Delayed Reaction: Friday the 13th: A New Beginning

Premise: Little Corey Feldman grows up and is stalked by another Jason.

 

Friday the 13^th: The one that started it.

Friday the 13^th Part 2: The first one where Freddy was actually the killer.

Friday the 13^th Part III: The one where Freddy gets the hockey mask.

Friday the 13^th: The Final Chapter: The one that was supposed to end it.

Friday the 13^th: A New Beginning: The one where they test if Freddy need required for these movies.

 

For a franchise with so many installments – to the point where it’s hard to look at them as anything other than lazy cash grabs – it’s funny to me how each installment so far does have something pretty notable about it. Even the next movie, Jason Takes Manhattan is unique in the franchise, although I think it’s safe to say that’s when the franchise truly gave up. Anyway, I get why A New Beginning was rejected by fans. After the first movie, Jason is supposed to be Jason. I don’t care about this new protagonist. He’s not Laurie Strode or Nancy Thompson. And, since the Jason isn’t really Jason, there’s no blood feud going on. I suppose the deaths are fun enough. That is the real purpose of the franchise, but…I signed up for the real Jason.

 

Verdict: Weakly Don’t Recommend

Movie Reaction: Tár

Formula: The Red Violin / The Assistant

I’ve been writing Reactions to movies for over a decade now. It’s getting into the thousands of times I’ve sat with a movie at tried to figure out what I thought about a movie that I’m willing to have other people see. In that time, I haven’t gotten much better at coming around on movies faster. I’m still quite bad about first reacting to the movie I hoped something would be rather than the movie it is. Something I do think I’m better at though is knowing when a movie will hit me differently later. I’m getting strong “will appreciate it more later” vibes from Todd Field’s new film, Tar.

 

Tar tells the tale of the fictional composer Lydia Tar (Cate Blanchett). Tar is a massively successful composer. EGOT winner. Head of the Berlin Orchestra. All around musical genius. Over the course of 158 minutes, the film follows Tar as her abuses of power finally catch up to her. It’s a slow burn movie. Early on, it just feels like a film about fleshing out this genius. It carefully lays out the assorted seams that will later unravel. In short, she gets #MeToo’d. It never lays it on too thick. It never forces a judgment upon her. I get why so many people have left the movie thinking Lydia Tar was a real person, because the film creates such a full character and doesn’t get bogged down explaining details.

 

It was strange watching this movie. I loved the experience of watching it. Cate Blanchett is phenomenal as Lydia Tar. I was most impressed with how at ease she was with the character. It’s such a natural performance, like she was revisiting a character she’s played several times over decades. I love the direction of the film as well. Todd Fields choosing to do very long scenes, often with unbroken shots. He’s made a film where I just want to listen to Tar talk. I know nothing about classical music yet the film made it sound like the most interesting topic in the world. There’s passion in the dialogue that can’t be faked.

 

Where the film lost me some is that when it ended, I wasn’t really sure what the point was. There’s a common complaint about the Oscars that Best Actor nominees tend to come from Best Picture nominees and Best Actress nominees don’t. In fact, many Best Actress nominees are the only nominations or only major nominations for their movies. In the discussion of those films then, the Best Actor films get thought of as complete films while Best Actress films are character studies. I don’t want to fall into that trap. I do think Tar is a film with a lot of merits, however it is a character study. The entirety of this movie is Blanchett as Tar. While I enjoyed supporting performances from the likes of Noemie Merlant, Nina Hoss, and Sophie Kauer, Blanchett is the one I’m focusing on. Where this becomes a shortcoming to me is that I don’t find Lydia Tar’s story arc particularly interesting. I’ve seen stories about people who abuse power before. It’s a little interesting in that it’s a woman getting #MeToo’d. Even that feels calculated though. Like, as an audience, we’re supposed to be more conflicted because she’s a woman and not a man grooming and preying on young women. When the movie ended, I was stumped, because the beats of the story and the general lesson of the movie were so uncomplicated. It made me realize that I liked the movie mainly because Blanchett was so engaging.

 

That’s where I’m expecting this will age differently with me. Perhaps on a rewatch, I’ll simply enjoy this in the way I enjoy a comedy movie with a nothing plot that makes me laugh a lot. For now, I don’t see why this movie needed to be so long other than the fact that it’s so much fun to watch Blanchett on screen as this character. I do want to be very clear about something though. I look at Tar as much closer to There Will Be Blood (a beautiful movie with a dazzling lead performance that I ultimately find hollow despite its watchability) than Judy (a movie that doesn’t exist beyond Renee Zellweger’s performance).

 

Verdict: Strongly Recommend

Movie Reaction: Prey for the Devil

Formula: The Exorcist * Eli

I’ve been pretty spoiled on horror in the last couple months. The mix of Halloween and a lull in blockbusters on the release calendar left room for a lot of studios to try out relatively inexpensive horror movies for several weeks. The likes of Barbarian, Pearl, and Smile have snuck out. Even Halloween Ends, the rare blockbuster horror franchise, had its charms. One thing that’s been missing from the mix was some Catholicism fan fiction.

 

While, I say that as a joke, there’s some truth to it. The catholic church’s age and rituals lend it to some really fun horror ideas. The stuff the church is actually up to is pretty boring, so I’d much rather see a movie about a world where the church has to train elite demon-busters. That’s basically what Prey for the Devil is. Sister Ann (Jacqueline Byers) works as a nurse for a church facility that cares for people possessed by demons. A group of priests there get an education in exorcism. After an attack by a possessed person in the facility (in addition to her established interest in the topic) Ann gets permission to learn exorcism with the priests. She eventually ends up in the middle of a severe possession case with a little girl that is more involved than anyone realized.

 

The movie is silly in principle but takes itself very seriously. That’s the right move. It doesn’t make it less silly though. There are a lot of the familiar possession scares. It’s a movie that knows how to shoot priests reciting bible verses in cool ways. I wouldn’t say I was ever scared, but I was generally uneasy watching this and I was certainly entertained. Byers is pretty good in the lead role. It’s hard to make any nun these days feel particularly modern. Byers fits well enough though. Colin Salmon as the head exorcist gives the film a lot of gravitas. Posy Taylor is no Linda Hamilton, but she’s believable enough as the possessed girl. There is one major plot twist that made me roll my eyes. Otherwise, it’s the kind of single base-hit horror movie I expect most times I go into a theater.

 

Verdict: Weakly Recommend

Movie Reaction: Ticket to Paradise

Formula: (One Fine Day + Notting Hill + 20 Years) / Father of the Bride

 

No matter what I do to combat it, reviews will always be prisoners to the moment. I can’t help it. They will always be seen through the prism of the time they were written. And, in this moment, I really want to see charming RomComs with movie stars being winsome. For that reason, I enjoyed Ticket to Paradise.

 

The story itself is pure RomCom. Julia Roberts and George Clooney play the long-divorced bickering parents of Kaitlyn Dever. After graduating college, Dever goes on a vacation to Bali, falls for a boy, and decides to marry him and stay there. Clooney and Roberts begrudgingly form a united front to go to Bali and convince her not to do get married. Of course, close proximity in paradise can ignite old flames. You can guess what happens from there. You’ve seen this movie even if you haven’t seen this movie, and that’s cool with me.

 

The film is directed by Mamma Mia: Here We Go Again director Ol Parker who has landed a career of making light-hearted films in beautiful locations where everyone feeds off good vibes. I’m jealous, frankly. I don’t know what there is to say about the movie, because anyone who will enjoy it already knows if they’ll enjoy it. I can understand having reached your limit already on movies about pretty white people who can apparently afford to take a week (or more) off to hang out in Bali. For me, there are so few movies like that anymore that I was ready for it.

 

Roberts and Clooney are old pros at this as well as old friends. I wouldn’t call their romantic chemistry undeniable, but I sure do like seeing them on screen together in general. I’ve yet to dislike Kaitlyn Dever in anything. I wasn’t super invested in her relationship with Maxime Bouttier’s character. They’re young and attractive though. That’s enough. Billie Lourd is there too as Dever’s best friend just hanging out on the island. The movie doesn’t know what to do with her, but she’s having too much fun to cut her out of the movie. A part of my brain decided to pretend this was a stealth sequel to Booksmart.

The worst thing I can say about the movie is that it’s a comedy of good vibes more than a laugh riot. Really, the only thing this movie was missing was characters randomly breaking into ABBA songs.

 

Side Rant: Ol Parker is 2 for 2 now with movies where the character ages don’t line up. Here We Go Again is insane. I broke that down in that Reaction. Ticket to Paradise isn’t as crazy, but it still doesn’t make total sense. So, Roberts got married to Clooney when she graduated college. Clooney was a grad student at the time. They had Dever soon after. Dever is graduating from Law School, making her about 25. That’s shockingly accurate for Dever, who tends to still be cast as younger characters in other films. However, that puts Clooney (~61) and Roberts (~55) in the 47-50 range for this movie. Honestly, it’s not a big deal. It’s just getting funny to me that Ol Parker doesn’t give a shit about character ages in his movies.

 

Verdict: Weakly Recommend

Delayed Reaction: One Cut of the Dead

Premise: An indie film crew is tasked with filming a zombie movie in one unbroken cut.

 

I’m going to give my increasingly common warning that this is a movie that’s best to go into unaware of what it is. Not because it is big on twists; rather a lot of why I loved this movie was because I let it surprise me and win me over. So, consider this my enthusiastic thumbs up and your last warning before I talk openly about the movie.

 

This film is broken into three parts, and it is so much fun finding that out while watching it. The first part is a bad 30-minute found-footage zombie movie. I watched this part thoroughly unimpressed. I’d heard great things about this movie; how it was made cheaply and overachieved so much. Despite how bad the movie was, I at least appreciated what appeared to be an authentic single-take. There didn’t appear to be clever editing. This really seemed to be done in a single take.

 

Then, 30-minutes in, there are closing credits. The film jumps back a month and reveals that what I just watched was the end product of as a live, single-take film commissioned by a TV station. The second act introduces all the actors and crew on the movie. It gives the background for them and the plan. I’ll admit, even this wasn’t doing much for me. It felt like lazy studio and filmmaking commentary. I still wasn’t getting why this movie was so praised.

 

Finally, I got to the third act where it all came together. That’s when it shows everything that was going on while the film from the first-act was playing out. Suddenly, all the odd pauses, strange acting choices, and narrative inconsistencies all made sense. Everything from the drunk actor throwing up to the director’s wife getting way too into her role started paying off wonderfully. I can’t think of the last time a movie won me over so much by the end after losing me so early.

 

Verdict: Strongly Recommend

Movie Reaction: Black Adam

Formula: 1 / Shazam!

Can we all collectively accept that superhero movies are a staple now? It seems like any time a superhero movie doesn’t destroy a box office record, the whispers pick up about if audiences have reached a saturation point. Look, it’s been at least two decades of this whether you want to use Spider-Man (2002), X-Men (2000), or even Batman (1989) or Superman (1976) as your starting point. That’s longer than basically any era other than Westerns. In the last year, Spider-Man: No Way Home blew away all box office expectations, The Batman made a $350 million domestic despite brand confusion and fatigue, and two MCU movies exceeded their prior installments in the box office. Even if Black Adam is seen as a disappointment, it’s still the biggest opening of Dwayne Johnson’s career*. So, even I am bored theorizing about what Black Adam could mean for the DECU or superhero market in general. I’d rather look at the film like any random Dwayne Johnson blockbuster.

 

*As the sole star. Technically, he’s in Fast and Furious and Mummy movies that opened bigger, but he was very supporting in those films.

 

Black Adam (Dwayne Johnson) is the story of a magical hero of a fictional middle eastern (?) nation of Sabbac. He was given powers by sorcerers to defend Sabbac but was magically imprisoned. In the thousands of years since his imprisonment, Sabbac has been run by a series of tyrants and thugs. One day in the present, archeologist Adrianna Tomaz (Sarah Shahi) accidentally awakens Black Adam. It turns out, Black Adam isn’t a noble hero. He’s vengeful and quick to kill. He then has to figure out if he really wants to be the hero that Sabbac needs. Meanwhile, an off-brand Justice League called the Justice Society, led by Hawkman (Aldis Hodge), has been sent to put a stop to Black Adam. Apparently, an all-powerful being who doesn’t give a shit is dangerous to society. The story is messy; messy in a way that I like. It’s fun that there are three opposing forces in this. The balance shifts a lot. The Justice Society are the traditional good guys, but are they really in the right? Black Adam certainly isn’t evil, but isn't a hero either. And the bad guy who I forget, is he – no, he’s just a bad guy. It’s a comic movie. It’s only going to get so complex.

 

As a Dwayne Johnson vehicle, I wasn’t super impressed with the movie. He’s fine, but the character felt thin. I don’t see why Johnson has spent so many years trying to get this movie made. However, as a 90s action movie made in 2022, I enjoyed this movie. Two movies I kept thinking of as I watched this were T2: Judgment Day and The Power Rangers Movie (1995). Black Adam bonds with Adrianna’s teen son, Amon (Bodhi Sabongui), who introduces him to modern life and concepts, much like John and the Terminator in T2. Obviously, the big difference here is that the Terminator is a robot and Adam is a person. In one, a lack of personality is a feature. In the other, it’s a bug. The Power Rangers comparison is a little harder to pinpoint. I think it has to do with the feeling of this being part of a larger world – ex. Amanda Waller is the one who deploys the Justice Society – yet it's self-contained. It didn’t feel like this was trying to set up a larger world. It’s not as quippy as an MCU movie or as dark as The Batman. It’s a happy medium, although that does lead to a lack of any distinguishing characteristics.

 

The eclectic cast of DC characters does leave Black Adam feeling like a movie built out of the leftover pieces of the DECU. That leaves room for entertaining performances by Noah Centineo, Quintessa Swindell, and Pierce Brosnan. I don’t see this specific tone as something DC will revisit. The movie is far more anonymous than bad.

 

Verdict: Weakly Don’t Recommend

Quickly Reaction: My Bloody Valentine

I appreciate the horror movies that never seems to die simply because they have a good title. My Bloody Valentine is a very forgettable movie. It absolutely plays like a slapdash attempt to get on the slasher bandwagon of the late 70s then 80s. However, My Bloody Valentine is a terrific title. Like, I know that the proper way to write something is to pick the title last, or at least not let a title dictate the story, but I fully understand the desire to write a horror movie to fit “My Bloody Valentine” after thinking of the title. Did the phrase even exist before this? I don’t care. Beyond the great title, I do think the mining backdrop is decently original. Otherwise, I can’t point to much that really stood out about the movie. It’s harmless enough though if you generally enjoy slashers.

Verdict: Weakly Don’t Recommend

Delayed Reaction: Superhost

Premise: A travel vlogger couple rent a house owned by a very unstable woman.

 

It’s funny to me that house sharing has become so popular despite many people apparently being terrified of it. Over the last decade, AirBnB or similar sites have been the inspiration for countless films. The Rental. Barbarian. Creep. 13 and 14 Cameras (to an extent) immediately come to mind. It makes sense too. The system is lightly regulated and fairly anonymous. It involves someone moving to an unknown space and doesn’t even have the familiarity of being the summer home of a friend of a friend.

 

So, no, Superhost isn’t the most original idea. It’s well done though. The vlogger background of the leads explains why the found footage cameras capture so much of what happens. I appreciate that the central couple are dealing with their own issues (relationship and business) even before superhost Rebecca (Gracie Gillam) shows up. Something about Gillam being a former Disney Channel star adds to her performance. I didn’t realize her past while watching the movie, but it made so much sense afterward.

This is a very satisfying little found footage horror movie that delivers the exact kind of scares I wanted going in. I appreciate the last little jab at the end, even though it wasn’t exactly subtle commentary.

 

Verdict: Weakly Recommend

Delayed Reaction: I Came By

Premise: A political graffiti artist uncovers something nefarious in the home of his latest target.

It’s so simple, but the idea that you messed with the wrong guy is a movie premise that can be revisited over and over without getting worn out. In a more general sense, so many movies are about people who do something a lot and this is the time it happens differently. A mailman delivers the mail each day but today he finds a magic egg. A woman gets a coffee at the same café but today she runs into her old boyfriend from college that moved to town. I Came By is very much one of these movies. George MacKay vandalizes a lot of houses, and this is the one he should’ve left alone.

 

I Came By is a film that I’ll remember positively for the same reasons I probably won’t watch it again. There are some big narrative shifts in the movie that genuinely surprised me. As a result, I never got firm footing while watching it. There was the feeling that anything could happen next, which is something that’s very hard to pull off. However, tropes become tropes for a reason. Filmmakers don’t structure so many movies the same way just because they are lazy. There are formulas that work. We know the pacing and the structure work. When a film disrupts the expected flow of the story, that can be thrilling, but it’s harder to make the structure work. That’s why climactic battles normally don’t start movies. There are ways to make it work. It’s just harder. I Came By makes some exciting choices but that does result in a story with a stuttered pace.

 

What that means is that this is a refreshing movie as a change of pace. It’s there to remind you that not every thriller is going to hit the same tired beats. It’s not a standard bearer of the genre though. It is helped by a strong cast though. Hugh Bonneville gets to use his Downtown Abbey respectability to good use. George MacKay gets to play a modern character for a change. Kelly Macdonald and Percelle Ascott are good too, although I’m not ready to believe that Macdonald is old enough to play MacKay’s mother. The movie even has a couple really terrific comic moments. One in particular will stick with me for a while.

 

Verdict: Weakly Recommend

Delayed Reaction: Hellraiser (2022)

Premise: A woman steals the puzzle box, not knowing what it is, and after it takes her brother, she must track down what the box is and why that happened.

 

I continue to have less to say about this franchise than I’d like. The puzzle box remains a great horror totem. The Cenobites continue to be one of the coolest horror creatures. The most important thing about this Hellraiser is that it functions as a great re-entry point in the series. It’s true to the original movie while updating to something more modern. In particular, it feels right that by this era, a millionaire would absolutely be outsourcing the work to get and activate the box.

 

Odessa A’zion is a nice heroine for the movie. I like that this franchise attracts fundamentally broken people. Even though A’zion ends up being the purest character in the film, even she is recovering from drug addiction.

 

The nature of the gifts from the Cenobites intrigues me. They are really tricking people. It’s not a monkey’s paw situation. The people chasing these gifts aren’t in it for traditional wishes. Mostly, they are just numb and looking for a way to finally feel something again. I can’t think of another horror movie that takes that angle.

 

Verdict: Weakly Recommend