Project Hail Mary, Artemis II and My Introduction to Hopecore

I have been bordering on pushy, telling my friends and acquaintances to go see the movie Project Hail Mary. 

We watched it as a family the first Tuesday after release, and all four of us adored it. Any one of us would have happily turned around and walked right back in for a secodn showing, had that been an option. Fenya thought there was a chance of it ending up as her favourite science-fiction movie ever. For myself, I haven't been this evangelical about a movie in terms of bugging folks to see it in a theatre since Inception. I asked a friend who hadn't seen it if he wanted to go so I would have an excuse to watch it in IMAX.

And there are a lot of different reasons for this:

• a solid story, driven by science but wrapped in humanity
• a remarkable performance by Ryan Gosling (who also produced it), and almost half his screen time has no other humans to interact with
• a commitment to practical effects wherever possible, including puppetry and physical models of spaceships
• perhaps the best alien character since Mr. Spock, but far, far more alien

But that isn't the reason I am pushing folks so hard to not wait for this to stream, to see it in a darkened room with strangers.

The premise of the story revolves around the need to send a middle school science teacher 12 light years away in a last-ditch hope to save Earth's rapidly dimming star. Drew Goddard's screenplay (based on Andy Weir's (The Martian) novel) does not soft-peddle the horror of this, having the topic introduced in a classroom, resulting in 8th graders very quickly connecting the dots between a cooling planet, a global food crisis, and probable breakdown of society, and (understandably) getting quite upset.

But even with that grimness, underscored by the frank admission by the project's director (Sandra Huller) that the 30 year timeline they are working with assumes the world's governments working together to ration food (which they won't), hope permeates almost every scene. Sometimes desperately, sometimes whimsically, but very nearly omnipresently.

And that hope is closer to the reason for my zeal, but not the core of it.

Seeing a film that dramatizes so clearly and spectacularly the need for curiosity, openmindedness and friendship in desperate times, while we as a society and a species face a wholly different but still entirely fraught circumstance, was something I think I needed in my soul.

And experiencing it with a room full of people I don't know, and hearing sounds in the dark that made me realize they felt something similar as well? 

That was transcendent. 

I don't want to say much more about the movie itself because there are so many tiny discoveries to be made and I want you to have all of them, even if you do wait to see it at home (but please go if you can). And I really don't want to oversell it because a co-worker went to see it and disliked it so much she left before it finished, but I have to tellyou, that feeling it gave me felt awfully, awfully good, and I want more people to experience it. And I am sorry it didn't play out that way for my colleague, but hey, there is no accounting for taste, right?.

And looking on Threads (Meta/ Facebook's version of Twitter), it looks like a lot of folks share my sentiment about the flick, one of which introduced me to the term 'hopecore', which, please God, let this become a thing.

Hopecore, eh? You know, I am not entirely sure what that is....but I am pretty sure I want more of it.

Now, I fully realize that what I find touching you might find treacly or overly sentimental or whatever, so bear that in mind, but if these testimonials leave even the slightest bit curious, get our there before it leaves theatres. I've seen it twice already and will go again if it coerces someone else into seeing it in the wild.

Meanwhile, here in the real world, four genuine hero astronauts travelled further than any other humans ever last week, as the Intrepid spacecraft carried the Artemis II crew on a loop around the moon.

My sister and her husband (who is probably an even bigger NASA fan than me!) were up last week and we were able watch the launch together. I will admit, my heart was in my throat from liftoff to maybe the two minute mark, because Challenger's fate at 73 seconds into their flight abjectly refused my polite but firm requests to leave my mind, but it was honestly a beautiful thing to see and I am grateful we could all see it together.

But what was most surprising was how much interest was maintained throughout the mission - not just by my fellow space nerds, but the public in general seemed genuinely entranced by this mission. Maybe there was more interest up here in Canada because one of our own, Jeremy Hansen, was on a lunar mission for the very first time. Whatever the reason, hearing people in the grocery checkout line talk about the insertion burn or folks in church discussing the lunar slingshot was tremendously gratifying.

Similar to Project Hail Mary though, while the technology was amazing, the humanity was what a lot of us found most moving. 

First of all, one of the most diverse space crews ever, with a black pilot, female mission specialist, and a Canadian.

The emotion they shared went beyond mere excitement, such as when they shared the enormity of seeing a tiny Earth dwarfed by the Moon's proximity, and a giddy voice from mission control responded with a line from PHM:

Peak eye leakage for me came when they named a crater after the late wife of the mission commander, Reid Wiseman:

(Get effed, toxic masculinity!)

Anyways, the day after safely splashing down off the coast of San Diego, the Artemis II crew had a lot of great stuff to say, like Jeremy Hansen:

“What you saw was a group of people who loved contributing, having meaningful contribution and extracting joy out of that. And what we’ve been hearing is that was something special for you to witness. I would suggest to you that when you look up here, you’re not looking at us. We are a mirror reflecting you, and if you like what you see, then just look a little deeper. This is you.”

And Christina Koch:

“A crew is a group that is in it all the time, no matter what, that is stroking together every minute with the same purpose, that is willing to sacrifice silently for each other, that gives grace, that holds accountable. A crew has the same cares and the same needs, and a crew is inescapably beautifully, dutifully linked. I know I haven’t learned everything that this journey has yet to teach me. But there’s one new thing I know, and that is planet Earth: You are a crew.”

The greatest delight for me, though, continues to be the positivity, the optimism, the sense of hope in a time where it feels like we could really use more of it.

I watched Project Hail Mary on an UltrAVX screen and then again in IMAX. Glory and I watched the recovery of the capsule on my iPad while we ate dinner.

Whatever screen I might be viewing, please Lord, let there be more hopecore for me to see.

The Revolution *Will* Be Dramatised - One Battle After Another, Reviewed

Prior to the Oscars, our household always tries to scarf down as many films with as many nominees as we can. Sometimes we encounter a delight we might not have come across otherwise, and other times these viewings feel obligatory or perfunctory, even after the fact. When we started watching Paul Thomas Anderson's One Battle After Another tonight I approached it like the latter, but was pleasantly surprised to discover the former.

I knew from the trailer that I was in for something conspiratorial and paranoid, but there is an almost hallucinatory or dreamlike element to much of it as well that reminded me of The Illuminatus Trilogy. The compartmentalized secrecy of the French 75 revolutionary group, while hearkening back to the Weather Underground of the 60s and 70s, felt chronologically displaced among modern autos and cell phones. It was even filmed in 35mm VistaVision for a more period feel.

The majority of the film follows a former revolutionary (Leonardo DiCaprio) and his teenaged daughter (Chase Infiniti) who go on the run after 16 years in hiding when a vengeful Col. Lockjaw (Sean Penn) discovers their whereabouts. This partially follows the plot of Thomas Pynchon's novel Vineland but is only a loose adaptation (with the author's blessing, which is cool).

The writing is tight and the pacing tighter than most of the other Anderson movie's I've watched (I appreciated There Will be Blood but actively disliked Phantom Thread), but like those movies there are some fantastic performances to be had here, running the gamut from broad satire to intensely personal. Benicio Del Toro joins the other two male leads for Oscar nominations and I adored his portrayal of a karate school teacher who maintains an unbreakable coolness despite the plot's impacts on his own, separate, clandestine objectives.

The lack of female nominations strikes me as tragic, given the caliber of performances, but 13 nominations for the film in total is no small achievement.

In terms of impact, it is one thing for a present day movie to echo the sentiments of a more subversive era, with its callbacks to Gil Scott Heron's The Revolution Will Not Be Televised and the film The Battle of Algiers (mandatory viewing for both the Black Panthers and the FBI's Hostage Rescue Unit) while people are weariung present day clothing. It is entirely another to watch Federal agents kitted out in full tactical gear storming a frozen food factory and high school dance as cover for their manhunt, using agents provocateur to escalate street confrontations while similar scenes are playing out IRL in Minneapolis. 

The introduction of an even more secretive faction of rich white racists brings things like the Epstein files to mind as well - all this from a screenplay Anderson says he has been writing for twenty years, and which wrapped shooting a year before the ICE surge descended on Minnesota.

An imaginative and chilling movie that has genuine affection for the characters that it subjects to such harsh trials, and yet still finds moments of gallows humour and absurdity, I suggest open-minded film fans seek out One Battle After Another on Crave here in Canada. Heck, if you watch Sinners on the same service, that's 29 nominations you've covered for the Oscars...

In Good Hands - Predator: Badlands (+), Reviewed

What is it about the 1987 Predator movie that has made it so compelling for nearly four decades now? Looking back, it felt more like a one-off than any sort of franchise starter; an action film/creature feature hybrid with slasher movie overtones. But whisper "over here" within earshot of most nerds my age...

The connection to the Alien(s) franchise (simply by being made by the same film studio) came afterwards, almost by chance it seems, and in comic form at first, not films. The Aliens vs Predator comics were bold and imaginative, the movies...less so. Like so many 90s "versus" films, they crutched far too much on the spectacle of  two headliners battling each other instead of any grander context, insight or even irony.

Predator: Badlands breaks tradition and precedent in two important ways: first, the alien Predator (or Yautja, as they call themselves) is the protagonist instead of the villain or anti-hero. 

Dek (Dimitrius Schuster-Koloamatangi) is puny by Yautja standards, and although the trailers make it clear just how deadly the planet he ends up on is (Genna, described on-screen as a "Death Planet), I was not aware of just how desperate his situation is even before arriving there. 

Secondly, the introduction of Weiland-Yutani, the Earth mega-corporation introduced in 1986's Aliens (and which has just been getting more and more malicious ever since) comes in a way that makes sense: a damaged android named Thia (Elle Fanning), abandoned here during a bio-survey, offers to share what she has learned about Genna and its fauna to help Dek find his prey - the unkillable Kalisk.

And as far as I am concerned, that is all you need to know. 

I will tell you that there is a lot I loved about Badlands:

I love that there is so little dialogue in the first act.

I love that Dek speaks in Yautja for the entire films, despite the fact they drop a universal translator into the mix early on. (The actor comfortably drops lines in this created language during interviews, and has wished it was real so he could talk to others on the set without breaking character... <3 ).

I already adore Elle Fanning (primarily due to The Great), but loved how (for instance) she uses her double jointed elbows to make propping up her severed upper half seem even more inhuman and unnerving. 

I love Schuster-Koloamatangi's performance, and not just for his physicality (which is compelling and fierce!), but the intensity of him delivering lines we can't understand without subtitles, the disdain he conveys even through all the alien makeup and animation, and the insecurity you can sometimes sense behind it.

I love that we cannot say with any certainty when this particular film is set (pre-Alien? post-Alien Resurrection?), and even more, I love that it doesn't really matter. (I will say some of the gear looks shinier than Aliens...)

Some people are upset by the PG-13 rating this film received, but I am all for it: build more fans! Does having a sympathetic creature make this film too Disney? Hell no, wait 'til you see what it does... Despite the fact that this film does not contain a single solitary human being, it still feels as brutal and unforgiving as a Predator movie needs to be.

But Predator: Badlands still somehow manages to work a little pathos in there as well. 

I say 'well done' to director Dan Trachtenberg, who also gave us the excellent Prey in 2022, pitting an extra-big, extra-raw Predator against low-tech indigenous Americans. If you have Disney+ and haven't watched this yet, I urge you to get on it; I think Prey is the best Predator movie since the first one, and I enjoyed a bunch of the others.

Trachtenberg also gave us the first animated Predator feature earlier this very year, Killer of Killers. The girls and I watched it Friday night, and I highly recommend it. In fact, I think it gives an even clearer picture as to where he is taking this franchise.

This film establishes what was suggested in the very first film: that the Yautja have been coming to Earth to hunt for a very, very, long time. Three vignettes pit immensely capable fighters against different hunters in three different settings: the Viking Age, feudal Japan and WWII. The samurai/ninja action of the middle segment is some of the best I have seen depicted, and the creativity of the fights in the Viking piece is jaw-dropping in places. The linking portion that ties the three stories together is the least compelling, but suggests an intriguing future - as does the post-credits scene. (!)

Three movies in, I feel that the Predator franchise has a guiding hand now that the Aliens one never did, each subsequent creator moving further away from the core to put their own stamp on things (and yes, that goes for you too, Ridley!). My hope now is for Trachtenberg to keep his hands on the wheel for as long as possible, and I will be there for every bit of the ride.

More Than Just Great - Fantastic Four: First Steps, Reviewed

Despite being the first superheroes created by Marvel Comics (yes, predating Spider-Man, Iron Man and the Hulk!), the Fantastic Four have not had much like being adatped to movies or TV. The Roger Corman version from 1994 (unreleased) is objectively terrible, the 2005 Tim Story films didn't blow anyone's skirts up, and the 2015 Josh Trank version was an utter bomb, regarded by many as being the worst superhero movie ever released, and Marvel disliked the movie so much they not only killed analogues of the actors in another comic, they cancelled the Fantastic Four comic itself. 

Fantastic Four: First Steps finally gives Marvel's First Family the platform they deserve.

Director Matt Shakman (WandaVision) and a host of writers have crafted a tight little adventure film (first Marvel film to clock in under two hours in who knows how long) that has great heart and expresses the core characters pretty much perfectly.

By settting the movie in a completely independent timeline (Earth 828, for artist/creator Jack Kirby's birthday), the filmmakers not only gave themselves a chance to play with a retro-future vision of New York, but removing it from an increasingly convoluted MCU continuity means absolutely no 'homework' is required by exhausted, lapsed or maybe even new viewers.

The casting is pitch perfect, from Pedro Pascal's portrayal of Reed Richards/ Mr. Fantastic as a brilliant, preoccupied but loving husband, to Vanessa Kirby/ Invisible Woman showcasing Susan Storm as being protective, diplomatic but also ruthless when her family is threatened. Joseph Quinn brings the needed sass and swagger to Johnny Storm/ the Human Torch but doesn't look out of place when displaying his own insights and intelligence.

My favourite is Ebon Moss-Bachrach as Ben Grimm/ The Thing, for carrying so much humanity and empathy through a CGI-created set of rock-like features - my compliments to the FX team! He also underplays the mopishness and woe-is-me nature so prevalent in the early FF stories. His deep appreciation of his found family does not grate against his desire to punch a threat if the opportunity presents itself.

I wish I could spend more time in retro-pastiche Earth 828, and the next time I watch this film I will pay even more attention to the billboards, ads and magazine covers (although wow it felt like a lot of product placement early on). I love that one of the montage bits early on show the Mole Man abducting the Pan-Am (Airlines) tower, and all the analog touches like tape drives for the H.E.R.B.I.E. robots.

For the first time in a long time, a Marvel picture has balanced action, character, humour and pathos proportionately while still bringing all the vibrancy and wonder of the source material. It is a wonderful thing to experience in the theaters, and a real tour de force in superhero films.

Most critically for me though, is how quickly they establish what differentiates the Fantastic Four from every other team in comics - the fact that they are a family.

Family, loyalty and sacrifice are themes that run throughout the film, and I would love to delve into them except for fear of spoiling even the tiny revelations that enthralled me. Suffice to say, this is one of the better Galactus stories I have ever come across because of the hard choices given the heroes in this story.

The love and optimism displayed in Fantastic Four: First Steps make it a great double-feature pairing with Superman, at  time when the real world could use a lot of both. Highly recommended, not just to comic fans, but to anyone who appreciates wonder on the big screen.

A Hard Story About a Soft Guy - Superman, Reviewed

Let me start off by saying that as much as I enjoyed James Gunn's Superman movie, both as a showcase for the world first real superhero and as the foundation for a rebooted shared universe for DC comics characters, my favourite iteration of Kal-el remains his portrayal on the Justice League aninamted series. (The same goes for Batman and I adored Matt Reeves' noirish take!)

After nearly a century of storytelling I think it has become apparent that, whatever the medium, is it not difficult to write a Superman story. He has an extensive array of interesting powers, many of which lend themselves well to a dynamic medium like film or television. He has an extensive and largely well-known lore and backstory, as well as one of the best rogues gallery in comic books.

So writing a story with one of the most beloved fictional characters is not supremely difficult -  it is estimated that there are over 50,000 indiviudal comics featuring Superman.

The challenge is in writing a good Superman story; one that is compelling and original and surprising. And although I have some problems with the how of it, I think James Gunn has done this with Superman.

In the interest of avoiding spoilers, I will be avoiding detailed discussions of some of what I felt were shortcomings. Some of them are nitpicks and couel of them really aren't,  and I felt that each of them could have been written around. 

The most critical thing they got right is the heart of Clark Kent himself; a midwesterner committed to helping people and doing the right thing. Not just beating up bad guys, but saving people (and more than a couple of animals).

They also got the casting and the supporting cast spot-on, from the journalists of the Daily Planet (especially Rachel Brosnahan in what feels like a very Margot Kidder-influenced Lois Lane) to the other heroes in the 'Justice Gang' (esp. Nathan Fillion's arrogant Green Lanter Guy Gardner). But special mention has to go to Nicholas Hoult for portraying a Lex Luthor with all the smarts and savvy of past interpretations and then infusing him with a roiling core of anger borne out of jealousy and perceived inadequacy. 

This acrimony lefd to some surprisingly mean-hearted moments that, even for a megalomaniacal and selfish tool like Luthor left me a bit surprised, but I respect the boldness of the choice. There are a few bold choices in the film, not all of which I agreed with, but all of which I think I understood.

Some of the best things about Superman is what they didn't do, however.

• They didn't make it an origin story (thank Gawd)
• They didn't have him straight up murder anyone, or let someone die to preserve his secret identity
• They didn't make his dog smarter than they majority of other characters - in fact, notwithstanding the superpowers, Krypto is maybe the most realistic dog in movie history
• They didn't get rid of the red trunks, a bag part of Superman's iconic look
• They didn't make Lois a patsy for Superman, challenging him instead

As a comic-lover, there was a lot for me to like in this film. As a movie lover, Gunn gave all of Superman's weaknesses an opportunity to be exploited, from the well known mineral ones to the less-explored social ones. He gave one of the most powerful characters in fiction multiple (maybe too many) opportunities to be vulnerable and a great assortment of characters to play his strengths and weaknesses against. 

The action sequences are dynamic for sure, Gunn's trademark humour is given many places to shine, but the best thing about Superman is its intrinsic belief about good - not that good will always triumph over evil, but simply what good is. The rest is nitpicking.

This is the Superman I have been waiting for for 45 years. Welcome back, Clark.

More Fast, Less Furious - F1, Reviewed

I came out of our Canada Day viewing of F1: The Movie with two thoughts:

1. That is some seriously commercial and formulaic filmmaking; and
2. That is a great summer movie.

The shorthand is, if you enjoyed the speed and camerawork of last year's Top Gun: Maverick, this is cut from essentially the same cloth, only at a much lower altitude. It not only has the same director (Joseph Kosinski), but where TGM had the full cooperation of the US Department of Defense and Navy, this one not only has Formula 1 Racing behind it, but even boasts seven-time World Driver's Champion Lewis Hamilton as an executive producer. Some wags are calling it Top Gear: Maverick, which I wish I'd thought of...

Brad Pitt plays Sonny Hayes, a one-time Formula 1 up and comer from decades back who is now a mercenary wheelman drifting from race to race (including the grueling 24 hours at LeMans!) without connections or continuity. His old teammate (Javier Bardem), now the owner of a struggling F1 team, begs him to return to the league in order to help him salvage what remains of a terrible season. 

Along the way he will have to contend with a prickly relationship with his rookie teammate (Damson Idris), convince a female engineer (Kerry Condon) to re-design the car and, of course, deal with the ghosts from his past - as well as a full field of younger, yet more experienced drivers.

The great thing about sports movies (which this undoubtedly is) is that the conflict is built in and you honestly don't need a whole ton of plot. The story of F1 isn't quite paint-by-numbers, but it is definitely done by the numbers, with not too many surprises in store along the way.

So why bother watching it?

Well, since they let Idris and Pitt drive on real F1 tracks with legit F2 cars during actual Grand Prix weekends (but not at the same time as guys like Lewis Hamilton or Max Verstappen), you are unlikely to ever get a better look at what F1 racing looks like at ground level.

And to be clear here, I am not a guy who really gives a hoot about motorsports, but I appreciate the skill and engineering behind any competition this intense, and let's face it, these amazing vehicles are essentially jet fighters on wheels. Kosinski has repurposed a lot of his technology from TGM and reapplied it to these road rockets, and makes even the qualifying laps look engaging and intense. In fact we all agreed that early shots of the spoiler dropping to increase speed should have been repeated more in later races (but this may be due to rules about how he drag reduction system is used).

I can't speak to how realistic the film is, because how the hell would I know, but they have enough good-looking details for the serious fans and enough explanations for newbies like me to keep the challenges and stakes clear without constant exposition. And I know Sonny's unconventional 'Plan C's would get a real-world driver penalized, if not litigated, indicted, or simply assaulted in pit row.

The story, though simple, does not treat its audience as stupid. The goal is not to win the championship or even a single race, but just to improve the team's standing enough that the board does not force the owner to sell and put a rookie driver out of work. No one will die if the goal is unmet, and there is no villain from another team sabotaging their cars or racing dirty to put them in their place. In fact, the lack of mustache twirling made the movie more enjoyable as a whole. Honestly, when the protagonist is coming out of a straightaway at 350+ km/h and approaching a corner on worn out tires, inertia is a sufficient enough antagonist, don't you think?

The product placement is relentless, even away from the track, so if you don't like logos, maybe give this film a miss. But the international venues are a real treat for the eyes on a big screen.

F1: The Movie has everything you want from a solid summer entertainment spectacle: thrills, spills, drama, charming performers and the occasional laugh. It's a pretty good date movie, as those who aren't that interested in cars can enjoy Pitt and Idris in everything from witty banter to ice baths.

And all of it, especially the cars but also the scenery, looks better on a bigger screen, so that and Hans Zimmer's score (plus a very decent soundtrack) made me glad we splurged and saw it in IMAX.

No Stars, but 4 * - Thunderbolts*, Reviewed

I had a whole Thunderbolts* review written here, hit a key combo by accident and lost the entire thing.

So let me just say this:

• great film and a wonderful time
• best MCU flick since Endgame? Probably yes, but let's not dismiss the two excellent Spider-Man films in there too...
• stellar post-Avengers cast - Florence Pugh, Sebastian Stan,Wyatt Russell, David Harbour and Julia Louis-Dreyfus
• dances with admirable skill and rhythm along a very thin line between dark, funny, and darkly funny
• ties in to established MCU lore without feeling like homework (a criticism Kevin Feige has made himself, actually)
• a team of anti-heroes brought together in a story tied inextricably to mental health? Bold!
• managed to stick the landing on both the team name* (and the asterisk)!
• best post- (really post) credit scene since Phase 3 (and it was only shot three weeks ago)

If you feel done with superhero flicks, this one might not change your mind, but if you enjoyed them at some point in the past, you should maybe oughta give Thunderbolts* a chance? It is not only distinct, but gives solid hope for future MCU films.

And I know all my fellow comic nerds have already seen it or have made plans, so we good.

All's Fair? - Warfare, Reviewed

Talking to my nephew after we had just seen the film, he was amazed when I told him that not only does Alex Garland's movie Warfare not have any score whatsoever, it only has a runtime of 95 minutes. This led me to observe that if larger movies like Black Hawk Down are like juice, Warfare is more like concentrate. 

Where BHD focused on the Battle of Mogadishu to illustrate the realities of modern war, Warfare is described as "a love letter from co-director Ray Mendoza to Elliot Miller, who after the traumatic events of the Ramadi Operation doesn't remember what happened to him."

Following a lead-up that begins as routine and boring but begins to ratchet up intensely, the majority of the film is a real-time recollection of an attack and casualty evacuation during one of the bloodiest battles of the Iraq War, the Battle of Ramadi.  

Viewers are immediately embedded with a platoon of Navy SEALs tasked with setting up an observation post and sniper team in support of a larger operation. A team effort that involves a nighttime infiltration, building security, aerial reconnaissance, intense observation through a rifle scope and tremendous tedium - until it doesn't.

The most astonishing thing about the movie is what it doesn't contain; in addition to a total absence of score (only two songs bookend the film), there are almost no personal moments or talk about what is going on back home, or post-mission plans and the like. No one gets a monologue to discuss the value or worth of their taks, or the Iraq theatre in general. There is very little in the way of banter or memorable lines, outside the stream of jargon and radio chatter as these young men go about their jobs in a manner that exemplifies competence porn - until it doesn't. 

It's kind of a shame in some ways, given the excellent cast they have to work with: Will Poulter (Guardians of the Galaxy Vol 3), D'Pharaoh Woon-a-Tai (Reservation Dogs), Cosmo Jarvis (Shogun), Joseph Quinn (Stranger Things). Despite how little they have to work with at times, they and the entire cast do a remarkable job depicting their focus not only on the mission at hand, but each other, and the degradation of their entire situation. The movie opens with a dialogue-free scene of the platoon listening to music together - one of the few lighter moments in the film - and the directors and cast make the most of humanizing characters that will soon be virtually unrecognizable under not only helmets and goggles, but also dust, blood and emotion.

Many people will find the lingo virtually incomprehensible, and at no point does a character request paraphrasing or a subtitle appear to give context to the audience. (Hell, I enjoy that kind of stuff and understood less than two thirds fo what I heard.) This is purely by design - Garland (Civil War, Annihilation) and Mendoza are striving less for a dramatization and more of a reenactment, hence the stripping away of familiar elements like a score. The context and tone makes it easy enough to follow, even without the details we may be used to from other movies.

The filmmakers do a great job of depicting military monotony laid over a foundation of apprehension, and the surprising swiftness with which the SEALs find their disposition changing - all without narration or a comprehensive understanding of the larger picture. When the environment descends entirely into chaos, the sound design assaults you with explosions as well as the muted deafness that follows. When the wounded scream, it is not just the sound of actor conveying intense pain, but also terror and uncertainty, and it is hard to listen to - again, by design.

CBC reviewer Jordan Weaver took exception to this approach, but the people I saw Warfare with appreciated the opportunity to witness a depiction that is entirely cinematic in some ways, but decidedly untheatrical in others. It feels less like a movie in places and more like time travel, a chance to be a fly on the wall and bear witness to a single hour that changed the lives of so many who were there.

In the end, while I might think of Black Hawk Down as a stronger movie overall, Warfare is probably the most realistic war film I have ever seen, and I am extremely glad I saw it in a theatre.

_________, in the Blue Room, with the Knife - The Residence, Reviewed

Netflix's The Residence scratched a lot of itches for me, including the need to periodically binge a series, which I didn't even know I had.

But near the end of our Spring Break staycation, Audrey and I were looking for a show to watch, and the trailer had come up in my recommendations. As luck would have it, Fenya arrived back at home from an outing just before we sat down to watch the first of eight episodes before dinner on Saturday night.

We watched four more before going to bed and resolved to watch the remainder the following night, which we did.

The high-concept of "a murder, but in the White House" was enough to pique my interest, being a fan of shenanigans at 1660 Pennsylvania since The West Wing back in the day. I've never watched a Shondaland production before, but have heard great things about Bridgerton and Shonda Rimes alike, so that felt promising.

The story revolves around the murder of the White House's Chief Usher, A.B. Wynter (Giancarlo Esposito, who appears to be in everything now, and replaced Andre Braugher after his tragic passing) whose body is discovered in the Games Room on the same night as a state dinner for the Prime Minister of Australia. Consulting detective Cordelia Cupp (Uzo Aduba) is summoned from her planned bird-watching expedition, and has to deal with not only a seemingly impossible murder but all the political angles including an incredibly hostile Chief of Staff (Ken Marino) and an FBI agent (Randall Park) resolutely endeavouring to be useful but earning little more that exasperated tolerance from Cupp.

As murders go, it is a doozy, and switching perspectives from the events of that night to a senate inquiry months after the fact (chaired by former real-life Senator Al Franken!) puts an intriguing spin on it. But like the title says, the big seller here is the setting. From the sets themselves to the shots moving in and out of a meticulous model of the residential wing of the White House, I would still be inclined to believe you if you told me it had been shot on location. A former White House staffer gave them details about the areas that have never been photographed, and there are many details that give the entire affair a considerable veneer of credibility.

Of course, having all the legendary rooms, many of which are named for their dominant colour, come up in a murder mystery so often, the Clue comparisons are there for the taking as well.

Even if the setting has no interest to you, the amazing array of characters and the manner in which they drift in and out of the prime suspect box as the series progresses is similarly top rank. The quirks are maybe amplified as befits a murder-mystery comedy. The feuding chefs, one from a Michelin-starred Swiss resort, the other from a food truck in Portland are just two of several great examples.

Most critically of all, did they stick the landing? I definitely think so, yeah - enough so that Fenya and I may rewatch it just to make sure!

I'm not gonna lie; at this point in time, the idea of a murder in the White House is maybe a bit more compelling to people than it would've been, say 12 months ago? But whether you ration it out or binge it like we did, anyone who liked Knives Out or wants to explore a more profane take on Agatha Christie would do well to check out The Residence.

A Real Gem - Hans Zimmer & Friends: Diamond in the Desert, Reviewed

I can't recall how but a few years back I stumbled across an excerpt from the Hans Zimmer concert film Live in Prague (2017). It featured some of the most dramatic music from Christopher Nolan's Batman film, The Dark Knight, and was filmed like a rock concert in an arena, with multiple cameras and moody, dynamic lighting. Not long afterwards our whole household watched the concert in its entirety and enjoyed it immensely.

We've returned to it periodically and screened it for visitors a few times and everyone seems to have enjoyed it, and it has yet to become tiresome despite mupltiple vieweings. So when I learned that a new Hans Zimmer concert movie was being released to a handful of theatres, I was very grateful that Audrey and I were able to go to a Sunday matinee showing.

Hans Zimmer & Friends: Diamond in the Desert is as good a concert film as the Prague one (shot in the Dubai Coca Cola Arena), with three music video-style sequences shot in other venues including the desert and the top of the Burj Al Arab. The best part though are the interstitial discussions between Zimmer and a handful of associates: Chris Nolan, Denis Villeneuve, Pharrell Williams, Billie Eilish, Johnny Marr and more.

Shot in b&w and in a different aspect ratio, they are so casual and personal that I hesitate to call them interviews. These amazingly frank discussions about the challenges of the creative process, remaining motivated and what it took to get Zimmer on stage the first time ("bullying" by Pharrell Williams and Johnny Marr, according to him...) and why he finds himself spending so much time there all come across as honest and unforced.

I was afraid these would be a distraction from the music I had come to hear, but all of these insights enhanced the movie tremendously and entrenched my impressions of Zimmer as not only a brilliant film composer but also jsut a solid, gracious and frankly delightful human. 

My favourite bits were Billie Eilish's producer brother Finneas asking if Zimmer cherry picks the best instruments to play when performing orchestral pieces live, and Johnny Marr (guitarist from The Smiths) marvelling at Zimmer's commitment to live touring, calling this charmingly awkward man a composer with the soul of a rock star.

At another point, Timothee Chalamet calls Zimmer (I believe) the greatest living composer, and it took me out of the film for a bit. 

Like a lot of people my age, John Williams' soundtrack to the first Star Wars album (and the accompanying liner notes!) was my introduction to film scores, and from 12 years old I began paying attention to the credits and film scorers. In addition to his tremendous accolades, including 5 Oscars and an astonishing 54 (!) nominations to date, he has scored some of my favourite films of all time. I mean, just from memory I am thinking Superman, Close Encounters, Raiders, Jaws, and Harry Potter.

In terms of recognizable movie themes, he is likely to be unequalled in my lifetime, while very few of Zimmer's compositions have that innate catchiness or stick in one's memory the same way. But then I asked myself: beyond nostalgia, how many of Williams' pieces have the same emotional impact that Zimmer's does?

While the rest of  Diamonds in the Desert played on (2:38 in total) I found myself catching my breath or dabbing my eyes at various points - of Williams' music, I think only the Schindler's List theme has had the same effect on me.

(I just played it to make sure, and yeah, there is definitely someone cutting onions somewhere in this house.)

The final piece of Zimmer's Gladiator suite ("Now We Are Free") chokes me up in way that has little connection to the bittersweet ending of that movie, and likewise for the intensely powerful "Time" that wraps up Inception. I don't have to think about my own late father to find "He Lives In You" from The Lion King: The Musical so emotionally resonant.

But thankfully there are other emotions to be triggered by Zimmer's repertoire: the building tension of Dunkirk, the fearful apprehension from The Dark Knight's "Why So Serious?", the adrenaline rush of Inception's "Mombasa" chase music.

And while I don't have a lot of time for Zack Snyder's take on my beloved DC superheroes, Tina Guo's blazing cello on Wonder Woman and Guthrie Govan's soaring electric guitar on Man of Steel are still exemplary compositions that clearly depict these legendary characters in my mind's eye as surely as George Perez or Curt Swan drawing them while simultaneously stirring my heart, and are even better live than on a studio recording.

If you are a fan of movies, music, movie music, the people who make movies and/or music or just creative staging and an exploration of the creative process, Diamond in the Desert is worth seeking out. Beyond even his music, Hans Zimmer is a gem beyond compare: warm, gracious, self-effacing and grateful.

Honestly, I think ranking musicians of composers like horses in a race is kind of a rube's game, should I hear anyone else describe him as the greatest living composer, I wouldn't be inclined to challenge them on it.

Obligatorio (But Not Bad) - Captain America: Brave New World, Reviewed

Since Avengers: Endgame, Marvel's movies have suffered from more than a bit of "what do you do for an encore?" None of the entries in Phases 4 or 5 have grabbed the interest of viewers the way previous entries did, which I suppose is kind of natural - not only is the Infinity Saga a tough act to follow in general, Captain America boasts what is likely the best superhero trilogy ever with First Avenger, Winter Soldier and Civil War. So to say that both Anthony Mackie and his character Sam Wilson have some immense boots to fill in Brave New World is a fairly significant understatement.

So let's get this out of the way: it's a fairly mediocre movie, as movies go. With the exception of the villain reveal (which Marvel has done a great job keeping out of most of the trailers and such), there is next to no tension in this film - next to nothing in the way of surprises. 

Given the death of William Hurt and the recasting of the legendary Harrison Ford as Gen. (and now President) Thaddeus "Thunderbolt" Ross, I don't know how they could have marketed this film without spoiling his inevitable transformation into the Red Hulk, but wouldn't that have been cool?

The aerial scenes are great but the on the fight segments on the ground don't appear to be up to the high standard we've come to expect from the MCU, although the climactic showdown is handled pretty well over all. But they also aren't throwing them in every seven minutes to keep you awake, so that's good. Does it feel like director Julius Onah is out of his element at times? Yeah, kind of. Is BNW too 'woke'? No, don't be stupid - what the hell does that even mean?

Story-wise, turning the snake-themed villain cadre the Serpent Society from the comics into a mercenary outfit with the same name led by an uncostumed Giancarlo Esposito as Sidewinder was a welcome discovery. It is a new nod to the slightly more grounded villainy the previous Cap had to deal with, and was apparently one of the big elements added in reshoots. And yes, reshoots are never the kind of thing you want to hear about, but I am willing to bet they came away with a stronger movie than they might have had without them, and besides, who doesn't like a bit more Giancarlo in their genre cinema?

So in some ways, CA:BNW feels a little like a salvage operation, not unlike the second Black Panther film, Wakanda Forever. And like it, I think the filmmakers deserve some kudos just for pulling off something coherent and entertaining while navigating the increasingly complex continuity of the MCU.

For my perspective, an adequate entry in the series is a little disappointing (given the strengths of the previous films) but not a loss or a defeat in any way. But remember, I am not buying my ticket as a movie fan who likes comic movies; I am going because I am a comics fan who wants to see beloved properties treated with respect.

And I got that, for the most part.

I like Anthony Mackie as Sam Wilson a lot, and the film pulls no punches in showing that, as Pres. Ross tells him to his face, "you are no Steve Rogers." He is not as strong, not as fast, not as durable, nor as resolute. But they make it clear that his heart is just as big as skinny Steve's, the kid from Brooklyn who could do this all day and hated bullies.

Linking the story to Carl Lumbly's Isaiah Bradley, who received the super-soldier serum during the Korean War and was tasked with taking down Winter Soldier before being disavowed and imprisoned was a great touch. It lets us address the racial issues at play with a Captain America of colour without making it the focus of the film.

Joaquin Torres (Danny Ramirez) is just as anxious to become the new Falcon as he was when introduced in the Falcon and Winter Soldier Disney+ series, and has much of the same swagger as Sam did when introduced in the second Cap film. He brings tech skills and heart, but will need more to become a sidekick we will clamor to see.

Saga-wise, I know many viewers will be heartened by the absence of a multiverse story (despite that being the name of this current set of Phases!), but be warned, it does get hinted at. Mostly I was glad to see them finally address the new landmass created by the Celestial emerging from the Indian Ocean in 2021's The Eternals. This was a movie where I remember more about the post-credits scene than the film itself, which is not a great sign, obviously.

More critically though, Celestial Island gives them a great way to introduce Marvel's other famously made-up mineral, adamantium. And having the initial tension revolve around an international treaty regarding the island and its miraculous metal was a great angle, but hopes for a Tom Clancy-like approach are never really met. (Note to filmmakers - despite being the Commander-in-Chief, the President should never be shouting orders like "launch interceptor missiles" on a warship - even if it is Harrison Ford!)

In the end, Captain America: Brave New World is by no means a must-see, even if you haven't succumbed to "superhero fatigue." But if you are curious at all about the progress of a character willfully stepping into shoes too big to fill, or the evolution of the MCU in general, we certainly didn't come away feeling disappointed.

Echoes of Uncertainty - Gladiator II, Reviewed

The last time I saw a sequel that I felt had no business even existing, it turned out to be really quite good (Blade Runner 2049). Given Sir Ridley Scott's involvement in the follow-up to the Best Picture Oscar-winner of 2000, it seemed foolhardy not to give Gladiator II a chance.

In the end, GII is not much of a patch on the original, but it is a pretty solid night out with a lot of great qualities.

The sequel still carries its lineage of epic scale delineated bith gruesome interpersonal violence, from the opening siege of Roman galleys on Numidia, to the bloody and fantastic battles in the Colosseum. Sure, liberties are taken regarding historical accuracies, but I would prefer to see a trebuchet slinging Greek fire onto a ship as oppsed to a catapult any day of the week and twice on Sunday. And the co-ruling bother Emperors Geta and Caracalla were just as legit as wanna-be gladiator Commodus, after a fashion.

The cast is quite good and the acting is commensurately excellent; Pedro Pascal, Connie Nielsen and Joseph Quinn all acquit themselves quite well, but Denzel Washington's Macrinus is absolutely amazing to watch. 

Starting out as an analogue to Oliver Reed's gladiator master Proximo in the first film, Denzel's Macrinus crafts an agenda that he leverages with his rageful new fighter Hanno (Paul Mescal). Denzel owns every scene he is in without scenery chewing - hell, seemingly wihout effort. At one point I whispered to Audrey, "I can imagine him saying, 'I had so much fun I forgot to get them to pay me'..."

The first Gladiator is one of my all-time faves, and as much as I respect Steven Soderbergh, I still think the Academy boned this one by not giving Ridley Scott the Best Director statue to go with Best Picture. And watching this film while remembering the first really highlights the areas it comes up short.

Paul Mescal is a good actor who brings palpable rage and sinewy competence to his action sequences, but he lacks the magnetism and power of Russell Crowe in his prime - I mean, I can't think of any comparable modern actors, in fact. The story glosses over his leadership and the way other fighters look to him for guidance, despite him being shown as a capable and inspirational leader in the opening battle. But the movie does not play out in a completely straightforward fashion and at least there are a couple of surprises in store.

Harry Gregson-Williams has done a lot of great scores, but as the film wraps up and they start homaging "Now We Are Free" from Hans Zommer's immaculate score from 2000 and Lisa Gerrard's vocals, it really brought home to me just how much more heart the original had. I remember welling up when Connie Nielsen demands the Praetorians bear Maximus' body out of the Colosseum as a soldier of Rome, and I think I felt a little let down that I didn't experience anything close to that during this film.

But that is not to say it is a bad film! I ranked this one a 7 on IMDb, as opposed to the 9 I gave the original, and I will likely watch it again at home at some point.

And at the end of the day, being entertained is the idea, right?

Still the Ghost With the Most? - Beetlejuice Beetlejuice, Reviewed

We recently watched the 1988 Beetlejuice with Glory, as she had very little recollection of watching it on video as a youngster. It holds up pretty well, actually, and it is fun to remember what a breath of fresh air Tim Burton was at that time, going from Pee Wee's Big Adventure in '85 to Beetlejuice, Batman and Edward Scissorhands in thre successive years. I started running hot and cold with him as a director around Mars Attacks, well before this College Humor video articulated precisely why much better than I ever could.

Anyhow, we all enjoyed it, and I appreciated reading the trivia on IMDb about how little the studio understood Beetlejuice, trying to convince Burton to rename it Ghost House, to which he countered with Scared Sheetless...and was horrified when they almost went with that instead.

Knowing that, as well as the fact that Michael Keaton doesn't do a lot of sequels but has wanted to do one to Beetlejuice for ages now, and learning that Winona Ryder had a shooting exemption for the very possibility of this movie placed into her Stranger Things contract almost a decade ago, Audrey and I decided to check out the sequel Beetlejuice Beetlejuice last Tuesday.

So, first the bad news - it is not as good as the original. How could it be? The first one was not just an unprecedented blend of comedy and mild horror, it had its own remarkably unique take on the afterlife, with its rules and bureaucracy and suicided staffers. Every time you turned around Burton and his writers were throwing something new and unusual at you, whether it was procedural or another fascinating character.

It really feels like the first half of this movie is devoting too much time for the setup, but when it finally hits its stride, it becomes almost as entertaining as the first one which is still pretty entertaining. 

Set 30+ years after the first movie, Lydia Deetz (Ryder) now hosts a cheesy supernatural reality show called Ghost House (ha!) and is estranged from her teenaged daughter Astrid (Jenna Ortega). Stepmother Delia Deetz (the sublime Catherine O'Hara) draws the family back together to the old homestead in Winter River when she learns her husband Charles (the now-incarcerated convicted and largely shunned Jeffrey Jones in the original) has survived a jet crash in the Pacific, only to have been eaten by a shark. 

Part of the reason the first half of the film feels underwhelming is there is just not enough Beetlejuice (72 year-old Michael Keaton!) in it, and when he is, he is not given nearly enough to do. It had me concerned that maybe the role is too much for even the most committed septuagenarian, but I needn't have worried. Once he gets more opportunities to interact with the rest of the main cast, there are not too many wasted moments - after all, Keaton says this is his all-time favourite character. And the Frederico Fellini-inspired backstory sequence is absolutely marvellous.

Beetlejuice Beetlejuice also lacks a lot of the living/unliving tension of the first film, where half the angst came from watching the adorably ghostly Maitlands come to grips with their new (after)lives, while Lydia struggled with her own existence in the real world - containing Beetlejuice was almost a secondary consideration. 

This largely familiar cast is rounded out by Delia's producer and partner Rory (Justin Theroux), who is just as new-age cringey as Otho in the original; Monica Bellucci as the mysterious Delores, now hunting for Beetlejuice, and Willem Dafoe as Wolf Jackson, an afterlife cop (originally an actor) trying to contain an uncontainable situation.

Now the tension is all on the living side of the equation, with the exception of Delores' pursuit of the title character, which never feels that threatening, honestly. But resolving the relationships between Lydia and her boyfriend and her daughter feels high stakes enough to keep you going. Astrid's potential romance with a bookish outsider (with a mop of dark hair and unconventional musical tastes who can't wait to leave his small town? in a TIM BURTON movie? I am shocked!) is a fun diversion, as is Delia coming to grips with being a widow by experiencing it as artistically and in as many media as possible. 

And I think we can keep this review spoiler-free but still mention offhandedly that those looking for a bizarre retro musical number will not be disappointed...or maybe they will, depending on how they feel about Richard Harris as a vocalist. Nothing could equal "Day O."  Nuff said! 

Anyhow, in the end, we all came out less surprised and delighted as we did the first time around in the '80s, but still thoroughly entertained. Best of all, it doesn't smack of desperation or selling out like some other decades-later sequels seem to. If you liked the first Beetlejuice, I think you will enjoy Beetlejuice Beetlejuice as well.

I only wish they could wait 30 more years before rounding out the trilogy as I suspect they might.

Marvel Regenerated? - Deadpool & Wolverine

Although this review should be spoiler-free (as always), it is problematic for two reasons: first, I cannot be trusted. Because I am an unbashed fan of the source material (i.e. comics) even more so than a movie buff, it is impossible for me to be objective about these films, so I don't even try.

Furthermore, because I don't want to spoil anything, my hands are tied in describing much of what I enjoyed so much about Deadpool & Wolverine, but I will take a shot at it.

A lot has happened since the last Deadpool movie was released in 2018; the character has moved from a rival studio (Fox) to the MCU (Disney). Marvel has lost its once ironclad grip upon pop culture, largely due to overextension. D&W is, in fact, Marvel's sole offering for 2024, the first year with only one MCU movie since 21012 if you discount the pandemic. (Deadpool to Logan: "Welcome to the MCU! You're joining at kind of a low point...") 

To be honest, I've enjoyed all the Marvel offerings to date to some extent, with the possible exception of Secret Wars, which felt like a wasted effort and missed opportunity. Sure, I've liked some MCU flicks more than others, but like the comics they are drawn from, I appreciate when the movies diverge into psychedelia, farce and even self-referential humour. But it was heartening to see how many other people were looking forward to seeing Hugh Jackman's return as Wolverine, and it was also good to see Marvel poking some fun at itself throughout the film.

And when Ryan Reynolds's Wade Wilson grabs an unconscious Logan by the lapels and clearly spies the legit superhero outfit we have waited so long to see, even he is moved to say, "well, that only took 24 f**king years...".

So let's be clear about a couple of things right up front: 

If you don't like or are tired of superhero movies, this one won't change your mind.

If you found the first two Deadpool movies a little too irreverent or raunchy or gory for your tastes, give this one a wide berth as well.

But if you find the MCU's ever-complexifying canon overwhelming, I have great news - this is barely an MCU movie.

Oh, they get the studio leader and fanfare, and the Time Variance Authority (introduced in the Loki streaming series) is a critical part of the plot, but very early on they lay out enough exposition (Deadpool even exclaims "what the MacGuffin is that?" during the setup) that even newcomers can probably follow along easily enough. And Matthew McFadyen as Mr. Paradox make a great foil for the Merc With a Mouth. There is also a wonderful cameo early on from an Avengers-adjacent stalwart.

What follows is a two hour love letter to the Fox superhero movies, actually, full of bloodshed, cheap gags and cameos galore, but all three of those elements are well-handled and GOD I wish I could tell you more, but please trust me and go see it quickly if you don't want many of the best moments spoiled for you, all right?

Wolverine's hero suit becomes a topic of conversation more than once in the movie, and even prompts a sober moment of guilt-laden reflection when Logan confesses why he wears it. And if I am being honest, the costume and the cowl were enough to ensure I saw this movie in the theater (even if I had to wait an unbearably long time for the latter). Grown men on the set were said to be moved to tears when Jackman showed up in the iconic blue and yellow outfit, and the actor even said, "why the hell didn't we do this years ago?"

Beyond the suit (God, the suit! I am so happy y'all!) there is no shortage of fan-service, but Shawn Levy and company know when to hang a lampshade on it, like prior to the first big set-to between the titular characters, when Deadpool breaks the fourth wall to say "okay nerds, get your special sock ready - this gon' be good!"

And there's a lot of these fights, some of which are pretty long, which I am sure will bore Audrey to tears - but maybe not. They keep their staging pretty imaginative for the most part, with some of them getting so busy I can't wait for a chance to watch them at home with a hand on the rewind button.

But it is a solid stuff, overall. The ridiculous plot gives room for both some emotional gravitas, an excellent new villain (Emma Corrin as Charles Xavier's sorta sister Cassandra Nova, introduced in Grant Morrison's extraordinary comics run 20-odd years ago), and a chance to say farewell to some long-standing characters.

I am not in the least bit clear how the resolution of the movie might or mightn't open the door for mutants in the MCU, and I earnestly do hope they don't keep Hugh Jackman doing this until he's 90, but in a strange way, Deadpool & Wolverine will make still another very decent farewell piece to this iteration of the character (19 appearances by Jackman as Wolverine! 19!) a brighter and lighter but still emotional counterpart to bookend the more earnest and serious Logan (2017).

Commercial success appears assured with a staggering $205M opening weekend, and with Feige's workload a little lighter, I am hoping there are more Marvel successes to follow this one.