Hacksaw Ridge - A Trip Down Memory Lane

Thought I'd rewatch a movie I hadn't seen in a while to get in a Memorial Day mood. So many good ones to choose from. Settled on this one! Intensely realistic scenes of battle will make this less than optimal for the very young or faint of heart. Otherwise, it has my full recommendation!

I do not feel compelled to write reviews of every movie I see. I don't see that many, and those I do see seldom rise above a certain formulaic mediocrity. Not so with Hacksaw Ridge.

This is the true story of Desmond T. Doss, played convincingly by Andrew Garfield, as an Army Medic, who served during the Battle of Okinawa, charging into the Hell of battle without a weapon, to become the first Conscientious Objector to be awarded the Medal of Honor.

The movie has a much greater scope than I had imagined. After a brief glimpse of the Hell that was to come, we see a flashback to Desmond's childhood, experiences planting the seeds of the man he will become. We meet his Dad, a WWI veteran, haunted by the ghosts of his past and survivor's guilt, masterfully played by Hugo Weaving. He and Rachel Griffiths, who plays his Mom, come across as genuine, three dimensional people, instead of some stereotypical caricature of rural religious folk.

We next see Desmond as a young adult at the outbreak of WWII. The courtship of his future wife, his travails in basic training, his struggle to stay in the Army (and out of Federal Prison) for holding fast to his beliefs.

The movie is interspersed with humor and heart. The story is compelling and well told. The casting is excellent. The direction and cinematography are both remarkable. The violence is quite graphic, so this movie is not for the very young or faint of spirit. Wait for the toned down edited for TV version.

Trigger warning: There are no delicate snowflakes in this movie. Safe spaces are few and far between. There is some cursing, a lot of violence, and (cover the ears of the children) people of faith who read the Bible and pray! One scene is of a church choir that you cannot unsee!

I very seldom give any movie I see a superlative five out of five stars. For that, the movie must truly be a timeless classic, not just an entertaining pastime or good popcorn movie. Given the very strict standards with which I grade movies, I give Hacksaw Ridge, five out of five stars. I won't say that it is the best war movie I've ever seen. It may be the best movie I've ever seen.

Do yourself a favor and go see it.

Avengers Endgame: A Movie Review, Sort Of

Spoiler Alert: Do NOT read this if you enjoy Marvel movies. You will hate me for what I reveal.

I finally got it off my chest. I had been holding back from reviewing Avengers Endgame because it was so gawd awful it put me off Marvel movies for life. But a comment on Twitter opened the flood gate. He said that "the plot of Captain America: Civil War is one of the dumbest things the MCU has done"
I replied, Nah, that honor goes to Avengers End Game. Beer belly Thor goes back in time and brings his hammer back to the future with him -thus altering all of the Thor movies in the franchise, because Thor's hammer went missing...into the future. Therefore the ending of the original Thor and all lthe sequels were wrong because Thor was hammerless.
Next, Thanos travels from the past and is killed, changing the motivation and plots for both the Guardian of the Galaxy movies, when Thanos disappears and never comes back to threaten or pursue them. Last, but not least, Capt. America travels back in time to supposedly replace all the Infinity stones just as they were before they were taken, "to eliminate the possibilty of altering the timeline".
But how does he go about replacing the one ripped by Thanos from the Vision's forehead? The Wankandans, supposedly the greatest computer experts ever known, tried for hours to remove and separate the stone without killing him. Thanos appeared, rips the stone from his forehead (and part of his forehead as well), and immediately leaves with his prize. At what point does Cap sneak back, hand him the stone and say "My bad!"?
As bad or worse than the abysmal time travel paradoxes of say Star Trek Voyager, Endgame is chock-a-block with them.
Remember in the first Guardian of the Galaxy, when any human touched the Infinity stone he disintegrates? Starlord was able to handle it only because he was only half human and he still needed the help of all his friends. Tony Stark picks up a whole handful of them and snaps his fingers. Yeah. Right.
If you think about it, the paradoxes in Endgame cancel out or distort nearly every movie in the Marvel canon. It is impossible to reconcile Avengers Engame with the rest of the MCU. About the only thing I can think was untouched was the first season of Daredevil. And don't get me started on how they ruined the reboot of Spider Man!

Shazam! - A Movie Review, Sort Of

Shazam! as a superhero origin story is simply magical! No, really, I mean his origin is magical...like Harry Potter's. He's not the strange visitor from another planet, no one gave him a lantern powered ring, and he wasn't bitten by a radioactive anything. Billy Batson is an orphan, who wants nothing more in life than to find his real mom. Even if it means calling in an occasional false police report. Young Billy is a bit of a troublemaker.

Family is a theme that runs through the film. The stern father and sterner grandfather of the kid who turns into a super villain, the foster parents and foster kids that young 14 year old Billy finds himself living among. An exploration of what family really means.

Billy Batson made his first appearance in 1939 as the boy who uttered a magic word to turn himself into "Captain Marvel". The magic word Shazam was an acronym for

The wisdom of Solomon

The Strength of Hercules

The stamina of Atlas

The power of Zeus

The invulnerability or courage of Achilles

And the speed of Mercury

We we have an admixture of magic and mythology here, too. And theology. Billy was supposed to acquire the wisdom of Solomon as he fought against the embodiment of the Seven Deadly Sins. The element of theology is downplayed in the movie. The foster kids give thanks before every meal, but it isn't exactly clear who they're thanking. Solomon's wisdom is clearly non-existent, as the wizard picks a delinquent 14 year old boy to be his champion, whereas I might have picked a police detective or a Navy SEAL. The fourteen year old exhibited all the wisdom...of a fourteen year old!

In many ways, Shazam! is the movie you would have had in "Big", if the Tom Hanks character had told the magic fortune teller "I want to be Superman!" There's even a small homage to Big as Shazam, nee Captain Marvel, fights the villain in a toy store.

Zachary Levi does a yeoman's job as the "Big" superhero, expressing childlike wonder at all the new and wonderful things he is able to do, yet reluctant when called upon to fight real evil. Shazam is a good solid popcorn movie, suitable for most children and some adults. It's entertaining, without being preachy about anything (a rarity in today's atmosphere). I don't remember a single call to save the planet over global warming, or saving the whales or the rainforests.

It's a comic book movie. No enduring truths. No stirring calls to action. Just sit your behind in the seat, or rent the Blu-ray, and absorb a little semi-mindless fantasy for an hour or so. I'd give it three out of five stars.

Unplanned - A Movie Review, Sort Of

First, a little background. I went to see the movie "Unplanned" Monday. Seems rather apt, since I wasn't planning on seeing it, until I became aware of the coordinated efforts on the Left to keep this movie from being seen. There was an overall media blackout. I hadn't heard any buzz about it, and aside from an occasional ad on Fox (props to them, by the way), I'd heard nothing about it. Seems that they tried to buy ads on Lifetime, Hallmark and HGTV, who weren't accepting its ads. Twitter was playing Mickey Mouse games with the movie's Twitter account followers, unfollowing them, hiding the account.

And then, irony of ironies, the movie was given an "R" rating! Totally unjustified! I watched a program on broadcast TV a couple of nights ago, where a man was brutally stabbed to death, in a much more graphic display of violence than anything you will see in this movie. So imagine people who think that fifteen year olds should be able to get an abortion without their parents' permission, cannot watch a movie about abortion, without their parents' permission!

Why doesn't the Left want anyone to see this movie? Because it gives an honest portrayal of Planned Parenthood and their place in the abortion industry. Unplanned is the story of Abby Johnson, an idealistic young woman who went to work for PP, and in eight years, became their youngest clinic director in the nation. This story is, as they say in the vernacular, "ripped from the headlines", which provides fodder for countless TV shows and movies, but this movie shows an honest and unflattering peek behind Planned Parenthood's closed doors, which made it  radioactive to the usual media suspects.

But Abby Johnson is no plaster saint. She had one failed marriage and two abortions herself. The pro-life protesters are not air brushed. Some outside the clinics shout "Baby killer", one wears a Grim Reaper outfit. The movie flashes back to Abby's college days where she is recruited as a PP volunteer. The lead actress, Ashley Bratcher, does an excellent job of portraying this woman on her journey to enlightenment. The supporting cast is good, perhaps not as polished as they might be, but considering the size of the budget and the subject matter, the cast is solid. There's even a cameo by "That Pillow Guy", Mike Lindell, who helped finance the project.

The accompanying music was quite good, considering the fact that a number of people refused to license their music for use in the movie.

Unplanned is the 'Little Movie That Could', overcoming opposition and great odds to tell a story that every teenage child in the country should see, before they consider an abortion for themselves, or helping a friend to get one.



In spite of all the obstacles placed in its way, "Unplanned" finished in 5th place at the box office this weekend. It is heart tugging and heart breaking at times, but well worth the price of admission. I give it four out of five stars.

As Alexandra DeSanctis put it, "None of it is easy to watch. But none of it is a lie."

Gosnell - A Movie Review

Permit me, if you will, a brief aside before I begin my Gosnell movie review. As you will soon evidence for yourselves, I do not write movie reviews for living. In fact, I haven't written one in a little over a year. I just haven't been that excited about the Hollywood fare, and even if a movie pops up that I'm mildly interested in seeing, if it isn't playing at my local theater, four miles away, I'll wait for it to come out on Blu-Ray. There's another theater in town, newer and nicer, ten miles away, but there can be a hassle with parking so...I just pass.

But a couple nights ago, there was a movie I wanted to see, so I drove down to see it... 347 miles... one way! In the interest of full disclosure, I am one of the film's "angels". I contributed to the IndieGOGO crowd funding that put up the money to have this movie made. As such, I was invited to the Hollywood premiere of the film. It was worth the trip.

The picture starts with a stake out on a drug bust. Someone had been writing 'scrips for prescription drugs like oxycodone, which were being sold on the street. Turns out some of those illegal 'scrips were written out of the office of an abortion doctor, Dr. Kermit Gosnell. A raid of Dr. Gosnell's clinic turned up a number of disturbing things.

The movie is part cop show, part procedural, part courtroom drama. This movie, based on a true story, has "ripped from the headlines" written all over it. Although, in fact, there weren't that many headlines written about it. The movie touches on that. The story of the investigation, the arrest and the prosecution were all tinged by the "third rails" of race and abortion. The agencies charged with keeping abortion clinics safe, clean and hygienic were instructed not to inspect Gosnell's inner city abortion clinic "unless there was a complaint". And even though there were multiple complaints, officials managed to look the other way. During the grand jury hearing, we discover that nail clinics are inspected for cleanliness once a year, but Gosnell's clinic went for seventeen years without an inspection.

When the cops arrived looking for drugs, the conditions were appalling. There was filth and unsanitary conditions. The smells...were unspeakable. We discover through grand jury and court testimony that when the restrooms were full, pregnant women sometimes were forced to urinate in the halls. Which no one cleaned up. They had that in common with the cats that roamed the clinic.

Kermit Gosnell is a peculiar man, almost charming in an old fashioned southern gentleman way. He keeps endangered turtles in his office, which he apparently cared for more than any human life. His manner and affectation was of someone who did nothing wrong, even famously plying the piano as police searched his house.

As I said, the movie is part cop show, part procedural, part courtroom drama. It's a murder mystery that involved an abortionist. This is not an anti-abortion film per se. The only evidence of an anti-abortion position, was on the first day of the trial. Expecting a huge crowd of reporters, the prosecutors rolled up to the front steps of the courthouse, but there were only a half a dozen people on the steps. Two of them were guards or bailiffs, and way off to the side, there were two people setting up a card table, with some pro-life signs around them. Other than this fleeting glimpse, no one is preaching against abortion. It's not a preachy film at all.

Although the crimes were quite horrific, this is not a graphically violent film. It's rated PG-13. It shares a trait with the ancient Greek tragedies, where all of the violence occurred offstage. There are disturbing things described, including a powerfully moving photo taken by one of the clinic's amateur nurses (Gosnell had children as young as fifteen administering anesthesia), which is shown to the jury and the gallery at the trial, but not to the audience. Yet for all the seriousness of the subject, there are some genuinely funny moments in the film from the wit of screenwriter Andrew Klaven, and the deft direction of Nick Searcy.

The story is powerful and moving. Do not be surprised if certain moments move you to tears. Director Searcy, also playing the defense attorney, guides the story along nicely. Dean Cain plays the detective, whose drug raid lead to a murder investigation, who can't understand why there isn't a police report when a healthy woman enters an abortion clinic and ends up dead. Janine Turner, of Northern Exposure fame, portrays a legal abortionist who testifies as to what a clean clinic, with a properly trained staff should be. Ironically, her testimony scored points for both the defense and the prosecution. Sarah Jane Morris plays the pro-choice prosecutor walking the tightrope of prosecuting the abortionist but not attacking abortion. Earl Billings plays the title roll with a charming creepiness about him.

The acting and the production values are first rate. The story is compelling and the biggest question that may be in the mind of everyone leaving the theater is "Why didn't I hear more about this when it was happening?"

I highly recommend this movie. It's a crime that was overlooked, and a prosecution that nearly didn't happen, in a movie that the networks and big studios didn't want to make. While producers are doing reboots of '80s TV shows, Rocky XVII and Fast and Furious 27, here is an original movie, well done, factually based on a real story, with a large portion of the dialogue taken from the trial and grand jury reports, with an important story that needed to be told.

Last I heard, it was opening in 650 screens. Do yourself a favor and see it.









For another great review, see: WHY ‘GOSNELL’ COULD ROCK HOLLYWOOD, ABORTION DEBATE -BY CHRISTIAN TOTO

Dunkirk: A Movie Review, Sort Of

In Spring, a young man's fancy turns to not getting shot, not getting blown up, not drowning and just possibly, making it home alive. Late Spring, anyway. May of 1940. The coast of France. The beaches of Dunkirk.

Director Christopher Nolan is described by IMDB as "Best known for his cerebral, often nonlinear storytelling". The movie Dunkirk is told from three points of view, and nonlinear is a good term for it. One point of view is from soldiers on the beach, another, that of a Spitfire pilot and the last, the civilian captain of one of the boats in the rescue flotilla.

The nonlinear aspect is off putting to some. In one scene you see from the cockpit of a Spitfire, pursuit of a German Messerschmidt about to attack some ships. Later in the film, from the point of view from the ship, you see a Messerschmidt about to attack, pursued by a Spitfire. Each layer adds to a fuller understanding of what is taking place, though it may not be obvious at first.

I'd known the story of Dunkirk since I was a lad, but I'd never realized its scope: four hundred thousand men, surrounded, with their backs against the sea, sitting ducks for the Luftwaffe. In a case of what may have been dueling bureaucracies, the Germans would not commit their tanks to finishing off the British army, along with their French and Belgian allies, and the British will not commit a sufficient number of Spitfires to fly cover, or destroyers to relocate the army, lest they be needed to protect the homefront.

Speaking of scope, the cinematography is tremendous and sweeping. The aerial dogfights are spectacular. The attention to historical accuracy was very good. For example the depiction of the Spitfire pilot hand pumping his landing gear was not uncommon, even in some American fighters of that era.

There have been several complaints about the movie, one from an Internet twit, who shall remain nameless, who said the movie "feels like an excuse for men to celebrate maleness". There is very little resembling machismo in this film. Just the historical account of 400,000 men trying to stay alive. Perhaps 50,000 to 70,000 of them didn't. They were bombed, strafed, torpedoed, many drowned. Those who survived, some were wounded, most watched their friends and complete strangers dying around them, wondering if any minute that fate might be theirs. Yet some extremely shallow twit person speaks of "celebrating maleness".

Still, this may not be the most stupid complaint. I hear some were chiding the movie for its "lack of diversity". Translation: a movie about an historical event where close to 100% were white males, there was not enough "diversity" in the casting. Funny. I didn't hear anyone complain there wasn't enough "diversity" on Wonder Woman's island of Themyscira, where there wasn't a man or transgendered woman in sight! They could have cast Caitlyn Jenner, in the role she was born to play, an Amazon with more upper body strength than the rest, kicking their butts from here to Sunday!
Nope. No men. No transgendered! 

Last, I heard a complaint that Churchill's role should have been bigger. (He wasn't in the movie at all!) One soldier returning home from Dunkirk did read an excerpt from one of Churchill's speeches about "fighting on the beaches", but that was about it. The movie wasn't about Churchill. It really wasn't about the war. In fact, there's hardly a German to be seen anywhere.

The movie isn't about heroism, writ large, but more of a quiet, resolute heroism. A calm determination to do what needs to be done, whatever the personal cost might be. Duty, not machismo.
The father who lost a son to the war resolutely determines that he will not let that happen to his fellow countrymen if he has anything to say about it. 

I will reluctantly have to add a fourth, but minor quibble myself. Putting on my Mr. Language Person hat, at the very start of the movie, they put up three statements, all beginning with "The enemy have...". I'm sorry, but shouldn't that be "the enemy has"? Or "the Germans have"? Enemy is a collective noun, like "herd". Even though there are many cattle, you say that the herd is here. Or our enemies are here. You would never say, "The herd are here", would you?

In spite of its brief grammatical lapse, and the unbearable whiteness of its cast /sarc, I recommend you see Dunkirk. It is a realistic glimpse into what may have been the turning point of WWII. Had the British army been wiped out at Dunkirk, there may never have been a D-Day.

I give it four out of five stars.

Spider-Man Homecoming: A Movie Review, Sort Of

First, a synopsis from IMDB:

Peter Parker, with the help of his mentor Tony Stark, tries to balance his life as an ordinary high school student in New York City while fighting crime as his superhero alter ego Spider-Man when a new threat emerges.

You remember that commercial where one lady is nattering on about 'friending people' and pictures 'on her wall', and her friend says, "That's not how this works. That's not how any of this works!"? That's me during Spider-man: Homecoming.

I knew from the trailers that there was a possibility of a love/hate relationship with this movie. If your only experience with Spider-Man is his appearance in the last Captain America movie, or possibly the last two reboots of the franchise, you might really like this film. If you're an aficionado of Spidey from the comics, you may have a few problems.

Here Be Spoilers!!

Herein I reveal my inner geek by knowing much too much about the subject. First thing in favor of the movie: It has Robert Downey Jr. in the role he was born to play: Iron Man. Against? Spider-Man never had Iron Man as a mentor, nor did Tony Stark cobble together some super powered suit with a Siri type, interactive computer. In favor? Spidey uses a mechanical web shooter that can run out of fluid at the most inopportune times, as opposed to the Tobey MacGuire's Spidey, who somehow grew ducts in his wrists that inexplicably shot out webs. In the comics, Peter Parker invented both the web shooters and the fluid and created his own costume. Not an Iron Man in sight! (Maybe an ironing board?)

Spidey's high school nemesis Flash Thompson, a burly (Caucasian) jock becomes simply "Flash" in this version, not a jock at all, but a fellow, slightly cooler nerd than Peter, in the same academic decathlon, played by a gentleman of Guatemalan descent. Which is not a problem other than constantly asking myself, "Is that supposed to be the same guy?" Juvenile humor alert: in this version, rather than physically intimidating him, Flash gets off on repeatedly calling him "Penis Parker". Real highbrow stuff!

A major annoyance and departure from the comics, is they gave Spidey a sidekick, ,a big Hawaiian kid who discovers Peter's secret identity early in the movie. The first of many. (People who know his secret, not Hawaiians!) Ned is really annoying. I mean really. No sidekick in the comics. Plus, the ante penultimate scene in the movie has young, hot Aunt May walking in on Peter in his room in his Spider-Man suit. (Ladies! Please knock!!)

The villain, played very nicely by Michael Keaton, was taken from the early issues of the comic, The Vulture, but they changed his origin to dovetail with the first Avengers movie, and beefed up his costume. A lot!

Spidey spends a lot of time talking to his suit, trying out features of which he is totally unaware, which is slightly reminiscent of the Greatest American Hero, which frankly did it better, with more laughs. The suit itself is annoying, in that the two eyeholes in his mask, permanent and fixed in the comics, narrow down in the movie, which serves to make his masked face more expressive, at the expense of his already limited peripheral vision. Rant break...

BTW, What's up with Spidey being played by a Brit? Are there no American actors to play American icons any more? The latest Superman is a Brit. In the Man From U.N.C.L.E., the Leo G. Carroll role was played by Hugh Grant. On TV, House, the Mentalist, the lead on Scorpion are all Brits! Now I have a great love for the Mother Country and the Mother Tongue, but we could use a few fewer mother loving Brits on the silver screen, nicht wahr?

...End of rant. The basic plot is boy meets suit, boy loses suit, boy gets suit back. On a Hollywood, inside baseball note, Gwyneth Paltrow makes a small cameo near the end of the movie. Has about five or six lines as I recall. I note this because I think she got something like fourth billing in the film, though if you blink you might miss her.

In typical Marvel fashion, there's not one but two vignettes during the credits. The first comes early on and gives a little insight into Michael Keaton's character. During the movie, we see a couple of public service type films made by Captain America. (And one really nice homage to Ferris Bueller). The last scene, at the very, very end of allllllllllllll the credits, is yet another one of these faux public service announcements on the virtues of ...patience. Droll.

The special effects surpass both of the other reboots. There are a few nice plot twists. Not a bad popcorn movie, but it wasn't exactly Spider-Man, at least not any we've seen before.

As I said, if you're not that familiar with the comics, but have seen the earlier Marvel Universe flicks, this might be right up your alley. And if you like eye candy Aunt May over old frail little old lady Aunt May, this version could be an improvement for you. My inner geek kept getting distracted by all the changes, so I'll give it 3 out of five stars.

Wonder Woman - A Review, Sort Of

'Wonder Woman' is the epic story of a man, a woman, a dog and a piano. Okay, you can forget the part about the dog and the piano. I wrote that before I saw the movie. I'm going to try to do this without any spoilers, but let me start by saying this is an above average superhero movie. If you just want to take my recommendation and go surf the web for Gal Gadot pictures, go ahead.

The first part of the movie is an obligatory flashback to Diana's youth. Young girl wants to be warrior princess, like her mom and her aunt and every other woman on the island. It could be worse. Remember the first Superman with Christopher Reeve? All that origin story needed was a guy in a headband tucking his baby boy into a rocket while the planet disintegrates around him. Five minutes tops. But, noooo! They hire a bloated Marlon Brando in a white wig, and build this long boring back story around him. Wonder Woman's origin is not that bad, however, if you can get past the whole "Zeus created man, gods walk the Earth and gave Wonder Woman her powers." I'm more of a mono-theistic kind of guy, but if I can believe in Hobbits and Orcs, I can suspend disbelief for a couple of hours.

Enter our intrepid male lead, Steve Trevor (Chris Pine), American pilot/spy/Amazon boy toy, who crash lands next to the island, bringing a large portion of the German Navy with him. Kickass battle on the beach ensues and Diana, having now heard about WWI, decides that saving the world is part of her job description, so she's off!

The story is generally well written, well paced, well directed. There's a CGI-fest towards the end that may be more popular with directors and the popcorn crowd, but is frankly a matter of taste. More importantly, between the Origin story and the CGI denouement, is a very solid motion picture. Woman Woman is the proverbial innocent abroad, a stranger to the customs and habits of mankind. There's humor to be found in her naivety. Gal Gadot plays Wonder Woman as a very confident hero, courageous to a fault, and acrobatically graceful in her slow motion fighting scenes. Supporting characters are well cast and well acted. Those who survive.

I can personally attest that the feminist complaint that Wonder Woman shaves her armpits is true, but was not terribly distracting from the story. There was no overt feminist message that I could detect. Diana did not lord her abilities over men, but was the consummate heroine, self confident, but lacking any need to "prove" herself to anyone.

There are also rumblings that some do not accept Gal Gadot as Wonder Woman because she is an Israeli. Aside from looking great in the outfit, her two years in the IDF may have given her the attitude necessary to pull off the character.

As with her brief appearance in the abysmal Batman vs. Superman flick, look for her in an upcoming Justice League movie. Hopefully that one will be more like this one and less like a brooding Ben Affleck film.

Four stars out of five.

Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2: A Review, Sort Of

To quote Erick Erickson, "Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 — Very Funny, But the First Was Better". This week's banner, you may have noticed is Baby Groot, who, as a walking talking vegetable, may put kids off eating broccoli forever. "But, Mom! Baby Groot!!!!!"

The opening credits are worthy of watching twice. The focus is on Baby Groot rocking out to some tunes while the rest of the Guardians fight some humongous monster in the background. Like I said, you need to watch it at least twice.

Although one might enjoy this as a stand alone flick, do yourself a favor and see the original first if you haven't. There are many references to the first film and the relationship of the characters, and as we said, it's a better film.

There are a couple of cool cameos, at least one clever product placement for a fast food restaurant, in addition to the proverbial Walkman. The soundtrack, like the first film, is vintage rock. Special effects and makeup are great and Stan Lee shows up for his ubiquitous cameo as well.

The plot is the least of anybody's worries. The themes deal with familial relationships. The jokes are sometimes a bit crude, not to everybody's liking. I found the movie to be a pleasant afternoon romp. A good popcorn movie. Beware: there were so many trailers prior to the movie that by the time they ended, I'd forgotten which movie I'd come to see!

Lots of fun. Nothing august, nothing of fate. Weighty affairs will just have to wait!*

I'd give it four out of five stars.


*Stolen from "A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum"

Logan: A Movie Review (Of sorts)

The Wolverine Retirement Home for Mutants

I will attempt to do this with as few spoilers as possible, but for those of you who expect some glimpse of nudity in your R rated movies, the only bit comes in a bit of a false start, where the movie seems to begin, but we see Ryan Reynolds in his Deadpool character, (FYI, he's not in the movie) press his or a butt-double's cheeks against the frosted glass of a phone booth for a funny trailer for his next movie.

The R rating is for language and violence. Lots of violence. The movie is set in the not too distant future. (Allowing, I suppose, room for one last Wolverine picture if the cash and box office of this one is enough to entice Hugh Jackman for one more go round, which apparently he said was his last) We see Logan, who  has retired from superheroing and derring-do, as the owner/operator of a limo service. Logan, who was born before the Civil War, has to be around 200 by now. They would have shown the cake with 200 candles, but even in the future, fire marshals won't allow that much open flame in a structure!

Logan isn't healing as fast as he used to. His beard is turning gray, he needs reading glasses and was coughing so much throughout the movie I wanted to give him a lozenge. He's taking care of Professor X, who, let's just say it's best for everyone if we keep the old guy sedated. Unfortunately, the kind of drugs the professor needs are not covered under Medicare  part B. Everyone tells the professor that when he's hearing voices, he's just "hearing voices", so no one believes him.

Turns out, he really has been communicating with a young girl mutant, threatened by an evil corporation making mutants to use as weapons. (When mutants are outlawed, only outlaws will have mutants!) The rest of the movie is the body count of taking this girl to some haven that may or may not exist, from whence they can flee to Canada. (I'm not sure if Trump is still president that far into the future, but if liberals see themselves as the good mutants, this may be their last best hope!)

Logan cusses a lot. If you are not a fan of, or don't like to hear foul language, then I'd say wait 'til they edit it for TV, where the language will be cleaned up and some of the more graphic violence removed. As you may know, I do not object to all violence in movies. Hacksaw Ridge one of my new favorite movies, is extremely violent, some of it graphic, in the depiction of showing the hell of war. I felt, however, as if a lot of the violence in Logan was gratuitous, and that we did not need to see how many different ways the Wolverine could stab someone through the head and see the blades come out the other side. Kudos, though, to the special effects guys!

Adult language is natural among adults. But, as I have stated elsewhere, if everything is worthy of an "f-bomb", then what do you say when you get really angry?? In my opinion, profanity was overused, particularly by one who could be considered a role model for the young.

Long portions of the movie tried to be philosophical, pondering the meaning of life, death and everything. Some parts were unbelievable, as we see Xavier sitting in his room at the hotel/casino watching Shane, when he could have been reading the minds of every player at the blackjack table and counting cards!

Don't get me wrong! It wasn't a terrible movie! There were some really nice touches in it. Logan coming to the defense of a beleaguered small farmer's water rights struck the right note, although it was literally short lived. Towards the end, you see one of the kids carrying a Wolverine action figure, in its blue and yellow Spandex, but they don't make a big deal of it. Just a nice touch.

The movie could have been subtitled "The Good Son". They posed as father and son to the farmer and his family, and it is a good metaphor for the movie. Logan treats Xavier as a father, putting him in a crappy home (an abandoned water tower) when he gets too old to care for himself. I kid. They're hiding from the authorities. Apparently Xavier caused some horrible tragedy years before and is a wanted man. Still, the tenderness with which Logan cares for the old man suggests a filial relationship and Xavier treats Logan as the son he never had.

Spoiler alert: The mutant little girl seems to be mute through the first half of the movie. Then we discover her real superpower: a high pitched, whiny, nasal voice that makes you want to kill yourself. Logan has a very high threshold for pain, but even he could only take it in small doses!

The plot, what little of it there was, seemed to wander. The acting was up to the task, although Jackman's vacillated between brooding and wincing in pain from being stabbed/shot/kicked/impaled by various objects. The special effects were good, in that they didn't call attention to themselves, but reinforced the storytelling. There was no profound message, IMHO, and no reason to want to see the movie a second time, (as opposed to say, Hacksaw, where my Blu-Ray just came in).

It's rated "R" for a reason. There were more beheadings than an ISIS family reunion. Some of the reviews I've read like it better than I did. But then, everyone likes their toast a different color. Just my POV. I predict no Academy awards, unless it is for something technical.

Two and a half stars out of five.

Hacksaw Ridge - A Review

I do not feel compelled to write reviews of every movie I see. I don't see that many, and those I do see seldom rise above a certain formulaic mediocrity. Not so with Hacksaw Ridge.

This is the true story of Desmond T. Doss, played convincingly by Andrew Garfield, as an Army Medic, who served during the Battle of Okinawa, charging into the Hell of battle without a weapon, to become the first Conscientious Objector to be awarded the Medal of Honor.

The movie has a much greater scope than I had imagined. After a brief glimpse of the Hell that was to come, we see a flashback to Desmond's childhood, experiences planting the seeds of the man he will become. We meet his Dad, a WWI veteran, haunted by the ghosts of his past and survivor's guilt, masterfully played by Hugo Weaving. He and Rachel Griffiths, who plays his Mom, come across as genuine, three dimensional people, instead of some stereotypical caricature of rural religious folk.

We next see Desmond as a young adult at the outbreak of WWII. The courtship of his future wife, his travails in basic training, his struggle to stay in the Army (and out of Federal Prison) for holding fast to his beliefs.

The movie is interspersed with humor and heart. The story is compelling and well told. The casting is excellent. The direction and cinematography are both remarkable. The violence is quite graphic, so this movie is not for the very young or faint of spirit. Wait for the toned down edited for TV version.

Trigger warning: There are no delicate snowflakes in this movie. Safe spaces are few and far between. There is some cursing, a lot of violence, and (cover the ears of the children) people of faith who read the Bible and pray! One scene is of a church choir that you cannot unsee!

I very seldom give any movie I see a superlative five out of five stars. For that, the movie must truly be a timeless classic, not just an entertaining pastime or good popcorn movie. Given the very strict standards with which I grade movies, I give Hacksaw Ridge, five out of five stars. I won't say that it is the best war movie I've ever seen. It may be the best movie I've ever seen.

Do yourself a favor and go see it.

"13 Hours" Opened Thursday Night. Why Haven't You Seen it Yet?

13 Hours, as most of you know, is the true story of a handful of individuals who showed uncommon bravery in the face of a colossal security clusterflock*, at a US diplomatic outpost, after the fall of Qaddafi in Libya. The movie doesn't go into the politics, most of which consisted in the (almost?) criminal refusal on behalf of the State Department to provide adequate security to, as the opening credits note, one of the twelve most dangerous spots on the planet.

If you listen closely, you can hear the faint voice of Barack Obama blathering about the wonderful opportunities for the Libyan people now that Qaddafi had been overthrown. Mercifully, I did not see any pictures of Hillary or hear the dreaded cackle, which, now that I think of it, might have sent their attackers fleeing in fear at the sound of it.

The story starts with the arrival of Jack Silva, played by The Office's John Krasinski**. A tense and potentially deadly situation arises on the streets of Benghazi before they can even reach the compound. Welcome to Benghazi! Jack is not an FNG***, as he has worked with some of the team in years past.

The CIA station chief "Bob", is portrayed as a snot nosed, condescending, officious prick who treats his security detail, mostly former Navy SEALS, as rent-a-cops. Not surprisingly, the former CIA station chief for Benghazi has said this is all 'baloney', but then, if even a fraction of it were true, I would vehemently deny it, too. Whose word are you going to trust? His, or the three men who risked their lives to save his bacon? Me, too.

The movie shows the very human side of these operators: interactions with their wives and kids, albeit long distance, the boredom, the bureaucracy, and when the balloon goes up, their professionalism and willingness to die for their friends and even some complete strangers, because that's what they signed up for.

The movie is well paced and suspenseful, and at times, like "24", gives the sense of taking place in real time. The suspense is heightened in that the bad guys do not wear any uniform or insignia and therefore look like anyone else. These men know all too well the consequences of shooting a "friendly", therefore you literally cannot tell friend from foe until they start shooting at you.

The battle scenes are intense and the down time in between them are very revealing of these men's character.The requests for help that go unanswered, surprising in the face of the number of people actually ready to respond, may cause one to pause.

I highly recommend this movie. The movie is accurate, according to (most of) those who were there. Director Michael Bay does the script, the story, and the heroes behind them justice. One caveat, you may not be able to leave the theater with a dry eye. Two ladies who saw the movie before I did, Tweeted: There was only one word when we left the theater: Speechless.

Five out of five stars.

*Hey! We are still PG-13 here!  But if that kind of language offends you, wait until 13 Hours comes out on network TV, and read the book while you wait. The language is not excessive, but realistic.
**Don't let that concern you. I was never a fan of The Office, but his acting is first rate here. He gives a very credible performance, showing wide range.
***F'ing New Guy, for the uninitiated

The Monuments Men, ISIS and Empire

Full disclosure: I am NOT on the cutting edge of cultural evolution. I do my best to keep pace with its rear echelons. Nevertheless, I finally watched The Monuments Men on Blu-Ray. Based on a true story, it's a buddy movie of sorts, set in WWII Europe. The Nazis are stealing art all over Europe, in all their occupied lands, particularly from the Jews. Every work of art, painting or statuary, gold brick or gold filling that they can lay their hands on is ending up in the homes of SS officers or being shipped by truck or train to large, makeshift warehouses, until it can be gathered at war's end to fill the planned Fuehrer Museum.

Not all art is equally valued, though. Modernist artists, like Picasso, were not deemed worthy, and many of their works were destroyed. Here we have a small band of Americans, along with one Frenchman and one Brit, tasked with trying to save as many of these irreplaceable works of art as possible.

Along the way, they discover that there exists a directive from Hitler, that if he were to be killed, all of the art was to be destroyed. Apparently, he thought that if he couldn't have it, no one could! Part of the tension in the movie is the race against the clock to save these art treasures, compounded by an invading army of Russians from the East, looting stolen art from the Germans, to take back to Russia as reparations for the damage Germany had caused to the USSR.

The movie works well for the most part. Good acting, a solid story line and a few scenes to make you laugh and tug at your heart, ending with what I consider to be a minor ripoff of Saving Private Ryan. If you haven't seen the movie, I would recommend it, not just for an interesting slice of history, but perhaps the chance not to be doomed to repeating it.

Watching the movie, seeing the Nazis destroy works of art that they did not deem worthy, made me think of ISIS with their total disregard for the historical treasures they destroy, because they find them contrary to their religious beliefs. There are a number of parallels between the Nazis and ISIS in their blatant disregard for human life, killing men, women and children for their ideological ends. This was just one more.

There was a second theme I noticed that ran through the movie (to me anyway), and that was empire. The Third Reich plundered every country they conquered, taking art, natural resources, slaves...whatever they wanted. It is the way of empire. The Soviet Union was a competing empire. As they conquer eastern Germany, they looted it of everything they could get their hands on. The satellite countries of the U.S.S.R. paid tribute of whatever they had to Mother Russia, because, that is the way of empire.

And then, you had a handful of men, commissioned by the US government to lay their hands on every piece of art they could find...and return them to their rightful owners. I believe they said that over five million pieces of art were retrieved, Rembrandts, Monets, a sculpture by Michelangelo, each worth millions by themselves, returned to the private owners whenever possible, the churches, the museums from whence they had been taken. This is NOT the way of empire.

We conquered Kuwait without taking their oil and gave the country back to the Kuwatis. We conquered Iraq, but did not loot it for either its national treasures or its oil. And apparently, conquered Europe without looting their art. As I said above. Just one more thing.

The looney Left likes to hurl the epithet "empire" at us, as did their Neoisolationist fellow traveler Ron Paul, as I detailed in "We Can't Afford the Empire".

Even under the sloppiest thinking short of downright dishonesty, it is impossible to define the United States of America as an "empire". We have many military bases around the world, much as our blue water navy, to project American power and to respond to events anywhere in the world, that might threaten our freedom. At least, that was true up until the last decade. Without the will to use that power, they may as well sit on their hands as our embassies are attacked and American citizens are tortured and killed.

Should we realistically evaluate our military bases, both foreign and domestic, so that we can maintain those and perhaps only those that are vital to our security and defense? Certainly. We have seen the disaster caused by the precipitous withdrawal of troops from Iraq and the far greater threat that was allowed to blossom in the absence of our military strength or a correspondingly strong Iraqi national defense.

Are we the "cops of the world"? Under Barack Obama we are scarcely the "Neighborhood Watch" of the world. China is building a blue water navy, Putin is running roughshod over the Ukraine, in spite of our written agreement with Britain, Russia and the Ukraine to defend their sovereignty. Our word was apparently no good under the current president. The same man who told us Iraq was stable enough for us to depart completely, who lied to us and told us "if you like your doctor, you can keep him", told the Ukraine that if you like your borders, you can keep them". Why should our allies believe anything he says? After drawing red lines and accusing the Syrian president of war crimes, Obama did nothing and the tyrant still sits in the seat of power. He brings toothless sanctions against Russia, all the while reducing sanctions against Iran because "they're not working".

Why should our enemies believe anything he says? Our military is steadily shrinking, our space program has been all but gutted. The preeminence of American power has been diluted, diminished or destroyed by this president.

To paraphrase Bill Buckley, I will not insult your intelligence by saying that you actually believe the argument you make when you say that the US is an "empire"

Star Trek - Into Darkness, a Movie Review

I went to see Star Trek - Into Darkness this afternoon. Before I get into any of the particulars of the movie, keep in mind that this is a "reboot" of the franchise. An updated 23rd century for 21st. century audiences. What the comic books might call a "re-imagining".

The first venture into the re-imagining, of necessity had to introduce you to old characters with new faces: Bones didn't look like Bones, Sulu didn't look like Sulu, Uhura looked more like one you'd want to jump their bones, (which I understand Gene Roddenberry did on at least one occasion in the original. But, I digress!)

The first venture also set up the notion that the universe and the stories told might differ from the "originals". This was accomplished by having an old, creaky antique Spock* travel through time and muck things up a bit, changing the entire space/time continuum. Oops! Spoiler alert! (I'm kidding! If you haven't seen the first one by now, I sincerely doubt you care all that much.)

So, Into Darkness, the Alice Eve lingerie review (no, just kidding again! I'm a kidder!) starts with a vignette on some strange new world, accompanied with yet another debate about the value of the Prime Directive. Honestly, if this thing is their "Prime" Directive, you'd think they'd be better versed on it and monitoring who was actually, you know, breaking it. This leads to some conflict between Kirk and Spock which marginally provides some character development, but not much.

There's a mysterious stranger in town, and with just a couple of minor subplots, the movie takes off in earnest. (And, no, not Ernest Goes to Starfleet Academy!) There are gunfights and chase scenes and more gunfights and space battles, and the special effects are simply superb. The sci-fi geek in you might want to see this for just the special effects alone, not so much in that your jaw drops and you say, "Look at that!", but they help to move the story along, without looking cheesy or being obvious green screens.

I'm going to try to hit the high points all at once and save my complaints along with the spoilers, which are tucked away on the next page. The movie is a little over two hours, but it doesn't feel that long. The action sequences move the story along. The movie is well scripted, for the most part. I can tell you there is a nice homage to Star Trek II in this one (more about that in the spoilers!)

The movie recycles or "re-imagines" a number of characters from the Star Trek canon. Dr. Carol Marcus, the scientist in Wrath of Khan, mother of Kirk's son is here. And the underwear shot is literally so short that if you blink, you could miss it. (That's why they invented the 'pause' on your Blu-ray player!) but, this is a whole new universe where Uhura dates Spock and old Spock bruises the space/time continuum, so there's no guarantee that they'll hook up in this one.

The mystery stranger turns out to be an old familiar (I almost said "face") character. His face too, is unfamiliar to most Trekkers. I won't tell you up front who this is, but I had figured it out before I went to the theater. In fact, if you just thought about it a while, you could too. If not, maybe you're in need of a vacation...in France...maybe Cannes???

Knowing this "spoiler" did not detract from the movie, other than just waiting to see if it was confirmed. You'll get over it. I went back and forth a few times before deciding to see the movie. I'd heard both good and bad reviews, decided I needed/ wanted to see for myself.

I liked it. There was some tension trying to reconcile this as a stand alone effort and yet for those of us familiar with TOS, the comparisons cannot be helped. I would expect younger viewers not steeped in the lore of Roddenberry to enjoy it much more than the rest of us. But, it is as they say, a great summer popcorn movie. The new ensemble of players work well together. There's something there for the purist and newbie alike. See it, enjoy it, and then come back and see if you don't agree with some of my gripes. If you click on the spoilers, don't blame me! Overall, three out of five stars.

*Not enough pancake, spackle or concealer in the galaxy to show him otherwise.
For the real spoilers and gripes, or to make a comment, go here:

The Avengers - A Movie Review, of Sorts

Finally saw the Avengers today. Long story short: worth the price of admission. And when I say, "long story", my primary complaint with the movie is that it was too long. At 143 minutes, it takes a cast iron butt to last to the very last scene after the credits. (More about that later.)

The action sequences are top notch. Don't be surprised if at times you find yourself on the edge of your seat. Those few, less than riveting parts, however, had me putting on my editor's hat, mentally cutting scenes to tighten up the movie. Not the best way to get one to suspend disbelief.

It helps if you have seen the movies that serve as prequels: Thor, Captain America, Iron Man I & II, and The Hulk. Those will introduce you to most of the characters, heroes and villains alike. Or, you could merely substitute years of study under the tutelage of Stan Lee and Jack Kirby in pulp magazines. Incidentally, you really have to wait for Stan's de rigueur cameo in this one.

Two surprises in casting: one Cobie Smulders, Friday Night Babe and Robin Scherbatsky of "How I met Your Mother", not exactly whom one might expect in an action flick, and one I didn't recognize until the credits rolled, Jenny Agutter, of Logan's Run and Vintage Babe of the Week fame.

I don't want to give away any plot spoilers or laugh lines. There were some laugh out loud moments in the movie, and too many trailers take every funny line and cram them into sixty seconds, leaving you, having seen the best parts of the movie before you ever get to the theater. If you liked any of the prequels, you'll like The Avengers.

The Marvel universe was not the Mayberry RFD of superherodom past. The characters had everyday problems just like the rest of us, and often dealt with their problems and opponents by cracking wise. They were smart alecks, often misunderstood, often got no respect, often were mistaken as enemies by other good guys. In the Marvelverse, it wasn't unusual for Daredevil to fight SpiderMan, Iron Man to fight Thor, and Hulk to fight...well, almost everybody! In typical Marvel style, Iron Man and Thor battle each other to a standstill before ever engaging the enemy. Hulk, who is of necessity CGI, since the Stanislavski method rarely enabled actors to turn green and multiply their own body mass, and his alter ego Bruce Banner both are improvements over earlier Hulk movies and, mirabile dictu, even Lou Ferrigno!

One small thing that I haven't heard mentioned anywhere else, is the fact that the movie does not contain what seems to be Hollywood's de rigueur antipathy to faith. The presence of Norse demigods, which frankly I feared the most when I first heard of the project, was explained in Thor with a variation of Arthur C. Clark's maxim:

Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.

The Asgards are merely an advanced technological society which appears as magic to we lesser mortals. Yeah. Right.

But Captain America has a great line, when he is cautioned about getting in the middle of a battle between "gods". Before he disregards this otherwise sound advice, he says something like, "There's only one God. And he doesn't look like that!" Throw in some motherhood and apple pie, ladies and Cap is the whole package!

Viewers of the earlier movies were rewarded by staying to the end of the credits with a brief scene foreshadowing movies to come. Part way through the credits, we are given a bonus scene foreshadowing the sequel which the outstanding box office virtually guarantees, but for those who wait to the very end of the credits, (I think I was the only one during today's matinee), there is a brief vignette of, shall we say, superheroes "off the clock"?

If you're in the mood for an action adventure movie, that doesn't require a lot of deep thought, but still deals with such things as courage, sacrifice and redemption, you could do far worse than 143 minutes spent in a comic book universe. Four out of five stars.

Captain America: A Movie Review

Speaking of Captain America, I went to see Captain America, The First Avenger tonight. I thought it worked quite well on two levels, one as a stand alone movie for those of you not familiar with the story. (Perhaps, you were in suspended animation for the last seventy years??) And second as a fairly faithful rendition of the comic book story. Nothing in this review should constitute a "spoiler", so if you haven't seen the movie yet, you should be good.

Purists might be put off a bit by the introduction of a few new characters not in the comics, or the transformation of "Bucky" Barnes from boy sidekick, to adult soldier*. Instead of Robin to Cap's Batman, Bucky is an adult, inducted into the army before 98 pound weakling Steve Rogers can get past his 4-F status.

The back story of using Rogers in a war bond tour adds some semblance of reason as to why the good Captain might end up in red, white and blue Spandex.

It takes a while to get Cap into the fight overseas, but once the action starts, it's worth the wait. The movie has all you could want in a pleasant couple of hours of entertainment: action, humor, pathos and just a hint of unrequited love.

There are, as in most comics, improbabilities of science, history and reason in order to make everything work. Captain America has enough heart for you to want to suspend disbelief and go along for the ride. There is the obligatory cameo by Stan Lee, and a couple of characters show up that are immediately recognizable to long time Marvel comic readers. I won't spoil the surprise, but the term "Howling Commando" might ring a bell!

Some mention should be made of Chris Evans, who plays the Captain. As Johnny Storm, (the Human Torch, in the Fantastic Four), he was one of an ensemble, mostly used for comic relief. Here, he has to carry the entire picture and does so, if I may say so, with flying colors (pun intended)!

The closing credits are wonderfully retro. And for those with the fortitude to stick through the credits to the very end, you see a teaser for the Avengers movie coming out next May.

Those of you who have read the comics will appreciate the line "Some assembly required."

I would heartily recommend "Captain America, The First Avenger" to comic book aficionados and non-nerds alike. Go see it. Four out of five stars.



*Bucky Barnes as boy sidekick

Angelina Jolie is "Salt" - A Movie Review

I realize I’m a little late to this party. Salt, with Angelina Jolie, was released a couple of months ago and is finishing up its first run, but should be coming soon to a cable channel or Blue Ray near you. I liked Salt. It’s a pretty decent film. You may recall that I was less than impressed with Jolie in “Wanted” (Wanted: A plot would be nice!)

This picture is much better. You are not asked to suspend your disbelief any more than say, your typical James Bond film. Let’s see what I can tell you without too many plot spoilers.
Jolie is Evelyn Salt, a CIA field agent, captured by the North Koreans, rescued by the world famous arachnologist who loves her. (Girl meets arachnologist. Girl loses arachnologist. Arachnologist gets girl. –who hasn’t seen that before?)

Years later, a Russian agent defects to the West with the message that a Russian sleeper is going to assassinate the Russian president, in the US attending the state funeral of a clearly fictional, too good to be true, vice president.

Is Salt a sleeper or a double agent? Is she trying to assassinate the Russian president or save him? Are those lips real? Which side is she really on? While there were no major surprises for me, (I have a high rate of success figuring out plot lines and devices in the first act), the director’s and/or writer’s use of foreshadowing gives plenty of clues to where the plot path will wander, for those paying attention.

The director maintains a nice edge of suspense, even when you’re fairly certain what must happen next, but not necessarily how. The action scenes and stunts keep the pace fast. There is a good deal of violence, however. The brutality, even when dealt out to those who probably deserve it, could be too much for those of gentler sensibilities. But for an afternoon’s entertainment, Salt is an excellent popcorn movie.

The burning question that must be on everyone’s mind as they leave the theater, (it certainly was on mine) is…what will happen to the dog?

4 out of 5 stars

Iron Man 2

Saw Iron Man 2 today. Great movie! There. If all you need is a recommendation, go see it. If you stick around, there will be spoilers! Okay. You were warned.

Iron Man 2 takes up pretty much where the last movie left off. Tony Stark has announced to the world that he is Iron Man. The Fed'al Gubmint decides that they should have custody of his state of the art technology. He refuses. So the Fed'al Gubmint is after Tony, particularly in the form of a smarmy Senator, played by Garry Shandling. It also seems that Tony's dad may have stolen some ideas or credit from a Russian physicist, whose son builds his own weapon of mass destruction and comes gunning for Tony. Stark's weaselly business rival wants to come after him, isn't quite bright enough so he enables the bitter Russian mad scientist with WMD to go after Iron Man. And to top it off, Tony's secretary Pepper, who doesn't come right out and say it, is after Tony. Follow the man in the red and gold suit!

Oh, he's also being recruited by agents of S.H.I.E.L.D., who made a cameo in 1, a slightly bigger part in 2, and should play a prominent role in the sequel, which is pretty much guaranteed to be made. More on Nick Fury later. Scarlett Johanson, who is way overdue to be a Friday Night Babe, is a S.H.I.E.L.D. agent planted at Stark Industries. (She fills out her role well!)

The movie plays well with Tony Stark's vulnerabilities. His heart (both literally and figuratively), his less than stellar relationship with his dad, friendship, loyalty and patriotism and the individual demons that still drive him.

With plenty of action and cliff hanging thrills, love, determination and a darned fine suit of armor conquers all!

From a technical standpoint, IM2 is superb. One of the problems I have with too many movies today, is that Computer Generated Images are used to produce the whizbang effects. Too many movies (Van Helsing and Hellboy, for example), I find it hard to care when one CGI is locked in mortal battle with another. It could be Ms. PacMan for all I care. Perhaps, aided in part by the fact that most of the characters are armored, the CGI effects are less noticeable. At any rate, it was no distraction here.

A couple of minor distractions: Product placement. I knew Dr. Pepper had a joint ad campaign with the movie. Still, when I saw the Dr. Pepper can in the foreground of a shot where no one was enjoying a nice cool beverage, it tended to pull me from the moment. Tony Stark drives an Audi, but that wasn't the only place I saw their logo. Every time I saw the Audi logo, I was momentarily pulled from the moment. And finally, Kodak must have shelled out a few bucks for product placement as well.

If you haven't watched it (or if you have, go watch it again) the first few seconds of the trailer above and you will see at least two Kodak signs. And when Nick Fury gives Tony some old home movies of his dad, guess whose logo is on the film canisters? (Slap yourself if you said "Fuji"!)


Samuel L. Jackson as Nick Fury

Geek alert! Finally, we come to the Nick Fury character. I'm not sure when it happened, but Nick is more amply endowed with melanin than he used to be! In the animated Avenger movies and now Iron Man, Nick Fury is a black man, but the original back story was that Sgt. Nick Fury of Sgt. Fury's Howling Commandos, was a white guy. And even though Commandos were British and Rangers were American, Sgt. Fury led his band of imaginary American commandos on numerous exploits during WWII, and later became an agent and director of S.H.I.E.L.D.

Now I know that Lawrence Olivier played Othello and a woman played Starbuck, but this is a little like a remake of Star Trek with a redhead playing Uhura and an Irishman calling himself "Sulu".

I suppose one can get used to almost anything. Besides, I guess it beats the alternative!


David Hasselhoff as Nick Fury

Heh.

Mini Movie (DVD?) Reviews

One of the unintended consequences of my bouncing back and forth from coast to coast in the last two or three weeks, was the opportunity to watch not only more movies, but more bad movies than I have seen in the last two or three years.

And since I had to suffer as a captive audience at 36,000 feet, some of Hollywood’s most banal, most of which I actively avoided first run; it’s only fair that you should suffer with me! Here's a sampling:

Mama Mia: This movie was not released, it escaped! The plot, if you can call it that, is a girl on the verge of her marriage wants to be given away by her father. Only her mother slept with three different men around the time she was conceived and she’s never met him, so she invites all three to the wedding, unbeknownst to her eponymous mother.

The score consists of Abba songs loosely woven into the plot. The deft screenplay goes something like this: Insert Abba song here.

Unless you are a huge Abba fan, lover of musicals and mindless sitcoms (preferably all three) there’s a good chance you will not like this movie. When I saw it, there may have been rumblings to rush the cockpit and take whatever means necessary to make the movie stop. I recommend additional sky marshals if the movie is ever shown on an airplane again.

Journey to the Center of the Earth Brendan Frasier stars as an affable young man who finds love and dinosaurs in the center of the earth. Extreme suspension of disbelief is required to enjoy this movie, so small children and graduates of government schools should enjoy it.

Henry Poole is Here Luke Wilson as an affable young man who finds love and an image of Jesus in the waterstain of the stucco of the house in suburbia where he has come to seek the meaning of life. This is by far and away the best movie of the latest aileron crop of movies. Thought provoking and clever, particularly effective was the director’s use of the invisible wall, as you were treated to the wall’s eye view of the people who came to study the stain.
I remember seeing the trailer for this film, and wasn’t inspired to see it. Sans car crashes and chases, it must have been a challenge to capture its essence in a trailer. They failed.
It starts a little slow, but definitely worth a trip to Blockbusters for a quiet evening in.

Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants 2 Since I somehow missed Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants (1), there may have been some nuance of relationship that I missed. I must say, that this is one of my top ten favorite movies with the word “Sisterhood” in the title!
This is a pleasant little film, heavy on the estrogen. And guys, despite the fact that three of the four major characters are out of the aforementioned pants at any given time, there is no nudity in the film, other than some beefcake provided by a male art model.
Not bad as far as “chick flicks” go

Swing Vote Kevin Costner as an affable apolitical ne’er do well, Bud Johnson, whose single vote will decide the future of the free world. I personally avoided this movie more actively than the rest. However, it was the most surprisingly pleasant. Based on a highly improbable circumstance where the aborted (no pun intended) vote of one man will determine the outcome of the US Presidential election, Swing Vote has a charming cast of characters, starting with Bud’s 12 yr. old daughter Molly, played by Madeline Carroll.
The movie skewers politicians who will do anything to get elected and the news media who would do anything to garner ratings and get a story. Throw in a little morality play of an apathetic voter and you have a pleasant evening’s entertainment!

Well, that’s all for now. Rent the DVD’s at your pleasure or peril, but don’t say you weren’t warned! Heh.

An American Carol- A Movie Review

Jon Voight and Kelsey Grammer as Washington and Patton

Inspired by Dickens' A Christmas Carol, where the miser Scrooge is taught the true meaning of Christmas by the visitation of three spirits, David Zucker of "Airplane!" and Naked Gun movie fame, takes on the story of left wing filmmaker Michael Malone, a Michael Moore lookalike, who wants to abolish the Fourth of July.

Those familiar with Dickens' tale will recognize that Malone's nephew also stands in for Bob Cratchit in Zucker's adaptation. Tiny Tim is there with a vengeance! As you might expect from a David Zucker movie, there are quite a few laugh out loud moments and I don't want to give any of them away. There is a bit with a pizza box that was pretty memorable!

But, there's also a serious thread that runs through the movie...that of patriotism and love of country. The movie runs from extreme silliness to extreme seriousness and back again. There's classic slapstick comedy and heart tugging poignancy.

There is some mild vulgarity, not enough to bother any but the most prudish among us...and they probably shouldn't be watching movies anyway!

There is no nudity, but plenty of thought provoking material. It's got an all star cast. The acting is top notch and cameos abound! Voight and Grammer are particularly good as Washington and Patton.

I recommend An American Carol. It's entertaining, funny and thought provoking. Conservatives will like it better than liberals, I think, but enough of the humor will surprise and ring true enough to elicit laughs from all but the Scroogiest libs!
All in all, I'd give it four out of five stars.

Here's the trailer:



Cross posted at Say Anything