Lady Bird (2017): Review

I decided to go see Lady Bird because I  was won over by the trailers and being told that Lady Bird is a must see, highly critically rated movie. Although the movie was good, it was not the practically perfect movie I was hoping it would be and I had difficulty rooting for or connecting with the main character.  Thinking about the movie, I cannot tell if I liked it or disliked it and that is never a good thing for me coming out of a movie because it tends to just slip away as it had no real resonance with me. It has high production value and I could tell that everyone working on the movie was putting their all into it and really cared about putting out a well done movie.  It was interesting but nothing that was life changing.



Lady Bird is a movie that following Catherine McPherson, played by Saoirse Ronan, who has renamed herself Lady Bird, as she goes through her senior year of high school at a Catholic school in Sacramento California. She has difficulty with her relationships with her mother Marion, played by Laurie Metcalf, and the differences the two want for Lady Bird's future. Lady Bird goes through this year in her life trying to make the future she want happen while interacting with different people at school.  Also staring Beanie Feldstein as Julie, Lady Bird's best friend; Lois as Sister Sarah Joan; Jack McDorman as teacher Mr. Bruno; Lucas Hedges as Danny; Timothee Chalamet as Kyle; Tracy Letts as Lady Bird's father Larry; and Stephen Henderson as Father Leviatch.

There was a very high production value in this movie, not in the sense that it seemed like a lot of money was spent on sets or CGI, but that everyone working on the movie appeared to care what they were doing and that a lot of thought and effort was put into each decision and how everything was shot, acted, and put together as a film.  Because of this there, were some things that I struggles with and made it hard for me to connect with the movie. The main thing that I struggled with is that Lady Bird is just unlikable as a person.  She made choices that were selfish and her motivation was inconsistent and changes without the movie showing why she was doing this thing that is different from why she did something earlier.  There were times where I would start to be on her side or she was starting to pull me in but then things would change and then I would be nope, she's unlikable as a person.

The way that the movie was put together made it difficult for me to connect to what was going on.  Overall, the movie was told in very short little snippets and then would jump to something else, sometimes it would be just a short jump in time while at others it would appear to be weeks. The times that I liked the movie the best is where the scene was longer and there was time for true development of relationships between the characters or for me to understand their processes. I want to see the story of the movie and not just show the start and end of something, I like to have time to see the character grow/ change/ develop/ understand their motivation, anything that would have me connect to the character or what they are going through or at least care.  I liked many of the supporting characters and think that this movie was casted phenomenally but all of the supporting characters, besides the mother and maybe Julie or the Father/Sister were very one dimensional. This may be because the movie showed these characters based on how Lady Bird saw them. Although there was some background of the motivation of some of the characters there wasn't any development for any of them. There were moments where the focus was on the supporting characters that were fantastic and pulled me in but then it would quickly jump back to focusing on Lady Bird.

I can tell why this movie was given good reviews but do not think it is a movie for everyone. I may be a bit more judgmental about this movie because I relate to the enrolment in which the story is set.  Lady Bird is in the graduating class of 2003 and she is attending Catholic school. I graduated a year before that and also went to a Catholic School so can connect to the world in which the movie is set. I am not from California but I was a teen of the early 2000s in a Catholic school. Due to this I felt that there were some details that took me out of it, the movie showed that a lot of thought was spent on the detail of the movie and for a film that showed that nuns would check the skirt length of the girls, Lady Bird would not have been allowed to have that unnatural dyed red hair color.   It also bugged me that she always looked dirty especially her hair, I also think that she would have had chipped nail polish. I did really like Sister Sarah Joan and Father Leviatch, they were just fantastic characters.



Overall, I understand why this movie received good reviews but it for me the hardest thing to get past is that the main character was unlikable. For a movie where they whole focus is on the main character and their relationships with others, it is not necessary to like the main character but the focus of the movie was following and getting drawn into her movie so you can understand her choices and the struggles she has to deal with to become who she is at the end of the movie.  If Lady Bird was likable or endearing I would have liked the movie much better. I could have even worked if I disliked her, but the tone of the movie would have needed to be different as it was presented as I should be connecting with her. I would have liked the focused to be on someone else or move split. It if was more half an half Lady Bird and her mother or her best friend Julie or even Danny it wouldn't have mattered as much that she was unlikable. The characters I liked best were given struggles that would have been very interesting to know more about or to see their journey so this movie left me feeling unsatisfied about wanting more about the supporting characters; wishing that I liked or hated Lady Bird more; or that I was able to watch the story happen not see it in short bits that jumped around.

My Rating: 2+

Justice League (2017): Review

Going into Justice League I was trying not to expect too much, as I had heard that the reviews were mixed but was hoping that I would enjoy it because I liked Wonder Women (2017) and enjoyed Batman V Superman (2016).  I am happy to say that I did enjoy Justice League and I am looking forward to seeing it again over Thanksgiving weekend with my family. If you liked the previous DC universe movies you will enjoy this and I think it is one of the better ones.



Justice League continues where Batman v Superman (2016) and Wonder Woman (2017) left off. Bruce Wayne/ Batman, played by Ben Affleck, is trying to find and recruit metahumans because he believes that an invasion is coming after the death of Superman/ Clark Kent, played by Henry Cavil.  He reunites with Diana Prince/ Wonder Woman, played by Gal Gadot, to try and bring together Aquaman/ Author Curry, played by Jason Momoa; The Flash/ Barry Allen, played by Ezra Miller; and Cybord/ Victor Stone, played by Ray Fisher, in order to fight Steppenwolf, voiced by Ciaran Hinds.. Also staring Amy Adams as Lois Lane; Jeremy Irons as Alfred; and Diane Lane as Martha Kent.

 

Justice League felt like a transition/ set up movie, but it was done in the good way that is still a story on its own.  The bad guy Steppenwolf was secondary to getting the Justice League together and this left me not caring about him or feeling as if there was any real danger from him.  At times, he was really good at destroying or making what he want happen really quickly, while at others he took forever to do anything or monologued.  He wasn't the worst bad guy I have seen in comic book/ superhero movies but he could have been much better.  I miss bad guys who are scary, or really evil, or really anything that would be a true counterpoint for the good guys.  Because there was such a team of good guys and that getting the team together was the important part, he was just there but he really needed to be something truly catastrophic to need all these meta humans to get together.  The fact that any true backstory was not included for anyone added to not feeling the scope of him.  It was mentioned that he almost destroyed the earth way back when but as this was just exposition  it didn't really do much for the whole movie.  Also the fact that there are three mother boxes it felt too much like the Tesseract or Allspark.

That being said, I did like the casting of this movie and enjoyed each main character on its own.  Henry Cavil as Superman is fine and he does a good enough job.  I am one who actually likes Ben Affleck as Batman and enjoyed how he plays this character as more grizzled. I liked that Batman is human compared to the others and you see him struggling or having to recovery.  Gal Gadot as Wonder Woman is just fantastic and she carries over the great job she has done in the previous movies.  I really enjoyed Ezra Miller as The Flash and how he plays this character, I do not watch the television show so I didn't have any strong feelings about him in this role and did like that he was a counterpoint to the more serious/ hardened way the others were played. I laughed the most at him and didn't think the humor he brought took away from the overall mood of the movie.  Jason Momoa is great as Aquaman and I really liked his I'm here but I kinda care but I kinda don't care way he was played and especially the sequence where he is talking to the team later on in the movie. I didn't get Cyborg as a character and didn't really care about his personal struggles, he seemed to be necessary only because of how he fit into the plot but I could have done without him completely. I would have like better chemistry between the characters but I think it was more about how quickly the movie moves from one thing to another (the movie only happens over a few days) then anything else, but that didn't prevent Momoa or Miller having good interactions with the others. They could have cut out some of the Superman family dealing with his death but as Superman is the point where the DC universe is centered I understand this decision.



Justice League keeps the story going and I found myself focused throughout the entire thing. It doesn't have the problem of a too long drawn out end sequences that has been a problem in earlier DC movies and it didn't seem as long as it was as I was watching it.  It has a lot going on but it wasn't too much to be completely distracting. Looking back on the movie I enjoyed it but there wasn't anything that really stood out as unique or revolutionary but was just a fun and entertaining comic book, superhero movie.

The CGI was obvious but I didn't find it that distracting. There were moments where there was CGI on CGI that I didn't like, specially with Superman, Cyborg, and Steppenwolf. Steppenwolf just looked like a video game and didn't seem to look like he fit in any of the sequences he was in.  They really need to work on Superman flying and him not looking so fake and the times where Cyborg wants completely shown was the parts where he looked really weird. I hated him when he was in the sweat suit, absolutely thought he look really bad.  A better costuming choice could have been made.  I did see this movie in 2D and am sure that if I saw it in 3D I would have a lot more to complain about the CGI.  I could tell that a lot of effort and production value was put into the CGI and making the film look the way it did.

 

Justice League was enjoyable and I really liked it. I really, really liked that this felt like one movie with a consist tone and forward moving plot.  The one thing that the DC movies do for me more than other universe movies is that it makes me want to go home and rewatch all the movies that came before it and then go and see it again. Not because there are things happening that I am confused about or that there wasn't a good enough stand along set up (I think all movies even if part of a series or universe should stand alone) but because I remember that I enjoyed them and are excited about the characters again. 



This movie is worth seeing if you like the other DC movies and I can see it as becoming one that I watch multiple times.

My Rating: 3

P.S. There are extra scenes and you need to wait until the end of the credits to see that final one.

Also check out my review for Batman v Superman http://myreviewsbyjane.blogspot.com/2016/03/batman-v-superman-dawn-of-justice-2016.html
and
Wonder Woman http://myreviewsbyjane.blogspot.com/2017/06/womder-woman-2017-review.html

The Foreigner (2017): Review

It was so nice to see a movie that made sense, engaged me from the very beginning, and gave insight into each characters motivation and how they connected to each other was consistent with the story that was being told. I really enjoyed this movie and Jackie Chan is still a major badass, I like that this movie was darker and more serious than the Jackie Chan movie I associate him with and it delivered the type of action movie that I really enjoy. It wasn't super complex or really gritty but the overall mood was consistent and really worked. It doesn't hurt that several of the action/ fighting movies that I have seen recently were not very good at all, but I would defiantly watch this movie again or keep watching it if it was on television.  It was a solid few hours that I spent at the movies.



The Foreigner stars Jackie Chan as Quan Ngoc Minh, a Chinese immigrant and British citizen who now lives in London. His daughter and last remaining family members gets killed in a bombing and he because focused on finding the killers. It appears to be a new Authentic IRA group but who Minister Liam Hennessey, played by Pierce Brosnan, doesn't know about or doesn't sanction their violence toward innocent women and children. Hennesseys history with the IRA is brought up and how he acts as a go between the British government and Irish. Quan focuses on Hennessey and trying to get him to tell the names of the people who killed his daughter. Hennessey is trying to find out who in his ranks is involved while Quan is causing him problems.  Also staring: Ray Fearon as Commander Richard Bromley;  Orla Brady as Liam's wife Mary; Lia Williams as Katherine Davies; Rory Flack Byrn as Liam's nephew Sean Morrison; and Michael McElhatton as Jim Kavenagh.

This movie made sense and kept me interested throughout the movie. The only bad thing about the story was seeing some third act scenes in the trailer so knowing that something would be coming later on in the film took away a little of the suspense. This however, did not diminish my enjoyment of the movie and liking how everything tied together. The story was pretty straight forward but how it weaved together information about Quan and Liam's past could have made it hard to follow or understand but it actually added to the story telling and was incorporated in a way that kept up the pacing. 

Overall, I liked the mood of the movie and how it was shot. The main complaint I have is the use of shaky came in some of the sequences and the tight up way some of the fighter where shot. Jackie Chan is amazing and able to stand on his own and be completely bad ass throughout an entire choreographed fight sequences so there is no reason to do the Hollywood short cuts of fast editing cuts and close up shots. I would have liked to have seen the chorography shot a bit further away and in one shot as it is well know that Jackie Chan is capable of this being done. I could tell the sequences where most likely shot in longer bits so it wouldn't have been hard to just back up the camera and show Jackie Chan in his glory.  Just because he is older now doesn't mean he isn't still bad ass. 



The casting was good and although there were a lot of supporting characters, because the focus was on Quan and Hennessy and it gave the information on how the other characters were connected to these two it worked. They were just there for set up or to frame these two main characters and the cast did a great job in their roles.  There were some things that were a bit obvious but the movie was still enjoyable.

This was a good movie and I would definitely recommend it. It could have done a bit more for it being rated R as it didn't really seem bad enough to earn this rating so I wouldn't mind letting older teens see this movie.  Definitely a solid action movie.

My Rating: 3

Thor: Ragnarok (2017): Review

 

*** review contains a few small spoilers, so be warned***

I am sorry to say that although Thor: Ragnarok was a shiny Marvel Cinematic University movie, it was just average and felt more like a transition movie in the universe than a true stand alone Thor movie. This is probably because of a lot of the characters I expect to see in Thor movies were not there and I really felt their absence. The movie didn't know what it was trying to be and combined three different types of movie into one.  This resulted in a movie that felt very disjointed and would jump in tone from one scene to another. For open disclosure, the Thor franchise is not my favorite of all the Marvel movies but I still have liked the previous two. I did like this movie but it will not be what I will first grab when I want to re-watch a Marvel movie and will just watch it if I am doing a marathon.



Thor: Ragnarok starts by quickly bringing Thor, played by Chris Hemsworth and Loki, played by Tom Hiddleston, back together with Thor returning from a battle to hopefully prevent Ragnarok (the destruction of Asgard) and finds that Loki has been masquerading as their father Odin, played by Anthony Hopkins.  They go to find Odin before he dies and discover that they have an older sister Hela, played by Cate Blanchett, who is the Goddess of Death and who has been kept at bay by Odin but who will be released once he dies.  Once Hela is released, she seeks to destroy Thor and Asgard and plans to conquer all of the realms.  While Thor is trying to stop her, he gets stranded on the planet Sakaar, where he is forced by the Grandmaster, played by Jeff Goldblum, to battle against Hulk, played by Mark Ruffalo, for entertainment.  Here he meets and tries to get a former Valkyrie, played by Tesse Thompson, to help him escape and then battle Hela before she is able to destroy Asgard.

As I mentioned above, Thor: Ragnarok felt like three different movies mushed together.  It seemed as if it was going for trying to change more into a Guardians of the Galaxy (2014) type movie, with wanting it to be humorous; having strong music/songs behind very stylized battle sequences, and having lots of alien races (this led to me feeling it was more of a transitional movie).  There was an attempt at having scenes be funny with the dialogue trying really hard to be funny. This overall didn't work for me because it was trying to make Thor both the funny man and the straight man at the same time. This doesn't work, a character needs to be one of the other.  The only character I thought was truly funny was Korg, voiced by Taika Waititi, he was by far one of the most enjoyable bits of the movie and the only one who had me laughing at his antics. Loki also had a few good moments., Thirdly there were times that were more serious and had great acting in them, this sub story line focused around Heimdall, played by Idris Elba.  When I see a movie I want it to have a consistent tone and feel thought it. There can be subtlety and differences but it just needs to fell like it all goes together or meshes well in how it is put together.

I wouldn't mind the fact that it was several different types of movie in one if it didn't seem like all the movie was trying to do was set up for what is coming next.  It pulled lots of different things together just to get characters to be working together or over story points that need to happen.  Take Dr. Stange, played by Benedict Cumberbatch, the movie brings him in and has help Thor really quickly and then disappear. Yes I understand that it was basically a cameo but based on what was going on, why would Dr. Strange just let Thor handle the rest of what happened.  I mean Thor was still on Earth when the main stuff started happening.  Ugg, I just wish the movie stood better on its own and felt like its own story not a transitional movie beefed up to just accomplish a few plot points. And while it was doing this it made everything so complicated and convoluted. I feel like it could have been much shorter and accomplished what the movie did.  While this frustrates me, it doesn't take away from how independently I liked the different bits.  I especially liked Jeff Goldblum but what actually happened on Sakaar wasn't much in either plot points or character development.



I feel like I have been complaining a lot so far but the movie was still good and a solid blockbuster.  The things that I do complain about doesn't mean that the movie was bad, I just don't think it got all the attention or effort it could have.  It felt very much phoned in for the Marvel Cinematic Universe.  This may be that it is very difficult for movie franchises, especially ones with lots of movies to make everyone special and work with the overall story arcs.  I know they can do them very well and I know that this movie will be hugely successful, I just expect more.  Especially as I really liked the other Marvel movies that have come out this year so well. When I think of Ragnarok against them, this movie just isn't as good.

Although I missed the Thor characters from the previous two movies, I liked the cast.  Casting Cate Blanchett was good, but with her being such an amazing actress, it made it more obvious that the others are not her caliber.  Even with the silliness of the movie, she still showed herself to be a great actress. Idris Elba was good as well, even thought he was only in the movie a little bit. Chris Hemsworth continues to be very attractive, and the movie has another one of those scenes just put in to enjoy and objectify his body. 

 

The CGI on CGI scenes were obvious and there was a few moments where I was distracted by it.  Usually CGI looks better when it is either in the foreground or background but not both.  I really, really enjoyed how the lighting was done with Thor and this was a nice development for Thor. The production value was high and a lot of time and effort was put into the CGI but I could tell there were moments where everything was computer generated. It is what is expected with Marvel.



This is a movie that people already know if they want to see.  If you like Marvel, it is worth watching but don't expect it to be of the higher caliber.  It is going to feel more like Guardians of the Galaxy (2014), then Captain American: Winter Soldier (2014).  I just wish that they didn't try to put so much into each movie and make them so complicated.  I am a regular audience member and not a super fan with these movies so I miss the majority of the easter eggs and have to ask "who/what is that."  I don't want to have to have seen and remember all of the previous Marvel movies to figure out what is going on.  Yes, there needs to be easter eggs for these type of fans but it is hard to join into or watch these movies if you haven't seen or at least know what has happened before.

My Rating: 2

P.S.  Of course you need to stay for the entire credits if you want to see the extra scenes, this is  Marvel movie after all.