Mission: Impossible - Fallout Review

The way to determine a great action film is the quality of its bathroom fight scene. "Mission: Impossible - Fallout" has a pretty good one, which makes it a pretty good action movie. Sure, there are countless other action scenes in this latest in the long running franchise, but few on this intimate of scale (most involve breakneck car chases, or freaking helicopters crashing into snowy mountain tops). It's the perfect summarization of the aging hero's latest entry, "pretty good" (feel free to toss a "darn" in the middle there).

Viewed against July's other big movie "Skyscraper," which I gave two and a half stars to, "Mission Impossible 6" is significantly better entertainment; you get far more bang (and I mean "bang") for your buck here than the half star difference between the two implies.

"Mission: Impossible - Fallout" is a perfect "Tom Cruise movie," at least when he's focused on punching bad guys from one location to another. From a plot stand of view, a perfunctory one, involving Cruise having to chase down stolen plutonium from madman Solomon Lane (Sean Harris), who wants to blow stuff up. Sure, there's little details here and there, with old friends lending a helping hand, a forgotten love suddenly appearing just in time to be in danger (and even a traitor or two(?)), but don't go into the megaplex expecting Shakespeare. Or anything new. Or anything you haven't seen Tom Cruise do. The dialogue is all stuff that sounds good in trailers (which explains why the trailers have so few exchanges of words), but it sets up the action just fine.

Tom's character, Ethan Hunt, is seemingly indestructible despite almost wearingly scraping himself off the floor each time he's put back down. Whenever he sees an impossible jump he never hesitates, and we the audience know he's going to make that leap, but the film almost doesn't let him. Instead of clearing the jump flawlessly, he bounces off the wall yet just barely hangs on- it's a refreshing change from most action movies, it's almost like it's his first action movie, even though most people in the crowded theater probably came here because of fond memories of the first five flicks.

It all adds up to your usual action movie cocktail, only executed quite well, playing out like an old James Bond film trimmed of its plot (as well as careless sex and chain smoking). The supporting cast really help sell things here, an eclectic, almost baffingly mixture of character actors all playing characters in a movie by doing and saying things we've all seen and done in other movies, and never in real life. But they're all so good at playing that person that it works on a level beyond dialogue; ignoring what someone was saying and just listening to how they were talking, their tone, facial expressions, you'd get the picture.

Let's try. Imagine Alan Hunley (Alec Baldwin) walks in a damp basement to talk to Ethan. By observing the scene and not the discourse, I thought:

"Oh, he's got bad new- OK cool, new set pieces, what's gonna blow up now?"

Well, he brought bad news and things did explode, but not before a shootout! Now that's what I call an effective genre film!

Skyscraper Review

Last week's big action flick might as well been called "Rock Hard," as this is effectively a remake of the far superior 1988 film "Die Hard" with Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson (Though I think "Duct Tape: The Action Movie" is just as good, as Dwayne uses the sticky stuff to get out of more than one sticky situation.)

Mr. Johnson plays Will Sawyer, who's in the security business for skyscrapers (which much be a new field, as I've never heard of such an occupation), working out of his garage with his wife and two kids. An old friend Ben (Pablo Schreiber) offers him the chance of a lifetime, to inspect the world's tallest building, located in Hong Kong.

What could possibly go wrong?

Of course, if you have ever seen an action film, particularly any that isolates the hero outnumbered in a foreign, you know the drill; there's a double crossing, incompetent cops, and a seemingly unlimited number of bad guys with bad shots but tons of ammo. What matters here is the action itself, which is pretty good, even if it is just Dwayne Johnson doing his best John McClane (though without the chain-smoking or one-liners).

His only defining characteristic was his missing leg, which, though a marvel technical achievement in removing appendages for stars, did little to actually define his character. Sure, it raises the stakes a bit (not unlike Bruce Willis' bloodied feet in "Die Hard"), but am I really supposed to believe that, biceps and all, that The Rock is no match for dozens of nameless henchmen with guns? I think not.

There is an overarching theme of family, and how its power can overwhelm any odds, but that softness hurts the overall film's effectiveness; for every movie "Skyscraper" shamelessly riffs on, it lacks edge, the brutal, bloody shootouts and fight-outs that will get more teenagers in the cinema but less old-timers like me.

The setting of Hong Kong is nothing but background story to the building- there is no exotic atmosphere in any scene, especially inside the skyscraper, where it looks like a vertical "Mall of America" in its prime. Upon some internet searching, it doesn't surprise me that Chinese-owned Legendary Pictures financed this film.

Mamma Mia! Here We Go Again Review

I've been going to the movies since I was a wee lad, and "Mamma Mia 2" is only the second film to receive a standing ovation once the credits roll (the first was inexplicably Robin William's 2006 comedy "RV"). It's worth noting that, despite that three star score up top there, I was still sitting in my seat and my hands were not slapping each other.

That's not to say that this sequel to the 2008 original is bad, it's just not for me. Sure, I sing "Dancing Queen" when it comes on the radio, and much of the cast is superbly talented, I just wasn't feeling this movie. The jokes, though few and very far between, were fine, inoffensive chuck-inspired quips of dialogue, the performances were charming and choreography was well-staged, but what point is there here? It's about Amanda Seyfried's character "Sophia" opening a hotel in honor of her dead mom Donna (Meryl Streep)- that's it! That's the entire plot!!

The exposition leads to the your usual romantic-comedy antics that follow. A long-long love shows up. A family member appears after years of distance, with more than just a few scenes of flashbacks, though enough here to qualify this as both a sequel and a prequel.

These prequel scenes held the least amount of power, especially since I have never seen the first film, as they exist to bulk out the overall thin story with additional subplots; I also have a sneaky suspicion that these scenes, which lack the original ensemble cast, were to avoid paying the elder cast (I imagine Streep's and Cher's hourly rate is quite high). The cast during these "years ago" parts were also less than convincing- am I really supposed to believe that Jeremy Irvine is a young Pierce Brosnan?

But picture this, me in a movie theater roughly five hours ago. In a packed cineplex, a young girl the row in front of me edges to the front of her seat by the time the first song plays, and did so for every song. This movie is not for me! I feel I cannot offer this film any actual criticism because it was not made for me, and because the people it was made for so obviously enjoyed it.

In its opening weekend "Mamma Mia! Here We Go Again" has already grossed more than its $75 million dollar budget, and I imagine its soundtrack will go on to make a lot of dough as well, even if it is, in essence, just another ABBA compilation. If a film makes that much money so quickly, then the people this picture was produced for cannot be wrong. Three stars.

Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom Review

The first "Jurassic Park" film is a smarter than average monster-on-the-loose kinda picture that has since gone on to be a staple in pop-culture. "Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom," on the other hand, plays out like a b-movie that has too high a budget and too little gore and nudity- at least we still see dinosaurs ripping body parts off of tertiary characters.

Set years after the 4th entry "Jurassic World," we find the island of dinosaurs is the home to a newly active volcano(!) and is about to explode! Claire (Bryce Dallas Howard) persuades Owen (Chris Pratt) to venture to the abandoned park in search of "Blue," a velociraptor trained by Owen to follow orders, become obedient (i.e. become a dog who's bite is most certainly worse than her bark). They believe eccentric gazilliare Ben Lockwood (James Cromwell), a former colleague of franchise favorite John Hammond, wants to protect these creatures and has built a sanctuary for them. Now, sit back and think about that plot; it pretends that there's a message about endangered species, as if they couldn't just clone more.

Of course, as the trailers have given away, Lockwood's successor Eli Mills (Rafe Spall) has different plans, and plans to continue the prehistoric exploitation. I suppose Claire and Owen should have asked to see the animal sanctuary before heading to an island that's about to erupt (can't forget about that volcano). This is the second-longest in the film series after the wobbly second entry, but it never drags; it's constantly moving from character to character (and dino to dino) and from action scene to the next.

But what's different here is the atmosphere- this is a dark film, lacking the whimsy of the first or forth film, or the fun energy of the third (it is best to just skip the second flick all together, or at least until the T-Rex breaks loose). There is a brooding overall mood that not even Chris Pratt can lighten up- there is abandonment and the acceptance of death in the eyes of the captured creatures, save for the Indoraptor (a genetic hybrid ancient reptile) who is treated like a slasher villain, lunging out of the darkness to kill unsuspecting prey.

The acting is generally OK, particularly little Isabella Sermon, who plays the granddaughter of Lockwood; she isn't given much to do except for parents to think that movies with kids are for kids, but she's plucky, and that's pretty refreshing, considering the franchise's history of shoehorning children into the action. (Remember the gymnastic daughter in the second film who flies through the air from pipes to kick a raptor to its death!?) I think it is safe to say that I'm not a fan of "The Lost World: Jurassic Park."

If none of this sounds like a film worthy of a three and a half stars, that's because it's not. In a perfect world it gets three, for being a solid piece of summer entertainment. But nothing's perfect, including me, and I love the story here; it's ridiculous and absurd, but it's smart enough to know not to acknowledge how utterly dumb it is.

That's just the way I like my giant monster movies!

Not to spoil anything, but there's a post-credit scene, and sets up the next film to take the franchise somewhere both Warwick Davis' Leprechaun and Chevy Chase have brought mayhem to. And I don't know, but I'm excited.

Incredibles 2 Review

A film like the "Incredibles 2" shouldn't work as well as it does, being a belated sequel to a beloved Pixar classic, especially with the flood of superhero films pumped out by Disney's Marvel. But it does- it is fast-paced, witty, and far too much fun to be labeled just another "superhero" movie. Perhaps if Marvel didn't slap together a new film every few months they would be as good as this.

Since we last saw the family, the Incredibles are still kicking butt and saving the world, or until they fail to capture The Underminer (John Ratzenberger). Superheroes are outlawed, Elastigirl (Holly Hunter), known as Helen Parr outside the tight underwear, is approached by generic movie-trope eccentric millionaire Winston Deavor (Bob Odenkirk). Having lost his father due to an absence of superheroes (an odd and dark sidestory for a film opening Father's Day weekend), he approaches the family with idea of reworking their advertising, showcasing the lives they save and downplaying the destruction caused while doing so. It's a fairly funny notion, the thought of revamping the promotional aspect in a product designed to make money, but that's something that'll zoom over kids heads and probably most adults, considering they bought tickets.

While Elastigirl is out working on her kind's public image, Mr. Incredible is left raising the 3 kids, a storyline straight out of a 90's sitcom script, where the mom gets a job and the dad needs to take care of the homestead. But it's more clever than that description, with Mr. Incredible struggles to understand his daughter's preadolescence boy-troubles, his son's "new math," and his infant's infinite energy (as well as his ever-growing list of superpowers). If it sounds like you turned on your TV to a rerun of "Full House," then you're right, but it doesn't play out that way. There's momentum to every joke, particularly with the youngest "Incredible" Jak Jak doing typical baby stuff, like waking up in the middle of the night, but only to fight a racoon with fire, lasers and the ability to go through walls. It's a nostalgic trip down family-focused humor, but with all the visual pizazz you expect from Pixar, and is a pleasant distinction from the Marvel and DC superhero flicks that litter the theaters multiple times a year, with their inappropriate sex jokes, dour atmospheres, and cluttered action.

The action here is cleaner than you would expect, making great use of every hero's unique ability, from stretchy arms to the ability to create voids for things to travel through. It's your standard box of "superpowers," not one made me go "oh, haven't seen that one before," and if I had to find any criticism, it'd be that. Great criticism right?!

As the credits roll, it becomes obvious why the script is so clean- there is just one credited writer, director Brad Bird himself, also the only author of the first film, so every action by the characters makes sense, and most every joke lands with at least a smile. Only the gags are rarely "set-up" then "joke," they are natural evolutions of the Incredible family and friends told through whimsical wit instead of a corporate money factory (not that this isn't made by a corporation, for money- and I'm sure there's a factory somewhere along the way).

A Quiet Place Review

Shhh, don't make a sound! Or at least, that is how the characters in "A Quiet Place" must live their lives. With creatures that hunt by only sound, we follow a small family live their lives. Talk about a "high concept" kinda film! It doesn't reach the heights of "Jaws" or "Alien," in terms of simple monster movies, but it is a decent diversion on a slow day.

Director, writer and star John Krasinski plays Lee, father of three- wait no two- no no three (it makes sense once you watch it), and his real-life wife Emily Blunt portrays Evelyn, though good luck learning anyone's names- there is barely any dialogue in its ninety five minute long running time! It is a bold move, leaving any conversations to be either sign language or simply gestures, which yes, means I had to look up their names on the internet for this review.

They don't do anything particularly exciting either. They gather food, wash laundry, you know, day-to-day stuff. But man, they just can't catch a break! It's like every ten minutes someone drops something and bam! Monster attack! You'd think they'd line their dwelling with wall-to-wall memory foam.

They have, however, lined the ground with sand, on wooden planks that don't squeak, for example. How they figured that out is beyond me, as they'd have to step on the hardwood floor and make noise to section off which ones do. You know, the calling card of the monsters. But there again I go, bringing logic to a monster movie.

The monsters themselves are your usual post-"The Descent" creatures, with slimy human-like things with twitchy movements and piercing roars. It's a shame too, as the few new things they introduce later in the film are novel and grotesque, it's too late. A creature feature, especially one that seldom shows the beast, should be hiding something new, exciting. Remember the time you finally saw the Xenomorph in the original "Alien" movie? How disgusted you were, how terrified? That never happens in "A Quiet Place."

Somehow this got released in theaters, there's a low-budget feel here, particularly the effects and acting. The pacing feels just a tad lethargic as well, sure, the many jump scares did make me spill my metaphorical popcorn, but there's something off the entire time. The whole thing has a first-draft kinda quality to it, like just a few million dollars more could have made this a future classic. As it is though, it's a small screen treat displayed on the big screen.

Ready Player One Review

"Ready Player One" is less of a movie and more of an experience, a high-flying adventure that is a spectacle that is both exhausting and visceral on a visual level. As soon as we entered the Oasis, the virtual-reality world that most of the action takes place in, I sunk right into my chair and jumped right on for the ride. It's the kind of movie that I wish I had an endless bag of popcorn to munch on when watching.

We follow Wade Watts (Tye Sheridan), an orphan who lives at his aunt's in a towering tenement of trailers patched together. We spend the entire movie with him, but most is in the form of his avatar, his created character in the Oasis, a world where everyone and their mom's live their lives in. As the film starts he's about to enter a race, the first of three "games" he needs to complete to gain total control of the Oasis, per request of the deceased owner James Halliday (Mark Rylance).

You see, this eccentric creator has hidden an "easter egg," which is a hidden item somewhere in the video game world, that requires someone, or some people, to complete a challenge and collect a key. Once they do, only then do they inherit a bunch of money and ownership of the virtual reality realm. And it's not just him that wants to win, everyone does, including Nolan Sorrento (Ben Mendelsohn), CEO to the Oasis competitor IOI. He's the villain of the movie, a decent one but not much from your generic "bad guy who works for bad company that does bad things."

This is where some cracks show, and it's mostly in the characterization. Sure, our boy Wade is a charming little lad, and his crew of digital buddies have some chemistry, but I don't believe that they're real friends. The group is far from "The Goonies," but I suppose that's kinda the point. Isn't that what happens when you only interact with your pals online?

But the action! That race I spoke of earlier, Wade just sits down in his DeLorean and slams down on the petal, racing past monster trucks, motorcycles and other wacky vehicles on an obstacle course where both a T-Rex and King Kong crunch and smash cars into coins that other racers can collect. I forgot to mention that everytime we enter the Oasis, things become a game of "Where's Waldo-" there are decades of pop-culture on every inch of the screen. Even the dialogue is referenced-packed, from more obvious mentions like "The Breakfast Club" to more obscure ones like "Buckaroo Banzai." I can't recall the last time I thought of that movie!

"Ready Player One" is a blast to watch, because the action is so clearly staged, filmed and edited. And there are a lot of them! It's a breakneck endurance round of pure joy, a nostalgic, whimsical return to form from the man who created the blockbuster.