POSTMORTEM: ‘BEETLEJUICE’
a review of the 1988 film ‘Beetlejuice’
Benjamin Kindel
Every iconic director has their trademark style, and while most develop their style immediately, others take time to shape it. It wasn’t until his second film that Tim Burton’s style came out in full force. Traces of it can be seen in his directorial debut Pee-Wee’s Big Adventure, but it’s in Beetlejuice that was see the full German expressionistic sensibility that Burton has since been known for.
And what is often regarded as a classic comedy is actually a well-protected horror gem. While I’m a fan of horror movies, and of comedies, it isn’t often that the two can be combined with acceptable results. But here, Burton meshes the two together and creates a film that surpasses the norm and hails above the rest.
Now, with many films in the Postmortem category, I’ve seen them numerous times before actually sitting down in a theater with them. And like many films in this category, sitting down in a theater with the film was like seeing it for the first time. I saw it in a different light, and noticed so many subtle things I’ve often overlooked. I also saw this film for what it truly is: a nightmare.
Beetlejuice is directed by Tim Burton, and is written by Michael McDowell and Warren Skaaren, with a story by McDowell and Larry Wilson.
Sure, this movie is funny in both a slapstick and quirky way, but deep down behind all that is something terrifying. Just look at what the film’s plot follows: a couple who dies hires a demon to exorcise their house and drive the living couple out of it. This opens the door to many scary things as we experience the haunting from the ghosts’ perspectives, and unfortunately, also the demons. His name, as we find out, is ‘Betelgeuse’, and he was banned for very good reasons.
Like many haunting films, this one too starts off playful and lighthearted before making the jump to morbid and intense. That jump, in this case, happens early on in the film and only grows in intensity as the events unravel, leading up to the climax where the ghost couple (Adam and Barbara Maitland) realize they have to drive the demon back to the world of the dead and banish him again.
In observing A (they die) and B (they fight Betelgeuse), this film certainly has a twisty road it follows in going from A to B. We see dancing food, sculptures that come to life, and the life of a quaint town. It’s as ‘Tim Burton’ as Tim Burton could get (until later he outdoes himself again with Edward Scissorhands, Ed Wood, Big Fish, Dark Shadows, and then Big Eyes). This style, derived from the 1930’s movement called German Expressionism (of which I could write a whole paper about), has since been morphed to include more modern sensibilities. However, the approach is still the same.
He still utilizes miniatures in place of modern techniques, he combines ‘painted’ lighting with studio lighting, and he gives the audience a psychological experiment with the living and the dead. He transcends normal studio horror and creates a witty commentary on how the living treat the dead, and how we don’t respect the past or our present culture. We’re too commercialized and find happiness in money and not values like family or hobbies.
Burton’s vision of the perfect life seems to be in the Maitland’s, while his view of American culture is in the Deetz family. They’re perfect looking, but are they happy? Their daughter is a suicidal gothic girl, the mother is self-obsessed, and the father is, in simple terms, ignorant. They provide the perfect antagonists for the Maitland’s, but Burton’s not done yet. He still has Betelgeuse to throw into the mix.
This film would be perfect without him, but having Betelgeuse there only adds to the insanity of it all. All of his scenes are wild and crazy, and he only adds to that as time progresses. He’s like an itch you can’t get rid of.
Without analyzing the deeper meanings of the film (which I probably got incorrect), this is still a solid movie that set the bar for future horror/comedies. It knows when to be serious, and it knows when to be silly. It pulls the strings on all the right emotions to make you jump, or quiver, or hold your breath in suspense. It’s truly on of the best horror comedies made, and unfortunately, the only way to really feel the horror sneak up on you is in a theater. Seeing it on the big screen scared me and made me truly appreciate this film for what it is: a masterpiece.
With incredible artistic direction, acting, a great score by Danny Elfman, and one heck of an ending, there is no going wrong with this film.
With Alec Baldwin and Geena Davis as Adam and Barbara Maitland; Annie McEnroe as Jane Butterfield; Maurice Page as Ernie; Hugo Stranger as Old Bill; Michael Keaton giving the iconic performance as Betelgeuse; Rachel Mittelman as Little Jane Butterfield; Catherine O’Hara as Delia Deetz, Jeffrey Jones as Charles Deetz, and Winona Ryder as Lydia Deetz.
So if you like horror, comedy, off-the-wall films, kooky or crazy films, Tim Burton, Michael Keaton pre-Batman, or films from the 1980s, then this film is for you. If not, give it a shot, and you might get won over by this classic film.
Curse You, Red Baron! A Review of the Film “The Peanuts Movie”
CURSE YOU, RED BARON!
a review of the film ‘The Peanuts Movie’
Benjamin Kindel
I’ve always been a longtime Peanuts fan, ever since seeing their cartoon strip in the Sunday paper. Since that time I’ve collected the various books about them, saw the numerous films they’ve made, and have just been head over heels over the characters. They all felt so relatable on different levels.
So when it was announced a film would be made based on the comic strips, my first reaction was “Oh god no!” These strips have heart to them, and great character. They’re funny and silly, and serious when they need to be. And I feared that all of those things would become lost once they were adapted. I felt like the Peanuts would become just another children’s animated film that would blend in with the crowd of other children’s animated films.
Naturally I had to see it immediately to get the fear over with and see if I was right or wrong.
The Peanuts Movie is directed by Steve Martino, and is written by Bryan Schulz, Craig Schulz, and Cornelius Uliano, while being based on the comic strip by Charles M. Schulz.
I’m way beyond happy to note that this film not only exceeded expectations, but it amazed me more than any other animated film to come out. It had more heart and soul to it than Inside Out, the film’s biggest competitor of the year. It had better character development than one would expect, and it even had some incredible action sequences (Curse you, Red Baron!).
This film understands the comic strips better than anyone, and it expands on them in a way that makes you believe that you’re actually still reading them. The plot feels sectioned off, like there are numerous mini-stories that are unfolding all back to back with an overarching plot that connects them all. That helps the notion that the film is faithful to the comic strips 100%.
And with wild tangents about Snoopy and Woodstock, this film really does include all the Peanuts gang, even the more obscure one like Snoopy’s distant family, or even background characters from the comic strip that made an appearance once in the late 1970s. If Charles M. Schulz were still around today, he would be extremely proud of this film and all that it accomplished.
The Peanuts Movie is not only an incredible adaptation of the source material, but it tackles serious issues that many young children are dealing with. In doing so, making these issues less foreign and more acceptable because major characters are also dealing with those issues. Being an adult with mild social anxiety and slight depression, it was actually oddly reassuring to find out that Charlie Brown also deals with those things and copes considerably well with them as well.
But behind all that heart in the film is actually a very serious story unfolding with Snoopy and his adventures. At times it stopped feeling like a children’s film and something more sinister and foreboding. Yes, it’s still appropriate for families, but be warned it does go to some dark places in the battlefields of WWII. This juxtaposition between Charlie Brown’s tale of acceptance offers the film a great variety in storytelling tactics that offer up some truly incredible visuals.
And don’t worry, this film does have a happy ending that will fill you with warmth and happiness. I found myself leaving the theater overwhelmingly content with my life, and eager to step back into the world Charles M. Schulz has created. It truly is a shame this film was not nominated for Best Animated Film, as it surely would have taken that award away in an instant.
This film features the voice talents of: Trombone Shorty (Miss Othmar/Mrs. Little Red-Haired Girl); Rebecca Bloom (Marcie); Anastasia Bredikhina (Patty); Francesca Capaldi (The Little Red-Haired Girl/Frieda); Kristin Chenoweth (Fifi); Alexander Garfin (Linus); Noah Johnston (Schroeder); Bill Melendez (Snoopy/Woodstock); Hadley Belle Miller (Lucy); and Noah Schnapp (Charlie Brown).
So if you like animated films, action, adventure, family films, films that make you feel good, The Peanuts, comedies, or a great time, then this film is for you. If not, then give this film a chance and will win your heart.
POSTMORTEM: HALLOWEEN
a review of the 1978 film ‘Halloween’
Benjamin Kindel
There are different levels of cult status, and on some bizarre level, Halloween has managed to create a whole different level for itself that it solely sits upon. This film is known by quite literally everybody, and not all the people who know of this film have actually seen it. That’s because by osmosis, they’ve picked up all there is to know about the film.
Few movies are like that, the only other ones that come to mind are Star Wars and Jaws, both of which Steven Spielberg had a part of (he’s everywhere but here in this case). I mean, honestly think about it. If you haven’t seen this movie, did you know who the killer was? Did you know what the theme sounded like? What about the iconic mask, did you know what that looked like? Before I even sat down to see the movie all those years ago, I was well acquainted with it. I was already scared of Michael Myers (or, rather, the Shape) and got chills every time the theme played somewhere. It became almost a joke between my friends and I: We’d hum the theme song while stalking someone around the neighborhood.
Now, we became more rabid about it after seeing the movie (of course when night rolled around we stopped laughing and started looking under our beds). That’s the power of this movie. It has such a large impact on pop culture that it doesn’t matter if you’ve seen it or not. It instills fear in you before you see it, and reaffirms that fear long after you’re done with it.
Halloween is directed by John Carpenter and is written by Debra Hill and John Carpenter.
Like a beacon of hope in the world of independent horror, Halloween exploded into the scene to become one of the most successful horror movies to be made. In fact, it’s still one of the most successful independent films ever made as well. What’s remarkable is that it doesn’t feel that way.
It doesn’t feel like a low-budget horror film that reused the same props over and over (for instance, it’s the same batch of leaves used in every scene with leaves; after a take the whole cast and crew would round them all up and store them in bags for the next scene), or minimalized its script because it ran out of money during production. Instead, it feels like a sharp thriller that’s so tense you almost blackout from holding your breath. The effectiveness of that tension is strengthened by the lack of comedic relief, and where even the sex scenes are something that set you on edge.
And it doesn’t take long to gain the appreciation it deserves. After the opening scene many people were already pushed far over the edge from just how jarring and horrifying the film could be. It understands that not seeing is more powerful than seeing, but it uses that to its advantage as well. It equally shows you gruesome violence while alluding to it at the same time. This was the tell-tale sign that the film was helmed by a true master of horror, one who understood how to tell a genuinely scary story.
Like many films that are considered classics, there is a difficulty to finding something wrong with it. There’s no nostalgia blocking my judgement, just simple fact that this film set out to achieve something simple. It just wanted to scare you.
The most effective scares in this film come from the feeling of hopelessness and despair. I found myself tensing up the most when a character is trying to run from the Shape but simply cannot. From either a locked door or an injured leg, they try to escape. The camera work and editing (mixed with both the score and great performances) build the tension by showing just how hopeless the situation truly is. One such example would be when Laurie Strode attempts to run back to the house she was babysitting in with the Shape in hot pursuit. But he doesn’t run, he walks. That makes him all the more intimidating. He knows they can’t get away, so he doesn’t rush his kills. He meanders about with them, almost observing the life leaving their bodies or the will to survive dwindle away.
That’s how Carpenter made the boogeyman come to life. He created an antagonist so powerful and scary that they understand how powerful and scary they are. The Shape takes such intense pleasure in his kills that he can’t be stopped because his will to keep killing won’t let him die. If that makes sense?
So when Laurie is trapped in the closet or sitting on the stairs, there’s a fear rushing through the audience and the characters that tells us nowhere is safe. If he can get into the house, if he can break into the car, if he can vanish into a crowd, then there is no stopping the boogeyman.
And just like that, Halloween became the definitive scary movie.
With Donald Pleasence as Dr. Sam Loomis; Jaime Lee Curtis as Laurie Strode; Nancy Kyes as Annie Brackett; P.J. Soles as Lynda van der Klok; Charles Cyphers as Sheriff Leigh Brackett; Kyle Richards as Lindsey Wallace; and Brian Andrews as Tommy Doyle.
So if you like horror, thrillers, suspense, John Carpenter, super young Jaime Lee Curtis, a scary good time, or movies about the holiday Halloween, then this film is for you. If not, give it a try, you may end up liking it.
POSTMORTEM: SAVING PRIVATE RYAN
a review of the film ‘Saving Private Ryan’
Benjamin Kindel
Few directors appear in history as having made so many monumental films that easily become a part of American culture. And while there are quite a bit that have made a mark in the few films they have made, it appears that with everything Steven Spielberg touches, any new film of his becomes a landmark event. His career appears to not be slowing down, and it never really peaks or valleys, it just keeps getting better and better.
Some may argue that his better films come early on, this being one of the touching points in that argument. In this era of his career, he not only made Saving Private Ryan, but also Amistad, The Lost World: Jurassic Park, and Schindler’s List, all of which have not only been huge releases, but have been one numerous ‘best of’ lists.
Because of how prolific he is, Steven Spielberg is actually quite hard to write a review for. His films always have this extra sense of ‘human’ in them that make whatever situation feel more personal. They all have a dreamlike wonder to them, even War of the Worlds. And no matter how depressing the subject matter is, there’s always a certain wonder to seeing a Spielberg film.
Saving Private Ryan is directed by Steven Spielberg, and is written by Robert Rodat.
This film is a pure powerhouse of emotion. From the touching opening to the overwhelming Normandy Beach sequence to the sacrifice at the end, the film understands just how to play with your emotions. It even juggles them around like a circus performer with scenes that make you unsure who to root for.
The problem with most war movies is that they serve more of a propaganda agenda then a storytelling one. The more successful ones are the ones like Full Metal Jacket or Apocalypse Now, both of which didn’t take a ‘side’ to the war and told it like it was: a messy and violent conflict. With Saving Private Ryan, Spielberg attempts the same approach, but can’t break away from his American sensibilities. That doesn’t hold him back though, as he shows American’s doing some awful things to their prisoners. In this muddles grey territory, we find the most heart in the film.
People fighting for what they believe in, while trying to support their country in a war that was too horrible to comprehend. We see these developments happening, and they don’t always end up with good consequences either.
Spielberg has also constructed a movie that feels less like a cinematic experience and more like a realistic one. We start to panic during the fight sequences, and we start to feel true emotion as characters die. And he pays no attention to how big the name of the actor is, if he wants that character to have their legs blown apart, he’ll do it. In this way, we also forget that Vin Diesel and numerous others are in this film and start to see them as what they are: characters in a war film.
I’m not saying this is the perfect war film, but it’s damn near it. With an engaging story and multiple sub-plots to keep up with, this film never has a dull moment in it. That’s the case with many Spielberg films. He captivates you with little things and takes pride in it. Even when the soldiers are camped out in the French village for what feels like an eternity, there’s still heart and soul in that scene that distracts you from the true running length.
And while you may or may not be a fan of war movies, this one is definitely still a must-see. It stops feeling like a war movie after they storm the beach at Normandy and it starts to take on the persona of a drama with emphasis on family values. This type of story would feel awkward in any other director’s hands, but somehow, Spielberg found a way to make the war hyper-realistic for the big screen.
It’s hard reviewing a film of his because he spends so much time and effort making it work, just look at Postmortem: Jaws. I have a feeling that Spielberg will only continue to grow and evolve into the most legendary filmmaker of history. And that’s putting it lightly.
Tom Hanks is Captain Miller in quite an emotional role; Tom Sizemore is Sergeant Horvath; Edward Burns is Private Reiben; Barry Pepper is Private Jackson; Adam Goldberg is Private Mellish; Vin Diesel is Private Caparzo; Giovanni Ribisi is T-4 Medic Wade; with Jeremy Davies as Corporal Upham; and Matt Damon as the titular character Private Ryan.
So if you like war movies, action, adventure, suspense, heart, soul, Steven Spielberg, young Vin Diesel, epic stories, or films with sad endings, then this film is for you. If not, give it a try. You may just be won over.
Bigger with More Teeth: A Review of the Film ‘Jurassic World’
BIGGER WITH MORE TEETH
a review of the film ‘Jurassic World’
Benjamin Kindel
This review does contain spoilers
It has been a rough twenty years for InGen, the company behind the ill-fated ‘Jurassic Park’ island resort that fell into oblivion before opening day. In those years, however, they’ve made a comeback. The island resort is back and kicking, including not only dinosaurs on the dinosaur tour, but amusement park attractions and a waterpark. Things couldn’t be better.
Now, the lead-up to the movie is almost as troublesome as the events depicted within the film itself, as it went through numerous rewrites and the tragic loss of writer Michael Crichton. And just as Steven Spielberg was gearing up to give up hope, a new flame had been struck and the project was pushed through so many hoops at such an alarming rate that it was almost unbelievable.
Being released just a year after the ‘Jurassic Park: An IMAX 3D Experience’ re-release, this film could not have had better timing. But is it a return to the summer-fun of the original film? Or does it fall flat like Jurassic Park 3?
Jurassic World is directed by Colin Trevorrow, and is written by Rick Jaffa, Amanda Silver, Colin Trevorrow, and Derek Connolly, with a story by Rick Jaffa and Amanda Silver, and is based on characters created by Michael Crichton.
After growing up on the Jurassic Park film franchise, I must say that there was a high bar that this film needed to reach to be considered good. In fact, not only did it reach that bar but it raised it even further for future films in the franchise.
This is one of those great films that both acts as a ‘sequel/reboot’ to a franchise, in a similar fashion to TRON: Legacy or Star Trek, both of which were sequels and reboots, effectively starting over but carrying the story forwards. Taking place in real-time twenty years after the first film, the island is a huge success (despite the shrinking attendance). This is a playful thing they’ve done for the film, allowing us to be nostalgic to the original while leaving room to be appreciative of the new one.
And there is a lot to appreciate. First, it weaves a story of two children being pushed to the island to distract them of their parents oncoming divorce with the story of two old flames trying to stomach each other during a time of heightened stress. Then in comes the antagonist with his silly/stupid plan for militarizing the raptors. This film loves to be self-referential. You can tell that with how they mention the first film so often with t-shirts, posters, and even jabs between characters about how it didn’t go well the first time. But with Hoskins (the antagonist), we get a more meta reference as his goal was what the original script for Jurassic World was about: militarized raptors performing spy missions.
But all fourth-wall breaking aside, the film knows how to juggle character with plot. It effectively pushes both forwards like a man on a chess board moving his pieces around. The filmmakers know what strings to pull at what times to emote certain feelings (dread, fear, romance, comedy), but they also know when to stop the action and focus on something more character-centric.
That is what makes this film feel more developed than the last one: it understands there are characters on this island along with the dinosaurs. There has to be equal action to character development. We know who everyone is at the start and see their journey to the end, where they are stronger or more brave than they were.
But the film must also succeed on the suspense and action portions, and it does that considerably well too. It ramps up the action each time something exciting happens, so that when we arrive at the raptor/tyrannosaurus/idominous fight at the end, it’s huge and epic. But there are more intimate fight sequences too that work just as well. The film has all the right cards and plays them all at the right times, each one seemingly revealing a new twist.
The first time I saw this film, it was quite shocking. From the idominous reveal in the cage to the camouflage in the jungle, even to when Hoskins eventually bites the dust, the film is a shockingly effective thrill ride.
But the thing that irked me the most was how violent and brutal Zara’s death was. It was the center of controversy because of how torturous it was, and while this is a movie about dinosaurs who have no real empathy for that sort of thing and just kill everyone equally, it felt so out of place because it was the only truly violent death scene in the film, and it came to a character who honestly tried hard to do her job correctly.
Aside from that, the film is truly a spectacle to be marveled at. It followed its own logic of using the original formula, but to make it ‘bigger and with more teeth’. And that’s exactly what this film did: it payed homage to the original while adding more teeth and amping it up to a larger scale.
The film has Chris Pratt as Owen; Bryce Dallas Howard as Claire; Irrfan Khan as Masrani; Vincent D’Onofrio as Hoskins; Ty Simpkins and Nick Robinson as Gray and Zach; Jake Johnson as Lowery; Omar Sy as Barry; we see the return of BD Wong as Dr. Henry Wu; with Judy Greer playing Karen.
So if you like action, adventure, suspense, drama, dinosaurs, Steven Spielberg, Jurassic Park, Michael Crichton, summer fun, or just a great time, then this film is for you. If not, give it a try, you may end up enjoying it a lot!
Feelings with Feelings: A Review of the Film ‘Inside Out’
FEELINGS WITH FEELINGS
a review of the film ‘Inside Out’
Benjamin Kindel
Pixar has made, over the years, many films that are both acceptable for children and adults to watch. This is the grey area for animated features; they either focus too heavily on the younger audiences or not heavily enough. This particular focus can ruin the lasting impact of a film. As the audience grows, they find themselves less and less inclined to watch the film they grew up liking.
Studios are now becoming smart about their content, creating animated films that are timeless. Laika has certainly done that, starting with Coraline, and while Pixar always seems to be ahead of the curve, this time they’ve truly outdone themselves.
They’ve created a film that works more for the older audience, but also plays with the younger viewers too. They’ve created something that speaks to everyone in a remarkable way. In so many ways, Inside Out could quite possibly be the most important animated film to come out.
Inside Out is directed by Pete Docter and Ronnie Del Carmen, while being written by Pete Docter and Meg LeFauve, with an original story created by Docter and Del Carmen, and additional story material by Michael Arndt and Simon Rich.
Every time a Pixar movie comes out, it appears that its sole purpose is to make you cry. Think of the opening to Up, the ending to Toy Story 3, or just about anything in Finding Nemo. Each of those movies, and the others by the studio, draw focus to objects who gather feelings and learn to cope with whatever struggle they are dealt. This time, however, Pixar has made the ultimate Pixar movie: feelings with feelings.
The story centers around young Riley who isn’t adjusting to a new city and a new life. In fact, it seems like all of her fears are coming true and her life is falling apart around her. While following that story, we also follow what goes on inside of her in her head. There, we meet her emotions that drive the plot further and into the crazy realm of Riley’s inner-workings and (gasp) her imagination.
This childish approach works extremely well because it keeps the younger audiences tuned-in and paying attention, while the older audiences are picking up on the smaller things like grief and depression. And despite all the colors and goofy characters, this could be Pixar’s darkest film yet.
It goes to places no other Pixar film dared to, making it a bold attempt by the studio. And that attempt paid off, making not only a thoroughly enjoyable ride, but a film that teaches a lesson everybody should learn. Yes, there are tears you’ll shed along the way, and there are even more laughs, but when the film reaches the climax, that’s exactly when Pixar has you where they want you. They have your full attention and turn the stage over to the moral of the story.
Now, I’m not going to spoil it here or spell it out for you. I’m actually finding it hard to write this without giving too much of the plot away. It’s definitely fun and engaging, and with a completely original idea and concept, I think this is the best Pixar film to date.
There aren’t many flaws to the film, and that definitely also sets it apart from the rest of the crowd. I have a hard time watching animated films as they always feel too catered to younger audiences. There’s either too many fart or poop jokes, physical humor that falls flat, or any number of things that don’t strike my attention. But Inside Out bypasses all of those for a new routine, with one of my favorite bits being the interpretive dreams section of the film.
Overall, it’s a highly enjoyable film with a great multilayered story to follow along with. This film will have lasting power and could move to be the studio’s most popular film, narrowly edging out the likes of Finding Nemo and The Incredibles.
Amy Poehler is Joy; Phyllis Smith is Sadness; Bill Hader is Fear; Lewis Black is Anger; Mindy Kaling is Disgust; Richard Kind is Bing Bong (Reach for the stars Riley); with Kaitlyn Dias as Riley, Diane Lane as Mom, and Kyle MacLachlan as Dad.
So if you like Pixar, Walt Disney Pictures, animated films, comedies, dramas, Amy Poehler, or just having a nice time, then this film is for you. If not, then where are your emotions taking you?
Back to the Future: A Review of the Film ‘Terminator: Genisys’
BACK TO THE FUTURE
a review of the film ‘Terminator: Genisys’
Benjamin Kindel
This review does contain spoilers
It’s not new territory when a long-running franchise decides to ‘reboot’ itself by hitting a bit “restart” button that comes in the form of meshing together the old movies with the new future ones. Star Trek did that in 2009 (using the multi-verse theory in a clever way), the X-Men films did that in 2014 with Days of Future Past (effectively erasing all the terrible Wolverine prequel films).
So when Terminator decided to attempt the same thing, the whole world was waiting with anticipation in seeing just how it would unfold. There was a ton of hype leading up to it: series creator James Cameron said the new film was the best of the series, Arnold Schwarzenegger was returning in two roles. But then the first trailer came out and revealed the film’s big twist. Everything after that would not save this blockbuster film, and it’s a shame.
This film is a dirty pleasure to be had, but is it as good as people thought it could have been?
Terminator: Genisys is directed by Alan Taylor, and is written by Laeta Kalogridis, Patrick Lussier, while being based on characters by James Cameron and Gale Anne Hurd.
The idea is simple: return the series to its sci-fi action roots while bending around the space-time continuum. The plot opens up to the fateful day that Kyle Reese is sent back in time to protect Sarah Connor in the original film. But in arriving in the 1980s, things have gone awry. Someone else has sent a ‘guardian’ back to arrive before Reese and protect/train Sarah, so by the time Reese arrives, she’s already a military soldier destroying robotic terminators. In this way, history is rewritten.
But that starts to destroy the future: Reese and Sarah are supposed to fall in love while on the run, that’s how John Connor is born. But in this new reality, they never hookup and get funky, which would (going by Back to the Future logic) erase John Connor. If that were the case, then him coming back as a super-terminator to start Judgement Day wouldn’t be an issue because he’s kinda, well, dead.
That’s not the only flaw with the film, another would be the fact that we still don’t see Judgement Day occur. Not even in Terminator 2: Judgement Day do we see the fateful day the robots rise over humanity. One could argue that in Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines we do see Judgement Day happen, but in Terminator Salvation they talk about Judgement Day as a thing that’s still yet to happen. So in this film, with the altering of timelines and the introduction of a superpower and new Skynet, I thought we finally would get the chance to see that happen.
Instead, we see green fields and blue skies. Judgement Day has been cancelled and all terminators (and Skynet) have been destroyed. Which bums me out and ruins all future chances of seeing human annihilation.
And somewhere in this confusing blunder of a film is actually a great action story. While overall it fails to live up to even the weakest of the Terminator films, it still held my interest during a large majority of it all as the characters jumped in between timelines and realities. It wasn’t until the final Genisys fight that I began to question the logic in the film. If it had been longer and worked more on establishing the future of the series instead of showing off how ‘cool’ and ‘awesome’ the effects are, then the film could have survived the summer.
This film had massive potential, and I feel it was entirely lost somewhere in translation. That’s why it works as a guilty pleasure. I understand the faults and failings of it, but I see the hope somewhere. The future of the series is bright, but only if they take the more serious approach that made the first two films legendary. It’s not about the cheesy one-liners, or the half-naked people. It’s about the terrifying realization that the future could end at any moment because of a decision we’ve made.
Arnold Schwarzenegger returns as ‘the Guardian’/Terminator, a role he probably should retire from before they run out of excuses on why he ages despite not being human; Jason Clarke plays John Connor; Emilia Clarke plays Sarah Connor; Jai Courtney plays Kyle Reese; and J.K. Simmons plays O’Brien.
The cast works effectively, playing the hell out of the characters they’ve been casted as. They are what I remember most about the film, and I truly hope they stick around for the future films as they could be the new faces of the series.
So if you like action, adventure, thrillers, naked people, Matt Smith, time travel, the Terminator franchise, or the 1980s, this film is for you. If not, then you might want to sit this one out.
POSTMORTEM: THE GOONIES
a review of the film ‘The Goonies’
Benjamin Kindel
When thinking about the 1980s, dozens of films came out in that decade that have had a long and lasting impact on pop culture. And it seems as if these trailblazers were the start of it all, the root if you would. But not all of them are the base of the tree.
Contrary to belief, The Goonies borrows heavily from other films from the decade and before, and this isn’t in reference to the Superman or The Sea Hawk scenes. It’s in the subtler things such as how heavily they play on Raiders of the Lost Ark. But despite how much it borrows, it still manages to create a brand of its own.
The Goonies is directed by Richard Donner, and is written by Steven Spielberg and Chris Columbus.
The film plays out like most 1980s era films: it starts with an introduction to the villains of the film (which are as usual slapstick type gangsters), then continues with various introductions to the main cast. However, this time around we get both at the same time, cutting back and forth between our young heroes and the villains they’re sure to run into in the future. This helps us better grasp the world as a whole, and get some nice development out of the various characters we’ll be spending time with later down the line.
If this film does anything good, it’s that it develops characters quite nicely. It spends time with them, makes you understand why they do the things they do, and even better, we see them grow. At the start, they’re all just saplings being planted into the ground, and at the end they’ve undergone this great transformation into better people. They understand things they didn’t at the start, and they have a better appreciation for the lives they’ve been given.
It’s the kind of happy ending that one can always expect from an 80’s era film, but that’s not to say it’s a bad thing. It makes the journey worth the watch, as no matter how bad or disastrous it can become, there’s always a silver-lining at the end. Think The NeverEnding Story or The Princess Bride, both of which are products of their time.
But not matter how stereotypical this film becomes or how predictable one can argue it is, it is nothing short of a great time. It’s strong storytelling to bring an often adult (or rather more mature) story into a family setting. It’s something everyone can watch and take something away from. And in that way, the film has become timeless, able to exist in any era and still have profound effects on the viewer who watches it.
Not many films break that mold and become this higher power, but somehow, The Goonies has.
Some of the finer moments of the film aren’t when they are being chased through various booby-traps or attempting to defy death, but rather when they break down and show their vulnerable side. This happens many times, but the strongest is when they’re at the bottom of the well trying to make the decision on whether to press on and face certain death, or stop now and accept the fate they’ve been given. No matter how many times I’ve seen the film, this one scene is always my favorite as it shows us (the audience) that we can be Goonies too.
And Goonies never say die.
Sean Astin is Mikey; Josh Brolin (!) is Brand; Jeff Cohen is Chunk, but with how he’s aged it’s fair to say he’s actually Hunk; Corey Feldman is Mouth; Kerri Green is Andy; Martha Plimpton is Stef; Jonathan Ke Quan is Data; and John Matuszak is Sloth.
So if you like action, adventure, Steven Spielberg, mystery, suspense, the 1980s, Cyndi Lauper, and a swashbuckling good time, then this movie is definitely for you. If not, give it a try, you might just get won over by this gem of a film.
Back to Before: A Review of the Film ‘Insidious: Chapter Three’
BACK TO BEFORE
a review of the film ‘Insidious: Chapter Three’
Benjamin Kindel
This review does include spoilers
I’m not going to lie, Insidious is still (in my opinion) one of the scariest movies I have seen. The pure shock of it all mixed with the elaborate story of a child being haunted while in a coma affected me long after the film had ended.
See, I rate horror movies on two different systems: The first would be how scared I was during the running time of the film. Many films only seem to scare me during the film, but once I leave, I’m unaffected. However, the truly good ones, the ones that stand out from the crowd, are the ones that rank highly on my second system. That one would be how long the film lingers after it is done. Drag Me to Hell (2010) was scary only during the time I was in the theater. The Possession (2012) stayed with me after I had gone home and for a few days after.
In that time, the thoughts of the story and hauntings then amplifies and warps, taking what could be a simple and small moment in the film and blows it out of proportion. For Insidious, it was when Dalton opens the door at the end of the film and sees the Lipstick Face Demon on the ceiling. I had a hard time opening doors for a long time after that.
When the second film entered theaters, I jumped right on the chance to see it, and (despite my somewhat shaky review), I thought it was a solid entry in the Insidious book that keeps growing and expanding. Now comes the third chapter, which is hailed as the “scariest film” in the series.
Is it? Is it really?
Insidious: Chapter Three is written and directed by Leigh Whannell.
So? Is the film scary? Yes, it is considerably scary. But it fails to reach the unrelenting terror and tension the first film succeeded at so flawlessly. Instead, it opts for more ‘quick’ scares that spook you then move right along as if they’re passing you in a crowd. Unfortunately, though, the film has no lasting impact. Once I left the theater, I was back to my normal routine. Sure, I had continued to think about the plot and characters and which moments made me jump, but I had no paranoia that any of the hauntings would happen to me.
This is the true downfall of the film. It fails to create a lasting impression on the audience once it finishes. It tried very hard to distinguish itself as a prequel that it forgot to do much more past that. And while I do appreciate the backstory and history presented, I would rather have the genuine scares that made me love the first film so much.
However, one thing that works so well with the film is the story being told. It weaves in and out of the ‘Further’ mythology that started to become developed in Chapter Two, creating the foundation for further films to be worked upon in the larger world of Insidious. Sure, we never saw what became of the Lipstick Face Demon in Chapter Two, but my current thought process is that the world must be developed first for a better appreciation for what happens next.
So that means we’ll keep taking steps backwards until we can move forwards. Doing a prequel as the third film in a series means that there is less danger for the previously established characters (namely Elise, Tucker, and Specs), but it introduces the idea that something awful can happen to the new characters in the series.
That is something the film never quite does, and it’s a true shame. The slogan is “This is how you die.” And in the first film, Elise talks about previous things that have haunted her and have made her the person she is today – the fighter who protects the world of the living from that of the dead. Chapter Three had the perfect setup for her to face a terrible event: the death of a client. The cards were all aligned properly, the situation was thrusting forwards, and …. nobody dies.
Imagine: Quinn doesn’t make it out of the bedroom alive. The Man Who Can’t Breathe wins and takes her soul forever and that is all due to Elise’s memory of her husband. She failed and caused an innocent young girl to perish, and a father to lose his daughter. That would be the catalyst for Elise to fight even harder in Insidious, and eventually go to battle in the upcoming Insidious film where she faces the Lipstick Face Demon. But the film never went there. Instead, it opted for the ‘happy’ ending where everyone gets what they want and live happily ever after (until she dies in Insidious).
Apart from that fault in the film, I also fail to see the importance of a younger brother for Quinn. He honestly only has one scene, and it’s where he introduces the family to Tucker and Specs. Apart from that, he’s either locked in his room or at a friend’s house missing out on all the plot happening. He’s underdeveloped and honestly only exists to add some ‘weight’ to the family. (a father with one child is not as interesting as a father with two children).
I’m hoping those issues fade away with the next installment of the series, because I honestly do like the trilogy how it presently is. But if the films become any sappier and filled with cheer, then the horror would be lost completely on what could be one of the strongest modern horror film series to date.
Overall, it is still a great film that’s worth the watch, especially for some of the more demented sequences involving the apartment complex and the ‘slavery’ imagery in the Further. For not being the scariest film in the series, it certainly has the most disturbing moments that I hope are expanded on more in the next chapter. A strong first film from Leigh Whannell, but I do hope he takes bigger risks with character and plot to deliver a stronger shock to the audience.
Dermot Mulroney is Sean Brenner, whose character becomes more bearable as the film wears on; Stefanie Scott is perfectly cast as Quinn Brenner, who juggles being a demented crazy person with a young woman struggling to find sanity in a completely insane situation; Angus Sampson and Leigh Whannell play Tucker and Specs respectively, with the right amount of stupid humor to relieve tension, but they also know how to play up the suspense when needed; Lin Shaye returns to the world of the living as Elise Rainier, the hero the series needs; and finally we have Michael Reid MacKay as The Man Who Can’t Breathe, continuing the long line of oddly named villains.
So if you like horror, mystery, suspense, James Wan cameos, spooky creatures, scary movies, prequels, or paranormal investigating, then this film is for you. If not, you might want to give the first film a try, then work your way up. You’ll thank me later and be less confused.
gracieabrams
2087
romaincrisis
origamiaround
izzy806
tangentwithtanner
jimmyeatworldofficial
germansingergirl