Only the Bills could get me to watch a Hallmark movie

I have never watched a Hallmark movie before this past week. I know I subscribe to the "give everything a chance" mindset, but there are many more things I would rather watch than a sappy, cheesy, poorly acted, predictable love story. Then they filmed one in Buffalo (sorta) and put Bills players in it. So, out of obligation to my city, I watched "Holiday Touchdown: A Bills Love Story."

Morgan Quinn (Holland Roden) and Gabe DeLuca (Matthew Daddario) work together to identify who has been sending gifts to Morgan's uncle, Tommy (Joe Pantoliano), every year for decades. 

I was impressed with the Bills players in this. When I heard they were going to be in the movie, I assumed there would be dull, stilted line delivery. It was not that bad. I am not saying they should quit their day jobs, but I have seen actual actors do much worse in movies before. 

I will also give the movie credit for being different from (what I assume) every Hallmark movie is like: boy and girl meet, stuff happens, they fall in love. Using the mystery of who is sending the gifts is a clever way to make these two spend time together. My only real complaint is that Gabe has been in love with Morgan for years, and everyone seems to know it (except Morgan). Take that out and have them fall in love over the course of the investigation, and the movie would have been a little better. 

Now, let's get to my biggest problems with this movie. As far as being a "Bills Love Story," it is just plug-and-play. They included references to Buffalo and the Bills in the script, but they could have easily substituted any other team, and not much would have changed. This point is underscored by last year's "Holiday Touchdown: A Chiefs Love Story" (which makes this movie feel less special). Those references felt shoehorned in to justify making the movie about the Bills. 

Then there is the "filmed in Buffalo" thing. This is more a matter of personal preference than a legitimate criticism, so take it with a grain of salt. Yes, they did film at a studio in Buffalo (that is a big deal), but the city is barely featured. I will give them Orchard Park. It is where the stadium is, and where the main character's family lives. But Morgan and Gabe spend a lot of time at Vidler's in East Aurora. Not sure anyone outside of East Aurora would consider that "Buffalo." There are some great shots of downtown Buffalo, but none of the action takes place in the City of Buffalo. 

4/10

Rated TVG

1h 27m

Random Rambling #60: Guilty Pleasure

With the amount of "Bar Rescue" I have been watching lately, it has gotten me thinking about the term "guilty pleasure." It is a term thrown around when someone feels a little ashamed of enjoying something. I used to use this when I talked about watching "Survivor." It's a reality show, and I know that it's not on the same level as "Breaking Bad," but I enjoy it. I just had to add that caveat that "I know it's not a high-quality show."

I don't do that anymore, and I think the term "guilty pleasure" should become an obsolete phrase. We should not feel guilty about the media we consume.

I don't remember where I first heard it, but one of my go-to phrases is "I don't want to yuck anybody's yum." If you are watching/reading something, don't feel bad about it. If you love reality shows, own it. If you think reality shows are a sign of the apocalypse, don't judge people who love them. When I am watching a movie I don't like, I don't just write it off. I am not sitting there thinking, "Who thought this was good?" The answer is someone out there likes it. Every movie/TV show/book gets made for someone. It might not be for me, but there is someone out there who will enjoy it. 

There are a ton of reasons why we watch/read things. It could be to educate (I just started the new Ken Burns documentary, "The American Revolution" on PBS), to be entertained, or to escape (to name a few). With all the time I have spent in the hospital lately, the main reason I had the TV on was to pass the time. Any reason you consume media is valid, and there is no reason to be ashamed of it. 

Keeping Entertained in a Hospital Room

As many of you know, I was in the hospital in Pittsburgh for over two weeks. I am still in the hospital, although I am now back in Rochester. You would think that I would be scratching things off my watchlist left and right, but that list is only getting larger. 

Several factors contribute to this, but two primary reasons are interruptions and mood. Now that I am in Rochester, I have sessions of OT and PT during the week, on top of doctors and nurses stopping by for various reasons. Then there is the biggest factor, my mood. There is a lot that I want to watch and could easily watch from the billion streaming services I subscribe to. I just don't have the energy for it. As badly as I want to watch "Pluribus" on Apple TV, I know it's going to take more mental energy than I have to give. 

So, how have I been passing my time? By watching a lot of random things on TV. I have watched a lot of Marvel movies on FX (I'm shocked at how often they have one of those airing). I have watched a lot of "Law and Order: SVU." Since returning to Rochester, I have watched a ton of "Bar Rescue" on Paramount. Essentially, anything that doesn't require me to engage fully is what I'm drawn to. 

At this point, that watchlist of mine will have to wait until I get out of the hospital. I know it's going to be a while before I get back into the movie theater, but there is plenty to watch on streaming right now. Until I am at my parents' house, I guess I just need to sit back and enjoy Jon Taffer going in and fixing up failing bars. 

Seeing a movie with a live band is the best time you can have in the theater.

If I had a physical bucket list, one item would be to see a silent movie with a live band. I recently had the opportunity to do that, and it was a fantastic experience. My friend and I went to the North Park Theater in Buffalo to see 1925's "Phantom of the Opera," starring Lon Chaney as the Phantom. It follows the life of a young ingenue at the Paris Opera House as she becomes the object of the Phantom's obsession. 

The movie is good, but I went to see a film with a live band, and that is what I am here to talk about. The Invisible Czars usually tour with two movies. I would have loved to see "Nosferatu: as well, but I had to get up early the next day. The experience was a blast. Before the movie starts, the band is introduced and explains what will be happening. They are going to the music that accompanies the film. They also said that there would be several parts of audience participation. We got to dance to some dance scenes and make the noise of the mob as they chased down the Phantom. 

It was easily one of my best theater-going experiences. It was an almost full theater on a random Thursday in October in Buffalo. It was great to see how many people came out to see a 100-year-old, silent movie. It is something I want to do again, definitely need to see "Nosferatu" when it comes back. It is really something we all should do. 

“Good Boy” gives a dog’s eye view of horror

I am always willing to see a movie that does something different. My favorite is the one-take movie. Seeing a film that tries something different stylistically can be an enjoyable experience. Last weekend I went to see a horror movie shown from the dog's perspective. 

When Indy and his owner move to a remote cabin in the woods, something sinister begins to happen to his owner. 

If you want to go in fresh, skip this paragraph. Before I went to see this movie, I had to know one thing: Does the dog die? He doesn't. That would have been a deal breaker for me. 

The movie is good. It wasn't great, but I enjoyed it. Even with a few jump scares, it wasn't all that scary. It had many suspenseful, tense moments, but nothing terrifying. Even the old me, who was too much of a scardy cat to watch horror movies, could have handled this one. 

Indy the dog is excellent, and a lot has to do with the editing. Indy didn't need to act scared because, if you cut to something scary, you intuit that Indy is: there is a name for this phenomenon, but I can't find it. Indy is the director's dog and was not a trained actor. After the movie, there was a brief behind-the-scenes featurette that showed the amount of work that went into it. It took over three years to make, and they filmed a little bit at a time. It's impressive to see how much work went into the movie. 

As I said before, this is shot from Indy's perspective. Every shot is at his eye level, so you are experiencing the events from that low angle. If Indy doesn't see it, neither does the audience. When they get to the house, Indy's owner receives a call from his sister, and a few seconds later, Indy goes to explore. You get the sense that something is up with the house, but, as the audience, you don't get much since Indy doesn't care. It's little touches like this that really add to the film's ambiance. 

7/10

Rated: PG-13 for terror, bloody images, and strong language.

1h 12m

Finally, “The Rock” stretches himself as an actor

When it comes to the ranking of wrestlers-turned-actors, the results have been consistent for years. Dave Bautista is far and away the number one, John Cena is comfortably number two, and at distant third, Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson. The other two have appeared in a wide range of movies, showcasing their excellent acting skills. Johnson, on the other hand, has only played one-note characters in big, multimillion-dollar blockbusters. When he was cast in "The Smashing Machine," a small-budget independent film, I was intrigued. 

"The Smashing Machine" follows mixed martial artist Mark Kerr (Johnson).

Johnson's performance is, by far, the best he has ever given in a movie. Kerr is an excellent fighter, but he also has a substance use disorder. We see him try to get stronger pain meds after a fight, and stashes drugs in various places, not just his house. He is in a rocky relationship with his girlfriend Dawn (Emily Blunt). Johnson shows a broader range of emotions than he has in any of his other films. Playing the part of Kerr requires him to be tough (which he has always done), but also requires him to show a lot of vulnerability. It is an impressive performance that I would not be surprised to see get Oscar attention for Johnson.

The performances are where my praise for "The Smashing Machine" ends. I felt the same way about this as I did about "The Hunger Games." It is a series of moments with almost no connecting tissue. Scenes don't resolve; they end, and then we are on to the next scene. At one point, Mark goes to rehab, and in the next scene, he is out—no word of his recovery or how he handled rehab. The movie doesn't have any interest in that or the fact that he had to drop out of a fight because of it, beyond people being mad that he had to drop out. It made the movie feel disjointed and incomplete. 

Johnson and Blunt are great, though she is not given much to do beyond the nagging/clingy girlfriend. The story, while interesting, is all over the place and doesn't end up saying much beyond, This is Mark Kerr; here is some stuff he did. The fighting sequences are great and all, but I would have liked to see more of Mark's substance abuse struggles and how he and those around him dealt with it. 

6/10

Rated R for language and some drug abuse.

2h 3m

Chemistry is Key in “All Of You”

One of the best things to come out of "Ted Lasso" is Brett Goldstein's new popularity. Roy Kent was one of the best characters on that show, and a lot of it was due to the way Goldstein brought Kent to life. In the years since, he has been in some high-profile movies ("Thor: Love and Thunder") and co-created, written on, and acted in one of my current favorite shows, "Shrinking." Because of this, he and co-writer William Bridges were able to release "All Of You," a movie version of "Solemates," a one-season show from 2020. 

Set in a future where there is a test to find your solemate, "All Of You" follows two friends, Simon (Goldstein) and Lara (Imogen Poots).

One of the interesting aspects of the movie is that we only see Simon and Lara together. They have been best friends for years, but there is clearly something more between them. This movie lives and dies on the chemistry between the lead actors, and Goldstein and Poots have it in spades. 

The movie is a study of these two characters. It is a solid movie that I enjoyed with great lead performances. The concept of a test that finds your solemate is a bit sci-fi, but that is as far as it goes. There is no future tech or anything like that, so it's not just for genre fans. 

All of You is on AppleTV.

7/10

Rated R for sexual content/some nudity, language, and brief drug use

1h 38m

“One Battle After Another” is makes great use of its runtime.

One of my biggest complaints about movies is how long some of them are. I brace myself when I see a movie that is well over two hours long. It usually means it's going to be bloated, and I will look for what could have been cut. It is rare for a long movie not to feel like a long movie: "One Battle After Another" is one of those.

Bob (Leonardo DiCaprio) was once a member of a revolutionary group called the French 76. When his girlfriend had a baby, he was caught by Col. Stephen J. Lockjaw (Sean Penn). He and his newborn daughter leave that life behind and drop off Lockjaw's radar. Sixteen years later, Lockjaw is back, and Bob must fight to save his family. 

It goes without saying that DiCaprio and Penn are incredible actors, and this movie does nothing to change that. For much of this movie, Bob is portrayed as a burnout doofus. He has spent years smoking and drinking, so by the time Lockjaw takes his daughter, he is not at his best. In one scene, he has to go through a series of code phrases to get some information, and can't remember the final phrase. He goes on a long rant at the man on the other end about how he has essentially fried his brain with drugs and is no longer good at the spy stuff. There is a lot of comedy in this movie, and most of it comes from DiCaprio. 

This movie is two hours and 41 minutes long, but doesn't feel like it. "One Battle After Another" is basically two movies. In the first hour or so, we see Bob and the rest of the French 76 in action. We are introduced to Lockjaw and his ethos. We see a bit of Bob and Perfidia's (Tayana Taylor, who gives an incredible performance) relationship and the birth of their child. The movie then flashes forward 16 years, showing Bob and his daughter, Willa (Chase Infiniti), in their new life. Then, Lockjaw returns, and the movie kicks into high gear.

If you, like me, get exhausted by the thought of sitting down to watch a long movie, this is not one of those movies. Throughout its runtime, it rarely slows down, and when it does, it's only to establish the Willa/Bob dynamic. "One Battle After Another" is an absolute blast to watch and is in the running for the best movie of the year. 

9/10

Rated R for pervasive language, violence, sexual content, and drug use.

2h 41m

“Long Walk” is as moving as it is brutal

Stephen King is primarily known for writing horror, but upon examining his career, it becomes clear that he has also dabbled in other genres. "Rita Hayworth and the Shawshank Redemption" is probably the most popular example. This past summer, "The Life of Chuck," another non-horror King adaptation, was released. The man knows more than just horror. 

Based on the 1979 novel, "The Long Walk" is set in a dystopian alternate version of America, where every year, a young man from each state is chosen to walk until only one remains. 

This movie is brutal. If any of the walkers falls behind the mandatory pace, they are shot. The survivor will receive a substantial amount of money and one wish. They all view this as a means to escape poverty and achieve a better life. They might volunteer for this walk, but when this is your only escape, do you really have a choice? The movie does not show every person who dies, but the ones it chooses to depict can be shocking and reiterate how brutal and unforgiving this world is. 

The core of this movie is the relationship between Garrety (Cooper Hoffman) and McVries (David Jonsson). They form a doomed friendship early on. Both know that for one of them to win, the other has to die, but they put that aside for a sense of camaraderie and brotherhood (as fleeting as they know it is). McVriers says that they are in control of how they spend their last hours. They can spend them as competitors trying to sabotage each other or as friends helping and rooting for one another. Even in a bleak movie like this, we can see the best of humanity. 

Later this year, we will have another non-horror Stephen King adaptation, "The Running Man," which is set in a bleak world where death is entertainment. If that is as good as the last few King adaptations, then I say, keep them coming. 

8./10

Rated R for strong bloody violence, grisly images, suicide, pervasive language, and sexual references.

1h 48m

“Murder” is alive and well in the Arconia

I came to "Only Murders in the Building" late. It wasn't until after season three that I finally watched the show. The premise of an Agatha Christie-style closed-room mystery combined with a true crime podcast was intriguing. Throw in comedy legends Steve Martin and Martin Short, and add in Selena Gomez, and the show was destined to be a hit. 

Season five of "Only Murders" finds our trio investigating two deaths. One of the longtime Arconia doorman, Lester (Teddy Coluca), and the other is Nicky Caccimelio (Bobby Cannavale), a wannabe mobster who runs an illegal casino in the basement of the Arconia. 

As always, this show is driven by the chemistry of the three leads. If they didn't work, this show doesn't work. Even in the weaker seasons, the interplay between these three is where this show shines. Martian Short and Steve Martian have been friends for years and even have a touring show together, so they were always going to make magic on screen. I have been very impressed with how well Gomez fits in their dynamic. She is the perfect balance to the manic energy of her two older costars. 

In the most recent seasons, the show has managed to attract some incredible guest stars, most notably Meryl "Freakin" Streep. Whenever the guest stars are announced, it is always fun to see who they got. This year, Logan Lerman and Oscar winners Christoph Waltz and Renée Zellweger are a part of the cast. They play three billionaires who used to gamble at Nicky's casino. They may, or may not, have had something to do with the deaths that the three are investigating. 

Most shows struggle to maintain consistency over five seasons, but this one has managed to do so. Even with the addition of some high-profile guest stars, the focus remains on the main characters. "Only Murders in the Building" knows that it is at its best when the three leads are on screen. 

“Only Murders in the Building” is on Hulu

Live-action “Lilo and Stitch misses the point

On the whole, the live-action remakes of Disney animated movies have been bad. At best, they have been forgettable. At worst, they have been unwatchable. They have become soulless cash grabs that, except for "Lilo and Stitch," have not made that much at the box office. 

A remake of the 2002 movie of the same name, "Lilo and Stitch," is the story of a girl named Lilo (Maia Kealoah) who lives with her sister Nani (Sydney Elizebeth Agudong). They adopt a "dog" who turns out to be an alien trying to escape his creators, who want him destroyed.

It wasn't until a few years ago that I genuinely appreciated "Lilo and Stitch." It was one of the movies released after the Disney Renaissance (for more on that, check out mattkeepsrambling.tumblr.com). It did not get the praise that "The Lion King" or "Beauty and the Beast" did. It has become one of my favorite Disney movies, which is why I was disappointed in the remake. 

Here are the parts that I enjoyed. Maia Kealoah is great as Lilo. She embodies the manic energy that Lilo brings into her and Nani's lives. They kept Stitch (voiced in both movies by Chris Sanders) the same chaos gremlin he was in the original; any change to Stitch would have been a massive mistake. 

The repeated line, "Ohana means family and family means that no one gets left behind," is the central message of both movies. The remake doesn't fully understand that. In both films, Nani struggles to keep custody of Lilo, but only in the remake does Nani consider giving Lilo up to the state for adoption. That is not in keeping with the theme of "ohana." 

They also changed up the ultimate villain of the movie. In the original, Jumba is the one who created Stitch and is tasked with capturing him. In the end, he joins Lilo in the effort to save Stitch. In the original, another alien, Captain Gantu, is eventually the one who is trying to destroy Stitch. This character is completely cut out of the movie, so Jumba doesn't receive a redemption arc; he is portrayed as a one-dimensional villain. 

I had hoped this would be a better movie. It makes confounding changes to the source material, but doesn't try to do anything interesting. The live-action remakes are a concept that needs to be abandoned. Sadly, there are a bunch more planned, including a sequel to "Lilo and Stitch." This is one of those Hollywood trends that I cannot defend and refuse to get behind. If you are a parent, watch the original with your kiddos; it is a much better movie. 

6/10

Rated PG for action, peril, and thematic elements.

1h 48m

There is some fun to be had in “Caught Stealing”

Austin Butler has built a career out of playing larger-than-life characters, such as Elvis. He is a phenomenal actor and brings his best to these characters. Even in a movie like "The Bike Riders," he is doing something extra. What he hasn't done is play an ordinary, regular dude. It was a bit jarring to see "Caught stealing" and see him doing just that.

Hank (Butler) is a former baseball player turned bartender living in New York City. One night, his friend Russ (Matt Smith) asks him to watch his cat while he goes back to England for a few days. When dangerous people come looking for Russ, Hank is forced into the seedy underworld of 1990s NYC. 

While I have my qualms with the film, I enjoyed it quite a bit. It is a compelling story of a man in over his head. He is being hounded by all the people who think he can lead them to a lot of money. He is just a bartender trying to escape a traumatic past, and these people are making that impossible.

Darren Aronofsky is a director who chooses interesting and complicated projects. This is not one of those. It might be one of his more accessible movies. There is nothing surreal or mystical about "Caught Stealing." It is pretty straightforward as an Aronofsky movie goes. This is probably because he didn't write this one. "Caught Stealing" is based on a book of the same name, written by its author, Charlie Huston, who also wrote the script. 

I first saw Matt Smith as the Eleventh Doctor in "Doctor Who," and it has been awesome to watch his career unfold since then. He has been in a handful of movies (He was the best part of "Morbis") and stars in "House of the Dragon! Russ is essentially a middleman for bad people. Smith makes Russ more charming than he probably should be. Both men have flaws, Hank is definitely an alcoholic, but they overlook those flaws-or actively ignore them- because they are friends. You can see why he and Hank are friends, despite Russ's questionable associations.

6/10

Rated R for strong violent content, pervasive language, some sexuality/nudity and brief drug use.

1h 47m

Old and New are at war in “The Gilded Age”

I was in the market for a new show to watch. One that kept popping up on watch lists was "The Gilded Age." I have thought about starting it a few times. The third season ended recently, so now is a good time.

Set in 1880s New York, "The Gilded Age" explores the conflicts between Old Money and New Money families.

When I started watching the first episode, my initial thought was, "Oh, so this is just 'Downton Abby,' but in New York City." Then the 'Created By' credit popped up, and it was Julian Fellowes, creator of 'Downton Abbey,' and it made sense. That is my one concern. I hopped off "Downton" when (spoiler alert) Matthew Crawley (Dan Stevens) died. The show had become very repetitive. One advantage "Gilded Age" has is that it focuses on two families: the Russels (New Money) and the Van Rhijns (Old Money). There is a lot more social intrigue. Bertha Russel (Carrie Coon) is trying to get the Old Money families to accept her and her family. Her husband, George (Morgan Spector), is a robber baron who is ruthless in his business practices. 

During much of the first season, many of the adult characters were not that likable: Bertha Russel in particular. She comes off as cold and mean. She doesn't want her daughter, Gladys (Taissa Farmiga), to be out in society until the family has enough social clout to fill their ballroom. She is a perfectionist and expects that in all aspects of her life. Over the course of the first season, that lessens a bit, but she remains a woman full of ambition.

The show, so far, has lived up to the hype. It is well written and acted. There is a lot more going on than "Downton Abby" did. The mix of old vs new money keeps things interesting. These are people obsessed with status and hold very different views on how someone achieves it. I have just started the second season, and things have only gotten better.

"The Gilded Age" is on HBO Max

“Highest 2 Lowest” modernizes the original

I had heard that Spike Lee was directing a remake of Akira Kurosawa's "High and Low." Then I heard nothing. Last week, I was looking to see what movies were out and saw that a theater near me was showing that movie, "Highest 2 Lowest," and that it was a limited run (one week only) and would be on AppleTV+ in September. Being someone who values the theatrical experience, I had to see it after watching the original, of course. 

David King (Denzel Washington) is a successful music producer who faces a moral dilemma when his chauffeur's son is mistakenly kidnapped. 

There is a lot to like about "Highest 2 Lowest," and while I don't think it surpassed the original, I still thoroughly enjoyed it. There are very few actors like Denzel Washington anymore, and his work as David King is impressive. We see a man forced to make a choice. King is about to lose his company, so he has leveraged everything he has to keep it. The ransom puts him in a difficult position. Initially, the choice is his company or his son, but when it is revealed that the kidnapper took his chauffeur's son, the choice is not so clear. Washington 

While I enjoyed this one, the original was better. In the original, the movie is basically split into two halves: the kidnapping and then the police work to find the kidnapper. The remake maintains the focus on King, and he is the one we see doing the work to find the kidnapper, which becomes less interesting as a result. I get that if you cast Denzel, you use Denzel. I think it just makes the second half weaker because finding the kidnapper becomes too easy/convenient. 

In "High and Low," Gondo (Toshirô Mifune) fades into the background as the police take over, but we see him defeated. In one scene, the police arrive at the house to speak with his chauffeur, and Gondo is mowing the lawn. There is nothing similar in "Highest 2 Lowest", and that is a detriment to the movie. Past paying the ransom, King doesn't really struggle with anything in the movie. 

I would recommend watching "High and Low" before seeing "Highest 2 Lowest." Both are great movies with incredible performances, but "High and Low" is a more complete movie. 

"Highest 2 Lowest" will be on AppleTV+ on September 5th

8/10

Rated R for language throughout and brief drug use.

2h 13m

“The Naked Gun” is a non-stop joke machine

Straight-up comedies are not released in theaters anymore. If you are laughing at a movie, it is usually one packaged in another genre. Characters can say/do funny things in a drama, horror, superhero, thriller, or action movie, but that doesn't make them comedies. "The Naked Gun" is a comedy, through and through, and that makes it the most important movie released this year.

Frank Drebin Jr (Liam Neeson) gets involved in a case with world-ending implications.

This is a very stupid movie, and I mean that as a compliment. The originals were joke delivery devices, full of wordplay, sight gags, and deadpan delivery of lines. The new "Naked Gun" follows in those footsteps. There are so many jokes per minute that repeated viewings will reveal ones I missed on the first round. In one scene at the police station, a cop is seen walking out of the cold case room wearing a winter hat and gloves (see what I mean by 'stupid')

Neeson is the perfect successor to Leslie Nielsen. Neeson is incredible at delivering the most ridiculous dialogue with a completely straight face, and you believe he is serious. When I heard he was cast, I knew the movie would be worth seeing. Neeson is known for his dramatic/action roles, but he can be hilarious in interviews (and shows off that deadpan he is a master of).

Pamela Anderson has been experiencing a career renaissance lately and has been showing Hollywood what it has been missing, as she was previously stereotyped and pigeonholed into roles that required her to look good. She is so incredibly funny in "The Naked Gun." Her character, Beth Davenport, ends up helping Drebin investigate the death of her brother. When the two of them enter an exclusive club where Richard Cane (Danny Huston), the bad guy, is hanging out, Beth distracts him by singing along scat-style with the jazz band on stage. It is a brilliant scene that can only work in a movie like "The Naked Gun."

If possible, see this movie in a theater with others. The communal experience of a group of people laughing together is second to none. The jokes come fast and don't end when the credits roll (there are multiple jokes within the credits that are worth sitting there for). If you have an affinity for the original movies or "Airplane" and its ilk, this is a fantastic homage to those movies.

8/10

Rated PG-13 for crude/sexual material, violence/bloody images, and brief partial nudity.

1h 25m

“Smoke” is entertaining, but disposable

Summer is an interesting time for TV. With very few exceptions, you either get reruns (if you still watch cable) or shows that are throwaways. That's not a bad thing, though; some of these shows are entertaining. Then some ride the line between "this is good" and "this is stupid." "Smoke" from AppleTV lives here.

"Smoke" follows arson investigator Dave Gudson (Taron Egerton) and Detective Michelle Calderone (Jurnee Smollett) as they investigate two serial arsonists.

When the show focuses on the cases, it is at its most compelling. The problem is, it isn't interested in doing that. It becomes pretty clear who the arsonists are pretty quickly, and the show loses a lot when that happens. For one of them, we end up following his life for a bit, but even when he is caught, the show quickly loses interest in him, and we move on to the other arsonist (whose identity we basically know at this point), and the investigation is not that interesting; when it could have been.

The performances are excellent. Egerton and Smollett are both fantastic, and the dynamic between the two characters is compelling enough to make up for the weaker areas of the show. Gudson is very good at his job, and that makes him a bit cocky. He thinks that greatness translates to every other aspect of his life. He is also writing a novel about an arson investigator, basing most of it on his life and the cases he is involved in. He thinks he is writing a masterpiece, but to others who hear/read it, it appears to be the clichéd drivel it is.

"Smoke" fits very comfortably into the summer show mold. There are some good things about it, but there are also some ridiculous things (like the end of the penultimate episode). The finale airs on Friday, so I will be finishing it out, but the show doesn't live up to its potential.

"Smoke" is on AppleTV+

“The Fantastic Four: First Steps” is….well…

We need to face facts: there has never been a good "Fantastic Four" movie. Although I appreciate the 2005 version, it's not a particularly good movie. It is fun and has some cool moments, but overall, it's a bit of a mess. There were other attempts to put this team on screen, but we don't discuss those for good reason. With "The Fantastic Four: First Steps," Marvel has finally done right by these characters.

The group known as The Fantastic Four has been superheroes for years. The team of Reed Richards (Pedro Pascal), Sue Storm (Vanessa Kirby), Johnny Storm (Joseph Quinn), and Ben Grimm (Ebon Moss-Bachrach) are faced with their greatest threat yet in Galactus (Ralph Ineson), a massive being who consumes planets.

One of the best things about "The Fantastic Four: First Steps" is that it is not directly tied to any Marvel movie we have seen before. This movie takes place on a different Earth than the one in the MCU. It is as close to a standalone film as Marvel has given us in a very long time. It serves as a good entry point for those who have not seen every MCU movie multiple times.

The Fantastic Four is often referred to as "Marvel's First Family," and this movie finally does them justice. While the film has some great action sequences, they are not the focus. What "First Steps" gets right that the previous attempts didn't was the interplay between these four characters. Sue and Reed navigate a relationship while dealing with one crisis after another, as Johnny and Ben's near-constant teasing of one another, this team functions as a family and comes together when the world needs them. That, above anything else, is why this movie works; it understands these characters.

Putting aside the bad adaptations, there was still a lot riding on this movie. This was Marvel's first attempt at bringing these characters to the screen (20th Century Fox owned the rights until Disney bought the studio in 2019). Marvel has been struggling with consistency lately. The films they have released since "Avengers: End Game" have been either box office flops, critically panned, or "that was pretty good." No one was getting blown away like they used to. "The Fantastic Four: First Steps" seems to have steered the MCU in the right direction.

8/10

Rated PG-13 for action/violence and some language

1h 54m

“Rebirth” mostly succeeds as a “Jurassic” sequel.

My love for "Jurassic Park" is well-documented. It is a movie that had a profound effect on me when I first watched it. It is my favorite movie of all time for that, and many other reasons. It is the only truly great movie in the franchise, and each sequel has been profoundly disappointing. Yet, I have gone to see every single one, for better or worse.

In "Jurassic World: Rebirth," Zora Bennett (Scarlett Johansson) leads a team to yet another island to get DNA samples from the largest dinosaurs to use in medical research.

"Rebirth" manages to be more entertaining than frustrating, which is not something the other sequels have accomplished. It features some fun action scenes, and the characters are less annoying than those in other sequels. The plot was pretty straightforward-"We need DNA from these three dinosaurs, and this is where they are on the island." It never tries to be more than that.

My biggest issue is that this island was where they put the rejected hybrid dinosaurs, and yet, only three are seen in the movie, and two of them are the same type. When it was revealed that they were going to an island with lab-created dinosaur hybrids, I was expecting all of them to be that. Most of the creatures we see are known dinosaurs. To top it all off, the ones we do get aren't that interesting.

"Rebirth" is one of the better sequels in this franchise. The bar for that is low, so that's not hard. It manages to be entertaining, but I am not sure what it adds to the franchise. Fair or not, every sequel is judged by the original. And by that metric, no Jurassic sequel is ever going even to come close to that high bar.

7/10

Rated PG-13 for intense sequences of violence/action, bloody images, some suggestive references, language and a drug reference.

2h 13m

“Superman” brings back the fun

There is no superhero more recognizable than Superman. The blue tights, the red cape, and the "S" emblazoned on his chest are all core to the character's look. The other key to what makes the Man of Steel an iconic character is his personality. He is commonly referred to as "the big blue boy scout" due to his optimistic outlook and sense of justice. We have not seen that version on screen for a long time, but with the release of "Superman," that version is back, and it could not be more timely.

Superman (David Corenswet) finds himself up against Lex Luthor (Nicholas Holt) as the billionaire takes his efforts to discredit Superman to the next level.

I recently came across a post online that claimed Superman is not a police officer; he is a firefighter. His primary concern is saving people: in one scene, he saves a squirrel. Early in the movie, Superman is in the Fortress of Solitude and sees that Krypto (his dog) has made a mess. His response, "What the hey dude?" Superman won't even curse. That is who this character is, and David Corenswet is perfectly suited for that. That line could be incredibly cheesy, but Corenswet delivers it with such sincerity that it works. He makes this version of the character the ultimate do-gooder, and that is precisely who Superman is meant to be.

What I love most about "Superman" is that it just drops you into this world. The movie opens with text to set the scene, but we receive no further introduction. As an audience, we have been watching superhero movies for over a decade and don't need an explanation for every monster and superhero. We just go with it. It does a great job of knowing the audience and keeping things simple in the process.

I could go on and on about this movie. Rachel Brosnahan gives us a fantastic Lois Lane, Nicholas Holt is one of the best Lex Luthors ever, Edi Gathegi steals the movie as Mr. Teriffic, and I love what they did with Krypto the Superdog. As the beginning of the new DC movie universe, this is a super start (pun intended).

9/10

PG-13 for violence, action, and language

2h 9m

“F1: The Movie” showcases speed and charm

I am not a racing fan. I understand how demanding the sport is, but I have no desire to spend hours watching cars driving. No offense to those who do, but that is not how I want to spend my time. Movies about racing? That is a different story.

Ruban Cervantes (Javier Bardem) asks former F1 driver Sonny Hayes (Brad Pitt) to return and help him with his F1 team. They have a talented young driver named Joshua Pierce (Damson Idris), but he has yet to win a race.

The main reason to see this movie is the racing sequences. Special rigs for the cars were designed to get these incredible shots but not throw off the balance of the vehicle. These are the best racing scenes ever put to film, and the reason to see this in the theater is I have heard the IMAX experience is incredible. Even in a regular theater, these scenes are stunning. It puts you right in the car with the driver, and you feel every turn and vibration. The race scenes also serve as a way of building the characters. Sonny is known for pushing the limits when driving, which some see as dangerous. During one race, to help Jousha win, Sonny uses his knowledge of the safety rules to force slowdowns in the race so that Jousha keeps his position. It is here that we see Sonny as the ultimate team player.

Pitt is one of those actors who can be considered a movie star. He has a presence on screen that not everyone else has. Sonny could be seen as a know-it-all jerk, but Pitt makes Sonny charming. He is very good at all kinds of racing and knows it. In our introduction, he has been hired to help a team for 24 hours at Daytona. We see him take them from the back of the pack to 1st during his shift in the car. It sets up exactly why he would be asked to help the F1 team.

For the racing scenes alone, this is worth the trip to the theater. I had a great time watching it. If I had one nitpick, it would be that it does follow the "sports movie template" and can feel predictable. But that is not a bad thing.

8/10

Rated PG-13 for strong language and action

2h 35m