Carrie Fisher: A Legend Lost

By now you've most definitely heard that Carrie Fisher has passed away at the age of 60. In the years that I have had this blog, many great actors and actresses have died. It's the sad fact of life: everyone will die. Never before has an actor died who was such a huge part of my love for movies. As Princess Leia, Fisher brought to life a defining character of my childhood, and her death particularly stings. Though none of us knew her, she still felt like a close friend to anyone who watched in amazement at Star Wars and any of its sequels. If you look at her body of work compared to actresses like Julia Roberts and Jane Fonda, she lacked the paychecks and awards that many received in their lifetimes. She also never really became a "household name". But isn't the true success of an actor when their work (in her case, Princess Leia) becomes iconic and forever branded into American culture. I'm here to explain and hopefully remind you of the reasons why Carrie Fisher was a legend.

The picture above is of a scene from 1983's Return of the Jedi, in which Princess Leia is captured and chained to Jabba the Hutt as his slave. Her metal bikini instantly became an iconic costume attributed with the character, the Star Wars franchise, and 80's culture as a whole. In the time since Carrie Fisher's passing, I have seen many people asking that the bikini be forgotten, claiming it was a sexist costume, and Fisher was much more than a sexualized object. In case anyone has forgotten, Leia strangled Jabba with the chain of that bikini, killed him, and escape. I'd counter that her act was pretty feminist for that time period. My point is, Carrie Fisher should be remembered for everything she did. She's complained so much about the metal bikini, but it's an iconic part of her career that we will remember fondly. Many are aware that she was very heavily involved with drugs throughout the early stages of her career. This is not a time to forget that she did drugs simply because she has died. This is the time to open up a conversation about the effects of drugs and the effects of fame. She passed away at sixty, and though her cause of death will never be attributed to drugs, they could easily be a factor in her weak heart. Fisher was always open about her mental illness and personal struggles with fame. This is not the time to try to bury the things she has said so we can raise her as a Saint. Share her quotes, because they describe experiences that very few people, let alone celebrities, are willing to open up about. Just knowing someone else shared an experience with an illness and pushed through can give someone hope. And isn't "hope" what Carrie Fisher's iconic character was all about?

I'm also against Carrie Fisher only being remembered for Princess Leia, and I'm happy to see that many are sharing her other achievements. She was a renowned author. Her novel Postcards from the Edge was a bestseller, and she adapted it herself into an Academy Award-nominated film starring Shirley MacLaine and Meryl Streep, for which Streep received a Best Actress nomination. She wrote numerous other books, all of which were autobiographical or semi-autobiographical. She was known for supporting roles in Woody Allen's Hannah and Her Sisters, and the films Shampoo and When Harry Met Sally. She even appeared as a fictional version of herself in 30 Rock and received an Emmy nomination. If you've ever seen Fisher interviewed, you have seen her irresistible charm and witty humor. As I searched the Internet for these videos, I found clips of Fisher on The Late Show only a month prior to her heart attack. Her sharp and edgy sense of humor is hilarious. She had just released her tell-all autobiography The Princess Diarist, which famously revealed she and Harrison Ford had engaged in a love affair on the set of Star Wars. I don't want to trivialize her passing, but I think she went out in a way she would have liked: by dropping the bombshell that she slept with one of Hollywood's biggest hunks, and in doing so, probably pissed her friend Harrison Ford off.

Personally, the death of Carrie Fisher hurts because I felt like I grew up with her. Of course, this is completely false, given that she is about forty years my senior. But when I was six or seven and watching Star Wars with my brother and father, I had no idea that the film came out in 1977, nor did I have any real concept of time. I watched the original trilogy more times than I could count, and sometimes on what seemed like a loop. I can remember being grossed out every time I saw Leia's kiss with Luke, two movies before she would learn he was her twin brother. I can remember the buildup of the inevitable romance with Han Solo, and the pretty steamy moment where they finally reveal their love in Empire Strikes Back. I remember the shock on her face when her true love is immobilized in carbonite with the famous "I love you / I know" exchange. Princess Leia, along with Luke, Han Solo and all the characters were pretty strong influences on my childhood. I played Star Wars with my friends on the playground and we acted out the movies (and several side-stories that I'm sure George Lucas was intending for more sequels) at recess and in my backyard. Last December, I was enjoying nerd-heaven when The Force Awakens came out. All of my favorite characters were coming back, and they had all aged. I felt as if the characters I knew and loved grew up with me, and I was back on an adventure with my old friends.

Finally, I have always thought that Leia was the princess that little girls should aspire to be, rather than the unobtainable Disney princesses. She didn't care what she said, and she had a temper. She wasn't the perfect weight, she was a real human. She had a gun and she liked to shoot it. Nobody was going to protect her. She fought herself. In the role of Leia, Fisher broke down every barrier for female heroines in an era where there simply were none. Characters like Ripley in Alien, Katniss in The Hunger Games and even Moana owe their successes to Carrie Fisher. Many female actors in action movies owe their careers to Fisher taking the first step in 1977. While her personal life isn't the best model of behavior, her later life shows a willingness to accept one's past and move forward. You'd be hard pressed to find a more realistic role model for girls. I hope that in the afterlife she's found R2-D2 (actor Kenny Baker alsopassed away in 2016) and they're waiting for the rest of the crew to join them. Rest in peace Carrie, in a galaxy far, far away. Your fans will never stop missing you.

Moana Review

Starring: Auli'i Cravalho, Dwayne Johnson, Rachel House, Christopher Jackson, Nicole Scherzinger

Moana is the newest film from the Disney empire. Since 2013, Disney has tried to recapture the magic of Frozen. Frozen received unanimous acclaim from critics, made $400 million in America alone, over $1 billion worldwide, produced the Top 5 hit song "Let It Go", and won two Oscars. After a few years spent trying to recreate that success, we were gifted with two Disney films in 2016:  Zootopia in March and Moana in November. I'm blown away by the craftsmanship in both films. While I never reviewed Zootopia (I actually did not see it in theaters) it will 100% be a contender for my favorite movie of the year. It's on Netflix, go check it out. But alas, this isn't a review about Zootopia, this is about Moana, the Polynesian princess tale from the Mouse House. The reason I bring up the perfection of Zootopia is to compare to the perfection of Moana. This proves that Disney is paying attention to detail, enough to produce two amazing films. I'd even call it a second Renaissance. I cannot speak for the cultural authenticity of Moana, but from what I've heard from individuals of Polynesian heritage, it does a pretty great job portraying the culture, lore, and values. As a Disney fan, Moana is one of the best Disney movies in my recent memory. The music, composed and written beautifully by Lin-Manuel Miranda of Hamilton perfectly captures the scenery, yet also taps into the modern viewer. The art and animation is gorgeous, and the characters of Moana and Maui seem so real. The voice work from newcomer Auli'i Cravalho and Dwayne Johnson seems effortless, and the story and its themes are touching and inspirational. It's perfect for all ages.

The soundtrack to Moana is excellent. It has become the staple of Disney musicals to include pop hits. Look to the entire soundtrack of Tangled as an example. Even Frozen did not include any music that was culturally significant of the Nordic people, which was disappointing. Moana includes songs that are heavily derived from Polynesian culture, which is thanks to the brilliant Lin-Manuel Miranda. If you're a Hamilton fan, you will instantly be able to recognize his style of songwriting, and most of it isn't even rap! The soundtrack perfectly blends with the story of the film. There is the classic Disney "I want" song (think "Part of Your World", "Belle", "For the First Time in Forever" and a classic villain song. The latter somehow makes it in, even though there is no clear antagonist. Moana brilliantly works without any romantic subplot (don't worry, Maui and Moana do not hook up) and no major villain. I won't spoil the ending, but there is a very interesting twist with Te Ka, who is the sort-of villain (even he isn't in the majority of the film, even if he's the looming threat.)

What is amazing to me, is how Moana doesn't just "work" in every department, it exceeds anything I expected. The story is rich with Polynesian culture and values. Moana goes through a very difficult test of her faith, and you begin to notice Maui goes through the same journey. The chicken Heihei, which actually annoyed me at first, ended up being pretty funny and useful to the plot (and kids LOVED him) Every song made its mark, and I've been singing them all since. The animation is beautiful and impressive. If you notice the stills I've pulled, the film does a great job displaying low-light scenes during dusk and dawn. The ocean is gorgeously animated, and the way it actuallt plays a character is breathtaking. There's a scene about ancestors (I won't spoil) and it gave me chills, and still does when I think of it. There's too much to say about Moana. It's the only film so far that I feel truly deserves its perfect rating. Even if it may not feel like it's perfect to you, I challenge you to find a narrative or creative flaw (not a personal one). I think you'll have a hard time.

Rating:

Arrival Review

Starring: Amy Adams, Jeremy Renner, Forest Whitaker, Michael Stuhlbarg

From the film's premiere, critics have been raving about Arrival. It's clear that Arrival will be a massive awards juggernaut.  Centering on Dr. Louise Banks, played by Amy Adams, Arrival tells the story of first contact with aliens. When twelve extraterrestrial spacecrafts show up at random locations in the world, the US government sends Banks, a renowned linguist, to try and decipher their language and teach them English, trying to find out why they have arrived at our planet. At face value, this seems like a modern version of Contact, the Matthew McConaughey / Jodie Foster film that isn't held in very high regard. But Arrival examines many deep existential questions. Through Banks' interactions with the "heptapods", it asks the viewer what humanity is. How do we define our life? Do we accept the possibility that our way of life could be wrong? Why do we perceive life as a sequence of events rather than one life? These are not questions I expected to be asking myself in a science fiction movie. A warning: Arrival is a thinker. Some people will get lost, and that's no fault of their own. However, if you want a great theological experience, Arrival is your movie.

Most of the praise has found itself gravitating towards Amy Adams. She's one of the most consistent performers in Hollywood, and she does not disappoint here. I hesitate to call it her career best performance because American Hustle presents her with a meatier role, but she is excellent here nonetheless. She seems to be the only one concerned with leaning the heptapod's language, which leads into one of the movie's key themes: government ignorance. The army is concerned with why they're here, and that's it. They can't seem to wait for Dr. Banks to complete her study. The film presents a negative portrayal of the armed forces, but one that I suspect isn't too far from the truth if aliens showed up on our doorstep tomorrow. The confidence in not only herself, but the heptapods, makes her a very likeable protagonist. The other characters are really afterthoughts aside from Jeremy Renner's character, who is a very admirable second-in-command to Dr. Banks.

The main reason why I loved Arrival was for its deep messages. There are many religious undertones to the film. Twelve ships arrive, which prompts Christian groups to declare the Rapture underway. A key point in the plot reveals an algebraic formula that equals 1/12, and that is no coincidence. Parallels between the aliens and angels, and the stereotypes with them are made. If aliens descend they will bring chaos. If angels descend they will bring benevolence. The heptapods appear as Gods and are treated as such. Another key theme is what it means to be human. The heptapods experience time as one plane. They know the past, present, and future all at once. At one scene Dr. Banks explains that humans experience time in a sequential manner only because it is the only way we know how. We're not incapable of learning new things, we just naturally do what's normal. As humans communicate in long phrases with clauses (and let me tell you, English is the messiest language they could teach aliens) they reply with one continual symbol every time. Their sentences are one symbol, each one with tiny flecks of difference to indicate clauses, conjunctions, and the merging ideas. It's something so advanced, but Arrival's message is that it should not be that advanced. Why can't we do that? Why have we developed into a nation and world where we don't understand each other, and our most powerful tool and weapon- language, is rendered useless.

My only complaint with Arrival is that it gets a little carried away. There is a mind-blowing twist halfway through the film. I love a good twist, but this is the first one that I actually did not immediately understand. I had to ask to figure out what was happening. I fear this will happen to many people, and I think the makers of the film could have executed that pivotal scene to make it a little simpler to comprehend. The film also takes some leaps at explaining time. It's really stretching the possibilities I know to be true from my background, but I'm not an expert. If you really want a good movie, see Arrival. If you like juicy, head-scratching, message-heavy movies, see Arrival. It would be a massive snub if this did not get Oscar nominations across the board, and I even see it winning some.

Rating:

Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them Review

Starring: Eddie Redmayne, Katherine Waterston, Dan Fogler, Alison Sudol, Colin Farrell, Carmen Ejogo, Ezra Miller, Samantha Morton, Ron Perlman, Jon Voight

Full Disclosure: I'm a Harry Potter superfan. I first saw Fantastic Beasts on opening night (two weeks ago) and have seen it again since. Why wait for this review? I needed to get all my excitement and bias out. Now that I have seen it twice and had some time, I think I can attack this without any sort of bias. Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them is an expertly-crafted movie. With this brand, you expect nothing but greatness at this point. J.K. Rowling and co. spend so much time and money, and you know their attention to detail is spectacular. For people expecting a sequel to Harry's adventures, or a story based off of Rowling's new eighth book, this is a completely original story. It's based off of the book of the same name (which was really just a gimmicky "textbook") and is written by Rowling herself. So it is canon, and falls into the Harry Potter universe, set 90 years ago. So essentially she's trying to bridge the gap between then and the first book. Following Newt Schmander, a British wizard in New York, Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them is a magical tale that will capture the imagination and attention of the viewer. J.K. Rowling is the screenwriter here, and she seamlessly adapts to the craft. This is simply just a really well-written film, even if it's not perfect.

To be honest, I didn't love Eddie Redmayne in the lead role. I don't doubt his acting ability. He did a really good job in the role that was given to him. Newt Schmander just isn't a character I'm dying to see in a sequel. He doesn't really have any interesting facets to his character other than a mysterious old flame. I much preferred the female characters. Tina, played by Waterston, is a great voice of reason. I really liked her character. The same goes for Queenie, played by Sudol. She doesn't have a lot of character development, but just like Jacob, I was drawn to her allure, and that's just due to some great casting. Jacob was by far my favorite. I really liked the idea of exploring a Muggle (No-Maj is not catching on) and his perspective of the Wizarding World. Colin Farrell is also a really great villain. He acts effortlessly, and proves that he is such an underrated talent. I could go into more detail, but I'm trying to avoid spoiling for anyone who may not have seen the film yet.

As far as the Beasts go, they are all incredibly well-realized. From the adorable Niffler (my favorite), to the gigantic Erumpent, to the deadly Swooping Evil, all of them capture the imagination. Also well-realized was the theme of persecution. There is a group called the "Second Salem-ers", group of religious nuts who want to bring forth another purge against magic in America. The cult leader is depicted as a ruthless human mother who beats her children into submission, and in doing so creates a horrendous danger. The theme of repressing your true self, and how this repression can create a monster is a powerful theme. While the Harry Potter series had many themes about life and death, I've never seen the franchise tap into this sort of imagery. Plus, Harry Potter took place in a Wizarding community, so the types of bigotry against them was nonexistent. It's interesting to see the other side, where the Wizarding world is the minority. I also found it fascinating to see the American version of magic, where everything is regulated by rules and everyone wants to be secret. You even have to register for a wand permit. I laughed at that, because it's such an American thing.

Here is where my criticism lies, and I'll try to avoid spoiling. Aside from not being very interested in Eddie Redmayne's Newt Scmander, I really did not like the President of the American Wizarding community. I thought she was so incompetent, but I don't think she was meant to be. The thing she just allows to happen at the end of the film is so irresponsible. Colin Farrell literally looks at her and says "Do you realized what you've just done?" She was such an unlikable character to me. I also felt like the film dragged a little bit in the middle. Somewhere in between beasts, where they were just explaining what an Obscurus was and taking 30 minutes on Newt and Tina's death sentence. Honestly, if it was a proper execution, that would be much cleaner and quicker. That was just ridiculous. In an "American Harry Potter" film, I expected to see the American Hogwarts, but instead was introduced to an American Ministry that was really quite boring. None of the characters aside from Farrell's captivated me, and I found those scenes seemed to waste time. I also personally didn't like Newt doing the mating dance. Loved the Erumpent, but thought his crude dance was unneeded and played for laughs, which it did not bring in my theater.

So here's my verdict. Fantastic Beasts is a great movie. It's of a quality better than some of the lower-level Harry Potter films (I'm looking at you, Chamber of Secrets and Deathly Hallows- Part 1) and craft-wise, it's astounding. The 3D was some of the best I've seen, and it transported me back to a world I haven't been to in a long time. As far as a sequel, I personally don't want to see Newt Schmander. I think a sequel should examine some of the other "loose ends" of the movie's end (if you've seen the film, you probably know what I'm talking about) and just disregard Schamander. It's not without it's flaws, but it's overall a really magical experience.

Rating:

Moonlight Review

Starring: Trevante Rhodes, Ashton Sanders, Alex Hibbert, André Holland, Jharrel Jerome, Janelle Monáe, Naomie Harris, Mahershala Ali

Moonlight is a heavy film. Watch the trailer, and you'll see that it's not a conventional coming-of-age story. Moonlight centers around a young African-American man in three stages of his life: his childhood, adolescence, and adulthood. The film itself is divided into three chapters and is very reminiscent of a play, of which it is based on. Chiron begins as a young boy living in rural inner-city Miami. His negligent mother is spiraling in and out of drug-induced stupors, leaving Chiron (who doesn't realize his nickname Little is a schoolyard taunt) to fend for himself. The kids beat him up and torment him for "being a fag", and he gravitates towards Juan, a local drug dealer who shows him kindness. The events that transpire in the years following show a young man struggling to accept himself and struggling with his identity. The two figures in his life: Juan, a mentor, and his drug-addicted mother, are masterfully contrasted in their tender and distant connections with the protagonist. While Moonlight addresses preconceived ideas about being gay and self-acceptance, it truly is about what it's like to grow up black in a community where the odds are stacked against you. It is a beautiful story, and while dull in areas, it is powerful and affecting all the same. Whether you identify with growing up poor, black, gay, or simply the pressures of being yourself, Moonlight finds a way to affect every viewer.

As far as acting goes, the three portrayals of Chiron (Little, Chiron, and Black) all make a strong impression. Personally, I feel the young Chiron was the most affecting. It's not pleasant to watch a small kid running for his life from bullies, and that's where this film opens. For such a small child, he painfully knows so much about his world. One of the most powerful moments is when he sits down with Juan and asks him if he deals drugs. Juan tells him the truth. He asks Juan if he gives drugs to his mom. Juan tells him the truth. He asks what "a fag" is and if he is one. Juan replies "No. You could be gay. But you don't gotta let nobody call you a fag." It's such a touching scene, and the simplicity of the moments between Juan and Chiron soon disappear. When he grows up,  his life becomes more complicated. Pursued by rumors of his sexuality, he's beaten up by his best friend. His dreams are haunted by longing for this friend and the sting of rejection. His mother is nowhere to be seen unless she needs money for drugs. A woman who was once "trying" is now seen as a disheveled mess, jealous of the love Juan's wife Teresa (played beautifully by Janelle Monáe) gives her son.

It is the final act that brings the film full circle. When Chiron becomes an adult, he becomes the same man Juan was. He was unable to escape the confines of his community and has fallen in the same hole. He's dealing drugs to people like his mother. He dresses with a bandana like Juan and wears grills in his teeth. By rejecting his mother and accepting Juan, he has basically become the amn. It is in this form, Juan has a lasting presence in the film, as he unfortunately dies off screen between parts 1 and 2. Mahershala Ali (Remy from House of Cards) does an exceptional job in this small supporting role. I cannot see him not receiving a nomination for his excellent performance. The same goes for Paula, played by Naomie Harris, who is the exact opposite. Her desperation for drugs blinds her to her child's needs. When the youngest Chiron is onscreen, we see her as a monster. Her behavior is robbing him of a normal childhood, and she is indifferent to his need for attention and love. As he grows up, we see her clean and begging for forgiveness. Paula is not a monster. She's not heartless like other portrayals of abusive moms. She is a product of drugs and bad decisions, and the bleak portrait of her helplessness is very powerful. The climax of the film is in the third act, where Chiron visits her in rehab. A shell of her former self, she looks for forgiveness, begging: "You don't gotta love me. But you're gonna know that I love you."

Moonlight is a coming-of-age tale that is very selective. My best comparison is Boyhood from 2014. That film is true to just about every kid growing up, and allows you to witness a child gradually becoming aware of the vast world around him. Moonlight is different. It is essentially about what it's like to be black, yet it somehow speaks to more than just skin color. The race and sexuality issues are able to illustrate a portrait of a man trying to feel at home in his own skin, yet still depict marginalized individuals. My only complaints for Moonlight are pace problems. It was often times a little too slow for me, and felt like it was moving at a snail's pace, especially in Act II. Occasionally I understood the choices, but at times I thought it needed to move more quickly. Anyways, if you want to see a surefire Oscar nominee, Moonlight will undoubtedly be in consideration, and I strongly believe it will get a lot of support. It's certainly a film that will make you think about your life.

Rating:

LEGACY REVIEW- Rocky (1976)

Starring: Sylvester Stallone, Talia Shire, Burt Young, Carl Weathers, Burgess Meredith

In a new aspect of my blog, I will be writing a few "Legacy Reviews" per year. These will consist of films released either ten, twenty, thirty, forty (etc.) years ago. As this past Monday was the fortieth anniversary of Rocky starring Sylvester Stallone, I've decided to kick this series off with a classic. It's pretty much a coming-of-age movie at this point. Seriously, if you haven't seen Rocky, what are you doing with your life? And if you don't like it, you might need to watch it again.

Rocky is essentially a perfect film. Anyone who has read my blog knows that in my earlier days, I may have prematurely rewarded a "perfect" rating a few times. It takes a long time to think over a film, and sometimes you do not notice a film's faults the first time. Rocky is one of my favorite movies. This being said, I have not seen it so many times that it blurs me to faults. The faults simply are not there. This is because it's so simple. The cast and crew are not trying to produce a great, awe-inspiring classic film. This is why it's so surprising that Rocky became just that. Rocky Balboa is an American hero, who achieves a version of the American Dream. In the beginning of the film, he lives hard, but he's faltering. His career is going nowhere. I've seen so many movies with this introduction, and in walks a character who's depressed and longs for better life. Rocky is always positive, and just dreams of a simple life with the clerk at the pet store. And isn't that the American Dream? Rocky dares to tell the story of a boxer who just wants the simple life, and won't give up in his journey to pursue it.

This past week, I wrote my term paper for my History of Film class on Network, a 1976 film that depicts the terrifying stakes of broadcast news, and the blurring of the business and entertainment industries. With such a complex and relevant message, it was rewarded with Academy Awards for Best Actor, Actress, Screenplay, and Supporting Actress. But Best Picture of the Year went to one Italian Stallion- Rocky. The early 1970s were dominated by the end of Vietnam and the Watergate scandal. There was an abundance of negativity in American culture, so America needed the escape that Stallone and crew presented. America needed a movie that was inspiring.

As far as the acting goes, there really are only three characters with development. We really do not get the chance to explore Apollo Creed or Paulie in this film. First I'll talk about Mickey. Burgess Meredith looks like he's on his deathbed (I was shocked to see he lived another twenty three years) yet he has so much spark and enthusiasm. Mickey is a firecracker. If you've seen any sports movie post-Rocky, there's probably a grizzled old trainer. Mickey set the stage for every single trainer in popular culture. Now to Adrian. Adrian has so much character development, unlike most we see today. She's a nervous girl, hiding behind her glasses in a pet store. Rocky swoops in to save her from her "disease called being shy", and he's successful. We see her blossom into a free-spirited individual who's not afraid to speak out and jump for joy with pride in Rocky. As for the Italian Stallion himself, Stallone knocks it out of the park. He carries his performance with such slyness, it's no mystery where he got his nickname. Rocky is always one-step ahead, and he fights for goals. What's even more admirable is how different Rocky is from a lot of boxing and sports movies after. Many sports movies focus on an "unreachable" goal. Rocky has that. But many heroes fight for personal goals. They're trying to prove something to themselves. I honestly feel like Rocky's just doing it for Adrian. He loves fighting, but he loves her more, and he's just doing what it takes to reach that goal. While the belt might be nice, he's after the girl.

As for the other aspects of the movie, the script (written by Stallone) is air-tight. That's because it's not complicated. It has a few characters, and a basic plot that everyone can identify with. And the action scenes are fantastic. The famous training scene will inspire anyone watching it. "Gonna Fly Now" is an instant classic warm-up song. And the fight between Creed and Rocky is also very tense. The stakes are high. What's brilliant about the ending is that he doesn't win. We all hope he'll come out the winner, and he achieves something arguably harder. He goes the distance. He makes it to the end with Apollo Creed. It's a clever message that we don't need to win. It's about going the distance. Also, that ending scene where Adrian weaves through the crowd to say she loves him is one of my favorite movie scenes of all time. There's so much emotion. So I'd be crazy if I didn't give Rocky 10/10 stars. Don't worry, I'm not crazy. It's perfect because it doesn't try. It's a simple script, a simple idea, with simple characters. That allows Rocky to fill the hearts of all who watch it.

A personal request for my review was to also rank the sequels and give advice on which ones to skip. I'll be honest, I haven't seen all of the films. But here I go anyways.

1. Rocky (1976)- I just spent paragraphs explaining this so I shouldn't have to again.

2. Rocky II (1979)- I really like Rocky II. It doesn't quite reach the heights of the first one, but it's a surprisingly stable sequel. I enjoy how they explore Rocky's relationship with Adrian post-wedding, and his illiteracy. Plus the re-match where Rocky finally wins is amazing.

3. Creed (2015)- This is the newest film, which stars Michael B. Jordan as Apollo Creed's son who goes to an old, grizzled Rocky to learn to fight. Stallone gives a performance to rival the original, winning the Golden Globe and getting an Academy Award nomination for his tragic performance as a man who wants to erase his past, yet feels an obligation to the son of his rival. Plus, it has an interesting portrayal of inner-city African-American living that is a poignant afterthought.

4. Rocky Balboa (2006)- This is the revival of the franchise. It's not great, but it's leagues better than I heard 4 and 5 were. While his grief and depression aren't as strong as they are in Creed, we see Rocky Balboa right after Adrian's death. He fights, but doesn't care because he's so broken. That final scene, where he visits her grave and says "Yo Adrian, we did it. We did it." will break your heart. It's this tenderness that made me enjoy Rocky Balboa.

5. Rocky III (1982)- It's far from great. It's campy, and it's phoning it in a little too much. Hulk Hogan? Mr. T? It's far from bad, but it lacks the originality that the previous two had. Granted, I haven't seen this film in a long time, but I wasn't wildly impressed. The Eye of the Tiger scene is awesome though, and I give points for that.

6. Rocky IV (1985)- Skip Rocky IV. Just do it. I didn't even make it through the film. I don't remember much except that I hated it and it ended the franchise for me. Dolph Lundgren is hamming it up in a ridiculous role. Brigitte Nielsen is a pretty awesome fighter but her character is also ridiculous. The film doesn't know whether to be funny or serious, and it ends up being laughable. This killed Rocky for me.

7. Rocky V (1990)- Didn't see this due to the mess that is Rocky IV. Heard I didn't miss much

If you're trying to have a marathon, go 1, 2, 3, 6, 7. Omit 4 and 5. You'll thank me.

Doctor Strange Review

Starring: Benedict Cumberbatch, Chiwetel Ejiofor, Rachel McAdams, Benedict Wong, Michael Stuhlbarg, Benjamin Bratt, Scott Adkins, Mads Mikkelsen, Tilda Swinton

Doctor Strange is the second movie in "Phase 3" of Marvel's Cinematic Universe, that started with Iron Man all the way back in 2008. Ever since 2012's The Avengers shattered records and re-invigorated comic book heroes like Hulk, Black Widow, and Thor, Marvel has been steadily expanding its brand. While first focusing on comic book royalty like Captain America, they recently dove into cult territory by adapting the Guardians of the Galaxy to screen. That effort proved ridiculously successful, so now we have Doctor Strange making his debut appearance. Doctor Strange uses magic, in a weird blend of Batman Begins and Harry Potter. In a year of underwhelming superhero movies (Batman v Superman, Suicide Squad, even Civil War in my opinion) Doctor Strange hopes to be a breath of fresh air. I will agree, it's very refreshing. While so many movies are rushing team-ups and world-building, it's nice to just see an origin story, and a man become a hero onscreen. Stephen Strange is one of the best surgeons. The problem is that his ego controls his life. He believes he is infallible, until he gets in an accident that leaves him unable to perform. A hint leads him to Western Asia, where he studies with a monk known as The Ancient One to gain his power back, and power beyond his wildest dreams. For the most part, Doctor Strange is a success. I had a great time. As it started to sit with me, I began to realize that like Strange, it was not perfect.

The first thing I must praise is the casting. This is the most high-caliber cast of any Marvel movie I've seen. Oscar-nominees Benedict Cumberbatch, Chiwetel Ejiofor, and Rachel McAdams lead the film with Oscar-winner Tilda Swinton in a key supporting role. Add Mads Mikkelsen as a wicked villain, and you have a great cast of characters. While Cumberbatch grounds the role with his steady (no pun intended) performance, it is Swinton that makes the movie. Her performance as The Ancient One, an age-defying monk that opens Strange's eyes is some of the best acting I have seen in a superhero movie. Not only does she sell her monologues and presence, she probably has the best action sequences in the entire film. Her assistants are played by Wong and Ejiofor. Wong literally plays a character sharing his name, which is quite funny. It fits, because Wong is the comic relief. You would be surprised though, that Doctor Strange is actually hilarious. I laughed really hard throughout. Ejiofor's performance was less consistent, but I cannot deny the gravitas he brings to his performance. As for Mikkelsen, he was a good villain. Marvel has this problem where none of their villains make an impact. I call it "The Loki Complex", in that none of their villains can match their first one: Loki. Unlike Ultron or Malekith (bet you don't even know what movie he's from, that's my point) Mikkelsen's character does seem like an actual threat to Strange. While supervillains often feel threatening to humanity or the world, it is important to establish a personal connection with the hero. Marvel can't see that. The Joker is so terrifying because he scares Batman.

I have two big issues with Doctor Strange. It is too derivative, and too confusing. The scene I have pictured above is from a fight scene where realities are being combined. The effects are magnificent, and the gravity-bending action is awesome to watch. However, it is almost exactly like the scene from Inception where the city folds into itself, just with more action and less of a point. As Inception is one of my favorite movies, I take issue with the fact that this just seems like a rip-off, with nothing new added but a few more skylines. This may also sound random, but I could not stop thinking how much this resembled Kung Fu Panda. That underrated film is about an unteachable pupil, who seeks to learn from an all-knowing teacher, to one day be able to wield a magical artifact. Things get complicated as the teacher's defected former student, believed to be the Chosen One, wants to steal the artifact for himself. That description fits both Kung Fu Panda and Doctor Strange. It's nowhere near a crime, and is a great theme, but it is simply sloppy writing.

Then comes the confusion. I'm all for complexity. After all, Inception is one of my favorite movies. I honestly feel that the writers of Doctor Strange had no idea where it would end up. At the conclusion, instead of a feeling of triumph shared with the hero, I felt perplexed. What is Marvel thinking? Why are they going in this direction? When will someone explain what an Infinity Stone is? Isn't the MCU complicated enough without sorcery and magic? A viewer should not be left with that many questions. Questions are a great technique for franchise film. They leave the viewer wondering, and install anticipation for the sequel. Even films like Gone Girl make use of questions to add a sense of dread for the characters' futures. But a movie should never make you question what you just watched.

I think you should try out Doctor Strange because there is a lot it has to offer. It has great acting, great visuals, and a sense of wonder that is too rare at the movies. But if you do not fancy over-complicated plots and a general sense of confusion, it's probably not your movie. A warning to people on the fence about 3D. To me and the group I went with, we all found the 3D to be too much, and sickening at points.

Rating:

Sully Review

Starring: Tom Hanks, Aaron Eckhart, Laura Linney, Anna Gunn, Autumn Reeser, Mike O'Malley

You probably know the story of Chesley Sullenberger (aka Sully) and US Airways Flight 1549. "The Miracle on the Hudson" is what the press labelled it. If you aren't familiar, go read about it and come back. I'll give the short version. Flight 1549 was struck by a flock of geese as it was taking off, destroying both of the engines in flight. The captain, Sully, guided the plane to a forced water landing in the Hudson River, something that had never happened before. And miraculously, every single person on that flight survived. Hailed as a hero, it was only a matter of time before Sully's story would make it to the screen. And who better to take on the role than Tom Hanks and director Clint Eastwood? Sully is a depiction of one of the greatest heroes of our time that doesn't lavish its subject. Sully was just doing his job. While the film falls short every in a few places from pacing and a few supporting characters, the message remains constant. And in an era where not many great messages are out there, it's refreshing to see Sully shine

Sully is grounded by Tom Hanks' fantastic performance in the titular role. Tom Hanks is one of my favorite actors because he always delivers. While he gave fine performances as Walt Disney in Saving Mr. Banks, and James Donovan in Bridge of Spies, not since Captain Phillips has he really given such a deep and layered performance. Hanks has demonstrated time and time again that he is the best actor to play the American "Everyman" in film, and his last four mainstream roles prove it. Sully is just an average guy doing his duty. He doesn't see the point in the pedestal the media places him on, and doesn't feel that he alone is the hero that saved the 155 souls on board. He carries this demeanor into the investigation. Yes, there is an investigation, and who better to head it than Anna Gunn, TV's favorite b*tchy wife from Breaking Bad. Because at the end of the day, while 155 people survived, Sully destroyed the plane. I actually found myself steaming at the investigation team for the accusations they made at Sully, and the test footage they showed. It seemed as if they were robots rather than humans. This would be a fine narrative to go by, albeit probably not true (especially when the team feels they were misrepresented), except Eastwood doesn't let that happen. In the end, he shows that the team investigating Sully do have hearts. They just have to do their job, which is unfortunate, but it plays back into the theme of Sully "just doing his job". I don't see why they felt they were portrayed poorly in the film. I think (and this is the same argument I had for Eastwood's last film American Sniper) that it was all up to interpretation.

While Sully certainly rises to the occasion, it does fall flat in a few categories. Laura Linney's performance as Sully's distraught wife is particularly poor. I love Linney, and I truly believe that the way she acted is the way someone could act in that situation. But after the credits, you see the real Sully, his crew, and his family. And the real woman is so far from the Laura Linney performance that it's baffling. Another few times there was humor when there really shouldn't have been. That may have been intentional, but I often found myself cracking up at parts that didn't seem like it should have been humorous. The film also makes a point at going inside the lives of the survivors, and showing their side of the story alongside Sully's. They try to force some dramatic stories onto us, but none of them stick. They feel tacked on and useless next to Sully's. I understand why Eastwood wanted to portray all the sides to this story, but sticking with Sully would have been best. All in all, it's a very enjoyable movie that lacks in certain areas. I cannot express how much I enjoyed seeing Sully. Go see it, and see a wonderful story unfold.

Rating:

Sausage Party Review

Starring:  Michael Cera, James Franco, Bill Hader, Salma Hayek, Jonah Hill, Nick Kroll, David Krumholtz, Danny McBride, Edward Norton, Craig Robinson, Paul Rudd, Seth Rogen, Kristen Wiig

By the time I saw Sausage Party this week, I had already seen the headlines. "The Most Offensive Movie Ever Made", "A Filthy Feast", "Literal Food Porn". It's the only other mainstream R-rated animated movie besides South Park: Bigger, Longer, and Uncut. The opening of the film is presented with enough whimsy and allure that it almost tricks you into believing it's a kids movie. There's a musical number and the animation is just so bubbly and child-like, almost second-rate compared to Disney and Pixar. Until that hot dog bun comes up. The sausages didn't really need an animator to make them sexual, but the buns have been specifically designed to be very "suggestive". Sausage Party is incredibly baffling. It presents ideas that are so brilliant, discussing religion, beliefs and morals, but then it throws it away for raunchy humor and trying to push boundaries. It's vexing that I still can't get a feel for whether I enjoyed it or not. Overall I laughed, but sometimes it was because I could not believe what I was seeing. Parents be cautioned...this is no children's movie.

The whole premise is that food is alive, and it doesn't know that it will be eaten by humans. The food in the supermarket anticipates when the "Gods" will take them to the "Great Beyond" and free them. It's obviously playing off of religion. When Seth Rogen's character Frank discovers the truth and tries to tell the food, they refuse to believe it. They would rather die and see the Great Beyond, because of what they've been promised. The idea of religion and that we believe "the best story" is really interesting. I wish it was explored more, and in more depth. I wish the movie settled with the idea that everyone can choose religion, and you can't force someone to believe. That's a message I wouldn't expect from Seth Rogen. Bickering between a Jewish bagel and a Muslim lavash mirrored the Israel-Palestine conflict, until someone points out that they have more in common then they think they do. It's so witty. But the conclusion of that storyline is that everyone has been lied to and the food tries to kill the people to achieve vengeance. Does that mean we need religion or we're savages? Am I looking too much into a raunchy food porno? Messages aside, I really appreciated the original humor. It was rarely "laugh-out-loud", but it's the type of clever humor that made me smile and chuckle to myself, mostly at the brilliant food puns. While some jokes might be seen as racist, I think overall they were pretty clever, though insensitive. There's a latina taco, African-American grits, and a gay twinkie. It's so stereotypical, and this movie doesn't hold back, making fun of just about every religion and race. The fact that it really hits everyone makes it seem a little more acceptable. Everyone got thrown on the cutting board and no one came back unscathed. I was promised a movie that would push boundaries and cross lines, and it certainly does that in every scene.

For all the interesting religious and cultural insights (a personal favorite is the African-American grits and Native American liquor getting their aisles replaced by crackers), Sausage Party throws it away for a VERY graphic orgy scene at the end. While the end result is so over-the-top, Sausage Party does present surprisingly mature ideas on sex and sexuality. The character of Brenda (brilliantly voiced by Kristen Wiig) has an interesting moral conflict. She and Frank broke through their packages to touch hands, and while he's on his mission for the truth, she feels everything that's happened, including falling out of their packages, seeing the truth, and getting lost, is because of their premature touching. Because "sex" is so repressed in this community, the food's belief system causes her to blame herself for everything. It's just like how many religions disapprove of sex before marriage, and shows how religion can really get in the way of people just trying to live. But, when she and Frank finally have sex, it's a ridiculously graphic scene. It's almost as if it was so repressed everyone turned into animals. It's just a free-for-all, and then the whole supermarket joins in. The Jewish bagel has sex with the Muslim lavash, and it's almost entirely just for shock value. While it was happening, I could not stop laughing, partly because I was so uncomfortable. Another sex story that's mishandled is the douche. This literal douche (he's the bad guy and it's a hilarious pun) wants revenge for being knocked out of the cart and losing his fluids. To do this, he rapes many characters to take their juices. It's shocking, and just not very funny. The discomfort I felt was kind of angering to see that happening. I wasn't offended, but I certainly don't think rape should be taken lightly.While it's genius to have a douche as a villain, his jaw-dropping actions really crossed the line for me.

While Sausage Party is interesting, and is certainly full of clever humor, I believe it throws all of it away for shock value. It's probablythe most inappropriate movie I've ever seen, and I don't know if it has any re-watchability. I can pick and choose certain scenes, and talking about it with friends who have seen it certainly bring some laughs, but I'm still confused about the film. I'm not even going to address the "twist" ending, which is the kind of introspective humor that belongs in Seth Rogen's This Is The End, not Sausage Party. If you're ready for what's "in store", go see Sausage Party. You truly have to see it to believe it. Words will never be able to accurately describe what is depicted.

Rating:

Suicide Squad Review

Starring: Will Smith, Jared Leto, Margot Robbie, Joel Kinnaman, Viola Davis, Jai Courtney, Jay Hernandez, Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje, Cara Delevigne

Suicide Squad is one of the most anticipated releases of 2016. An adaptation of the DC comic book team of the same name, Suicide Squad teams up famed Batman villains Deadshot, Captain Boomerang, El Diablo, Killer Croc, Enchantress, Katana, and of course....Harley Quinn and the Joker. A lot of the fascination with the film was driven by its comedic marketing campaign, as well as the innovative performances by Jared Leto as the Joker, and Margot Robbie as Harley Quinn. The commercial and critical disappointment of Batman v Superman also fueled interest, as director David Ayer promised a difference in the somber and serious tone of the DC universe thus far. The numerous trailers, characters, and songs really made Suicide Squad break every August record possible, and score one of the biggest openings ever. Then the reviews hit. I saw Suicide Squad late, so I had already witnessed the horde of negativity towards the film. And it wasn't different between critics and fans. The 27% score on  RottenTomatoes was echoed by disappointed fans. I tried to have an open mind for Suicide Squad, but there was just so much riding on this film for me. I am constantly frustrated with the DC superhero movies rushing their storylines. Suicide Squad was hopefully going to be the new beginning...but it's just another road block. It's not a step back, and actually isn't horrible. Their are salvageable parts that make it an enjoyable movie. It doesn't deserve as low as 27%. But it truly is a disappointment in the long run, and DC fails to live to expectations once again.

I think the Joker and Harley Quinn deserve their own section. I really liked the portrayal of Harley Quinn. I think the Harley that I saw in the cell, and in the training was the Harley I'm familiar with. But I don't think her relationship with the Joker was particular believable. It was very thinly crafted. I had no introduction to their relationship because it starts somewhere in the middle. I think the claim Davis' Amanda Waller made that she was "crazier" than the Joker was interesting. This Joker was definitely a little more subdued. But the claim was never really explored. Harley didn't always seem crazy, she seemed as if she were stumbling around sometimes. I loved Margot Robbie's mannerisms, but I hated her accent. It was so bad, and basically a different accent every time she opened her mouth. The Brooklyn accent never really stuck. Now to the Joker. I didn't love Jared Leto's performance, but I see that it could possibly be improved with more screen time. The true casualty is that he's barely in the movie. It's disappointing, because so many people are intrigued by a new Joker, and one that is innovative, but closer to the comics' roots than Jokers before him. He's a gangster, and that's an angle not seen since Nicholson played the character. Breathing life into a character that could have died with Heath Ledger is a huge selling point for any movie, and the ad campaign for this film capitalized on it. But no one could emerge from this film truly "loving" this Joker, because he barely gave a performance. This Joker is a far departure from Ledger's performance, but it doesn't commit to a new direction. I was mostly confused about where Leto's Joker stood, but I think the future installments will do him justice. I love that the Joker with Harley is finally hitting the big screen.

There's no doubt that this is a talented cast. But I believe only one person emerges unscathed, and that's Viola Davis. As Amanda Waller, she expertly blended menace with insanity. She was one crazy woman, but one no one would ever cross. Davis has proved time and time again she's a talented actress, and this was no exception. While Nick Fury assembled the Avengers and left them to their own devices, Waller really is ingrained in their actions, always watching them and messing with them. Then there's Rick Flagg, played by Kinnaman. He does nothing. He has no superpowers, and though he claims the Suicide Squad works for him, Waller foils him constantly. It just makes him look like an idiot. He's dating June Moon, aka Enchantress: the film's main villain. Cara Delevigne was probably the worst part of the entire movie. She deserves her own paragraph, but it was truly pathetic. Killer Croc, Katana, Slipknot, and Boomerang also had nothing to do. They shined in certain places, but overall they contributed nothing to the team. Slipknot even was the first to die, in a death so obvious you could see it coming a mile away. And El Diablo didn't even shine. He never fought until the end, in a random twist with a thin backstory and loose morals. It just wasn't interesting. Every action scene proved it was "The Will Smith Show." He had the backstory, the motivation, and the star power. He was alright. I didn't hate him, but I didn't love him, as he was a little too one-dimensional. It felt like the studio was so obviously "shoving him down my throat", and I just didn't care for his character. The sad part of Suicide Squad's team is that so many people feel useless. In Marvel, even if the heroes are less powered (i.e. Black Widow, Hawkeye), they still feel useful to the audience. They have intellect, and tactics that make them seem valuable. Only about three members of the Suicide Squad felt like they could really do damage, and were necessary.

Where to begin with Enchantress? She was a member of the Squad that was so obviously going to turn evil. It's the old worn-out story of another personality controlling someone to be evil and fight their allies. The ad campaign tried to hide it. They pulled the old "bait and switch", teasing us with a Joker and flipping at the last second. She was controlled by her heart outside of her body, in a case held by Waller. The scene where Waller stabs the heart with a pen to try and kill her was so pathetic. I rolled my eyes and laughed, because it was so ridiculous. It was such a stupid idea. I also don't understand how that same heart (now stabbed) could be given to Enchantress and still be viable. As for Delevigne, she barely acted. It was a different voice than hers, speaking in a made-up language and hula dancing like a cheesy showgirl. It was just yet another CGI villain with NO motivation, NO morals (be them good or evil), NO feasible plan but to destroy everything, and NO sensible way of achieving that plan. She even fights a different CGI monster. It reminded me of the worst Transformers scenes imaginable, except not even action-packed. DC has great villains! Batman has great villains! So why was this opportunity wasted? There is nothing salvageable from Enchantress, and her involvement in the movie is what dooms it. Just like Doomsday in Batman v Superman, she's a third-act CGI antagonist. The studio so obviously switched the original plot of the Joker to the Enchantress story. I'll never understand the reasoning, and it further frustrates me. Where DC was supposed to correct its mistakes, it just makes the same ones over again.

So is Suicide Squad really bad? It's not, but it's certainly not great. I can't say I'd ever see it again, so that's the failure of a superhero blockbuster. These are supposed to have re-watchability. Everything good is just overshadowed by horrible executive decisions. This version of the movie is not the version I saw in the trailers that got me excited. I heard that the executives really came and sliced it up, and they removed everything great. Harley Quinn would have been perfect in medium doses, but she's so over-the-top it's kinda stressful, even if I did like what she did with the character. The Joker doesn't even have a chance to make an impact. Will Smith is front-and-center for some reason. The musical soundtrack deafens the audience with rap verses. A stupid subplot with a generic villain weighs the whole film down. This movie had so much potential. Just listen to "Heathens" by twenty one pilots and watch the trailer. That's the best version of the movie you'll ever see.

Rating: