Change Your Image
sgordon2011
Reviews
Jurassic World (2015)
I Hate This Movie
Firstly, let's establish that the entire reason this movie currently exists is for Spielberg to continue making gobs of money.
Secondly, let's also establish that the director is waaay out of his depth on this one. Having helmed "Safety Not Guaranteed" (which is a solid little indie romcom that I enjoy) it's clear that promoting him so drastically in budget, scale, and material is not something that should have been green lit. But here we are.
This movie relies almost entirely on the nostalgic goodwill of the audience. I'm sure many of the adults watching grew up adoring Jurassic Park and are eager to share that thrill and enjoyment with their own kids with the new franchise. However, so much of the heart and soul of Jurassic Park lies in Spielberg's deft balance of action sequences and emotion. Jurassic World has absolutely none of that as it handles each new sequence with a ham fist. There are glimmers, of course, like the slaughtering of the brachiosaurus at the hands of the new mutant dinosaur, but just as quickly as it appears, it's gone again.
I will admit, I was taken in at moments, my mind drifting into excitement at the discovery of the original park, the revving of those original Jeep engines, the concept of having a raptor as a really intense, really cool dog... I found these moments enjoyable, but none of it has anything to do with the reason the original story took place in the first place-that man should not play God. Clearly no one listened because Spielberg and Co continue to beat a dead horse because "dinosaurs are cool" and apparently that's all anyone expects from this franchise.
The original is first and foremost science fiction, with the happy opportunity of being directed by the godfather of the summer blockbuster; It falls into the pleasant position of being excellent at both. However, Jurassic World is just a Frankenstein's Monster dressed in a vintage Jurassic Park t-shirt asking you to love it as it's slowly strangling you to death.
Wonder Woman 1984 (2020)
Solid Entry into the Wonder Woman Universe
This movie is attempting to be a lot of things, some of which it does well and some of which it doesn't. The emotional arcs of the characters? Solid. The action sequences? Well, oddly, they feel out of place and disjointed from the rest of the film; almost like they were chucked in there to remind us (the audience) that we were watching a superhero movie...
Homages to past iterations of Wonder Woman? Got it. Well done. Any visible connection to the rest of the DC Universe? Not so much. But is that connection even necessary? I'd argue that DC hasn't shown itself to care much about building a cohesive universe before, so why should I expect that now? It fits well as a second story to the first Wonder Woman, so I'm satisfied with that.
We can certainly get into the political commentary and the pros and cons of that as well. One can argue that such blatant messaging doesn't belong in a film like WW84, but my question is why not?
Coastal Elites (2020)
Hilarious
So I have enjoyed this HBO special in two capacities:
1. It is a pungent take on the frustration in America right now, in 2020. It's well written and well acted. It feels very much of the time and I am grateful that it exists.
2. Looking at the reviews on here of Trump's delicate, special, little snowflakes absolutely raging at the fact that they have not broken the creative American spirit is absolutely, side-splittingly, hilariously perfect.
Betty (2020)
It's Not Skate Kitchen
I saw Skate Kitchen at Sundance back in 2018. The movie has a lot of slow build, to the point that it almost seems boring. But then suddenly, after all the build up, you get these fantastic shots of the girls just skating and it really captured the essence of these girls. There was pretty minimal narrative in the film, which was intentional, focusing more on the girls and their friendship rather than huge amounts of drama.
That said, I'm not sure it works as well in a narrative format. I see a lot of the reviews listing the main reason they don't like the show is the fact that the acting isn't good. I can't speak for the rest of the cast, but the ones from Skate Kitchen are definitely NOT actors. Moselle literally found the girl playing Camille and a couple of the other girls on the subway and asked if she could follow them around. They're not acting really, and that's the point. At least, that was the point in Skate Kitchen. I feel the narrative aspect of the TV show loses a lot of the improvisational aspects of the girls just hanging out and being themselves.
Essentially I feel like the show loses a lot of the heart that made Skate Kitchen so charming. But it's not a bad show in and of itself.
Booksmart (2019)
It's exactly what it's supposed to be.
This movie hits all the marks for a solid teen comedy. The mistake people seem to be making is comparing it to Superbad. It's definitely NOT that. If you go in expecting the teen version of a Judd Apatow movie, you're not going to get that. It's much more fitting in the vein of John Hughes, but for 2019.
Also this movie is very specifically targeted at young Millennials and Gen Zers. If you don't get it, that's probably why. It's not a film for everybody, and that's fine.
Olivia Wilde's directorial debut is extremely solid. Her tone is great. The performances she gets from the young actors is great.
Yeah, it's a solid movie and I'd definitely watch it again.
A Wrinkle in Time (2018)
Not great, but also not as terrible as they'd let you think
So let's get the good stuff out there: the visuals are pretty great. I loved the costumes of the Mrses, Nobody, and I dug Zach Galifianakis as Happy Balance. I liked the diversity of the cast, as it didn't seem to make much a difference either way, which is refreshing. I thought much of the cinematography was well done and quite beautiful.
Now for the faults: like most people who have seen this film, the plot is severely lacking. I understand that they're going to find Meg's father, but that is clearly the McGuffin here. Though it's role as the McGuffin is largely undercut by the fact that Meg's father's disappearance is supposed to be the foundation for her despair; so the fact that her search for her father doesn't really matter much means that when they do find him, I don't particularly care. I mean, sure, the reunion itself is emotional, but as far as what it means for Meg as a whole person, it doesn't seem to matter at the bottom line. And I think that's a lot of the problem with this movie-much of the emotion is forced and hollow, with the film telling you how you should feel rather than allowing you to feel it. For example, Calvin just suddenly appears on the street with Meg and Charles Wallace and just stares at Meg and compliments her hair. It's incredibly awkward.
I also don't understand why Meg is so important. It's made clear that she's smart, like her parents, but not an oddball savant like Charles Wallace. Yet the Mrses (Mrs. Which, specifically) is convinced that only Meg can save the universe from the Darkness. But why? And besides, if the Darkness is pure evil, why is it not a more powerful force? Why is there no dark, tentacle cloud over Earth? Why does it just manifest as jealousy or abuse in humans? I'm sure this is probably explained in the book, but to be frank, I don't remember much about the book when my fifth grade class read it. There are a lot of questions about the universe that are glossed over or brushed aside and it weakens the movie as a whole.
So aside from convoluted story and plot (which I can put squarely on the shoulders of the screenwriters) the pacing also feels off. We spent a good 15 minutes of run time on a flower planet, that while quite pretty, doesn't lead us to much, other than Mrs. Whatsit deciding they need to see a Seer (Happy Balance) to find their father. Why not do this in the first place? They waisted 15 minutes of the movie on a flight sequence that had very little to do with the plot or story at the end of the day. And it's instances like this that make the 1hr, 49min run time feel heavily bloated. I sat through Wall-E (slightly over 2hrs) and the time flew by. By the time Meg finally has her Boss Battle with IT, I was ready to head out. They spend the first 45mins of the movie setting up the characters, but none of it feels particularly necessary. If Act I had been shortened into 20 minutes, it would have left more time for them to explore more of the Universe on the way to finding Meg and Charles Wallace's father. Or they could have just cut it down by 20mins and have been fine.
I have to say, people are railing on this movie, and it's really NOT that bad. It's pretty heavy subject matter for kids (some pretty heady ideas being tossed around) but if you think your kid will sit through it, then I think it's worth a watch. I wouldn't spend $15 on it, but $5-$8 sure.
I also have to say, hating on the acting is a bit unfair. For the Mrses, Nobody, and Happy Balance, they are beings who are choosing human forms so that the kids can relate to them. They can be whatever they want to be. To expect them to be emotionally human as well is unfair, thus I believe that the irritation one might feel with the acting stems from that. I'm of the opinion that it was a directorial choice and should be noted as such.
In conclusion: an OK movie. Not great, but not the worst movie I've ever seen.