Category: now in theatres

Dub’s Take: The Exorcism (2024)

A spoiler-free mini movie review.

1 out of 5

For “Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes”, I wrote it was this movie season’s poster child for needing an apathetic studio executive to mercifully cut 45 minutes off the overlong film like amputating gangrene. Today’s “The Exorcism” is what happens when you cut too much: it’s abrupt; obfuscating; and, frankly, embarrassing.

The whole time I was trying to put my finger on exactly what wasn’t working: some lousy dialogue and CGI. But I wasn’t expecting a masterpiece: surely a one-star review cheesy lines & VFX does not make?

Nevertheless, events in The Exorcism transpire almost transitionlessly: Russell Crowe’s disgraced actor Tony Miller goes from recovering alcoholic to back on the bottle, and possessed, all in the first act; Samantha Mathis shows up for less than a minute as the executive for the comeback film Miller is working on, and ditto for Sam Worthington as his co-star; and the less said about the slapdash finale with a wasted David Hyde Pierce, the better.

There seemed to be enough working ingredients that either the story should have been told as drama (concentrating on the strained relationship between Miller and his estranged daughter in-and-around environments non-conducive to healing, like a movie set) or as a harder version of what we got here. For instance, Miller isn’t fired from the meta-film for almost three weeks, and by then he’s so far gone that he’s full-on contorting. Why wasn’t he let go sooner? This could have been solved by having a scene with Mathis saying they’re “over-budget and over-schedule” and another delay would kill the film, but it’s not here.

The Exorcism reeks of being hacked to pieces in post-production, when someone in a suit told the editors to concentrate on the horror instead of the plot. I’m not saying that a longer version actually exists, or that it would be better than what we got in the end: movies lose scenes in the filmmaking process all the time, and the public isn’t always privileged to the DVD leftovers. But I imagine another movie ten-times better lost in a warehouse somewhere: an allegory about moviemaking and how the script becomes its own monster and feasts on the egos of those involved, with Adam Goldberg (doing great work here as the meta-film’s director) the Machiavellian ringmaster.

There’s a more interesting film here that’s had its textured ends removed like calf testicles.

Poster sourced from impawards.com. What do you think? Were you also confused by The Exorcism’s humdrum poster & marketing? Did you, too, consider that it could be a sequel to Crowe’s other horror project from last year “The Pope’s Exorcist”? Is Russell Crowe still enough of a draw for you now that he’s in his career’s third act, that you’ll see a new movie of his based on his huge mug dominating the ads? Do you agree that Hyde Pierce’s amazing performance in 2010’s “The Perfect Host” means he could’ve, should’ve done a more convincing job here? Leave a comment below!

Posted on by wd 0

Dub’s Take: Bad Boys Ride or Die (2024)

A spoiler-free mini movie review.

3 out of 5

“Bad Boys 4” must be the stuff professional movie critics dread: a campy action yarn neither ground-breaking, nor a colossal tire fire. Even without seeing every major 2024 North American theatrical release thus far, I have immense respect for working writers who can pump out 400-words-or-more per screening and still find things to talk about.

There’s much to like about the sequel: sleek cinematography that recalls Billy Gierhart’s direction on the “SWAT” TV show (swooping drone shots a go-go); a refreshingly easy-going Will Smith performance; and at-least 75% mindless entertainment. For most, that will be enough. But a side-story about Martin Lawrence’s Marcus having a near-death experience is too dour; there is wasted opportunity for more action when instead we get more bereavement; and even under two hours, it’s still a bit long. Everything is too long these days.

I don’t think Will Smith is a bad actor: maybe too focused – even in looser caricatures, like here – and his choice of roles is unvarying. Here, his Mike lacks metalepsis, but this is likely the most relaxed we’ll ever see him on-screen. Lawrence is also fine, but this time around, his Marcus is handicapped by a heart attack, and the film’s subsequent riffs on “Fearless” – such as trying to help Mike bond with his estranged son – are too on-the-nose for what’s supposed to be a high-concept action-comedy. The chemistry between the leads is still there thirty-years on (one need only watch the opening scene to agree), but I only laughed out loud once, and it was at DJ Khaled’s cameo.

Ultimately, Bad Boys 4’s visual candy is so sweet that it masks how the script doesn’t take any chances in the same way. Halfway through, the boys are targeted by every LA gang similar to “John Wick 4”, and the film sets up an alleyway confrontation that could have played like an ultra-violent “Anchorman” News Team showdown, but it ends before it begins. Mike & Marcus may be older, but that doesn’t mean the franchise needs to become more rooted in reality as a result.

Maybe swapping Smith’s & Lawrence’s roles for a new property would give everyone – actors & viewers alike – something different to chew on.

Poster sourced from impawards.com. What do you think? Do you think a 90-minute action-comedy where Will Smith plays the goofy Martin Lawrence character and Lawrence plays the serious Smith character would work, or do you think it could only sustain a ten-minute SNL skit? Does anyone even care about the Will Smith “slap” enough anymore – other than Smith himself – to draw parallels between it and Mike’s panic attacks in the film? Leave your comments below!

Posted on by wd 0

Dub’s Take: Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes (2024)

A spoiler-free mini movie review.

1 out of 5

“Planet of the Apes 10” (or “X”), at almost two-and-a-half hours, is too damn long. I wanted a Charlton Heston-style pun with “YA BLEW IT UP”, but I couldn’t figure one out.

I’m no historian either, but wasn’t there a time when movie studios wanted shorter films in theatres to increase the number of showtimes in a day? But the era of butchering overlong “auteur” films has been over for a long time, hasn’t it? Last-century classics like “The Wild Bunch” and “Once Upon a Time in America” were championed once their unaltered versions were repatriated, but it seemed left-minded executives could come in whenever they wanted and cut scenes they thought were superficial. Today, it’s the studios producing these overlong movies, maybe in their post-COVID attempts to revitalize theatrical box-offices with tentpole “experiences”.

I grew up with the “Apes” films up to “Conquest” and I’m always down for a monkey movie. “Kingdom” starts nobly, not only by having lots of different kinds of monkeys in it, but by taking place “generations” after the other entries, serving as a soft-reboot of sorts for the resuscitated franchise. I liked the dialogue’s seasoning of existential despondency and the throwback soundtrack, both which recall the 1968 original. “The Witcher” ‘s Freya Allen successfully auditions for “Tomb Raider” with her role. And the special effects were pretty good, including some effective mo-cap, and a high-angle of some windy trees in the prologue that was eye-catching on a big screen.

But the film is purposeless other than as distraction. Its formulaic first act set-up of rescue & revenge segues to a meandering middle and a predictable end, with too many “what ifs” for a road picture and not enough actual adventuring. Extended passages like a campfire and a cameo from William H. Macy are too much texture for a monkey movie. The worst element is character actor & pasty White guy Kevin Durand’s main antagonist Proximus, for which Durand adopts a problematic Keith David impression. Producers should have just hired Keith David instead.

Nothing here couldn’t have been done in a hour-and-a-half – the median length for all four original Apes sequels. No wonder there’s a conscious audience shift to streaming: who wants to pay modern prices and leave their home to take an uncomfortable nap?

Poster sourced from impawards.com. Do you have any good Charlton Heston or Planet of the Apes puns or jokes? Leave yours in the comment box below!

Posted on by wd 0

Dub’s Take: Unsung Hero (2024)

A spoiler-free mini movie review.

2.5 out of 5

“Unsung Hero” – the much-anticipated faith-based family drama inspired by the lives of, and produced by, the boys from “for KING + COUNTRY” – is a perfectly middle-of-the-road motion picture. There’s your one-sentence Kojima-style review right there.

Viewer mileage will largely depend on their opinion of FKAC: you’ve probably heard one-or-two of the Christian pop-duo’s crossover hits on Top-40 radio. My wife is a fan and we attended their 2023 Christmas concert, where half the intermission was taken up with promoting Unsung Hero. Their stamp is all over it: its namesake song off their 2022 album “What Are We Waiting For” is the film’s theme; Joel Smallbone steps into the shoes of his Job-like father; and the young actors playing Joel & Luke as children are in the background of scenes ten-times more than the other adolescents, even making sly jabs at their eventual rise to stardom, despite the film’s focus being the awakening of their older sister’s singing career (Rebecca St. James).

A perfect example of the movie’s internal struggle to balance corny cheese with heart-tugging worship can be found in its climax: Dad has one last chance to redeem his music management career, by presenting Rebecca to his rock-star neighbour Eddie Degarmo. While Kirrilee Berger’s singing as Rebecca is enduring, we keep cutting back to Degarmo’s reaction, and “General Hospital” ‘s Jonathan Jackson wears a stupid wig that cessates any sincerity the scene earns otherwise. I can’t think of any other way the filmmakers could have avoided this (Jackson’s acting is fine) other than not cutting to his reaction until the end.

Other bits of movie dissimulation include a trip to the playground that ends in a heavy-handed metaphor about moving on, and at least two of the seven siblings barely getting any screentime. But there’s at least one stand-out moment for Joel’s patriarch when he’s at his lowest, and I appreciated the script not skimping over the financial intervention of Lucas Black’s overly-generous co-congregant. The movie is presented professionally, but workmanlike. There isn’t anything stand-out about its plot or themes, nor anything so egregious it doesn’t deserve a recommendation if you’re into this sort of thing.

Unsung Hero’s faults are cancelled out by its positives & vice-versa, resulting in an average time at the movies. I can’t say I was disappointed, since it was exactly what it said it would be on its label.

Poster sourced from impawards.com.

Posted on by wd 0

Dub’s Take: Jeanne du Barry (2023)

A spoiler-free mini movie review.

3.5 out of 5

Let us all admire for a second how far French actress/director Maïwenn has come, from Scream Queen in 2003’s “Haute Tension” to her filmmaking status in the 2010s. Her “Jeanne du Barry” may only stymie Western audiences for her casting of the French-speaking Johnny Depp as her film’s primary male lead: the King of France, no less. Allow me then to proudly declare that the two-hour-plus subtitled film was such a successful love story, that my pale-as-a-ghost wife – who will avoid foreign films – was in tears by its end.

In my screening’s post-film behind-the-scenes interview, Depp is as restrained as to his reasons behind the “challenge” of playing the character as his Louis XV is in the film itself, only really iterating that Maïwenn was able to convince him otherwise. Taking the last four years of Depp’s highly-publicized fall into account, it’s easy to dismiss his performance here as sleepwalking for a much-needed paycheque – personally, I think Maïwenn’s casting wants audiences to draw parallels between the eminent nature of her actor’s public & private lives with that of Louis XV’s, who also forwent the luxury of discretion based on his status and what was expected behaviour of royalty. As a man willing to forgo etiquette for love, Depp is great here, in a role he makes believable despite it leaving little room for his usual ostentatiousness.

Of course, the film’s real success isn’t just in its fortunate stunt casting: Maïwenn displays herself an equally-capable dramatic actress as she is director, allowing her Jeanne’s love for Louis to help her carry the silent burdens of her position. The production design is sumptuous (love those powdered wigs). While Jeanne’s poor upbringing made me want for more juxtaposition between her life in the palace and the one she left behind, I understand it was probably jettisoned to focus elsewhere (once you mention the Revolution, we want to see it). I also think the film could have ended at the perfect point about 10 minutes earlier than it did.

As a romance and not a biography, Jeanne du Barry is at its best. It’s when the viewer begins to look broader than the borders of its script that we realize the shortness of its plot: nothing much happens, other than the slow unfolding of life, which ends when it ends. I suppose you could say that about most lives.

Poster sourced from impawards.com. What do you think? Are you a big Johnny Depp fan? (I’m really not.) Are you excited to see him in a “normal” performance for once, even if it is the first post-trial role he was able to get? Do you think Amber Heard will ever have a similar comeback? Did you all know that Kevin Spacey is starting to work again, too? Do you believe in second chances, or are these all just a bunch of spoiled libertines? Leave a comment below!

Posted on by wd 0