Trev's Movie Dump: February 2016

Not quite as active of a film viewing month as January was, but still some gems (and bombs) to talk about. Shall we get to it?

How to Marry a Millionaire (1953)

Surfing Netflix one evening, the lady and I stumbled onto this one. The premise is simple: three crafty New York aristocrats are in search of the good life. In order to get it, they're each on the hunt to marry a millionaire. The movie plays out exactly as you may think, in that they learn that true love is more important than money. 

All-in-all, not a great film, but not terrible. Marilyn Monroe keeps up with her typical type-casting as the pretty yet dim-witted blonde who's always good as the comic relief. Nothing else really stands out in terms of performances. 

The craziest thing about this movie is the attitude men and women seemed to have about adultery back in the 50's. I'm not sure if this film speaks accurately for the time, but these girls (nor the men they pursue) appear to give a shit at all if one another is married or not. I guess if you watch shows like Mad Men this seems to be the common attitude at the time. At least Mad Men is a serious drama and views cheating and lying as a serious character flaw. However, this movie explores the humor in being shallow. 

Unless you're a big Monroe fan or something, this film doesn't need to be seen. 

Deadpool (2016)

Like any good boyfriend, I took the lady to see Deadpool on Valentine's Day. Now, I know I'm the superhero fan in the group -- and because of such, I'm definitely a little bias -- but this film was great! Clearly this was the film Reynolds was born to play (it's really just Van Wilder turned smart-aleck assassin). While the film is astonishingly crude and violent there's also quite a bit of soul. In between the stacks of dead bodies, a love story is unfolding. Sure, it's not a love story for everyone. But for anyone with an inappropriate sense of humor -- and at least some familiarity with X-Men world -- then there's no reason why you shouldn't find some sincere enjoyment from this guy. 

American Ultra (2015)

I'm a big fan of screenwriter Max Landis ever since I saw his novel take on a found-footage superhero film, Chronicle. Anxious to see what Landis' stories could do with when teaming up with some major studios, I ended up getting scared away from theaters when I saw both this film and Victor Frankenstein receiving less-than-great reviews from critics. Finally, I caught both these films once they came to home video. And what I saw definitely aligns with what critics are saying. 

From a pitch standpoint, American Ultra sounds like a fun idea. We basically have a small-town stoner burnout, who's a type of Jason Bourne action hero suffering from some sort of amnesia and doesn't remember his past. When the American government tries to put a hit out on him in an effort to eradicate this sleeper cell program (he was unwittingly apart of), his training comes flooding back and begins kicking ass and taking names. Slowly, this guy begins to put back together the pieces of his past causing him to question how much of his current life is a lie.

First off, some great talent in this film. Eisenberg portrays the timid stoner well, but falls into the action role even better. His chemistry with his love-romance, Kristen Stewart, is actually quite good. We have Topher Grace as the arrogant, cowardly goverment agent out to get Eisenberg. Jone Leguizamo plays an eccentric small-town drug dealer. Tony Hale channels some of his Buster Bluth as an anxious FBI computer hacker. Walton Goggins portrays a creepy-ass, psychopathic government hit-man named "Laughter" because, well... the character is always giving off this eerie snicker. And, last but not least, good old Bill Pullman makes a cameo as well. 

Not a bad set of talent, eh?

Too bad the film felt way too bland. And for this, I blame the direction. 

Although the story is fun, it's very simple. Because of this, I think a director for a story like this requires a true flare behind the lens to help elevate the film. I'm not saying the directing was god-awful or anything, it just felt lazy, or clumsy, or something... I can't quite put my finger on it, but it definitely needed to rise higher than just the standard quo to make this film more appealing than it was. 

Next from Max Landis we have...

Victor Frankenstein (2015)

Again, this is a decent premise. Take Victor Frankenstein and his assistance Igor, and make them Sherlock Holmes and Watson only their solving the mysteries of the undead and things that go bump in the night. 

Unfortunately, I blame the writing for this lackluster film. The only thing I can applaud is a very interesting take on Igor -- a hunchback at an circus freak show who's taken in by Dr. Frankenstein as his assistant. There's a lot of depth to the character as you find he's actually quite brilliant despite being ridiculed by nearly everyone and has a deep love for one of the acrobats in the circus. An intriguing take on a character who's always hidden in the shadows. 

Then we have Frankenstein (the scientist/doctor, not the monster). Right from the start, this guys somehow knows karate and takes down men more than twice his size for no real explanation. (I mean, he's established as an aristocratic doctor, not a street brawler.) He's also just an unlikable guy. Now, there's compelling unlikability as seen in Steven Moffat's Sherlock or Hugh Laurie's House -- basically a character we just love to hate, yet somehow can't stop rooting for. But here, I found Frankenstein to be winy and uncomfortably erratic. I will say that Landis also has a very interesting take on Frankenstein's backstory, or more precisely, his family, but spoiling that information may ruin what little there is to enjoy about this film. 

This film and American Ultra are by no means must-see films. But if you find yourself home sick one day and want to put something on that you wouldn't feel too much guilt sleeping through, then either one of these will do. 

Despite last year being not all that great in hopes from some awesomely compelling Ladis stories, there is a few new projects in the works. First is Bright set to shoot with Will Smith. And he's also one of a dozen writers working on that Power Rangers reboot. So, I'm sure we'll be seeing plenty more of him.

-------------------------------------------- UPDATE -------------------------------------------- 

While strolling through my YouTube channels, I saw that Landis had uploaded a trailer for his new film (and directorial debut), Me, Him, Her. Don't really know what to think, but why don't you take a look. 

Did that make much sense to you? No? Ok, good... then it's not just me. (Well, it looks like we have a love triangle of sorts with two people in particular having their life flipped upside down Still, some impressive faces in the cast. We've got chubby Haley Joel Osment, Maeby from Arrested Development, and I even think I saw a brief glimpse of Scott Bakula and Geena Davis filling in as the concerned parents role. I mean... Genna fucking Davis! It's not that I thought she was dead or anything -- in fact she came to Sony once to give a speech on women in the entertainment industry -- but it's just been forever since I saw her in anything fresh. 

Anywho, that's all the news I gots. 

It Follows (2015) 

Rated as one (if not the) best horror film in 2015, this movie thoroughly entertained me from start to finish. It's a film about an STD... as in a sexually transmitted demon. Our main girl sleeps with some guy she's recently been dating, next thing you know he knocks her out with chloroform. She wakes to find herself tied to a wheel chair where the guy explains the rules of this film and the sad truth: a demon is coming to kill her. You see, when you sleep with someone who has this STD, they pass it on. After that then demon will steadily follow you, always walking, until it reaches you. Then it will kill you. It's constantly changing it's appearance and is only visible to its current victim(s). The only way to save yourself is to sleep with someone else and pass it along. Not all that different from the theory behind The Ring, only now a VHS tape is someone's genitals. 

The film is beautifully shot. But what's even greater is the tension that each scene creates. My eyes were constantly scanning each and every shot on the lookout for something deadly walking in from the distance. Because of that, I was sitting mere inches away from the screen absolutely mesmerized.

Once the film finished, I was sure this was going to be in my top 10 films of 2015 -- hell, maybe even a top 5 -- but I slept on it. Then more I thought about the story, the more unanswered questions I had. Later I went online to explore other viewers' theories on the STD and the message behind the movie only to get to one conclusion... there really isn't one.

This story feels like it came from a nightmare. One of those nightmares where you feel like somethings watching you from the distance, lurking right behind you, always making sure to stay hidden in any blind spot. Then the filmmaker awoke from that nightmare and wanted to capture that uncomfortable tension on film. And he did it. Perfectly. But the story feels rushed and unfinished. I don't want to give anything away at all, but I strongly urge people to watch this film and come back for a discussion. What do you take away from it? How do you feel about the climax (a narrative one, not a sexual one) in the final act? Do you believe this whole story is a metaphor for something? If so, what?

No, I'm not asking anyone to write a mid-term paper for me or something, I'm truly curious to find answers to these questions, because, for me, I feel like there's really no logical answer. Well, I should restate that. I don't believe the filmmakers have any reasonable answers to these questions. And that's what made this as something that could have been "great," come away as something merely "good."