Delayed Reaction: Mad God

Premise: An assassin travel through a dark underworld where...stuff happens.

This movie is beautiful. It's a stop motion feast for the eyes. Scene after scene I was amazed by the level of detail and depth on the screen. And those visuals are distinctively grim and ugly. I commend the level of craft involved in making this.

 

The movie overall didn't do much for me. It was craft without a ton of substance. The film is told wordlessly and is scene after scene of gnarly images. I totally get the people who really fell hard for this. There are different kinds of movie fans out there. I'm clearly not a target for this one. Seriously, it's worth checking a few minutes out though. You'll know quickly if the movie is for you or not, and it is for you, it'll entrance you right away.

 

Verdict: Weakly Don't Recommend

Delayed Reaction: Luck

Premise: An unlucky young woman finds herself in the land of luck and risks ruining everything.

If your goal is to ape Disney animation, a good way to start is by bringing in the disgraced producer who masterminded the second animation Renaissance at Disney. That's what Skydance did, hiring former Disney exec John Lasseter to run their animation division. I won't get into the discussion of if he deserved this second chance, mainly because I don't know. What I can say is that Luck feels very Disney. Maybe it feels too Disney. Luck comes from the Inside Out or Zootopia school of "Let's come up with some basic rules for an abstract or fantasy world." So, the rules and concept of this feels really familiar. But effective enough.

The animation isn't quite Pixar level, but it's more evolved than, say, Netflix Animation. The protagonist is winning and the supporting characters are fairly inventive. It's hard to argue with the overall message. I really don't have strong feelings about this movie. I doubt it was worth Skydance and/or Apple's investment, but it's an entertaining enough watch.

 

Verdict: Weakly Don't Recommend

Delayed Reaction: The Sea Beast

Premise: A seafaring kingdom kills giant sea beasts...but maybe they shouldn't?

Netflix Animation sure makes me appreciate the more established animation studios. A Disney or a Pixar may have a formula, but it's a proven formula. The Sea Beast feels like an approximation of what a good family animation film should be. It's basically Moana meets Pirates of the Caribbean. The sea and water effects do look great. They really found ways to convey the detail and scope of that. The character animation is still lacking. The writing isn't there either.

 

It seems like Netflix put a decent amount of money into this. Over time, I think they can establish themselves as something more than off-brand Disney. The studio is only about 4 years old though. Give it some time. Meanwhile, The Sea Beast has some charm and certain animation strengths, but it's not appointment viewing.

 

Verdict: Weakly Don't Recommend

Delayed Reaction: The Greatest Beer Run Ever

Premise: The true story of a guy who decided to deliver beers to friends in Vietnam to show his appreciation.

This is the follow up from the director who won Best Picture for Green Book. That is both a factual statement and a descriptive statement. Green Book is a fine movie. It's a little silly that it won Best Picture, and there's been buyer's remorse since the moment it won. It was an accident of circumstances. Peter Farrelly is beloved for his 90s comedies with his brother. He ventured out on his own with a movie about race relations that was surprisingly good, considering the last 2 decades of films that people largely (and rightfully) ignored. That awards season had a lot of flawed nominees, so Green Book could sneak through.

 

Now Peter Farrelly is a director with Oscar pedigree, but that was the exception to his filmography, not the rule. So, how does he follow that up? He's not really an auteur. He won't start making Romas or Nomadlands. The Greatest Beer Run Ever is a comedy movie made by someone who is expected to make more than a comedy movie now. And I don't think that's working for anyone.

 

The movie is most comfortable early on, when Chickie Donohue (Zac Efron) is stumbling his way to and around Vietnam. Chickie is a fool with a good heart. That's Farrelly's specialty. It's even what works best about Green Book. Now, imagine if Harry or Lloyd were thrown into Platoon. It would be strange, right? That's what happens in this. It becomes a different movie, and not one that works as well. It doesn't all fit together. The individual parts aren't bad though. Farrelly does a good job depicting the attack on Saigon. It's more technically impressive than I expected. It's just a different movie.

I remain optimistic about Zac Efron. I like how determined he is to work in comedies. He just continues to have the Arnold Schwarzenegger problem. The man is chiseled and he can't hide it. The more people don't acknowledge it, the stranger it is. For the Schwarzenegger comparison, that's why Twins works and Jingle All the Way struggles. Efron's Chickie is a slacker merchant seaman who drinks every night yet also looks like he hasn't had a carb in a decade and never misses leg day. It's less that he's miscast and more that the film ignores who they cast.

 

I don't know where Peter Farrelly goes from here. I don't think he wants to go back to Dumb and Dumber but I don't think he'll ever find the alchemy of Green Book again. After The Greatest Beer Run Ever, I'm hoping he at least gives himself the freedom to not think he needs to make an award movie every time.

 

Verdict: Weakly Don't Recommend

Delayed Reaction: Meet Cute

Premise: A woman with access to a time machine decides to relive the night of an amazing first date over and over again.

I love time travel and time loop movies. It's my favorite writing cheat: redoing the same scene to note the effect of minute differences or changes. When a movie does it right (About Time, Palm Springs), I eat it up. However, it does mean I hold these to a higher standard. When one of these movies doesn't totally work, my disappointment is more severe than it should be.

 

Take Meet Cute. This is a perfectly decent time-travelling RomCom. It's a Peacock Original, so there's an assumed level of quality there. And getting Kaley Cuoco and Pete Davidson as the leads is a win. This movie just never got going for me. I never bought into the time loop. The movie starts well into Sheila (Cuoco) doing the time-travel thing, so there's an imbalance right away with her and Gary (Davidson). The movie hinges on the date that she's reliving to be so magical that we'd believe she wants to keep reliving it. Already though, we're seeing her getting bored by it and fracturing the allure. The most interesting part of the story happens before the movie starts. I'd've loved to see that first date and what led her to deciding to relive it. Just watching a dozen ways that Sheila acts crazy isn't that alluring.

 

There are two proven ways to make a time travel movie work. Either give the protagonist a reason to want to get it right or give them no control about the time travel. In About Time, I'm willing to watch Tim relive the same moments because he's sincerely invested in getting the moments right. In Palm Springs, Nyles' boredom makes sense because he has no way out. Neither of these apply to Meet Cute. The revelation that Sheila is depressed does a lot of heavy-lifting to explain why she wants to keep reliving this night. It never feels like she's trying to make the night better. In fact, the entire movie, it's like she's trying to find new ways to ruin the night. Late in the film, it introduces the Butterfly Effect potential of going further back than that one night, but it is so underexplored that I don't know why they introduced the idea at all.

 

Meet Cute is a movie I should've like a lot more, and knowing that seems to have ruined the experience. This is an idea with limitless potential and most of it was squandered. I wish I could say that Cuoco and Davidson's chemistry carried me through it, but they are on such unequal footing for so much of the movie that I never felt a spark. The basic beats of this pretty short movie are easy enough to lean on, but it never found a way to get any investment from me.

 

Verdict: Weakly Recommend

Delayed Reaction: Mrs. Harris Goes to Paris

Premise: A cleaning lady saves up all her money to go to Paris and get a Dior dress.

Simply put, this movie is very nice. It can be generally summed up as "a woman goes to Paris, makes friends with a bunch of people because she's pleasant, and gets a really nice dress." The stakes aren't particularly high, nor do they need to be. I get why this has been a low-key charmer all year: the kind of movie that makes only a few top 10 lists, but everyone wants to mention as a movie they considered.

 

I feel like all the words I want to use about this are overused. Like, I want to call Lesley Manville as the titular Mrs. Harris "winning". It's cool that Isabelle Huppert was willing to take a supporting role in this small movie. She's a legend who really doesn't have to take any role she doesn't want, so it says a lot when she takes a pseudo-villain role in this. It's hard to find someone in this cast I didn't like. I wasn't that familiar with the French actors, but I look forward to seeing them show up in other films. Alba Baptista was so charming that I'm actually considering if catching up on Warrior Nun is worth my time.

 

There is one thing that kept bugging me about this movie. So, it's all about this woman with low standing going to Paris and making her voice heard for the first time. I don't know that I actually believe the transformation. Manville is very convincing in Paris, but I don't believe that character would've had that life in London before this. This is an argument I make a lot. I can believe that if that character started the movie in the place she does, she would get to where she does by the end of the movie. I have trouble believing the character we meet in the movie would start where she does though. I'm willing to go with it, because I'd rather just enjoy the movie, but it is something that took me out of it on occasion as I watched.

 

Verdict: Strongly Recommend

Delayed Reaction: Emancipation

Premise: A slave during the Civil War escapes in hopes of finding freedom.

That's it? That's the movie I've been hearing about for so long? Ever since "the slap" at the Academy Awards last winter, I've been hearing about what it might mean for Apple's Emancipation. Would it get pushed back a year to let things settle down? Would it get a quiet release and stay out of the awards game? Would it downplay Will Smith's involvement a la Ansel Elgort in West Side Story*? All this wondering accidentally built up Emancipation even more.

 

*Look, I know that Will Smith shouldn't be getting lumped in with people accused of much worse stuff. But let's not pretend we don't know why that's happening. "The Slap" was seen by millions. It is a very public event. Ansel Elgort's sexual assault allegations are way more damning but not nearly as visible. And Smith is way more famous. Smith's profile and the visibility of what he did wrong, for the purpose of something like awards predictions/discussions puts him in discussions with people who [allegedly] did much more abhorrent stuff behind closed doors.

 

What I realize now is that if there had been no slap at all, Emancipation still would've disappeared. Maybe Smith would've gotten a halo nomination if the Lead Actor field was weak enough. That's it though. And it makes sense. Anthony Fuqua is more of a populist director. If not for Denzel's Training Day Oscar, which was a "stars aligning" set of circumstances, Fuqua would be a director who has never touched real Oscar consideration with his films.

 

Emancipation is a pretty good movie. But it's a pretty good action thriller. It belongs in a movie night more with Apocalypto than 12 Years a Slave. The reasons it was ever considered for awards were all surface level. It's a movie about slavery. It's starring an Oscar winner. Hell, they even desaturated it to the point that it's nearly black and white. This all sounds like an Oscar player. It's just not though.

 

Despite all my criticisms, I did like the movie. I'm just annoyed that it was sold as something it's not. Fuqua knows how to make a good action movie. Giving it the backdrop of slavery effectively adds stakes. Will Smith lets the story and the pacing do the work. He's not relying on his charisma as much as normal. I guess my message is that you should watch this movie if you are a fan of Training Day, The Equalizer, or Shooter. Don't expect Apple's follow up to CODA.

 

Side Rant: Can we just stop with the Black and White? I'm so tired of filmmakers using less color as their statement of serious intent. I can't think of many films enhanced by the decision to go black and white. If you can't make your film look good using a fuller color palate then that's a failing as a cinematographer.

 

Verdict: Weakly Recommend

Delayed Reaction: Something from Tiffany's

Premise: After a mix-up at Tiffany's the engagement ring one man intends for his girlfriend ends up with another woman.

This movie has me thinking about something. I like to dismissively laugh at my parents for how addicted to the Hallmark Christmas movies they get. The subtext is that I'm somehow too good to be caught watching those. However, I can't point to a single reason why Something at Tiffany's is any better than those Hallmark movies. The best defenses I have are that it's an Amazon movie, it's has a higher caliber star in Zoey Deutch, and the director has a cooler indie filmography than many of the Hallmark filmmakers. I can also point to how Something from Tiffany's is actually based on a book or how Amazon and Deutch by definition probably mean more was spent to make this. That looked like real New York City to me too. I think I just need to take the loss here and admit that I'm no better than the people gobbling up interchangeable Lacey Chabert and Candice Cameron-Bure movies.

 

Let's be honest here too. I watched this because I like Zoey Deutch. I'll let someone else figure out how much of like means 'pretty' and how much means 'talented'. Both are at play. This is a charming movie. It gets a lot of use out of some very pretty parts of New York City. Zoey Deutch and Kendrick Sampson are charming together. I like that their situations aren't overly tidy. They are both in long-term relationships that work. They just aren't optimal. Those relationships do fall apart at just the right time to make no one the bad guy when Deutch and Sampson end up together. This is a Christmas RomCom. It can't be too complicated, after all.

 

In the back of my mind, I'm determined to find a favorite movie with Zoey Deutch in it. It feels like she has a What If? or even an About Time somewhere in her career eventually. I expect it'll sneak up on me. Something from Tiffany's wasn't it, but it's coming. And I'll be there when it happens. Otherwise, is Everybody Wants Some!! really going to remain my go-to Zoey Deutch movie?

 

Verdict: Weakly Don't Recommend

Movie Reaction: Violent Night

Formula: Die Hard ^ Krampus

I love Christmas. It's my favorite holiday. It's just a pleasant idea. I don't care about the religious part. I just enjoy the place it holds in pop culture. There's the general idea that people should be nice to each other. It's got snow before the part of the year when we're tired of the cold. The placement of Thanksgiving and New Year's around it makes it feel like the whole last month of the year is dedicated to Christmas. But, I'm not against a little railing against the idea of Christmas. Using the squeaky-clean image for some entertaining contrast.

 

That's what Violent Night is. Someone was sitting around one day thinking "I know Die Hard isn't really a Christmas movie*, so how can I make it undeniable? I know, I'll make Santa the hero!" That's how you get a story of a group of criminals taking a family hostage on Christmas night, just as Santa is delivering the presents there, and he gets stuck playing the hero. Of course, with an idea this silly, this is played mostly for laughs. That's the right move. This also makes David Harbour, patron saint of dad bods, a great choice to play old Saint Nick.

 

*Other people can define a Christmas movie how they want. My stance on what counts as a Christmas movie is if Christmas is why the movie exists. Die Hard was a summer release that only is set during Christmas since it was a good excuse to explain why the building would be empty. They do a fine job mixing the Christmas into the movie, but it just doesn't fit my personal - and likely not even bulletproof - definition.

 

It's best to think of this movie as sloppy with a few moments of genuine inspiration. That's all it's aspiring to be anyway. I don't know if the logic of how Santa works or of the plan to rob the matriarch (Beverly D'Angelo) of the wealthy Lightstone family really checks out. What I do know is that Santa kills a guy using a Christmas tree topper as a throwing star. It's a movie where Kris Kringle turns out to be a Viking who gives gifts to children to make up for all his bloodshed on the battlefield.

 

What can I say? I had fun. As long as you can laugh at some comic violence, Violent Night delivers. A few of the gags I've seen before - it's becoming a Christmas comedy staple to tie someone up with Christmas lights - but a few were new and clever.

 

Movie Theater LVP (Least Valuable Patron): It's been a while since I did one of these. I'm giving this award the family sitting further down my row who brought a baby and very young children to see this. I'll admit, the mother was impressively successful keeping the baby from crying. Normally it would be a single whine before she quieted it down. Still distracting though. I'm pretty sure this movie did spoil the idea of Santa for one of the small children though. At one point in the movie, a character explains that Santa is something parents made up, and I definitely heard a concerned gasp from the child. I know it's hard to get a babysitter, but no one needs to bring the whole family down for a 9:45 showing of Violent Night.

 

Verdict: Weakly Recommend

Delayed Reaction: Lady Chatterley’s Lover

Premise: A woman's impotent husband tells her she can have a child with another man, then she goes on and has an affair. Imagine that.

This is based on one of those books that I've known about forever but had no idea what it was actually about. The novel Lady Chatterley’s Lover is a famous banned/scandalous book. Kind of like Lolita. I don't know if the book is any good or if it's just infamous. Regardless, that made viewing this movie fun. I got to go in as a blank slate.

 

You know how with Shakespeare, people are always trying to find ways to adapt it to feel just as compelling now as it did hundreds of years ago? They try to make it edgy or get the actors to give it a more modern cadence. But, no matter what they try, it can't stop feeling like a play from the 1600s. That's how Lady Chatterley’s Lover is. By any modern lens, it's not a very salacious story. I've seen a bunch of movies about affairs. This one even stacks things in Lady Chatterley’s favor. He husband is a jerk. He is also the one to introduce the idea that led to the affair. There's the public inequity that means her life is the one most ruined by this. So, while I believe the story was shocking in 1928, it's just not now. To counteract that though, they really amp up the sex. There's a lot of it in this movie and I was surprised how softcore Netflix let this get. It was a good effort to dust off the story. Not super effective, but I applaud the effort.

 

Casting Emma Corrin as the titular Lady Chatterley works well. My only other exposure to her before this was The Crown, and I'll admit it took me back at first seeing what Princess Diana was up to now. Jack O'Connell is fine as the farm hand she carries on the affair with. I'm bothered by my face blindness to him. I've been aware of him for too long and seen too many things with him to still not recognize him. It doesn't make sense. I have to give Matthew Duckett some praise for his performance. He's playing a paraplegic veteran who is getting cheated on yet, thanks to his performance, I still feel no sympathy for him. It was also fun seeing Ella Hunt show up. I still remember her from the underrated Anna and the Apocalypse.

 

Verdict: Weakly Don't Recommend