One Movie Punch

Today’s movie is “Kickboxer: Retaliation” (2018), the martial-arts action thriller directed by Dimitri Logothetis and written for the screen in collaboration with Jim McGrath. The film follows Kurt Sloane (Alain Moussi), who has retired from fighting after defeating Tong Po in “Kickboxer: Vengeance”. However, a fight promoter named Thomas Moore (Christopher Lambert) wants to see him defend his title against Mongkut (Hafþór Júlíus Björnsson), a chemically engineering super fighter. After kidnapping him and taking him to a Thai jail fails to convince him, Moore kidnaps his wife Liu (Sara Malakul Lane), and Kurt begins to train with the help of Master Durand (Jean-Claude Van Damme) and fellow inmate Briggs (Mike Tyson).

Spoilers ahead.

I’m such a fan of this series of Kickboxer reboot films, as I was for original series of films. I love martial arts tournament films, everything from “Enter the Dragon” to “The Karate Kid” because they all follow a mostly predictable format: create a reason to compete, train for the competition, test your skills, then face your opponents. “Kickboxer” was no exception when Jean-Claude Van Damme starred in the original, taken almost verbatim from his role the year before in “Bloodsport”. Now both films are in a process of a sort of reboot, bringing famously skilled stunt folks to the scene. Last year, I loved watching “Lady Bloodfight” (2016), a female-driven version of “Bloodsport” by Amy Johnston, and Alain Moussi in both “Kickboxer” reboot films.

Now, just because I’m in the bag for the franchises and the format doesn’t mean I’ve lost my critical eye with any of these films. Yes, you will see some pretty amazing fight choreography, both one-on-one and multiple attackers, all top notch and enjoyable, particularly the training scenes with Tyson. But you will also see, in this case, a pretty sketchy script made to fill in the holes between fight scenes, and some of the most distracting editing for transitions, including a nauseating title sequence. A sketchy script that includes way too many convoluted reasons to stage a fight between Kurt Sloane and Mongkut. I also want to point out that Briggs and Mongkut look an awful lot like Balrog and Zangief from the Street Fighter franchise.

The thing is, I don’t expect much from the script when it comes to martial arts films, because great fight choreographers and stuntmen don’t always translate to great acting in speaking roles. I absolutely love the star factor with this film, assembling almost an Expendables-like cast from the martial arts tournament films of old. And, yes, I hope they continue with that trend for the upcoming third film in the franchise, “Kickboxer: Armageddon”. And maybe, just maybe, some geniuses in the film industry will realize the great potential in a shared universe of tournaments, perhaps telling four origin stories before having them all compete to the death in a tournament film. The fight scenes alone would be worth the price of entry.

“Kickboxer: Retaliation” (2018) has a great cast and is filled with incredible action sequences set between a poorly written script and distracted editing. It is an exceedingly average entry into the franchise, containing the same potential as its predecessor, and strong enough to keep the franchise alive. Fans of martial arts tournaments, or folks who want to reminisce about great action stars of the 1990s, should definitely check out this film, and if you dig it, or can at least tolerate it, check out the previous entry in the franchise.

Rotten Tomatoes: 91%

Metacritic: 54

One Movie Punch: 6.4/10

“Kickboxer: Retaliation” (2018) is rated R and is currently streaming on Netflix.

Welcome back to Matinee Mondays! 

I live in a movie market blessed enough to have an independent theater, but far enough away from the major market that we have to wait two or three weeks to see some breakaway independent hits. I’m glad I am finally getting to this film after seeing some amazing reviews. Also, check out my review of “Winter’s Bone” (Episode #040), Debra Granik’s last feature film from 2010. It’s a lot more brutal than this film, so make sure you’re good with all the warnings before heading into it. You’ll understand why there is so much hype around this film as well.

And now...

Today’s movie is “Leave No Trace” (2018), the independent drama directed by Debra Granik and written in collaboration with Anne Rosellini, based on Peter Rock’s novel “My Abandonment”. The film follows Will (Ben Foster), a war veteran who suffers from severe PTSD and copes by living in a public park with his daughter Tom (Thomasin Harcourt McKenzie). After being evicted from their last camp, the two struggle to integrate back into society, and eventually must come to terms with each other.

Spoilers ahead.

I sometimes find it impossible to review a film that has already scored well with the critics, even though I only check the scores and not the details. I usually think there’s not much more I can say that hasn’t already been said, but I don’t think that’s going to be a problem with “Leave No Trace”. The film is layered and textured with so much meaning and subversive critique of our society, one that will probably be discussed for years to come. So, here’s my contribution.

One thing I admire about “Leave No Trace” and “Winter’s Bone” (Episode #040) is that both films give a more nuanced and emotional look at rural white folks, both the good and the bad. Hollywood often turns rural white folks into caricatures painted with a broad brush as ignorant, lazy, and racist. And sure, there are many of those folks out there, and we should rightfully be concerned about the growing neo-nazi and white supremacist movements. However, that broad brush also paints over many decent folks who want to live quiet lives, and struggle with poverty, medical concerns, addictions, and mental illness. It’s easier to say the white working class and poverty stricken deserve their situation rather than look to the real causes of poverty, namely the enormous cost of our military imperialism and the immense wealth inequality created by free-market capitalism.

Will and Tom exist in that grey area, fleeing a society that has used Will in our relentless warmongering to the point of causing severe PTSD and a distrust of the society he returned to. Excellent dialogue present and clarify the overriding themes, like the insistence that being homeless isn’t a crime, but still not being able to live on public land. Scenery and locations are used to juxtapose the forest as Will and Tom’s home against the tree farm literally cutting trees down to feed the machines. The film has the right balance of nature and civilization that forces the viewer to question our progress, one that leaves so many people broken beyond repair and economically behind, and the appeal of the small communities found in the outreaches of rural America. My only wish was for a different ending, especially as a father who struggles with anxiety and depression, who also constantly worries about doing enough to prepare my daughter for the future and whatever it may entail. I also know it was the only ending that made sense, because in order to survive, we will have to leave the older generations, and their outmoded ways of thinking, behind.

“Leave No Trace” (2018) is a masterpiece, a film that we will definitely see again come Oscar time. It is rich with meaning and full of critique about the direction of our country and civilization as a whole, told through a generational struggle between a father and his daughter by two incredible actors. Fans of family drama, or excellent film-making, or fantastic performances, should definitely check out this film. It really does live up to the hype and is proof that we need Debra Granik making more feature films.

Rotten Tomatoes: 100% (CERTIFIED)

Metacritic: 88

One Movie Punch: 9.6/10 

“Leave No Trace” (2018) is rated PG and is currently playing in theaters.

Today’s movie is “Father of the Year” (2018), the Netflix Original comedy directed by Tyler Spindel and written in collaboration with Brandon Cournoyer. The film follows Ben (Joey Bragg) and Larry (Matt Shively), whose argument about which father would win in a fight, escalates into a confrontation between Ben’s alcoholic father Wayne (David Spade) and Larry’s submissive father Mardy (Nat Faxon). The chaos results in Ben losing his job in New York and working to repair the damage for another shot.

Spoilers ahead.

In my quest to view every single Netflix Original film this year, I knew I would have to watch a few stinkers. The year started out pretty rough, with more than a few bad late-night comedies and romantic comedies, but things have steadily improved since then. Netflix has been making some pretty big acquisitions and great long-term contracts, including their deal with Adam Sandler’s Happy Madison Productions. I spoke a lot about the pros and cons with their agreement in my review for “The Week Of” (Episode #121), and without repeating myself too much, I think today’s film fits the Happy Madison formula.

“Father of the Year” is a constant rotation of slapstick physical comedy and gross-out humor, regularly interrupted with a by-the-books boy meets girl relationship story. It includes an above-average amount of literal potty humor and has fleshed out caricatures for the fathers, one the epitome of trailer trash and the other being the near-perfect alt-right definition of the beta male, literally bullied by his kid. Wash, rinse, repeat. Cap it off with a resolution where everyone gets what they should, if not what they wanted.

Am I being too harsh? I don’t think so. Happy Madison Productions have become their own genre of films, which isn’t a bad thing. However, the difference between a good and a great genre film is being able to tell an excellent story within that genre. “Father of the Year” has an almost painfully contrived story, centered around the slapstick gags and situational comedy, and a real waste of talent for Bridget Mendler, who plays Ben’s love-interest, Meredith. It’s good for a few laughs and a few more groans, but that’s about it.

“Father of the Year” (2018) is another slapstick, gross-out comedy from Happy Madison Productions, sticking to the formula and delivering an exceedingly average film. Fans of Happy Madison Productions or late-night comedies should consider checking out this film, especially if you’re looking for something new. Otherwise, skip it and check out any number of better comedies out there. 

Rotten Tomatoes: NR

Metacritic: NR

One Movie Punch: 5.4/10

“Father of the Year” (2018) is rated TV-MA and is currently streaming on Netflix.

Welcome back to Streaming Saturday! 

There’s not much happening on Netflix this weekend, so I decided to go back and work in a film I’ve been waiting to see for a while. Don’t worry, though, there will be plenty more Netflix Originals next Saturday. In the meantime, if there’s a Netflix Original you’ve seen or are looking forward to, head over to onemoviepunch.com and let us know!

And now...

Today’s movie is “Outside In”, directed by Lynn Shelton and written in collaboration with Jay Duplass. The film follows Chris (Jay Duplass), an ex-con who has returned to his hometown after serving twenty years in prison, released in large part to the advocacy of his high school teacher, Carol (Edie Falco). Struggling to adjust to living on the outside, Chris confesses his love for Carol, developed over their efforts to secure his release, just as Carol is reexamining her failing marriage and her purpose in life.

Spoilers ahead.

I love films that defy expectations, especially for situations and relationships that, on their face, seem unlikely. Of course, that unlikelihood is driven mostly by our own social programming, believing, for instance, that every ex-con is still somehow unfit for society, even when structural racism is blatantly apparent within our enforcement and judicial systems. Most states allow some form of legal discrimination against ex-cons, from denial of employment to loss of voting rights. It’s the fate of Chris attempting to reintegrate back into society, and the reason for the very activism and advocacy that Carol engages in.

Two expectations are being defied with this film. The assumptions and prejudices about ex-cons are the first, with Chris’ character having very little understanding of how much the world has changed over twenty years, and the dreams he has had for himself while trying to be released. The second set of expectations concern issues of fidelity, especially in long-term relationships lacking both emotional and sexual fulfillment, as in Carol’s situation. Clearly Chris is a good person and Carol has good reason to move on, but the beauty of this film is convincing the viewer that it really is the best situation. You can see the genuine love for Chris in Carol’s eyes, followed by the struggles against social expectations, and vice versa in Chris for Carol.

Lynn Shelton, as a whole, keeps a good pace, revealing as much about the incident that placed Chris in jail as needed, and showing a realistic progression in their relationship. I even enjoyed the complexity of Carol’s daughter Hildy (Kaitlyn Dever), who misreads her mother’s feelings and develops her own crush on Chris, and is clearly affected by her parents’ failing marriage as well, artistically expressed within a burnt-out house. Shelton uses some great filters to capture the Pacific Northwest, and the transitions utilize the scenery well. I was also a fan of the music, both the score and song selection.

“Outside In” (2018) is one of the more under-rated films to be released this year. Lynn Shelton and Jay Duplass developed a charming tale about an unlikely relationship, steeped in the prejudices and social mores of their situation, brought to life by Duplass and Falco. If you like independent dramas, then you should definitely check out this film, and let others know about it. It deserves to be seen.

Rotten Tomatoes: 95%

Metacritic: 76

One Movie Punch: 8.6/10

“Outside In” (2018) is not rated and is currently streaming on Netflix.

Welcome back to Film Buff Fridays!

We’re going from one 80s cult classic to another, this time in the horror genre. Once I saw it was available on streaming services, I figured it was time to check it out again. And I know at least one of our regular listeners will enjoy this film. Casey. Got any cult classics from the 1980s you want me to review? Head on over to onemoviepunch.com and let us know!

And now...

Today’s movie is “Killer Klowns from Outer Space” (1988), the cult comedy horror classic directed by Stephen Chiodo and written for the screen in collaboration with Charles Chiodo and Edward Chiodo. The film follows Mike Tobacco (Grant Cramer) and Debbie Stone (Suzanne Snyder) who follow a shooting star to a mysterious big top in the forest, only to realize it is an alien invasion intent on harvesting humans for food. With the help of Officer Dave Hansen (John Allen Nelson), and two ice cream truck operators, they try to stop them before they can escape. It is also the greatest film to ever include a gigantic crazy straw. 

Spoilers ahead.

Hollywood is still mostly driven by the pitch. For those who aren’t familiar, the pitch is when a group of folks bring an idea to producers with money, attempting to secure funding, with only an idea. It has lead to some of the greatest movies ever made and it has rejected a number of ideas which would go on to be some of the greatest movies ever made. It generally only validates a particular producer’s biases, but it also gets around having to read 200+ scripts a week from hungry screenwriters. The pitch can also lead to some films like today’s film, a pure concept film turned into a low-budget, but influential production.

Can you imagine the pitch for “Killer Klowns from Outer Space”? The Chiodo brothers filing into a room and telling them about a crazy idea, explaining the story arc and looking for funding to turn something that should have been flatly rejected into one of the most influential films of the late 1980s? Killer alien clowns that come to Earth, that somehow know all about clowns, to harvest the townspeople. As a comedy. It seems highly implausible, which is exactly how the script was formed as well. It’s as if when they were writing this, they would stop at times and ask “Is this believable?” and only proceeding if the answer is “No.”. I would also hate to be heading back to the same producers after it did poorly at the theaters.

However, take any film and make it available in syndication during the 1990s, and it found its audience. I can’t count the number of times this film was playing on television, and how many times I thought this is the dumbest thing I’ve ever seen, and yet, after thirty years, I start to realize how original the film actually is, even while containing all the tropes of comedy and horror from the 1980s. The costumes are insanely well detailed, and the sets are exactly what you would expect from the concept. Sure, the special effects are categorically awful, but still loveable. The montage of short scenes involving the townspeople are actually quite great at demonstrating the mayhem within the town as the clowns invade. The dialogue is also poorly written, but it still moves the story along. Even the ending is campy, not only because our “heroes” (for lack of a better word) survive, but because the entire frigging town was captured and killed in the ensuing alien ship explosion. There is so much to tear apart, and yet, I can’t help but love it because it is what it is, and that’s a rare beast in film-making.

“Killer Klowns from Outer Space” (1988) is a campy horror comedy that puts absolutely no pretension into itself, taking a silly concept from start to finish, and earning an odd, but enjoyable milestone in the history of film-making. It has its many problems, but it also has very surprising strengths which will be appreciated for years to come. If you like comedy horror films, or clowns, or clowns in comedy horror films, or some truly amazing costume work, then this film is for you. Just be ready to groan. A lot.

Rotten Tomatoes: 75%

Metacritic: NR

One Movie Punch: 7.2/10

“Killer Klowns from Outer Space” (1988) is rated PG-13 and is currently playing on Hulu and Epix.

Welcome back to Documentary Thursdays!

We did it! We’ve reached 200 episodes and I don’t think I could have picked a better film to review. Thank you all for your support since we launched at the beginning of the year. I had just a few doubts that anyone was listening, but I know you are. If you’ve enjoyed this podcast as much as I’ve enjoyed making it, let us know on social media by wishing us a Happy 200th Episode.

And now...

Today’s movie is “RBG” (2018), the CNN Films documentary directed by Julie Cohen and Betsy West. The documentary follows the beloved Ruth Bader Ginsburg, aka RBG, aka The Notorious R.B.G., one of the strongest voices on the Supreme Court. The film follows her life, career, and impact on politics and society. I want to talk about this film in the context of three other films I’ve reviewed this year, all of which relate directly to various parts of RBG’s life. I’m also a little nervous writing this review because Julie Cohen followed the podcast on Twitter. I hope I do your film justice.

Spoilers ahead.

“RBG” opens up with Ginsburg’s desire to attend law school, which even in the 1950s, was rife with either sexism or novelty. Earlier this year I reviewed “Ann Carver’s Profession” (1933) (Episode #159), which was only the second film to feature a female lawyer. It seems eerily similar to RBG’s life, with Ann Carver going into law with the same social minimizing about her desires, and with the same social disapproval of her success. But unlike Ann Carver, who won her cases using pomp and circumstance, RBG won with insightful reasoning and a desire to fulfill the potential written into the founding documents of the country. And instead of Ann Carver’s husband and society basically convincing her she’d be happier as a wife and mother, RBG continues to push through school and when her star is on the rise, Marty (Ruth’s spouse) does the right thing to support her efforts and becomes a homemaker. Ginsburg’s life is exactly how I had wished Ann Carver’s life would go, but clearly in 1933 we weren’t ready for it, and by we, I mean privileged (and fragile) white males as a whole.

It’s not enough to be an exceptional lawyer or judge, however. We have plenty of them in society, more than a few of which have made quite comfortable lives for themselves performing what should be tantamount to a civic duty. What makes RBG special in her career as a lawyer was fighting against sex discrimination written into the law, with the overriding idea that sex discrimination doesn’t just hurt women, but also men. I’m by no means making a false equivalency, of course, as sex discrimination still disproportionately affects women, and more so for women of color. I remember watching “Mercury 13” (Episode #116) also this year, showing how women were completely shut out from training to be astronauts, much like their exclusion from receiving housing allowances in the Air Force or entry into the Virginia Military Institute, even if they could meet the same physical requirements. Each case she either presented or judged helped to reduce this discrimination in substantial ways, even if we still have a long way to go.

In 1990, Ginsburg moved to the other side of the bench, but her amazing work inspired many other lawyers to continue the fight, like Gloria Allred, whose life you can check out in “Seeing Allred” (Episode #041). RBG was never as bombastic as Gloria Allred, by any means, but that never meant she could be ignored. Both as a lawyer and a judge, Ginsburg continued to issue arguments and opinions showing her immense understanding of the law. One of my favorite parts of this documentary was the use of visual text to help emphasize Ginsburg’s words, cramming a lot of dense material into a visual medium. If there’s any criticism about this film, it is that there is very little new information for long-time fans of RBG, and perhaps too little about the need for her to continue on the court as long as possible given the current political climate. I also couldn’t care less about her friendship with Justice Scalia, who is perhaps one of the most vile men to ever sit the bench despite the media’s love affair with his career. Sure, it’s important to show how professional and collegial RBG can be, but I don’t think it adds much to her legacy, and quite frankly, does a lot more for Scalia.

“RBG” (2018) is a wonderful documentary about an amazing woman, whose lifelong efforts to reduce sex discrimination in all its forms is a testament to the promise (and for the remaining codified discrimination, our failures) as a country. Julie Cohen and Betsy West deliver a pretty standard, chronological look at one of the most important justices to ever be appointed to the judiciary, and this film serves as a great introduction to Ruth Bader Ginsburg to those who many only know her from memes and corporate news. If you love RBG, or you want to learn more about RBG, I can think of nowhere better to start.

Rotten Tomatoes: 93% (CERTIFIED)

Metacritic: 72

One Movie Punch: 8.8/10

“RBG” (2018) is rated PG and is currently playing in theaters.

Welcome back to Worldwide Wednesdays!

We’re heading from Spain to France this week with another Netflix Original romantic comedy. Are you a fan of the French film scene? Check out Episode #026 (“Blockbuster”), Episode #110 (“I Am Not An Easy Man”), and Episode #130 (“Faces Places”) for a healthy dose of French cinema. And if you have any other suggestions, let us know at onemoviepunch.com.

And now...

Today’s movie is “To Each, Her Own” (2018), the Netflix Original French romantic comedy directed by Myriam Aziza and written in collaboration with Denyse Rodriguez-Tomé. The film follows Simone (Sarah Stern), a lesbian who is struggling with coming out to her conservative Jewish family, a strain on her long-term relationship with Claire (Julia Piaton). And worse yet, right after proposing to Claire, Simone becomes sexually involved with a Senegalese chef, and things go delightfully awry after that.

Spoilers ahead.

I had a few worries walking into this film. The first was the lack of publicity by Netflix for the film, without even a trailer posted to YouTube. Petty, I know. The second, and more important worry, was whether this film was going to boil down to Simone “finding the right man” and suddenly becoming straight, thus perpetuating a long-standing myth among fragile heterosexual males regarding lesbians. And I’ll tell you right now, it doesn’t do that at all. It was one of many expectations to be challenged by this film.

The setup for the film has all the subtlety of a sitcom. Simone, the lesbian from a conservative Jewish family. Claire, the out lesbian who wants Simone to be honest about herself and their relationship. And Wali, the Senegalese chef from a Muslim family, who finds himself drawn to Simone and much as Simone is to Wali. All sorts of boundaries are established: religious, social, ethnic, and sexual. Every boundary is accompanied by a supporting cast that either helps to support or erode those boundaries, as Simone’s actions to avoid these pressures builds into some truly hilarious scenarios. Sarah Stern, Julia Piaton, and Jean-Christophe Folly execute their awkward love triangle, reacting genuinely to every twist and turn, and dealing with their own turbulent emotions and boundaries as well.

Myriam Aziza maintains a pretty standard romantic comedy pace, injecting enough humor at the right moments to keep the film reflective and insightful, and mostly veering away from direct political or social arguments unless it drives the story. I am glad that we can have a solid film about the changing sexual and social politics of today, especially one interested in an awakening bisexuality from a same-sex character, and about the potential of a polyamorous or open relationship, and about the pressure of religious and social upbringing in terms of finding love, and about whether any or all of these expectations should matter. One of my main criticisms was the lack of a definitive ending, but that’s one more expectation this film gladly shatters.

“To Each, Her Own” (2018) is lighthearted romantic comedy about social, cultural, and sexual expectations in modern France. Myriam Aziza and Denyse Rodriguez-Tomé have crafted a deceptively complex script steeped in boundaries ready to be pushed, and in some cases, shattered altogether. Fans of romantic comedies and LGBTQ films should definitely check out this film, but be warned. This film also contain scenes of absolutely amazing looking food, so in addition to having your interest piqued, you may also be incredibly hungry.

Rotten Tomatoes: NR

Metacritic: NR

One Movie Punch: 8.2/10

“To Each, Her Own” (2018) is rated TV-MA and is currently streaming on Netflix.

Today’s movie is “Braven” (2018), the Canadian action and adventure film directed by Lin Oeding and written for the screen by Michael Nilon and Thomas Pa’a Sibbett. The film follows Joe Braven (Jason Momoa), a logging company owner whose family is threatened by drug runners attemping to store a large shipment of cocaine at his cabin. As you can imagine, things get really violent, really quick.

Spoilers ahead.

I’ll admit that my entire reason for seeing this film is Jason Momoa. I’ve been happy to watch his star rise, with my first encounter being his role as Ronon Dex on “Stargate: Atlantis”, then later as Khal Drogo in “Game of Thrones”. I’m not quite sure how I feel about him as Aquaman, yet, given the obvious difficulties in maintaining the DCEU franchise, but I’m willing to give it a shot later this year. In the meantime, I’m happy with him in any role, and this film is no exception.

“Braven” knows exactly what kind of film it is, wasting no time in setting up the characters and situation before diving into some decent survivalist action. We get all we need to know about Joe Braven through his relationship to his father Linden (Stephen Lang), his wife Stephanie (Jill Wagner), and his daughter Charlotte (Sasha Rossof). We also get to know the antagonist Kassen (Garret Dillahunt) through an exceptionally violent opening scene, and the lengths they’ll go to protect their cocaine. And, of course, Joe Braven tries to settle things peacefully before switching tactics. It can seem a little cheesy, but it works.

Lin Oeding’s direction brings all his stuntman experience to the other side of the camera, shooting mostly great action with a few shaky camera shots. However, a lot of other opportunities feel missed, particularly with the incredible and underutilized scenery available to them around Newfoundland, and perhaps not enough focus on the drama side of the story development. I did not expect this film to have a larger meaning, but I feel there was some massive potential as well, which could be recycled into a sequel, if desired.

“Braven” (2018) is a straight-ahead action thriller in the vein of many 1990s action films, taking a simple plot and expanding it into a star-driven adventure. While not a great film by any measure, it is above average, full of potential, and still a satisfying view. Fans of Jason Momoa, or classic 1990s action thrillers, should definitely check out this film. And we’ll be back later in the year to review “Aquaman” (2018), assuming its not pushed back.

Rotten Tomatoes: 76%

Metacritic: 61

One Movie Punch: 7.2/10 

“Braven” (2018) is rated R and is currently streaming on Amazon Prime.

Welcome back to Matinee Mondays!

Sorry to bother everyone before the review, but I just wanted to pop on and say thank you to everyone whose recently subscribed. I’ve seen a noticeable jump in the numbers and we’re almost ready to start our next phase of expansion. What’s that, you ask? Well, you’ll just have to wait and see, but keep a watch on Twitter and Facebook for an announcement later this month. In the meantime, if you have any films you are looking forward to the rest of the year, reach out to us at onemoviepunch.com or on social media. You know the ones.

And now... 

Today’s movie is “Sorry to Bother You” (2018), the debut feature-length film written and directed by Boots Riley, the driving force behind The Coup and Streetsweeper Social Club, and activist extraordinaire. The film follows Cassius Green (Lakeith Stanfield), a black telemarketer in a weird parallel universe who adopts a white accent to follow the fast track at his sales company, entering a bizarre, yet honest world of wealth and privilege.

Spoilers ahead.

I want to start this review with the time I met Boots Riley before a show in Los Angeles. November 6th, 2014. My good friend was in my area doing some union organizing, and I worked it out to head back home with him. Once the work was done, he yells out, “Oh shit! The Coup is playing in LA tonight!” And I was like, “Who are The Coup?” which was followed by my friend berating my ignorance and loading up everything Boots ever did while we drove down to Los Angeles. Absorbed all the music, read all the articles, and after grabbing a bite to eat, we were hanging outside the venue when he walked up. I was stoked. He was conserving his voice for the show, not talking to anyone. I was disappointed... until I heard the music, and the intensity, and the sheer energy from The Coup, and while my buddy was crashed out in the passenger seat, I spent the entire drive to San Diego playing The Coup on repeat. When I heard they were letting him do a movie, and that it was going to have the same title as The Coup’s 2012 album, I was in.

I loved so much about this film, too much for a podcast with this format, pardon me while I ramble on a bit. The trailer doesn’t even give you a tenth of the scope of this film. It gives you the barest of introductions to the many themes at play. Cassius Green, whose very name is a play on words, is situated in a parallel universe that removes the fig leaf from the economic and social oppression of our current society, one with a perverse sense of humor and arguably more honest than our own. A deceptively simple premise becomes increasing more complex and bizarre as more and more of this world, and the billionaires running it, opens up to us as Cassius first tries to organize the workers, then climbs the ladder by trading those principles for a paycheck, then realizing the world is more insane than he ever imagined, and thankfully, fighting back. Cassius, who begins by questioning his purpose and the meaning of everything, ends by finding his own purpose and meaning... and still has some pretty huge problems afterwards. I’m doing my best here not to reveal too much about the story, though, because frankly, you probably wouldn’t believe me.

Seeing really is believing with “Sorry to Bother You”. You need to take the surreal journey with Cassius, and meet the other important characters like Detroit (Tessa Thompson), his activist/artist girlfriend, and Squeeze (Steven Yeun), the workplace union organizer. You need to see the distinct style and amazing details that merit a second or third viewing, every one of which is a commentary on our current society, and not just the oligarchs, but the vast populations of people too comfortable to care and too myopic to see our society’s inherent contradictions and daily hypocrisies. You need to be shocked by the corporate endgame and the chaos that follows, and feel the disappointment when things don’t turn out the way you would expect, even though it’s how it turns out every single day here. I haven’t seen an aesthetic this simultaneously insightful, satirical, and acerbic since Kurt Vonnegut. Simply amazing.

“Sorry to Bother You” (2018) is subversive and revolutionary, a film that pushes our country’s nose in its own mess, unmasking the economic realities of our country. Boots Riley has made something incredible, a film that embodies nearly all the many ideas and themes from his life’s work as an artist and an activist. I could literally go on for hours about this film, but I will end by saying if you want to see a truly unique film that satirizes everything about our current society, then you should definitely check out this film. It’s everything we need right now.

Rotten Tomatoes: 94% (CERTIFIED)

Metacritic: 79

One Movie Punch: 10/10

“Sorry to Bother You” (2018) is rated R and is currently playing in theaters.

Today’s movie is “The Insult” (2017), the Lebanese drama directed by Ziad Doueiri and written in collaboration with Joelle Touma. The film follows Tony Hanna (Adel Karam) and Yasser Salameth (Kamel El Basha) who wind up in court because of traded insults in modern day Beirut, assisted by lawyers related to one another with different cultural and political views of their clients. The film received an Oscar nomination for Best Foreign Language Film in 2018.

Spoilers ahead.

Cycles of violence are difficult to stop, especially as the violence escalates between two groups diametrically opposed to one another. Nowhere is this more prevalent right now than the Middle East, where decades of war and atrocities have made peace not just a difficult, but an impossible prospect. Most folks might be able to understand this rationally, I don’t think people can understand it emotionally unless they’ve been involved in a cycle of violence. But if there was one film to help illustrate the perpetuation of cyclical violence, it’s this film. 

The real strength of “The Insult” is the script. Doueiri and Touma craft a story that uses a conflict between individuals, each with their own failings, both figuratively and literally as a metaphor for larger, multigenerational tension and conflict within the area. Figuratively speaking, Tony and Yasser are both refugees struggling against their histories and their prejudices, both having been victims of “the other” and transferring that emotion towards each other. Literally speaking, however, both become pawns in a larger effort by their respective communities and political organizations to attempt re-litigating the horrors of the past through the lens of what is by all measure a petty case. It’s a tactic used frequently in the United States to raise smaller squabbles towards the Supreme Court, fueled by wealthy individuals and organizations, and rarely concerned with either the plaintiff or defendant.

Doueiri maintains a good pace throughout the film, not too locked in to the structure demanded by the Lebanese judicial system in order to progress the story. Adel Karam and Kamel El Basha are excellent, beginning as flawed individuals and growing as a consequence of their trials, with only the slightest hint of saccharine sweetness. I also enjoyed the smaller sub-plot between Tony’s lawyer Wajdi Wehbe (Camille Salameh) and Yasser’s lawyer (and Wajdi’s daughter) Nadine Wehbe (Diamand Bou Abboud), layering in the generational differences even within families. Everything in the film helps demonstrate the difficulty of reconciliation and the need for it.

“The Insult” (2017) is an excellent film that shows the incredible difficulty in achieving peace within a community wreaked with violence, along with how individual conflicts can be turned into vehicles for political and social causes. Ziad Doueiri and Joelle Touma craft a well-structured script that is brought to life by an excellent cast. If you like judicial thrillers, and would like a little more social insight into the long-term effects of regional warfare, then this film is definitely for you.

Rotten Tomatoes: 89% (CERTIFIED)

Metacritic: 72

One Movie Punch: 8.6/10

“The Insult” (2017) is rated R and is currently streaming on Amazon Prime.