Delayed Reaction: Army of Thieves

Premise: Another heist movie in the world of Army of the Dead except no zombies.

 

I am so confused about this movie and series from top to bottom. Army of the Dead was an expensive film stuck in development hell for over a decade. The script was from the mid-2000s and not developed until Netflix overpaid for it. It came out in May of 2021 after reshoots to replace one of the actors. Nearly a year before that though, they greenlit a prequel to the movie, starring (and directed by) Matthias Scweighofer’s safecracking Ludwig Dieter – who is a side character in Army of the Dead. Oh, and the movie is a straight-up heist movie. The zombies that defined the genre the first movie is in are just hanging out in the background. That is such a weird move.

 

Netflix is desperate for meaningful film IP. Something I believe unequivocally is that Netflix has never released a blockbuster movie. Sure, they have hits on their service, but that doesn’t mean people would’ve paid to watch them in droves. Netflix popularity is a lot like Road House being the most popular movie on cable for years. That movie was a moderate hit in theaters that was easy to watch. It’s nowhere on great film lists and has little pop culture legacy. Now, look at the Netflix catalog of hits. The Irishman was made because no other studio would pay for it. Why would they? Scorsese’s last passion project, Silence, made $23 million worldwide. Netflix made hits out several RomComs: a genre that theaters have largely abandoned because they so rarely catch on. Does anyone think Set It Up or To All the Boys would’ve been hits had they not been easily available to throw on at home? Or let’s look at the big ones. Birdbox felt more like an accident than a real hit. I don’t see people paying to see that the way they did with A Quiet Place. Extraction at one point was their biggest hit ever in terms of views, and it’s a movie that doesn’t exists. They got the Adam Sandler and Michael Bay deals after their box office draws had faded. And point to one movie between them on Netflix that doesn’t feel like a B- effort. I think the closest argument for a legit blockbuster on Netflix you could make is The Old Guard. Even that feels more like an Atomic Blonde in terms of IP value. An Old Guard sequel won’t be an event film. It’ll be a movie people only remember when it shows up on the Netflix menu one Friday. Simply put, Netflix is still where filmmakers go to produce the screenplay at the bottom of their pile, not the top.

 

This all ties back to Army of Thieves in that this is such an odd show of confidence by Netflix. How many people even register this as an Army of the Dead prequel when they start it and how many are disappointed to learn that this is apparently a heist franchise, not a zombie franchise?

All that said, I did enjoy Army of Thieves decently. It’s a send-up of heist movies the way that Army of the Dead is a send-up of zombie movies. It has the similar feel of a movie that would’ve felt fresher around 2005. I wonder if this started from an original screenplay that was adapted to be a prequel. It sure feels like it. Ludwig Dieter is an odd choice to lead the movie as a character, but it does make a lot of sense for a heist movie. I like Nathalie Emmanuel in this. I’d probably prefer the movie centered around her, honestly. Ruby O. Fee is fun. I don’t recall seeing her in anything else before, but she fits right into a motley crew of criminals in a not very serious movie. Stuart Martin is a nice douchebag. He’s a bit on the generic side though. He’s more of a cast member on a long running procedural than an action movie leading man.

This is the exact kind of disposable, entertaining watch that Netflix specializes in releasing every week or two. I have no idea how they stay profitable this way. As long as they know, that’s all that matters:

 

[Another] Side Rant: Is Nathalie Emmanuel famous? Is she a star? To date, her resume outpaces her fame. She was in the biggest show in the world – Game of Thrones – and is still in arguably the biggest film franchise in the world – The Fast and the Furious. They are secondary roles in both though. This is only her 9^th film (her first being in 2012). Her most prominent role outside of GoT and FatF is the Hulu Four Weddings and a Funeral series, which made not dent. Like, I’ll see anything with her because I’ll see anything with an attractive Brit. I get the sense that she’s going to be one of those actresses who is always one role away from the A-list (whatever that even is these days).

 

Verdict: Weakly Recommend

Delayed Reaction: Paranormal Activity: Next of Kin

Premise: A woman who was abandoned as an infant tracks down her biological family in a creepy Amish community.

 

I need to make something clear immediately. This is not a Paranormal Activity movie. This is a found-footage horror movie that only shares the name as a branding move. I’m sure someone can find a couple small details that link the movies, but they are superficial at best.

 

The idea is pretty cool. Margot (Emily Bader) is a filmmaker who reluctantly decides to make a documentary about her search for her family. She was abandoned at a hospital as an infant. The footage of her mother leaving her is mysterious. Through 23 & Me, she finds a relative. He’s Amish and on his Rumspringa. He agrees to bring her and her small film crew back to his community for her to learn more. As you’d expect, the community are hiding something and it eventually leads to a lot of people dying.

 

As a found-footage movie, it is fine. They cast a bunch on unfamiliar but quality actors who pull off all the scares and verisimilitude. Dale Lippert in particular is a funny and weird sound guy who releases the tension just enough. Enough money went into this to make a lot of great looking locations. However, this is WAY too edited for a found footage movie. Look, I’m fine buying into the conceit that people are leaving cameras on in situations when they normally wouldn’t. I don’t need the film to throw that in my face though. Repeatedly, this film has shots and angles that I don’t believe any of their cameras actually caught. It broke the illusion, and that’s a line a found footage movie should never cross.

 

Why calling this Paranormal Activity bothers me is in the way it’s shot and earns its scares. PA has a specific style beyond just found footage. It relies on surveillance footage. There are a lot of static or mechanical shots. The power is in the stillness. Next of Kin gets rid of almost all of that. Calling this a Paranormal Activity movie is kind of like calling THX 1138 a Star Wars movie because it’s set in a Sci-Fi world and written by George Lucas.

 

Verdict: Weakly Don’t Recommend

Delayed Reaction: Red Notice

Premise: An FBI agent and a thief team up to thwart a bigger thief.

 

I guess the idea behind this is that Netflix was going to cast their way into a hit. I mean, this cast is almost algorithmically perfect. Dwayne Johnson is maybe the last real headlining star who has churned out box office successes almost single-handedly. Ryan Reynolds is quietly a huge box office draw. Few actors shill for their movies as hard as him. He made Deadpool a hit. Somehow, Free Guy turned into a success. I don’t think we appreciate how big of a star he actually is. Gal Godot is less proven. Her biggest claim is making Wonder Woman work where all the other DC films at the time had failed. The amount that she came out of the DC ordeal unscathed is remarkable. Putting those three stars together in a movie is the equivalent of earning base hits for an RBI rather that swinging for a home run.

 

I don’t know how to rate Red Notice. It reportedly cost $200 million. Regardless of whether it had been a theatrical release or not, this was never making that back. Director Rawson Marshall Thurber doesn’t make movies at that level. The spy comedy genre isn’t one that makes blockbusters. I can’t come up with a scenario where that would ever have worked. So, if Netflix thought this was going to become valuable IP for them, this is a failure. The movie is about as notable as Central Intelligence at 4x the budget.

 

Now, if I ignore any industry expectations or production history, then this movie is perfectly enjoyable. Johnson and Reynolds’ personas are well matched. Johnson is a good straight man who is able to be flummoxed. Reynolds works best when he can be a sarcastic irritant. Both move between high and low status pretty well. Godot is a slightly weak link. She’s not a versatile actress, and this movie doesn’t quite know how to use her specific kind of charisma. This movie might have too many alphas.

 

Nothing in the plot itself is especially clever or new. It falls in that category of movies where, while I didn’t predict the exact twists, I’ve seen all the possible variations before. It’s been only a couple days since I saw this movie and most of the specifics already escape me. Don’t get me wrong. I had a base level enjoyment of the movie. I don’t regret watching it. If Netflix makes a sequel, I’ll probably see it opening weekend. I’m not investing any more thought into this series though until then.

 

Verdict: Weakly Don’t Recommend

Delayed Reaction: V/H/S/94

Premise: Police raiding a warehouse find a series of disturbing VHS tapes.

 

It's hard for me to express my delight at finding out about this movie. I had no idea it was being made. I randomly stumbled onto it looking for something else the day after it was released and I practically squealed. V/H/S and V/H/S/2 are my two favorite horror movies. They are a mix of found footage style (which I'm a sucker for), horror filmmakers of talent, and incredible ambition that work so wonderfully. The anthology structure gives them variety and doesn't wear out any of the ideas. It's frustrating how much people dismiss them because of gripes about the found footage style, gimmicky structure, or lack of polish.

 

After the third movie, V/H/S Viral, was a complete whiff (not enough shorts and an awful bridging story) I thought the franchise was dead. It's hard to convince enough filmmakers to put time and effort into a low budget anthology. But I think the basic premise is malleable. There's a collective of people who basically collect and share tapes of people getting killed by malevolent forces. That's it. There's so much room to work in this. The main thing they need to avoid is overexplaining this collective idea.

 

(As I like to do with anthologies, let's break this down by each short)

 

Holy Hell

This short is the bridge between the other segments. I think it's also the weakest. It's the main time when the production values really hurt. And I'm just not a fan of when they try to develop the story behind this collective. As much as I adore the first two movies, I never have a desire to know more.

 

Storm Drain

This one also feels a little cheap. Found footage should avoid mimicking news programs. Local news feels cheap, but because it's produced daily over years, it's actually pretty hard to fake it convincingly. Trying to do a news program is a nice slant they haven't tried before though. Creativity of the footage source is the biggest problem as this series progresses, so I appreciate any attempt to find a new reason for this footage to exist. The Raatma stuff is fun. I don't care for the very end though. I don't like when they get jokey. The V/H/S tone works better when the segments are uniform in vision and leave out the camp.

 

The Empty Wake

This is one of the stronger segments due to its simplicity. No surprise it comes from prolific horror writer Simon Barrett who has been involved in previous V/H/S movies and has written some of the best horror of the last decade. He's a better writer than director though. I imagine he came back for the chance to direct, so I'll take too much Barrett over none. I think this does play a little fast and loose with the camera angles that are possible.

 

The Subject

Oh my. This was a treat. It came from Timo Tjahjanto, who codirected the insane death cult segment from V/H/S/2. This is a crazier idea but without the intensity. That makes sense. I think Gareth Evans brought most of that in the V/H/S/2 segment. This was still good though. Some really messed up visuals.

 

Terror

This was overall my favorite segment. Some of the white nationalist stuff was over the top, but the mix of elements in this is wholly unique. Exploding blood. What an idea.

 

The first three V/H/S movies were indie features that screened at Sundance. The group behind them had a lot of developing talent, eager to show off their skills. V/H/S/94 is a Shudder exclusive with a more modest budget and emerging talents don't have the same incentive to sign on. Expectedly, my response is a little more muted. Still, it was so damn refreshing to have one of the favorite franchises back and in good form. I'm hoping Shudder can keep these coming.

 

Verdict: Strongly Recommend

Delayed Reaction: Love Hard

Premise: A woman surprises her internet boyfriend with a visit, only to discover she’s been catfished. But maybe that’s not a deal breaker.

 

There’s a nice level-setting line in this movie that really helps me talk about it. At one point, Nina Dobrev’s Natalia is talking to her friend on the phone who says something like “In L.A. you’re a 6, so in Lake Placid you’re a 10.” This is the kind of movie where Nina Dobrev is just a winsomely attractive woman. So, this is a fantasy world where all understanding of normal human behavior should be ignored.

 

With that understanding, I thoroughly enjoyed this movie. The catfishing and convoluted place-setting I’ll ignore. That’s just the cost of doing business for getting into this movie. Nina Dobrev is RomCom delightful. She’s another actress that could’ve thrived in the RomCom-friendly 90s. I like seeing Jimmy O. Yang in a human-scale role. Normally he’s a scene-stealing side-character. In this, he’s a believable romantic protagonist. Sure, maybe he wouldn’t really end up with a Nina Dobrev, but it’s not unbelievable that he could. I also appreciate that Darren Barnet’s character isn’t being made fun off. He’s not an awful person. Dobrev isn’t pursuing him even though he sucks, despite being so handsome. He’s a nice dude who Dobrev doesn’t actually mesh with.

 

I did watch the movie too early. I didn’t realize how much of a Christmas movie it was. I normally like to save those for post-Thanksgiving. Although, at the rate I’m posting these, it might be after New Year’s before this get posted. So, nothing about this is right. Some of the Christmas touches were fun. It chimed in on the “Is Die Hard a Christmas movie?” debate*. I’m in the category of people who like Love, Actually despite its flaws, so I enjoy the homage to that movie in this. And, the reworking of the “Baby It’s Cold Outside” lyrics was charming as hell.

 

*My stance: I don’t think it is. I’m fine if you do. Unless you can define what a “Christmas movie” means to you, then I won’t engage in a debate about it.

 

Verdict: Weakly Recommend

Delayed Reaction: Beanie Mania

Premise: A documentary about the rise and fall of Beanie Babies.

 

There isn’t a lot to say about this documentary. It’s pretty straight-forward. It seems that someone said, “Remember Beanie Babies? What was that?” then sought to find the answer. It can be hard to track a craze. It’s often the result of so many small occurrences snowballing at the same time. Tracking the Beanie Baby crazy reminded me a lot of when someone tries to find where a meme started. Generally, at some point, you just have to settle on an agreed source. This doc decides that the Beanie Baby craze started because of a group of moms in suburban Illinois, which, ok. Sure. I guess there’s some truth in that. Then again, one of those moms was a publicist for People magazine, so maybe they were just the highest profile or loudest early adopters. This aspect of the doc didn’t entirely sit well with me.

 

Once it gets past the origins, this does a pretty good job of documenting the phases of this craze. I was 10 at the peak of Beanie Babies. I was never a collector, but I remember the insanity. The Princess Diana bear and the Happy Meal Mini-Beanies were the benchmarks for me. I remember how nuts both were. I like how well the movie researches the mysterious Ty company and the savvy way the Beanies were marketed.

 

Obviously, the craziest thing is the secondary market that evolved. I think the movie could’ve found some more room to examine how it compared to the modern movements like crypto currency, NFTs, and “meme stocks”. Granted, Beanie Mania probably already pushed the limits of how much economics people want in their entertainment.

 

At only 80 minutes, this was an easy watch. For those too young to have experienced the craze, this somewhat captures that moment. For those who do remember it, it is a nice blast of nostalgia.

 

Verdict: Weakly Recommend

Delayed Reaction: Being the Ricardos

Premise: Lucille Ball and Desi Arnez prepare to shoot an episode of I Love Lucy the same week that a story comes out about Ball being a communist.

 

I’d be cool if this became an annual thing. A fall/winter biopic about some famous people in the 50s or 60s. Judy won Renee Zellweger another Oscar in 2020. I enjoyed Stan & Ollie in 2019 despite it being mostly ignored by awards bodies. I still need to see Film Stars Don’t Die in Liverpool, but it seems like the same thing. Hell, I’ll even take a fictionalized account like Hail, Caesar! The studios were allowed to paint their picture of Hollywood in the middle of the century. Let’s have some behind the scenes takes on what it was like now.

 

Being the Ricardos is a very Sorkiny movie. He wrote and directed the movie. It’s packed with his dialogue. I’m not the first person to point out that it plays like what he wanted Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip to be. I ate it all up. Nicole Kidman and Javier Bardem aren’t perfect Lucy and Desi mimics, but they capture the spirit of the characters well. I’m less concerned about how well they recreate classic I Love Lucy scenes. I’m more interested with how well they portray them as the shrewd producers and businessmen/women they were.

 

I will say, this movie is for people who would find it fun to read through three drafts of an I Love Lucy script to see how the episode evolved. I imagine it’s a little too wonky for some people in the same way that explaining how a football play is devised would bore me to tears. That said, there is a lot of fun in this as I Love Lucy pseudo-fan-fiction. I love seeing William Frawley (J.K. Simmons) and Vivian Vance (Nina Arianda) bicker. From what I know, that’s pretty accurate to how they really were. I enjoyed all the discussion of whether or not Lucy Ricardo could be pregnant. Like a lot of Aaron Sorkin work, I could just as easily have enjoyed this as a stage play. It’s not crazy ambitious as a film, but it’s thoroughly entertaining. Great performances. Familiar topic. Fast dialogue. What more do I need?

 

Verdict: Strongly Recommend

Movie Reaction: The Matrix Resurrections

Formula: The Matrix / A Glitch in the Matrix

 

The Matrix is one of those movies that, through no fault of its own, may have done more harm than good. The effects which work so well in the movie ruined action movies for years from poor imitation. The bullet time has become a go-to lazy parody in bad movies. The philosophy of the movie gave rise to a movement of bad interpretations of the movie and even worse applications of those theories. I can’t be the only one who would be happier if I never had to hear someone earnestly explain simulation theory.

 

One of the scariest things in Hollywood is when a franchise reads its own reviews. It turns into a case of the tail wagging the dog. Instead of directing the conversation by developing the story further, it becomes about explaining why an interpretation of the last story was wrong or how people liked the wrong parts of the movie(s). To a large extent, that’s what The Matrix Resurrections is. It’s a movie all about how we feel about The Matrix.

 

This time, Thomas Anderson (aka Neo) (aka Keanu Reeves) is back in the Matrix, only he’s been convinced that the first three films were all just a psychotic fantasy. He’s a video game developer who made the game The Matrix which was a revolutionary when it came out in 1999. Now he’s being told by his parent company, Warner Brothers, to make a sequel (Get it?). Of course, he eventually takes the blue pill, finds that 60 years have passed, and has a new set of analog character to work with. Outside the Matrix, there’s a whole story about there being a new Neo and Trinity grown as a power source or something. I never understood the “real world” parts of these movies that well. Inside the Matrix it’s all very meta. The program has gotten better at fighting the growing number of bugs. Most of the time however is spent reflecting on the old Matrix that we all know.

 

I think your enjoyment of the new Matrix will depend on what you liked about the original movies, and if you liked the wrong parts, you will be shamed for it. At this point, it’s clear that what the Wachowskis liked about The Matrix isn’t what made it so popular. I like them as cool action movies with some nifty world-building and mythology. I like that there is more to them to examine if you’d like, but I wasn’t that interested to do so. Lana Wachowski didn’t make Resurrections for me, although she tried to. This movie goes out of its way to point out the movie parallels and recontextualize what we’ve seen before. Nowhere is this more apparent than all the times Resurrections cuts to clips of the original movies. Note: If you need to remind the audience with that many clips you are probably doing something wrong. You see, the people who care about what you are trying to explain remember the movies well enough that they don’t need the flashbacks. All the people who need the flashbacks don’t remember those scenes for a reason: they aren’t that big of fans. That’s my main issue with the movie. It wants to force the entire audience to care more than it’s willing to. Either make a movie that’s only for the fans or make one that’s wholly accessible. Don’t make the focus be convincing the people that weren’t a certain kind of fan to convert. At some point, it becomes like explaining why a joke is funny. It turns people off even more.

 

What bummed me out about this movie is how much Neo and Trinity were in the way. I realize Keanu was needed to get this off the ground, but having him in this movie felt like such a retread in a world that was otherwise ready to evolve. Like, they cast new people to play some characters then decided Neo and Trinity needed to be the same people. It’s such a weird compromise. They get Keanu and Carrie-Ann Moss on board to get the greenlight for this hundred-million-dollar blockbuster to make a movie about how if you are watching this to see a blockbuster then you are missing the point.

 

Look, if you loved unpacking all three films in the original trilogy, then there’s plenty to enjoy about this movie. Or similarly, if you enjoy the philosophizing of Cloud Atlas and Sense8, this is also for you. If you came for an action movie with cool effects and maybe a provocative thought or two, you’ll be left wanting. Sadly, I’m more in the latter category, although there’s nothing wrong with being in the first category.

 

Don’t get me wrong. There is some excitement in the movie and the new cast is actually a lot of fun. Jessica Henwick would’ve been the star of this movie had it not been so indebted to Keanu and Neo. I wouldn’t mind if another project pops up with her as the focus. Yahya Abdul-Mateen II has a nice take on Morpheus. Jonathan Groff is a weirdly perfect new take on Agent Smith. And Neil Patrick Harris brings some of that Gone Girl menace that we don’t see often enough. There are a few big action set pieces to remind us that the Lana Wachowski still knows what she’s doing. However – I hate how bad this makes me sound – there’s just too much talking and explaining for the 2.5 hour run time. And please quit trying to make me feel bad for enjoying a movie differently than you want me to.

 

Verdict: Weakly Don’t Recommend

Delayed Reaction: The Power of the Dog

Premise: In 1925 Montana, a cowboy doesn’t care for his new sister-in-law and nephew(-in-law?).

 

Time to show how the sausage is made a little. I somehow forgot to write a Reaction on this when I first saw it. Things got out of order in my Word doc and several weeks passed without me writing anything on it. That turned out to be a good thing though. I didn’t pay full attention to the movie when I watched it and came away pretty tepid on it. It wasn’t until a friend texted me about it and commented on the ending that I 1) realized I forgot to write a Reaction and 2) was missing something.

 

So, I decided to watch it again. I’m glad I did. I picked up on a lot more and, knowing where the movie was headed, I appreciated a lot more of the performances. When I first watched it, I spent a lot of time trying to figure out what Phil’s (Benedict Cumberbatch) deal was. Was he being a dick to his brother’s (Jesse Plemons) new wife (Kirsten Dunst) because he secretly liked her? Or is he just a jerk? And what’s with his change in the attention he paid to his new nephew (Kodi Smit-McPhee)? I jumped around a bunch of different ideas from thinking this would be a love triangle to being a Brokeback Mountain. That distracted me from how subtle a lot of the performances were and how deliciously mean the ending is.

 

[Standard Disclaimer: While this movie is adapted from a novel, since Jane Campion wrote the screenplay and directed the film, I’ll be attributing authorial credit to her. I don’t know which story choices came from the novel or her, so I’m looking at her decision to include any part of the novel in the film as a choice she made. It’s not wholly accurate, but it’s easier than reading the book too. Sorry.]

 

It’s all there from the very beginning. We know early on that Smit-McPhee is determined to protect his mother. There’s no kindness in how Cumberbatch is treating Dunst. And, Smit-McPhee plays Cumberbatch masterfully. I enjoy how the film uses knowledge of other indie films to distract the audience from what’s really happening. I really thought this was turning into a Brokeback Mountain or Call Me By Your Name in which an unlikely bond between two men exposed something buried inside them. I spent so much time looking for that in the performances. Upon rewatch, I really love how both Cumberbatch and Smit-McPhee play it. Cumberbatch is a lot of bravado masking fear. He’s too much of an asshole to even be outright sympathetic, but you can at least understand how he became what he is. Meanwhile, Smit-McPhee is gangly and awkward and uses it to mask what’s he’s really up to. It’s a great misdirect. He rope-a-dopes him, taking Cumberbatch’s abuse to earn his trust.

 

I’m not as crazy about Kirsten Dunst’s performance. Perhaps it’s just because I feel so bad for her. She really does play her anxiety and eventually alcoholism well. It’s a more traditionally showy performance and she’s a bit too much of a plot function. Look, I’m in the “Kirsten Dunst needs an Oscar nomination if not win” camp, so if this is what gets her there, I’ll take it.

 

A pair of really great performances and an excellent ending. It is a little slow, but any patience is rewarded. This movie really grew on me.

 

Verdict: Strongly Recommend

Delayed Reaction: The Rescue

Premise: A documentary about the rescue of the Thai football team trapped in a cave.

 

Simply put, this movie is The Martian but based on a true story. It’s about some people trapped in a hard-to-reach location and the specialists from all over the world who helped to rescue them. I only kind of remember the story from 2018. Twelve boys and their coach were trapped in a cave in Thailand after early monsoon rains flooded it. I remember hearing they’d all been rescued but I had no idea how much effort it took.

 

The same people who made Free Solo made this and it succeeds for a lot of the same reasons. They do a great job explaining a niche activity (cave diving, in this case) in a way that conveys the difficulty and danger of it. They manage to wring tension out of the story, even though we know how it ends. Where it differs from Free Solo is that they obviously couldn’t film the rescue like they filmed the climb. Instead, they use reenactments and really drive it home how crazy this rescue mission was. I finished the movie, laughed in disbelief, and said “Are you fucking kidding me?” That’s the kind of movie this is. There’s something so satisfying about so many people going to such great lengths to help some people in need. I’m all for some doom and gloom in movies, but on occasion I also need something to rejuvenate my spirits like this did.

 

Verdict: Strongly Recommend