Tomb Raider Review

No, the newest Lara Croft isn't about gawking at an inadequately clothed title heroine as she kicks ass. It's nothing like the previous two movies with Angelina Jolie, but it is not nearly as good. It takes itself far too seriously, forcing a backstory on Laura that's unsurprising. Guess what? Her father's dead, and she decides to finish his work. It's an uninspired riff on "The Last Crusade," and it just doesn't work. Well, for the first half anyway.

"Tomb Raider" is two movies stitched together with only one being any good. That'd be the second half, where we find Lara (Alicia Vikander) enter a tomb, set off some booby traps, unleash some evil then escape while it crumbs just behind her. It's some fun, about as good as the Brendan Fraser's original "Mummy" movie, though not as good as any of the "Indiana Jones" flicks.

The plot in detail finds Lara in pursuit of Himiko, an ancient evil queen buried deep underground on a remote island. She takes his notes, hitching a ride on a rusty old boat that soon capsizes and she, with the help of movie magic, washes ashore. Of course, her father's rival (or colleague, or.. something), Vogel (Dominic West) is on the island, searching the last seven years for the location of the mummified royal lady. Of course (of course!) her father's papers show the location of the tomb, and now she, and the captain of the dingy they sailed there on must plot their way out of slavery before Vogel can dig up evil. By this point, the story is so wildly silly that it allows the action to become equally preposterous- it's gloriously goofy fun.

It's just that the first half, the parts leading up to the unearthing of the catacombs are so dull. We find Lara piece together the whereabouts of her father, her struggles as an underdog and well, it just isn't anything special. It's actually exceptionally average- nothing's offensive, but there is just nothing to recommend.

This film gets two stars, because I can only endorse the second half. For all the fun puzzle solving, lavishly decrepit set pieces, and haunted skeleton-stuffed coffins, you deal with about an hour of boring exposition, despite its brisk pace jumping from the streets of London to a fishing village in Japan. It's a shame it takes so long for a movie called "Tomb Raider" to actually enter a tomb, but trust me, it's kinda almost worth the wait.

Death Wish Review

A film like "Death Wish" can never come out at a good time, but despite general critic reception, this remake is a fairly taut little thriller. Paul Kersey (Bruce Willis), a surgeon whose wife is killed and daughter is left in a coma after a violent home invasion, questions gun store employee Bethany (Kirby Bliss Blanton) about the process of purchasing a gun in Chicago. "Oh, no one fails the test" she says, or something like that. He does not walk out with a piece, but gives a satirical nod to the camera at how painless the process is. How could a movie be pro-gun if it comments on how easy it is to buy and use them?

But Kersey doesn't get his first gun and suddenly become "John McClane," he fumbles, slicing his hand at his first stab at vigilantism. It is a refreshing change from these usual movies, where the hero is some ex-military guy or cop- Paul's a doctor! I mean sure, he does become a pretty good shot by the time the credits roll, but with every bullet fired he becomes a bit more confident pulling the trigger. Bruce is surprisingly good at this; despite his career as action star, he looks uncomfortable at the prospects of owning and using a gun, and turns to online tutorials on how to clean, load and fire them. He's convincing here, every bit as fit for the role as Charles Bronson was. It isn't glorifying violence, it is a commentary on how easy it is for someone to become so aggressive.

End social observation.

Director Eli Roth, of the bloody "Hostel" movies fame, is surprisingly restraint here, with all the expected gory bits cut down to quick cuts, barely shown. Why the intestines spill in the first place show just how deteriorated Kersey is, as his vigilante episodes become less about killing and more about torture. The camera never fetishises on the blood, with it lasting only a few seconds on screen, but he handles the slower moments with general finesse, giving Bruce a chance to do things other than his usual reluctant-hero schtick. The supporting cast, including Vincent D'Onofrio as his brother Frank and Elisabeth Shue as his brief wife, bring more to the screen than the script asks them for.

Just like in the original film, Paul has a couple of detectives nearby, who grow to suspect of him, just one piece of evidence away from convicting him. But new here is that his first act of vengeance is caught on camera and posted around social media. It floods the internet, radio talk shows, and leads to at least one copy-cat on the streets of Chicago. It is a decent refresh of musty old material. Things do wrap up in the end a bit too cleanly, but that's how the first one did, so why change it?

As a remake, it gets the job done for those looking for something more extreme than your usual Liam Neeson outing. It is less excessive than the sequels that followed the 1974 original, and about on par with 2007's "Death Sentence," based on the the book sequel to the first book. (Yeah, somehow a franchise like "Death Wish" is complicated. Also, somehow it is a franchise.) Without the politically charged world outside the multiplex, it is a movie where people shoot each other. If you liked last year's "The Foreigner," I probably sat next to you in the theater.

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.

The Commuter Review

If Liam Neeson isn't tired of the genre films he's cranked out in last decade, then neither am I. Directed by usual "Liam Neeson's family is in danger" thrillers Jaume Collet-Serra, their new movie "The Commuter" is exactly what you expect when you buy your ticket, and I would suggest buying one.

Liam plays "Michael McCauley," an ex-cop turned insurance salesman who has just lost his job. But how are he and his wife going to pay for their son to attend college? It is explained briefly, the only glimpse into his career, that he lost everything in the last recession. So, after a favorable meeting with his old pal Murphy (Patrick Wilson) and a shady introduction of his old boss Captain Hawthorne (Same Neil), Mike rushes off to catch his train ride home. That's when he meets Joanna (Vera Farmiga), who sets off the main chunk of the plot; find someone on the train who doesn't belong, with a bag that doesn't belong to them. He does all that he gets $100,000. Of course Mikey takes the money, and that's when the film gets that familiar "Liam Neeson" smell. And here, like always, it's a good smell.

We don't see much of them throughout the 105 minute running time, veteran actors who have little to do except show up, say some stuff and then go cash their paycheck. But their presence is welcome, and are a great complement to the grizzled Mr. Neeson.

The rest involves some fine hand-to-hand combat, fruitless suspicions, and a climactic train derailment. But while the fighting is well-choreographed, including one later in the film that is edited to look like it was a single take. It's fun! It's the "whodunit" moments that begin to creak as they're piled onto one another- though the final "it's not him it's him" did fool me, none of it is particularly satisfying. I'll accept all the moments that are far from believable (and trust me, there's enough to fill at least two other movies), but they need to convince me to buy what they're selling.

Yet while the skips in logic are abound, this is Liam's movie; he sells everything so well that it wasn't until I walked out of the theater that I started to discover all the cracks. But onscreen, I soaked up every weary look and every jaded threat he tossed out, and he tosses out a lot of them. Perhaps this post-Taken career is coming to a close, but after every punch he throws he looks winded, as if he needs to take his back pill before the next jab. And although he is still walking by the time the credits roll, despite being hit by everything shy of a bullet, I'd be surprised if in his next thriller he doesn't have to escape a nursing home. But I'd probably go see it.

Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle Review

This reboot-sequel-remake of the beloved Robin Williams classic Jumanji is far better than it should have turned out. It's zippy pace, cartoony visuals and often hilarious interplay between the leads make this a far more fun adventure than the dull exposition of the latest Star Wars picture.

The narrative structure plays out just like it did in the original, only the board game turns into a video game and four teenagers get sucked into the game world, instead of the other way around. It's a wise move, keeping things from feeling like a retread, with more advanced CGI alligators (or were they crocodiles? That zoologist of theirs certainly slacked when it came to introducing all the wildlife). This gives the movie a sort of low-rent Indiana Jones feel, with exotic locations, weapons, and humorous fight scenes. I paid less than ten dollars for my ticket, and I walked out Tuesday night satisfied.

Much of the film's humor comes from the set up- the four teenagers get transformed into famous faces sure, but isn't it funny that the popular girl turns into a paunchy Jack Black? Well, as it turns out, it is quite funny. I laughed a lot at these scenes, particularly as he (she?) gawked at the other male actors or fumbled with her first urination session.

Yeah, there is a whole scene dedicated to men peeing, but it's well written and even better acted. And it's scenes like this that are refreshingly less sterile than your typical Disney-designed adventure, with plenty of swearing, sexual innuendos and violence (albeit goofy). It's an old school kind of feeling, proving political correctness isn't always the most entertaining route to film.

That isn't to say everything is perfect: the villain is a nameless badguy played by someone I can't remember (oh right, thanks Google, his name is Van Pelt and is played by Bobby Cannavale), and the teenagers, when played by teenaged actors (or at least teenage looking actors) are as dull as dishwasher. They fit their generic role, sure, but I could play the awkward prepubescent girl better than Madison Iseman did. What this kills is the feeling of growth once they escape the video game (what, you call that a spoiler? Did you really think they'd be stuck in their until the inevitable sequel?); The kids come out of the jungle and are suddenly friends, but they have no chemistry. Where's the Breakfast Club when you need them?

All in all, “Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle” is a fun diversion over your holiday break. I laughed, it has a good heart, and it is a rare remake-sequel-reboot that doesn't go through the same exact motions of the original. Just don't expect those motions to be all that original.

Star Wars: The Last Jedi Review

Watching a new "Star Wars" movie is always a pleasure; there are always so many new worlds to zip through in high-speed chase sequences, bizarre characters to be swindled by, and that always fantastic musical score by legend John Williams. The newest entry in the series, "The Last Jedi," hits a lot of the right notes, but it gets bogged down by an overwhelming sense of listlessness. Sure, there are tons of explosions, spaceship chases, and blaster battles, but it plays like a "best hits" of the franchise. I didn't even walk out of the theater remembering one new piece of music. I couldn't recall a single new character, or piece of dialogue. What happened?

Perhaps writer-director Rian Johnson got caught up in the chance to spearhead an entry in the biggest space series of all time, deciding that if nostalgia worked in the last entry "The Force Awakens," then that must be all people want. It is three entries since Disney bought LucasFilms and we still have old faces walk around the Millennium Falcon (scenes like these probably look good in commercials). We are still referencing Darth Vader- despite dying in Episode 6! The lightsabers and still-living cast members should be enough! There is a difference between homage and nostalgia, and here we all pure nostalgia.

Johnson's script contains a lot of humor, but never for the better. Sure, Oscar Isaac's Poe Dameron is a wise-cracking Han Solo for a new generation, however, there is no reason other than Disney's "Marvel-ization" of the franchise for many of the gags here. Take the scene when Rey (Daisy Ridley) hands Luke Skywalker (Mark Hamill) the lightsaber, right where the last movie left off. He, eyes open and mouth gaping, takes the saber, then just tosses it over his shoulder. Who let Stan Lee in the writer's room?

Carrie Fisher, who lamentably passed away last year, has a lot of screen time here, and she is such a joy to see in costume. It is natural to get emotional whenever her familiar voice echoes throughout the theater, but that's the only emotion that pulls through in the plot. There are deaths, near-deaths, and revelations, but nothing that comes close to punch when Darth Vader killed Darth Sidious in Episode 6, or even when Anakin's mother died in his arms in Episode 2. I know, that's saying something.

The mostly-plucky case from the first film in the "Nostalgia Trilogy" returns, but they're given so little to do. The plot is too bulky, with small groups of new and old characters flying in all different directions, and every point is a recycle of old ideas. Finn (John Boyega) and Rose (Kelly Marie Tran) try to infiltrate the First Orders' ship, Rey goes to train with Luke Skywalker, and Kylo Ren (Adam Driver) struggles with conflict the glimmer of light in his dark inside. Too many ideas a repurposed from earlier entries- you get a new version of the Ewok in Porgs (the force is telling me their toy will be popular this Christmas), you have a new Mos Eisley with the casino on Canto Bight, and you have Luke Skywalker going all Obi Wan Kenobi at the end (spoilers?).

There are plenty of other new and old minor characters here as well, but they just steal screentime and development from the major cast. But Adam Driver suffers the most, remaining every bit as disinteresting as Hayden Christensen did in the prequel trilogy; a whiny punk who is bafflingly cast and written. He lacks chemistry with the spunky Daisy Ridley and the elder cast mates, and his biggest character development is a promising one that ends in groaning retread. This isn't to say Mark Hamill was ever the strongest actor, but Driver plays Kylo as if he is auditioning for "Pretty Little Liars." If his character had died in this entry, then I'd give "The Last Jedi" a recommendation.

Had the action been outstanding, then we'd be seeing a greater number of stars at the top of the page. Yet the pedestrian set pieces are interrupted by bland jokes and stoic conversations of unimportance- we see the Millennium Falcon fly.... cool. I could have saved the cost of admission watching one of the other films on TV. Oh, a lightsaber battle? Wait, that's the only duel? Excuse me while I pull up on YouTube that Darth Maul battle from Episode 1.