Movie Reviews
Titles Covered: The Toys that Made Us, The Lion King (2019), The Grinch (2018), Dora and the Lost City of Gold, My Darling Clementine, The Outlaw Josey Whales, Stranger Things, Scary Stories to tell in the Dark, and John Wick Chapter 3.
The Toys that Made us (****)
Imagine that one day, someone comes along and finally explains the truth behind your childhood. No, they don’t simply regurgitate your fuzzy memories, but reveal the inner workings that you weren’t aware of at the time. The true motivations of your friends, teachers, and parents are finally made plain. Would that be terrifying? Probably! But when the same approach is taken with an aspect of childhood that you can comfortably laugh at, it’s wildly entertaining.
That’s the angle of the Toys that Made Us, a fast-paced and quirky series that explores the dirty secrets behind the toys and associated cartoons that you may have loved years ago. The vast majority of interviewees are now retired, and speak with an uncharacteristic frankness that sharply contrasts with the usual “behind the scenes” promotional videos. They trash each other, argue about who deserves the most credit, and confess to some bizarre decisions.
Throughout the series, we learn that our childhood was all a lie. He-man’s popular cartoon show? It was a bluff a desperate marketing executive made in order to sell product to Toys R Us. Barbie was based on a fictional German prostitute. Transformers was a rebranded Japanese puzzle toy with no actual story behind it. G.I. Joe was originally just a macho Barbie doll. And everyone in the 1980’s was trying to rip off Star Wars. I guess we already knew that last bit.
Despite that, the series doesn’t let itself sink into cynicism. We’re constantly reminded that children loved these toys, and got a lot out of them. Sure, He-man was entirely based on marketing research. He was also a role model who embodied the power fantasies of 5-year-old boys while simultaneously teaching them moral lessons.
Some of the running gags and editing gimmicks get a little tiresome, but otherwise The Toys that Made Us is pretty damn delightful. Strongly recommended.
The Lion King 2019 (**)
In a word: redundant.
Lion King 2019 is the most redundant of the Disney Live-action remakes by far. Beauty and the Beast had some significant plot changes, new songs, and made Maurice into a sad and emotional character. Aladdin changed up the order of events in the 1st act, rewrote Jafar, and had fresh takes on Jasmine and the Genie. By contrast, the new additions to Lion King are very minor: a few altered lines of dialogue, a quick new scene here and there, and a new song by Beyonce that isn’t even very good. But apparently that was enough to make 1.6 billion dollars.
Frankly, that massive profit should go straight to the animators. Baby Simba is super cute and actually scared my cats into thinking that a real lion had gotten into the house. While the Lion King remake is creatively bankrupt, the animation is very stunning and beautiful. I think it’s worth remembering that such beauty isn’t created automatically, but is the work of many CGI artists and animators. So raise a glass to the unsung heroes!
Other than the animation… Um… I liked Scar’s voice. It fit the CGI model really well and is very menacing. Timon and Pumba were fine as well, and it’s naturally a delight to get James Earl Jones back. The rest of the voice acting ranges from mediocre to bad. It also bothered me that the pride of lions had about 3-4 different accents and dialects. Aside from a cute rendition of “The Lion Sleeps Tonight”, the musical numbers are weak: Circle of Life is a shot by shot remake, I Just Can’t Wait to be King lacks the manic energy of the cartoon, Be Prepared is truncated to the point where it feels like an introduction to a missing song, and the rest are forgettable.
Here’s a pitch I’ve made a few times: if you must remake the Lion King, include live animals and don’t have any dialogue or narration. Sound crazy? Well, that crazy idea made back 6 times its budget in the late 80’s.
I guess if you really just want to see The Lion King with realistic CGI, this version is fine. I’m just not sure what it really accomplished besides that.
The Grinch 2018 (***)
The funny thing about kid’s films is that kids often latch onto movies that make sense to them, and grow up assuming the movie is good and well-regarded. Such is now the case with the 2000 Jim Carrey Grinch adaptation, a largely mediocre movie that younger adults seem to think is some kind of classic. Seriously, if your kids want a modern Grinch, go with the 2018 version.
However, you should know that Benedict Cumberbatch’s titular Grinch is certainly different from previous adaptations. He still hates Christmas, but he’s more of an emotionally wounded prankster than a villain. Naturally, purists will prefer the meaner, grouchier Grinch (I do too!) but I applaud Mr. Cumberbatch for finding a new angle. It’s also great fun seeing him steal Christmas, as the animators have put a lot of effort into making his Herculean task of robbing hundreds of houses seem totally plausible.
If nothing else, The 2018 Grinch movie does a good job in presenting Whoville, and creating contrast between the Whos and the Grinch. In the 2000 adaptation, the Whos were a selfish and obnoxious bunch who were arguably worse than the Grinch. Obviously that was also a deliberate artistic choice, but it wasn’t a particularly good choice. I prefer the Whos of the 2018 version, who sing real carols about Jesus (a slightly gutsy move for a secular movie) and actually reach out to the Grinch to offer forgiveness.
The rest of the movie, sadly, is typical CGI kids movie fluff. There’s a bunch of cartoon animal slapstick, a new pop rendition of the Grinch song, and a somewhat forgettable subplot about Cindy Lou Who trying to catch Santa Claus. This is all fine, I guess, but none of it grabbed me.
The Grinch 2018 is solid. I’d still recommend the original 1966 Boris Karloff version, but the newfangled CGI update is a decent successor.
Dora and the Lost City of Gold (***)
A while ago, College humor made a joke trailer for a gritty “Dora the Explorer” movie starring Ariel Winter. It seemed like such a silly idea, the sort of quick gag appropriate for SNL or the Simpsons. And yet, as we’ve seen with Pride and Prejudice and Zombies or Abraham Lincoln Vampire Hunter, no idea is too silly for Hollywood. So someone decided to make the actual movie.
The result is a movie with many goals. It’s a PG-rated update to the preschool cartoon. It’s also a parody of the cartoon. It’s also a fish-out-of-water comedy in which a living cartoon character has to deal with the real world. It’s also a kiddy version of Indiana Jones… with a masked CGI fox as one of the bad guys. Strangely all of these angles work, even if they don’t excel.
The keystone to this bizarre concoction ends up being Izabela Moner, who finds just the right balance in portraying a 16-year-old Dora the Explorer. She’s cheerful without being annoying, funny without being too silly, and mature-looking without being sexualized.
I don’t want to overhype this movie. The supporting cast of kids could have been better written and cast, and some of the humor is pretty forced. But for what it is, Dora and the Lost City of Gold is a cute kiddy adventure that finds the right blend of humor and seriousness.
My Darling Clementine (***)
Troll tip: The next time you meet a film fan who starts complaining about how the Wild West was romanticized in movies, ask them to actually name a movie that did so. There are such movies, but most people under 50 haven’t actually seen them. The modern “Revisionist Western” goes back a long way.
But… if you want to watch a pre-1960’s traditional Western, My Darling Clementine is a pretty good place to start. Known as the favorite movie of Harry Truman, My Darling Clementine is actually the story of Wyatt Earp, and by extension the story of the shootout at the OK Corral.
The story starts with the Earp brothers arriving in the town of Tombstone. The lawlessness of the town prevents Wyatt from enjoying any relaxation, so he volunteers to be the Sherriff after cattle rustlers kill his little brother. The rest of the movie explores Wyatt’s attempts to bring law to the Wild West, as well as his friendship with Doc Holiday, a mercurial gambler stricken with tuberculosis.
Oddly enough, the titular “Clementine” is barely in the movie. She’s a love interest in a story that carely has any romance. Heck, the Latina femme fatale has way more screen time than Clementine.
Your friends who don’t like old movies aren’t going to get much out of this one. But for historical perspective, it’s a really nice look at a pre-Revisionist Western done right.
The Outlaw Josey Whales (**** and a half)
Now THIS is a great Western! Directed by and starring Clint Eastwood, the story of Josey Whales revolves around the Civil War, specifically those caught on the losing side.
The titular Josey Whales starts out as a simple farmer, bent on revenge after Union guerillas kill his family. He joins a similar group of hell-raising Confederate gunmen, and becomes a wanted war criminal after the South surrenders. Bounty hunters, lawmen, and even former comrades chase him across several states as he attempts to escape a war that’s supposed to be over.
This great story provides lots of action, suspense, and moral ambiguity as we hope that Josey can both escape to freedom and rediscover his moral compass. A recurring plot twist is that more and more “outcasts” join Josey on his trek, until the wanted loner basically has his own gang of misfits. The brutality of the frontier is on full display, as we see desolate ghost towns and vicious gangs on all sides. And yet, there is hope that grace and mercy will win the day, especially in a stunning parley between Josey and Native warlord “Ten Bears.” His “words of life” speech should be required viewing in film class.
Honestly, the only small flaw is that Clint Eastwood plays Josey too similar to his previous “man with no name” characters, and finds every opportunity to show off his trademark sneer. Also, some of the violence gets a little silly. Otherwise, the acting is very strong, especially from Chief Dan George as an eloquent native American, and John Vernon as a conflicted antagonist.
Stranger Things
Season 1 (****) is a great nostalgic throwback that feels like a movie that Spielberg or Zemekis could have made in the mid-80’s. I’m generally not a huge fan of drawn-out episodic series format, but didn’t mind it too much for Stranger Things. Sure, each season could have been a 2-hour movie and had roughly the same amount of plot, but Season 1 moved briskly enough that it doesn’t get bogged down. It’s a great season to binge watch. The plot feels like a combination of E.T. and Poltergeist, and manages to balance the sci-fi and horror elements exceptionally well. It also works well as a self-standing season, so if the later seasons don’t sound appealing, you can just stop here.
Season 2 (** and a half) is a mixed bag. The pace is much slower, and the focus is more scattered. Kat and I actually got so bored with the first half of the season that we stopped watching and didn’t revisit it until a year later. The second half of the season gets better, but I couldn’t shake the feeling that it was basically the same story as Season 1, except with many small monsters instead of one big monster. Also, I understand that the writers need to justify the importance of the kids, but making the monsters invulnerable to everything but Eleven wasn’t the right way to do it. On the other hand, the acting remains very strong, the effects are great, and some of the subplots are good fun. I especially liked Eleven’s journey, and thought her stand-alone episode was a great use of the mini-series format. Also, the character evolution of the “jerk boyfriend” character was refreshing and innovative. On the whole, I guess Season 2 is alright, but would have been much better cut down to about 4-5 episodes.
Season 3 (*** and a half) is absolutely nuts. You’re either going to hate it for deviating from the small scale of the original season, or love it for taking things in a wacky new direction after the somewhat boring Season 2. It’s a much “bigger” season with huge set pieces and lots more action and sci-fi twists. It also feels more vintage 80’s, which is partly justified by the presence of a shopping mall selling trendy 80’s clothes. On the other hand, the cast of characters is starting to get overly large, including some who are poorly acted (Erica, and the misogynist strawmen at the newspaper), while the best new actor (Maya Hawke as “Robin”) meanders without a clear purpose or arc. Otherwise, Season 3 is a wacky, crazy delight… as long as you’re OK with Stranger Things becoming a preposterous adventure series.
Conflict of Interest Declaration for the last 2 reviews: I currently hold LGF-A stock.
Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark (***)
Hey, I’ve actually read the book this time!
Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark is an anthology series of ghost stories published back in the 80’s, with heavy amounts of implied violence. The movie adaptation attempts to combine several of the short stories into an overarching narrative. It’s a pretty simple setup: kids accidentally unleash a supernatural evil that attacks them using monsters from the different short stories.
The individual short story bits are done really well, with great tension and practical effects. The creature design is remarkably well done, such that even the most ludicrous monster (the white woman) still appears menacing.
Alas, the whole movie doesn’t quite live up to its best parts. The overarching mystery plot is pretty lame and cliché. I’m getting rather bored the old “people who persecuted the monster were the real monsters” storyline. Also, the main cast of kids is just OK, and only the acting of the lead girl really stood out to me.
On the whole, Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark is solid. If you’d like a movie that’s appropriate for older kids, but also really scary (surprisingly so!), this will do.
John Wick 3: Parabellum (*** and a half)
Since the closure of the Hunger Games series, Lionsgate has been searching for a new lucrative franchise. Divergent wasn’t quite big enough to justify its high budget, Chaos Walking is still in production, and so the indie distributor relied on John Wick, a rare franchise that makes more money with each sequel.
The story goes that there is an elaborate Illuminati-like society of assassins bound by bizarre rituals and strange rules. The first John Wick movie was a relatively grounded revenge thriller that mostly used the Illuminati backstory for mystique and texture. The second movie delved further into the secret society. I didn’t particularly like the second movie, which seemed to lack a point and was burdened by very long, very repetitive fight scenes. Fortunately, the third movie fixes this problem by featuring more creative fight scenes and a more straightforward plot.
I especially loved the first act of the movie. John Wick is on the run from his fellow assassins, and is scared and overwhelmed constantly. This part of the story made him seem more vulnerable and sympathetic. It also had my favorite fight scene in the whole series, in which John Wick is in an antique weapons shop, rapidly assembling guns from different parts and grabbing throwing weapons off the walls. Then, the plot thickens as a new villain “adjudicator” for the assassin society provides a new and unique threat, and John Wick has to figure out his own motivations. What exactly does he have left to live for?
For all this good, the end of the movie kind of lost me. It becomes obvious where the plot is going: the High Table of Assassins is going to have to be destroyed by John Wick and his allies. But there isn’t enough time for that story to be resolved, so it’s going to have to be in a sequel. This leaves the final 30 minutes of John Wick 3 without a real purpose. It’s just long fight scenes prolonging the inevitable “to be continued” ending.
The 1st act of John Wick 3 is fantastic, the 2nd is good, and the 3rd is meh. It’s a huge improvement on the mediocre John Wick 2, but I think they could move the plot along a little faster.
The Toys that Made us (****)
Imagine that one day, someone comes along and finally explains the truth behind your childhood. No, they don’t simply regurgitate your fuzzy memories, but reveal the inner workings that you weren’t aware of at the time. The true motivations of your friends, teachers, and parents are finally made plain. Would that be terrifying? Probably! But when the same approach is taken with an aspect of childhood that you can comfortably laugh at, it’s wildly entertaining.
That’s the angle of the Toys that Made Us, a fast-paced and quirky series that explores the dirty secrets behind the toys and associated cartoons that you may have loved years ago. The vast majority of interviewees are now retired, and speak with an uncharacteristic frankness that sharply contrasts with the usual “behind the scenes” promotional videos. They trash each other, argue about who deserves the most credit, and confess to some bizarre decisions.
Throughout the series, we learn that our childhood was all a lie. He-man’s popular cartoon show? It was a bluff a desperate marketing executive made in order to sell product to Toys R Us. Barbie was based on a fictional German prostitute. Transformers was a rebranded Japanese puzzle toy with no actual story behind it. G.I. Joe was originally just a macho Barbie doll. And everyone in the 1980’s was trying to rip off Star Wars. I guess we already knew that last bit.
Despite that, the series doesn’t let itself sink into cynicism. We’re constantly reminded that children loved these toys, and got a lot out of them. Sure, He-man was entirely based on marketing research. He was also a role model who embodied the power fantasies of 5-year-old boys while simultaneously teaching them moral lessons.
Some of the running gags and editing gimmicks get a little tiresome, but otherwise The Toys that Made Us is pretty damn delightful. Strongly recommended.
The Lion King 2019 (**)
In a word: redundant.
Lion King 2019 is the most redundant of the Disney Live-action remakes by far. Beauty and the Beast had some significant plot changes, new songs, and made Maurice into a sad and emotional character. Aladdin changed up the order of events in the 1st act, rewrote Jafar, and had fresh takes on Jasmine and the Genie. By contrast, the new additions to Lion King are very minor: a few altered lines of dialogue, a quick new scene here and there, and a new song by Beyonce that isn’t even very good. But apparently that was enough to make 1.6 billion dollars.
Frankly, that massive profit should go straight to the animators. Baby Simba is super cute and actually scared my cats into thinking that a real lion had gotten into the house. While the Lion King remake is creatively bankrupt, the animation is very stunning and beautiful. I think it’s worth remembering that such beauty isn’t created automatically, but is the work of many CGI artists and animators. So raise a glass to the unsung heroes!
Other than the animation… Um… I liked Scar’s voice. It fit the CGI model really well and is very menacing. Timon and Pumba were fine as well, and it’s naturally a delight to get James Earl Jones back. The rest of the voice acting ranges from mediocre to bad. It also bothered me that the pride of lions had about 3-4 different accents and dialects. Aside from a cute rendition of “The Lion Sleeps Tonight”, the musical numbers are weak: Circle of Life is a shot by shot remake, I Just Can’t Wait to be King lacks the manic energy of the cartoon, Be Prepared is truncated to the point where it feels like an introduction to a missing song, and the rest are forgettable.
Here’s a pitch I’ve made a few times: if you must remake the Lion King, include live animals and don’t have any dialogue or narration. Sound crazy? Well, that crazy idea made back 6 times its budget in the late 80’s.
I guess if you really just want to see The Lion King with realistic CGI, this version is fine. I’m just not sure what it really accomplished besides that.
The Grinch 2018 (***)
The funny thing about kid’s films is that kids often latch onto movies that make sense to them, and grow up assuming the movie is good and well-regarded. Such is now the case with the 2000 Jim Carrey Grinch adaptation, a largely mediocre movie that younger adults seem to think is some kind of classic. Seriously, if your kids want a modern Grinch, go with the 2018 version.
However, you should know that Benedict Cumberbatch’s titular Grinch is certainly different from previous adaptations. He still hates Christmas, but he’s more of an emotionally wounded prankster than a villain. Naturally, purists will prefer the meaner, grouchier Grinch (I do too!) but I applaud Mr. Cumberbatch for finding a new angle. It’s also great fun seeing him steal Christmas, as the animators have put a lot of effort into making his Herculean task of robbing hundreds of houses seem totally plausible.
If nothing else, The 2018 Grinch movie does a good job in presenting Whoville, and creating contrast between the Whos and the Grinch. In the 2000 adaptation, the Whos were a selfish and obnoxious bunch who were arguably worse than the Grinch. Obviously that was also a deliberate artistic choice, but it wasn’t a particularly good choice. I prefer the Whos of the 2018 version, who sing real carols about Jesus (a slightly gutsy move for a secular movie) and actually reach out to the Grinch to offer forgiveness.
The rest of the movie, sadly, is typical CGI kids movie fluff. There’s a bunch of cartoon animal slapstick, a new pop rendition of the Grinch song, and a somewhat forgettable subplot about Cindy Lou Who trying to catch Santa Claus. This is all fine, I guess, but none of it grabbed me.
The Grinch 2018 is solid. I’d still recommend the original 1966 Boris Karloff version, but the newfangled CGI update is a decent successor.
Dora and the Lost City of Gold (***)
A while ago, College humor made a joke trailer for a gritty “Dora the Explorer” movie starring Ariel Winter. It seemed like such a silly idea, the sort of quick gag appropriate for SNL or the Simpsons. And yet, as we’ve seen with Pride and Prejudice and Zombies or Abraham Lincoln Vampire Hunter, no idea is too silly for Hollywood. So someone decided to make the actual movie.
The result is a movie with many goals. It’s a PG-rated update to the preschool cartoon. It’s also a parody of the cartoon. It’s also a fish-out-of-water comedy in which a living cartoon character has to deal with the real world. It’s also a kiddy version of Indiana Jones… with a masked CGI fox as one of the bad guys. Strangely all of these angles work, even if they don’t excel.
The keystone to this bizarre concoction ends up being Izabela Moner, who finds just the right balance in portraying a 16-year-old Dora the Explorer. She’s cheerful without being annoying, funny without being too silly, and mature-looking without being sexualized.
I don’t want to overhype this movie. The supporting cast of kids could have been better written and cast, and some of the humor is pretty forced. But for what it is, Dora and the Lost City of Gold is a cute kiddy adventure that finds the right blend of humor and seriousness.
My Darling Clementine (***)
Troll tip: The next time you meet a film fan who starts complaining about how the Wild West was romanticized in movies, ask them to actually name a movie that did so. There are such movies, but most people under 50 haven’t actually seen them. The modern “Revisionist Western” goes back a long way.
But… if you want to watch a pre-1960’s traditional Western, My Darling Clementine is a pretty good place to start. Known as the favorite movie of Harry Truman, My Darling Clementine is actually the story of Wyatt Earp, and by extension the story of the shootout at the OK Corral.
The story starts with the Earp brothers arriving in the town of Tombstone. The lawlessness of the town prevents Wyatt from enjoying any relaxation, so he volunteers to be the Sherriff after cattle rustlers kill his little brother. The rest of the movie explores Wyatt’s attempts to bring law to the Wild West, as well as his friendship with Doc Holiday, a mercurial gambler stricken with tuberculosis.
Oddly enough, the titular “Clementine” is barely in the movie. She’s a love interest in a story that carely has any romance. Heck, the Latina femme fatale has way more screen time than Clementine.
Your friends who don’t like old movies aren’t going to get much out of this one. But for historical perspective, it’s a really nice look at a pre-Revisionist Western done right.
The Outlaw Josey Whales (**** and a half)
Now THIS is a great Western! Directed by and starring Clint Eastwood, the story of Josey Whales revolves around the Civil War, specifically those caught on the losing side.
The titular Josey Whales starts out as a simple farmer, bent on revenge after Union guerillas kill his family. He joins a similar group of hell-raising Confederate gunmen, and becomes a wanted war criminal after the South surrenders. Bounty hunters, lawmen, and even former comrades chase him across several states as he attempts to escape a war that’s supposed to be over.
This great story provides lots of action, suspense, and moral ambiguity as we hope that Josey can both escape to freedom and rediscover his moral compass. A recurring plot twist is that more and more “outcasts” join Josey on his trek, until the wanted loner basically has his own gang of misfits. The brutality of the frontier is on full display, as we see desolate ghost towns and vicious gangs on all sides. And yet, there is hope that grace and mercy will win the day, especially in a stunning parley between Josey and Native warlord “Ten Bears.” His “words of life” speech should be required viewing in film class.
Honestly, the only small flaw is that Clint Eastwood plays Josey too similar to his previous “man with no name” characters, and finds every opportunity to show off his trademark sneer. Also, some of the violence gets a little silly. Otherwise, the acting is very strong, especially from Chief Dan George as an eloquent native American, and John Vernon as a conflicted antagonist.
Stranger Things
Season 1 (****) is a great nostalgic throwback that feels like a movie that Spielberg or Zemekis could have made in the mid-80’s. I’m generally not a huge fan of drawn-out episodic series format, but didn’t mind it too much for Stranger Things. Sure, each season could have been a 2-hour movie and had roughly the same amount of plot, but Season 1 moved briskly enough that it doesn’t get bogged down. It’s a great season to binge watch. The plot feels like a combination of E.T. and Poltergeist, and manages to balance the sci-fi and horror elements exceptionally well. It also works well as a self-standing season, so if the later seasons don’t sound appealing, you can just stop here.
Season 2 (** and a half) is a mixed bag. The pace is much slower, and the focus is more scattered. Kat and I actually got so bored with the first half of the season that we stopped watching and didn’t revisit it until a year later. The second half of the season gets better, but I couldn’t shake the feeling that it was basically the same story as Season 1, except with many small monsters instead of one big monster. Also, I understand that the writers need to justify the importance of the kids, but making the monsters invulnerable to everything but Eleven wasn’t the right way to do it. On the other hand, the acting remains very strong, the effects are great, and some of the subplots are good fun. I especially liked Eleven’s journey, and thought her stand-alone episode was a great use of the mini-series format. Also, the character evolution of the “jerk boyfriend” character was refreshing and innovative. On the whole, I guess Season 2 is alright, but would have been much better cut down to about 4-5 episodes.
Season 3 (*** and a half) is absolutely nuts. You’re either going to hate it for deviating from the small scale of the original season, or love it for taking things in a wacky new direction after the somewhat boring Season 2. It’s a much “bigger” season with huge set pieces and lots more action and sci-fi twists. It also feels more vintage 80’s, which is partly justified by the presence of a shopping mall selling trendy 80’s clothes. On the other hand, the cast of characters is starting to get overly large, including some who are poorly acted (Erica, and the misogynist strawmen at the newspaper), while the best new actor (Maya Hawke as “Robin”) meanders without a clear purpose or arc. Otherwise, Season 3 is a wacky, crazy delight… as long as you’re OK with Stranger Things becoming a preposterous adventure series.
Conflict of Interest Declaration for the last 2 reviews: I currently hold LGF-A stock.
Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark (***)
Hey, I’ve actually read the book this time!
Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark is an anthology series of ghost stories published back in the 80’s, with heavy amounts of implied violence. The movie adaptation attempts to combine several of the short stories into an overarching narrative. It’s a pretty simple setup: kids accidentally unleash a supernatural evil that attacks them using monsters from the different short stories.
The individual short story bits are done really well, with great tension and practical effects. The creature design is remarkably well done, such that even the most ludicrous monster (the white woman) still appears menacing.
Alas, the whole movie doesn’t quite live up to its best parts. The overarching mystery plot is pretty lame and cliché. I’m getting rather bored the old “people who persecuted the monster were the real monsters” storyline. Also, the main cast of kids is just OK, and only the acting of the lead girl really stood out to me.
On the whole, Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark is solid. If you’d like a movie that’s appropriate for older kids, but also really scary (surprisingly so!), this will do.
John Wick 3: Parabellum (*** and a half)
Since the closure of the Hunger Games series, Lionsgate has been searching for a new lucrative franchise. Divergent wasn’t quite big enough to justify its high budget, Chaos Walking is still in production, and so the indie distributor relied on John Wick, a rare franchise that makes more money with each sequel.
The story goes that there is an elaborate Illuminati-like society of assassins bound by bizarre rituals and strange rules. The first John Wick movie was a relatively grounded revenge thriller that mostly used the Illuminati backstory for mystique and texture. The second movie delved further into the secret society. I didn’t particularly like the second movie, which seemed to lack a point and was burdened by very long, very repetitive fight scenes. Fortunately, the third movie fixes this problem by featuring more creative fight scenes and a more straightforward plot.
I especially loved the first act of the movie. John Wick is on the run from his fellow assassins, and is scared and overwhelmed constantly. This part of the story made him seem more vulnerable and sympathetic. It also had my favorite fight scene in the whole series, in which John Wick is in an antique weapons shop, rapidly assembling guns from different parts and grabbing throwing weapons off the walls. Then, the plot thickens as a new villain “adjudicator” for the assassin society provides a new and unique threat, and John Wick has to figure out his own motivations. What exactly does he have left to live for?
For all this good, the end of the movie kind of lost me. It becomes obvious where the plot is going: the High Table of Assassins is going to have to be destroyed by John Wick and his allies. But there isn’t enough time for that story to be resolved, so it’s going to have to be in a sequel. This leaves the final 30 minutes of John Wick 3 without a real purpose. It’s just long fight scenes prolonging the inevitable “to be continued” ending.
The 1st act of John Wick 3 is fantastic, the 2nd is good, and the 3rd is meh. It’s a huge improvement on the mediocre John Wick 2, but I think they could move the plot along a little faster.