Knee-jerk review: "Smile 2"

1. Too long perhaps, but fantastic.
2. You might chuckle at this notion, but actress Naomi Scott knocks her performance out of the park.  It's practically award-caliber.
3. The first Smile (2022) was a clever rip-off of scary "cursed chain" movies like The Ring and It Follows.  As they say, audiences want the same but different.  Smile checked those boxes.
4. Like so many high-concept horror movies, however, Smile didn't really know where to go or how to wrap it all up.  The explanation for the creepy, inexplicable weirdness is almost always a letdown.
5. The sequel is a huge improvement on every level... but the ending is still kind of a mess.
6. We had to go to Reddit discussion boards to figure out what exactly happened in the last 15 minutes or so.  What we found there makes sense.  We somehow overlooked a pretty clear explanation of the movie's internal logic.
7. Jump scares on top of jump scares.  You may or may not like that sort of thing.  They are cheats, yes, but they're also very effective.
8. The movie is so layered and well-developed that if you took the scary stuff out, you'd still have a very compelling drama about a tortured, recovering addict pop star unwisely trying to make a huge stadium tour comeback she's not ready for.  The pressure she feels from her icy stage mom, the tour's pushy financier, all of those hundreds of people depending on her tour for their jobs, is palpable.
9. We don't get out much, but it's been a while since we saw a movie this gory.
10. The peppy, obsequious personal assistant - who provided no value or skill beyond running around fetching things - was a fun character to hate.
11. Writer-director Parker Finn packs in a lot of glossy style.  Horror movies don't usually look this good.
12. The scene at the fancy socialite charity is something else.  Ditto the car crash at the end.  And the backup dancers in her apartment.  And the sequence with the stalker fan.  If you can string together four or five truly memorable scenes, you've pretty much done your job as a filmmaker.
13. Despite this, the 15-year-old Fry and her friend fell asleep for, like, 30 minutes during the first hour.  How is this possible?  We know why.  Because they go to the movies in slippers and pajamas and wrap themselves in fleece blankets like they're at a sleepover.
14. We have mixed feelings about movies like this that blur the line between fantasy and reality so that the hero (and the audience) can't ever be sure what's real.  But it mostly works here so we will allow it.
15. Naomi Scott.  Wow.

Tweet

Knee-jerk review: "Alien Romulus"

1. Without a doubt, it's the best one since 1986's Aliens.  And we liked Alien Resurrection (1997) more than most.
2. It's the ninth movie in the Alien franchise - if you count the Alien Versus Predator movies - so along the way, as is so often the case now with sci-fi, the mythology and backstory behind both the origin of the alien species and also the machinations of the evil Weyland-Yutani company has gotten way complicated and shaggy.
3. It's a lot to keep track of, especially at the end when the story connects to the self-important, overwrought Prometheus and Covenant sequels.  The movies probably worked better when Weyland-Yutani was a powerful faceless behemoth.  The air of mystery helped.  The more we learn about what they're trying to do with the aliens, the more ho-hum familiar they seem.
4. Cailee Spaeny is decent, if a little dull, in the lead.  The same, frankly, goes for the whole cast.  Just fine all around, but no one really pops.
5. Spaeny at times gives off Natalie Portman vibes.
6. Spoiler alert: the decision to use CGI technology to make 1979-era Ian Holm one of the supporting characters is a huge misfire.  We can understand the desperation to do as much as possible to connect this movie to the other Alien movies, but it's a gimmick that is not needed here.  The movie crackles just fine on its own.
7. Aside from the creep factor of animating a dead actor and creating a performance from scratch without his involvement, the CGI that reproduces Holm just... isn't good.  Big time uncanny valley. 
8. And from a story point of view, Holm isn't playing the character he played in Alien.  This is a different character with a different name.  But they're both androids, so the suggestion seems to be that there's this whole line of androids out there that all look like Ian Holm.  That sort of makes sense, but it's way too distracting and needlessly meta for it's own good.
9. Script-wise, the opening ten minutes are lean and mean.  We meet the main character, see her terrible predicament, then watch her grapple with a crazy, dangerous choice that might be her only way out.
10. The "big bad" alien at the very end is wild.  The filmmakers really went for it.
11. The Swiss-watch plotting of James Cameron's Aliens is second to none.  Anything that can go wrong for our heroes goes horribly wrong, again and again, but always in completely plausible ways.  Nothing feels forced.  Romulus has that same sort of feel.  Nothing is easy for the characters.
12. Zero gravity clouds of acid alien blood?  Check.
13. There's plenty of scary action set pieces here, which is really all any of us need in a sci-fi horror movie.

Tweet

Knee-jerk review: "Trap"

1. Fifteen-year-old Lil Fry assessment of Josh Hartnett: "He's so fine."
2. The first 45 minutes or so unfold about as we expected based on the trailer.  Then the story takes an unexpected detour - a variation perhaps on that trademark M. Night twist? - that turns everything around.  One critic called it a Psycho-style shifting of protagonists, a clever observation we wish we'd been clever enough to have made.
3. It's a lot of fun so long as you don't peer too closely at the creaky wheels of the plot, especially in the way these supposedly crack FBI profilers make some really dumb choices that benefit the villain.  (No spoiler here if you've seen the trailer, but if the idea is to set a surprise trap at a pop concert for a notorious murderer, it makes no sense to stack the arena with cops before the show even starts.  Why risk tipping off your prey?  Bring in the SWAT after the house lights go down.)
4. The movie may not work as well as it thinks, but there's no denying the audaciousness of a major studio movie building a premise around a vicious and insane serial killer, played by a famous Hollywood heartthrob no less, living a double life as a normal suburban dad.
5. The filmmakers did not skimp on trying to accurately portray the huge pomp and circumstance of a Taylor Swift-style concert.  We've seen countless low-budget versions of this sort of thing that never ring true.  Here it feels genuine.
6. Will a secret password really help explain away an unauthorized visit to an arena roof?
7. Alison Pill is always good, but to us the real gem here is Ariel Donoghue who plays Hartnett's daughter with heartbreaking earnestness.
8. Sure can't hurt your music career if dad is a famous movie director.
9. Bonus points for a subplot involving the casual - and sometimes unintentional - cruelty among teenage girls.  The struggle is real.

Ranking M. Night's movies (not counting his first two, pre-Sixth Sense films)
1. The Sixth Sense (1999), obviously
2. Unbreakable (2000) still feels somehow underrated
3. The Visit (2015)
4. Old (2021) is a guilty pleasure for us
5. Signs (2002), despite a very cheesy ending
6. Split (2016)
7. Trap (2024)
8. Knock at the Cabin (2023)
9. The Village (2004)
10 (tied). Lady in the Water (2006) and The Happening (2008) are total misfires

We never saw The Last Airbender, After Earth, or Glass.

Tweet

Knee-jerk review: "Longlegs"

1. The unsettled creepiness of the trailer for this movie did the trick.
2. Nicolas Cage is over the top as usual.  They hid his face - heavy with strange prosthetics - from all the promotional material, which certainly upped the curiosity factor, but what we imagined turned out to be far scarier than what he really looks like.
3. Definite echoes of Silence of the Lambs, of course (newbie female FBI agent brought in on a disturbing serial killer case) but if you're going to steal, steal from the best.
4. The tone of the whole thing just feels... off-kilter.  Eerie.  A low hum of dread. 
5. That doesn't mean the filmmakers are above employing a few traditional jump scares accompanied by a screeching music cue.
6. Lot of long takes and wide angles that makes one anticipate something's about to happen.  Sometimes it does, sometimes it's a fake out.
7. In other words, it's the kind of movie where a character sits alone at night researching scary things (our heroine apparently can't work on this case during the daytime) and the camera's pointed at them in a way that you can see an open window or door behind them.  So you're crawling out of your skin expecting something awful to appear in that window or door.
8. We've never seen Blair Underwood this gritty and terse.  Isn't he usually playing some variation of the suave charmer?
9. Things get stranger and stranger as the story unfolds.  The final reveal about what's exactly been happening with these serial murders is completely nuts.  But that's usually the case with these kinds of things (see also: most of Stephen King's novels).  The set-up is so weird and scary that there's no way to plausibly explain it all away.
10. We discussed the ending with the 15-year-old Fry on the drive home, trying to puzzle out some of the character choices at the end.  We thought we understood the rules of what was happening.  But then maybe not?  We finally decided this sort of movie is about mood more than plot.
11. For us, there's nothing scarier than someone knocking on your front door in the middle of the night.
12. The odd "longlegs" name we think is explained in a quick line of dialogue during the first encounter with the Longlegs character, but we didn't make it out.  He says something about how he didn't bring his long legs.  What the heck.  (UPDATE: apparently, the gag is that he's towering over the little girl he's talking to - using long legs - so he squats down to better communicate.)
13. The film geek in us 100% loved the gimmick of using a square aspect ratio to signal the flashbacks.
14. Obligatory scene of characters exploring a dark, scary place with flashlights.
15. A couple of allusions to T. Rex's "Bang a Gong."  No idea why.
16. If nothing else, it was a memorable experience.

Tweet

Knee-jerk review: "Twisters"

1. Traditional summer popcorn movie.  Whether or not you take that as a recommendation is up to you.
2. Glen Powell is a movie star.  Full stop.  Effortless charm, charisma, and cool.
3. A big sequence midway through depends on the audience believing that a small town in Oklahoma - surely as weather-aware as they come - can be caught totally off guard by the sudden arrival of a tornado.  Textbook definition of "suspension of disbelief."  Tornados don't appear out of nowhere like a boogeyman in the woods.  Forecasters usually know 2 or 3 days in advance that trouble is brewing.
4. We were unfamiliar with director Lee Isaac Chung, but this movie is as polished and slick as they come.
5. Never hide from a tornado under a highway overpass.
6. "If you feel it, chase it!"  If you think about it, that makes no sense.  Better is a line delivered later: "If you're afraid of it, ride it."
7. Is this ragtag community of nomadic screwball tornado chasers really a thing?
8. The most interesting element of the movie - unscrupulous land barons swooping in to take advantage of raw emotions to buy destroyed property at a discount - is so glossed over if you blink you might miss it.
9. Every amateur scientist surely has a giant laboratory in a rural barn, right?
10. Is it me or does Daisy Edgar-Jones look like should could be Anne Hathaway's little sister?
11. We remember seeing the original Twister back in the summer 1996 and liking it a lot, but aside from the crazy ending where (overrated) Helen Hunt and (always underrated) Bill Paxton are inexplicably able to ride out a tornado by hanging on to a standpipe, we don't recall many details.  And, of course, also the flying cow.  Oh, and also the terrifying prologue where Helen's dad gets sucked out of the storm cellar.
12. As a kid, we visited a relative's farm in rural Texas many times that had a storm cellar.  Like something out of The Wizard of Oz, just this set of metal doors set into ground right in the middle of the yard with a little ventilation pipe sticking up.
13. Are there really meteorologists who can just look at the clouds and figure it all out?
14. Some online chatter about whether or Twisters should have featured a character from Twister to make it an official, traditional sequel.  Not necessary.  It's not like these movies are offering some complex narrative tapestry.  (The metal Dorothy gizmos from Twister are featured.)
15. In sum, if you're looking for a movie with lots of tornados causing lots of damage, this is that movie.

Tweet

Knee-jerk review: Netflix's "Beverly Hills Cop: Axel F"

1. Historically, the film snob cinepile is us has avoided commenting on streaming movies.  The local multiplex is where "real" movies belong.  But we're making an exception here.  We get why Netflix would want this sequel, but we can't help but wonder what the box office might have been if it had gone into theaters this July 4 weekend.
2. We were probably too young (12) to see the original Beverly Hills Cop, which was a pretty hard R, despite the humor: bloody violence (the cold-blooded execution of Axel's buddy that kicks the whole movie off was particularly shocking to a young Cheese Fry), extreme profanity, and as a final kicker, a lengthy scene in a strip club.
3. In many ways, the filmmakers have created an 80s action comedy in 2024.  It's all stunts and fights and jokes and cool moments with the barest thread of a plot to string everything together.  They have our respect.
4. Eddie Murphy, of course, has effortless charm and presence.  What has he been doing with himself all these many years?  A quick look at IMDB tells us he's mostly been toiling in streaming titles aside from his work as Donkey in the Shrek movies.  His last theatrical movie may have been Tower Heist all the way back in 2011, which was a pretty good caper movie if you haven't seen it.
5. Aside from Bob Seger's "Shakedown" and Brigitte Neilsen, we have zero recollection of what happened in 1987's Beverly Hills Cop 2.
6. We really didn't fully understand all of the convoluted plot nonsense here with drug smuggling and cargo trucks and nefarious activity at dark, seedy shipping docks.  It's not an 80s cop movie without nefarious activity at dark, seedy shipping docks.  But the mechanics of the plot aren't really what's important in a movie like this.  Everyone wants the Macguffin SD card that will prove the bad guys are bad and the good guys are good.  How and why wasn't completely clear.  But we went with it.
7. Kevin Bacon is in 100% mustache-twirling villain mode.  It suits him.  This is no spoiler.  As soon as he shows up, you'll know he's the Big Bad.  This isn't a movie of subtlety.
8. It's not a Beverly Hills Cop movie unless Axel has to bullshit his way into some exclusive location.  Good stuff.
9. While we appreciate bringing back Billy Rosewood and John Taggart, the actors playing them show their age (Judge Reinhold is 67, John Ashton is 76) in a way that unexpectedly made us face our own mortality.
10. This movie didn't really require a dramatic throughline, but the business with Axel trying to reconcile with his very estranged daughter definitely helped add substance.  Bonus points for really making it seem like their split was Axel's fault.
11. We suppose it was inevitable to bring back Bronson Pinchot's Serge character.  We honestly could have done without.
12. We remember ever less about 1994's Beverly Hills Cop III aside from the fact that it for some reason ended in an amusement park.  Not sure we even saw it in a theater. 
13. It's almost distracting how many different ways the movie arranges and rearranges and orchestrates the famous "Axel F" theme. 
14. Gold star for a pretty solid - and brutal - Beverly Hills street shootout, but we have deduct points for staging the climax in a fancy mansion that is a totally ripoff of the original movie's ending.
15. Way, way more fun than we were expecting.

Tweet

Knee-jerk review: "A Quiet Place: Day One"

1. It's not exactly what the trailer sold. The question is whether that's a good thing or a bad thing.
2. Rather than an apocalyptic sci-fi horror movie with chases and jump scares, which is what we were expecting (people-eating aliens attack Manhattan!), it's more of a moody character piece about two lost souls finding each other in a time of tragedy (a dying woman finds a reason to live!).  It's not bad for what it ends up being... but it's not the traditional horror movie audiences might be expecting.
3. Even so, there are effective sequences of what might happen if all of Manhattan had to be cut off from the rest of the world.  And the aliens do attack our human heroes more than once, so that box does get checked.
4. We've never encountered a cat that obedient or that interested in helping/paying attention to humans.
5. Djimon Hounsou is always fascinating , no matter what he does.  Apparently, he's reprising his voiceover role from the second movie.
6. We're just not sure if these monsters can sustain a franchise.  Characters try hard to be quiet, then a character makes a noise, then monsters attack.  Is that enough? 
7. The first movie, of course, was top-notch on every level.  A modern classic.
8. There's still something chilling about a New York City scene involving an explosion that covers everyone in white ash.
9. Whatever weirdness was happening in that construction site with the aliens and the eggs and whatnot, it's surely laying the groundwork for A Quiet Place: Week One.

10. Wikipedia tells us that Patsy's Pizza is a real place.  
11. Is the presence of a clickwheel iPod suggesting an early 2000s setting?  We're too lazy to work out the timeline of the original movie to estimate when the original attack was supposed to have happened.  Cool detail, though.

Tweet

Potentially Better Ideas for a "Star Wars" TV Show

We don't hate "The Acolyte," the new Star Wars show that's running now on Disney+.  But we're not exactly excited by it, either.  It's... perfectly fine.  We suspect most fans will admit that only "The Mandalorian" (first season) and "Andor" have truly delivered the goods.  More often, the shows have ranged from "meh" ("Obi-Wan Kenobi") to embarrassing ("The Book of Boba Fett").  We would argue that part of the problem is that Star Wars producers and filmmakers mistakenly assume that the only interesting thing about Star Wars is the Force and the Jedi.  Ugly truth: we barely tolerated the goofy mysticism and pseudo-religious doublespeak of the Force in The Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi.

We've proposed this sort of thing in passing before, but now we want to devote a full blog post to it.  Why not transplant traditional TV genres that have proven the test of time into the Star Wars universe?  Don't dismiss this as a joke.  We are 100% serious.  Best of all, these premises will limit Jedi characters and Force usage to limited guest star moments in very special episodes.  And another thing: no more serialized seasons that drag out simple storylines across endless episodes.  Let's get back to the old school stand-alone episodes of yore.

* Blue collar workplace dramedy in an X-wing mechanic shop
* "Law and Order"-style police procedural in Cloud City (we thought "Rangers of the New Republic" might follow this idea before star Gina Carano went off the rails and the show got cancelled)
* Medical drama on the Death Star
* 20-something coming of age romantic comedy in the Rebel base on Hoth
* "Yellowstone"-style family melodrama on an Imperial Star Destroyer
* "West Wing" or "Game of Thrones"-style political intrigue in the Galactic Senate
* Underworld crime thriller set in that Mos Eisley cantina

You're welcome, Disney.

Tweet

1990s Cultural Signifiers

We've read a few books by Chuck Klosterman (Sex, Drugs, and Cocoa Puffs and Chuck Klosterman IV).  He's an interesting author.  He reminds us of that friend we've all had who - often over drinks at a too-hip bar that they, of course, suggested - seems way smarter and erudite than the menial dead-end job they always seem to be working.  Klosterman has an opinion about everything and states those opinions with steely conviction, but his sentences can be so unwieldy and pretzel-twisty that we often feel like he's talking over our head.  And so we have no choice but to nod sagely as if we agree lest we admit we're rubes who can't follow him.  That said, it's a rare thing indeed to find an author who's so clearly thought this long and hard and deep about a subject that might seem trivial to other historians and essayists: pop culture.

In his book The Nineties Klosterman notes that marking decades can't be done on the calendar - they should be bookended through how the culture perceives that decade.  He argues that the 1990s started with the fall of the Berlin Wall in November 1989 (although he suggests that the 80s vibe may not have truly faded until 1991 or so) and ended with the September 11 attacks in 2001.  He further suggests that the Bush-Gore election in 2000 and that first year of the Bush presidency in 2001 were essentially an extension 1990s "so what?" ambivalence.  Times were pretty good and life was dull, the internet and smartphones hadn't yet turned everything upside down.

More interesting, though, is the idea Klosterman threads through the book that there will always be a disconnect between how you remember something happening and how it really was when it was actually happening.  That is, when you look back at the more dramatic turns of history from the vantage point of the present day, it can be easy to wonder how could that have possibly happened when at the time what happened seemed perfectly logical and wholly unsurprising.

Aside from all of this fancy philosophizing about the 1990s, why they were the way they were, and how we now remember them, we found pleasure simply following Klosterman as he wound his way through the decade ruminating on a number of people, places, and things that we'd forgotten about (or almost forgotten about).  We experienced a great many fizzy and nostalgic "oh yeah! we remember that!" moments. 

Here's a list of 1990s signifiers in no particular order.

* Political correctness
* Alanis Morrissette's Jagged Little Pill
* Clarence Thomas' 1991 Supreme Court confirmation
* Reality Bites
* Prozac Nation
* Grunge
* Ross Perot running for president
* The Gulf War - broadcast live on CNN
* Quentin Tarantino and Pulp Fiction
* Star 69
* Windows 95
* Michael Jordan playing baseball
* Zima
* Dolly the cloned sheep
* Biosphere 2
* MTV's "The Real World"
* The Matrix
* Oprah Winfrey
* Titanic
* The all-purple "alternative" adjective
* The Blair Witch Project
* Eminem
* "The X Files"
* Generation X
* The long cardboard boxes CD used to come in
* George H.W. Bush
* The Unabomber
* Broadway's Rent
* 70s nostalgia ("That 70s Show," Dazed and Confused)
* Napster
* The rise of the internet (AOL and dial-up modems)
* Kurt Cobain suicide
* The Clinton-Lewinsky scandal and impeachment
* Pauly Shore
* Jurassic Park
* "Achy Breaky Heart"
* Oklahoma City bombing
* Rodney King video
* Falling Down
* The Mark McGwire/Sammy Sosa home run chase in 1998
* Y2K hysteria
* VHS tapes and Blockbuster Video
* Nirvana's Nevermind
* Tiger Woods
* The OJ murder trial
* American Beauty
* NBC's Thursday night "Must See TV" lineup
* The Columbine school shooting
* The Matrix
* The word "queer"
* Kids
* 1994 baseball strike and cancelled World Series

A word about that cover photo.  We had that clear Princess-style phone in our college bedroom.

Tweet

Knee-jerk review: "The Fall Guy"

1. What a mess.
2. There's a couple of mildly amusing twists at the end (that we really should have seen coming), but overall we pretty much hated it.  Constantly rolling our eyes and checking our watch.  We thought it might never end.
3. And then the 12-year-old looked at us as the credits rolled - eyes sparkling - "That was really good."  We're such a grumpy ogre.
4. Pretty much every element of the movie felt misguided and/or inept.
5. What worked was Ryan Gosling's charm as he fumbled through the mystery plot.  The movie toyed with a "fish out of water" vibe as this kind of goofy Hollywood stunt man wandered into a pretty dark criminal underworld.  But the movie never really committed to it.  Instead, we kept having to go back to the romance subplot and the movie set where Emily Blunt was directing a big action movie.  That was a big problem because...
6. The scenes with Blunt were deadly, dragging everything to a dead stop.  We'd have never guessed she could be this dull and unlikable.  At times we were wondering why Gosling had any interest in her.  There's one especially awkward sequence where she cruelly tortures and humiliates him on the set in front of everyone just to get back at him for some pretty typical bad-boyfriend-type behavior.
7. It some ways The Fall Guy seemed to want to be a romantic comedy as these two estranged lovers figured out how to get back together.  But for that to work you need laughs.  All of those endlessly talky scenes with Gosling and Blunt were completely humorless.  Those moments played more like an overcooked Lifetime drama, totally out of whack with the screwball lunacy of the action scenes.
8. There's also a weird moment when Gosling shows he can fight, but it's completely undercut because he'd just been drugged by the bad guys and so the movie adds in this weird "I'm hallucinating!" animation stuff as it's happening so we weren't sure if he was really this good at fighting (it could have been funny if the stunt guy didn't know how to really fight) or if he was just imagining it.  This is a perfect example of how the movie likes to go for the fun gag at the expense of a clear and coherent story.
9. Like we said.  A mess. 
10. Then there's this painfully convoluted bit where the plot of the movie Blunt's making has parallels to what really happened with Blunt and Gosling's characters (did Blunt's character write the script?).  It doesn't work at all, but they keep going back to it and using the movie plot to work out their own romance. Clearly, the filmmakers think this element is very clever.  
11. All they really kept from the old 1980s TV show was the name Colt Seavers (which is pretty badass), his big pickup truck, his stunt man job, and the theme song.
12. We saw the negative reviews.  But we went anyway.  A lot of critics really don't like director David Leitch (who used to be a stunt man), but we thought 2017's Atomic Blonde and 2022's Bullet Train were a lot of fun.  The issue may be that he knows how to handle hard-boiled action (Atomic Blonde) and/or snarky action (Bullet Train) but is still figuring out more "realistic" romantic elements.
13. We don't want to get too inside baseball, but most of the Hollywood stuff felt completely phony and forced on multiple levels.  Most glaring: in the middle of a multi-million dollar action movie production, the director and the crew unwind with drinks at a karaoke bar?  It's not even dark outside when they go.  Another example: the swanky hotel suite where the lead actor is staying is full of props and posters from his past movies.  So he had all of that shipped to Australia for a three-month shoot?  Little things like that can make one go crazy.
14. Bonus points for the Lee Majors cameo at the end.  We didn't even recognize Heather Thomas in her cameo in the same scene.
15. It's hard to fathom that all of the talented filmmakers and seasoned studio executives saw how this movie was shaping up and didn't step in to fix it.  Or maybe this is the improved version of the original idea?
16. Avoid.

Tweet