Skip to main content

... you’re being uncharacteristically non-hyper-verbal.

Movies on My Mind
Week Ending 7 May 2016

The Irishman

The Irishman (formerly I Heard You Paint Houses, based on Charles Brandt’s account of mob hitman Frank Sheeran, who was chums with Jimmy Hoffa, whom he professed to have offed) has been gestating for what seems like forever. I’d been wondering about its expiry date, as the names attached throughout have been the ever-longer-in-the-tooth holy trio of De Niro, Pacino and Pesci.

Now it seems there's a tight window (we’ll know by this time next week) for financing coming together. It seems the plan is to using de-aging technology (most recently seen making Downey Jr look less than zero in Civil War) to work its regressing magic on these wise guys. I’m a bit uneasy about that, as no matter how good it is, it’s distracting. Not that I think Scorsese would go there if he didn’t think he could pull it off, but it will still be there in the viewer’s mind.

Hopefully he’ll make going back to the Mob worthwhile; I’d presume so, as if his words in 2013 hold true it seems to be one of only a few projects left on his slate before he retires. We’ve got the also long-on-the-cards Silence due this year, and then there’s a Sinatra biopic. That said, he announced Devil in the White City after that interview, and a Mike Tyson biopic is rumoured (again using aging technology), as is a Ramones movie, so maybe such pronouncements are akin to Soderbergh saying he’s going to retire.

Black Widow

Just how tantalising is the prospect of a Black Widow movie, one of the least engaging of the Marvel supporting characters? About as much as a War Machine one. A Falcon movie, I could maybe get behind, at a stretch, as Anthony Mackie’s character is at least fun and engaging. But nothing about Scarlett Johansson’s performance as Natasha Romanov makes me want to spend two hours (or two and a half, following Civil War’s example) in her company.

And, since the glaring omission of female-powered Marvel superhero movies is due to be redressed with Captain Marvel (making her debut in Avengers: to-be-called-something-other-than-Infinity Wars) and the co-led Ant-Man and Wasp, it isn’t as if Kevin Feige will be stumbling about looking for possible properties. Joss Whedon attempted to beef up the roles of Black Widow and Hawkeye in Age of Ultron, and only managed to underline why they’re at-best supporting characters. Maybe it’s partly the actors, although Hawkeye would be an uphill struggle for anyone to make exciting (and, to be fair to Renner, he’s great in lots of movies, he’s just not a “star”; Johansson is a star (at least until Ghost in the Shell comes out), but she entirely lacks the prerequisite accompanying charisma); I’d have been into the idea of Emily Blunt as Natasha, but alas it wasn’t to be.

The Mummy

Russell Crowe as Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde? I’m trying to think when he last played anything approximating unhinged. He can do menacing, no problem (I Heard You Throw Phones). I guess we’ll find out soon enough, as he’s apparently going to be cameoing as one or the other or both in The Mummy. I expect it’ll just be the former for now.

Who knows how this is going to turn out; adjusting the Universal classic monster crew for a present day setting may end up blanding the whole thing out, losing the sense of what made them so regarded. On the other hand, it’s more creditable to try than taking the lazy option of an identikit ye olde London CGI-d period setting. The big question mark is Alex Kurtzman as a director. And the guy who writes synopses for these things. We’re promised (threatened?) “a surprising intensity and balance of wonder and thrills in an imaginative new take that ushers in a new world of gods and monsters”. Here’s hoping the script reads better than that.

Justice League

One only has to witness his stony face from the interview rounds for Batman V Superman to know Batfleck was none too chuffed with the way things turned out. He’s escaped without too much bruising, that being reserved for Zach Snyder, but he’s understandably keen to ensure it doesn’t all go pear shaped a second time with Justice League. Which is why he’s being reported as the newly appointed executive producer. Except… didn’t Ben also have significant input in the fashioning of Dawn of Justice? Which is how Chris Argo Terrio came on board? The position sounds good on paper, but one can only be dubious that, with the movie already in production, this is a PR exercise after horse has bolted.

His solo bat outing is rumoured to feature a whole villains’ gallery. Well, why not? Stuffing your picture to the gills worked so well with Dawn of Justice, after all. I remain to be bowled over by Affleck as director. He’s an above average filmmaker, but none of the material he’s selected thus far has been more than agreeably serviceable, and his penchant for putting himself or his sibling in starring roles suggests he sees himself as more of an Eastwood type multi-hyphenate than he actually is. The hype surrounding his new found second career is as undue as the evisceration he received during his Bennifer era fall from grace.

Why We’re Killing Gunther

Arnie’s post-Governator, resumed movie career has been distinctly underwhelming. Not so much his performances (he’s the best part of both Escape Plan and Terminator Genisys by a long shot) but the stumbling material (anyone seeing Sabotage would think twice about the prospect of David Ayer’s forthcoming Suicide Squad being any good, studio butchery or no studio butchery).

Why We’re Killing Gunther has an attractive premise, but penned by SNL veteran and first time feature writer-director Taran Killam, it may be a little premature to get hopes up. However, Arnie as an arrogant (but really good, ya?) hitman, who so infuriates his fellow tradesmen that they decide to off him, and fail spectacularly, sounds like it could work like a charm based on not-quite-so-prodigious-any-more muscleman’s oafish charm. I see the Variety report references the on-again, off-again Legend of Conan (once King Conan) as his next project, but I’ll believe that when it enters production.

Space Jam 2

Just why? Because Warner Bros suits (not exactly a studio going great guns just now) think it’s a now ripely nostalgic property and they’re are all out of ideas on how to make dough from their cartoon legacy (and generally)? Does Justin Lin know what he’s letting himself in for?

An ordeal, if Joe Dante’s experience on the royally shafted but actually quite enjoyable Looney Tunes: Back in Action is anything to go by. That film found Dante attempting to ensure something like Space Jam, desecrating hallowed characters as it did, didn’t happen again (there was a Jackie Chan vehicle, Spy Jam, planned as a follow up at one point). It looks as if he’ll have to resign himself to another case of mistreatment (“It doesn’t matter what the characters used to act like. They should act like they’re contemporary characters today” was the studio’s mandate). Maybe, to make amends, Warners could dust off Termite Terrace, the film he and Charlie Haas planned about the studio’s early animators, set in ‘30s (and focussing on Chuck Jones). Chance would be a fine thing.

Box Office

Captain America: Civil War’s lack of a $200m+ opening weekend in the US will have DC defenders rejoicing, even though Marvel professes to have always expected its likely ballpark as $175m. Does it signal anything that it hasn’t outperformed the studio’s expectations? Probably nothing more than a line-up of superheroes not being quite the same must-see third time out, even if the quality is well up to par, and that right after the fizzle of the Bat and the Steel Man general audiences may not be so whetted in appetites (although the opening is still coming in ahead of Dawn of Justice). It’s going to have no problem hitting the magic $1bn mark globally, unlike DoJ, and will thus be a Top Four Marvel movie, which no one is going to sneeze at.

The performances of openers in the near future become more debatable, however. Will Neighbors 2 buck the trend in underperforming comedy sequels? Will Nice Guys find a niche? Will The Angry Birds Movie swallow all competition? Have X-Men: Apocalypse and Alice Through the Looking Glass got any chance of doing anything like the business their predecessors did? And that’s just the rest of May.

Agree? Disagree? Mildly or vehemently? Let me know in the comments below.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

She writes Twilight fan fiction.

Vampire Academy (2014)
My willingness to give writer Daniel Waters some slack on the grounds of early glories sometimes pays off (Sex and Death 101) and sometimes, as with this messy and indistinct Young Adult adaptation, it doesn’t. If Vampire Academy plods along as a less than innovative smart-mouthed Buffy rip-off that might be because, if you added vampires to Heathers, you would probably get something not so far from the world of Joss Whedon. Unfortunately inspiration is a low ebb throughout, not helped any by tepid direction from Daniel’s sometimes-reliable brother Mark and a couple of hopelessly plankish leads who do their best to dampen down any wit that occasionally attempts to surface.

I can only presume there’s a never-ending pile of Young Adult fiction poised for big screen failure, all of it comprising multi-novel storylines just begging for a moment in the Sun. Every time an adaptation crashes and burns (and the odds are that they will) another one rises, hydra-like, hoping…

Rejoice! The broken are the more evolved. Rejoice.

Split (2016)
(SPOILERS) M Night Shyamalan went from the toast of twist-based filmmaking to a one-trick pony to the object of abject ridicule in the space of only a couple of pictures: quite a feat. Along the way, I’ve managed to miss several of his pictures, including his last, The Visit, regarded as something of a re-locating of his footing in the low budget horror arena. Split continues that genre readjustment, another Blumhouse production, one that also manages to bridge the gap with the fare that made him famous. But it’s a thematically uneasy film, marrying shlock and serious subject matter in ways that don’t always quite gel.

Shyamalan has seized on a horror staple – nubile teenage girls in peril, prey to a psychotic antagonist – and, no doubt with the best intentions, attempted to warp it. But, in so doing, he has dragged in themes and threads from other, more meritable fare, with the consequence that, in the end, the conflicting positions rather subvert his attempts at subversion…

My name is Dr. King Schultz, this is my valet, Django, and these are our horses, Fritz, and Tony.

Django Unchained (2012)
(MINOR SPOILERS) Since the painful misstep of Grindhouse/Death Proof, Quentin Tarantino has regained the higher ground like never before. Pulp Fiction, his previous commercial and critical peak, has been at very least equalled by the back-to-back hits of Inglourious Basterds and Django Unchained. Having been underwhelmed by his post Pulp Fiction efforts (albeit, I admired his technical advances as a director in Kill Bill), I was pleasantly surprised by Inglourious Basterds. It was no work of genius (so not Pulp Fiction) by any means, but there was a gleeful irreverence in its treatment of history and even to the nominal heroic status of its titular protagonists. Tonally, it was a good fit for the director’s “cool” aesthetic. As a purveyor of postmodern pastiche, where the surface level is the subtext, in some ways he was operating at his zenith. Django Unchained is a retreat from that position, the director caught in the tug between his all-important aesthetic pr…

Must the duck be here?

The Favourite (2018)
(SPOILERS) In my review of The Killing of a Sacred Deer, I suggested The Favourite might be a Yorgos Lanthimos movie for those who don’t like Yorgos Lanthimos movies. At least, that’s what I’d heard. And certainly, it’s more accessible than either of his previous pictures, the first two thirds resembling a kind of Carry On Up the Greenaway, but despite these broader, more slapstick elements and abundant caustic humour, there’s a prevailing detachment on the part of the director, a distancing oversight that rather suggests he doesn’t feel very much for his subjects, no matter how much they emote, suffer or connive. Or pratfall.

Whoever comes, I'll kill them. I'll kill them all.

John Wick: Chapter 2 (2017)
(SPOILERS) There’s no guessing he’s back. John Wick’s return is most definite and demonstrable, in a sequel that does what sequels ought in all the right ways, upping the ante while never losing sight of the ingredients that made the original so formidable. John Wick: Chapter 2 finds the minimalist, stripped-back vehicle and character of the first instalment furnished with an elaborate colour palette and even more idiosyncrasies around the fringes, rather like Mad Max in that sense, and director Chad Stahleski (this time without the collaboration of David Leitch, but to no discernible deficit) ensures the action is filled to overflowing, but with an even stronger narrative drive that makes the most of changes of gear, scenery and motivation.

The result is a giddily hilarious, edge-of-the-seat thrill ride (don’t believe The New York Times review: it is not “altogether more solemn” I can only guess Jeannette Catsoulis didn’t revisit the original in the interven…

I don’t think you will see President Pierce again.

The Ballad of Buster Scruggs (2018)
(SPOILERS) The Ballad of Buster Scruggs and other tall tales of the American frontier is the title of "the book" from which the Coen brothers' latest derives, and so announces itself as fiction up front as heavily as Fargo purported to be based on a true story. In the world of the portmanteau western – has there even been one before? – theme and content aren't really all that distinct from the more familiar horror collection, and as such, these six tales rely on sudden twists or reveals, most of them revolving around death. And inevitably with the anthology, some tall tales are stronger than other tall tales, the former dutifully taking up the slack.

Can you float through the air when you smell a delicious pie?

Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse (2018)
(SPOILERS) Ironically, given the source material, think I probably fell into the category of many who weren't overly disposed to give this big screen Spider-Man a go on the grounds that it was an animation. After all, if it wasn’t "good enough" for live-action, why should I give it my time? Not even Phil Lord and Christopher Miller's pedigree wholly persuaded me; they'd had their stumble of late, although admittedly in that live-action arena. As such, it was only the near-unanimous critics' approval that swayed me, suggesting I'd have been missing out. They – not always the most reliable arbiters of such populist fare, which made the vote of confidence all the more notable – were right. Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse is not only a first-rate Spider-Man movie, it's a fresh, playful and (perhaps) surprisingly heartfelt origins story.

I don’t know if what is happening is fair, but it’s the only thing I can think of that’s close to justice.

The Killing of a Sacred Deer (2017)
(SPOILERS) I think I knew I wasn’t going to like The Killing of a Sacred Deer in the first five minutes. And that was without the unedifying sight of open-heart surgery that takes up the first four. Yorgos Lanthimos is something of a Marmite director, and my responses to this and his previous The Lobster (which I merely thought was “okay” after exhausting its thin premise) haven’t induced me to check out his earlier work. Of course, he has now come out with a film that, reputedly, even his naysayers will like, awards-darling The Favourite

There's something wrong with the sky.

Hold the Dark (2018)
(SPOILERS) Hold the Dark, an adaptation of William Giraldi's 2014 novel, is big on atmosphere, as you'd expect from director Jeremy Saulnier (Blue Ruin, Green Room) and actor-now-director (I Don’t Want to Live in This World Anymore) pal Macon Blair (furnishing the screenplay and appearing in one scene), but contrastingly low on satisfying resolutions. Being wilfully oblique can be a winner if you’re entirely sure what you're trying to achieve, but the effect here is rather that it’s "for the sake of it" than purposeful.

Never compare me to the mayor in Jaws! Never!

Ghostbusters (2016)
(SPOILERS) Paul Feig is a better director than Ivan Reitman, or at very least he’s savvy enough to gather technicians around him who make his films look good, but that hasn’t helped make his Ghostbusters remake (or reboot) a better movie than the original, and that’s even with the original not even being that great a movie in the first place.

Along which lines, I’d lay no claims to the 1984 movie being some kind of auteurist gem, but it does make some capital from the polarising forces of Aykroyd’s ultra-geekiness on the subject of spooks and Murray’s “I’m just here for the asides” irreverence. In contrast, Feig’s picture is all about treating the subject as he does any other genre, be it cop, or spy, or romcom. There’s no great affection, merely a reliably professional approach, one minded to ensure that a generous quota of gags (on-topic not required) can be pumped out via abundant improv sessions.

So there’s nothing terribly wrong with Ghostbusters, but aside from …