Generally speaking when they make a movie about the creator of an iconic character it’s because they want to tap that well again and know that the public is tired of seeing retreads of the same story. This one, however, appears to be a story actually worth telling. The fact that the creator of one of Horror film and literatures most iconic monsters is a woman wouldn’t be that big of a deal today but when Mary Shelley wrote Frankenstein it was 1818, women were not exactly in a position of high regard or power in the swingin’ 1800s. This is what makes the story interesting. Let’s be honest, even today horror is a boy’s club, a woman that wanted to terrify audiences would most likely be seen as “a little off” at best so how did this young woman produce one of the top 5 classics of horror writing and manage to keep her name on it? I’m not sure how much of the story here is based on hard fact, viewing the trailer it looks like they’ll be explaining the inspiration behind most of the facets of Frankenstein throughout, regardless it’s bound to be a progressive tale that let’s both women and men know what can be accomplished in the face of adversity.
Elle Fanning, a still vastly underrated talent, stars in the titual role and appears to bring her A game, If you pay attention you can even catch a glimpse of Arya Stark herself, Maise Williams in a supporting role. Judgements will have to be reserved until relase but at a minimum this looks like a welcome departure from the prim and proper world of you standard period piece.
I promised we’d look out for you, and so here it is! We’re giving away free Fandango passes to the biggest movie of the year, Avengers: Infinity War! We just recently reported how the film’s pre-orders are beating the last seven Marvel movies combined, including Black Panther, so these are going to be hot.
SYNOPSIS: As the Avengers and their allies have continued to protect the world from threats too large for any one hero to handle, a new danger has emerged from the cosmic shadows: Thanos. A despot of intergalactic infamy, his goal is to collect all six Infinity Stones, artifacts of unimaginable power, and use them to inflict his twisted will on all of reality. Everything the Avengers have fought for has led up to this moment – the fate of Earth and existence itself has never been more uncertain.
You know the drill. To enter, simply complete the required steps in the Rafflecopter contest form below. Winners will receive a pair of Fandango movie vouchers, up to a $21 value each and good at any theater available on Fandango.com or the Fandango app. That’s right, this contest isn’t limited just to DMV residents. Further instructions will be included on the vouchers themselves. Winners will be selected on April 17th and notified by email!
So enter now! Avengers: Infinity War opens April 27th!
The current talk surrounding the Fast & Furious spinoff with Dwayne Johnson and Jason Statham hasn’t been great. Not that we know anything about the movie itself, but we do know Johnson’s recent comments made towards franchise kingpin Vin Diesel, and how it’s unlikely they’ll be making any movies together soon. That means the Hobbs/Shaw spinoff flick is where Johnson will be calling home in the F&F universe, and now he’s got a red-hot director joining him.
Deadpool 2, Atomic Blonde, and John Wick director David Leitch has been confirmed to direct the spinoff, and that list of credits alone should be enough to get you amped. Look at everything he’s done previously and just imagine it with Johnson and Statham instead. If Johnson was looking for a way to overshadow what Diesel is doing over in the “core” F&F movies, Leitch is the guy to help him do it. He was rumored for the gig a couple of months ago and it looks like the ink is dry on a deal.
The Hobbs/Shaw spinoff opens July 26th 2019.
Please welcome David Leitch as the director of the Fast & Furious Hobbs and Shaw spinoff. pic.twitter.com/RnpN0RMko9
I’m not sure if you’ve seen the trailer for Lean
on Pete, but it’s kind of ridiculous. It’s a very earnest series of
shots displaying the unlikely love between a boy and his horse. It’s nothing but clichés and awards laurels
praising it to be very important, and
I just can’t. Needless to say, my expectations were pretty low heading into
this film, and I’m happy to report that I was wrong. Lean on Pete is actually
a pretty good movie.
Charlie Plummer stars as the aforementioned troubled young
boy living a rough life with his neglectful father, who just isn’t capable of
being there for his son. The only comfort he finds is in his job with Del (Steve
Buscemi) taking care of race horses, particularly the titular horse Pete.
Luckily, the movie isn’t as schmaltzy as it sounds. The
writing and performances are both fantastic and elevate what could have been a
pretty corny boy-and-his-horse movie. Buscemi is as charismatic as ever, and
Plummer just knocks it out of the park. He showed a lot of promise in last
year’s All the Money in the World, but really gets a chance to shine
in this one. His All the Money performance was far more based in realistic
suffering, whereas in this film he gets to show a lot more depth. He plays a
young man who doesn’t fit into society the way he feels he should, and is too
proud to accept the help he’s offered. It’s a compelling character study that
Plummer handles brilliantly.
What’s odd about Lean on Pete, and makes it stand out
from other sad animal movies, is its plot structure. We follow the story of the
boy, the horse, and Del for a little over an hour, before transitioning to what
almost feels like an entirely new plot for the remainder of its over-two-hours-long
runtime.
It’s going to sound a little weird, but the only thing I can
think of to compare this plot shift to is Jaws. You know how the first half of
that movie takes place on land, focusing on the town’s reaction to the shark,
and then the second half is just as long and takes place on the boat, with them
fighting off the shark? That’s what Lean on Pete feels like. It feels
like a strong two act film, with each act being close to feature length. It’s
as if this movie contains its own sequel, and in doing so, loses some of the
momentum they built in the first half, as we watch the boy travel the country
in a series of vignettes of different abusive situations. Perhaps it would have
been best to release it in two parts, or only having the first part adapted
like Call
Me by Your Name. Regardless, there’s a weird, prolonged tonal shift
that happens and I’m still not quite sure why.
Ultimately, however, this is a very solid movie that far
exceeded my expectations. When it’s about a boy and a horse, it’s compelling.
When it’s about being a homeless youth in America, it’s compelling. Lean
on Pete is a pretty solidly crafted movie, even if it is too long for
its own good.
There’s no such thing as a dead franchise in Hollywood, and lately we’ve seen some of the most successful reborn with a gender-swapping twist. Steven Soderbergh’s Ocean’s 11 movies are the most mainstream he’s ever done, combining an all-star cast of handsome dudes to pull off a series of entertaining swindles. And now the series is back with Ocean’s 8, which finds Soderbergh passing the baton to his buddy Gary Ross and a cast led by Sandra Bullock as Debbie Ocean, who has gathered a crew of thieving ladies to pull of a heist her estranged brother wouldn’t dare try.
Bullock is joined by Cate Blanchett, Anne Hathaway, Rhianna, Helena Bonham Carter, Awkwafina, Mindy Kaling, and Sarah Paulson, who plot to rob the Met Ball, and possibly a diamond necklace worn by Hathaway’s character. Confused? Isn’t Hathaway in on the heist? Yeah, probably. Or maybe not? Expect plenty of double-crosses in this con game.
This looks great based on the outfits alone. What’s the costume budget on this thing?
Luke Evans and Kelly Reilly both star in the thriller 10×10; a movie about a young woman named Cathy (Reilly) who is abducted in broad daylight by a man named Lewis (Evans) who then throws her into a secret 10×10, soundproof room in his home all in an attempt at uncovering a dark secret that she has tried for years to hide.
At the beginning of this movie I had hope. The filmmakers did a pretty good job of building suspense. From the background sounds to the visuals where we were able to see the danger that was lurking closely behind it all helped to create a sense of dread, fear, and helplessness within the viewer in knowing that harm is about to come to Cathy.
However, once she was kidnapped things took turn for the not so good. The movie after a certain point seemed to be more focused on showcasing incredibly frustrating fight scenes than actually having something meaningful to say/show. Cathy on more than one occasion was able to take control of the situation at hand, but because of stupid decisions that every thriller movie has to fall victim to her attempts are for nothing, if, but to further the plot. I understand that continuing the story is priority number one, but nothing grinds my gears more than when watching characters make stupid decisions especially on more than one occasion. It just seems really lazy to me and actually takes me out the experience of the movie.
Once it seemed as though the filmmakers realized that the fight scenes could only get them but so far and that what they had created up until that point was a movie that was void of any real purpose that that is when they said “ok, let’s try to make this meaningful.” Near the end of the film the filmmakers attempted to add in some kind of commentary on morality and the idea of right and wrong. The movie never explores this theme up until this point, so when it comes up it’ll more than likely leave you more confused than provoking any kind of real thought.
By the end of the film you’ll end up feeling pretty detached from the entire experience and I think that that can be chalked up to the fact that you won’t be rooting for anyone when it’s all said and done. I’m not the kind of person that believes that movies have to always follow a certain guideline when it come to its characters. Movies are (generally) based on individual stories which are based on, or at the least inspired by, real life and sometimes people in the real world are not good people; therefore, the stories aren’t always going to be and shouldn’t always be based on do-gooders.
With that being said, when it comes to characters, though you may not like them, agree with them, sympathize and/or connect with them one still needs to, at the least, be able to empathize with them; it’s that empathy that helps the audience feel some kind of investment in their story to the point where you would like to see how it all ends. However, by the end of this movie you will not care for either Cathy or Lewis because you’ll see that neither of them are honestly worth saving. Though, we find out their motivations through their sad background stories that brought them to this point because these characters are so foolish, selfish, stupid, and downright psychotic those character traits essentially undo any kind of empathy or remorse that could have been mustered up for them.
This was a movie that had me fooled. It seemed like maybe, just maybe, I was getting something more than your run of the mill, predictable thriller, but that sadly was not the case. The filmmakers really dropped the ball on this one.
I remember sitting in Hall H at Comic-Con last year as Charlize Theron showed off footage from Atomic Blonde, and we were all stunned by the incredible action, so reminiscient of John Wick. Not surprising considering it was shot by its co-director David Leitch. Coming off the love Theron gained as Furiosa in Mad Max: Fury Road there was a great deal of expectation, but Atomic Blonde only managed about $100M worldwide upon release. A disappointingly low number, although still a financial success for the small-budgeted flick.
While a sequel seemed unlikely, Theron has confirmed (via IndieWire) that they are “working on a sequel” to Atomic Blonde. There aren’t any further details at this point, so we don’t know who would be returning other than her. The first film was set just prior to the collapse of the Berlin Wall, with Theron as a secret agent sent behind enemy lines to investigate a fellow agent’s death.
So Theron could be talking about a script being worked on, or perhaps they are just figuring out the story. I wouldn’t even be surprised if the next film turns out to be an origin featuring a totally new actress in the role with Theron as a producer. We’ll just have to wait and see.
Theron will be seen next in Jason Reitman’s Tully, opening May 4th.
The new indie dramedy film The Five Year follows the
fairly simple story of a tight knit group of friends who reunite for a lakeside
weekend getaway after five years apart. Screening last night at the Nova
International Film Festival, the film follows the dynamics and relationships of
the various friends, and how they’ve shifted as the group grew apart. We also
watch them have fun at the lake a lot and get into various amusing shenanigans.
It is a comedic drama, but honestly, to me it felt less like a traditional
comedy and more like a series of scenes of people who are inherently funny
having a fun time. In that sense, it reminded me of the more recent Adam
Sandler movies, but not in a necessarily bad way.
Now before it begins to sound as if I’m condemning something
to trashy Sandler-Land, allow me to explain what I mean. Sandler has recently made
a string of films that focus less on traditional comedic elements and are more
centered on a whimsical spirit and exotic settings. In that sense, in its form
rather than its content, The Five Year feels like a comedy.
There were moments in this movie that felt like I was just straight up watching
a group of friends go on a vacation together, which is an interesting
experiment. There’s also a strong mumblecore influence pulsing through its
veins as we simply observe their lives.
That being said, the laughter does stop hard in the third
act as all the various conflicts we’ve observed come to a head: The marriage
that’s on the rocks; the secret affair with your best friend’s sister; the fear
of giving up your dreams. All of these heavy themes are allowed to blow up in every
character’s face, putting an immediate halt to any humor, which is a very
modern form of dramatic-comedy storytelling.
To me, Judd Apatow is the king of this trope. So many of his
films stop the laughs in the third act to focus on the deep emotional trauma
beneath the surface of its characters. Personally, I’m not much of a fan of
Apatow-ing in a dramedy, but I do understand its effectiveness, and give points
to The
Five Year for providing more somber outlets for its cast members to
shine.
Clearly this cast has chemistry together, and the team
behind the camera must as well. There are some aerial shots and montages in
this movie that are nothing short of beautiful, and are paired well with some
excellent original songs. I truly only wish these resources could have pooled
to tell a more conventionally cohesive story, as opposed to a 90 minute mood
piece with occasional laughs.
That being said, Nova Fest is a platform for unconventional
filmmaking, so if there’s a home for a work like this, it’s here.
In 2018 everybody knows the name Timothee Chalamet, and it’s not just because it’s spelled weird. The young actor had a Hell of a 2017, with high-profile roles in Lady Bird, Hostiles, and Call Me By Your Name, the latter earning him Best Actor nominations at the Oscars and Golden Globes. That’s going to put a lot of eyes on anything he does for a while, and next out of the gate is Hot Summer Nights.
A different kind of coming-of-age story for Chalamet, he plays a shy kid who has one crazy summer when the local wild girl takes a liking to him and he starts selling weed with her drug-dealing brother. The film marks the directorial debut of Elijah Bynum and co-stars It Follows’ Maika Monroe, Alex Roe (Rings), Thomas Jane (Punisher Warzone), Emory Cohen (The Place Beyond The Pines), William Fichtner (Drive Angry), and Jack Kesy (Deadpool 2). So a pretty great cast and the trailer is stylish as Hell. Here’s the synopsis:
Set in Cape Cod over one scorching summer, Hot Summer Nights follows Daniel (Timothée Chalamet), a shy out-of-towner who gets in over his head flipping weed with the neighborhood rebel (Alex Roe) while pursuing his new business partner’s enigmatic sister (Maika Monroe). With a hurricane looming in the wings, tensions rise against a backdrop of drive-ins, arcades, and crashed parties as the stakes (and temperatures) grow ever higher. Available exclusively on DIRECTV June 28. In Theaters July 27.
Those hoping for a return to form for revered German director Wim Wenders may want to go find one of his recent documentaries, instead. Submergence continues the filmmakers’ extended streak of subpar narrative features, somehow managing to make a movie about a long-distance romance, Middle Eastern terrorists, and deep sea diving pretentious, boring, and pointless. The only reason it remains remotely watchable is the presence of Alicia Vikander and James McAvoy, although they struggle to rise above this painful drag.
A strangely literal romantic drama about disparate lovers, Submergence stars Vikander as Dani, a brilliant and flirty scientist (she’s constantly putting on and taking off her nerd glasses) obsessed with the bottom of the ocean. She’s on the verge of the biggest submergence of her career, in which she’s expected to make a huge discovery about…something. But she just can’t focus, staring off into the gloomy distance before telling her nosey colleague “I realize I’ve never been lonely before.”
Well, that’s one way to steer the conversation away from the job at hand and onto something totally unrelated. And weird.
Dani longs for James (McAvoy), a handsome gent she met only recently at a French resort and struck up a passion with. “Passion” in the sense that she won him over with overly scientific jargon about the “mesopalogic zone”, which she coos with erotic potential. She can’t stop talking about her work, while he’s always deflecting about his. He says he’s a water engineer, helping to get clean water in places overrun by terrorist factions. His job is considerably more James Bond than he lets on. When she asks about it, he spins it into witty Scottish charm.
She asks, “What’s your favorite body of water”?
His response, “The human body…well, it’s MOSTLY made of water.”
Ugh. On that note, they hit it off like gangbusters. For like five minutes before they are separated by their careers, but not before promising to make a go of their newfound relationship. Now she stares at her phone like a nervous schoolgirl hoping to a message from him. It’s been a month without hearing a word, and she worries she’s been tossed aside.
It never makes sense her obsession with James considering their brief dalliance, especially in light of the major breakthrough she’s about to make in her life’s true passion. Visualized in somber tones throughout, Dani is “submerged” by the emotional void left by James’s absence as much as she is the inkiness of the ocean’s depths. Meanwhile, there’s an incredible imbalance in the torment the characters are going through, as James finds himself the hostage of a terrorist cell. The silent despair she feels inside her submersible is nothing like the actual torment he faces, with the threat of death a daily constant.
And yet, even the potential for violence against James or the danger of Dani’s drowning can’t shake Submergence from its dull stupor. Penned by screenwriter Erin Dignam, who last wrote Sean Penn’s abysmal The Last Face (Hey Hollywood, learned your lesson yet?), the film lacks everything we used to love about Wenders’ early work. He used to tell personal stories rich with character and infused with the flavor of a specific region, but there’s nothing to find here but emptiness and the feeling that potential is being seriously wasted. It’s not offensively terrible like Wenders’ Everything Will Be Fine, but it certainly won’t remind anybody of his Happy, Texas glory years. Best to not submerge yourself too deeply in this one.
