"Deadpool & Wolverine" stars Ryan Reynolds, Hugh Jackman, Emma Corrin, Morena Baccarin, Rob Delaney, Leslie Uggams, and Matthew Macfadyen. Released on July 26, 2024, the film has Deadpool traveling across the multiverse with Wolverine. The film is directed by Shawn Levy, who also directed films such as "Big Fat Liar", "Just Married", "Night at the Museum", "Real Steel", and "Free Guy". It is the third installment in the Deadpool film series and the 34th movie in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. The iconic "Merc with the Mouth" may be known for invading comics with his fourth-wall-breaking and deranged sense of humor, but his cinematic journey is something that should be studied for years. His infamous first appearance in "X-Men Origins: Wolverine" would've been the first and last time we see Deadpool on the big screen. But in 2016, the masked anti-hero made a stunning comeback in his first solo adventure, catapulting Ryan Reynolds' career to new heights. That trend would continue two years later with "Deadpool 2", which I thought was the best of the duology. With the merger between Disney and Fox, many of us thought that movie would be the last time we see Deadpool on the big screen since the former is more of a family-friendly brand. However, we were proven wrong with the long-awaited follow-up that takes the foul-mouthed and violent superhero into the teen-rated Marvel Cinematic Universe. By that, I mean two foul-mouthed and violent superheroes, with Hugh Jackman returning from retirement to reprise his role of Wolverine following his supposed swan song, "Logan". Were they enough to reinvigorate the expansive franchise through its Multiverse Saga, or are they better off staying in their own adult-rated Marvel universes? Let's find out. The story occurs six years after the events of "Deadpool 2". Following his time-traveling shenanigans, Wade Wilson (Reynolds) now lives a quiet life working as a used car salesman and spending time with his friends, including his former fiancee Vanessa (Baccarin), leaving his mercenary days behind. However, his new life was suddenly interrupted by the Time Variance Authority, a mysterious organization tasked with monitoring the timelines of each universe. The TVA recruits Wade to take on the mantle of Deadpool once more to tackle a special mission. However, upon learning his timeline is about to be annihilated following the death of Logan (Jackman), its "anchor being", Wade travels across the multiverse to find an alternate variant of Logan, who's haunted by his traumatic past. Despite not seeing eye to eye, Wade and Logan must put aside their differences to save Wade's universe from destruction, leading them to confront the telekinetic mutant Cassandra Nova (Corrin). My early exposure to Deadpool wasn't very memorable pre-2016, only recognizing the mercenary mutant through "X-Men Origins: Wolverine" and the direct-to-DVD film "Hulk Vs." It wasn't until I watched the title character's first solo outing that I gained a better appreciation for the foul-mouthed anti-hero. The first "Deadpool" movie was raunchy, wild, and violent, but it also didn't neglect to combine them with clever humor, fun charisma, and heart. "Deadpool 2" offered more of the same, but better, with just the right amount of character growth for Wade to make it one of my favorite superhero sequels. These movies made me appreciate Deadpool as much as I do for other heroes and reevaluate Ryan Reynolds as one of the more charismatic actors. So when I heard that Deadpool is making his way to the Marvel Cinematic Universe with Wolverine, I was beyond excited to see the two iconic mutants working together for the first time since "X-Men Origins: Wolverine". However, I was also curious how they would make this work, especially with the multiverse element and the Marvel Cinematic Universe's history of teen-rated content. One very noticeable reason for my curiosity was its rating. The Deadpool movies have been rated R for several reasons. The films' instances of gory violence, adult jokes, and pervasive language were enough to make Deadpool more of a role model for adults compared to other superheroes that kids look up to. With Deadpool now a part of the MCU, there was some concern about Disney limiting the character's crude nature to make it more "family-friendly". Thankfully, those worries were thrown out the window when we heard they're leaving the raunchy tone intact, resulting in this film being the first R-rated installment in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. So, as usual, it bears repeating to think twice before taking younger kids to "Deadpool & Wolverine," so you won't be judged repeatedly for being a bad parent. I'm sure Deadpool and I will if you don't heed that warning. But besides its rating, how does this long-awaited team-up stack up compared to Deadpool's previous adventures? Unsurprisingly, it turned out exactly how I expected it to be: crude, violent, meta, and, more importantly, fun. "Deadpool & Wolverine" may not have top "Deadpool 2" as my favorite installment in the R-rated superhero trilogy. However, it retains almost all the elements that made its predecessors work for me, plus a dash of the usual MCU flair for good measure. The result is a nonstop, Easter-Egg-hunting, gloriously brutal ride that's also a crowd-pleasing tribute to Fox's Marvel library, mainly the X-Men films involving Wolverine. My mother and I went to see the movie with a packed crowd, and I have to say, it was so delightful to see a Marvel movie with a well-behaved audience again. Now, you might think I'm just glossing over it because it's a Marvel Cinematic Universe movie. That's not entirely true, as I gave "Black Widow" and "The Marvels" a lower grade for a reason. Undoubtedly, "Deadpool & Wolverine" has flaws similar to those from other MCU installments. However, this one stood out the most because its pros outweigh the minor issues in its story, including the pacing and the antagonists. Like its predecessors, "Deadpool & Wolverine" understood that there's more to its concept than just Deadpool swearing constantly and killing people every few minutes. It's also about Wade's journey that leads him to become a better person and hero. In this film's case, we see Wade attempting to prove his worth as a hero to everyone. He wants to be seen as more than just a laughing stock, leading him to understand the importance of becoming a hero whom people can look up to. While certain aspects of its storytelling may not resonate with everyone, its blend of heart and humor succeeds in not taking itself too seriously or being excessively vulgar throughout most of its duration. It was also carried by the highly entertaining buddy-comedy chemistry between Deadpool and Logan, with the latter's past actions serving as its soul amid their brutal feud. This was due to Shawn Levy, who's proven to be surprisingly confident with big-budget blockbusters. Similar to his previous work, "Free Guy", Levy provided a line between self-awareness, charm, action, and sincerity that treads along its abundance of Easter eggs and surprising cameos, reflecting Disney and Marvel's "maximum efforts" to take bold swings in mocking themselves with rewarding results. As for the cameos, I highly recommend experiencing the film without prior knowledge. You might be pleasantly surprised by the filmmakers' efforts to incorporate them into the movie. Levy also did a splendid job maintaining the R-rated violence through his vision and the action choreography, offering plenty of hilarious and satisfyingly gory moments, including the opening sequence. Ryan Reynolds has repeatedly proven his worth of being Deadpool in the previous two movies. He was abundantly charismatic, crude, and even hilarious, similar to the character he was portraying. Unsurprisingly, his performance in "Deadpool & Wolverine" proved this fact further, with just enough heart and charm to elevate his sense of humor. As for Hugh Jackman as Wolverine, what else can I say about him that hasn't been said? He's the perfect embodiment of the iconic X-Man in live-action form, not just for the character's hot-tempered attitude but also for his humanity and trauma. His performance in "Logan" is still my favorite regarding that film's authentic and raw take on the character. Nonetheless, Jackman's performance here further indicates his passion and commitment to Wolverine after playing him for over 20 years. The rest of the cast did very well with their performances, including the supporting cast reprising their roles from its predecessors. Most of them, including Vanessa and Colossus (Stefan Kapicic), don't have as much screen time as others, but a couple of them stood out the most regarding their humor, including Rob Delaney as Peter Wisdom and Leslie Uggams as Blind Al. Emma Corrin, known for portraying Diana, Princess of Wales in "The Crown", was also decent as the delightfully twisted twin sister of Charles Xavier, Cassandra Nova. Unfortunately, even with some of her bright spots, Cassandra is another victim of the MCU villain issue, in which an antagonist is more formulaic than the fourth-wall-breaking masked hero. This flaw wasn't as massive here as in the other MCU installments, but I can see it bothering those hoping for another layered comic-book villain. Finally, we have Matthew Macfadyen, who's certainly an odd one regarding his role as Mr. Paradox, the TVA agent with a personal agenda. His performance intends to make Paradox an over-the-top yet calm character obsessed with being on top, and I thought it wasn't too bad. Overall, "Deadpool & Wolverine" is a wildly violent and entertaining trip through the multiverse that's as delectable as a plate full of chimichangas. It has some minor issues that kept it from dethroning "Deadpool 2" and many other outstanding MCU installments, including some of its narrative beats and villains. But, in all seriousness, what are you expecting out of a "Deadpool" movie? The next "Dark Knight"? Yes, it has flaws, but what matters is whether I had fun watching it, and guess what? I had an absolute blast watching Deadpool poke fun at Disney. Even better, it retains the narrative's heart amid its vulgarity and adult-rated violence that made the previous two "Deadpool" movies great adaptations of the iconic anti-hero. Ryan Reynolds and Hugh Jackman were both fantastic in their roles, and Shawn Levy delivered some great moments in his direction, including the action sequences and self-aware humor. More importantly, it's another boost the franchise needs to reinvigorate its fifth phase, with the upcoming "Captain America" film hoping to continue this streak. If you loved the previous "Deadpool" movies and even the Fox-Marvel films from the 2000s and 2010s, you'll have a great time with this one. A-
0 Comments
"Sing Sing" stars Colman Domingo, Clarence "Divine Eye" Maclin, Sean San José, and Paul Raci. Released on July 12, 2024, the film has a group of inmates putting together an original stage show. The film was directed by Greg Kwedar, who also directed "Transpecos" and the short films "Guest Room", "La pluma", "Manos de madre", and "Dakota". It is based on The Sing Sing Follies by John H. Richardson and Breakin' The Mummy's Code by Brent Buell. Spending endless hours in prison would've been the last thing people wanted when they did something they'd regret. Usually, letting them rot in a jail cell would help them change their ways, but what if there's a better way to help these prisoners regain their humanity? This film has that answer: through the power of acting. You might be wondering, "There's no way a bunch of inmates can redeem themselves by acting in a theatre production." Well, you better prepare to have your foot and eat it, too, because this strategy exists in real life, and it has been proven successful for years. Who knew the arts could be this much of a game-changer? This particular program is the topic of this latest drama that's been receiving rave reviews since its premiere at last year's Toronto International Film Festival. Now that it has made its way to regular theaters, let's see if it's as inspiring as someone quoting Shakespeare. The story centers on John "Divine G" Whitfield (Domingo), a man arrested for a crime he didn't commit. He's transferred to Sing Sing Correctional Facility, one of New York's most infamous maximum security prisons. He's currently running the Rehabilitation Through the Arts program, which has a theatre group of other incarcerated men, including a wary newcomer named Clarence (Maclin). As part of the program, the group, alongside theatre director Brent Buell (Raci), is assigned to assemble an original stage production, Breakin' The Mummy's Code. During production, John finds himself on a journey of purpose and rehabilitation through the power of theatre. "Sing Sing" is another film I didn't expect myself to watch or even talk about. I only heard about the movie through its poster and strong reviews, and that's about it. I didn't view the trailer or anything, although its concept and Domingo's name were enough to get my attention. With it still playing in a limited amount of theaters, I wasn't expecting to see what the hype was about until the next few weeks. But thanks to my luck, I saw "Sing Sing" earlier than expected via the mystery movie event. Like I said, you can't go wrong with seeing an upcoming film earlier, even if it's something you didn't expect to get. So far, most of the mystery movies I saw during the summer have impressed me a lot, except "Summer Camp", whose crime was providing tediousness in its story and comedy. So, where does this one land compared to the others? Well, I can tell you this: it's nowhere near the likes of "Summer Camp". In fact, it's miles better than that movie. One thing to know about "Sing Sing" is that it's based on the actual RTA program, founded by Katherine Vockins in 1996, whose purpose is to guide inmates through the path of healing and redemption through theatre art. Sing Sing is one of the New York State security prisons hosting this program. However, the narrative in "Sing Sing" was more of a dramatization of the program's process instead of its origins via a documentary. Honestly, this idea seemed more interesting than documenting the program's early days, and regarding its execution and emotional themes, it proved me right. I'd never heard of the RTA before watching "Sing Sing", generally because I'm not into prisons that much. Then again, I haven't been to an actual prison, so what do I know? Watching the film not only made me want to learn more about it but also made me appreciate its therapeutic measures in helping inmates be better people. Even better, the film served as a genuine and beautifully humane love letter to theatre and a heartfelt depiction of humanity and redemption. The film used its isolated prison setting to showcase the characters' experience in bringing their production to life while reflecting on their past mistakes that led to their imprisonment. John, one of the characters, had lost hope and faith in humanity due to his wrongful arrest, but he found his purpose again through the support of his fellow inmates. Regarding its background and characters, "Sing Sing" would've been another prison-related melodrama with stereotypical characters if placed in the wrong hands. Fortunately, it's placed in the hands of filmmaker Greg Kwedar, whose direction oozes with authenticity and tranquility. Yes, it does include incarcerated gangsters and thugs, but Kwedar portrays them as actual human beings who understand their flaws through his direction and screenplay, which Clint Bentley co-wrote with Kwedar. The inmates want to change themselves for the better, hence the RTA. Kwedar proved how essential the program and the incarcerated inmates involved are, thanks to his approach to traditional filmmaking surrounded by a wholesome aura. Aside from some concerns about its pacing, "Sing Sing" provided a sense of compassion and sincerity in its low-level drama and charm within its refreshingly compelling narrative. Additionally, "Sing Sing" is known for having two professional actors working alongside many real-life members of the RTA. Yes, you read that right. The supporting cast working with Colman Domingo and Paul Raci are actual formerly incarcerated prisoners playing themselves. Now, that's another way for them to earn their redemption. Unsurprisingly, these men all did great with what they were given. They don't serve as pointless extras like many other films. They're actual characters who breathe life into their humanity. But what about the main lead, Colman Domingo? Well, he's undoubtedly fantastic. Domingo's gratifying performance highlighted John's good-natured but internally heartbroken personality in an engaging and emotionally serene way. I won't be surprised if he gets nominated for his work in "Sing Sing" because he is really talented in this one. Clarence "Divine Eye" Maclin was also excellent as the film version of himself, showcasing his range as more genuine than stereotypical. I would also credit Paul Raci for his performance as Brent Buell, the director behind Breakin' The Mummy's Curse. Overall, "Sing Sing" sings its praises loud and clear with a genuinely authentic and charmingly captivating reflection of humanity through the arts. Well, it actually doesn't involve any singing, but you get the point. The pacing can be a bit slow during a few scenes, but it didn't distract me from the craft and passion Greg Kwedar and his crew put into the film. This is an expertly directed and genuinely remarkable tribute to the RTA's process of healing and redemption and the people involved. More importantly, it showcases that the power of art, whether theatre or cinema, can do more than entertain. It can also bring out the humanity and goodwill within us, especially the actors and crew responsible for bringing it to life. The cast was terrific in their roles, especially Domingo, Kwedar's direction was superb in its authenticity and tone, and the screenplay effectively emphasizes its themes and layered characters. In today's world, where people often disregard their surroundings and lose hope in difficult times, "Sing Sing" is a powerful reminder to never give up on a better future. If it's playing at a theater near you, it's definitely worth checking out. A"Twisters" stars Daisy Edgar-Jones, Glen Powell, Anthony Ramos, Brandon Perea, Daryl McCormack, Sasha Lane, Kiernan Shipka, Nik Dodani, and Maura Tierney. Released on July 19, 2024, the film has a group of storm chasers encountering a series of tornados ravaging Oklahoma. The film is directed by Lee Isaac Chung, who also directed "Munyurangabo", "Abigail Harm", and "Minari". It is a standalone sequel to the 1996 film "Twister". In most cases, our real enemy interfering with our lives is humanity itself. But in some cases, nature poses our greatest threat, primarily through destructive weather. While it's not without merits of beauty from watching the weather from a distance, it's also infamous for its natural disasters, wrecking everything in its paths depending on the type we're facing. But nothing comes close to being as disastrous (and deadly) as a tornado, which sucks up everyone and everything that gets in its way. The 1996 disaster classic "Twister" proved to be one of the finest examples of tornados in cinema, emphasizing the authentic tension and frights of surviving the high-speed whirlwind of death. It did earn some award nominations for its technical aspects for a reason. This weekend, that classic disaster blockbuster becomes the latest film to get the legacy sequel treatment to remind audiences of the dangers of nature's fatal side. However, it appears it won't be connected to the original despite occurring in the same universe. Besides that, is it another legacy sequel worth watching, or are we better off moving to a tornado-free state? Let's find out. The story centers on Kate Cooper (Edgar-Jones), a meteorologist haunted by a traumatic encounter with a tornado, causing her to retire as a storm chaser. Kate is then lured back to her childhood home in Oklahoma by her colleague, Javi (Ramos), to test a revolutionary storm scanning system. Her trip down memory lane leads her to cross paths with Tyler Owens (Powell), a famous social-media storm chaser thriving to recklessly post his encounters with the storms online. As storm season intensifies, Kate, Javi, and Tyler find themselves fighting for their lives as they encounter a series of twisters, each more dangerous than the last. "Twister" is another 90s film I hadn't watched much of until its legacy sequel was around the corner. The reason was that I was too young to watch it then, and unlike most people, I followed the ratings policy like it was the law. It wasn't until recently that I found the time to watch this disaster classic all the way through in preparation for "Twisters". It was honestly a fun ride. It's pure 90s disaster corniness packed with a likable cast and great tension. Plus, it had a flying cow. How can you not say "no" to a film with flying beef? The visuals did look dated when watching it on my MacOS computer, but back then, they were the reason the film earned an Oscar nomination for Best Visual Effects. It was enough to boost my curiosity toward "Twisters", another legacy sequel whose goal is to reintroduce the concept to fans old and new while retaining the elements that made its predecessors cinematic classics. Some have worked like "Top Gun: Maverick" and "Creed", while others made us think that some movies should've stayed as one-off classics. "Twisters" is another fortunate example of a legacy sequel done right. Like its predecessor, "Twisters" is summer blockbuster entertainment that relies on its charisma and tension to generate high winds of fun and disaster-related frights. Both movies showcase the fundamentals and thrills of storm chasing but don't leave out the dangers and everlasting impact of this life-threatening hobby. However, "Twisters" outdid its predecessor for several reasons, including the story. "Twister" was a fun yet self-contained blockbuster emphasizing visual spectacle amid its run-of-the-mill plot involving characters deploying a research device inside a tornado. In comparison, "Twisters" attempted to do both while maintaining its goal of delivering popcorn entertainment with surprisingly impressive results. "Twisters" is a disaster movie, but at its core, it's also a character drama that explores themes of grief and the importance of helping others. One aspect of these themes is represented by the character Kate, who is haunted by her past actions and has retired as a storm chaser. The film also delves into the difference between helping victims for profit versus assisting them out of genuine concern and with the assistance of scientific weather knowledge. While it followed some similar elements we've seen in other films before, including "Twister", the story was sincerely engaging enough to ride alongside the winds of spectacle, thanks to Mark L. Smith's suitably written screenplay. Coming off the heels of the critically acclaimed drama, "Minari", Lee Isaac Chung faced the daunting task of delivering a worthy summer blockbuster. His work on "Minari" was one of the reasons for my anticipation of "Twisters", notably for his direction of the story, presentation, and characters. However, I was also concerned about him being another promising director who would fall victim to Hollywood's limitations of an audience-driven summer blockbuster. Fortunately, that wasn't the case. In addition to his execution of its themes, Chung also effectively delivered immersive tension in its authentic weather-related incidents without resorting to over-the-top scenarios. It captured that classic summer blockbuster feel we'd got back in the day mixed with some modern elements to warrant its refreshing take, especially the young characters and viral videos. Of course, the film isn't without its character moments in between the tornado sequences that maintain its predecessor's likability and charisma. Aside from its familiarity, the only other flaw I had was its runtime, which ran a bit longer than it should have. "Twisters" was a bit over two hours long, which is ten minutes longer than "Twister". While it may have overstayed its welcome, it was quickly compensated by its pacing and diverting cast. "Twisters" sees Daisy Edgar-Jones stepping into big-budget territory for the first time following her work in smaller films and television shows, like "Where the Crawdads Sing" and "Normal People". I first saw the young actress in the Hulu film "Fresh" in 2022, which I enjoyed. I didn't even bother with "Where the Crawdads Sing", making "Twisters" my second exposure to Edgar-Jones. All I can say is that I wouldn't mind seeing more of her sooner or later. Daisy Edgar-Jones delivered a performance worthy of capturing Kate's trauma and strong-willed persona, making Kate a likable protagonist amid its disaster thriller formula. Glen Powell has recently provided some surprisingly solid works, mainly due to his charming appeal. Unsurprisingly, his entertaining performance as the reckless yet good-hearted Tyler is no exception. Anthony Ramos also did pretty well regarding his performance as Javi, and Brandon Perea, fresh off the heels of his breakthrough role in "Nope", provided some solid moments as Boone, a videographer from Tyler's crew. As for the technical aspects, it's easy to admit that "Twisters" retains the immersive visual spectacle that popularized the 1996 disaster thriller. The visual effects effectively highlighted the constant dangers and intensity of its tornados, mainly when they're destroying everything in their path, without sacrificing the horrific appeal for just the spectacle. Its focus on the destruction adds to the horror of these high-wind funnels of doom due to the people being in actual peril, adding to the thrilling stakes of encountering dangerous weather up close. The cinematography also looked terrific for some of its wide-angle and anamorphic format shots, especially for the sceneries in Oklahoma and tornado sequences. Dan Mindel, its cinematographer, is no stranger to filming blockbuster action films, and based on my experience with this film and his other works, it makes sense why he was chosen. Overall, "Twisters" is an exhilarating storm of blockbuster spectacle with a 100% chance of traditional disaster thrills and compelling characters. Some of its familiar elements are hit-and-miss, and the runtime lasts longer than the usual duration of a tornado. Nonetheless, the film is another superb example of a modern summer blockbuster done right, with enough effort in its straightforward story and character depth to match its visuals and horrific destructions. It is also another case of a legacy sequel improving over its predecessor regarding its approach to mixing nostalgia with substance. With its charismatic cast, Chung's direction, solid screenplay, technical aspects, and a mixture of tension and humor, the film blew away almost all of my expectations of a cinematic blockbuster experience. If you liked the 1996 film, you'll definitely enjoy this latest addition to the legacy sequel lineup. B+“Fly Me to the Moon” stars Scarlett Johansson, Channing Tatum, Jim Rash, Ray Romano, and Woody Harrelson. Released on July 12, 2024, the film has a NASA director forming a relationship with a marketing specialist during the 1960s Space Race. The film was directed by Greg Berlanti, who also directed “The Broken Hearts Club”, “Life as We Know It”, and “Love, Simon”. Do you remember those scenes where characters visit the cinema, and you see some posters for fake movies in the background? From the looks of this film, it looks like we might be one step closer to living in that fictional world. Based on the poster, it definitely resembles a fake film you’d see in specific television shows or movies, but it has plenty of big names attached to it, so I’m not going to complain about it. This is also the latest attempt from Apple Studios to make it big in the theatrical department outside its streaming service, Apple TV+. However, its previous ones hadn’t exactly soared as high as a rocket ship, considering that their budgets were so dang massive. Not to mention, most of them weren’t as well-received as others. This movie's $100 million budget should soften the blow for the struggling brand, but what really matters is its quality. Does this romantic comedy prove to be out of this world? Let’s find out. The story occurs in the late 1960s when the United States competed in the Space Race against the Soviet Union. Cole Davis (Tatum) is the director of NASA struggling to put the Apollo 11 launch into effect, putting them in the shadows of their rival. The government, led by Moe Berkus (Harrelson), brings in Kelly Jones (Johansson), a manipulative marketing specialist, to assist Cole in fixing NASA’s public image. When the mission is deemed by the White House too important to fail, Kelly and Moe commence “Project Artemis”, which consists of filming a fake moon landing. As the relationship between Cole and Kelly develops, the latter begins to question her intention, which may or may not further hurt NASA’s reputation. I was on and off about watching “Fly Me to the Moon” despite having a cast of familiar faces. It had a concept that would’ve resembled something out of a comedy, but it also provided some romance elements that we typically see multiple times before. That is until I realized the movie’s director, Greg Berlanti, was involved. For those unaware, Berlanti was responsible for directing one of my favorite films of 2018, “Love, Simon,” which successfully combined teen romance with its John Hughes-esque heart and inclusion. It was enough to see if the filmmaker could go two for two in the romance genre. Sadly, I was easily fooled by the potential it marketed. However, it wasn’t without its merits that kept this rocket ship from exploding too early. Outside his other works that weren’t as well-received as “Love, Simon”, Greg Berlanti is one of the filmmakers who provide audiences with heart and charm into the traditional romance tropes. They may not work 100% of the time, but they never fail to put a smile on the faces of fans who want a traditional love story. Berlanti’s approach in “Fly Me to the Moon” offered exactly what its target audience would expect from a period romance drama. It’s got the charisma, the tenderness, and even the teen-rated intimacy between its protagonists. Unfortunately, his direction in the film doesn’t quite reach those similar heights as his take on “Love, Simon”. It may seem like an unfair comparison regarding their distinct concepts, but when it comes to the genre, it’s the tonal balance that makes a difference. At times, “Fly Me to the Moon” has several sequences that would’ve belonged in a typical romance movie, mainly the relationship between Cole and Kelly. At other times, it offers scenes that we would’ve seen in regular comedies like Cole surviving an explosion at the beginning of the movie and its scene-stealing cat. They’re not without their share of amusement and sweetness, especially the cat, but the unevenness in Berlanti’s vibrant direction struggled to stick its perfect landing. Rose Gilroy’s screenplay provided plenty of traditional romance tropes that may not work as well as others. However, it deserves some credit for its reflection of the relatable commentary. “Fly Me to the Moon” is a suitable acknowledgment of truthfulness that brings hope and accomplishment to oneself and the entire nation. In a decade where media can be manipulated to sell a product, the characters are placed in a scenario where the country does what it takes to accomplish the impossible, even if it means faking the unimaginable. It’s an inspiring depiction that struggled to reach for the stars regarding its emotional and storytelling grasp, but also thought-provoking in how we view media marketing today. It’s also plagued by its surprisingly long runtime, which is over two hours long. Undoubtedly, the charm and its cast did whatever possible to maintain my interest, but they couldn’t hide the truth that this is another movie whose simple concept stretched itself too thin regarding its pacing. The flawed script could’ve been easily forgivable if the movie was twenty to thirty minutes shorter, but that’s just me. As mentioned, “Fly Me to the Moon” kept the rocket ship’s mileage going, thanks to its delightful cast. Scarlett Johansson, who also served as one of the film's producers, continued her booming success with another captivating performance. Her portrayal of Kelly's persuasive yet determined persona provided a solid amount of charismatic appeal, injecting likability into her easy-to-hate traits. Considering her time in the Marvel Cinematic Universe ended on a rocky note, this is a well-deserved win for the actress. Channing Tatum also did very well with his performance as Cole and his charming albeit predictable chemistry with Johansson. Jim Rash and Ray Romano delivered some decent moments as Lance Vespertine and Henry Smalls, respectively, but the real showstopper regarding the supporting characters was Woody Harrelson. Harrelson’s attractive performance as Moe was one of the reasons the movie got more mileage, mainly because of how he portrayed the character. Moe is someone who’s willing to put his need to get America on top of the space game ahead of people’s beliefs, and Harrelson plays that to his strengths. The result is another entertaining turn from the actor. Overall, “Fly Me to the Moon” plays among the stars that don’t shine as bright as others despite being carried by its charismatic leads. It’s a straightforward and harmless date movie that’ll undoubtedly impress its target audience with its charm and lightheartedness, which is expected. However, as a reflection of truthfulness and media marketing, the movie is a bloated and occasionally uneven trip that struggled to stick the landing in its themes and narrative. Johansson and Tatum offered plenty of chemistry to carry its weight, and Berlanti’s take on its messages and charm was a joyful treat. Unfortunately, its runtime, familiar genre tropes, and hit-and-miss tone make this marketing ploy a failed launch. It’s worth watching if you’re into the genre, but I recommend waiting for it to appear on Apple TV+. C+“Longlegs” stars Maika Monroe, Nicolas Cage, Blair Underwood, Alicia Witt, Michelle Choi-Lee, and Dakota Daulby. Released on July 12, 2024, the film has an FBI agent searching for a serial killer. The film is written and directed by Osgood Perkins, who also directed “The Blackcoat’s Daughter”, “I Am the Pretty Thing That Lives in the House”, and “Gretel & Hansel”. In times like these, if you want to give audiences massive heebie-jeebies, you ensure you provide them with the most messed-up experience of their lives. Whether horror or otherwise, most movies have accomplished this task over the years for better or worse. Some have messed audiences up so much that they’re left forgotten, while others were left stuck in their heads in the best way, resulting in them being uniquely unsettling masterpieces. This latest horror thriller from writer/director Osgood Perkins looks to be another example of the latter, which has been getting rave reviews since its screening at Beyond Fest back in May. I guess putting an unhinged Nicolas Cage in the movie can make a difference. Now that it has been released to the public, does it prove to be just as disturbing as the reviews suggested, or is this case another bust in the horror genre? Let’s find out. The story follows Lee Harker (Monroe), a recently-employed agent for the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Lee is recently assigned to an infamous case that was left unsolved, in which a Satanic serial killer known as Longlegs (Cage) goes around killing people through horrific methods. During the investigation, Lee discovers crucial occult evidence involving various victims in different eras, revealing a personal connection to the murderous psychopath. Lee goes through a nightmarish hell to bring Longlegs to justice before he commits another murder, leading her to discover the terrifying truth behind Longlegs’ unusual murder spree. This movie has been heavily anticipated for quite some time since its debut at Beyond Fest. Multiple critics hailed it as the most terrifying experience of the year, with some saying it’s a modern-day “Silence of the Lambs”. Hearing those praises, along with its creepy-as-hell marketing, was enough to get me curious about this latest nightmarish thriller. On the other hand, this could wind up being another scenario in which an anticipated horror movie wound up being overhyped and disappointing. The last time that happened to me was “In a Violent Nature”, which impressed me with its ambition and nothing else. I’m happy most people loved that film, but I’m also upset I didn’t feel the same way. So, I had been ensuring my expectations weren’t too high amid my curiosity. It was a good thing I did because I left the theater feeling relieved that it turned out great. While “Longlegs” may not have met all of my expectations of an impeccable horrific experience, it’s still a cinematic accomplishment in uneasiness and nightmarish, helmed by Osgood Perkins. Before this film, the only movie from Perkins I watched was “Gretel & Hansel” in 2020. I remembered enjoying it for Perkins’s ability to combine effective atmospheric dread with unsettling horror, even though the story and pacing were so-so. Watching “Longlegs” certainly brought me back to that memory of watching “Gretel & Hansel”, especially with its cinematography, nightmarish atmosphere, and slow-burning pace. However, this movie did what “Gretel & Hansel” should’ve done four years ago: being an engaging and messed-up trip through the depths of hell. Not literally, but you know what I mean. Osgood Perkins has the ingredients to make his new nightmare stick inside audiences’ minds, such as the spine-chilling atmosphere and haunting imagery. He effectively blends them all to create a terrifying beast that Satan would adore. “Longlegs” is pretty much a mixture of slow-burn crime thriller and occult horror, with Lee investigating the murders committed by Longlegs and his Satanic beliefs. So, if you’re looking for another horror movie filled with cheap jump scares and far-fetched supernatural beings killing people, “Longlegs” isn’t exactly the right choice. The film is another example of using dread and discomfort in its imagery and characters to provoke unsettlement and disturbing tension instead of cheap jump scares, excessive gore, and CGI demons. While some jump scares, supernatural elements, and violent content were present, they're more genuine than third-rate or over-the-top. Along with Andrés Arochi’s stylishly grim cinematography, Zilgi’s unnerving score, and skillful editing, the film is a mesmerizing piece of darkly surreal horror that’s contained but also rightfully messed up. Perkins’ screenplay was also really admirable in showcasing the frightful nature of Satanic worship and occults and providing an engaging crime mystery through its interesting protagonist and psychological terror. Of course, the imagery and frights didn’t do all the heavy lifting in “Longlegs”. It was also powered by its remarkable main leads, whose performances were just as haunting as its concept. Maika Monroe has been establishing herself as a scream queen after her breakthrough role in “It Follows” in 2014. Her streak continues a decade later with her role as Lee Harker, an FBI agent with a mysterious past. Monroe has appeared in other projects beyond horror, but her "scream queen" persona is where her career truly excelled. Her portrayal of Lee further demonstrates this, as Monroe's performance adeptly captures the composed yet internally terrified FBI agent. Nicolas Cage was also as fantastic as ever regarding his unhinged performance as Longlegs. If you enjoyed his other movies where he goes completely off the rails in his performance, you’d be delighted with this one as much as I did. Fortunately, his demented performance is more authentically unsettling than unintentionally goofy, making his role one of the best he’s ever done in his comeback career. Blair Underwood and Alicia Witt also delivered strong performances as Agent Carter and Ruth Harker, Lee’s religious mother, respectively. Overall, “Longlegs” is a compelling testament to slow-burn horror that’s as nightmarishly deranged as a devil-worshipping serial killer. While its pacing and direction might not impress everyone, given its crime procedural aspect, it’s never to the point of being lifeless, dull, or a major disappointment in my eyes. It’s a captivating yet deeply haunting display of Satanic terror that never relies on third-rate shortcuts to get easy scares. Instead, it focuses on bringing dread and unsettlement into its violence, characters, and imagery without overdoing its explicitness. The main leads delivered some stellar performances, mainly Nicholas Cage, and Osgood Perkins provided impressive results in his approach to slow-burn horror territory. Combine those elements with its superb cinematography, unsettling storytelling, and Zilgi’s musical score, and you get one of the more rewarding pieces of horror cinema this year. If you prefer unsettling horror over the ones from Blumhouse, you’ll probably also like this one. A- |
Home of the most friendly movie reviews on the planet.
Categories
All
Follow Me |