Black Panther (2018): Review

I am super excited to say that I really enjoyed the most recent Marvel Cinematic Universe movie Black Panther.  I have been looking forward to seeing this movie and was intrigued to see what they would do with this character Black Panther after introducing him in Captain America: Civil War (2016). Although the MCU character Black Panther, played by Chadwick Boseman, was introduced previously I do not believe that it is necessary to have watched Civil War prior to seeing Black Panther. For the most part it stands on its own within the MCU. It was very good and besides a few things I really liked it and thought it was worth the hype.  At times, it became a bit preachy with its message, which isn't what I am seeing a big budget action/ superhero movie for, but it wasn't too much to take away from my enjoyment of the movie.

Black Panther follow the newly crowned King T'Challa of Wakanda, as he takes the thrown following his father King T'Chaka's, played by John Kani, death.  The movie explores that background of the Wakanda and how it has developed it technology and secrecy from being over a mine of Vibranium.  After becoming King, T'Challa works to keep the secrets of his county while seeking down a man who previously store some Vibranium during the reign of his father. Secrets come out and the future direction of Wakanda is uncertain. Also staring; Letita Wright as T'Challa's sister Shuri; Danai Gurira as General Okeye, the head of Wakanda warrior women; Lupita Nyong'o as Nakia; Michael B. Jordan as Erik Killmonger; Andy Serkis as Klaue; and Martin Freeman as Agent Everett K. Ross.

Black Panther has an amazing overall cast and I love the interplay and chemistry between the different actors and characters. There was the right amount of serious characters and those who made jokes. Those who added comedy or drama were consistent with their characterizations and all their actions felt natural  and made sense for who they were.  There was some development for the main characters and the motivation of the supporting characters was there enough to drive forward what was happening. There were a few missteps but they were minor like with W'Kabi played by Daniel Kaluuya.  I didn't liked Zuri, played by Forrest Whitaker but this probably has more to do with my not particularly caring for Forrest Whitaker as an actor and that he always seems to be these weird characters that take me out of the movie and story as it has been set up with tone and feel.  Angela Bassett as T'Challa's mother Ramonda was fine, but I don't really see what she added to the movie and nothing would have changed with her being completely removed.  The one thing that she actually does could have easily been done by someone else more integral to what was happening. 

I really liked that there were kick ass women in this movie, that the little sister was the tech person, and that T'Challa aka Black Panther was supported by two amazing strong women; one who was basically a spy and the other the head of his secret service and band of Amazonian-esk warriors. It is always nice to see well develop, strong, stand on their own women.

Usually with the MCU movies I complain about the opening action sequence and think it is too much, too hard, too fast, but I liked how it was done with Black Panther. There is a bit of backstory and set up so it takes a few minuets to get into the action sequences and it is on a smaller scale, with a single purpose so it doesn't become too more or feel like I want to know why this huge action sequence is happening and why cant I see that.  I actually liked all of the sequences and even later on in the movie when there are jumps between different locations within the climax it works with how it is weaved together.  I will complain that I didn't not like the close up, quick jumping editing during most of the fighting sequences. I feel like I have complained about this type of editing and filming of fight sequences and I will continue to complain about them because I  think they are distracting and lazy.  Show me the sequences and the cool choreography. The tech during the sequences was really cool and I enjoyed how technology was incorporated and not really addressed, just treated as normal and a tool.  

The main thing that I was not impressed with in Black Panther was the CGI.  I expect more from a Marvel movie and this CGI was not up to par. It was obvious and at times distracting. CGI is suppose to make the shot better not distract me because it jumps out as computer generated.  There were quite a few CGI on CGI which to me makes it look more fake and distracting. This is where the things in the foreground and background are both CGI, it works better when it is one or the other. Also the people on the terraced cliff looked crap.  Although a lot of the CGI was obvious there was a lot a scenes and shots that were beautifully done and gorgeous, especially when it was background sky/landscape. Overall I liked the cinematography and when the focus was on drama and enhancing what was going on it was done really well. Just stop with the everything on screen is CGI, movies are not video games.

I liked the music and how the movie used both more modern and more traditionally themes.  It added to what was happening on screen and helped me to be drawn into the story.  The story made sense and was pretty straight forward. There was nothing shocking about what was happening but there was a plot that kept a forward momentum.  I really appreciate this. There are lots of action/ superhero/ big budget movies that try to do too much and go off in too many directions that it doesn't make sense or feel like one cohesive story. Even thought the movie stands on its own it had a nice transition to how it will be incorporated into the MCU.  I also really liked that it makes sense why other superhero's or the Avengers were involved in what was occurring in this movie. 

Overall, I really enjoyed this movie and am looking forward to seeing it again. I was focused on what was going on and didn't notice the time slipping by. This is a must see for fans of the MCU, action/ super hero movies. This is a good MCU movie to watch even if you have not been keeping up with the complicated multiple movie/different character storylines. 

My Rating: 3+

P.S.  I liked the Stan Lee cameo and how it was worked in.

P.P.S. This is a Marvel movie so make sure to stay to the end as there are two extra scenes. One midway through the credits and the other at the very end.

What do you think?  Did you like this movie as much as I did or is it one that will fade into the middle for you? 

Fifty Shades Freed (2018): Review

 

*** Contains some spoilers***

This weekend the last installment of the Fifty Shades movie trilogy came out and it was basically exactly how I expected it to be. High production value, poor chemistry between the leads, bad dialogue, and cringe worthy sex scenes. If you don't know anything about the story or haven't seen the previous movies, I would recommend seeing the other two movies first as it expects you to know and remember what has already happened, who all the characters are, and it moves quickly through the story which doesn't give time to figure out the holes.  It really seems like these movies in general and this installment in specific is really made for someone who has read the books and know basically what is going on.  There is no suspense to what is happening and even myself, who has read the books and is familiar with the story, had difficulty following the jumps and no build up pace of this movie.



Fifty Shades Freed continues where Fifty Shades Darker (2017) leaves off and begins with the wedding of Anastasia Steel, played by Dakota Johnson, and Christian Grey, played by Jamie Dornan. It follows them on their honeymoon and then back into their lives as they adjust to being a married couple and Christians want to control Ana, and Ana wanting to be independent and live her life. While they are working on this the situation with Jack Hyde, played by Eric Johnson, comes in as he is mad at Ana for getting him fired in the previous movie. 

This movie in no way will stand on its own and it is truly necessary to know what has happened in the previous movies and remember the other characters to know who is who and what their relationship is to either Ana or Christian.  These characters are there but there is no real development or anything that doesn't really matter. The only one with real lines or involvement are Kate, played by Eloise Mumford; Elliott, Mia, played by Rita Ora; and Elliott, played by Luke Grimes;.  They are needed for some of the plot or they would probably been treated like Grace, played by Marcia Gay Harden; and Jose, played by Victor Rasuk.  If you don't remember who these characters are or what they have done, I recommend watching Fifty Shades of Grey (2015) [read my review here http://myreviewsbyjane.blogspot.com/2015/02/fifty-shades-of-grey-2015-review.html ] and Fifty Shades Darker (2017) [read my review here http://myreviewsbyjane.blogspot.com/2017/02/fifty-shades-darker-2017-review.html ] before going to this one.

Fifty Shades Freed is on par with the previous two movies so if you liked/ enjoyed them you will like this one. I do need to continue to criticism and state how there is NO chemistry between Dakota Johnson and Jamie Dornan and it felt like it was worse than in the previous two movies but I will. I remember thinking that the two of them didn't play well off each other but were at least okay when they weren't together in the first movie and the second one was a bit better as an overall movie, but in this one there just isn't anything.  Dakota Johnson continues to be alright as Ana and you can see her trying to make it bearable but Jamie Dornan was just horrible. I couldn't find anything appealing or likable about him as Christian and this is the movie where he is suppose to finish his transformation/ rowth and became "freed" from his background and issues. I was part of the #NotMyChristian group but I at least wanted him to do well in the role as I want all movies to be good.  You know that it is  really bad when there is more chemistry between Ana's bodyguard Sawyer, played by Brant Daugherty, and her assistant Hanna, played by Ashleigh LaThrop who were only on screen together for the most a few minuets.  Their chemistry was instantaneous and showed through immediately, I wanted more of them.



One of the things I didn't understand in the book and it also appears in this movie, is that is has less sex scenes then the previous two.  Fifty Shades Freed gets to one faster but then doesn't show the whole thing.  It is just a total let down for me in this department.  I did think the movies had gusto for some of the shots there took it really close to actual pornography to the point where it was like really they are going to allow that in a Rated R movie. I will admit that I am more aware of this type of thing ever since I started reviewing movies and am more familiar with what determines each category of movie ratings. If you liked the sex scenes in the previous two movies you will probably like the ones in here, but again if you don't know the story and don't understand what is going on with the dynamic of the characters at the points in the story of each scene you may not understand what they are doing. The movie as a whole felt rushed, this includes the sex sequences (except maybe the ice cream one).

The production value of this movie is great and it was beautiful to watch. I an tell that a lot of time, effort, and money went into the filming the movie and its locations. During the honeymooning there is a lot of nice locations and it shows how great it would be to travel with money and be swept away by a rich, handsome millionaire to travel the world in style.  I also liked how music was used in this movie and it added to the atmosphere of what is going on on screen and how you should be feeling as the story goes on.  This is consistent with the previous two movies.

There is little growth for the main characters and as it is suppose to be how Christian is able to leave his past issues behind and find comfort with Ana as his motivation to better himself, it doesn't show this.  He continues to be as he is and then Ana makes weird choices.  Something that really doesn't matter but I noticed was that Ana wears power suits/ clothes in this movie.  This is against what she does in the books because she mentions needing to get some flowery skirts to better fit in with her work environment and that this is the feel of the office that drew her to SIP. I also liked how the female bodyguard Prescott, played by Kristin Alter, got to be the one who kicked some ass.



Overall this movie is exactly as I expected it to be.  If you liked the previous movies you will enjoy this one.  It continues with the story but expects you to know what is going on.  To anyone already planning or excited to see Fifty Shades Freed, you will like it. If you didn't like the previous ones you wont like this one, and if you haven't seen either of the previous two movies I highly recommend seeing them first.

My Rating = 2-

 

I, Tonya (2017): Review

***Some spoilers for the story, but it is based on real life so you probably already know them***

Of all the movies that have been hyped up a lot recently, I am glad to say that I, Tonya absolutely stands up to that hype and deserves all the positive things being said about it.  This movie was fantastic; from the casting, to the acting, to the pace, to the production value, to the editing; almost everything in this movie was fantastic done and put together.  It is not a perfect movie but overall it was stellar and I not just enjoyed it but think it was really good.



I, Tonya is the telling on the Tonya Harding story. How she came up in the world of ice skating, her relationships with her mother and husband, how she became an Olympic athlete and was the first to land a triple axel in competition, and the "incident" where Nancy Kerrigan get attacked during the lead up to the 1994 Olympics. Starring: Margot Robbie as Tonya Harding; Allison Janney as LaVona Golden; Sebastian Stan as Jeff Gillooly; Julianne Nicholson as Diana Rawlinson; Paul Walter Hauser as Shawn; and Bobby Cannavale as Martin Maddox. The movie starts with the characters talking to the camera interview style, in the present, and telling the story. As they are talking about the events the movie goes back to Tonya starting out in ice skating and following her story up to the point of the interviews. The movie jumps between these re-tellings of the story and the chronological story following Tonya.  I liked how there were comments about what was being told in the main Tonya storyline, and how the different characters pointing out what they say did or didn't really happen.

One of the things that I think works well in the movie is that is a true life story so it makes sense and is logical.  The downfall of some based on real events movies is that the pacing and story arc can not be correct for the movie going experience, but with I, Tonya's story leading up to the "incident" it has the right feel of set up, build up, climax, and ending that works very well  in a movie. The direction and production choose a great way to tell this story, with giving enough information about different moments in Tonya's life and all the things she was going thought. I really liked the pacing and was waiting for what I knew was coming and surprised at the little things that I didn't really know about the whole story. The whole journey of the story felt interesting and although I was anticipating the part that everyone was waiting for, I still engaged with what was happening at the moment.



The casting of the movie was fantastic,  all of the actors were perfect in their roles and I really believed how they were and how they interacted with each other. They embodied the motivations of the characters with enough development to be pulled in but not too much to muddle up what was going on.  I think that Margot Robbie and Allison Janney deserve all the praise they are received for their roles but I also think Sebastian Stan deserves to get more love about him as Tonya's boyfriend/husband, he was brilliant. Each character that was focused on drew me in, I understood what they were doing and their viewpoint. Their interplay and interactions felt real and believable.

I could tell that a lot of effort was put into the details of the time that the movie was set in and it felt like the 80s/ early 90s.  I appreciated how the sets were staged and the look of some of the shots felt like they were older and fitting in with the time it was set it. It felt like it was actually that time and place not a stylized version that some movies do.  It helps that it was not my era so I cannot be super judgy of the details just that it felt right to me.  The music enhanced the experience as I noticed the songs in the background but they didn't become everything and take over what was happening between the characters.

 

The only real criticism I have for I, Tonya is the actual ice skating sequences.  As Margot Robbie is not an Olympic level ice skater and whoever did the difficult ice skating sequences didn't look like Margot, the sequences felt produced and put together. It looked like it was produced and not preformed.  If you have every spent any time actually watching ice skating it is noticeable that she didn't really preform it well and even the dancing parts looked forced.  The cuts between her top half, her feet, and some of the full body shots just didn't look right and I could tell that they didn't really fit.  It also didn't help that they showed some real footage of Tonya Harding ice skating at the end which just emphasized the fakeness of the sequences during the movie. It also didn't help that the routines felt like they were shown in real time, adding to the produced not performed feel. I did really like getting to see the ice skating sequence at the end and also the snippets of interview with the real people.



Overall this movie was fantastic and deserves all of the hype that it has.  It is not perfect but pretty close. It felt like a lot of effort was put into the movie and the casting was perfect, but it didn't feel like the movie was too stuck on itself. It was telling a good story (the movie, not the actual plot), that drew you in and was paying attention to details, but not that it expected you to know that it knows that it is trying to be fantastic.

There is a lot of swearing and abuse in the movie so it may not be suitable for younger children but I think it was fantastic and recommend seeing it to anyone with the slightest interest.

My Rating: 4-

The Disaster Artist (2017): Review

***There are spoilers, so be warned***

For being based on the making of one of the best bad movies, The Disaster Artist was absolutely fantastic and brilliantly done.  I first heard about "The Room" (2003) several years ago and how it is just one of those movies that is so bad, its good, and as soon as I learned about it I had to go and watch it. Although I am not one of the hard core fans (spoons), I do have an appreciation for it and get a kick out of all the iconic scenes. When I discovered that James Franco was creating a movie about the making of "The Room" I was intrigued and interested but it wasn't until I saw the first teaser trailer and saw James Franco as Tommy Wiseau, that I got really excited and couldn't wait to watch it.  I would have seen it sooner if there was a showing closer to where I live but I was able to get to the first screening in my area and it was absolutely worth it. The Disaster Artist exceeded my hopes and expectations. There were a few things that could be better but overall it was amazing. I think anyone who had an appreciation or joy for "The Room" will really enjoy this movie and should definitely see it.



The Disaster Artist, is based on the making of the 2003 movie "The Room" and on the 2013 book of the same name, written by Greg Sestero and Tom Bissell. Dave Franco plays the part of Greg who meets Tommy in an acting class where they share the dream of wanting to act in movies and be stars.  They befriend each other and due to their shared dream of being actors in LA they move and try to become big stars.  When he continuously gets shut down and told that he wont make it in Hollywood or that he could only be the villain Tommy decides to write, direct, produce, fund and star in his own movie which he titles "The Room." The movie follows the struggles of making the movie and the strain put on the friendship between Tommy and Greg due to Tommy eccentricities and enigmaticness. It continues to follow Greg and Tommy through the premiere of "The Room." Also staring: Seth Rogan, Ari Graynor, Jackie Weaver, Paul Scheer, Josh Hutcherson, and Zef Effron.

Overall, the acting and casting of this movie is fantastic. They are bad when they are suppose to be bad and great when they are not needing to be showing "bad acting."   The movie goes from following Tommy and Greg, to showing the filming of iconic scenes of the movie, to the ending when it premiers and the are showing the reactions to the movie. James Franco is absolutely phenomenal as Tommy Wiseau.  He just becomes the character and although he is suppose to be this person who is so out there and that people react to this quality about him, Franco didn't take it too far and I could see how he was not just making a mockery of what he was doing as he has done in other movies. I could see the care that the cast was taking to try and find the correct balance between the ridiculousness and "badness" of the movie (with in the movie) they are making but not going to the point where it is just a parody or going for all the laughs they can et.  The Disaster Artist is a serious movie it just happens to be about someone and something that has cult status for how "bad" or "enigmatic" it is. 



I hate to say it because as a whole this movie has few things that I can truly critique as not fantastic, but Dave Franco as Greg was the weakest link.  He was in no way bad, it is just compared to his brother and how absolutely perfect he was as Tommy, Greg's interpretation just didn't feel as all encompassing. I could see Dave Franco acting and the charming characteristic or idiosyncrasies that have been a part of his previous performances (and his personality) come through at times. The scenes where he is on his own or the focus is more on him (especially in the middle of the movie) shows this with. It is just the feeling gotten from him, like he has a twinkle in his eye as he is acting. When he is playing off of others it is not as obvious and he still goes a good job overall.  Also I didn't care for how they did his beard and hair in the movie, if it was more of a dead ringer for how Marks (Greg's role in "The Room") it wouldn't have bothered me as much, I just didn't like it, it looked bad to the point of  being a little distracting. The main focus of the movie is more on Greg and I would have preferred it to be more about Tommy but I can understand with him being a person that doesn't share about his past (age, place of birth, and where his money comes from) I can understand this choice.

The cinematography and how The Disaster Artist is shot is great. The pacing is almost perfect. There were a few parts in the beginning that could have moved forward a bit faster but this doesn't really take away from the overall experience. I liked the combination of and how they showed the film making process of the movie within the movie and the little comments of the others helping to make and act in the movie. 



Although you probably don't have to have seen "The Room" to enjoy The Disaster Artist and it stands up on its own with not just expecting you to know what it going on and giving enough info about the scenes and they are being shot or at least the set up, having an understanding of the plot of "The Room" and the different characters in it adds to the enjoyment and expectation when watching The Disaster Artist.  There were times when I found myself getting excited and anticipating moments that were coming and then really enjoying them when they actually happened. It is strange to actually have this done in a great way and I was not left feeling dissatisfied or let down that it didn't meet my expectations or wants.  It was a great move going experiences especially as everyone in the theatre with me seemed to enjoy it and were laughing along with me.

I didn't like how they had people at the beginning of the movie say things about Tommy or "The Room."  I think it just adds some blah before the actually movie started. I think it would have been more successful at the end of the movie.

Right before the credits they show a split screen of different iconic scenes from "The Room" and the remade scenes in The Disaster Artist. Some of these have been released as promotional material but they were still really great to see and I hope there are even more when the Blu-ray is released.

Althought this movie was fantastic and I loved it, I would not recommend it to everyone. Because of the cult status of "The Room" I would not recommend the movie to someone who didn't find the trailers interesting or doesn't enjoy its so bad its good.

My Rating: 4-

P.S.  You want to stay though the end of the credits as their is an extra post credit scene.

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+