Annihilation Review

A movie like "Annihilation" is a tough sell- you have killer mutated creatures, trees that grow in the shape of people, affairs, all inside a giant CGI wall called the "shimmer." How do you advertise a picture like this? Cast Natalie Portman as the lead, of course! She plays Lena, a biologist and former soldier whose husband went on a secret mission inside the shimmer, came back, and suddenly is throwing up blood and having seizures. So in the world of movie plots, Lena joins the next mission inside the mysterious veil.

She's lead by Dr. Ventress (Jennifer Jason Leigh), who's callous disinterest is a wonderful contrast to Portman's natural softness. Three others join, but any sci-fi monster(ish) movie lover will know that they're just appetizers to the large fanged things lurking in the dark of the environment. The trilogy of tertiary characters are well acted, but the twists they bring to the story are most welcome and help deepen the strange, if not sometimes nebulous, mythology of the film.

To detail anything more is a disservice to the final product, so that's the plot in a nutshell; just know that what follows is a lusting adventure through a lush jungle peppered with the occasional monster movie moment. The world inside the shimmer is in an ever constant change, becoming stranger as the cast wanders further towards their end goal. It is an odd odyssey that exploits your expectations of the typical jungle creature feature, and any problems are minute to what I saw on screen. I'm a pushover for this genre; the same sort of deal happened last year with "Alien Covenant," and although "Annihilation" is a bit fresher, it is an equal film, just with more different a flavor.

Just know that this is not an action film! Sure, the trailers show up the film's handful of monster attacks, but it works betters the less words are spoken, the fewer bullets drop from their guns. It moves at a lethargic pace, taking its time to marvel inside the bizarre biodome. Anytime the characters look in awe, so does the audience- one particular highlight is when the motley crew stumbles upon what happened to one of the previous explorers. His skeleton is plastered across a wall, growing into the plaster and intertwined with the omnipresent motility, a haunting image that echos the space jockey from the first "Alien." Scenes like this are what I wanted more of, but the few we get easily trump last year's clunker "Life." This isn't a space opera but more of an Earth opera, if there is such a thing.

Black Panther Review

If you were to strip "Black Panther" of all of its cultural significance, everything it represents, you would still have a superior Marvel film. Director Ryan Coogler avoids every dumb Marvel convention (save for a few stupid jokes and the dreary Stan Lee cameo), because it is too busy brazenly lifting elements from two other juggernaut franchises, James Bond and Star Wars.

I'm not saying "Black Panther" is an amazing film- it is a pretty good one yes, on its own, but nothing here screams "superhero movie," and I kinda wish it wasn't one. In the land of Wakanda, where it is explained how the Black Panther gets his panther-like abilities (something about the fake metal vibranium), the people (Wakandians?) fight with spears and clubs- not too dissimilar from the Amazons in last year's "Wonder Woman." But every moment "vibranium" is mentioned I groaned. Why would people, if this metal can heal people from bullet wounds, control spaceships, create holograms, have spears? I'm sure they're indestructible, and they can sometimes charge up and shoot "pulses" out at enemies, but why a spear?! Can the lightsaber from Star Wars also shoot out pulses? No! They use blasters- they're two separate weapons. And there are blasters here, or at least these fist-worn hand cannons that only fire these pulses. There is no clear distinction from what each weapon can do in a fight scene, and just when you wonder "how can they get themselves out of this one" the weapon then absorbs the incoming fire, or something else. Its James Bond influences are felt here, with Shuri (Letitia Wright), the titular kitten's younger sister, acting as Q, giving the purring leading man gadgets to play with and returning quips, but it isn't as rewarding as even the worst 007 flicks. It isn't until the action turns to  director's famous hand-to-hand combat that things get good. And they really get good.

Not unlike Ryan Coogler's smash hit "Creed," the highlight of the picture is one of those "one shot" fight scenes, at a failed underground weapon sale goes awry. It is brief, but I cheered for every whip the camera did around badguy number #2 as T'Challa (Chadwick Boseman) raced to nab then villain Klause (Andy Serkis). His rule as primary adversary is short lived (no spoilers here, I didn't know he was in the movie until the opening credits began scrolling), an awful, hammy performance that proves why he needs to stay beneath his usual performance capture suit.

Now this is where you can yell "spoilers," but oh well. T'Challa dies. Only he doesn't. Sure, he is flung off a waterfall about 3/4s the way though, secondary characters mourn his "death," and N'Jadaka (Michael B. Jordan) takes the throne (his official "I'm the real bad guy" now moment). Now, if you have ever seen a movie, you know he's not dead- there's too much action that hasn't taken place yet! I never thought for a second he was deceased- oh, and the fact that T'Challa appeared in the latest "Avengers" movie trailer helps. It is a waste of story, giving false motivation to the lead characters, and is a bad attempt at trying to make this an "underdog" movie.

This is where the film's plot grows opaque- N'Jadaka takes takes command of Wakanda by besting T'Challa in ritual combat. But he never really died- he "somehow" stayed "barely" alive, I think one of the tertiary characters called it, so then N'Jadaka never really bested him. Is there no one who checks to make sure the dead guy is dead before hailing a new king?!

Heart-shaped herbs are another murky addition to the story, explained to be what gives someone "Black Panther" abilities. When the bad king takes over and gains the super powers for himself, he burns the rest of the garden where they grow. But why?! A conveniently stolen herb is what gives T'Challa his powers back (making him no longer "barely" alive), why would someone want to burn them? If he takes damage, I'd wager popping an herb or two would patch you right up. I'd keep them in my medicine cabinet. Then again, I'm not a movie villain (I make sense...).

At least the action is good... well, for the most part. This is where the film goes all "Star Wars," on us; the end climax features spaceship (well, they're in the sky but...), a large-scale war of nameless minions, and a duel between the hero and the villain. It is a welcome change of pace for the Marvel franchise- it is a proven way to end a movie, and I didn't care. But the battle between T'Challa and N'Jakada was disappointing- the second they put on their masks, they disappeared into a video game cutscene, with unconvincing CGI and all the cliche's in the book. (Tell me if you have heard this one: the hero takes advantage of something the bad guy overlooks. Big surprise.) The resolution was unsatisfying; yay, the good guys won!? As if we didn't see that coming. If the halfhearted underdog story worked even remotely, then I would be ending the review with a different sentence.