds unexpected love while bringing sensibility to the out-of-touch royals. And much like that film, it leverages more of the fairy tale archetype that melds so well with holiday films. However, “A Christmas Prince” has that “made for television” feel, not just in story pacing and content and characters, but down to the well-timed scene fadeouts for commercial breaks, ready for syndication and distribution. It’s not something a causal viewer may notice, but it does take away from the overall enjoyment of the film. And no one is looking for that in a fairy tale holiday film, because once you start picking apart one part, it’s not that hard to keep shredding it to bits.

But bah humbug to anyone who wants to tear this film apart on principle, or because it would be easy to do. We might have a career-minded woman finding unexpected love, but Rose McIver does a great job in that role, and has great chemistry with Honor Kneafsey and Ben Lamb. Sure, Lord Simon and Lady Sophia are power-hungry caricatures, and Mrs. Averill (Sarah Douglas) and Mr. Little (Richard Ashton) are constant reminders of the need for royal protocol, even to a fault, but they don’t phone any performances in. And the film leverages the beautiful architecture of Romania for sets and locations. It’s a beautiful, charming, predictable, romantic holiday shlockfest, but it’s also endearing, and has surprisingly few reviews on Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic for a film so well-received by the audience.

“A Christmas Prince” (2017) is a holiday fairy tale involving royalty, a well-trod path that is mostly well-produced, and delivers a heartwarming message for romantics, and a surprisingly fun hate watch for cynics. But take it from me, don’t watch the film with both kinds of folks, because it can make for a contentious viewing. Fans of holiday films have likely already watched this, despite the small number of critics who have reviewed the film.

Rotten Tomatoes: 75%

Metacritic: NR

One Movie Punch: 7.0/10

“A Christmas Prince” (2017) is rated TV-PG and is currently streaming on Netflix.

Hi everyone!

Welcome back to the podcast. This will be the second of two episodes today as we’re in the final stretch of getting caught up, both on episodes and what was happening while the podcast was offline. I’ll be continuing my story in a minute, but if you haven’t heard the earlier segments, hit pause, then go back to my review for “Outlaw King” (Episode #314) for the first segment, then listen every episode after that for another installment. Let me know you’re listening by sharing this episode with #WelcomeBackOMP. 

Last segment, I was figuring out how to get caught up on the podcast, and how to change it to make more room for other projects I had abandoned this year. One of those projects was another novel I had finished writing two years ago, then set aside to edit later. While I set it aside, I began working on a sequel during #NaNoWriMo, and realized about halfway through that it was the third book, so I stopped. And then last year for #NaNoWriMo, I started the second book, and got about two-thirds of the way through before getting started on this very podcast.

And that’s where they sat, until very recently. Instead of starting another book for #NaNoWriMo this month, I promised myself to start editing the first book, and that’s when inspiration hit me. I was going to do a few things at once while editing, so that when I was done, I would have a finished novel, a full audio transcription of it, and then use the audio to create a multi-episode radio drama, called “Anytown Stories”. It would be a weekly podcast, continuing the main story of the first novel, and including shorter stories, or other audio creations, every now and again. I had almost all of chapter one recorded to create the first three episodes when we had to evacuate, and once I got the podcast reworked and planned out, I took a few hours to wrap up the initial efforts and demo shows I had been working on. Once this podcast is back up to speed and transformed, I hope to finish those draft episodes, and then complete work on the rest of the project. Got ideas about that? Reach out to me.

More on the upcoming changes to the podcast later this week. Stay tuned tomorrow to hear a two-part story about what happens when a pipe begins leaking within your garage wall.

Today’s movie is “It” (2017), the Warner Bros and New Line Cinema horror film directed by Andy Muschietti and written for the screen by Chase Palmer, Cary Fukunaga, and Gary Dauberman, based on the first half of Stephen King’s classic novel, “It”. The film follows a series of child disappearances in Derry, Maine, a town with a dark history, and a group of children over one summer who come together to form the Losers Club. After each of them begins to experience what appear to be hallucinations, they decide to track down and face the creature, named Pennywise (Bill Skarsgård).

Spoilers ahead.

In the early days of the Internet, many of us set out to find other people who shared our interests, especially those of us with eclectic taste in the smaller subcultures either not recognized or not welcome in rural America. One of those communities I ended up finding was called SKEMERs, The Stephen King E-mailers, and in a daily newsletter that worked like the letters pages in a comic book, we would read other people’s letters, then submit responses. It was a curated mailing list, and it spawned a huge community who met annually in Maine, and regionally every now and again. I went to two separate gatherings, one in Chicago, another near the Quad Cities, and each time I enjoyed being able to talk King with folks in person, and keep in touch via the newsletter after that. Of course, online communities come and go, and while the group is now defunct, its members are still out there, and I keep in touch with more than a few of them to this day. So, when I saw that they were remaking “It”, after a fairly decent (for the time) television version, I was suspicious, until I saw the critical response, and by then I had missed it in theaters. So getting to finally see it as part of getting caught up was such a treat.

“It”, as a novel, was told with two interweaving storylines: when the Losers Club were children in the mid-1950s, and when the Losers Club were adults in the mid-1980s, moving effortlessly back and forth. The latest adaptation, however, has decided to split the narrative chronologically, and bring both time periods forward about thirty years. It’s a bold and smart move for three reasons. First, there is simply too much source material for even a three hour film, and this first part comes in at a solid two hours and fifteen minutes. Second, you only need half the cast for each film, and don’t need to spend too much time on trying to manage the two versions of each character. And finally, moving the time period up makes the story more relatable to modern viewers, and cuts down tremendously on dealing with anachronisms while filming. We also get to use the entire vocabulary of Stephen King, with the R-rating, and yes, I mean all the swear words and content, which Finn Wolfhard clearly had an absolute blast with throughout the film.

In fact, I thought the whole cast was great, and not just the seven members of the Losers Club. The supporting cast was also excellent, especially with some of the deeper and darker content, like Beverly Marsh’s disturbing father, or Eddie’s Munchausen syndrome. Pennywise is excellent, with high marks for Bill Skarsgård’s performance, and with equal credit given to the amazing effects artists that made the shapeshifting realistic, despite its fantastic origins. I was captivated from the start, and more than a few scares made me jump or cry out, even knowing the story. And the comradery of the children reminds me a great deal of “Stand by Me”, especially how King can capture adolescent boy behavior, from the most innocuous to the most evil. And I was happy at the end, to see “Chapter One” appear, and then excited for next year’s sequel, which will continue the story.

“It” (2017) is easily one of the best Stephen King adaptations I have ever seen, capturing that unique mix of childhood nostalgia, small town feel, and in this case, neo-Lovecraftian horror. The ensemble cast is top notch, and the story is well told, from start to finish. Stephen King fans have already seen this film, and have either loved it or hated it, although not too many in the latter camp. Any other horror fans who have yet to check it out should definitely do so, then get in line for tickets to the sequel. 

Rotten Tomatoes: 85% (FRESH)

Metacritic: 69

One Movie Punch: 8.8/10

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