Review of “The Transporter Refueled”

Frank Martin (Ed Skrein) is a package delivery man. He delivers the kinds of packages that you don’t want sent via Fed Ex or UPS. He doesn’t want to know the name of his client, he doesn’t want to know what he’s delivering and the deal isn’t allowed to change once it’s agreed upon or Frank walks away. He’s a skilled and daring driver behind the wheel of his tricked out Audi S8 and he’s also handy with his fists in the event there is trouble along his delivery route. Frank’s father, Frank Sr. (Ray Stevenson), is recently retired from his secret government job and visits his son in the South of France. Frank gets a call from a potential client about a job and agrees to meet her the next day. There he meets Anna (Loan Chabanol) who hires him to deliver two packages he’s to pick up at 5 pm in front of a bank. When he arrives, he discovers the two packages are two friends of Anna’s and all three are dressed in identical black dresses and blond wigs. Frank dislikes the way this job is going and tells them all to get out but he’s shown a smart phone with live video of his father chained up in a warehouse. Anna gives him no choice but to take them where they want to go. He must also outrun a squad of police cars and motorcycles as his car parked in front of the bank with three identical looking women has attracted the authorities’ attention. Successfully evading the police and switching cars, Frank takes the women to the warehouse and finds his father unharmed. Frank is told he must help Anna and her friends who are all prostitutes working for Arkady Karasov (Radivoje Bukvic) and his gang of Russian mobsters. Anna wants to destroy Karasov’s organization and free her friends and herself from their lives as high end escorts. To ensure his assistance, Frank Sr. has been given a slow-acting poison. If Frank helps them, Anna will give his father the antidote. Frank has no choice but to join their plot if he wants to save his father.

There isn’t much I can say about “The Transporter Refueled” as it didn’t make much of an impression on me. The movie is technically well done with some very intricate action scenes in tight places that make imaginative use of the environment. There is also some beautiful scenery as much of the film takes place in Monaco. If cars are your thing the Audi S8 driven by the Transporter is a lovely luxury sedan that is tricked out with various high-tech gadgets and effective counter measures. And of course, the film is populated with many beautiful and often scantily clad women. The movie is packed with things that should have grabbed my attention and kept me riveted from beginning to end yet it didn’t. As the story progressed, I felt more and more uncomfortable with the direction of the characters and their choices. “The Transporter Refueled” left me feeling like I needed to take a shower afterward.

While the movie gives its female characters plenty of intelligence and drive to pull off their mission without Frank’s help, they still need him to provide the muscle to make their escape plan a reality. In some sense, Frank is cast in the more stereotypical sexual role as the protector while the women are portrayed as the brains of the operation. The movie slips back into a more conventional male/female dynamic as the story goes along. That dynamic is part of my biggest issue with the movie. At one point, Anna and Frank wind up in bed together. It’s the film’s inappropriate romantic moment and it made my skin crawl. This woman that was sold to her pimp by her mother at the age of 12 and has been subjected to who knows what kind of abuse is now in bed with a man she met 24 hours earlier. This isn’t slut shaming, it is questioning the script and why a scene like that was included when the story makes it clear these women are very intelligent and have lived a life in hell through no fault of their own. It seems unlikely any woman who had lived Anna’s life would quickly fall into bed with a man she is forcing to help her. Perhaps I’m applying my own moral code to the characters in the film but it seems kind of gross to have the character have sex as a way of saying “thank you” to the man she is essential extorting into helping her. Maybe we are to think her life taught her this as the only way of expressing her appreciation for Frank’s help. It still strikes me as borderline abusive and a kind of sexual expression I could have done without. I’m no prude and the scene is very brief but I still left the theatre feeling like I’d seen something particularly filthy.

Otherwise, “The Transporter Refueled” is pretty average and largely inoffensive. The plot seems overly complicated if you give it a moment’s thought. Why these super intelligent call girls don’t just hire someone to kill their Russian pimps using the money they steal from their first incredibly complex and intricate robbery instead of following through with the rest of their equally byzantine plans escapes me (and apparently the writers of the script as well). It also doesn’t make much sense why the minivans and small cars employed by the Monaco police and airport security are able to keep up with Frank’s supercharged car. He should be able to leave them in the dust without creating all the mayhem to evade capture shown in the film. If I was Audi, I’d think twice about giving the filmmakers any more cars for the proposed next two films in this new trilogy.

The playful sniping and apparent rivalry between Frank Sr. and Jr. is a rare high point for the film. Ed Skrein and Ray Stevenson look nothing alike but still have a nice father-and-son chemistry. I hope this may get a bit more screen time in the next film as it is probably the best aspect of the story. I feel certain at some point the elder Martin will be sacrificed to save the younger as a high emotional point to give the Transporter a revenge angle to finish off the main villain. It seems like the most movie cliché thing to do so I’m certain it will happen, probably in the third film.

“The Transporter Refueled” is rated PG-13 for sequences of violence and action, sexual material, some language, a drug reference and thematic elements. There are numerous fights, some including weapons of various types, and one major shootout. There isn’t much blood from any of these fights and no gore. One character is shown being shot in the chest several times and a couple of other characters are shown being shot in the head but again there is very little blood and no gore. We also see the aftermath of a hotel room fire with three charred bodies. The previously mentioned sex scene is brief and shows a woman in her underwear. We also see a suggested threesome with no nudity. A reference is made to a woman dying of a heroin overdose. Foul language is widely scattered.

While fans of the original series of “Transporter” movies may find much to enjoy in this reboot, I found it more of the same with new faces. It also troubled me seeing how sex is such a commodity and those that have been used so violently are portrayed as being willing to trade it for services rendered. Perhaps my opinion of the film is colored by this feeling; however, I don’t think my view of the movie would have been much different if that scene didn’t exist.

“The Transporter Refueled” gets two stars out of five.

This week, a brief visit to the afterlife, a relationship from hell and freaky grandparents are your new cinematic options. I see and review at least one of these films.

90 Minutes in Heaven—

The Perfect Guy—

The Visit—

Follow me on Twitter @moviemanstan and send emails to stanthemovieman@comcast.net.

Review of “No Escape”

Jack Dwyer (Owen Wilson) is moving his whole family to Southeast Asia to work for a company modernizing the water system there. He’s bring his wife Annie (Lake Bell), oldest daughter Lucy (Sterling Jerins) and youngest daughter Beeze (Claire Geare) with him. On the flight over, they meet a world-weary Englishman named Hammond (Pierce Brosnan) who, once they land, guides them through the trickier side of living in their new country. Once in the hotel, the family notices many of the basic amenities, like cell and wired phones and TV, don’t work. The next morning, Jack goes looking for an English language newspaper amongst the local shops when he notices a group of riot police on one end of the street and a group of rebels on the other. Soon, the shops begin dropping their security doors and the two groups clash leading to death on both sides but the outnumbered police are losing. Jack tries to make his way back to the hotel but the way is blocked by a mob. An American is pulled out of the hotel and shot in the head. Someone in the crowd notices Jack and they begin to chase him. Jack manages to get away and back to the room but finds his oldest child Lucy has snuck off and gone to the pool unaware of the danger. Jack manages to get to her but is trapped in a stairwell when Hammond busts open an emergency door and shoots a couple of Jack’s pursuers. Hammond tells Jack to take his family to the roof. When they get there it’s filled with hotel guests and employees hiding out. Thinking an approaching helicopter is there to rescue them everyone stands and waves but is shocked to see a rebel with a machine gun open fire. Jack and his family manage to hide and the helicopter hits a power line and crashes on the roof. Jack has to get Annie and the kids off the roof and to safety before the rebels break through the barricaded door and kill them all.

“No Escape” is a type of film I call Tension Porn. The characters are placed in a situation that is designed to keep the audience constantly on edge wondering if, against all odds, the heroes of the film will succeed. While many films have a similar structure, what sets “No Escape” apart is the ruthless effort to make the audience worry about the lives of four people who are so completely unprepared for life in this new country even if everything goes well. Here, they are on the ground for about 12 hours when everything hits the fan. They don’t speak the language, they have very little money on them, they don’t have any weapons, they don’t have any fighting skills and they have two children under 10 years old. How could they possible survive in a city where it seems 9 out of 10 people want to kill them? Ugly, bloody death is lurking around every corner. There is no way they should survive and yet (spoilers) they do. This movie is lazy, predictable and ugly from start to finish.

If you’ve seen a trailer you know the very basic and simple story of “No Escape.” The writers, brothers John Erick Dowdle and Drew Dowdle, attempt to slip in a little social commentary in a brief scene between Jack and Hammond but it is mostly a time killer to set up the last act of the movie. From about 10 minutes in, the film is mostly Owen Wilson and his movie family running and hiding. While they move from hiding place to hiding place the movie is moving from unlikely to unbelievable.

One particular scene struck me as so completely dubious as to lose me for the rest of the film. The family is riding a motorbike wearing clothes pulled from corpses with scarves pulled over their faces when they encounter a crowd of celebrating rebels having an impromptu victory parade. Traveling against the flow of people, the family falls off the bike and a rebel helps them get it upright again. The rebel looks into Owen Wilson’s very American eyes with strands of blond hair peeking out from his hat and scarf disguise and, while looking suspicious, lets the family go. Every rebel he’s encountered to that point has quickly tried to kill him. The movie tells us that no foreigner, and many locals, is safe from these bloodthirsty killers yet he just happens to find the one that is either sympathetic or stupid. Either way, that scene turns everything that happens after it into a farce.

The movie wastes the talents of its actors as Wilson, Bell, Brosnan, Jerins and Geare all turn in pretty good performances. Not that anyone is asked to do any award-worthy acting; but given the quality of the script the company manages to put out some affecting work. Wilson and Bell are a convincing couple who go from the marital tension of moving half way around the world to the abject fear of trying to protect their children and save their own lives. The criminally underused Brosnan is the only spot of seeming joy in what is otherwise a dark and depressing world even before the trouble starts. Even when the full extent of his character’s involvement in the events preceding the uprising is exposed, Brosnan is still a likable rogue that appears to have a conscience when he sees innocent victims of his work.

The predictable plot doesn’t help make the movie any more watchable. The characters you think will die don’t make it to the end of the film. It isn’t a surprise the scenes from every action/chase picture are there to find in “No Escape.” What is a bit of a surprise is the level of xenophobia that seems to permeate the movie. The number of locals willing to help the Dwyer family can be counted on one hand. Everyone else is looking to kill whitey. It’s a kind of absolute that only exists in movies. When we finally find out what set the insurgents on their angry, violent rebellion, it doesn’t seem like it rises to the level of mass murder. The movie portrays those that are leading the revolution like pirates with bandanas tied around their heads, many with scars running down the length of their faces and their apparent weapon of choice is the machete. It plays into a stereotype that sees “the other” as being not much more than an animal that is out to get Americans. It’s a narrow worldview that offers simple answers to complex questions much like an attention-seeking politician.

“No Escape” is rated R for strong violence throughout and for language. There are numerous shooting, hackings and beatings. Many are bloody. There is a scene of attempted rape including the woman being beaten up. Foul language is common but not overwhelming.

After watching the trailer I dreaded seeing “No Escape” because I knew I would constantly feel uneasy as this family feared for their lives. I wasn’t wrong. I never considered the film would also be filled with a predictable plot and a fair amount of xenophobia but sadly, that was part of the movie as well. I feel sorry for the cast that did good work in what is a losing effort.

“No Escape” gets one star out of five.

Follow me on Twitter @moviemanstan and send emails to stanthemovieman.com.

Next week, an action franchise gets a reboot and two old geezers get on each others nerves. I’ll see and review one of these films.

The Transporter Refueled–

A Walk in the Woods–

Review of “American Ultra”

“To thine own self be true.” A character in Shakespeare’s “Hamlet” says this to his son just before the young man boards a ship bound for Paris. Couched in flowery language, the father is telling his son to take care of himself in such a way that if the need arises he can take care of others; but what if you do not know who exactly you are. Is it possible to be true to yourself if you question your own existence? Some question their sexuality, their belief system, their choice in a mate, their career and many other aspects of life but in the film “American Ultra” the main character faces the kind of existential crisis the puts his entire life history into question. Adding to his stress during the predicament, he must also face down over a dozen trained assassins.

Mike Howell (Jesse Eisenberg) lives a simple life with his girlfriend Phoebe (Kristen Stewart) in Liman, West Virginia. Mike works at a small grocery store, passing the slow times drawing comic book-like stories about a space travelling ape and getting stoned. Mike loves Phoebe and wants to ask her to marry him during a romantic trip to Hawaii. Sadly, Mike suffers from paralyzing anxiety whenever he tries to leave Liman and they must cancel their trip. Mike’s attempt to leave Liman triggered various alarms at the CIA as Mike was part of a secret operation to create super spies with exceptional training and combat skills. Called the Ultra program, it was led by Victoria Lasseter (Connie Britton) who shut it down when it didn’t produce significant results and it appears Mike has had memories of the program blocked. Lasseter gets an anonymous phone call telling her Mike is about to be killed. Lasseter confronts her supervisor, Adrian Yates (Topher Grace), and he tells her he is purging what’s left of Ultra and there’s nothing she can do about it. Lasseter travels to Liman and says a phrase to Mike that should activate him but he doesn’t respond. Later, Mike finds two men messing with his car in the store parking lot. When he confronts them, they attack him. Armed only with a cup of ramen noodle soup and a spoon, Mike is able to disarm and kill both men. Panicked, Mike calls Phoebe. Yates is furious when he hears Mike killed the men he sent to Liman and figures out Lasseter activated him. Yates then calls in a full mobilization of troops and special agents to shut down Liman, find Mike and Lasseter and kill them both.

“American Ultra” is a good mix of action and humor. The movie never takes itself too seriously and makes fun of characters within it that do. It has the kind of irreverent tone one might expect from writer Max Landis, the creative mind behind the script for “Chronicle” and several other films coming out this year. Landis is an entertaining follow on Twitter as he has very little in the way of a filter. If a thought crosses his mind it will find an outlet within 140 characters. That reckless disregard for authority and the powers that be are on full display within the story and characters in “American Ultra.” It may be the most dangerous summer movie of the season that isn’t about rap music.

Jesse Eisenberg and Kristen Stewart make a believable slacker couple. They have a grungy chemistry together that works despite Stewart’s reputation as having only about one and a half emotions in any of her movies. She actually displays a fair range of feelings as Phoebe and manages to pull off the biggest shocker of the film with a twist about half way through. It isn’t telegraphed or made obvious in any way and actually surprised me when it was revealed.

There are several good performances in the film aside from the two leads. Topher Grace makes a terrifically obnoxious and power-mad bureaucrat as CIA mucky muck Adrian Yates. He also manages to be funny despite his odious character and his willingness to violate the constitutional rights of just about everyone he meets. Connie Britton’s Victoria Lasseter is the motherly figure Mike needs as things get dark near the story’s end. Britton is able to pull off the hard-edged agent as well as the caring and concerned parental symbol to this very confused stoner. The only other major character is Tony Hale as Lasseter’s assistant Petey Douglas. Hale is able to make Petey both a friendly and efficient agent but also I man with a conscience that struggles when given an order that contradicts his beliefs. One scene shows that struggle in such a way that I was gripping my theatre seat arms as his life and death decision needed to be made. From a story point of view, his decision could only go one way but Hale shows the frustration and anguish his character is going through in such a visceral way that it put his final choice in doubt for me. While he doesn’t have much in the way of screen time Hale puts every second to good use.

There is one other major player I left out that had me kind of scratching my head. John Leguizamo plays a character named Rose. Rose is a drug dealer and friend of Mike’s that seems to have been pulled from a completely different movie. Rose is a character I might expect to see in a major city or one of its suburbs. The film is set in what looks like a fairly small town (that also has a fairly large airport). Rose deals all kinds of drugs as well as illegal fireworks and has two guys working for him as what appears to be bodyguards. None of this makes sense within the small town setting of this movie. Leguizamo plays Rose like someone from the gritty streets of New York City. He refers to both Mike and his two African-American bodyguards as the “N-word.” His presence is probably an effort to throw an unusual character into the mix to stir up some humor and add a little color into what is a very white movie. I have no problem with creating roles for people of color even if they are a little stereotypical; however, this doesn’t really work within the whole universe of this movie. Perhaps if there had been some kind of explanation for Rose being in that town that tied in to Mike and his past then it would have been a somewhat better fit. Leguiazmo gives an energetic and entertaining performance that still had me a bit baffled as to what it was doing in this movie.

“American Ultra” is rated R for strong bloody violence, language throughout, drug use and some sexual content. There are some brutal fights in the film. Several people are shot at point blank range and there is a great deal of blood splash from these wounds. There are also some sound effects that imply necks being broken during some fights. Mike smokes weed through practically the entire film. Others are also shown using various kinds of drugs. The sexual content is brief with no nudity shown. Foul language is common throughout the film.

Despite having a character that seems to come from a 1980’s B-movie, “American Ultra” is a fun and exciting film. It starts the meat of the story quickly and keeps the momentum going right up until the end. Eisenberg, Stewart and crew all give winning performances and manage to pull off some pretty good stunt work as well. It isn’t finding an audience in its opening weekend but it deserves one. It may not sound like the kind of flick that appeals to you for some reason but I encourage you to give it a try as it may be one of the most interesting film I’ve seen this year.

“American Ultra” gets five stars.

Two new movies open this week. I’ll see and review at least one of them. Watch the trailers below.

No Escape—

We Are Your Friends—

Follow me on Twitter @moviemanstan. Send emails to stanthemovieman@comcast.net.

Review of “The Man from UNCLE”

If there’s a saying that sums up the thinking of movie executives it must be “Everything old is new again.” So far this year we’ve had reboots or sequels to “National Lampoon’s Vacation,” “Mad Max,” “Fantastic Four,” “Jurassic Park,” “Ted,” “Magic Mike,” “Terminator,” “Mission: Impossible,” “Entourage,” “Pitch Perfect,” “Despicable Me,” “The Woman in Black,” “Taken,” “Hot Tub Time Machine,” “The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel,” “Cinderella,” “Divergent,” “The Fast and the Furious,” “Paul Blart: Mall Cop,” “Avengers,” “Poltergeist” and “Insidious.” And that’s just through the middle of August. The rest of the year has more ranging from another visit to the animated “Hotel Transylvania” as well as a galaxy far, far away for another episode of “Star Wars.” Many of these are or were greatly anticipated while others caused either a collective groan or disinterested shrug. Probably falling into the disinterested category is the big screen interpretation of a 50 year old TV show about Cold War spies from opposite sides of the Iron Curtain that work together to keep the world safe. While I was aware of “The Man from UNCLE” TV show and may have seen an episode or two, I can’t say the idea of a movie version ever crossed my mind. It apparently crossed the minds of movie executives who approached director Guy Ritchie to bring his unique visual style to this reimagining. While it certainly has style and very pretty people playing the roles, “The Man from UNCLE” doesn’t feel at all substantial.

Napoleon Solo (Henry Cavill) was a notorious thief in Europe until his capture by a task force of elite law enforcement. His prison sentence was suspended in exchange for using his special talents to help the CIA. Illya Kuryakin (Armie Hammer) is a KGB agent with anger issues due in part to his treatment after his father was caught skimming funds from the Communist Party and sent to a gulag. It’s the early 1960’s and the Cold War is at its zenith. Solo is sent into East Berlin to help Gaby Teller (Alicia Vikander) escape to the West. Her father was a German nuclear scientist helping the Nazis in World War II try to make an atomic bomb. He has developed a way to quickly and easily enrich uranium and has recently disappeared. The CIA thinks Gaby can lead them to her father. In trying to escape, Solo and Gaby are followed by Kuryakin and a chase ensues. Solo and Gaby are able to escape. The next day, Solo’s boss Saunders (Jared Harris) reintroduces Solo and Kuryakin and, along with Illya’s KGB boss, informs the pair that they will be working together to find Gaby’s father as it is in the best interest of both sides that her father’s work not fall into the wrong hands. Gaby’s Uncle Rudi (Sylvester Groth) works for Alexander and Victoria Vinciguerra (Luca Calvani and Elizabeth Debicki), the owners of a shipping company in Rome. His late father started the company and was a fascist that supported Mussolini. The company may have ties to Nazi sympathizers. Despite their utter dislike and distrust of one another, Solo and Kuryakin must work together to find Gaby’s father and keep the world safe from Nazis with nukes.

It’s hard not to like “The Man from UNCLE.” From the far flung international locales to the witty banter, the film is designed to be interesting to both the eye and ear. Director Guy Ritchie pulled a few pages from films of the past to embed the notion that this is a 1960’s film that just happens to have 21st century actors in it. The action scenes are tight with little wasted space and the story zips along almost faster than the audience can keep up. It has all the makings of a giant money maker that should launch a franchise. Then why did I feel like I’d just walked through a sprinkler when I intended to jump into the deep end of the pool? I should have been soaked head to toe in nostalgia and international intrigue but instead I feel practically bone dry.

Perhaps the fault lies in setting the story in the early 1960’s: Kennedy is president, the Soviets are perceived to be the biggest threat to freedom and the scourge of Nazism isn’t that far in the rearview mirror. While I certainly remember the old USSR and the fear that the world would fall under totalitarian rule, it isn’t something I look back on with fondness or warm feelings. “The Man from UNCLE” seems to long for the day when our enemies were much easier to identify and target. Moving the story into modern times would have been easy as the U.S. and Russia don’t get along much better now than they did back then. Preventing a terrorist group from getting their hands on a nuclear device would seem to be an easy enough translation from the 1960’s to now since that’s one of the intelligence community’s biggest fears. Drop the Nazis and put in ISIL and you have a modern story that could throw in a few digs at NSA eavesdropping on all our calls and emails. It could have felt more relevant while also being a globetrotting romp.

Maybe it is due to the heroes having only a small amount of trouble in dealing with the bad guys. In the latest “Mission: Impossible” movie, Ethan Hunt gets put through the ringer a couple of times. He actually seems to be in some peril. Neither Napoleon Solo nor Illya Kuryakin is in any real trouble during the course of the story. They do get in a few tight spots but get out practically unscathed. When the heroes of a story appear to be able to cruise through any danger it makes the whole thing seem unimportant.

Despite the setting and lightness of tone, “The Man from UNCLE” still manages to be entertaining. Henry Cavill and Armie Hammer make a winning team of likable secret agents that have a begrudging respect for each other. Cavill’s Solo is the more James Bond-like with a command of several languages, a love of fine wines and a winning way with the ladies. A nice counterpart to that is Hammer’s Kuyrakin. The stereotypical ice-cold Soviet agent that has a warm spot buried deep in the Siberia of his soul, Kuryakin has knowledge of fashion as well as a number of ways he can kill someone with his bare hands. Both agents possess skills complimentary to the other. Throwing Alicia Vikander into the mix as the master mechanic Gaby Teller and you have a team that can handle just about any situation that is thrown their way.

Director Guy Ritchie keeps the action moving from scene to scene with very little wasted time. Ritchie’s style is quite recognizable with the occasional odd camera angle, the uniqueness of the soundtrack and the use of quick flashbacks that show what happened in scenes just a few minutes earlier. Ritchie keeps the eye moving along with the story and that helps to keep the momentum at a fast pace.

“The Man from UNCLE” is rated PG-13 for action/violence, some suggestive content and partial nudity. There are several fist fights with one resulting in the death of a character from a stab wound. There is a scene of torture using an electric chair. Several nameless henchmen are shot. One character is shot at point blank range. There is very little blood shown. There are some sexually suggestive sounds heard over a radio. We see a topless woman in silhouette and get a brief glance of side breast. Foul language is widely scattered and mild.

“The Man from UNCLE” is a stylish and witty spy romp that puts to full use the fashion and look of the 1960’s. It is about as substantial as cotton candy and may leave the viewer with a feeling of “that was nice” but that’s about all. Apparently audiences want more than “nice” since it was left in the dust by “Straight Outta Compton” and came in third at the box office behind “Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation” which is in its third week. I enjoyed the film and think it is worth seeing but I can’t say it’s great.

“The Man from UNCLE” gets four stars out of five.

Three new flicks this week and at least one of them will get a once over by yours truly.

American Ultra—

Hitman: Agent 47—

Sinister 2—

Follow me on Twitter @moviemanstan and send emails to stanthemovieman@comcast.net.

Review of “Fantastic Four”

A troubled past doesn’t guarantee failure. Films like “Titanic,” “Jaws” and perhaps most famously “Apocalypse Now” are just a few films that were created in turbulent environments. Whether the trouble was a conflict between the cast and the director, the director and the studio, between cast members or some other configuration, good work still came from what could have potentially been a disaster; however, some productions, like “Alien 3,” “Cop Out” and “Waterworld” are doomed to failure when egos and power struggles get in the way of making an enjoyable bit of entertainment. The latter appears to be what happened to Fox Studios’ “Fantastic Four” reboot.

As a child, Reed Richards (played as an adult by Miles Teller) dreamed of building a matter transporter…and he actually succeeded thanks to parts provided by his friend Ben Grimm (Jamie Bell) from his family’s junk and salvage yard. Reed considers Ben his best friend and good luck charm. Reed is discovered at a high school science fair by Dr. Franklin Storm (Reg E. Cathey) and his adopted daughter Sue (Kate Mara) and invited to attend is institute of gifted young people in the Baxter Tower in New York City. Ben stays home to work in the family business. Dr. Storm also has a son named Johnny (Michael B. Jordan) who is a brilliant mechanic that prefers to spend his time tinkering with his car and running in illegal street races than in a lab. A crash that totals his car forces him to work for his father in the lab. Dr. Storm is working on an interdimensional transporter and believes Reed can push his research over the edge. The project was started by Victor Von Doom (Toby Kebbell), a brilliant but troubled scientist who has some less than pleasant history with Dr. Storm and they no longer work together. Dr. Storm gets his funding from a shadowy board of directors with ties to the government led by Harvey Elder (Tim Blake Nelson). With Reed on board and Victor back in the fold largely because he loves Sue, the interdimensional transporter is perfected. Elder wants to turn the project over the NASA and the government but Dr. Storm wants to keep the project in house and under his control. After a few rounds of drinks, Reed, Victor and Johnny decide to take the transporter for a test spin on their own and Reed calls Ben because he was there for the earliest experiments in the garage and wants his good luck charm to come along. Ben agrees and they are soon teleported to another dimension. It’s a barren world with storm clouds overhead and pools of glowing green liquid. Victor puts his hand in the fluid and can feel the energy coursing through it; but it also causes a chain reaction that is causing the ground beneath their feet to come apart. Victor is engulfed in green flames and falls down a cliff. The others run to the transporter pod to go home where Sue is trying to initiate the return sequence. Fire engulfs Johnny, Ben is encased in rock, Reed is bathed in unknown energy and Sue is hit with a blast from the other dimension when the pod reappears. Each is endowed with unique powers and abilities.

While far from being a great movie “Fantastic Four” isn’t as bad as the Rotten Tomatoes score of 9% might imply. The introduction to the group, their transformation and dealing with their powers is actually pretty good. You get a good idea of the personality of each main player and the conflict between Victor and Reed gets an understandable foundation. It is the part of the story where the four put their powers to use where the train goes off the rails.

The whole structure of the film feels flimsy and unfinished. The set up to what should be the super showdown is incredibly long when compared to the finale which feels like it plays out in about 10 minutes, if that. What appears to have been planned as a two hour plus film is over in an hour-40. While many comic book movies are too long, “Fantastic Four” isn’t long enough as we are shown huge amounts of history and preparation leading to an ending that is anti-climactic. Granted, I think everyone knows the good guys are always going to win in the end of a superhero movie but it shouldn’t feel like the kind of role-playing game I used to participate in as a child with my friends when, after one of us had been shot with the death ray or whatever the evil scheme entailed, we popped right up, saved the damsel in distress and put the villain in his place.

“Fantastic Four” director Josh Trank made an impressive debut with his first studio film “Chronicle.” The story of three high school kids who gain powers from a mysterious alien artifact was a low-budget, found-footage gem. The story was great, the effects were good and the whole thing worked together for a wonderfully enjoyable time at the movies. That film got him the “Fantastic Four” gig but something happened that turned what should have been a dream into a nightmare. Trank can be heard on the Kevin Smith podcast “Fatman on Batman” giving a thorough history of his early life, how he became a filmmaker and the process of making “Fantastic Four.” It takes, coincidentally, four episodes to tell the whole story. Nowhere in those four episodes, about six hours of content, does Trank complain about the making of “Fantastic Four” or Fox executives; however, on Thursday, August 6, Trank tweeted the following: “A year ago I had a fantastic version of this. And it would’ve received great reviews. You’ll probably never see it. That’s reality though.” Trank quickly deleted the tweet but it was of course screen captured. While vague, this tweet seems to be saying the film was interfered with by Fox executives and turned into something other than his original vision. There is of course another side to the story that suggests Trank may have been in over his head and/or was difficult to work with. The truth lies somewhere in the middle with enough blame to go around for both sides. The product of this middle ground is a movie with an odd structure, average at best special effects, a villain that doesn’t make much sense, has odd motivations for his evil plan and a story that starts out fine then turns into a mess at the conclusion.

“Fantastic Four” is rated PG-13 for sci-fi action violence and language. We see a couple of characters engulfed in flames. One character causes people’s heads to kind of explode. We see a splash of blood on the wall behind them. There is a fight where giant boulders are used as weapons. Foul language is scattered and mild.

Josh Trank’s tweet, the troubled production and the poor box office showing of “Fantastic Four” may put the director in movie jail for a period of time. Movie jail is when filmmakers can’t get a job after what is perceived to be a failure on their part. Trank will likely survive just fine in the wilderness of independent filmmaking where he can be fully in charge of the production with little to no interference. But that leaves us to wonder just what kind of “Fantastic Four” the director had in mind. Will we ever see it? Will there ever be an entertaining version of Marvel’s first super team that isn’t a cartoon? Are Mr. Fantastic, The Invisible Woman, The Human Torch and The Thing just too tough a nut to crack? Should Fox make a deal with Marvel like Sony did with Spider-Man and share the movie rights? Speculating about all this is far more entertaining than watching the movie, as this “Fantastic Four” may actually be worse than the dayglow colored version we got a decade ago.

“Fantastic Four” gets one star out of five.

The music that spoke to one generation and frightened another and a TV to film crossover open in theatres this week. I’ll see and review at least one of these.

The Man from U.N.C.L.E.—

Straight Outta Compton—

Follow me on Twitter (I try not to be too controversial) @moviemanstan. Send emails to stanthemovieman@comcast.net.

Review of “Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation”

IMF agent Ethan Hunt (Tom Cruise) is tracking a worldwide terrorist organization called the Syndicate. He believes they are responsible for political assassinations around the world that all looked like tragic accidents. Each of these acts also led to political upheaval in the countries where they occurred. CIA director Alan Hunley (Alec Baldwin) believes Hunt is creating conspiracies in his mind and wants the IMF defunded and absorbed into his agency and convinces a Senate subcommittee. Agent William Brandt (Jeremy Renner) now works directly under Director Hunley but still tries to protect and help Hunt where he can. Hunt is captured by the Syndicate; but just before he’s going to be tortured by Janik “Bone Doctor” Vinter (Jens Hulten), Ilsa Faust (Rebecca Ferguson) helps to kill the guards watching him and set him free. Ilsa appears to be a deep-cover agent working within the Syndicate for another intelligence agency. She stays behind to protect her cover. Hunt contacts Brandt to tell him what he’s discovered and is informed the IMF is no more. Hunt decides to stay in the field despite now being declared a target of the CIA. Hunt covertly contacts electronic intelligence expert Benji Dunn (Simon Pegg) to help him track down the leader of the Syndicate: A man he’s only seen once killing an innocent woman. The chase will lead Hunt, Ilsa, Brandt, Dunn and fellow agent Luther Stickell (Ving Rhames) around the world in an effort to take down a terrorist group that seems to have eyes, ears and assassins everywhere.

“Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation” has the slick and polished look of the most recent “James Bond” movies but has a decidedly lighter tone. While the fate of the world is equally at risk in this film series based on the TV show that ran 1966-1973, the characters are allowed to make a degree of fun of the situation that Bond is rarely allowed. While Bond is a lone figure with minimal support from his agency, Ethan Hunt is part of a larger and much more active ensemble. Hunt is frequently saved by one of his fellow agents, either directly or remotely, setting this view of espionage apart from its British counterpart. Each approach has its merits and the M:I series gets a bit more narrative mileage from the comradery of its characters.

Much has been made from the well-publicized stunt of strapping Tom Cruise to the side of a plane and filming him as it took off. The advertising for the film certainly didn’t bury the lead as this is the first scene in the movie. While it is probably the biggest stunt in the film, there are plenty more that occupy a great deal of the film’s over two hour running time. Whether sliding down a rope from the roof of the Vienna Opera House or holding his breath for six minutes to film an underwater scene in one take, Cruise delivers big thrills at great personal risk to himself and his multimillion dollar paychecks.

Whether the acting is any good is kind of beside the point in “Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation” but it is good. The entire cast is spot on with particular praise for Rebecca Ferguson as Ilsa Faust. Without giving too much away, her loyalties are always in doubt as she never plays her role with too many clues as to which way she might go. She also looks good in a silky yellow dress as she prepares to carry out an assassination. Ferguson is also adept at physical stunts, performing more than a few wild and vicious moves.

Simon Pegg is always reliable for some lighter moments as tech genius Benji Dunn; but these lighter moments are actually a set up for some dark times near the end of the film. Audiences don’t like seeing the smart, friendly characters face mortal danger. It gives us even more stress than when we watch the characters that we expect to be at the edge of death. We have learned Ethan Hunt can extract himself from every situation; but Benji is far more adept at hacking a security system, not beating up a security guard. After all, his name is Benji…like the dog.

Alec Baldwin also provides a secondary heavy that is almost as detestable as the leader of the Syndicate. Baldwin’s CIA Director Hunley shares many attributes with Baldwin’s “30 Rock” character Jack Donaghy: Both are decisive, ruthless and like to talk in a low growl when they are making a point. Baldwin doesn’t have that much screen time but he uses it to full effect. Hunley is portrayed as a bit of blowhard that talks a good game but has trouble delivering what he promises. Baldwin tackles the role with an intensity that says Hunley might be a bit of a braggart but he means business. It’s a very good performance.

If there’s anything I can complain about in “Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation,” it’s the omnipotent villain trope that has played a part in nearly all this series. The Syndicate seems to be everywhere and always prepared no matter what Hunt or his colleagues do. The story elements seem to require someone on the inside of the CIA and IMF in order to be as well informed as they appear. I guess this would be a spoiler so prepare yourself: No one is exposed as working with the bad guys. A couple of red herrings are dropped here and there but none of them ever converts into a double agent. The leader of the Syndicate is supposed to be the product of a friendly government’s intelligence agency that goes rogue and creates his own organization to commit chaos around the world. It would seem that he is far better trained than any of the people trying to stop him as his presence is unknown to every other spy agency in the world. It’s all a bit too neat and tidy to occur in a world where every email, phone call and Internet search is collected by one organization or another for analysis. I would hope someone sifting through all that metadata would notice something that would tip off the CIA. I suppose this is yet another example of me thinking too much about a movie plot but it always strikes me as odd when a bad guy can gather so much material and so many operatives and fly completely under the radar.

All in all, this is a minor complaint as everything that is good about “Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation” far outweighs the bad. From the cinematography to the action to the interplay between the characters to most of the story, the film is a huge love letter to fans of the series.

“Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation” is rated PG-13 for sequences of action & violence and brief partial nudity. There are several fist fights, a knife fight, car chases, car wrecks, motorcycle chases, motorcycle wrecks and shootings in the film. There is far more blood in the trailer for the new “Hitman” film than there is in this entire movie. The brief partial nudity is so brief and partial I’m surprised it was mentioned. It is the back of a woman as she takes off some wet clothes and puts on dry clothes. Foul language is brief and scattered.

“Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation” opened at number one at the box office but with the lowest opening of any of the previous four films. Some news stories attribute this to the bad publicity Cruise received from the HBO documentary on Scientology. That seems unlikely. Perhaps the public is just tired of big budget, big action flicks; especially the fifth in a series. Aside from strapping Cruise to the side of a plane (that everyone with an Internet connection could see as many times as they wanted), what was really different about this version of M:I? The answer is nothing. This is a really well done version of the thing we’ve seen four times before. If people decide not to go should we really be that surprised?

The film is doing well worldwide so we can expect a sixth M:I to be released in two or three years as Cruise has already agreed to star in it. If the studio and Cruise don’t mind a little free and unwanted advice, may I suggest you figure out some twist or variation on the spy genre that will surprise people and drive them to tell their friends about what a unique experience the next M:I is. Otherwise, even the rest of the world may start staying home.

“Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation” gets five stars.

Two new films open this week and I’ll see at least one of them.

Fantastic Four—

The Gift—

Follow me on Twitter @moviemanstan and send emails to stanthemovieman@comcast.net.

Review of “Mr. Holmes”

Having been out of the consulting detective business for 30 years, a 93-year old Sherlock Holmes (Ian McKellen) fills his days at a home in the English countryside tending his beehives. His mental faculties are beginning to leave him and he is desperate to find a way to reverse his decline. A letter from a Japanese fan of his book on royal jelly begins a correspondence between Holmes and Tamiki Umezaki (Hiroyuki Sanada). Umezaki tells Holmes about a plant in Japan that is supposed to possess restorative powers for the mind and circulation, leading the detective to travel to the land of the rising sun. After returning from that trip with a sample of the prickly ash plant, Holmes begins using a concoction made from it to aid his memory. Holmes, who was never pleased with his depiction in Dr. Watson’s writings, is desperate to remember the details of his final case so he may set the record straight. Holmes housekeeper, Mrs. Munro (Laura Linney) and her son Roger (Milo Parker), live with him. Mrs. Munro is a simple, hardworking woman that doesn’t have much need or time for hobbies. Roger is filled with curiosity and, when he’s done with his chores, enjoys spending time with Holmes, learning about the bees and helping him when he can. Holmes, who can be impatient, enjoys spending time with and answering questions from Roger. Holmes gives Roger pages from the story of his last case as Holmes finishes them; but he’s having more and more trouble recalling the details. Holmes knows there’s something about the case that drove him into retirement and longs to discover what he did wrong. He has fond memories of the subject of his investigation, Mrs. Ann Kelmot (Hattie Morahan), but also feels sadness and regret. Holmes is anxious to remember all he can of the case before his mind is completely gone and his time on Earth is over.

Don’t confuse “Mr. Holmes” with the Robert Downey, Jr. portrayal of the consulting detective as they are different as night and day. Where Downey’s Sherlock is quick repartee and action, Sir Ian McKellen’s Holmes is quiet, reserved and more than a bit sad. This Sherlock Holmes is reflective and knows his days are dwindling down to a precious few. At times, Holmes is pitiful and lost in the wilderness of dementia; however, there are moments when the old Sherlock manages to break through and impress those around him with his powers of deduction.

Jumping back and forth in time and from Japan to England, “Mr. Holmes” is a low-key affair that is more about loss, regret and longing than detection. That’s fine as Ian McKellen is brilliant as Sherlock and Milo Parker makes Roger more than just a precocious brat. Their time on screen together is often both magic and melancholy. Holmes sees something of his younger self in Roger: A boy longing to be more than just the product of his surroundings yearning for knowledge and adventure. Holmes also sees the dark side of that desire when Roger lashes out at his mother when she announces she’s accepted a job at a hotel requiring them to move to a different part of the country. Holmes has spent most of his life alone or at least feeling alone and sees a chance that Roger may be headed down this same solitary road. His reaction to Roger’s outburst may be seen as decidedly un-Holmsian but it shows the character as something other than the calculating automaton as he’s frequently portrayed in the books.

McKellen also performs the role of an elderly individual on the verge of their final decline with unusual accuracy and poignancy. Sadly, I have seen what the ravages of time and illness can do with my own father. His decline was at times slow and hardly noticeable and then he seemed to wither and deteriorate right before my eyes. McKellen, who is 76, is himself looking into the last of his days. While he is still vibrant and active he also has the presence of mind to know he has fewer days in front of him than behind. This obviously informed his performance in the scenes where Holmes is his most decrepit. Sherlock Holmes is a superhero of the mind and his arch nemesis is time. A far more dangerous villain than Moriarity and one he can’t outthink no matter how hard he tries. Seeing Holmes at his most vulnerable is heartbreaking on various levels.

As much as I enjoyed “Mr. Holmes” and Sir Ian McKellen’s performance, I had one problem with the movie. As the story winds down an event occurs involving Roger. I won’t give any more detail than that as to not spoil it for those that wish to see the film; however, I will say it feels more than a little manipulative. We already have warm feelings for Holmes, Roger and even Mrs. Munro who is portrayed as militantly ignorant and wants Roger to be that way as well. We learn she feels this way out of fear (again, I won’t spoil it more than that) but the audience views her as cold and mean towards both Roger and Holmes. Things have warmed up a bit in their relationship when this event occurs causing a great deal of fear and anger along with the possible destruction of something Holmes loves like family. It’s all very melodramatic and heart wrenching and seems completely unnecessary. The movie is based on a book called “A Slight Trick of the Mind” by Mitch Cullin. I’m unsure of how closely the movie follows the book but this final bit of drama feels tacked on for cinematic purposes. Maybe the translation from the page to the screen amplified the emotion or the necessary truncation of events in a book being adapted to a script left out other similarly earthshattering happenings. Whatever the case, it seems out of proportion with the rest of the movie.

“Mr. Holmes” is rated PG for thematic elements, some disturbing images and incidental smoking. We see some survivors of the nuclear bombing of Hiroshima with severely scarred faces. Depression and suicide are featured in parts of the story. People are shown smoking in a movie theatre and in a few other locations. Foul language isn’t an issue.

Ian McKellen would have made a fantastic Sherlock Holmes in his younger years. His subtly expressive face and biting sarcasm could possibly have been the defining portrayal of Holmes for the 20th and 21st centuries. While he’s burned into the collective consciousness as Gandalf and Magneto, McKellen’s distinctive features should have been equally as recognizable as the occupant of 221B Baker Street. It’s a shame we’ll never get to see his performance in “The Hound of the Baskervilles” or “A Study in Scarlet.” Fortunately, we do get to see him in the title role of “Mr. Holmes” and that is special and memorable in its own way. While I hold no sway in such things, I believe Sir Ian McKellen deserves a nod for Best Actor when the Oscars roll around again.

“Mr. Holmes” gets five stars.

A couple of films continue their franchises this week. I’ll see and review at least one of them.

Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation—

Vacation—

Follow me on Twitter @moviemanstan and send emails to stanthemovieman@comcast.net.

Review of “The Gallows”

In 1993, a group of students at Beatrice High School put on a play called The Gallows. One of the actors named Charlie Grimille (Jesse Cross) that was playing the lead character Augustus died during the performance when a simulated hanging failed. His parents were videotaping the show and captured the accident. Twenty years later, the students of Beatrice High are putting the play on again despite some initial resistance from the school board. Portraying the role of Augustus is Reese Houser (Reese Mishler), a former football player who quit the team to star in the play. He secret harbors a crush on his lead actress Pfeifer Ross (Pfeifer Brown) but has yet to express his feelings to her. Reese’s friend Ryan (Ryan Shoos) is recording the play from the control booth but considers all this drama stuff to be silly and spends a great deal of his time ridiculing the cast and crew. Reese isn’t a very good actor and Ryan suggests to him they go back to the school late at night and destroy the set so the play is cancelled. Ryan thinks this will give Reese a chance to console Pfeifer and possibly spark their romance. Reese, Ryan and Ryan’s girlfriend Cassidy (Cassidy Gifford) head to the school and enter through a stage door that Ryan discovered doesn’t lock. Once inside they begin destroying and dismantling the set. A noise alerts them to the presence of Pfeifer who noticed Reese’s car in the school parking lot. Reese lies and says they were there to rehearse. Returning to the stage, the four find all their damage has been undone. The door with the broken lock is now locked and strange noises seem to be emanating from the darkened school. Their cellphones have no service and no lights work in any part of the school except for the red stage lights. While looking for an exit they stumble into a service room that has an old TV and VCR showing a news report of Charlie’s death. When it ends, they discover there is no videotape in the player. Reese notices something in the report and runs to the main entry hall where a display contains a photo of the original 1993 cast. Reese studies the photo and is stunned to see his father was part of that cast. He was originally supposed to play Augustus but pulled out just before the first performance. His understudy, Charlie, was supposed to play the hooded hangman but ended up filling in and died as a result. Is Charlie’s ghost haunting the performance with revenge in mind?

The answer is “of course” and the real question is if “The Gallows” manages to create a villainous ghost that manages to scare audiences enough to make it worthwhile. The answer there is “no,” from me anyway. “The Gallows” is a cheaply produced, badly acted and poorly written found-footage horror film that lacks any consistent tension and has very few real scares. It isn’t good enough to seriously recommend and isn’t bad enough to watch ironically. It’s just not worth your time.

“The Gallows” features a completely no-name cast. That isn’t necessarily a bad thing but this cast features mostly annoying players. Ryan Shoos, whose character name is Ryan Shoos, plays the grating friend of Reese, the film’s lead character. I wanted him to die from the first moments he began providing his cameraman’s narration. Ryan (the character, not the actor) is the smartass that is far too cool for the company he keeps. He doesn’t mind putting the drama nerds in their place and becomes physically violent when they stand up for themselves. The character has no redeeming qualities whatsoever and his demise takes far too long in a movie that feels lengthier than its listed 80-minute running time.

Reese Mishler’s Reese Houser is about the only character that appears to have some sense of decency. While his only motive for doing the play is to get close to his love interest, Reese also feels an obligation to follow through with his role despite stage fright and a lack of any acting talent. While he goes along with Ryan’s plan the character seems to do so with at least a small amount of guilt.

Cassidy Gifford’s Cassidy Spilker (yup, that’s the character’s name) is your stereotypical movie hot cheerleader type that is a bad girl through and through. She, like Ryan, also thinks the whole drama requirement for graduation is lame and eagerly joins in the planned carnage of the set. The character isn’t much more than eye candy as she is made a sexual object by Ryan and wears fairly revealing clothes. Cassidy is mainly on screen to either look at in lust or to watch be attacked by the ghost.

Pfeifer Brown plays Pfeifer Ross (gotta love these imaginative character names) like a starlet in the making. She is the queen of the drama class and knows it. While she may actually have some talent within the movie’s reality, she takes it all far too seriously and is an annoying character. All in all, the movie focuses on four people and three of them are often painful to watch.

The found-footage format is a deal breaker for many horror fans. I personally like the style if it makes sense. For “The Gallows” it doesn’t. Of course there are several shots that would never be naturally created with either a camcorder or a cell phone. Visuals from both are used to tell the story of “The Gallows.” Sometimes we see events from one source then see what was going on at another source at the same time. It fills in some details missing from the other video. That’s a nice touch that’s often missing from other similarly shot movies. Sadly, there are frequent scenes where the perfectly centered character would likely not be so well framed just as something horrible happened to them. Since the phones featured in the movie appear to be iPhones, the shots where the phone is roughly set down on a surface but still manages to be pointed at the action seems a bit farcical. Even in a protective case, it takes some effort to make sure the device remains upright and doesn’t fall on its face or back. If this was true found footage, the audience would see many close-ups of palms and fingers or still shots of ceilings.

This is one of those times where I think too logically about a plot point but this next bit really stuck out to me: In the 21st century the idea there’s a high school anywhere in America that doesn’t have a burglar alarm is ludicrous. These characters run through the halls of their school, screaming and calling for help and trying to get in every door and not one alarm goes off. I went to high school in the 1970’s and my school had motion and audio sensor alarms. I actually set them off one night when I went to the room of a teacher, with his permission, to get some scripts for a play we were doing. Yes, it was a drama class. The police showed up but since I was with a teacher and several other students there weren’t any charges filed. This was in 1979. Seeing these characters running around a modern high school and not getting stopped at gunpoint by the police felt completely unrealistic and was stuck in my brain for the whole movie. I know it’s a ghost story and, if it had been a better movie, I would have been completely willing to let the supernatural aspect of the film go by with no question; but this may be my biggest issue with “The Gallows” aside from the bad acting and the minimal scares.

“The Gallows” is rated R for terror and disturbing violent content. OK, if the MPAA says so. There are a few jump scares, a couple of which have nothing to do with the ghost. We see a couple of people jerked up via a noose by their necks into the ceiling of the building. One character has bruises on the neck that get progressively worse as the story goes along. We get a look at a couple of dead people hanging in the rafters. We see the hanging of two people on the stage. Foul language is scattered.

According to its Wikipedia page, “The Gallows” was made for about $100,000.00 and it looks it. There is very little in the way of special effects and since most of it was shot in darkened rooms set decoration could be kept at a minimum. As of Saturday, July 11, 2015, the movie has made over $4-million and is predicted to have a $10-million opening weekend. While it will open well behind films like “Minions” and the seemingly unstoppable “Jurassic World” and “Inside Out,” it has more than made back its money and could become one of those low-budget horror franchises like “Paranormal Activity” and “Saw.” To me, more “The Gallows” films would be a true horror unless the story and acting is improved and the scares are amped up. To be honest, I’m more than a little angry to have given this junk my money.

“The Gallows” gets two very unimpressed stars out of five.

I’m on vacation so there may not be a review posted this week but find below the trailers for the movies coming out over the next couple of weekends.

Ant-Man—opens 7/17.

Trainwreck—opens 7/17.

Paper Towns—opens 7/24.

Pixels—opens 7/24.

Southpaw—opens 7/24.

Follow me on Twitter @moviemanstan. Send emails to stanthemovieman@comcast.net.

Reviews of “Magic Mike XXL” and “Terminator: Genisys”

Summer is the season of school being out, vacations, spending time at the pool or lake or ocean or whatever body of water you might be near and braindead movies meant to pass a few hours between warm weather activities. Few films this season will probably be as braindead as “Magic Mike XXL” and “Terminator: Genisys.” I saw them both and could feel the death of grey matter as they both progressed. One was responsible for more synapse-cide than the other.

Mike Lane (Channing Tatum) has left the male stripper life behind and is now building and selling custom furniture. He gets a call from former fellow stripper Tarzan (Kevin Nash) telling him their old boss and MC Dallas (played in the first film by Matthew McConaughey but only mentioned in this film) has died. Mike travels to a motel where a wake is supposed to be held but finds Tarzan and the rest of his old crew of Ken (Matt Bomer), Richie (Joe Manganiello), Tito (Adam Rodriguez) and Tobias (Gabriel Iglesias) partying around the pool. Tarzan admits he lied and Dallas isn’t dead but left them on their own to go start another club overseas. The gang is headed up the coast to Myrtle Beach for the annual stripper convention for one last ride before they all hang up their G-strings and try for some kind of normal lives. They ask Mike if he wants to go but he says no as he has a life, business and responsibilities there. That night, he hears a song he used to dance to and does an impromptu routine in his work space. The next day, he meets with the guys and agrees to go on one last ride. An accident disables their ride and puts Tobias in the hospital with a head injury, standing them until their converted food truck van is repaired. Mike decides to approach his old boss Rome (Jada Pinkett Smith) who runs a private club for women in a house where male strippers are scattered around performing shows. While unable to convince Rome to be their fill-in MC, she does give them access to a car and has Andre (Donald Glover), one of her performers, give them a ride. Things are looking bleak as the troop heads to their last convention with no MC and not much of a plan.

“Magic Mike XXL” looks like a movie that didn’t have a completed script when it went into production. The story is very fragmented and jumps around like a child playing hopscotch. The only cohesive section of the film is the road trip until Tobias gets hurt; then, the section with every fortuitous turn imaginable begins. People who won’t help suddenly appear to do exactly what the boys need. There’s no slot during the convention for them to perform but that suddenly opens up. All their plans, thrown together in what appears to be a matter of hours story-wise, work out perfectly leading to a triumphant conclusion. It appears the only thing you need to live a charmed life is washboard abs and bulging pecs. Anything resembling everyday life is left behind once Mike decides to rejoin his buddies in Stipper-ville. “Magic Mike XXL” is a silly fantasy about shallow people living lives filled with as much instant gratification and recreational drugs as they can find. Of course, we discover they are all much deeper than we suspect and all they really want is just an average life with someone to love…except the New Age healer/actor/singer who realizes his dreams of stardom are likely never to be fulfilled but tells Mike, “I’m still pretty.” There were times in this film that I wanted to smack ever character on screen for being so petty.

About the only saving grace of the film is a scene involving Andie MacDowell as a divorced, modern southern belle hosting some friends at her home when Mike and the guys show up. It turns into a session of discovery and revelation that, while ridiculous, was interesting to watch. It seems like the only scene in the film that actually had a little thought applied to it. It also is one of those aforementioned fortuitous turns helping the boys get to Myrtle Beach. The film is also saved (somewhat) by the charisma of Channing Tatum. Tatum plays characters in most of his films that seem like decent people. Tatum comes off in interviews like an average guy that just happens to make movies. It’s his appeal as an everyman that keeps “Magic Mike XXL” from being an insufferable experience.

“Magic Mike XXL” is rated R for strong sexual content, pervasive language, some nudity and drug use. Most of the dance scenes involve simulated sex acts. The only nudity I remember is Joe Manganiello’s bare backside early in the film. There are also some exposed cheeks when the boys are wearing their stripper gear. The guys are shown smoking weed and taking capsules that are referred to as Molly. Foul language is common.

While this film certainly isn’t aimed at me, “Magic Mike XXL” still manages a few laughs with the antics of the male strippers and a cameo by Michael Strahan as one of Rome’s dancers. While the humor and the charisma of Channing Tatum provide some bright spots, “Magic Mike XXL” feels like it was made from an unfinished script that left me feeling at times confused and then finally uninterested.

“Magic Mike XXL” gets a fully clothed three stars out of five.

John Connor (Jason Clarke) and Kyle Reese (Jai Courtney) along with the rest of their troops are on the verge of destroying Skynet and ending the extinction of the human race. One team is hitting a facility where Skynet is based by Connor and Reese lead a team against a facility that contains the time machine used to send Terminators to the past. Skynet is disabled and all the robots shut down; but the time machine has been used to send a T-800 model back to kill Sarah Connor (Emilia Clarke). Kyle Reese volunteers to go back and protect Sarah. John knows if he doesn’t he’ll never be born. Kyle begins the process of time travel but sees John being attacked by someone in the crowd. Kyle shows up in 1984 and is almost instantly attacked by a liquid metal T-1000 model (Lee Byung-hun). Hiding in a clothing store, Kyle is saved by Sarah Connor driving an armored truck. In the back is an aged looking T-800 (Arnold Schwarzenegger). Kyle tries to shoot him but the old T-800 knocks him unconscious. When he wakes, Sarah tells Kyle that the Terminator she calls “Pops” has raised her since she was nine. He’s there to protect her. Kyle is suspicious and doesn’t trust Pops. Things have changed from the history Kyle was told by John. Kyle also has memories of being a child and telling himself that Genisys is Skynet. Nothing is making sense.

I don’t want to give away any more than that brief synopsis as I often get yelled at for telling too much. Besides, the whole story of “Terminator: Genisys” is far more complicated as time is twisted into knots and histories and futures are as fluid as water. Nothing you know about the “Terminator” universe stays completely unchanged from film to film so this shouldn’t be a big surprise. That the timeline can be manipulated and changed was one of the most appealing aspects of the film. It also means there can be endless sequels since the past can be manipulated like soft clay and molded into whatever the next writer wants.

Arnold Schwarzenegger is the star of the film even though his is more of a supporting character. Pops is given the job of putting the science of the film into words. It seems like a risky idea considering Schwarzenegger’s thick accent. Still, he manages to deliver explanations for the various timelines that at least sound like they have a scientific basis. Schwarzenegger also provides much of the film’s humor. His scary dead-eyed smile is usually delivered at the perfectly inappropriate time and his lack of emotion and understanding of emotional expressions means lines that aren’t funny take on a humorous context.

Most of the film’s action is created through CGI. While many scenes look pretty good, including the film’s climax, some look bland, particularly a helicopter chase amongst the skyscrapers of San Francisco. There are shots that look flat and unfinished like the nighttime setting would hide the flaws. It doesn’t. This is a brief scene compared to others but it stuck out. One highlight of the CGI is the fight between old and young Schwarzenegger. An Australian bodybuilder with matching physical measurements to 1984 Arnold was used as a body double then had Schwarzenegger’s young face digitally stitched to his head. It works surprisingly well and looks almost completely natural. Oddly enough, the digital Arnold face actually has a brief flash of too much emotion.

I believe the studio made a tactical error in releasing a major plot twist in one of the film’s trailers. It caused a bit of a stink on the Internet but I didn’t think that much of it at the time. Having now seen the film it was a much larger mistake than I originally thought. This kind of surprise (which I won’t tell if you don’t already know) is the kind of major story event that can raise the audience excitement for a film and give it enormous word-of-mouth buzz. Since it was revealed in the trailer, the reveal is ho hum. According to press reports, director Alan Taylor didn’t know about the spoiler being in the trailer and is quoted as saying he wouldn’t have revealed it before the film came out. Since the film is underperforming at the box office in its opening days, this may actually be costing the studio some money. It also doesn’t help that “Inside Out” and “Jurassic World” are still performing strongly this late in their runs; but people talking about that surprise might have driven a few more patrons the film’s way. The trailer reveal seems at best short sighted and at worst incompetent.

“Terminator: Genisys” is rated PG-13 for gunplay throughout, brief strong language, intense sci-fi violence and partial nudity. Guns of various types are fired throughout the film, most frequently at non-human characters. Those humans that are shot show very little blood. The fights between the various types of Terminators involve lots of bodies getting thrown around and through walls and ceilings. The flesh gets beaten, burned and ripped off the T-800 models in various ways. The nudity consists of those people who travel in time as they must do so naked. The most we see is bare male backsides. Foul language is intermittent.

If you don’t think too hard about the twisty timelines (or know anything about actual physics and the improbability of time travel), “Terminator: Genisys” is a fun action flick with plenty of nostalgia for those of us old enough to have seen the first film in the series. Seeing Arnold in his various forms saying his most famous “Terminator” lines in completely different contexts brings a smile to those of us who have aged along with the T-800. Resetting the timeline also opens the door for more films with two already planned and getting 2017 and 2018 release dates. It would appear Arnold is telling us, “I’ll be back.”

“Terminator: Genisys” gets five stars.

Horror, sci-fi, a sex romp and little yellow helpers are all on tap at theatres this week. I’ll see and review at least one of the following.

The Gallows—

Minions—

The Overnight—

Self/Less—

Follow me on Twitter @moviemanstan and send emails to stanthemovieman@comcast.net.

Review of “Ted 2”

As a child I played with G.I. Joe and other dolls for boys that are now called action figures. I’d sit in the floor for hours and create my own stories in my head. To me Joe and the others were alive and were my sons. We’d fight crime together, solve mysteries, explore alien worlds and protect the Earth from invading robots. They were the playmates that weren’t available as there weren’t many children my age nearby. My dad didn’t really like the idea of his youngest son playing with dolls. While he never said anything directly to me, my mother told me of his displeasure. I tried to keep my adventures with my sons as low key and quiet as possible but one time I said “Dad” out loud acting as the voice of one of my imaginary boys and my father responded, asking what I wanted. I felt the flash of heat in my face as I had to explain I wasn’t talking to him and saw the combined look of realization and mild disgust as he understood what happened. Despite this, I continued to play with my dolls and treat them like people for some time after. It took imagination to believe pieces of plastic were alive. In “Ted 2,” it takes expert CGI and the voice acting talents of Seth MacFarlane to create a living teddy bear…again. Does this return visit to Boston rely on the same jokes and premise as last time? To a point, yes.

Ted (voiced by Seth MacFarlane) and Tami-Lynn (Jessica Barth) are recently married. John Bennett (Mark Wahlberg) is now divorced from his wife and hasn’t reentered the dating scene for fear of wasting more of his life on another doomed relationship. Ted and Tami-Lynn soon begin fighting over her buying clothes and his buying drugs. Their marriage may be over after just six months. A coworker at the grocery store suggests they have a baby to help strengthen their marriage. Ted suggests it and Tami-Lynn agrees. Since Ted lacks sex organs he decides for artificial insemination. After efforts to procure both Sam Jones and Tom Brady (playing themselves) as donors, John offers and Ted accepts. Sadly, Tami-Lynn is unable to conceive due to damage caused by years of drug abuse so they head to an adoption agency. After making some phone calls, the adoption agent informs them they won’t be able to get a child because, in the eyes of the state, Ted is property. The inquiries from the adoption agency set in motion the wheels of government and soon Ted is stripped of his job, his bank accounts and all his rights. John and Ted approach a law firm and are sent to a junior associate who will take the case for free. Samantha Jackson (Amanda Seyfried) is untested and new but has an enthusiasm for the case plus she loves to smoke weed. Taking the case to court generates publicity that attracts the attention of Donny (Giovanni Rabisi), Ted’s obsessed fan that now works as a janitor at Hasbro, the original maker of that model of teddy bear. Donny urges the Hasbro CEO Tom Jessup (John Carroll Lynch) to do everything in his power to make sure Ted is declared property, making the legal ramifications of abducting him minimal. Donny believes if they cut Ted open they can figure out what makes him alive then duplicate it to make millions of Ted copies. All Donny wants is a Ted of his very own to love and he doesn’t care of the original has to die to get it.

“Ted 2” doesn’t break any new ground and relies on the familiar mix of sex/drug humor and pop culture references that the first film and most of Seth MacFarlane’s comedy is rooted in. This could be looked at in two way: Either it’s lazy film making or, if it ain’t broke don’t fix it. I tend to lean toward the latter.

The combo of MacFarlane’s voice acting, Ted’s adorable design and Mark Wahlberg’s lovable lunkhead John make for a winning mix of personality and charm. Even when they are behaving like drunken teenagers (which is most of the time) the Thunder Buddies never come off as grating or tedious. While this certainly isn’t the most complicated character Wahlberg has ever played, he manages to give the character a sweetness and innocence that probably comes from spending most of his free time with a living teddy bear. Who wouldn’t be something of a softie if your favorite childhood toy came to life and lived with you well into adulthood? Wahlberg also manages to give the role some mild emotional depth as he deals with the end of his marriage. While obviously a plot device to add the character of Samantha Jackson and give John a love interest, Wahlberg manages to convey a fair amount of pain and loneliness due to this turn of events. Amanda Seyfried displays her comedy chops in the role of the young attorney. Seyfried doesn’t mind getting down and dirty with the boys and holds her own. She also gets to display her singing voice with an original tune written by MacFarlane. It isn’t the big showy kind of song she sang in “Les Miserables” but it manages to move her and Wahlberg’s characters towards the inevitable romantic moment her presence calls for. The rest of the cast, including cameos by Liam Neeson and Jay Leno, delivers well-timed comic bombs that more often than not hit their targets.

The true test of “Ted 2” is if it’s funny and it is. MacFarlane’s TV cartoon shows are well known for the cutaway jokes that have nothing to do with the story and they also make up a part of the movie. Pop culture references also fill a big chunk of “Ted 2’s” nearly two hour running time. Sports, music and the ever growing geek culture of comic conventions are all fodder for MacFarlane’s signature humor. The script is densely packed with jokes and the majority of them work. There are a few clunkers along the way but given how many times the script tries to make the audience laugh it’s forgivable if a few of them fall short.

One issue I have with the film is similar to my complaint about the first film and that is the subplot involving Giovanni Rabisi’s obsessed fan. His character and everything surrounding it sticks out like a sore thumb. It simply doesn’t fit with the rest of the world created by MacFarlane and company. Rabisi’s Donny is a combination of damaged child and psychopath. His darkness and naiveté is about as appealing as a sprig of broccoli in the middle of a banana split. The story already has an antagonist in the form of the state trying to make Ted a thing. The addition of a mentally disturbed stalker feels like padding to lengthen out the story and it isn’t necessary. I didn’t like it before and time hasn’t softened that opinion.

“Ted 2” is rated R for crude and sexual content, pervasive language, and some drug use. A couple of sex acts are talked about and briefly described. We also get a look at a cosplaying woman who, when her shirt is ripped off, exposes her three breasts like in “Total Recall.” Ted, John and Samantha are shown several times using a bong to smoke weed. On a couple of occasions the bong is in the shape of a penis. Foul language is common.

Seeing for the second time a walking, talking teddy bear that loves to drink, smoke weed and have some kind of non-traditional sex with women still creates in my mind a sense of wonder but not as much as the first time. “Ted 2” once again leans heavily on the shock value of a teddy bear doing all the things teddy bears aren’t known for and using the kind of language that would get the mouths of most teddy bear owners washed out with soap. The notion of an inanimate object coming to life is almost as old as storytelling itself: From the golem of Jewish folklore to Pinocchio to Chucky the murderous doll, objects coming to life due to magical circumstances is certainly not a new concept and there isn’t much new in “Ted 2.” While that might be a strike against most movies, here it provides more a feeling of comfort and welcome familiarity. It also doesn’t hurt that most of the jokes work. My one suggestion for “Ted 3” (should it happen) is to leave out the Donny character as it simply doesn’t fit with the rest of the world. I’m not saying there shouldn’t be a villain, just not Donny. Otherwise, “Ted 2” provides more than enough laughs to overcome the feeling of sameness.

“Ted 2” gets five fully stuffed stars.

This week America celebrates its independence with movies about male strippers, the beginning of the end of humanity and three outcast teens, one of whom is dying. Light up a sparkler (outside of the theatre) while I go see and review at least one of these flicks.

Magic Mike XXL—

Me and Earl and the Dying Girl—

Terminator: Genisys—

Follow me on Twitter @moviemanstan and send emails to stanthemovieman@comcast.net.

Stan The Movie Man Movie Reviews

Checking out the latest films and giving you my uneducated opinion

Movie review

Review of “The Transporter Refueled”

Review of “No Escape”

Review of “American Ultra”

Review of “The Man from UNCLE”

Review of “Fantastic Four”

Review of “Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation”

Review of “Mr. Holmes”

Review of “The Gallows”

Reviews of “Magic Mike XXL” and “Terminator: Genisys”

Review of “Ted 2”