film reviews

Film Review: THE EQUALIZER 2 (USA 2018) ***

festreviews 2018 movies, movie, Movie Review , , , , , ,

 Submit your Screenplay to the Festival TODAY

The Equalizer 2 Poster
Robert McCall serves an unflinching justice for the exploited and oppressed, but how far will he go when that is someone he loves?

Director:

Antoine Fuqua

Writers:

Richard Wenk, Michael Sloan (television series) |1 more credit »

Stars:

Denzel Washington, Pedro Pascal, Bill Pullman

 

Watch the TV series, the first film adaptation and then the sequel!  Denzel Washington returns as what has been touted as his first sequel, reprising the role as vigilant fighter for the people.

The lean and lazy plot involves EQUALIZER 2, Robert McCall (Washington) learning that one of his longtime friends, Susan Plummer (Melissa Leo, the best thing about the movie – watch her fight), has been murdered.  McCall decides to return to his old ways and seek out, find and punish the perpetrators.  In the mean time, he helps several Bostonians including a young black man who has the gift of painting, Miles (Ashton Sanders, from MOONLIGHT) and Fatimah (Sakina Jaffrey).  In the midst of all this, he pines over the loss of his wife.  He is still friends with his ex-partner, Dave York (Pedro Pascal), his pal and former partner in the CIA who turns out to be a and guy, quite early in the film.  Dave has a family and children, which the story totally neglects towards the end of the film.

Washington puts in his 2-cents worth as McCall even going over emotional in trying to lead Miles to turn over a brew leaf.  Veteran actor Bill Pullman is largely underused as Susan’s husband, targeted to be killed being a ‘loose end’.

The film has a few interesting points like the first appearance of Washington at the start of the film on a train in Turkey.   When the camera first offers the audience a glimpse of him, he is wearing an orange beard with a white cap and glasses looking like devout Muslim.  The scene is obviously milked for laughs. It is very funny, though I found self the only one in the theatre breaking into laughter.  Director Fuqua also inserts a few suspenseful scenes that deserves mention, like the one in which Miles is hiding in a panic room where there is a two-way glass separating the killer and Miles.

Impressive too, is the storm cinematography.  The film’s climax coinciding with a hurricane arriving in Boston by the sea where the fighters engage in the fight out in the open amidst strong winds and gushing sea water makes a welcome change.  This climax does remind one of the blowing tumbleweeds in the ending shoot out in THE MAGNIFICENT SEVEN, Fuqua’s last action movie.  Cinematography is by Oliver Wood ( who normally does work of this kind in action movies like the BOURNE series and DIE HARD, who first gained attention with his work using natural light to light up the 1969 cult movie THE HONEYMOON KILLERS).  One could argue that a hurricane in the climax might be distracting to the action, but one must give director Fuqua credit for trying something different.

There was a clash of times for the promo screening for EQUALIZER 2 and MAMMA MIA2.  I had picked EQUALIZER 2 as I hated MAMMA MIA one, especially having to watch Meryl Street jumping up and down the bed like an annoying teenager, not to mention hearing Pierce Brosnan sing.  The latter film has so far gotten positive reviews compared to EQUALIZER 2, likely for the reason of expectations.  One expect better and different from EQUALIZER 2 director of turning point films like TRAINING DAY.  EQUALIZER 2 is not that bad.  It is what one would expect from the action director – a generally slower moving actioner, with over quick fight edit sequences and lots of blood and gore.

Trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HyNJ3UrGk_I

 

 

 Submit your Screenplay to the Festival TODAY

Film Review: BLINDSPOTTING (USA 2018) ***

festreviews 2018 movies, movie, Movie Review, Uncategorized , , , , ,

 Submit your Screenplay to the Festival TODAY

Blindspotting Poster
Trailer

Director:

Carlos López Estrada

Writers:

Rafael Casal, Daveed Diggs

Stars:

Daveed Diggs, Rafael Casal, Janina Gavankar

 

Written and starring written by Rafael Casal and Daveed Diggs two childhood friends who grew up in Oakland, California, BLINDSPOTTING is less a structured film than a series of incidents tied together to tell a story, as manipulative as it becomes.  They felt that cinematic portrayals of the San Francisco Bay Area have constantly “missed something”.   Their flawed film wanted to draw attention to the culture, community, and sense of “heightened reality” that shape life in Oakland, high goals.   The film therefore addresses issues of gentrification, police violence, and racism.  But the film provides no solutions and only poses more questions.

The term BLINDSPOTTING is at one point explained in the film by a psychologist that it is the spot that an individual wants to see in a certain situation, which might not be the case in reality.  The brain sees one image and blocks out the other.  It is the fighting they Collin sees in many an incident.

The film opens with the probation conditions laid upon convicted felon, Collin (Daveed Diggs) after serving his term in prison.  It is a year long probation where Collin has to meet various conditions including keeping an 11 pm curfew and not get into any altercation with the law.

The film follows two childhood friends, Collin and his trouble maker white best friend, Miles (Rafael Casal), through the last three days of Collin’s year-long probation.  Collin lives in a probation house and struggles with trying to get his life in order and put his criminal past behind him, while the short-tempered and rowdy Miles searches for trouble and embraces the “street” lifestyle.  One night while waiting anxiously for a red light to change in order to get home for his 11pm curfew, Collin witnesses a white police officer (Ethan Embry) gun down a black civilian, an incident that haunts Collin over the next few days.  Immediately observable is the fact that Collin initially appears scared rather than angry at the injustice.  Miles purchases a gun which ends up in the hands of his young son Sean, an incident which horrifies Sean’s mother Ashley (Cephas Jones). Collin begins to realize that Miles’ recklessness will likely land him into trouble, and the two are set on an explosive collision course. 

When Collin was in prison, it is pointed out that Val never visits him while Miles does.  Val claims the reason Miles visits him is that he feels guilty and that he should have been the one in jail.  As the film is manipulative, it never addresses the reason Val has never visited.  But to one in prison, a visit by a friend means lots.

Collin on the other hand, is trying to keep his relationship with Val (Janina Gavankar).

These are two friends that should stay away from each other.  Things reach a boil when Miles purchases a gun, that he uses freely without restraint.  Yet the two get a job together Collin meets the bad cop, who happens to be one of the people the two have to move.

Occasionally engaging and funny, BLINDSPOTTING is original for the fact that audiences might not be familiar with the ‘Bay’ Oakland area.  Though the film shows promise, the uneven BLINDSPOTTING lacks structure and a strong narrative.

Trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-9-HBqVbtTo

 

Submit your Screenplay to the Festival TODAY

Film Review: DON’T WORRY, HE WON’T GET FAR ON FOOT (USA 2018) ***1/2

festreviews 2018 movies, movie, Movie Review, Uncategorized , , , , , , ,

Submit your Screenplay to the Festival TODAY

Don't Worry, He Won't Get Far on Foot Poster
Trailer

On the rocky path to sobriety after a life-changing accident, John Callahan discovers the healing power of art, willing his injured hands into drawing hilarious, often controversial cartoons, which bring him a new lease on life.

Director:

Gus Van Sant

Writers:

John Callahan (based on the book by), John Callahan (story by) | 4 more credits »

Stars:

Joaquin Phoenix, Jonah Hill, Rooney Mara

DON’T WORRY HE WON’T GET FAR ON FOOT is a comedy-drama biography film based on the memoir of the same name by John Callahan.  Gus Van Sant (DRUGSTORE COWBOY, MY OWN PRIVATE IDAHO, GOOD WILL HUNTING, GERRY, ELEPHANT) wrote the screen adaptation and directed the film.  

When the film opens, John Callahan (Joaquin Phoenix) is addressing an audience after winning some award for his cartoons.  Callahan is in a wheelchair as a result of a car accident involving drinking.  But Callahan is still drinking though he is attending an AA group led by Donnie Hill (a totally unrecognizable Jonah Hill).

The film unfolds in non-chronological order, centring on Callahan before and after the accident, including his rise to fame with his cartoons.

DON’T WORRY will inevitably be compared to the French film, Julian Schnabel’s The Diving Bell and the Butterfly (French: Le Scaphandre et le Papillon), a 2007 biographical drama based on Jean-Dominique Bauby’s memoir of the same name, on a man’s disability and rehabilitation.  The film depicts Bauby’s life after suffering a massive stroke that left him with a condition known as locked-in syndrome. Bauby is played by Mathieu Amalric.  Bauby is totally conscious but unable to move all parts of his body but his left eye that he used to write the memoir.   The Diving Bell and the Butterfly won awards at the Cannes Film Festival, the Golden Globes, the BAFTAs, and the César Awards, and received four Academy Award nominations and is considered by critics as one of the best films of the decade.

DON’T WORRY never reaches the high standard hit by Le Scaphandre et le Papillon but goes towards a different direction, stressing more on the emotional than physical comeback.  Whether Callahan can have sex is one of the main conditions examined.  The main difference between the two films lie in the difference in the two main characters.  In the French film, Bauby was strong and fixed on recovery while in this film, Callahan is self destructive and wallows in self pity.  This is not helped by the fact that Callahan is still an alcoholic.

The film also considers the emotions that Callahan goes through right after the accident in the hospital.  Ironically the drunk driver, Dexter (Jack Black) that caused the accident walked away with only a few scratches.  Callahan met Dexter by chance at a bar and spent the night drinking heavily and driving.  The film fails to mention what happened to Dexter after the accident.  But Callahan asks key questions like: “Why is this happening to me?” – a question that is invariably asked by probably every person undergoing such a tragic accident.  Callahan also confesses to a worker, Annu (Rooney mara) that he promised God that he would do anything and or would make a pact with the devil to become normal again.   These key emotions differentiate DON’T WORRY from the French film.

Callahan’s birth as an artist only begins at the film’s one hour mark.  A few of the cartoons are revealed to the audience and to Callahan’s credit, they are quite funny –  a kind of THE FAR SIDE by a guy in a wheelchair.

Van Sant’s DON’T WORRY encompasses the best of his ‘lonely’ films like ELEPHANT and GERRY and ‘hidden talent’ films like GOOD WILL HUNTING, offering audiences gut wrenching insight in his soulful biography of a troubled human being.

Trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2BwxeOzSx8A

 

Submit your Screenplay to the Festival TODAY

Film Review: GAUGUIN (France 2017)

festreviews 2018 movies, movie, Movie Review, Uncategorized , , , , , ,

Submit your Screenplay to the Festival TODAY

Gauguin: Voyage to Tahiti Poster
Trailer

Focused on French painter Paul Gauguin’s affair with a younger lady in Tahiti.

Director:

Edouard Deluc

Writers:

Edouard Deluc (screenplay), Etienne Comar (screenplay) | 4 more credits »

Stars:

Vincent Cassel, Tuheï Adams, Malik Zidi

 

For those unfamiliar, GAUGUIN is a famous talented French painter of the 19th century.  But Paul GAUGUIN (Vincent Cassel) was a dissatisfied painter tired of the so-called civilized world and its political, moral and artistic conventions.  So he leaves his wife and children to travel to Tahiti, Polynesia on the other side of the world with little money.

For those not well versed in Geography, Tahiti is right in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, plunked right in the middle of lots and lots of water, far away from nowhere.  It is a beautiful place with white sandy beaches (check your Google map) but the country is large enough to nurse a huge jungle.  The cinematography is never too shy to show the beauty of the island.  There are lots of gorgeous landscapes on display with shots of green, rivers, mountains an beaches.  Indeed, it would be a worthwhile place to visit for a naturalistic vacation.  Tahiti is where Gauguin is headed, consumed with a yearning for original purity, and ready to sacrifice everything for his quest. 

Those who criticize me know nothing of an artist’s nature.  These are the words of Gauguin s he rides his horse into the jungle with barely enough provisions for a few days. Impoverished with diabetes, and solitary, Gauguin pushes deep into the Tahitian jungle, where he meets the Maoris and Tehura, his muse, who will inspire his most iconic works of art.  Tehura becomes Gauguin’s wife.  In real life, Tehura was only 13, which means that Gauguin would be stamped a pedophile in today’s standards.

The film traces the two years of Gauguin’s life in Tahiti, which is inspired by Noa Noa (meaning Fragrance) , the travel diary Gauguin wrote after his first trip to Tahiti in 1893.

Deluc’s biography is even in its pacing with no high points with a few dramatized events – the only one or two involving Gauguin’s painting like the difficulty of finding a canvas and the confrontation with his wife Tehura on hi suspicion of her being unfaithful.  Still this charged scene is conducted with restraint.  Deluc trivializes Gauguin’s sickness.  Gauguin is never shown really sick only perhaps a bit of coughing and grumbling about his energy.  But in real life, he did live till he ripe age of 54.

Vincent Cassel inhabits the role of Gauguin, delivering a steering performance showing the artist at his ugliest, unkempt, often sick and tired.  Cassel used to be a hunk and  heartthrob in his younger days with his stunning good-looks and great body as in films like BROTHERHOOD OF THE WOLF and READ MY LIPS.  His age is showing in recent films like MESRINE and GAUGUIN but he continually to do outstanding work, staring out as one of France’s greatest and most under-rated actors.  His chiseled body is still observable many a film’s scene where he has his top off.

GAUGUIN is a no-nonsense biography, told straight forward from start to finish, but praising the artist for more than his worth as a human being.  Nothing is also mentioned with his relationship with his wife and kids when he returned to France.

Trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3HiCzb2gWo0

Submit your Screenplay to the Festival TODAY

Film Review: SKYSCRAPER (USA 2018)

festreviews 2018 movies, movie, Movie Review, Uncategorized , , , , , ,

Submit your Screenplay to the Festival TODAY

Skyscraper Poster
Trailer

A father goes to great lengths to save his family from a burning skyscraper.

Director:

Rawson Marshall Thurber

Writer:

Rawson Marshall Thurber

Stars:

Dwayne Johnson, Neve Campbell, Pablo Schreiber

 

Silliness is the order of the day!  Universal Studios has given a $125 million budget to writer/director Rawson Marshall Thurber who has been responsible for small films like DODGEBALL, WE’RE THE MILLERS and CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE, the latter also starring “The Rock” Dwayne Johnson.  The Rock has had two recent hits JUMANGI and RAMPAGE.  Is The Rock impervious to failure?  The ultra-silly SKYSCRAPER will put The Rock who plays a one-legged hero, jumper of buildings to the test.

The film begins with FBI agent Will Sawyer (Dwayne Johnson) attempting to save a a man who is willing to kill himself and his son, but ends up with him losing his leg.

Will is now a former FBI agent and amputee.   Will lives in the tallest and “safest” skyscraper in Hong Kong with his family.  The skyscraper itself, known as “The Pearl,” houses several floors that function as their own society, and despite the risks highlighted by Sawyer, who is the building’s head of security, his bosses insist that it is impenetrable.  True to Sawyer’s belief, the building comes under attack by terrorists, forcing Sawyer to take action.  Matters are complicated further when he finds himself framed for the attack, and his family trapped above the resulting fire line.

Among the silliness:

Will hangs from buildings using duct tape.

Will uses his metal leg many times to save the day

Will is able to climb umpteen floors with that leg of his.

Thurber’s written dialogue is just as silly.  At the end when all is over, Will’s wife Sarah tells him “You need a shower.”  “I do” is his reply”.  What a great family,” Inspector Wu retorts.  As the film involves Will also saving his two kids, “Daddy, daddy,” are two words that can be heard repeatedly during the film.

The film is noticeable short of one-liners as Will is more often that not hanging for his life from the skyscraper.

SKYSCRAPER steals shamefully from many other films like TOWERING INFERNO, THE FAST AND THE FURIOUS and most notably, the James Bond film with the mirrors climax, THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN.   The film expectedly contains lots of CGI and pyrotechnics,

The cast includes lots of Asians, obviously to cater to the Chinese market.  Will Trump slap a tariff on SKYSCRAPER?  Singaporean Chin Han plays the skyscraper’s builder, Taiwanese Hannah Quinlivan plays a sexy Chinese fighter (what is it with her hair?) and Hong Kong’s Byron Mann plays Inspector Wu.  The main villain is played by Dane Roland Møller, a terrorist.  Noah Taylor first seen as a child actor in THE YEAR MY VOICE BROKE makes a cameo as a baddie.

Will’s wife, Sarah (Neve Campbell) is not the usual dame in distress, screaming housewife.  Here, she not only speaks Chinese but can fight her way through any number of villains.  The children are the useless screaming ones that need saving.

The script calls for Will to fight both the fire and the terrorist resulting in a divided film which cannot decide which direction to go.  The fire is then as easily put out as the villain dispatched (not revealed how in the review).

SKYSCRAPER is still watchable for the less demanding moviegoer as there is always something happening (silly or not) in very scene.  At the time of writing, of 91% google users liked the film.  As long as one is comfortable at the one legged jumper, able to leap buildings!

Trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t9QePUT-Yt8

 

Submit your Screenplay to the Festival TODAY

Film Review: MARY SHELLEY (Luxembourg/Ireland/UK 2017)

festreviews 2018 movies, movie, Movie Review, Uncategorized , , , , , ,

Submit your Screenplay to the Festival TODAY

Mary Shelley Poster
Trailer

The love affair between poet Percy Shelley and 18 year old Mary Wollstonecraft Godwin, which resulted in Mary Shelley writing Frankenstein.

Director:

Haifaa Al-Mansour

Writers:

Emma Jensen, Haifaa Al-Mansour (additional writing by)

Stars:

Elle Fanning, Maisie Williams, Douglas Booth

 

“There is something at work in my soul, which I do not understand,” so says Mary Shelley at the beginning of the film.  We take it that the filmmakers plan to shed some light on the topic of Mary Shelley’s troubled soul, which inevitably resulted in one of the most famous horror novels of all time – “Frankenstein”.

MARY SHELLY is a biographical drama of the famous author who wrote the book “Frankenstein” by the age of 18.  At the film’s start, the audience sees the younger Mary (Elle Fanning) reading and scribbling.  She has trouble at home, particularly in the relationship with her step-mother and sent to live with relatives in Scotland where she meets her suitor Percy Bysshe Shelley (Douglas Booth).

However, 15 minutes into film after Mary meets Percy,  director Haifaa al-Mansour decides to concentrate her film on Mary Shelley’s first love and her romantic relationship with him (full name Percy Bysshe Shelley).  The story turns out to be less a biography of the author than a period love story.  Worse still, al-Mansour’s decision to have her film punctuated with Percy’s poetry distracts the fact that the film is about Mary and not about him or his writings.

The trouble with all this is that director al-Mansour is unable to sway the audience unto Mary’s side.  There is hint of the need for female independence in these times, which is emphasized at the end when she has trouble getting her novel published.  When told by her father (Stephen Dillan) that if she goes with Percy, she would lose the love of her father forever,” one is immediately not on her side, for Mary seems young, impetuous and impertinent.   When Percy finally flirts with the younger Claire (Bel Powley) , things become clear that Percy is not the man Mary had thought him to be.  It is too late as Mary is pregnant with his child.

Elle Fanning is convincing as the independent young lady who falls into hard times, due to her own fault.  Douglas Booth is terribly annoying as the handsome rogue, Percy – but I suppose the character of Percy is supposed to be annoying. Tom Sturridge goes over the top in his portrayal of the even more detestable Lord Byron.

The scene of Mary comforting Claire in the woods under rain and thunder shows the director at her worst, going for cheap theatrics.

Al-Mansour’s film is beautifully created and shot in terms of period atmosphere both in the interiors to the dimly lit cobblestone street and vast green Scottish landscape exteriors.  MARY SHELLEY is Saudi Arabian director Haifaa al-Mansour’s second feature after she became film society’s darling with her debut feature WADJDA.  WADJA was the first film made by a female director from Saudi Arabia and the first film from Saudi Arabia o be screened at Cannes.

` But MARY SHELLEY ends up a story without a strong direction with inspiration behind Mary for her books only hinted at.  One assumes it is due to her hardships – such as the haunting of her mother’s death, her distressful love affair and loss of her in infant child.  In the end, the audience is  still left in the dark as to the understanding of what was really at work in the soul of Mary Shelly. 

Trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-WGaZaojFc

 

Submit your Screenplay to the Festival TODAY

Full Review: THREE IDENTICAL STRANGERS (USA 2018) ***

festreviews 2018 movies, movie, Movie Review, Uncategorized , , , , , ,

Submit your Screenplay to the Festival TODAY

Three Identical Strangers Poster
Trailer

New York, 1980: three complete strangers accidentally discover that they are identical triplets, separated at birth. The 19-year-olds’ joyous reunion catapults them to international fame, …See full summary »

Director:

Tim Wardle

Stars:

Silvi Alzetta-Reali, Eddy Galland, Ron Guttman

 

The doc, THREE IDENTICAL STRANGERS opens in the year 1980 when 19-year-olds Robert Shafran and Edward Galland found each other at the same community college and realized they were twins separated at birth.  (Two coincidences here.)  To each other’s surprise, they discover a third.  Triplets at birth finding each other is news.  The surprise triplets became fast friends and overnight media sensations.  When they first found each other, they were wrestling on the floor like puppies.  There are clips of the triplets on television shows and in even a movie, DESPERATELY SEEKING SUSAN.   Media highlight their similarities like their taste in women, sports, likes and habits.  The differences are obviously not mentioned as these are not news-worthy items.  It is a well known fact that if something is constantly brought up, people believe it to be the truth.  They open a restaurant called ‘Triplets’.  They make a lot of funny, enjoy each other’s company and are very happy.  Can the happiness last forever?  Every story eventually has a dark side.  This story certainly has.  This side takes over the film with it becomingly very sinister during its last half.

The dark side involves the discovery at the adoption agency that the triplets (as are other twins) were part of an experiment conducted on human behaviour.

I previewed this doc with my partner as I wanted his input on the subject of twins as he has three good friends who happen to be one of twins.  To my surprise, (there seems to be surprises just jumping out with this doc), he informed me that he did not wish to see the second half of the doc as he has already seen it.  Apparently, according to him, (I could not find any documentation), the second part of the do with the experiment of separation of twins at birth were already screened on TV as part of a CBC documentary series.  This explains the reason the film appearing clearly divided into two parts, each very different with director Wardle never tempting to bridge the two segments or the transition in mood of the two sections at all.   The result is a rather disjointed two sections of film, with the audience feeling elated initially and then disgusted at the goings-on.

The film’s best part is the insight given by a few of the interviewees.  One, a lady who worked at the adoption research centre gives her opinion that it was not considered inappropriate in those days to do experiments of this kind.  Psychology was new and in, and it was a cool subject then, not like today.

Wardle appears to wish to please the audience and the manipulation is clear from the film’s start.  The initial meeting of Robert and Edward when Robert when to college is enacted with all the fake surprise looks of the actors.  Wardle has gone so far as the film a vintage Volvo cruising down the street, the same make of vehicle Robert drove years ago.

As they say, a documentary is often as good as its subject.  A far as Wardle’s documentary goes, what other film could have topped this with a more intriguing subject.  THREE IDENTICAL STRANGERS will eventually be praised as a film despite its glaring flaws.   

THREE IDENTICAL STRANGERS is intriguing fodder but one wishes that more conclusion would have been presented regarding the experiments.

Trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c-OF0OaK3o0

Submit your Screenplay to the Festival TODAY

Film Review: WHITNEY (USA/UK 2018) ***

festreviews 2018 movies, movie, Movie Review , , , , , ,

Submit your Screenplay to the Festival TODAY

Whitney Poster
Trailer

An in-depth look at the life and music of Whitney Houston.

Director:

Kevin Macdonald

Stars:

Whitney Houston, Bobbi Kristina Brown, Bobby Brown

 

WHITNEY is a household name.  Her song “I will always love you” was the all time number one selling record of any female artist.  Whitney Houston starred with Kevin Costner in the movie hit THE BODYGUARD.  When she drowned in her bath tub from an overdose in 2012, she again made headline news, but not in the best of occasions.  Everyone knows who Whitney Houston and bits and pieces of her troubled life but director Kevin Macdonald (he made the Oscar winning Doc ONE DAY IN SEPTEMBER) bares it all in the warts-an-all documentary of one of the world’s most famous singers of all time.

Director can do nothing but screen Whitney’s performances onscreen (except for maybe her disastrous Danish concert) and still capture the audience’s interest.  Macdonald realizes the potential of her performances and there are many songs played on the film’s soundtrack.  Her most famous song, “I will always love you,” is heard twice with Whitney performing, once in a rousing rendering in South Africa after Apartheid and the second not so arousing during the Danish concert where fans booed her offstage.  Macdonald begins the film with an uplifting note, with Whitney rendering her other famous song “I wanna dance with somebody” with voice over claiming her to be the number 1 pop star.   The film goes down from that high point.

Not long into minutes of that song, Macdonald edits into the picture images on America’s unrest from riots to bombings to angry demonstrations.  One immediately wonders the reason Macdonald is doing this as Whitney’s life has nothing much to do with a all these, except that she was living during those times.  The same thing can be observed in the recent Elvis documentary THE KING, but in that one Elvis was drafted into the military and he was cited as the American dream.  The film then delves into Whitney’s childhood, going on to her rise in the music industry with some reference to her church singing.

After the first third of the film’s 2 hour running time, Macdonald slowly charts Whitney’s downfall.  This encompasses her caustic marriage to Bobby Brown, her drug addiction, her child molestation, her fallout with her father, her failure for a comeback and finally her death from an overdose.  These are depressing topics and mar the life of a celebrity the world loves.   Fans will take offence over this grim look on their favourite idol though it is claimed that this documentary was made with the full cooperation of the Houston family

Macdonald attempts to defend his position during an interview with Whitney’s ex-husband Bobby when he refuses to talk about Whitney’s drug abuse claiming that this was not the cause of her downfall.  Macdonald retorts that she was taking drugs in the last years of life and not to include it in the doc would not paint a true picture of her.  True, but Macdonald also includes a long panning shots as the camera moves in and out of the hotel room to the bathtub where she drowned.  Again, one wonders the purpose for this gruesome and uncomfortable exercise.

The last documentary made about a similar performer was Asif Kapadia’s Academy Award Winning AMY.  Macdonald’s WHITNEY definitely has his audience feeling sorry for her though more good memories could have been included in his grim documentary.  When one loves and remembers Whitney, one wants to remember the good stuff as well as the bad.

Trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R0rhC90Z4ok

Submit your Screenplay to the Festival TODAY

Film Review: HOTEL TRANSYLVANIA 3: SUMMER VACATION (USA 2018) ***

festreviews 2018 movies, movie, Movie Review, Uncategorized , , , , , ,

Submit your Screenplay to the Festival TODAY

Hotel Transylvania 3: Summer Vacation Poster
While on a vacation with his family, Count Dracula makes a romantic connection.

Director:

Genndy Tartakovsky

Writers:

Michael McCullers, Genndy Tartakovsky|1 more credit »

Stars:

Mel Brooks, Adam Sandler, Selena Gomez

According to Cineplex Magazine, writer/director Genndy Tartakovsky finally agreed to do the second sequel when his in-laws invited him and his family on a cruise ship to celebrate New Year’s Eve.  This was when Tartakovsky realized that being confined to one location with ones family’s is fertile ground for the drama and disaster needed for this third outing.

The first two H.T. films were only so-so, so one wonders the reason Tartakovsky was so reluctant to do a third film.  To his credit, this one is the funniest of the lot, likely because Tartakovsky has gained more experience as an animated comedic director.  There are not that many jokes that involve the monsters in the confined space of a cruise ship, likely because the ship is large enough for the monsters to get lost.

Unlike most animated films (DESPICABLE ME, ZOOTOPIA) in which the plot involves something really substantial like saving the world, the lazy story involves the monsters escaping extinction as they are pursued throughout the ages by the Van Helsing family who believe that all monsters are bad and must be eradicated from the face of the earth.  This is introduced at the film’s start, which is actually the film’s most hilarious bit, where the monsters are in disguise trying to pass on as humans on a train when Van Helsing suddenly appears.  A chase on the top of the running train ensues with the monster all getting away with Van Helsing as the only casualty.

Dracula (Adam Sandler) agrees to go on a cruise ship with his daughter Mavis (Selena Gomez) and his troupe of monsters that includes Frankenstein (Kevin James), the werewolf (Steve Buschemi) and the invisible man (David Spade).  He goes on a date and falls in love with the ship’s captain, Erika (Kathryn Hahn) who not only happens to be a woman but Van Helsing’s daughter and has it in her blood to destroy Dracula and his pals.

With Adam Sandler leading the voice cast, one can expect the jokes to be silly.  And the jokes come as silly as they get, which fortunately are quite hilarious.  One complaint is that they happen a bit too fast, so that a lot will be missed if one is not paying full attention.  The lazy plot allows for a lot of improvised jokes with the monsters reacting largely to each other.  The voice cast is impressive, and includes the likes of Kathryn Hahn, David Spade, Wanda Sykes and even Mel Brooks.  It is hard to know who is voicing which character even with Sandler voicing Dracula, as Sandler does his characterization with an East European accent.

Even a child will know that Dracula will survive once again from the clutches of Van Helsing or his daughter.  Director Tartakovsky manages to sneak in a nice message or two within the proceedings.

The idea of an animated feature containing all the known movie monsters is a good one, thus spurning three in the franchise and with more, more likely to come.

Trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d5exSS74Lh0

 

Submit your Screenplay to the Festival TODAY

Film Review: FIREWORKS (Uchiage hanabi, shita kara miru ka? Yoko kara miru ka?) (Japan 2017)

festreviews 2018 movies, movie, Movie Review, Uncategorized , , , , , , ,

Submit your Screenplay to the Festival TODAY

Fireworks, Should We See It from the Side or The Bottom? Poster
Trailer

Schoolchildren Norimichi, Yûsuke and Jun’ichi want to know if fireworks look round or flat from the side. They make a plan to find the answer at a fireworks display, while Nazuna schemes to… See full summary »

Directors:

Akiyuki Shimbô (as Akiyuki Shinbô), Nobuyuki Takeuchi (co-director)

Writers:

Shunji Iwai, Hitoshi Ône (screenplay)

Stars:

Suzu Hirose, Masaki Suda, Mamoru Miyano

 

FIREWORKS is the hit Japanese animation feature featuring teen boys doing what they do best during their free time – chasing girls and making pranks.  Despite this theme, FIREWORKS turns out to be an extremely boring exercise from the very start.  Be it the unfamiliar Japanese culture but that should not be a sufficient reason. 

It is based on the 1993 Japanese live-action television play of the same name, also released in cinemas in 1995, by Shunji Iwai.

The lengthy title can roughly be translated to ‘Fireworks, Should We See It from the Side or the Bottom?’ as teen wonder as they travel to an island for the purpose of watching fireworks.

To directors Akiyuki Shinbo and Nobuyuki Takeuchi’s credit, FIREWORKS has a solid look that can pass for a Hayao Miyazaki movie.   The typical Miyazaki movie regularly contains a plot that includes the element of teen true love, and part of this theme is present.

The story is set in the town of Moshimo.  The vents take place from the point of view of teen Norimichi Shimada.  Norimichi and his friends, Yusuke, Miura, and Junichi live while harassing their teacher and the former half galvanising over the beauty of their classmate Nazuna Oikawa, who is poised to move to a new town with her family.   Nazuna, on the day she is supposed to leave, picks up a small strange-looking glass marble she finds by the sea.  After school, she encounters Norimichi and Yusuke who happen to be on pool-cleaning duty.  Challenging them to a swimming race, she proposes the winner has to follow whatever she says. Yusuke wins and she asks him to go together to the festival to see the fireworks. 

Both Norimichi and Yusuke have the hots for Nazuna but it is the former that prevails.  He uses the marble to alter time in order to eve Nazuna.  And so the story goes.

The story/film can be described as a teen coming of age drama with magic though it leans more towards the whimsical than the dramatics.

The film is to be commended for its lively coloured animation with  haunting music by Satoru Kōsaki

The supernatural slant is provided in the shape of the glass marble that when thrown turns back time.  Unfortunately, the audience is forced one again to view a few of the boring scenes.  The glass marble is thrown a couple of times.  It is all about the glass marble. Nothing is mentioned of where it came from or how in got its powers.

Why would, this film, many may wonder earn a commercial release?  For one, Bell Lightbox gives foreign films a chance – a good thing and also the fact that though the film received mixed to positive reviews from critics, many have praised the film for its music and animation.  The film has so far grossed $26 million worldwide, becoming the sixth highest-grossing anime film of 2017 and the highest-grossing Shaft (the film company that made FIREWORKS) film.

Trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KG770hOuT2k

Submit your Screenplay to the Festival TODAY