"Creed" was quite possibly the biggest surprise of 2015. I had no idea going in that a story about the long-lost son of Apollo Creed being trained by an aging Rocky Balboa would be any good, but then the film blew me away with stunning performances from Michael B. Jordan, Sylvester Stallone and a gripping, emotional tale about legacy and second chances while honoring the past and looking ahead to the future. I loved every second of "Creed," and still feel that it is the greatest sports movie of the last two decades.
So naturally, "Creed II" was green-lite almost immediately, and like most sports movies, the sequel had to up the ante. But the progression here feels natural - now that Adonis Creed (Jordan) has made a name for himself in the boxing world, he has to face the son of the man that killed his father in the ring, Ivan Drago (Dolph Lundgren). It's a rather predictable storyline, but like the rest of the movie, it is played masterfully, certainly helped by Stallone returning to write the screenplay.
I felt that the best part of "Creed" was Stallone taking on the role of mentor, his character coming full circle and finding his purpose again long after he thought his life was over. And while Stallone gets some good scenes throughout "Creed II" especially when he tries to be in Adonis' life outside of the ring to make up for how bad of a father he was to his own son, the main focus is rightfully on Adonis and his drive to fight Drago's son, as well as facing the ugly side of the boxing world.
Michael B. Jordan goes through hell in this movie, and it feels like we go through every painful step with him, as he faces both physical and psychological torment he must endure alone. Even if his journey is formulaic and predictable, Jordan's performance is so captivating that it's hard not to be invested in his struggles.
Another great part of "Creed II" is the story of Ivan Drago and his son following the events of "Rocky IV." Like a dark reflection of Adonis' story, theirs is one of redemption and dismantling the shame of their family name the only way they know how, by fighting. A lot of this is said without many words, just Lundgren and Florian Munteanu's stoic performances. While not a big part of the movie, it does serve to make the Dragos into much more sympathetic characters after how basic and underdeveloped Drago was in the past.
Still, "Creed II" follows many of the same sports clichés we've come to expect - pride getting in the way of everything else, the mentor that doesn't approve, the training montages, the mentor and fighter disagreeing so much that they don't want to see each other again, and so many more. But the best part of this movie is that these clichés never grow tiresome. We recognize these moments, but they're handled so well and acted so brilliantly that we don't mind them. Even if we can see them coming from a mile away, Adonis and Rocky are just so likable that it's hardly a problem.
Overall, "Creed II" is not quite to the same level as the first film, but it is still a worthy sequel, building off the themes and plotlines of "Creed" and the previous Rocky movies. It is predictable, but enjoyable nonetheless. If you enjoyed "Creed" then you'll have fun with this one too. Even though I'm not a fan of predictable sports movies, this one always had my attention.
Final Grade: B+
While more films discuss the struggles of exploring ones sexuality and coming out as gay during a time when that was not acceptable, this does not diminish the importance of "Boy Erased." The film does take the time to delve into Jared Eamons' (Lucas Hedges) transition from confused boy to homosexual man, but the main focus is on the brutal and unforgiving world that surrounds Jared, especially the Baptist society he grew up in that sees homosexuality as a disease that can be purged through relentless and unforgiving bible worship, to the point that it could be seen as torture.
The film is unflinching and unsympathetic in its portrayal of this abuse, while also showcasing the ignorance of Jared's preacher father (Russell Crowe). Yet it maintains its moral center through Nicole Kidman's performance as Jared's mother, conflicted by both sides but unable to act out without destroying someone's life. While the film can be hard to watch at times, Kidman makes the journey well worth it.
Overall, the timing for "Boy Erased" could not be more perfect. At a time when cinema is embracing the things that make us different and honoring those imperfections like a work of art, this film speaks to those who still see those same differences as a curse or weakness that must be corrected. It shows that we've entered a new world of movies and that old world of trying to change people to be something they're not will no longer be tolerated. It's a strong, powerful message that deserves to be seen.
Final Grade: B-
If you were expecting more of the same from "Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald" you will be sadly disappointed, much like me. The film lacks most of the charm of the first film in this new Harry Potter franchise, or the magic of the Potter franchise in general, relying more in weak character development and far too much world building for its own good, given the limited time and scope.
What I enjoyed the most about "Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them" was how relaxed and fun the whole adventure felt. The magical creatures were all inventive and felt wholly unique from our world, while still taking the time to explore what makes them so special and how to befriend them. To add to this, we had the best character in the history of the Potter series - Jacob Kowalski, the muggle with a heart of gold and takes everything the magical world throws at him in stride. In a way, the audience is Jacob in the first film.
But those elements are severely downplayed in "Crimes of Gindelwald" and it only hurts the movie. While it has a few of the same magical creatures from the first film, they hardly get any screen time and don't do much outside of being pretty CGI eye-candy (CGI-candy?). There's only one new magical beast, and while it is given a bit of development, it hardly makes up for the lack of other magical animals. Jacob, on the other hand, returns but gets very little to do. He isn't even given much to react to, since he spends most of his time in a normal house.
What "Crimes of Grindelwald" offers instead of this is a confusing story with far too many characters for its own good, each of them trying to become fully fleshed out characters, with erratic pacing that will give most people emotional whiplash near the end of the movie as it speeds towards a nonsensical climax between its group of rouge wizards and witches fighting the evil Grindelwald (Johnny Depp) as he tries to take command of the magical world so that they can rule over both the magic and non-magic world.
The film speeds along far too quickly for anything to either connect with the audience or make sense, as many plot points are dropped in rapid succession. It is also never clear who is working for which side near the end of the movie, especially characters like Leta Lestrange (Zoe Kravitz) and Thesus Scamander (Callum Turner), brother and arch-rival of the main character Newt Scamander (Eddie Redmayne).
All of this turns what could have been a relaxed and fun fantasy adventure into an overly dark and complicated drama that it really didn't need to be. There are far too many twists and turns, when the story works best when it just builds off the simple imagery of magic in our world. There is little fun to be had with "Crimes of Grindelwald," which is the biggest strike against it.
The performances are the only thing working for the movie, especially from actors like Alison Sudol as Queenie Goldstein and William Nadylam as Yusuf Kama, both being far more emotionally gripping than I would have expected. But beyond this, "Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald" has no magic to speak of, focusing on the wrong things and going far too much in the direction of dark and complex in this mystical, fantastical world.
Final Grade: D+
"Overlord" is the type of movie that anti-Nazi filmmakers in the 1940s wish they could have made about World War II, though were limited due to the film codes at the time. This movie is over-the-top gory insanity while showing the scummiest we've seen Nazis in cinema in a long time, showcasing a brand of pure evil that is perfect for a B-movie with an A-movie budget. It is horrific in all the best ways without ever losing the feel of a brutal World War II film.
The film follows a small group of surviving American soldiers on the eve of D-Day. Their mission - to take out a Nazi radio tower so the Allied Forces can communicate with each other properly in the upcoming battle. After a brutal airstrike, only four soldiers make it to the ground and quickly learn the base is crawling with thousands of Nazi troops. Though after the Americans do some digging and infiltrating, they learn something unnatural and terrifying is going on inside the nearby church as Nazi scientists try to make the "thousand-year army" come to life.
"Overlord"'s strength lies in its unpredictability, much like "Bad Times at the El Royale." Because of the mixed genres of action, horror and war, you never know if an action sequence is lurking around the corner or if it's an experiment gone horribly wrong. The film delivers on all of these fronts, but is at it's best when emulating classic WWII films with strong characterization and pitch-perfect pacing to rake up the tension as the Nazis draw closer and closer.
The other strength is that most of the cast are unknowns, while still giving emotionally-gripping performances. You get attached to them as people rather than as stars trying to play soldiers, which makes their performances even more convincing. The only star you might recognize is Kurt Russell's son, Wyatt, which will drive you crazy as you try to figure out if this guy might be related to Kurt. Beyond that, casting unknown actors as your leads in a war-time horror flick works well here.
The effects are hit-and-miss, sometimes going over-the-top goofy and otherwise selling the terror that comes with Nazi experiments gone wrong. I can say that the effects are so good at one point that I seriously considered leaving the theater because they were so gross and disgusting. There are loads of practical effects here as well, especially during the battle sequences.
Overall, "Overlord" is a treat for those who want a little bit of everything. While the plot is nothing special, the pacing and performances sell every tense moment, while still delivering those B-movie thrills and chills. The film takes itself just seriously enough to make the dramatic moments stand out, but with just enough flair to make it fun for the audience.
Final Grade: B+
Queen is one of those universal bands that everyone has not only heard of, but everyone has a favorite song of theirs. Outside of the Beatles and Journey, not many other bands have achieved that. There is a universal appeal to Queen, not just through their music, but through the life of its lead singer, Freddie Mercury. It's so intertwined with Queen that the two are practically indistinguishable, despite the fact that it shouldn't.
"Bohemian Rhapsody" takes this aspect of Queen's appeal to create a safe yet well-made version of the band's rise to success and the tragic story of Freddie Mercury. The film is headlined by a wonderful performance from Rami Malek as Mercury, as he practically disappears into the role to give a whirlwind tirade told through rock music and sexual exploration. And while the film never reaches outrageous status, this is ultimately a harmless film about a rock band with some of the biggest universal appeal the world has ever seen.
That being said, most of the better moments in "Bohemian Rhapsody" are the simple scenes between the band members and how their conflicts led to some of their best songs, especially ones like "We Will Rock You" and "Another One Bites the Dust." While Freddie is the showstopper, the film works best when it focuses on the band, trying to calm that diva within Freddie to show his true potential. The way conflict turns into success is handled well throughout this movie.
But what pushes this film down is its lack of focus. They try to cover so much of Freddie's descent into wild sex parties and the rock star lifestyle that they never bothered to ask why this happened. They're trying to say so much about Freddie and why he took this path that feels like it's saying nothing. There's no focal point for Freddie that lasts throughout the whole film, which is what was desperately needed to wrangle him in.
Because of this "Bohemian Rhapsody" is only ever a serviceable bio-pic of Freddie Mercury, led by a stunning performance from Malik, that only touches upon the band from time to time. The film is often chaotic and misguided, while only giving us the origin of some of Queen's greatest hits. The film feels like an incomplete picture of the band, while still hitting many of the right notes to hit that universal appeal of a legendary rock band.
Final Grade: C
We live in an amazing time for cinema when movies can give us whole new perspectives on lives so vastly different from our owns are readily available. Films that focus on the fears and walk of life that we might often take for granted. Films like "BlacKkKlansman," "Sorry to Bother You" and "Black Panther" have done that well this year, but another film to join those ranks is "The Hate U Give." But the difference with this film is that it's perspective is primarily for a younger audience without giving any easy answers to this troubling and complicated world.
The film is told from the perspective of a 16-year old black woman, Starr Carter (Amandla Stenberg), who lives in a troubled but culturally rich part of town while attending an upscale yet uppity high school, essentially stuck between two vastly different worlds. But this comes crashing down when Starr witnesses a police officer shoot her defenseless best friend, and her worlds are forced to collide in the most racially charged manner possible.
Stenberg's performance is the backbone of this movie, trying to handle the delicate situation of handling two societies when there is so much discomfort in her heart. She is just as confused and passionate as the rest of the country is with this situation, and demands that some action be taken. For a film aimed at a teenage audience, that is a poignant message, which makes this the most powerful film for the young adult audience this year.
While the film can often go a bit over-the-top with its message and keeps hammering it in many times over, "The Hate U Give" tries to tell a complete picture of this complex situation. It's not just from Starr's perspective, but delves into how outsiders react to this situation, as well as from the officer's point of view and what they're trained to do in this situation. The film doesn't do anything easy or simple, just like this real life chaos.
Final Grade: B-
This just might be the greatest slasher movie ever made. Certainly up there with the original "Halloween" but this one has the added advantage of age and complexity. The first "Halloween" worked best when it was subtle and simple, never adding more than it needed to its basic slasher premise of a serial killer on the loose on Halloween. The 2018 film works in many of the same ways, but the film adds another layer by giving its characters far more dimensions and subtleties.
Unlike the first Halloween film, every character in this film feels fully fleshed out and relatable. From the goofy dad to the confused teenage boys to the babysitter that isn't afraid to curse in front of the little boy she's looking after because he's got a fiery attitude as well, I liked all of these characters. And that's the greatest strength of a slasher movie - that the people you care about the most are just as much of a target of our villain, Michael Myers.
Of all the slasher villains, I always found Michael Myers to be a cut above the rest for one simple reason - he is human. Unlike Jason Voorhees or Freddy Krueger who are unstoppable supernatural killing machine that have unlimited amounts of plot armor until the last part of the third act, Michael is just as vulnerable as anyone else in this movie. He has his reasons for why he kills, but they're never told to us. Is it for revenge? A coping mechanism? Blood lust? It makes him feel alive? Is it the only thing he knows? Or is it something else? We never know and that honestly makes him scarier than any other slasher - that we all have a little bit of Michael Myers inside of us and all it takes is one thing to make us snap.
"Halloween" knows this very well and plays with the psychology of Michael Myers, shown mostly through Jamie Lee Curtis' character and the effect a psychopath like that has on someone. Curtis gives a wonderful performance, showing the deep mental scars she's had to endure from Michael for 40 years and makes this whole movie feel more grounded and emotional than it had any right to be.
This could have easily been another dumb, mindless slasher film. But "Halloween" is not only surprising, but heavily satisfying and enjoyable. Even if you're not a fan of horror or slasher films, this is still one worth checking out. Like the original "Halloween," this film is a game changer and makes its genre to a whole new level of art. Check this one out with a large crowd and see just how scary and enjoyable this one can be.
Final Grade: A
"First Man" is one of the more worthwhile experiences this year, not just because of its captivating portrayal of Neil Armstrong landing on the moon, but because of how it represents the fears and troubles society faced in the 1960s. The film is a time capsule of its era, using the moon landing as a focal point to show how Americans were so emotionally repressed at the time. Combine this with it's commentary on how the majority of America was against landing on the moon until we got up there and you've got a film that sucks you into this dangerous and complicated time.
Ryan Gosling excels as Neil Armstrong, giving us a broken man that does not want to reach out and connect with others in his line of profession. He keeps his trauma as hidden as he can, but whether he knows it or not, that fear of losing the ones he cares about drives him to be greater than he is. Gosling is subtle in his gestures and mannerisms, but clearly wants to explode with emotions.
The visuals are stunningly beautiful, never once looking like CGI or like anything was done on a computer. From the scale and scope of the rockets to the vast reaches of the upper atmosphere, there is a lot to be impressed by in "First Man." The set design compliments this, by always feeling cramped and claustrophobic in those tiny cockpits, while taking specific care to show how flimsy and poorly put together these rockets were, giving the audience an even bigger sense of dread as you realize these ships are probably held together with chewing gum and a lot of prayer. And yet, these are vessels that our heroes must rely on to get them through space.
"First Man" makes for a terrific companion piece to "The Right Stuff" and "Apollo 13" (watched in the order they were made), as they tell the vast range of the human struggle to get into space and become something more than we ever thought possible. All three detail the tragedy and hardships we realistically went through, without shying away from why each of these men would do something as crazy as venture out into space. "First Man" serves as the perfect ending to this tale, telling it from the perspective of Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin, showing that the challenges and losses of this movie and its brethren was not wasted.
Final Grade: B+
