Ralph Fiennes

Review of “The Menu”

There’s a famous line from the 1987 movie “Wall Street” said by actor Michael Douglas as the investment whiz Gordon Gekko that goes, “Greed, for lack of a better word, is good.” Most people shorten it to “Greed…is good.” During Wall Street’s boom in the 1980’s, the Tech Bubble of the 1990’s, the subprime mortgage heyday of the early 2000’s and the explosion of profits by oil companies and giant retailers now, greed does appear to be a great way to get rich…in the short term. Remember, tech stocks and subprime mortgages both eventually tanked. And the go-go days of the 1980’s on Wall Street was slowed down by various scandals involving insider trading and other financial crimes. Eventually, as my mother used to say, the chickens come home to roost, meaning the good times must end, sometimes catastrophically. While a movie about an exclusive restaurant, it’s demanding chef and its upper crust clientele may sound like it has nothing to do with examples of corporate greed and corruption, “The Menu” will surprise you with just how many similarities there are.

Julian Slowik (Ralph Fiennes) is the celebrity chef behind the ultra-exclusive restaurant Hawthorne, located on a small island miles from the mainland. Tickets to Hawthorne are $1250 per person. Being able to afford the ticket price doesn’t guarantee you’ll be invited to dine on the delicacies found on the island and in the waters around it. You must be deemed worthy by chef Slowik. On this night, Tyler (Nicolaus Hoult), a foodie fanboy of Slowik’s, is accompanied by his companion Margot (Anya Taylor-Joy). Influential food critic Lillian Bloom (Janet McTeer) and her editor Ted (Paul Adelstein) are on hand. Washed up actor George Diaz (John Leguizamo) is trying to kick-start his career with a food/travel show and is using this night as a test run. He’s joined by his much put-upon assistant Felicity (Aimee Carrero). A trio of tech bros, Soren, Brice and Dave (Arturo Castro, Rob Yang and Mark St. Cyr) that work for the “angel investor” that owns Hawthorne. There’s also a married couple, Richard and Anne Liebbrandt (Reed Birney and Judith Light), that have dined at Hawthorne many times. None of the guests know one another, although a couple of people recognize Diaz from his movie career, and Margot avoids eye contact with Mr. Liebbrandt. When the guests arrive at the island, the boat immediately pulls away. Each is greeted and checked in by Elsa (Hong Chau), Slowik’s maitre d’ and personal assistant. Elsa notices Margot is not Tyler’s originally listed guest. He clumsily explains his original date couldn’t attend so Margot is taking her place. This seems to trouble both Elsa and Slowik when she informs him of the change in plans. As each course is served, Slowik tells a story of how the food ties into a tale that will become clear as the night progresses, and each course has a name. For instance, one is called Memories. Slowik recounts how on a Taco Tuesday night when he was a child, he stopped his father from beating his mother by stabbing him in the thigh with a pair of scissors. The dish served is a chicken thigh stabbed with a small pair of scissors and laser etched tortillas. With much flourish, each course is served with military precision by the sous-chefs. With each course, Slowik becomes more interested in Margot, following her into the bathroom at one point and asking her questions about why she’s at Hawthorne. Margot dislikes Slowik’s style, his imperiousness, and his food. Slowik’s reasons for inviting these guests on this night becomes more and more clear as the food comes out, the wine is served, and secrets are revealed.

“The Menu” is a pitch-black satire of wealth, greed, consumerism and clickbait culture. Written by Seth Reiss and Will Tracy, the film comes from an experience Tracy had on his honeymoon, dining at Cornelius Sjømatrestaurant in Norway. While I doubt Cornelius Sjømatrestaurant has as bloody a floorshow planned for its guests as Hawthorne did, it does look interesting, if you like seafood.

While everyone in the cast is great, the film lives or dies on the performances of Anya Taylor-Joy and Ralph Fiennes. Taylor-Joy’s Margot is hard as nails. She doesn’t put up with any foolishness and will stand up for herself even in the face of the imposing Slowik. Taylor-Joy is an interesting actress to watch, not just because she’s attractive in an unconventional way. There’s a warmth and childlike quality to her character, just under the hard exterior. She’s cunning, but only when necessary. She’s smart enough to know when to act dumb. She can be demure one moment and deadly the next. Some of this duality comes from Reiss and Tracy’s script, but the rest is innate to Anya Taylor-Joy’s skill as an actor.

Ralph Fiennes plays chef Slowik as a barely contained volcano. There’s enormous rage hiding just under the surface of the celebrity chef. Like where the crater is filled with water, making a beautiful lake, boiling under the surface is molten hot rage, waiting to explode. As that rage slowly leaks out, it opens the door allowing a flood of pent up anger and resentment to spill out over his kitchen and his guests. Some of Slowik’s anger is justified, while some if petty and trivial. Yet it all combines together into a toxic stew of revenge that to Slowik tastes like justice. Fiennes is clearly playing someone with mental illness that has convinced the sous-chefs his menu for the evening is justified and worthy of their efforts to the very end. It’s a performance that could earn Fiennes some awards season love.

“The Menu” is rated R for strong/disturbing violent content, language throughout and some sexual references. A finger is shown being cut off. A person is stabbed in the neck and bleeds out. A person is stabbed in the leg. There is a suicide by gun and a suicide by hanging. There is also a mass murder/suicide by fire. The sexual reference is a description of a sex act between a sex worker and client. Foul language is common but not overwhelming.

The world of high-end restaurants, spending thousands of dollars on tiny servings of food just to say you’ve dined at some celebrity chef’s newest monument to ego has never made any sense to me. Call me pedestrian, but I’d rather go to Cracker Barrel or an all-you-can-eat buffet and have big portions of food I can recognize and pronounce than someplace for “the experience.” If you agree, seeing “The Menu” won’t change your mind. Still, the film is a tasty bit of twisted fun that might make the perfect snack of entertainment.

“The Menu” gets five stars out of five.

Follow, rate, review and download the podcast Comedy Tragedy Marriage. Each week my wife and I take turns picking a movie to watch, watch it together, then discuss why we love it, like it or loath it. Find it wherever you get podcasts.

Follow me on Twitter @moviemanstan.

Review of “No Time to Die”

James Bond (Daniel Craig) and Madeleine Swann (Lea Seydoux) are enjoying their lives together after Bond has left MI6. While visiting the grave of Vesper Lynd, a bomb destroys her tomb and a group of assassins, led by a killer with a bionic eye named Primo (Dali Benssalah), attack the couple in Bond’s bulletproof and well-armored car. A call from Ernst Blofeld (Christoph Waltz), who is in an ultra-high security prison, suggests Swan is the reason for the attack. Bond leaves Swann as he no longer trusts her. Five years later, Bond is in the Bahamas, still retired, when he’s approached by CIA operative Felix Leiter (Jeffrey Wright) and another agent Logan Ash (Billy Magnussen) about Russian biochemist Dr. Valdo Obruchev (David Dencik) who was recently abducted by from a secret lab in London. While Leiter and Ash want his help, newly minted 007 Nomi (Lashana Lynch) wants Bond to stay out of it. Obruchev was working on a strain of virus that could be targeted to a specific person’s DNA, making it a nearly perfect weapon for political assassination. The virus research is an off-the-books project overseen by MI6 head Gareth Mallory, aka M (Ralph Fiennes). Obruchev is now able to modify it to kill not only a specific person, but anyone related to the target. Recent DNA database hacks suggest someone is building a worldwide hit list. Swann is a psychotherapist that works with MI6 in questioning Blofeld. She is approached by someone from her past, Lyutsifer Safin (Rami Malek), who is scarred, visibly and emotionally, is looking for her help and not giving her much choice.

Daniel Craig is my “James Bond.” I’ve seen Connery, Moore and the rest, but Craig is the only one I’ve seen all his Bond performances in a theater. I like that Craig looks like he’s been in a fight as well as looking like he’s lost a few. Connery and the rest all looked too soft to be tested, bitter, world-weary secret agents. Craig looks like he’s been through some difficult stuff and has paid the price for his loyalty to her majesty’s secret service. I have also enjoyed the emotional thread that’s run through all of Craig’s Bond films starting with “Casino Royale.” The death of Vesper Lynd (Eva Green) was the kind of devastating loss only seen once in the history of the franchise, “In Her Majesty’s Secret Service” from 1969. While Bond’s reaction to the loss is a minor plot point in the next film, it is quickly forgotten as the story of “Diamonds are Forever” moves on. Craig’s Bond has been dealing with Vesper’s loss for most of his outings. It’s the only time a series of Bond films have been this connected. That connection has been both a strength and a weakness of the last five films.

Daniel Craig gets a rousing story for his final outing as Bond. There is giant action set pieces, beautiful but deadly women, twisted villains and the fate of world hanging in the balance. It’s everything one expects in a Bond movie, but I could have done with a little less.

Every chase scene is split into two sections with high-speed action then lower velocity, more personal battles. The stunts are spectacular, and many appear to have been done practically, but there comes a point when I, as the viewer, would like to get back to the story. “No Time to Die” is in no hurry to do that.

While the story isn’t complicated, the screenwriters parse out information over the length of the film until you don’t see the ultimate plan until near the end. If the plot were more interesting, I might have not minded the water torture approach to storytelling. However, “No Time to Die” is a standard “madman looking to destroy civilization” tale the Bond films have done before. Aside from tailoring the virus to specific DNA, nothing in “No Time to Die” is that new or spectacular.

Still, the spectacular locations, massive stunts and action scenes make “No Time to Die” a mostly enjoyable ride that ends the tenure of Daniel Craig. With a running time of 163 minutes, the film tests the patience of its audience. It feels overstuffed, like the filmmakers are giving Craig as much screen time as possible to say goodbye to Bond. Whatever the reason, “No Time to Die” has a problem of abundance and needed another pass by an editor.

“No Time to Die” is rated PG-13 for sequences of violence and action, some disturbing images, brief strong language and some suggestive material. Bond is involved in numerous fist and gun fights resulting in the deaths of numerous henchmen. There’s a scene where a ballroom full of people are bleeding from their eyes and dying on the spot. Many, many car crashes leading to inevitable injury and death. A person’s fake eyeball pops out. Foul language is scattered but there is one use of the “F-bomb.”

Daniel Craig is now done with Bond. There were indications in the past he found playing the agent tedious and was sick of the role. However, there is a video online of Craig speaking to the crew on his last day of filming where he appears very emotional about being done with 007. Perhaps his complaints were more about fatigue in the moment. Whatever the reason, Bond will move on to a new actor. He might be a return to the pretty boys of Moore and Brosnan, but I hope another tough-looking chap that looks to have taken a punch or two is brought into the role. Fans will complain, just like they did with Craig (Bond isn’t blonde or blue eyed), but if the right choice is made, they will quickly forget their issues. I will miss Daniel Craig as Bond. I wish he had gotten a better farewell.

“No Time to Die” gets 3.5 stars out of five.

Subscribe, rate, review and download my podcast Comedy Tragedy Marriage. Each week my wife and I take turns picking a movie to watch, watch it together, then discuss why we love it, like it or hate it. Find it wherever you get podcasts.

Follow me on Twitter @moviemanstan.

Review of “Holmes and Watson”

Detective Sherlock Holmes (Will Ferrell) and his loyal assistant Dr. Watson (John C. Reilly) has just proven in court the man the police believe is the evil Moriarty (Ralph Fiennes) is actually an imposter, setting him free and infuriating London police Inspector Lestrade (Rob Brydon). At a birthday party planned by Watson for Holmes and hosted by Queen Victoria (Pam Ferris) at Buckingham Place, a body is discovered in a giant birthday cake. With the body is a note threatening the life of the Queen and to rewrite history. Performing the autopsy on the body is American doctor Grace Hart (Rebecca Hall) and her companion Millie (Lauren Lapkus). Watson immediately falls in love with Hart while Holmes becomes infatuated with Millie. Clues from the body take Holmes and Watson on a twisted journey that leads Holmes to believe someone very close to him may be the leader of the plot and a killer, but who?

I am a big fan of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s creation Sherlock Holmes. I have read several of the stories and highly recommend a British television adaption starring Jeremy Brett in the title role. While the films starring Robert Downey, Jr. were entertaining action films, I didn’t consider them a true adaption of Doyle’s stories. Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin Freeman portray the pair in a recent BBC series. There are other adaptions dating back to the beginning of film and stage plays prior to that. Now, Will Ferrell and John C. Reilly take on the mantle of the great detective duo and, between the script and their portrayal, show they are not up to the task.

“Holmes and Watson” is a bad movie in so many ways, but I’ll only cover the most glaring examples. First, the movie isn’t funny. There are plenty of very talented people on screen with decades of comedy experience both in America and in the UK. Ferrell, Reilly, Rob Brydon, Lauren Lapkus, Hugh Laurie, Steve Coogan and many more in the movie have been in some classic and groundbreaking comedy during their careers. In “Holmes and Watson,” the cast is hamstrung by an unfunny script. There are a few laughs scattered about but not nearly enough to fill the 90-minute running time. Much of the dialog feels riffed. The sloppy editing sometimes shows the actor saying another line but there is no audio of the line. There is then a quick edit to another camera angle. This implies there were various bits of dialog and storylines that were left on the cutting room floor. Considering what shows up on screen, it’s difficult to believe this was the best of the footage shot.

The movie also can’t decide whether Holmes is a genius or a lucky moron, so he is shown as both. There are moments where Holmes is doing the mental math in his head to calculate whether his next move with be successful. Apparently, the character is smart enough to figure out angles and speeds necessary, so his plans will succeed. When things don’t go as planned, Holmes shifts from genius to moron and freezes in place. Ferrell drifts dangerously close to what I thought of him early in his film career: A little of him goes a long way. Playing one of the title characters means Ferrell is in nearly every shot and his portrayal of Holmes wears thin very quickly.

Then there are the little things. For instance, I thought I saw some familiar characters in the backgrounds of various scenes. Nothing is ever done with these characters, so I put them out of my mind. Only when I printed off the list of actors did I learn these background characters where who I thought they were: Albert Einstein, Charlie Chaplin and Sigmund Freud. They are never referenced, and nothing is ever done with them. I guess there were scenes including them in brief cameos, but they got cut from the final edit, yet there they are, loitering in the background. It’s clear the film makers probably shot enough alternate takes to cut together three or four movies. Since these were considered the best of the bunch, I hope we never get an alternate cut using all the stuff these didn’t use.

The physical comedy is so also unfunny. People get hit in the face, back of the head, beaten with a chair, a croquet mallet and more. Horse poop (hopefully fake) gets smeared all over Watson as a “disguise.” One character acts like a cat. A swarm of bees attacks, driving a character to jump out a window. As seen in the trailer, Queen Victoria gets hit in the face with an old-style camera. None of it generates more than a giggle, if that. It’s been a long time since the Three Stooges and physical comedy has progressed, except in “Holmes and Watson.”

“Holmes and Watson” is rated PG-13 for drug references, crude sexual material, language and some violence. Aside from the various bits of violence I described earlier, there is a knife thrown that hits a character in the side. There is also the implication that the body inside the cake is stabbed as Holmes and Watson use a sword to cut it. The sexual material is exclusively about masturbation. Holmes and Watson use cocaine. While we don’t see its use, we do see the effects. Foul language is scattered and mild, but there is one use of the “F-bomb.”

With all the very funny people, and Will Ferrell, involved in making this movie, it should have been funnier, and it should have made more sense. It isn’t, and it doesn’t. There is plenty to parody about Sherlock Holmes, from his drug use to his encyclopedic knowledge of just about everything. Why writer and director Etan Cohen chose to not focus on anything in particular is a mystery worthy of the master detective.

“Holmes and Watson” gets 1 star.

There’s only one new film opening this week. I’ll see and review the following:

Escape Room—

Listen to The Fractured Frame for the latest news in movies, TV and streaming, available wherever you get podcasts. Follow me on Twitter @moviemanstan and send emails to stanthemovieman123@gmail.com.

Review of “The LEGO Batman Movie”

The ongoing battle between Batman (voiced by Will Arnett) and the Joker (voiced by Zack Galifianakis) continues as the Clown Prince of Crime plans on detonating a giant bomb causing Gotham City to collapse into the caverns below. During the epic battle that pits Batman against his entire rogue’s gallery, the Caped Crusader tells Joker he isn’t his biggest enemy. This breaks Joker’s heart. Batman defuses the bomb and easily defeats all his enemies’ singlehandedly but they also all get away. Meanwhile, in his guise as playboy billionaire Bruce Wayne, Batman attends the retirement party of Gotham City Police Commissioner Jim Gordon (voiced by Hector Elizondo) and is immediately struck by the beauty of his replacement, Gordon’s daughter Barbara (voiced by Rosario Dawson). He is so attracted to her he doesn’t realize he agrees to adopt an orphan named Dick Grayson (voiced by Michael Cera). Joker and all the villains attack the party but also all surrender and are locked up in Arkham Asylum. It’s all part of a diabolical plan to force the Dark Knight to admit the Joker is his greatest enemy.

Anyone that has been a fan of Batman, especially the movie incarnations of the hero, will find plenty to love in “The LEGO Batman Movie.” The filmmakers have taken great care to dive deep into Batman lore and make numerous references to the versions of the Dark Knight over the decades. It is both a loving tribute and an at times vicious send up of the World’s Greatest Detective. It also is often very funny with more jokes than you can keep up with for three quarters of the film.

The voice work “The LEGO Batman Movie” is terrific. Maintaining that low gravelly voice for long recording sessions couldn’t have been easy for Will Arnett. He manages to infuse a great deal of emotion in a voice that could have become rather monotone after a while. Much of that emotion and attitude can be credited to the script from Seth Grahame-Smith and Chris McKenna. Batman is a character that could easily come off as far too dour to ever be as funny as he is in this film. Grahame-Smith and McKenna use the darkness and anger to some degree but play up the character’s ego and his self-aggrandizement for much of the humor early on.

Zach Galifianakis, Michael Cera, Rosario Dawson and Ralph Fiennes (as loyal butler and surrogate father Alfred Pennyworth) all are given bits of fun and silliness to let their characters shine. While the rest of the massive voice cast is used mostly for seasoning, all the characters are given a chance to make an impact often with jokes that could easily get lost in the avalanche of dialog in the often crowded scenes.

My only major problem with the film is the last quarter as all the heroes prepare to face the villains for the final time. The jokes slow down to a crawl as the battles between Batman and the villains start to become repetitive. While the story is trying to show how Batman needs the help of his friends and family and how they are willing to take the risk of fighting some of cinema’s worst bad guys, Batman does the most predictable thing for the most predictable reason. It feels mostly like the writers spent all their energy and imagination on the earlier sections of the film and didn’t have anything left in the tank to carry it through the end. Since this could be considered a kid’s movie maybe they never planned for it to have a story that would appeal to adults. That seems unlikely as there are many jokes early on that will probably go over the heads of most children. Either way, “The LEGO Batman Movie” is in some ways like a marathon runner that just can quite make to the finish line as strong as he would like.

“The LEGO Batman Movie” is rated PG for rude humor and some action. The rude humor is probably in reference to the use of the words “butt” and “fart.” There are numerous action scenes with two characters falling from a plane and out of a building as it is being destroyed around them. There are also fights but all involve characters formed from LEGO. Aside from the earlier words mentioned there is no foul language.

“The LEGO Batman Movie” is quite the roller coaster ride for most of its 104 minutes; but maybe it should have been closer to 90 minutes as the final act feels repetitive and a bit wooden with a significant reduction in jokes and the seemingly required kid’s movie message hammered down the audience’s throats. It’s not quite a home run but is certainly a solid triple.

“The LEGO Batman Movie” gets four stars out of five.

This week features psychological horror, high school hijinks and monsters in feudal China. I’ll see and review at least one of the following:

A Cure for Wellness—

Fist Fight—

The Great Wall—

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

Reviews of “Hail, Caesar!” and “Pride and Prejudice and Zombies”

Hail, Caesar!

Movie star Baird Whitlock (George Clooney) is kidnapped by a group of Communist script writers who feel they are undercompensated for their work. Eddie Mannix (Josh Brolin) works for the studio as a “fixer” who tries to keep movie production running smoothly by taking care of any problems for the actors and directors. Mannix gets a ransom note asking for $100,000 for the return of Whitlock. Whitlock is the star of a big-budget Roman Empire film called “Hail, Caesar: The Story of the Christ” and is needed back on set as quickly as possible. He also wants to keep Whitlock’s disappearance out of the two gossip columns written by feuding twin sisters Thora and Thessaly Thacker (both played by Tilda Swinton). Mannix is also dealing with the pregnancy of unwed starlet DeeAnna Moran (Scarlett Johansson), and monosyllabic cowboy actor Hobie Doyle (Alden Ehrenreich) being shoehorned into an upscale costume drama much to the chagrin of director Laurence Laurentz (Ralph Fiennes). As if this wasn’t enough, Mannix is also considering a lucrative job offer from aircraft manufacturer Lockheed and is also trying to quit smoking.

Joel and Ethan Coen are the talented writers, directors, editors and producers behind some of the best movies in history (“Fargo,” “No Country for Old Men,” “Raising Arizona,” “O Brother, Where Art Thou?,” “The Big Lebowski,” “True Grit” to name a few). They have also given us some interesting films with unique characters and a skewed view of the world. These films aren’t quite great but are certainly worth a look. Where “Hail, Caesar” falls on the list from worst to first will probably require some time to decide and may depend on your mood when you see it but, for me, it doesn’t quite reach the heights of their best efforts.

Right off the bat, you know you’re watching a Coen Brothers movie. The look of the sets, the way the characters are filmed and the often amped up energy between the actors are all signatures of a Coen Brothers joint, especially one of their lighter films. Adding to the mood is the utter self-absorption of some of the movie’s characters. They cannot see past their own wants, needs and desires to consider all the trouble they are causing. They need someone like Mannix to take care of the problems they are ill equipped to handle or blindly stumble upon. The film, set in the late 1940’s or early 1950’s, gives the audience a peek behind scrubbed clean facades and into the dirty lives of Hollywood stars from the era. Reading a little of Hollywood history shows there were plenty of pregnancies, closeted gays and lesbians, and substance abuse to cover up keeping the real versions of Eddie Mannix busy. Watching the small emergencies and major catastrophes Mannix deals with fill his day made me wonder if what he does only enables the actors and directors bad decision making. Of course, the answer is “yes” since he was hired by the studio to keep the actors and directors working, on schedule and within budget.

Watching Mannix work is probably the most interesting thing about “Hail, Caesar!” making the subplot about the kidnapping of Baird Whitlock almost an afterthought. Sadly, that part of the story is written that way as well. There is a great deal of Communist ideology spewed by the group of writers holed up at a beachside bungalow. Granted, it’s all done in a friendly fashion, leading to a case of Stockholm syndrome for Whitlock. Nothing about this group is terribly interesting aside from the petty sniping between members. I suppose I expected a more aggressive gang hoping to convert Whitlock as a vocal and public advocate for their cause. Instead, Whitlock doesn’t really get it and is treated like the slow cousin at the family reunion with everyone just nodding and smiling as he tries to play along. Pretty much everything at the beach house feels like filler and tends to bring the movie to a bit of a narrative stop.

Far more entertaining are the films within the film being filmed. A water ballet featuring Johansson’s pregnant DeeAnna Moran in a mermaid costume and a big dance number with Channing Tatum’s Burt Gurney leading a group of sailors tap dancing on tables at a bar the night before they ship out contain dazzling visuals, impressive choreography and catchy tunes. I almost wish they had just made a movie that stitched these scenes together with a Hollywood backlot story about Eddie Mannix and left the Communist kidnapping plot out. Even watching Clooney chew the scenery in the sword and sandals epic his character is filming beats anything that happens after his kidnapping. It’s the dichotomy between what Hollywood is trying to sell us and what this movie is trying to show us about the real world that drags the film down a peg or two. It’s far from awful but I could have used a bit more screwball action and a lot less Communist manifesto.

“Hail, Caesar!” is rated PG-13 for some suggestive content and smoking. The suggestive content is very mild and hardly noticeable. Smoking is common throughout the film.

One of my favorite Coen Brothers movies is “Raising Arizona.” It is goofy and sweet and features some very memorable characters. From time to time, for no reason, my wife will just suddenly announce, “Short of Edwina. Turn to the right!” which is a line Holly Hunter’s character says on her first meeting with Nic Cage. “Raising Arizona” has more memorable lines. Perhaps that’s what “Hail, Caesar!” lacks…scenes and dialog that burrow into your brain and pop up for no particular reason in conversation. While that isn’t a requirement for a great movie, it does help.

“Hail, Caesar!” gets four guitars.

Pride and Prejudice and Zombies

The Bennet family lives on a nice estate in the English countryside. The five Bennet daughters have all been schooled in Chinese martial arts as all good young women should be in a land plagued by a zombie scourge. Elizabeth Bennet (Lily James) meets and takes an instant dislike to Col. Darcy (Sam Riley), a well-known zombie killer, at a reception at the home of Mr. Bingley (Douglas Booth). Mr. Bingley sees Elizabeth’s sister Jane (Bella Heathcote) and is instantly smitten, making Jane’s mother, Mrs. Bennet (Sally Phillips), quite happy as she hopes to marry her daughters off to wealthy families as her own is not as financially secure as she would like. The zombie plague is beginning to overrun most of London’s defenses and Mr. Wickham (Jack Huston) is brought in to improve them. Darcy and Wickham have a strained history going back several years that Wickham blames on Darcy. This drives a further wedge between Darcy and Elizabeth.

“Pride and Prejudice and Zombies,” henceforth to be referred to as “PPZ,” is a brilliant idea on paper. The juxtaposition between the mannered and stuffy British upper class and the mindless hunger of zombies should have been a no brainer (pardon the expression). Sadly, this theatrical representation of a genre mashup is about as dry and dull as a British costume drama without the ravenous undead.

“PPZ” isn’t funny, isn’t scary and isn’t otherwise much of anything. It seems to have taken more of the tone of the original Jane Austen work and left any of the excitement of Seth Grahame-Smith’s modification on the page. While there are moments when Austen’s words are said during a fight scene between two characters and that does provide some visual humor it doesn’t translate into actual laughs. Perhaps Grahame-Smith’s book wasn’t intended to be funny; however, if you want a film like this to appeal to a broad audience, it needs some laughs that aren’t the polite chuckles this film only occasionally provides.

The movie isn’t scary in the least. These zombies still possess some of their former intelligence and can maintain their composure at least until they consume human brains. After they get their first taste of grey matter, they become ravenous and aggressive. The world of 19th Century England dealing with zombies is somewhat interesting and the modified history, construction of a massive wall and deep moat to block zombie progress, is a nice touch of background; but it doesn’t do much to carry the story past the opening credits.

I suppose the filmmakers were hoping to attract fans of Austen’s work AND people that enjoy “The Walking Dead.” The Venn diagram of those two audiences doesn’t have a great deal of overlap and you need an audience big enough to justify making the sequel suggested in the film’s closing image. Considering the anemic opening weekend box office, a second film seems unlikely.

“Pride and Prejudice and Zombies” is rated PG-13 for zombie violence and action, and brief suggestive material. We see a few zombie heads explode when they are shot. An arm is severed and zombies often appear to have severe injuries to their faces. We also see some corpses with large holes in the tops of their heads and their brains removed. Suggestive material is limited to the occasional sight of the tops of a heaving bosom.

When I heard “PPZ” was being made I was actually a little excited to see it. I believed it might be possible to turn a one-note premise into an entertaining movie. Sadly, I was wrong. With such a serious tone and ignoring its humorous potential, “PPZ” is largely a lifeless mess.

“Pride and Prejudice and Zombies” gets two stars out of five.

This week, comic book fans get what could be a cinematic Valentine’s card from a much anticipated character. There is also a comedy about dating and a revisit from Blue Steel! I’ll see and review at least one of these films.

Deadpool—

How to be Single—

Zoolander 2—

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