Bird Box: Like "The Happening", But Like... You Know... Competent

Bird Box has been on Netflix for less than a week and I already feel like I'm late to this party. Clearly, what I'm taking away from my viewing last night is that someone watched The Happening, realized it was a sewage burrito wrapped up in a stale carcass and decided to re-do it with some competence. I hadn't actually seen anything on the film advertised (which is the downside of movies on Netflix), but it generated some buzz early and the starpower of Sandra Bullock has helped it take off to become Netflix's most popular film of probably the entire year (I'm just guessing - research would have to be involved, and I'm feeling particularly lazy today). Netflix has been churning out original content so much that it's hard to gauge what to spend your time on and what to skip, but at least for this film, a film that would've done very well in theaters I imagine, it's certainly worth your time.

Much like The Happening starts, Bird Box tells the tale of some weird global epidemic where people are committing mass suicide. It starts in Europe and then makes its way over to us. Sandra Bullock plays Mallorie, a pregnant, reclusive artist living in the Bay area of California. Her sister (Sarah Paulson) is her only connection to the outside world. Mallorie is pregnant, but her dude has left her and she's not exactly excited about the prospect of being a mother. She feels she won't have that motherly instinct of connecting immediately with her child. After a checkup at the hospital, the attack begins. This time, it's not "the trees" exterminating mankind, but it's some sort of unseen monster or monsters that if you look at them, your eyes glaze over in an eerie crimson and you off yourself without hesitation. Mallorie barely survives and holes up in a house with other random survivors who include John Malkovich, Trevante Rhodes, Lil Rel Howery, BD Wong, and Jacki Weaver. The film goes back and forth between the house of volatile survivors and five years in the future when Mallorie is on her own traversing a river with two blindfolded children trying to make it to an alleged safe haven.

While the movie isn't perfect, it's certainly a hell of a lot better than The Happening. While both films begin with an intriguing premise, it's Bird Box that actually delivers on the premise. The two biggest differences here are tension (of which The Happening had none) and actual three-dimensional characters (which, again, The Happening sorely lacked  - seriously, Mark Wahlberg was a science teacher??). Both movies saw an unseen force affecting the minds of ordinary citizens and forcing them to kill themselves, but Bird Box succeeds in upping the tension because there is an actual visual force that is doing this to people. We only get glimpses of it in shadow or in drawings, but the fact that there is a malicious creature out there doing this makes the film even that more suspenseful and terrifying. And we get to figure out the rules of the creatures along with the characters to add to the fear and excitement. How much of the creatures do you have to see in order to become affected? Do the creatures know how to cut the power? Do they enter houses? Can you look at them on a video? Will they attack you inside of a car? Figuring out the rules of these things along with our characters lends to most of the terror of the movie. The other side of that is when Mallorie is alone with the kids. They're blindfolded 90% of the time we know them and they're trying to go down a river without being able to see. We hear forces around them, we know how kids don't necessarily listen to adult figures and don't necessarily understand the gravity of certain situations. So, the tension here is upped even further.

Then there's the characters. Kudos to director Susanne Bier for making a movie with probably the most diverse cast of the year. The house is mostly female. There's the old, racist white dude. The kind black man. The funny black man. The Latina cop. The gay Asian. Like, this movie has diversity COVERED. And they're all pretty well-rounded. Sure, Bier spends most of her time with Mallorie, but we get insight into each person and they're not just defined by their occupation or their interests or their pasts or their sexualities. They're genuine people who, if this situation actually occurred, you could find yourself in a house with. As always, Bullock is phenomenal. She's ice cold toward her children, who she only calls Boy and Girl because, as we see from her past, we're not sure if she actually couldn't make a connection with them, or if she loves them so much she knows what could happen to them in an instant, and doesn't want to make a connection for fear of losing them. Rhodes of Moonlight fame delivers here as well, showing the makings of a superstar he's destined to become. Malkovich plays slimy just as he always has - with a grin on his face and black in his heart. He's always fun to watch playing an evil curmudgeon. The rest of the cast is put together nicely to really make this movie FEEL theatrical, even though we all watched it at home on our TV screens.

Bird Box has its flaws as well. While we do get to discover the rules along with the rest of the characters, there are still a lot of questions leftover. The biggest one is why the creatures don't enter houses? Why are there some people who can look at them and be affected in a homicidal way instead of a suicidal way? Who gets what outcome? And my biggest gripe with the film I'll put below in a SPOILER section in case those of you who haven't seen it are waiting for my go-ahead. As for that, it's definitely worth watching. It's suspenseful, entertaining, and pretty scary throughout without resorting to jump scares and letting the ambiance of the situation take charge. It's got a little bit of the good from A Quiet Place and none of the bad from The Happening to make a worthwhile night at home at the movies. Spoilers below.





SPOILERS. IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN IT YET. DON'T LOOK PAST THIS. 







Okay, so I think my biggest complaint about the film is the fact that it continuously switches timelines throughout the movie and doesn't give the audience a reason for the transitions like something unexpected. We get scenes when she's in the house with everyone and five years later alone with the kids. In our brains we know that most, if not all, have probably died, we just don't know how. But usually when something is set up like that, it's to subvert the audience's expectations and give us something UNexpected. This didn't happen. Everyone except Tom dies in the house. Five years later, Tom is with Mallorie and the kids at the cabin. But we know he's not with her when she's in the boat... so what happens to him? Does he stay back to protect them and magically show up at the end? What's the ace up the sleeve?

The answer is nothing. He just saves them and kills himself exactly as we thought happened to him when we realized five years later she was alone. So, the point of the jumping back and forth between the years was what exactly? How was the movie elevated by telling it this way rather than chronologically? It's really the only thing that bugged me. I was very much entertained by the rest.

B

The Favourite: Dark, Cunning, And Hilarious

For most of my readers, including myself, I'm willing to guess that The Favourite hasn't hit your radar or it has and it's been dismissed by you as a "boring period piece". Don't worry - it did that for me as well. I see anything from that era advertised, I immediately push it out of my mind because I generally don't care for those types of films. But, the director... the trailer... the cast... and frankly, the rottentomatoes rating helped shift the balance of intrigue back to me. First, the director - Greek director Yorgos Lanthimos caught my eye. He's not the type of director to give you a standard period piece. He's a (for lack of a better word) art-house director who makes quirky and dark movies like The Lobster and The Killing of a Sacred Deer, both of which I saw, both of which I kinda liked and also seriously hated at the same time. Then, the trailer. I wasn't bored when it saw it. In fact, I chuckled a lot during its two minute run-time subverting the expectation I had when I saw it was, indeed, a "period piece". The casting of Emma Stone, Rachel Weisz, and Olivia Coleman really sucked me in. And the 97% on RT finally convinced me to give it a shot and I'm very glad that I did.

This is going to sound a little stale, but stick with me - The Favourite is a story about an ailing Queen Anne (Coleman) in the early 18th century, when Britain is at war with the French, and she has no desire to rule due to a serious bout of self-pity (and Gout). In her stead is Lady Sarah (Weisz), her longtime friend and secret lover. She rules with an iron fist without conscience and without care for anyone's feelings, including the Queen's. She's tough and therefore she wants Britain to be tough. Enter Abigail (Stone), Sarah's cousin who comes to court penniless and in search of employment. At first she's given work as a scullery maid, but when she slips the Queen some herbs to help her ailing Gout, Sarah lets Abigail be her lady-in-waiting. While Sarah deals with business in Parliament, Abigail uses this time to win over the Queen for her own dastardly plans - become a baroness once again. Her relationship with the Queen also turns into a sexual one and creates a devious love triangle between the Queen, Abigail, and Sarah. Sarah and Abigail torment one another and one-up one another in order to become... you guessed it... the favorite.

What I wouldn't have guessed about the movie is that it's equally as funny as it is seriously screwed up. I loved watching these women one-up each other in creative and dastardly ways all set in a time when women, other than the Queen, really didn't have a voice. There's a really dark sense of humor here that once you've figured out the tone of the film will really get at your funny bone, but it'll take a little bit to get used to. Each woman is fueled by her various needs and becomes likable at certain points in the film, but all are inherently unlikable. There's so many layers of character, trying to figure out who to root for becomes the fun of the film until you realize there really isn't anyone to like here. Anne is essentially a child. She pouts for a good part of the film not wanting responsibility of making wartime decisions and throwing herself on the floor in tantrum. Sarah is an icy, cold woman who stands tough, and hardly ever reveals vulnerability unless it is for her own personal benefit. Abigail, who audiences would most likely call the most likable is sweet, endearing, loving and probably the most evil of the three. Watching each layer of these characters peel back to reveal something new and terrible is the fun of the film. The humor comes from the dry wit of the era that actually lends to more laughs than you'd expect. Even as a film set in the 1700s, it's a very resonant movie today.

The one thing Lanthimos does with the film really well is he never calls attention to the fact that there is a lesbian love triangle happening onscreen. It's never called out for its same-sex relationships, especially in a time when it was more than forbidden - it would incur certain death. It's treated (as it should be) as another cinematic love triangle. You don't have to be convinced this is how it went or it doesn't have to be "talked about" at length for how strange it is for a Victorian era love triangle to be all women - it just is. Too many times filmmakers like to make it a point to show just how accepting and avante garde they are for featuring an LGBTQ relationship onscreen that it actually detracts from the point of the relationship. I loved that in this movie. While I didn't know going into it that it was part of the story, I also never questioned it as it happened. In fact, I thought it added another beautiful layer to an already twisted story. Becoming "the favorite" has a much deeper and sinister meaning for the one who prevails, which also leads to dire consequences, not just for the other, but for the whole of Britain and the outcome of the war with the French.

The writing is crisp and the directing is on point - other than several scenes shot with a panoramic lens (or fish eye lens - I couldn't tell sometimes) because they were distracting and took me immediately out of the film. But the cast helped elevate the movie. Rachel Weisz is great, as always, playing the cruel Sarah who also shares a real love and soft spot for the Queen. You will always fear her and wonder if her loyalties lie with Queen or with country, but you never question her love for Anne. Nearly every line uttered from her mouth is jaw-dropping in its malice and inevitably hilarious. Emma Stone is great and she nails it with the accent. Never once was it distracting and unbelievable. And because she is such a likable person, she lends that likability over to Abigail so we, as the audience, instinctually trust her, when by the end, we know we shouldn't. Olivia Coleman steals the show. This movie was written for her and it shows. She WILL be nominated for an Oscar because she plays Queen Anne with such a juvenile temperament, which lends to the most fun of the movie. She's so bipolar, you never know what you're going to get. One minute she's laughing and giggling, then she hears music and goes into a rage tantrum. She's not dumb, though, she's ultimately just as manipulative as Sarah and Abigail, but plays it off as aloof. She's brilliant.

While The Favourite, on the surface, may not look like your cup of tea, I urge you to give it a chance. It's funny, it's fun, it's dark, it's full of delicious wickedness and some of the best British insults you'll ever hear. The story itself could be presented in any time period and be just as brilliantly vile, but I think having it set when its set, with the characters we get, lends to the fun of the film that I already want to see again. I highly recommend it.

A

Holmes & Watson: A Lazy, Lifeless, Unfunny, Piece Of Rotten Shit, Sherlock

Let's get this out there first - I think Will Ferrell is a comedic genius. Whatever your taste in comedy may be at the moment, there's no denying that for a long time, Ferrell changed the comedy landscape forever. He came in to SNL and completely revitalized it with his unique brand of humor. Then, when he left to make movies, he created SEVERAL iconic characters that will have a lasting impact in comedy lore. Anchorman's Ron Burgandy and Talladega Nights' Ricky Bobby were two Ferrell characters that showcased just how damned funny the man could be (he also had Adam McKay by his side and a cast of brilliant comedians). Since then, Ferrell has made a lot of hit or miss films that never really reached the peak of the first two. For every Blades of Glory there's a Semi-Pro. But Holmes & Watson takes the "miss" to a whole other level. If the title of this review didn't already spell it out for you, let me reiterate - Holmes & Watson is fucking terrible.

I'm going to blaspheme right now and I apologize to those who I offend. I do not like Stepbrothers. I don't think it's the classic and funny movie that so many people have. I think that McKay and Ferrell took a step backwards with the film by getting rid of plot and creating two unlikable characters that don't really do or say anything that funny to me. I've seen it three or four times. I saw it as a young 20-something and didn't care for it. I gave it another shot in my mid-20s and didn't care for it. And I watched it earlier this year in my early 30s and my opinion hasn't changed. HOWEVER. I do understand why people enjoy it. I can admit that while I don't particularly find it that funny, I can see there is humor present in the movie that would strike someone without my own particular sense of humor. Stepbrothers is not a vast comedy that will tickle the funnybone of everyone who sees it (like Anchorman or Talladega Nights), it's a niche comedy that you either love or hate. So, why waste an entire paragraph of this review talking about a movie that's ten years old? Because unlike Stepbrothers, Holmes & Watson doesn't even have humor that SOME people would find funny. It's so wildly unfunny, you can't even force a pity laugh without succumbing to crippling sadness.

Comedy is at its worst when it's lazily written. You can hit all the script points you need to have a "story". You can add actors who are known for being funny. You can add a hook to your story to draw a crowd, but if you never give a shit about anything beyond that - it's the worst kind of comedy. I think Ferrell and John C. Reilly do have a very good chemistry, but just putting the two men in front of a camera doesn't automatically mean you've struck gold. There was a lot of potential here. I mean, Ferrell and Reilly doing a comedic take on the normally serious Sherlock Holmes and John Watson characters? I'm already sold on the pitch. But that's all the movie is - an idea that SOUNDS like it COULD HAVE been funny when really all writer/director Etan Cohen did was pitch an idea. Everything else seems like they came up with it on the day and just went with it. There's only like four set pieces to the movie. There's a seriously illogical plot. And the biggest piece of evidence this is how the production went - almost everyone has been shoddily dubbed over in the film for one reason or another. Half of the voices don't match the lips and the editor was so tired of watching the same shitty scenes over and over he just said "fuck it, it's fine."

I don't know what the hell was done to get such big names in the movie either. This film is populated with recognizable faces, not just of comedians, but serious thespians as well. I assume Ralph Fiennes just really wanted to work with Ferrell on a film at some point and didn't sign on because he'd read the script (which I also assume was impossible because there's no way this movie had a script - more the incoherent crayon drawings of a writer who accidentally pitched his way to making a movie). Rebecca Hall, Steve Coogan, Kelly Macdonald and Hugh Laurie are all a part of this traffic collision and every scene they're in, it's even more cringe-worthy because what they're given to do doesn't even sound like a funny idea that just didn't work - it just sounds terrible. A few times you could see these people drop out of character and cringe along with you. Ferrell was on James Corden's show and expressed that a comedian never sets out to make a bad movie, but sometimes when everything comes together, it just doesn't work. And for the most part, I agree with that. So, normally, when we see Ferrell doing something outrageous for a laugh that he doesn't get - you still applaud his bravery and commitment to trying to get the laugh. In Holmes & Watson it's an entirely different level. I almost felt embarrassed for him. I've never felt embarrassed for Will Ferrell. There's a scene where Sherlock, for no reason, breaks out into song... a dreadfully unfunny song that doesn't even match up to the music... and I felt embarrassed. I felt that somehow it was MY fault this was happening to Ferrell, but I couldn't stop it.

Ferrell's movies have ranged from brilliant to stupid, but without a doubt I can say that Holmes & Watson is Will Ferrell's worst movie of his entire career. This is without overstatement. And it's not even close. Whatever you consider his worst movie - this one has you checked and mated. The terrible British accents (which could've been played for laughs with a better script) hinder the moments where humor could've escaped and made it difficult to improvise since both actors looked totally uncomfortable speaking with them. The anachronistic jokes in the movie range from over-done/obvious Trump jokes to jokes about the movie Ghost (yeah, timely). There's Titanic jokes, several cocaine jokes, confusing masturbation jokes, and jokes about America. All are so forced and riddled with anti-humor that the feeling of embarrassment never leaves, it just reinforces itself in your gut so much that you want to upchuck into your bucket of popcorn (which also happens in the film). I'm not going to be one of those people who says this is the beginning of the end of Ferrell's career, but I will say he needs to get back with Adam McKay soon for a jump start. And writer/director Etan Cohen... you should be goddamn ashamed of yourself for what you did to poor Will Ferrell. You owe him an apology and probably some more money because whatever Ferrell was paid for this film will never be enough to justify its existence. 

D-

Spider-Man: Into The Spider-Verse: Fourth Time's A Charm

Spider-Man has to be the most eye-rolling superhero for moviegoers. It's not that he's a bad, or even ineffectual superhero, and it's not an eye-rolling like say the Fantastic Four are because there are actual good Spider-Man films... there's just so damn many of them because Sony are a bunch of greedy bastards. There's the Sam Raimi trilogy with Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst. The Spider-Man 3 misstep sort of ended that trilogy quickly. Then... not five years later... they rebooted it with Andrew Garfield. They didn't start it up again... they rebooted it. We seriously got Peter Parker's origin story AGAIN. Those movies weren't great and after two of them... they decided to reboot Spider-Man A THIRD TIME  in a decade. Spider-Man: Homecoming is arguably the best live action Spider-Man film. I think they finally got the casting of Peter Parker right by going with an actor who actually looks and sounds like a high school student. He's not obnoxious, but quirky and the whole movie felt like a John Hughes flick. So, imagine the heightened amount of eye-rolling that occurred when I first saw a trailer for yet ANOTHER incantation - the fourth one - of Spider-Man - this one not even related to the Marvel Cinematic Universe, and also animated. Sony obviously can't let the character go because it doesn't matter how many times it's rebooted, spun off, or re-made... people will continue to go see it. But here's the thing - maybe we shouldn't stop them from doing it because the last few, including this one... are really good.

Miles Morales lives in our universe. He's got a teenage-y relationship with his parents, he's close to his Uncle Aaron (Mahershala Ali), he loves graffiti art, he's very intelligent, and he was just bitten by a radioactive spider. He starts having Spider-man-like problems and seeks help. He runs into the real Spider-Man (Chris Pine) who, at the moment, is fighting Kingpin (Liev Schrieber) and trying to stop his "machine" from ripping open a hole from another dimension. Spider-Man fails, dimensions are ripped open and the machine busts. And... not a spoiler... Spider-Man dies. Yes. Peter Parker dies. Miles is left all alone, with no one to train him, with the task of destroying the "machine" before Kingpin and his goons fix it and rips a hole big enough to end the world. That night, Miles visits Peter's grave and is visited by none other than Peter B. Parker (Jake Johnson) - Spider-Man from an alternate universe. Then he meets Gwen Stacey (Hailee Steinfeld), Peni Parker (Kamiko Glenn), Spider-Man Noir (Nicolas Cage), and Peter Porker - an actual animated pig (John Mulaney). All of them are different Spider-people from their own universes who were sucked into Miles'. They must get back to the "machine", use it to get home, then have one of them destroy it before they're all killed in the process. 

This version of Spider-Man is actually unlike any of the other films we've seen before. There's a different way of telling this origin story and presenting the characters and just an overall tone that has yet to be touched in a Spider-Man film yet. It's refreshing to watch because we've seen these movies repeat themselves over and over and over again that this film felt like actually watching something new. Honestly, it's like watching The Lego Batman movie after you're sick of all The Dark Knight films. It makes sense because the directors of The Lego Movie, Phil Miller and Chris Lord are directly involved with Into the Spider-Verse. The movie is filled with their fast-paced quirk and witty dialogue. It's a very, very funny movie with great character choices, while not parlaying the heart and earnestness of the characters in favor of laughs. It's perfectly balanced and does a great job of giving us a new origin story, one that doesn't feel like we've already seen it four or five times. 

The voice actors are all perfect in their roles. Jake Johnson as the slovenly Peter B. Parker brings the most comedy to the film, but John Mulaney as an animated pig Spider-Man will have you rolling and there's nothing better in the entire movie than having Nic Cage as an old-timey 1930s wise guy Spider-Man. Every time he uttered a line in the movie, I was on the floor. But Shameik Moore (Dope) really nails Miles. And he's a great character to watch. In a new school, he's already a fish out of water. No one understands him (including his parents), so he seeks refuge with his Uncle Aaron, who lets him sneak out of school and finds him abandoned walls to put up his art. So, when he has to turn into Spider-Man, he's even more out of his depth. He doesn't just "get it" like all of the other Spider-Men we've seen in past movies. In fact, he doesn't "get it" for most of the film. He has different powers and they happen by accident. For being a cartoon, it's actually the most realistic portrayal of a superhero figuring out and dealing with their powers that we've seen. That's why it was important for the relationships to be authentic in this movie and for you genuinely care about all of them. Also, Lily Tomlin shows up as Aunt May and is funny as hell. 

The animation is beyond impressive. The movie seamlessly transitions from straight up CGI-animated film to looking just like the comic book that inspired it. It's another aspect of the film that's unlike anything we've really seen before. For being the fourth iteration of a character in the last twenty years, the filmmakers did a really good job of making it feel wholly fresh and new. There were a few points where the action sequences did move a little bit too quickly and too rushed and it was difficult to tell what was happening, but it never takes you out of the film. If I wasn't so staunchly against seeing anything in 3D, I'd almost say this is the perfect movie to try and check out. 

Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse brings a fresh eye to an exhausting franchise - and it has nothing to do with The Avengers. I know. Good luck keeping track of all this shit. But it's a welcome entry that, if you're not aware by now, Marvel will milk until it's out of juice and will reboot again four or five years after they've claimed it's "the last one". I highly recommend checking this one out on the biggest screen you can (with as few moviegoers as possible) because not only is it a fun, exciting, and great movie... it's probably the best Spider-Man movie they've made yet. And they've made a shit ton. 

A

The Mule: One Last Weird, Quiet Ride

It's only been out for a week, but do any of you even remember this movie exists? It was kind of dropped out of nowhere and most of us who hadn't heard anything about it were surprised that Clint Eastwood was acting again - at the ripe old age of 88. I remember ten years ago when Eastwood announced his retirement from acting with Gran Tornio. That movie was so good it was a welcome, albeit sad, end to a legendary acting career. It was fitting. However, Eastwood started churning out movies he was directing and they were all meh. All of them. None of them great and none of them bad, but very vanilla bland films. So he came back to acting in 2012... with Trouble With The Curve. Oof. Now, we can't pretend that Eastwood is going to be around forever. He's pushing 90 and each movie he signs on to do could very much be his last. And had it been Gran Tornio, it would've been the perfect final film. But had it been Trouble With The Curve... oof. Shoulda stayed retired gramps. But, because Eastwood's 88-year-body is apparently more vigorous than most human beings, he's still churning out movies nearly every year - TWO this year. He returns in front of the camera with The Mule - a movie that's already been forgotten and disappeared among the high profile holiday films. However, IF this winds up being his final acting role in a film - it's not as good of a sendoff as Gran Torino, but it's a pretty decent last role.

Based on an actual true story, ol' Clint plays Earl Stone, a 90-year-old horticulturist who literally has nothing. He's lost his house and his business because of "the internet". He's lost his family because he was a terrible father and always put work over family. The only person he's close to is his granddaughter Ginny (Taissa Farmiga). When Earl is offered a job of "driving" by a guest at Ginny's wedding shower, he takes it, thinking it'll be an easy job of just driving and getting paid. What he's actually doing is taking large shipments of drugs for the Mexican cartel, run by Laton (Andy Garcia). After a hefty payment the first trip, Earl decides to go back for another ride. And then another. And then another. Until Earl has become the cartel's most successful drug mule... because who is going to suspect a 90-year-old white dude? Working on the case, however, is DEA Agent Bates (Bradley Cooper) who starts closing in on the cartel's runs and getting ever so close to discovering this mule really is.

It's actually a very, very interesting story. It's amazing to watch how Earl is so successful and how he gets out of sticky situations. As with most of Eastwood's roles, Earl is a take-no-shit cranky old man, but he's not up to the gruffness of his Gran Torino character. He's a little older, a little more senile, talks a little bit lighter, and has a much friendlier aura to him. However, he also realizes he's 90 and that nothing really scares him anymore. He's threatened several times by gun-toting cartel members and he tells them to go fuck themselves. He still likes to drink, party, and take home ladies of the night. What's also fascinating about him is that while he has a give-no-shits attitude about getting killed or caught with his drug-running, he does care about patching things up with his estranged family. He knows its never too late to start and while this job may kill him, he puts forth the effort as a 90-year-old that he hadn't put forth in the 89 years prior. Maybe Eastwood is just that watchable of an actor, but I wanted to stay with this character for even longer than the film's running time.

But, the movie itself is just okay. There's just a lot of Eastwood driving back and forth with his payload and not a lot happening in between. The scenes with him trying to repair relationships with his family become repetitive. Him trying repair - them yelling at him that he was never there. And while it was interesting to see Earl doing these drops and the reasons for them - they too get a little repetitive. The scenes with Bradley Cooper are ALSO repetitive. He brings new intel to his boss (Laurence Fishburne), asks for permission to intervene, gets it, it's wrong intel, back to the drawing board. It's a slow-moving film where not a lot happens until the end, and even then, if you've read the true story article you know what happens - it's pretty anti-climactic. But Eastwood has crafted such a good character and he's still such a powerhouse of an actor that it kept me interested and intrigued. There aren't many actors pushing 90 who would've been able to make this movie work like Eastwood does. The rest of the cast is pretty great as well. Cooper is definitely phoning it in after his brilliant performance in A Star Is Born, but even Cooper doing Eastwood a favor in this movie is great. The rest of the cast brings it and the only sore thumb among the bunch is Farmiga - who, in my opinion, is awful in everything she's in. She's definitely the wrong Farmiga to cast these days (BRING BACK VERA!!!)

So, while this PROBABLY will be Eastwood's last on-screen role, it's actually a pretty decent farewell to an actor who should've retired ten years ago. The film itself doesn't really hold up to the character, but then again, it doesn't matter because everyone has already forgotten this movie exists. This movie will live on in people who are browsing HBOGO on a Saturday night and remembered it was in theaters a few years back and you "kinda wanted to check it out" but never did. I'm sorry for potentially killing off Clint Eastwood during this entire review, but I gotta think that The Mule will be, at least for the acting side of things, Eastwood's one last weird, quiet ride.

C+

Instant Family: Quite Surprising Indeed

He may not be the greatest actor, but I feel like if I was to step into someone's career in Hollywood at this point, I'd either have to step into The Rock's career or Mark Wahlberg's. Not all of his movies are great, but I have to imagine based on the movies he's currently making, he gets a lot of really fun scripts. He's one of the rare few who isn't pigeonholed into a certain type of movie or a certain type of role. He gets to do the dumb alpha male action movies and he gets to do fun comedies. And he knows how to do both. He's one of the actors going right now who looks like he gets offered a wide array of projects in several genres and gets to do the ones he WANTS to do. He's not afraid of doing the raunchy comedy (Ted), the special effects epic (Transformers), the harrowing drama (Patriot's Day), the action-thriller (Mile 22), or even the family movie with Instant Family. While these movies may not all be winners, Wahlberg is a bankable star doing the films he most wants to do, even if a lot of these films (and his presence in them) elicits a lot of eye-rolls. When I first saw the trailer for Instant Family I thought it was a joke. It looked like a cheesy, paint-by-numbers, cliche-riddled, 90s movie we've seen a dozen times. The "laughs" in the trailer were the most obvious jokes/reactions to hackneyed situations. And Wahlberg trying to play the fish out of water dad made it look even worse. There was no way I was going to see this movie. But, as an avid rottentomatoes guy, that 82% fresh rating kept staring me in the face, daring me to see the movie. Until I caved. And I'm very glad that I did.

No thanks to a terrible trailer, Instant Family is actually a really good movie. It takes the situation of a white, childless couple adopting rowdy children of color and all the crazy antics of their lives - and actually turns it into something fresh, funny, and endearing. Wahlberg and Rose Byrne play Pete and Ellie, a couple who have focused most of their marriage on their house-flipping business. But when they decide they want a family, Ellie looks into adoption. They take the 8-week foster parent courses, meet a bunch of different children, until they decide on 15-year-old Lizzie, who comes with two smaller siblings, Juan and Lita. At first everything is going great. They're polite kids who just need a little love and guidance. But once the "honeymoon" phase wears off, shit hits the fan. Lizzie, who harbors an equal amount of love and resentment for her incarcerated druggie mother starts acting out because love and true human interaction triggers her. Juan is scared of everything and Lita is in the third year of her terrible twos, having never known what a mother is. We get to see the strife of this odd family that all comes from genuine organic places. Everyone involved is thrust into unfamiliar territory and there is no real correct way to handle it. But it's such a charming movie that you find yourself rooting for every individual character.

What looks like another white-savior movie actually turns out to say something different. Director Sean Anders even brings this idea into the focal point of the movie. Lizzie rebels against Pete and Ellie because she knows what it's like to be abandoned... especially by white people who think they're doing their moral duty of saving a bunch of minority children and when they get tired of them, they'll ditch them as well. Anders even throws in a couple of Blind Side references for good measure. But the truth of the matter is, sometimes people need people who are different than them. When Pete brings up that he doesn't want to be that white savior with these kids... the case worker relays that there are far more kids in the system than there are people willing to adopt them. It doesn't matter what they look like as long as they'll love these children and provide for them as if they were their own. It was a surprising move that wound up being highly effective. And while it's often played for laughs, there are some seriously REAL moments in the movie where Pete and Ellie, in the height of their frustration, plan ways they can "return" the children and make up a story to their families so they don't look like they gave up. These plans are never discussed with a heightened degree of seriousness, but these feel like real conversations I'm sure real adoptive parents have had at the beginning of their journeys.

While I do blame the trailer for making the movie look like something it isn't, I am glad that it didn't spoil any of the funniest and most heart-warming moments of the film. I felt like I was watching a movie I didn't know anything about and nearly everything I got to see was brand new. There are a lot of very humorous moments that have very touching after-effects. Sean Anders based this movie off his own real life experiences with adopting his children and there really is a personal touch to this movie that isn't seen in a lot of his previous work. And because it is such a personal story, the characters are a lot richer and more authentic. Wahlberg and Byrne have a great chemistry and the child actors portraying their kids are all wonderful as well. Byrne especially stands out in the film because while she's held her own in comedies like Bridesmaids and Neighbors, I never remember just how funny she actually is. Several times she had my sides splitting. Put away everything you think you're going to expect with this movie because I assure you it will exceed expectations.

The only issue I have with the movie is that it does tie up almost too nicely at the end with a couple of moments being a little too "out-there" in terms of realism, but in favor of a crowd-pleasing ending. It wasn't enough, however, to ruin what was certainly a very unexpectedly great experience I had watching the rest. It's been out for a few weeks now, but in this coming weekend of no new releases and with a LOT of good movies to choose from, Instant Family should definitely be near the top of your list.

B+

Green Book: As Heartwarming As It Is Heartbreaking

I love Oscar season. Those last couple of weeks in November and nearly the entire month of December you're going to be seeing some of the best movies of the year. These are the movies vying for coveted Oscar nominations and they're released at the end of the year so Oscar voters can remember them. This is usually when you'll get movies from the best Directors in Hollywood. Tarantino, Scorsese, Spielberg, etc. all love to release their Oscar bait films in December. However, this year, all of the aforementioned Directors don't have any films coming out. And while there are a lot of good looking (and terribly dramatic) films coming out in December, we don't have any really big tentpole Directors to latch onto in excitement for their new film. I'm excited for Barry Jenkins' follow up to Moonlight with If Beale Street Could Talk. I'm also excited for Adam McKay's follow up to The Big Short with Vice. Robert Zemeckis has Welcome to Marwen and I'm even looking forward to Clint Eastwood's The Mule (haven't been excited for an Eastwood movie in awhile). But, little did I know that I would enjoy a heartwarming movie, one of my favorites of the year, from one half of the gross-out duo Farrelly brothers. Peter Farrelly brings us Green Book, a movie that's as heartwarming as it is heartbreaking. A fantastic film.

For some reason... and this is one of the downsides of Oscar season... Green Book wasn't given a wide release. It was released a couple of weeks ago, but not at any theaters near me. I had to venture all the way to Monterrey Park. It's always upsetting to me when I see a movie that is culturally relevant and exceptional only get released to half the amount of theaters that another bullshit Robin Hood movie gets. No one wants to see another iteration of Robin Hood, but EVERYONE should see Green Book. What was inspired by a true story, tells the tale of Tony "Lip" Vallelonga (Viggo Mortensen), a Bronx nightclub muscleman (and sometimes personal driver) who gets recruited by African-American pianist sensation Dr. Don Shirley (Mahershala Ali) to drive him on his concert tour of the deep south for two months in the early 1960s. While Tony isn't the most bigoted person in New York, he still shows contempt for people of color (two African-American repairmen drink water from his glasses and he tosses them in the trash). However, he is a hard-working family man who is true to his word in any job or situation. The two of them together is an odd-couple pairing, but it isn't good-hearted black man has to change the scarred heart of a vicious racist. The two travel the deep south, Tony acting as Dr. Shirley's driver and muscle to get him out potentially dangerous situations. Together, they're able to learn from each other, and help each other out and form what wound up being a real lifelong frienship.

I think one of the things Green Book has going for it, is it's not trying to showcase any sort of savior complex in either of the men. Shirley is not out to change Tony and Tony's not out to change Shirley. They each are looking out for their own motivations, while keeping an eye on each other. From just being who they are, they're able to see the good (and flaws) in one another and not just change their behaviors, but change who they are as men. Tony is loud, he's a constant talker, he's a bullshitter to an endearing point, but also an obnoxious one. Shirley imparts wisdom on being a better person (like not shoplifting), and improving Tony's diction when it comes to speaking with affluent crowds or writing love letters to his wife. Tony is able to show Dr. Shirley how to let loose and try different types of food or experiences and that he doesn't always have to be on guard - even as a black man in the south during a very tumultuous time. There isn't that "Oh, shit!" moment where Tony sees Dr. Shirley play piano and realize he's not a racist anymore. The two spend every day together for two months and he  learns that Shirley isn't a just another black man he has to deal with... he's just a man. A man he enjoys the company of. It's one of the most charming and engaging movies of the year.

It's also very, very funny. This is one of the pluses of having a Director whose entire career has been spent making comedy films -- he's able to inject a lot of humor into the film. Obviously there's the opportunity for a lot of laughs when you have a road trip movie and an odd couple situation at hand, but it's humor that's relevant to the times. There are real fears each man has, both internally and externally, and these fears are valid - but in their times of difference and vulnerability while experiencing these fears there's great humor to be had. There's also real sadness in the film. It's not an easy thing to watch as Dr. Shirley is used as a musical prop at each concert he performs at. He's given wide admiration during his performances, but as soon as he's done playing he's relegated to a storage room (or, as they call it, a dressing room) and denied bathroom or restaurant privileges that his white audiences are afforded. It's even harder to watch because we want him to fight back. We want him to get angry or refuse to play, but Shirley takes the non-violent MLK route and proves always to be the bigger man. And it's in these heartbreaking moment that the humor affects the movie in such a way that not a lot of movies with similar themes allow their audience to have. It wasn't funny for a black man in the south in the 60s. It was an awful and terrifying time, and in a lot of the same areas, it still is. So, it was nice to see a different, and a little bit more light-hearted, perspective without diminishing the pain these people actually experienced.

I do get that movie has its flaws in that it might give almost a too light-hearted approach, and there are some scenes that are almost too feel-good to have existed, but that's what makes the movie so wonderful. There are plenty of movies out there to showcase the bad of pre-civil rights movement America where you get to feel like shit for its entire runtime. This movie sets out to explore these moments, but give us more of the humorous human moments as well. The other thing I loved is that while, as an viewer, you will feel a lot of different emotions, there isn't a whole lot of emotional manipulation in the film that can pervade Oscar-bait movies. There isn't a moment dedicated to the film solely to make every eye in the theater weep. That's not what Farrelly was going for. He's more interested in the characters, in the men, in the friendship that organically blossomed from two flawed individuals from two very different backgrounds coming to love one another.

Even if you find it just a little bit too sentimental, everyone will love Green Book. It's the perfect film for the holiday season and to end the year on a high note. It's certainly one of my favorites of the year and the performances are stellar. I always forget how Viggo Mortensen is a natural actor who falls into every role he's given. Adapting Tony's personality for this movie, he's hardly recognizable. Mahershala Ali is also proving to be one of the most watchable actors in recent memory. He's going to go and do great things and here is no different. After this and Moonlight, I'm pretty much geared to watch the man in anything he's in. If Green Book isn't playing in a theater near you, I sincerely encourage you to take a weekend in December, make a day of it, and seek it out. It's worth all the time and money you can afford to give it. What a wonderful film.

A