Movie Reaction: Brightburn

Formula: Chronicle ^ Manof Steel

Clark Kent doesn't need this shit. Poor Henry Cavill spent 75% of his time over several Superman movies trying to convince people that, just because he's an alien with superpowers, doesn't mean they should be afraid of him. Then this Brightburn kid shows up and sets his efforts back several decades. #NotAllAliens, am I right?!

The idea that absolute power corrupts absolutely isn't new by any means. As long as there have been superheros, there have been villains to match them. The yin and yang balance has driven the idea superheroes from the very beginning. It isn't often that we only see the supervillain without a counter-balance though, which is exactly the idea behind the latest genre bender, Brightburn.

It's a pretty efficient 90 minute movie that takes the Superman origin story - a couple on a farm finds an alien baby crash landed on their land and raise him as their own - then proceeds to give the worst-case scenario. Early on, everything seems pretty nice. Brandon (Jackson A. Dunn) is a normal enough kid. He has loving parents (Elizabeth Banks and David Denman). At school, he's a bit of a nerd, but overall, his life is good. Then puberty - or the alien equivalent of it - happens and everything goes to hell. Some mysterious force rejiggers his brain, and the sweet kid we get a glimpse of early on goes full psychopath. Even worse, he starts to realize that he has super-strength and can't be hurt. Then his parents make the mistake of informing him of his origin. From there, let's just say it's a shame this world doesn't have a Superman.

As a genre experiment, I liked the movie. It doesn't get bogged down in the details of what Brandon is exactly or, more importantly, why he is. It only introduces the characters that it needs to. The movie is at its best when it leans all the way into horror. There's a scene in a diner that all the trailers have been using which really is the best part of the movie. It captures the terror of the whole situation with Brandon. It's not a fair fight. It's not pretty. This is a grim movie.

I am a little low on the movie overall. The foundation of it isn't solid. It tries to strip the story down too much, and as a result, I don't understand any of the characters. What's the nature of Brandon's change in the movie? Has he always had powers and the change is just mental? His father mentions that Brandon never got hurt growing up, so that much is not new. How about the flying, super-strength, and super-speed? There's a scene with Brandon and a lawnmower that suggests that he's only learning of his impermeability when he's 12. I find that had to believe, but if that is his only power he has until the movie begins, I could maybe be convinced that he was unaware. Or has he always had the powers and the inciting events of the movie just unlock him as a psychopath? If that's the case, I don't buy it at all. I mean, there must be an incident of him playing tee-ball and hitting the ball three counties over, right? The movie doesn't establish that the parents kept him away from things that might expose his abilities. They seem genuinely surprised by many of them. On that note, if you are a parent knowingly raising a mysterious alien baby, you should be much more on alert than Banks and Denman are. Denman is suspicious sooner than Banks, but even that seems more like a development in the timespan of the movie rather than a long-held concern. This all may come off as "death by a thousand cuts" criticism, but it's not. All these nitpicks stem from the movie being underwritten, and they inform how I'm supposed to view the characters. Elizabeth Banks is good in this movie, but I have no idea how to read her. Is she willfully naive or generally naive? Has Brandon actually been acting different or is she only noticing it now? Was she ever worried that something could be wrong with him or was she so desperate for a son that she never questioned it? There are so many little details the movie is missing that would enrich the whole thing.

Dammit. I think I just talked myself out of liking this movie. Oh well.

It really is a decent movie. I just think the things that interested the people who made it weren't the things that interested me about it. They put together some great horror set pieces. It has a lot of striking visuals. They get good performances out of the actors for what the movie requires. The character motivations don't really make sense to me though and the starting point, as it's presented in the movie, isn't that well thought out.

Verdict: Weakly Don't Recommend

Movie Reaction: Aladdin

Formula: (Aladdin (1992) * Beauty & the Beast (2017)) / Beauty & the Beast (1991)

 

• Disney is making too many of these Live Action remakes of animated classics.
• This movie as an obvious cash-grab by the studio that's dominating too much of the movie industry to begin with.
• Will Smith's blue genie looks weird.

OK, now that I've gotten those talking points out of the way, I'm free to find Aladdin topics that actually interest me.

For the most part. I've liked Disney's live-action remakes the last few years. Maleficent is a fun angle to come at Sleeping Beauty from. 2015's Cinderella was a nice magic-lite take on the story. Pete's Dragon had a thoughtful approach to the material. The Jungle Book was visually impressive. Oddly, the remake I've had the most trouble with is by far the most successful one: Beauty and the Beast. That movie is fine. Emma Watson is ideal casting and you can see every dollar spent on screen. My issue with it is that it adds nothing to the story that wasn't already in the animated movie. There's no new perspective or twist on the storytelling. It's a slavish remake that doesn't improve on anything already in the original. I left that movie mostly wondering "what's the point?".

I'm all for the idea of making Aladdin into a live-action movie. Of the Disney Renaissance movies, it's probably the most ready for a Pirates of the Caribbean treatment. It's full of exciting set pieces and is set in a distinctive and recreate-able location. I don't always love director Guy Ritchie's movies (Sherlock Holmes, King Arthur: Legend of the Sword), but he's a solid choice for a big-budget fantasy action movie. After white-washed embarrassments like Exodus: Gods and Kings and Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time in the last decade, I love that Disney actually cast the movie with actors of Middle Eastern decent, even though it meant casting relative unknowns (or under-served actors) other than Will Smith. I was pretty bullish on this movie. I wanted it to be awesome.

Unfortunately, this isn't going to be my "all the critics are wrong" piece. I had almost exactly the same problems with this that I did with the Beauty and the Beast remake. If you've seen the animated Aladdin, then you've already seen this movie, only better and shorter. So, I won't even give a summary of the story here. If you need one, go set aside 90 minutes and watch the 1992 movie. You won't be disappointed. (And if you are, keep it to yourself.) This Aladdin is trying to play by animated rules in a live-action world. So...

...The bazaar chase at the beginning with "One Jump Ahead" doesn't work. How many good live-action chase scenes can you think of where someone is also singing? Mena Massoud (playing Aladdin) mostly seems distracted by the singing part (or lip-syncing) as he's jumping roofs and dodging guards. The movie has no idea how to mix the singing and action.

...The movie struggles to make Iago, Abu, and the Magic Carpet into characters. The more the movie anthropomorphizes them, the more "uncanny valley" they get.

...There is no way to make the Genie's songs as entertaining as they should be. In the original, you get the sense that the directors gave Robin Williams a mound of coke right before doing "Friend Like Me" or "Prince Ali" and told him "Go", then a team of animators did everything they could to keep up. Will Smith doesn't bring the same energy to the role as Robin Williams, and the movie doesn't really fill the void with anything else. Will Smith is doing a watered-down Robin Williams instead of his own take. His songs are more lethargic and understandably bound to reality.

...The Cave of Wonders looks like it was made on a budget. There are a bunch of jewels, but not at the level one can have in an animated movie. I got more 'cave' than 'wonder' from those scenes.

...Spoiler Alert: There was no giant snake. The whole climactic sequence felt small scale. It all happens in a single room, and Jafar never seemed as threatening as he should've.

Had the movie been less concerned with strictly recreating scenes and songs from the original movie, I could see how all these things could've been turned into strengths rather than weaknesses.

Naomi Scott as Jasmine is the breakout star of this. That girl can sing. "A Whole New World" wasn't really a duet. It was Mena Massoud trying to keep up with her. He's not a bad singer. She's just better. She even gets her own anthem in the movie: a new song called "Speechless" which Scott really nails. Mena Massoud is fine in the movie. I think he's asked to do a little too much. There aren't many actors who really could pull off everything the role requires (singing, action, romance, wit). Will Smith is a fine Genie. He doesn't disappear in the role. He shouldn't. Robin Williams didn't either, mind you. With the non-human characters never really popping, Smith is asked to supply most of the energy in the movie, which is too much for anyone. Nasim Pedrad plays a new character, a handmaiden of Jasmine's names Dailia. I like Pedrad, and she brings some "best friend in a RomCom" energy to the movie that I appreciated. Billy Magnussen shows up as one of the princes vying for Jasmine's attention. He's a goofball and has fun with it.

Marwan Kenzari's Jafar was a bit of a bust. He wasn't given any personality. It was almost like the movie was so afraid of falling into Middle Eastern villain tropes that they forgot to write anything for the character at all. Navid Nedahban as the Sultan was a non-entity, but the character was in 1992 as well.

Another problem that this shares with the Beauty and the Beast remake is that making it live-action calls attention to some of the problems with the original movie. Somehow, being animated made the fact that Belle was a prisoner seem more playful in the original Beauty and the Beast. It felt more nefarious in the Emma Watson version. Similarly, Aladdin's story isn't all that fleshed out. Every beat is rushed, especially Aladdin and Jasmine's relationship. Massoud and Scott don't have immediate chemistry and the movie doesn't leave much time for a relationship to develop. By the time it got to the magic carpet ride, all I was thinking was "Girl, don't get on that strange man's carpet. You barely know him and all he's done so far is talk about jams, call you an item that can be bought, and upstage you on the dance floor". The 1992 movie had these problems too, but I don't notice them as much. 

This has been a surprisingly difficult Reaction to write. I don't want to rip this movie apart, because it's more underwhelming than bad. It's a frustrating movie, but there were things I liked about it. I obviously can't separate this from the 1992 original, so this has been more of a comparison than a review. Even though I'm pretty down on this movie, I'm actually happy it open so strong in the box office. Maybe it's because I like the diversity casting. Maybe I'm more of a Will Smith fanboy than I let on. Or maybe I just like that Disney actually opened a movie on Memorial Day weekend that wasn't a financial disappointment*.

Verdict: Weakly Don't Recommend

*OK. A little context. Disney sucks at Memorial Day releases lately. Solo: A Star Wars Story, Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales, Alice Through the Looking Glass, and Tomorrowland all underperformed while carrying big budgets. I find it refreshing to know that they aren't just cursed this weekend.

Movie Reaction: Booksmart

Formula: Superbad / Ghost World

Booksmart is an irreverent R-rated teen coming-of-age comedy about co-dependent best friends at the end of high school realizing that they've never put themselves out there. They decide to go to their first high school party that night and get side-tracked along the way at other parties they probably shouldn't be at. They find themselves in cars or getting rides from fromer SNL cast members. When they finally reach the party, they split up to go after their high school crushes. They get in a big fight along the way and eventually make up when they realize how much their friendship means to them. The movies ends with a sad scene as they go their separate ways for the first real time. That party they end up at is broken up by the cops who publically arrest one of them. While they aren't popular by any means, the two friends come to realize that everyone else in their class isn't out to get them. The two friends are played by Beanie Feldstein (Jonah Hill's sister) - a bloviating alpha - and Kaitlyn Dever (a prolific child actor making her transition to more adult roles) - the meeker "side-kick" of the friendship with ambitions she doesn't often get to express. The movie is the result of a decade-old pet-project that the screenwriters have been trying to get made for years. And, of course, casting by Allison Jones.

Sound familiar?

Look, I'm going to make the Superbad comparison. I can't help it. Superbad is one of my favorite movies ever and there are too many similarities [for me] to ignore. The fact that I'm happily comparing Booksmart to Superbad though should tell you everything you need to know about how much I enjoyed this movie.

(Let's play a game called "which MPAA rating belongs to which movie?"

-Rated R for strong sexual content and language throughout, drug use and drinking - all involving teens

-Rated R for pervasive crude and sexual content, strong language, drinking, some drug use and a fantasy/comic violent image - all involving teens

I'd tell you the answer, but I already forgot.)

OK. I think I've got it all out of my system. That's the last I'm going to mention Superbad.

Booksmart is a very easy movie to love. I'm a sucker for high school comedies. Calling something "a coming -of-age story" is practically a cheat code to getting a favorable rating from me. All I really need is a couple good leads (Check), a supporting cast of familiar comedy faces (Check), maybe a breakout performance (Check), as many jokes as possible (Check), and a few moments with some heart (Check). This is Olivia Wilde's debut as a director. I never would've expected this kind of movie from her and it's a welcome surprise*. There are a couple times late when her direction gets in the way, but mostly she has an invisible touch that lets the actors and script take all the focus. I can't wait to see what she does next.

*Clarification: She isn't formally trained in comedy, the roles she's most associated with aren't in comedies, and, most importantly, it's unfair to expect a movie this  good out of any debut feature director.

This is a role that Beanie Feldstein has been building to for a while. She stole scenes in Neighbors 2 and Lady Bird. She's just as good here in a lead role. Like her brother, she's great at being loud and abrasive while still being likable. She's perhaps even more nuanced at it than him. I've only been aware of Kaitlyn Dever for about 2 years, but it turns out she's been in many, many movies that I've seen. While I know her best for a recurring role in Justified, her role as the best friend in Laggies a few years ago is how I knew she'd be great for this kind of comedy. She's also been on Last Man Standing for over 100 episodes. I don't watch or care much for that show, but it's a wealth of experience for her nonetheless at getting laughs from people. Feldstein and Dever are an exceptional duo. I'd happily see them in a dozen more comedies together. Their characters' friendship is codependent but not toxic. One of my favorite touches in the movie is when they get distracted complimenting each other. They are both the best friend we all wish we had in high school. It makes a lot of sense when I realize that one of the screenwriters of this also wrote The Spy Who Dumped Me and Life Partners: two movies that center on awesome female friendships.

I won't be able to touch on everyone in the cast. A lot of people are in this, and in many cases, the screenplay does a great job fleshing them out in only a few scenes. Billie Lourd stole the show for me. She plays an over the top rich girl who fans of Scream Queens will immediately recognize, except she's even more exaggerated and likable in this role. There's also fine work from Jessica Williams as the girls' favorite teacher, Jason Sudeikis as the school principal, and Lisa Kudrow and Will Forte as Dever's awkwardly supportive parents.

It's taken Hollywood a while to figure high school dynamics out. The John Hughes version of high school cast a long shadow, well past the period when it rang true to modern audiences. A brain, an athelete, a basket case, a princess, and a criminal isn't really right anymore. Several movies in recent years have attempted to capture the more current dynamics of high school. In particular 21 Jump Street tried to directly define them. Booksmart does a great job of this. All the characters are recognizable without fitting into neat boxes. There's very little judgment of the characters even though it uses them all for laughs.

The movie isn't perfect. I was a much bigger fan of the first 2/3s of the movie than the last 1/3. It has that problem that a lot of comedies have where the jokes slow down a lot late so it can focus on the plot. I'm all for giving a comedy some dramatic heft, but the very best comedies balance it better. The very end leans even more into wish fulfillment than a certain other 2007 comedy that I've promised not to name. These are very small concerns though.

I may need to see this again. The audience when I saw this sucked. I found myself laughing harder and more often than everyone else, and it really messed with my perception of some of the jokes. While the movie is consistently funny, I feel like it lacked a couple big comedic centerpieces. There weren't any scenes where the jokes built and built until I was struggling to keep up with the laughs. Comedy is infectious though. Maybe with a better audience, my perception of that would be different.

I refuse to end on a sour note like that though. Already, I'm making the kind of nit-picks to determine where in the top tier of movies I've seen that Booksmart belongs. So, let me be clear. Booksmart is certain to be toward the top of my year-end list of movies. It's the first movie of the year that I'm certain to watch again, buy the Bluray, and look for an excuse to quote it. I love how the screenplay is both thoughtful and funny. I love the two leads and everyone they interact with. It's a crowd pleasing movie that more people should be seeing.

On Last Thought: I'm genuinely surprised by the low box office numbers for Booksmart. It opened with only $6 million this weekend. That's low. Just last year Blockers, managed a $20 million opening despite coming out in April. 12 years ago Superbad opened at $33 million. Hell, The Duff from 2015 even made $10 million on its opening weekend.

Here's my best guess why it opened so low: Maybe the reviews were too good? The way it was advertised, did people think it wasn't a pure comedy? Because its opening numbers look a lot more like The Edge of Seventeen's ($4 million) or Dope's ($6 million). Movie like Eighth Grade, Me & Earl & the Dying Girl, and Lady Bird are a little different since they started as limited releases, but they never had weekends bigger than Booksmart's. I mean, yes, Booksmart has some heart to it, but that movie is mostly just a really funny comedy; the kind of comedy that should open bigger. I'm curious to see how the narrative develops over the next few weeks for Booksmart. Someone is bound to dig a little deeper into it. This is not the beginning I expected for it.

  

Verdict: Strongly Recommend