MAMA

MAMA - D+

Bland, mundane and rather boring. There was nothing about this film that captivated me. The story, the acting, the directing, the music, everything about this film was painfully average.

The story as well as the characters had difficulty deciding what they were trying to be. Was this a horror film? Was I supposed to be afraid of Mama? Was it a tragedy? Was I supposed to feel sorry for her? The subtle ambiguity of what exactly was going on and why would've worked better if the true intention of the film was for the audience to make up its own mind. Yet when driven hard in a certain direction, with expectation, it comes off as rather insulting.

Too many deaths in this film, at least for what I think the film was going for. Less deaths would have made for a better point.

Found the film too dull to go back for a second look to see what I may have missed. Entertain, it did not.

US

US: C+

There were a lot of things in this movie that worked and a lot of things that didn't. In regards to the film's story, it hit the mark in terms of urgency, suspense, thrill and action. The protagonists were heroic, courageous and easy to root for. The main character Adelaide, a heroine brought to life by a strong performance out of Lupita Nyong'o.

What doesn't work here, are nonsensical moments, major plot holes and unanswered questions. Jordan Peele needs to reenlist at Sarah Lawrence College and take a class in comic relief, as that was one of the film's greatest weaknesses. They weren't funny, they weren't alleviating, they weren't even properly distracting. The film worked so hard to bring you into the moment and capture your undivided attention, only to completely take you out of the moment with illogical and senseless character choices and dialog.

The film did itself a major disservice with a predictable and not only unnecessary but detrimental twist. The world of fiction, desperately needs iconic, heroic, and significant female characters as well as characters of color. The film built a definitive one throughout the story, only to take that assurance, turn it into ambiguity and leave us with a possibility of what could now be provisional. I think that was a mistake, and it not only weakened the character, it weakened the story.

The performances of the actors, the overall direction of the scenes, the musical score and the choice of setting were all enough to where this film was perfectly fine being told straight forward.

The old saying is sometimes less is more and to the point, sometimes more is less. That's US.

BACKDRAFT 2

BACKDRAFT 2 - B+

Surpassing the original on many levels, the direct to video sequel should have received a theatrical release. Joe Anderson replaces Robert DeNiro as the fire investigator with a chip on his shoulder. A deeper dive into the character, with a greater centralized focus on who he is and what makes him tick. Donald Sutherland returns as Ronald Bartel and this time around he serves more purpose and is better utilized. Billy Baldwin also returns as Brian McCaffery, and has a handful of scenes, one in particularly powerful, but his death was cheap and easy. An unnecessary device to trigger emotion that had already been established with earlier scenes. Alisha Bailey as Maggie was a welcomed addition and the chemistry between her and Anderson as partners developed naturally. Jassamine Bliss Bell as Jenny on the other hand was so insignificant that it was hard to remember that she was even there. Written in for the sake of giving the main character a love interest, she could easily be edited out and it wouldn't change a thing about the film.

The greatest strength of the script was the mystery of who was behind everything and why. The greatest weakness was in the revelation. A character with a name and a face would have been rewarding and instead we're left with a disappointing let down of simply terrorists. In what was an otherwise strong script, getting too complicated in details that led to nowhere and building up to what should've been a great pay off only to end up lackluster kept this film from receiving what would have otherwise been an A.

TOY STORY 4

TOY STORY 4: A

It was unnecessary. In the realms of the story it served no purpose and it had no meaning. Other than to cash in on a bankable franchise and to later make a killing in DVD sales so that diehard fans can say they own all four movies, this film had no reason to be made.

TOY STORY 3 was a definitive ending. There didn't need to be anything after. The closure was perfect.

Yet the film was made, and frankly it was good. It was very good. It just wasn't all that much different. Nothing new or fresh here, just rehashed and recycled concepts and ideas that we've already seen in the other three films.

The laughs were similar, the heartaches the same and the lesson learned at the end well taught, but as a reminder more so than a first time viewing.

This was a refresher course, a summer class, a retake of what you already know and what you've already seen.

Not so much the feel of a part four as much as it felt like an alternative to what could have been part three.

I guess I've made my point on that, I'll move on.

The story was good. Touching, heartfelt and moving. The idea of an anti-villain, multilayered and a victim of her own desires was something I'd like to see more kid's films try and tackle.

Woody coming to terms with the fact that people grow apart and move on, find new purposes in life was a very strong message. A risky one, especially for demographic this film aims at, but an important one.

The voice work and animation as always were great.

Fun to see Bo Beep back.

I really need to stop writing this in the middle of the night when I'm so tired I could easily pass as a zombie.

THE MULE

THE MULE: B-

A performance driven film that relied heavily upon a seasoned director/actor with an all star cast to elevate a solid, yet conventional script. While the characters may have been spontaneous themselves, the structure of the story predictable and quite strict.

As he has been the past 65 years, Clint Eastwood was brilliant as Earl Stone. Michael Pena and Bradley Cooper worked well together and with performances like these Cooper is quietly cementing himself into modern day Marlon Brando type territory. Dianne Wiest has had better performances, but she was still good in this one.

The Cinematography was strong in this film. Well lit, well shot and a great attention to detail.

SMALL FOOT

SMALL FOOT: A

A clever family film full of laughs that tells its story to adults through well crafted dialog, while showing the story to a younger audience through visuals.

Didactic, yet gentle, a sprinkle of Laurence Kraus and a dollop of Christopher Hitchens made its way into a not so subtle philosophy. The message here was clear. Question, discover, and learn. Ask why. Know why. Understand why. A mind is meant to be open, not closed.

The film also illustrated beautifully how the root of most conflict is a mixture of misunderstanding and miscommunication. And how the origin of solution comes not from the mouth but from ears. Only when the mind and the heart come together do we find the greatest sense of moderation.

The voice work here was decent, but the animation deserves most the credit for bringing the characters to life.

A film for the thinkers and a film for the non. Not many do that. This one did.

Pet Sematary (2019)

PET SEMATARY (2019) - B

I actually have quite a bit positive to say about this film. I felt there were a lot of things that this film did well. The acting was very good. The directing especially in the transitions, the pacing and overall tone was most certainly worthy of praise. The overall tension, and build up was soothing to the eye, the ear and the mind.

The story I felt while lacking more than a bit in certain elements, was rather strong in others. The characters themselves as individuals were well developed, but their relationships to one another felt distant. While easy to relate to a character in empathetic theory, it made it difficult to resonate in sympathetic reality.

Connections in this film were strong. Church coming back and causing the accident was clever, and gave the moment more meaning. Rachel's reservations about death, I felt were best depicted in this film, even compared to the 1983 Novel. Ironically her relationship with Zelda was one of the only I felt got any real attention to detail. I think they meant to with Jud and Ellie, but it was not near as developed as it could have been.

Lastly I want to praise the scene where Ellie was struck by the truck. That was done so well. The acting, the pacing, the directing. It was as shocking, devastating and depressing as any audience member could hope for.

As to the criticisms it humors me to think of how many including the director himself complained about how unscathed Gage was in the 1989 version. Yet Ellie in 2019, didn't strike me as a nine year old girl who had been hit by an oil tanker. She was actually in better shape than Gage was in the Original.

I also felt it strange upon the braggart claims of how much more connected to the novel this film was than its 1989 counterpart, how much indeed it was not. While many of the changes didn't necessarily bother me, other than the actual mention of the Wendigo & a fun little reference to Oz the Gweat and Terriblwe, this felt vastly different than the novel. Maybe because it was.

In my opinion, the purpose of a remake goes far beyond cashing in upon a bankable name. I feel that the duty of a remake should be to enhance and capitalize upon what the original film did right the first time, while focusing in on and fixing anything that it did wrong. While this film did a lot of things right, it seemed to have the same problems that the 1989 film had.

Victor Pascow seemed rather useless in the 1989 version and even more so in this film. Jud's choices and decisions seemed uncharacteristic, unwise and particularly stupid for someone who had known of the MicMac burial ground for 70 years. He seemed every bit as ignorant and foolish here as he did in the 1989 version.

Where this film falls apart is in the last 10 minutes or so. With a better ending I feel this film could have gotten an A. What the 1989 film did better than this film was tug at the heart, mess with mind and hit home the depressive devastation that a parent would have to go through realizing that they would have to send back to the grave, the loved one they fought so hard to bring back. This film lacked that moment that made the first film and the novel so powerful. They traded it in for a more Hollywood ending, and I think the film was the weaker for it.

Yet the rest of the film was pretty strong and I'll stick with the B I gave it.