Connect with us

Movie Reviews

Adann-Kennn J. Alexxandar Movie Reviews: “Gladiator II” – Valdosta Daily Times

Published

on

Adann-Kennn J. Alexxandar Movie Reviews: “Gladiator II” – Valdosta Daily Times

Adann-Kennn J. Alexxandar Movie Reviews: “Gladiator II”

Published 3:15 pm Tuesday, November 26, 2024

“Gladiator II”

(Drama/Action: 2 hours, 28 minutes)

Advertisement

Starring: Paul Mescal, Denzel Washington, Connie Nielsen, and Pedro Pascal

Director: Ridley Scott

Rated: R (Strong bloody violence)

Movie Review:

“Gladiator II” takes place 16 years after Russell Crowe’s gladiator Maximus from 2000’s “Gladiator” (also directed by Ridley Scott). “Gladiator II,” despite its unhistorical aspects and over-the-top fight scenes, is entertaining while not capturing the artful grandeur of the 2000 prequel.

Advertisement

In 211 A.D., Maximus’ former lover Lucilla (Nielsen) is now married to a hero of Rome, General Acacius (Pascal). As Lucilla, Acacius and some select senators plot to overthrow Emperors Geta (Joseph Quinn) and Caracalla (Fred Hechinger), Maximus’ young son Lucius (Mescal) returns as a gladiator owned by malevolent and sly gladiator promoter Macrinus (Washington).

“Gladiator II’s” narrative is comparable to its prequel. The protagonists in both movies are driven by a noble sense of revenge for a murdered loved one. “Gladiator II” just adds some political intrigue to the story, better special effects and more brutal action scenes..

Ridley Scott offers a similar story. He just makes it more ornately decorated. Apart from Denzel Washington’s Macrinus’ schemes to ascend to power, the “Gladiator II” story is unconvincing because of fast character shifts. Characters appear inconsistent from one scene to the next in a hastened manner filled with platitudes.

Go for the gladiator events in the Colosseum. The fight sequences are a bold reconceptualization of the ancient Roman arena.

Grade: B- (The arena is full of action but is not dramatically fulfilling.)

Advertisement

“Wicked”

(Musical Drama/Fantasy: 2 hours, 40 minutes)

Starring: Cynthia Erivo, Ariana Grande, Michelle Yeoh, Jonathan Bailey and Jeff Goldblum

Director: Jon M. Chu

Rated: PG (Scary action, thematic elements and suggestive material)

Movie Review:

Advertisement

“Wicked” is an absorbing movie based on characters from L. Frank Baum’s 1900 “The Wonderful Wizard of Oz” and Gregory Maguire’s 1995 novel “Wicked: The Life and Times of the Wicked Witch of the West.” It holds one’s attention for a runtime of two hours and 40 minutes. It is a good movie with some interesting developments.

“Wicked” is a prelude to the famous “The Wizard of Oz,” a 1939 American musical fantasy film that has been seen in cinemas and televisions by multiple generations for 84 years. “Wicked” details how the Wicked Witch becomes the villain in the land of Oz.

A bubbly and popular student, Galinda Upland, who becomes Glinda the Good, is played by Ariana Grande. Cynthia Erivo plays Elphaba Thropp, who becomes the Wicked Witch. Galinda and Elphaba must share a room at Shiz University, a mandate of Madame Morrible (Yeoh). Galinda despises her roommate and initially hates sharing the large dorm room. After multiple disagreements, the bitter rivals become friends at the elite school. As Elphaba adapts to her growing sorcery powers, she soon learns that the good life is not for all citizens in Oz. Even more, she is being duped into helping with the notorious scheme.

“Wicked” is one of the more entertaining movies – a dashing musical – one will see this year. It has plenty of good lessons to learn and meaningful characters and a well-developed story.

Erivo and Grande are a dazzling duo. Erivo plays Elphaba with endearing qualities. She makes the character endearing, a young being deceived. Conversely, Grande plays Galinda in a beautifully annoying style. Galinda is rich, spoiled and thrives on superficial aspects, such as her appearance and clothes.

Advertisement

The movie does have nuances that perplex. The biggest is that Elphaba’s green skin alarms everyone, yet the students take a history class taught by Dr. Dillamond, an erudite goat voiced by Peter Dinklage. No one finds that oddity strange.

However, the land of Oz is a fantasy ripe with talking trees, flying monkeys and other fascinating creatures. It is a nice escape for those looking for the perfect getaway for families.

Grade: B (Something deliciously wicked this way comes.)

“Bonhoeffer: Pastor. Spy. Assassin”

(Period Drama/History: 2 hours, 13 minutes)

Starring: Jonas Dassler, David Jonsson and Clarke Peters

Advertisement

Director: Todd Komarnicki

Rated: PG-13 (Violent content, thematic elements and some smoking.)

Movie Review:

“Bonhoeffer” is an intriguing story set during World War II. It follows the plot of Dietrich Bonhoeffer (a skillful Dassler), a pastor who attempts to help save his homeland of Germany from Hitler. Bonhoeffer is one of the first people to notice that Hitler is trying to reinvent the Christian church as he annihilates the Jews. Bonhoeffer’s rejection of Hitler’s Third Reich through his fiery sermons does not go unnoticed, and he quickly becomes one of the freedom fighters deemed a threat to the Nazi’s rule of Germany.

This movie is based on true events, and it is captivating. It shows how a man of faith becomes part of a plot to assassinate Hitler. However, it does have two glaring faults. The producers and writer of this movie try too hard to make Bonhoeffer a modern Jesus Christ. This is sort of an overkill.

Advertisement

The second is something directors do too much today because they think it is an artistic measure. Director Todd Komarnicki (“Resistance,” 2003) is better known as a writer for his screenplay “Sully” (Director Clint Eastwood, 2016). He has too many flashbacks. They often interfere with the story.

Komarnicki does this to give insight into Bonhoeffer, but a straightforward synchronous story is often better. A visit to a concession stand or a bathroom break could cause one to be out of synch for just a split moment because flashbacks interfere with synchronous story-telling.

Otherwise, this true tale of a man’s bravery fighting against the evil he sees is gratifying. It captures a slice of history by making it a biographical thriller, even if its execution is iffy.

Grade: B- (The pastor’s theology is sound.)

Advertisement

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Movie Reviews

Is ‘Josie and the Pussycats’ (2001) Really Even A Rock N Roll Movie? (FILM REVIEW) – Glide Magazine

Published

on

Is ‘Josie and the Pussycats’ (2001) Really Even A Rock N Roll Movie? (FILM REVIEW) – Glide Magazine

The satirical romp Josie and the Pussycats (2001) is a fun movie. But is it a great rock ‘n’ roll movie?
Eh, not so fast on that second one. Welcome back to Glide’s quest for what makes a good rock ‘n’ roll movie. Last month, we looked at Almost Famous, a great launching pad because it gets so much right. And every first Friday, we’ll take another look at a rock ‘n’ movie and ask what it means in the larger pantheon. This month, the Glide’s screening room brings you Josie and the Pussycahttps://glidemagazine.com/322100/almost-perfect-why-almost-famous-sets-the-gold-standard-for-rock-movies/ts. The film is a live-action take on the classic comic-and-cartoon property of a sugary, all-girl rock trio that exists in the world of Riverdale, a.k.a. fictional home of the iconic Archie Andrews.

But this Josie has next to nothing to do with Riverdale and is instead a satire of consumerism and ’00s boy bands. A worthy target, and a topic that has stayed worthy in the quarter-century since Josie dropped. The film was not a hit, but it has become something of a cult classic (like many movies featured in this series).

The plot is fairly simple. Wyatt Frame, an evil corporate type, is making piles of money off boy band Du Jour. They start to wise up to his evil scheme and have to be… taken care of. Frame needs a new group to front his plot, which revolves around mind control to push consumer culture. Enter Josie and the Pussycats, who are about to have a whirlwind ride to the top. And along the way, foil a plot with tentacles so far-reaching they have ensnared… Carson Daly?

Josie is a fun, clever movie, but it doesn’t have a whole lot to say about real rock ‘n’ roll, unless you want to simply accept a perspective that it’s just another cynical consumer-driven product. Even that is an argument that can be made, as long as you’re willing to ignore underground and indie scenes and passionate artists making amazing music.

And it is true that this is a theme of Josie. The band triumphs at the end via their authentic music. But it somehow doesn’t feel authentic, which makes it something of a hollow victory. Let’s consider the criteria already established for a good rock ‘n’ roll movie, and how Josie delivers on that front. The first is in the characters department. The film dodges the previously established Buckethead Paradox, which states that “The real-life rock stars are so much larger than life that you can’t make up credible fictional versions. There is no way someone like Buckethead would come out of a writer’s room and make it to a screen.”

Advertisement

For better or worse, Josie dodges the Paradox by essentially embracing it. The characters themselves are cartoons, and there’s no effort at realism. Given that intent is a huge part of art, it seems unfair to call these characters “cartoons” as a criticism, and it should probably be a compliment. At the same time, they aren’t particularly memorable, which is not a great quality.

And—as a bonus—Tara Reid is perfectly cast as drummer Melody Valentine. Josie was a few years after her turn in Around the Fire (1998), an unintentionally hilarious classic that plays like a jam band afterschool special from the producers of Reefer Madness (look for this amazing film in an upcoming piece).
The acting in general is good, with Rachel Leigh Cook as Josie McCoy and Rosario Dawson as bassist Valerie Brown rounding out the band. And Alan Cumming almost steals the show as sleazy corporate weasel Wyatt Frame.

The character of Wyatt is the film’s funniest riff on a rock ‘n’ roll archetype: the sleazy, corporate manager accompanied by assorted crooked accountants. From Colonel Tom Parker to Albert Grossman to The Great Rock ‘n’ Roll Swindle. It’s all about the benjamins. Which is where the music comes in. If the music is good, that’s what makes it worth it. And Josie’s music has aged particularly well. It’s well-recorded, produced and executed. The songs are particularly catchy. The vocals are by Kay Hanley of Letters to Cleo. Much of the soundtrack sounds like a lost album from The Muffs, and one wonders why Kim Shattuck wasn’t involved.

There’s an argument that power pop was never supposed to be dangerous, and that the Muffs aren’t dangerous either. Fair on the surface, but they played real punk clubs and came from a real scene. There’s not even a hint of that in Josie. So an argument that they play pop punk (which they kinda do) is really lacking the punk part.
And it was produced by Babyface, of all people. While that doesn’t seem like it should lead to great rock ‘n’ roll, sometimes preconceptions are wrong.

That said, this is a very commercial product and sound—as catchy as it is—so maybe it’s not a misconception. Maybe the right question to ask is whether it’s all too perfect? And that’s what gives this ostensibly rock ‘n’ film a smoothed-down edge? After all, the basic ingredients are there. But part of what makes good rock good is that it feels actually dangerous. Maybe there are some actual subversive messages, or a genuine counterculture scene. And Josie simply isn’t that film. The soundtrack is fondly remembered enough that Hanley appeared live and performed the songs at a screening in 2017. That appearance also included the film’s stars Cook, Dawson and Reid.

Advertisement

It’s worth noting that while Cook and company obviously lip sync to the songs in the film, their performances are credible. They went through instrument boot camp, so they pull off the parts.

In the end, the film is primarily a satire of consumer culture. And even more strangely, is loaded with actual product placement. Clearly, the joke was intended to “hit harder” with real products, but having Target in the film constantly makes it feel like more of what it is parodying than a parody. Where’s the joke if the viewer actually pushes to shop at Target while watching the film? And if the filmmakers actually took money (which they almost certainly did)?

And perhaps that is the lesson for this month: a great rock ‘n’ roll movie needs to have something to say about the larger meaning or culture of the music. And while Josie may have a lot to say about culture in general, and it may say it in a fun and likeable way, it’s just not very rock ‘n’ roll. There’s no grit. Now, does it have some things to say about being in a band? Yes, though they are arguably true of most collaborations.

If someone in a hundred years wanted to understand early 21st century rock, Josie and the Pussycats is a bad choice. It doesn’t show the sweat of a performance or the smell of beer. But it’s a great choice for anyone looking for a light-hearted, fun watch with a great soundtrack. We could all use some sugar in our lives these days.
Join us again next month, when we’ll look at one of the inspirations for Josie, A Hard Day’s Night, the legendary first film from The Beatles

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Movie Reviews

Peaky Blinders: The Immortal Man review – Tommy Shelby returns for muddy, bloody big-screen showdown

Published

on

Peaky Blinders: The Immortal Man review – Tommy Shelby returns for muddy, bloody big-screen showdown

After six TV series from 2013 to 2022, which caused a worrying surge in flat cap-wearing among well-to-do men in country pubs, Peaky Blinders is now getting a hefty standalone feature film, a muscular picture swamped in mud and blood. This is the movie version of Steven Knight’s global small-screen hit, based on the real-life gangs that swaggered through Birmingham from Victorian times until well into the 20th century. Cillian Murphy returns with his uniquely unsettling, almost sightless stare as Tommy Shelby, family chieftain of a Romani-traveller gang, a man who has converted his trauma in the trenches of the first world war into a ruthless determination to survive and rule.

As we join the story some years after the curtain last came down, it is 1940, Britain’s darkest hour and Tommy is the crime-lion in winter. He now lives in a huge, remote mansion, far from the Birmingham crime scene he did so much to create, alone except for his henchman Johnny Dogs, played by Packy Lee. Evidently wearied and sickened by it all, Tommy is haunted by his ghosts and demons: memories of his late brother, Arthur, and dead daughter, Ruby, and working on what will be his definitive autobiography. (Sadly, we don’t get any scenes of Tommy having lunch with a drawling London publisher or agent.)

But a charismatic and beautiful woman, played by Rebecca Ferguson, brings Tommy news of what we already know: his malign idiot son Erasmus Shelby, played by Barry Keoghan, is now running the Peaky Blinders, a new gen-Z-style group of flatcappers raiding government armouries for guns that should really belong to the military. And if that wasn’t disloyal and unpatriotic enough, Erasmus has accepted a secret offer from a sinister Nazi fifth-columnist called Beckett, played by Tim Roth, to help distribute counterfeit currency which will destroy the economy and make Blighty easier to invade. Doesn’t Erasmus know what Adolf Hitler is going to do to his own Romani people? (To be fair to Erasmus, a lot of the poshest and most well-connected people in the land didn’t either.)

Clearly, Tommy is going to have to come down there and sort this mess out. And we get a very ripe scene in which soft-spoken Tommy turns up in the pub full of raucous idiots who cheek him. “Who the faaaaaack is ‘Tommy Shelby’?” sneers one lairy squaddie, who gets horribly schooled on that very subject.

Advertisement

In this movie, Tommy Shelby is against the Nazis, and he can’t get to be more of a good guy than that. (Tommy has evidently put behind him memories of Winston Churchill from the first two series, when Churchill was dead set on clamping down on the Peaky Blinders.) The war and the Nazis are a big theme for a big-screen treatment and screenwriter Knight and director Tom Harper put it across with some gusto as a kind of homefront war film, helped by their effortlessly watchable lead. Maybe you have to be fully invested in the TV show to really like it, although this canonisation of Tommy is a sentimental treatment of what we actually know of crime gangs in the second world war. Nevertheless, it is a resoundingly confident drama.

Peaky Blinders: The Immortal Man is in out on 6 March in the UK and US, and on Netflix from 20 March.

Continue Reading

Movie Reviews

Movie Review: Here comes “THE BRIDE!”, audacious and wild – Rue Morgue

Published

on

Movie Review: Here comes “THE BRIDE!”, audacious and wild – Rue Morgue

That’s both a promise and a challenge she delivers, since what follows may rub some viewers the wrong way. Yet Gyllenhaal’s full-throttle commitment to her vision is compelling in and of itself, and she has marshalled an absolutely smashing-looking and -sounding production. The story proper begins in 1936 Chicago, which, like everything and everyplace else in the movie, has been luminously shot by cinematographer Lawrence Sher and sumptuously conjured by production designer Karen Murphy. Her involvement is appropriate given that her previous credits include Bradley Cooper’s A STAR IS BORN and Baz Luhrmann’s ELVIS, since among other things, THE BRIDE! is a nostalgic musical. Its Frankenstein (Christian Bale), who has taken the name of his maker, is obsessed with big-screen tuners, and imagines himself in elaborate song-and-dance numbers. (Considering the reception to JOKER: FOLIE À DEUX, one must applaud the daring of Warner Bros. for greenlighting another expensive film in which a tormented protagonist has that kind of fantasy life.)

THE BRIDE! may be revisionist on many levels, but its characterization of its “monster” holds true to past screen incarnations from Karloff’s to Elordi’s: His scarred appearance masks a lonely soul who desires companionship. Frankenstein has arrived in Chicago to seek out Dr. Cornelia Euphronious (Annette Bening), correctly believing she has the scientific know-how to create an appropriate mate for him. Rather than piece one together, Dr. Euphronious resurrects the corpse of Ida (Jessie Buckley), whose consorting with underworld types led to her brutal death. Previously chafing against the man’s world she inhabited in life, she becomes even more defiant and unruly as a revenant, apparently possessed by the spirit of Shelley herself, declaiming in free-associative sentences and quoting rebellious literature.

Buckley, currently an Oscar favorite for her very different literary-inspired role in HAMNET, tears into the role of the Bride (who now goes by the name Penny) with invigorating abandon that bursts off the screen. Unsure of her identity yet overflowing with self-confident bravado, she’s the opposite of the sensitive “Frank,” but they’re united by the world that stands against them. That becomes literal when a violent incident sends them on the lam, road-tripping to New York City and beyond, on a trail inspired by the films of Ronnie Reed (Jake Gyllenhaal), Frank’s favorite song-and-dance-man star.

With THE BRIDE!, Gyllenhaal has made a film that’s at once her very own and a feverish homage to all sorts of cinema past and present. It’s a horror story, a lovers-on-the-run movie, a crime thriller, a musical and more, and historical fealty be damned if it makes for a good scene (as when Penny and Frank sneak into a 3D movie over a decade before such features became popular). In-references are everywhere: It might just be a coincidence that the couple’s travels take them past Fredonia, NY (cf. “Freedonia” in the Marx Brothers’ DUCK SOUP), but it’s certainly no accident that the former Ida is targeted by a crime boss named Lupino, referencing the actress and pioneering filmmaker whose works included noirs and women’s-issues stories. Penny’s exploits lead legions of admiring women to adopt her look and anarchic attitude, echoing the first JOKER (while a headline calls them “Twisted Sisters”), and the use of one Irving Berlin song in a Frankensteinian context immediately recalls a classic comedic take on the property.

Whether the audience should be put in mind of a spoof at a key point in a film with different goals is another matter. At times like these, Gyllenhaal’s pastiche ambitions overtake emotional investment in the story. As strong as the two lead performances are (Bale is quite moving, conveying a great deal of soul from behind his extensive prosthetics), it’s easier to feel for them in individual scenes than during the entire course of the just-over-two-hour running time. The diversions can be entertaining, to be sure, but they also result in an uncertainty of tone. The dissonance continues straight through to the end, where the filmmaker’s choice of closing-credits song once again suggests we’re not supposed to take all this too seriously.

Advertisement

There’s nonetheless much to admire and enjoy about THE BRIDE!, and this kind of risk-taking by a major studio is always to be encouraged (especially considering that we’ll see how long that lasts at Warner Bros. once Paramount takes it over). Beyond the terrific work by the aforementioned actors, there’s fine support from Peter Sarsgaard and Penelope Cruz as detectives on Penny and Frank’s heels, with Sandy Powell’s lavish costumes and Hildur Guðnadóttir’s rich, varied score vital to fashioning this fully imagined world. Kudos also to makeup and prosthetics designer Nadia Stacey and to Chris Gallaher and Scott Stoddard, who did those honors on Frank, for their visceral, evocative work. Uneven as it may be, THE BRIDE! is also as alive! as any film you’ll likely see this year.

Continue Reading

Trending