“Krampus” movie review

Posted on by
5

KrampusTwas truly a nightmare before Christmas! What would happen if Charles Dickens, Dr. Seuss, and the Brothers Grimm would combine their unparalleled literary social commentary and storytelling abilities for a Christmas movie? The answer is Universal and Legendary Pictures’ Krampus. Based on an actual legend of German origin, Krampus is the antithesis of Santa Claus. Whereas this narrative is not based soley on the legend per se, many of the insidious characters are. A Christmas horror movie is nothing new–recently watched Silent Night Deadly Night with a friend–but a movie of this quality, in terms of production design and plot is, and provides us with a movie that is equal parts a holiday and horror film. In an unconventional way, this movie highlights what Seuss and Dickens wrote about in their timeless tales: Christmas becoming more commercialized and about selfish material gain rather than the spirit of sacrifice, giving, and relationships. Just like Scrooge was so terrified emotionally and physically by the ghosts of Christmas past, present, and yet to come, that he believed in Christmas with all his heart, you may also call your behavior, this holiday season, into question as a result of coming face to face with Krampus.

You better watch out, you better not cry, you better not reject Christmas, I’m telling you why, Krampus is coming! For those who lose sight of the true spirit of Christmas and get selfishly wrapped up in their own negativity instead of wrapped up in love, ancient European legend speaks of Krampus (the shadow of Santa Claus) who visits the houses of non-believers who have turned their back on Christmas. Krampus is about a family that, much like yours, is getting together for the holidays. And most likely, just like your extended family, there are members who do not get along with one another–and even resent one another. The Engel family is about to find out the hard way not to lose sight of the magic this time of year. During the course of a day, young Max (Emjay Anthony) falls out of the spirit of Christmas after his dysfunctional family continues to squabble and rejects the spirit of the season. After he rips up his heartfelt letter to Santa in rage, Max unknowingly unleashes the spirit of Krampus and his fractured family must ban together in order to save their very lives from Santa’s sinister shadow.

Following a montage of what looks like Walmart or Best Buy on Black Friday juxtaposed against cheerful Christmas songs, the movie opens on a scene from a film adaptation of Charles Dickens’ A Christmas Carol. Krampus establishes the subtext of this unconventional Christmas movie up front. It is no surprise that there are many self-reflexive elements in this movie; but, it is surprising how well-executed the plot of this film is. Despite the fact the trailer was quite good, I had fairly low expectations for this film because usually Christmas horror movies are just campy. However, there are naturally exceptions to that trend in films like Tim Burton’s Nightmare Before Christmas or A Christmas Carol. A Christmas Carol? Yes. For those who have read the masterpiece, you know that it is a very macabre story in many respects. It had to be. How else was Scrooge going to be so scared for his life and the future if he wasn’t terrified and truly desire to embrace the spirit of the holidays? Maybe A Christmas Carol film adaptations are not traditional horror films, but they certainly contain many horror elements. Krampus takes the idea of developing a horror film out of Christmas to a whole new level. One that is billed as a horror comedy, but it is really more of a traditional horror film.

Horror films, like other genres, often follow the “order–>disorder–>order again” plot structure, but there are times in which it is more like: “order–>disorder–>order–>disorder again.” As I have written in my own research and previously on my blog, horror is concerned with warping that which is otherwise safe or familiar in order to comment on a societal problem or trend. Not always, but many times horror films can enable us to look at gender roles, sexuality, racism, economic, and technological sociological factors in a different light either positively or negatively. That has always been the case since the days of Nosferatu to Psycho to Alien to Silence of the Lambs. Horror films usually have substantial twists or reveals; and one in Krampus definitely caught me by surprise. Just when you think everything is going to be fine and follow a more cliche path, you are blindsided! Although the dialog is typically not strong in a horror film, Krampus contains well-written dialog that is both funny and fitting. Regarding the dark-comedic content in the plot, the comedy is more subtle than prominent; although, watching a jack-in-the-box devour a small child has a degree of demented humor in it.

Like with Universal and Legendary’s Crimson Peak, German expressionism is presented quite well in Krampus. In my previous writings, I have highlighted that German expressionism is at the root of the American horror film. There is even an animated sequence integrated very well into the diegesis that contains copious examples of German expressionism with elongated buildings, gothic design influence, and the use of natural and artistic shadows. Not as pronounced, the rest of the movie clearly shows that German expressionism was included in the designs of the creatures, Krampus himself, and in the neighborhood. By using shadows and warping the perception of landscape and residential engineering, the otherwise upper-middleclass neighborhood looks like it jumped right out of Nosferatu. Whereas this may be an unconventional Christmas movie, it still very much embodies the holiday season. We are reminded to never lose sight of the spirit of sacrifice, tolerance, giving, and relationships. Furthermore, this movie is instrumental in encouraging us to not allow the holidays to become a mechanical reaction, but to truly allow the magic of Christmas to aid us in bringing cheer to those around us.

If the lyrics “he sees you when you’re sleeping, he knows when you’re awake, he know if you’ve been bad or good, so be good for goodness sake” were not creepy enough as it is, then knowing that the shadow of Santa will be unleashed and not come to give, but to collect, if you turn your back on Christmas, then they just became even more terrifying. Universal has proven for more than 100 years that they are the king of horror; and this newest addition to both horror and Christmas movies continues that tradition of a commitment to being the subject of our nightmares.

“Hunger Games: Mockingjay Part 2” movie review

Posted on by
Reply

Mockingjay 2Audiences witness a franchise and world-wide phenomenon come in for a mostly smooth, however anti-climactic, landing. The final installment in the Hunger Games franchise Mockingjay Part 2 over-promises and under-delivers. Despite that, the continued plot from Part 1 is carried out well enough and has many poignant moments and a few exciting sequences. You will also get to watch two of the best-written scenes in the entire franchise. Instead of a continued goodbye to Philip Seymour Hoffman, his few appearances in the film actually remind audiences that the majority of Part 2 was actually filmed in early 2014 and all the actors have long-since moved onto other projects and left the dystopian world of Panem behind. The first act of the movie begins abruptly and may bore you, but Acts Two and Three will deliver some impressive scenes and generate a great deal of excitement and anticipation. At the end of the day, The Hunger Games is one of the best examples of a cash grab with only Disney’s Frozen leading the pack for the ultimate superficial, absent of any critical value, cash cow.

Pick up right where you left off with Katniss (Jennifer Lawrence) having just survived the vicious attack from Peeta (Josh Hutcherson). By now, Katniss, President Coin (Julianne Moore), Gale (Liam Hemsworth), and Finnick (Sam Claflin) all realize that the stakes are incredibly higher than they ever thought. For now, they are on a mission for the survival of the rebellion and to keep Panem from imploding on itself and falling into complete chaos. Ignoring President Coin’s orders, Katniss stows away and joins a special operations team on the front lines with one goal in mind–assassinate President Snow (Donald Sutherland). With the end in sight, the rebellion infiltrates the capital and continues to press on toward the presidential estate in order to bring the thoughtless deaths and dictatorship of Snow to a close.

Over all, the movie does a good job of bringing the high-concept plot to a close. It also finishes its run on top as other films try to be a Hunger Games but fail to deliver the same value. You know you did something right when there are half a dozen other big-budget films and parodies that are based on similar concepts made popular in the franchise. The most prominent disappointment in Mockingjay Part 2 is the abrupt start and fairly anti-climactic denouement. This film cannot be entirely held responsible for the rough first act because Part 1 should have ended with Peeta strangling Katniss before we witness her in the neck brace. Starting Part 2 with Katniss in the neck brace without having seen her in it, in the previous installment, would have been a much better choice. Her recovery from the acute neck trauma was also a little rushed. It would have been more appropriate and added to the emotional power of the film to see her slowly recover as she makes her way towards Snow’s mansion. The chemistry between Katniss and Peeta is not as well played out in this chapter as it had been in the previous movies. Not having read the books, I am unsure if that is how it is supposed to be or the writers and director just didn’t feel the chemistry was important.  There are a few tense moments between Peeta and Katniss that show a quality of writing not often found in the rest of the franchise.

Although the writing throughout the films has not been a strong point–not that is has been bad–just that it is not as strong as it should be, there are two scenes from Part 2 that are emotionally powerful and very well written. Without giving anything away, there is a scene with Katniss and Peeta lying awake at night talking. The exchange of dialog is some of the best writing in the entire series; however, just when the writers were about to hit a homerun, it ends suddenly at the buildup. The emotional highs and lows of the relationship between Katniss and Peeta are seen in this brief portion of the movie. Towards the end of the movie after the capital has been won over and Snow is being held captive in his own estate, Katniss approaches him for what would be one of the last times. She finally comes face to face with her oppressor turned prisoner. If there was one scene selected for its contributions to the film in both acting, writing, and directing, this scene would be it. The tension felt between Snow and Katniss is so think that it could be cut with a knife. Truths are told and secrets revealed that are a game changer that comes out of left field (for those of us who have not read the books). In many movies, a scene like this may not contain much in the way of class, but Sutherland brings that sense of the notorious paired with high class that he is known for.

This is it! We finally get to the capital. Wait. It is already in ruins??? Despite the fact that some of the best scenes from the Hunger Games franchise take place in this last installment within the walls of the opulent, garish, lavish capital of Panem, the audience does not get to witness the decay and destruction of the city that flourished on the backs of those who begrudgingly took from their lands to support the lifestyle of the 1%. Where is the forced transition from, what amounts to, heaven to hell? The gold and silver lined streets, turning into ash??? There would have been some critical and intrinsic value in watching the city destroy itself amidst the house of cards that it build. Instead we get thrown in to the post-war Panem. Even for our characters, there would have been immense satisfaction in watching the capital pay for the shattered lives and broken families that proved the resources for their glutinous lifestyle. Just before the war comes to an end, there is a death scene that is handled quite poorly. There is no emotional windup or climax–it is just a quick death that you could miss by looking down at your popcorn or that text message. Audiences leave the world of Panem with some degree of hope for the once dystopian society that finally has a chance at a fair, democratic, and bright future.

It is definitely evident that this franchise fought hard and valiantly to stay relevant and alive for the past few years. From what I can gather, this last installment in The Hunger Games plays it closely to the book, with some exceptions that definitely could have been visually told better. It does what a final chapter should do and brings the narrative to a close by providing a degree of resolution. Even though there are many elements of the movie that could have been treated with more finesse and better developed, it is probably the best in the franchise. Whether you only watch the movies or you are among those who read the books and then saw the movies, this film should appeal to both audiences.

“007: SPECTRE” movie review

Posted on by
2

SpectreA brilliant Bond film and excellent followup to the wildly popular Skyfall. Director Sam Mendes pulls out all the stops in MGM and Columbia’s Spectre the 24th official title in the Bond 007 franchise. After the soaring success of the previous chapter in the Bond anthology, who would have known that this final appearance of Daniel Craig as the heartthrob MI6 “paid assassin” would be just as thrilling! Just the opening sequence of the movie will have you on the edge of your seat, and the many throwbacks to past Bond film plots or characters will capture your attention for the two and a half-hour runtime. Even Blofeld, the original Bond villain, and his fluffy white cat appear in this epic Bond story. The jaw-dropping action will satisfy even the most ardent and long-time James Bond fans. Whether you’re an old-school or new 007 fan, you are definitely in for a treat. Some of the most refreshing and getting-back-to-authentic Bond elements, of the Craig chapters in the series, is the lack of over-the-top and at times absurd gadgetry, and a return to the very essence of what makes this franchise stand the test of time.

After the tragic events at Skyfall and the destruction of MI6’s massive facility on the Thames, James Bond 007 (Craig) is following a lead in Mexico City thanks to a cryptic posthumous message from the former Agent M (Judi Dench). When the actions in Mexico City draw the attention of the UK’s new head of security and Agent M (Ralph Fiennes), 007 is both grounded and puts the very existence of MI6 in jeopardy. After an unauthorized mission to northern Africa, 007 learns of the sinister crime syndicate known as SPECTRE. Coming face-to-face with the leader of Spectre, 007 learns of a chilling connection between the leader and himself. From northern Africa to the Austrian Alps, 007 must race against the clock to stop a big surveillance data collection organization from being the eyes of the world, and take out the leader of Spectre before he has his hands in the security pockets of several countries around the world.

This final chapter in the Craig Bond series has it all: action, romance, espionage, intrigue, and car chases. But probably the best elements of the movie are connected to  getting back to the very core of what has kept this franchise alive for over 50 years and 24 official titles. Despite the success and popularity of the 90s Brosnan 007 movies, they tended to place a lot of significance on the futuristic and ultimately impossible gadgets. Understandable, because the 90s were a time of massive personal electronic device innovation and the dot com boom. However, this emphasis on the gadgets took away from the plot and character development. Still, those era of Bond movies were exciting and still popular today amongst mostly the newer Bond fans. Returning to the very essence of what make Bond the 007 that fans adore is what makes the Craig films unique and exciting–especially in Skyfall and Spectre where 007 truly comes into his own. We still get some gadgets and the famous Bond film cars, but there is a degree of believability and realism that exists in these films that did not exist in the 90s Bonds. Even though these are still high concept films that have over-the-top action packed sequences, these movies still have a sense of old-school espionage class about them. An interesting side note: there is definitely a hint of the plot from Tomorrow Never Dies in this current installment.

No 007 movie would be complete without an original song that is eerie, romantic, and mysterious all at the same time. The title song from Skyfall performed by the incomparable Adele was an outstanding work of music and lyrics. It truly embodied the film itself and cemented her career as a master of soul/jazz. I cannot say the same for Sam Smith’s performance of “The Writing’s on the Wall.” I was not all that impressed with his performance and I thought the song itself paled in comparison to 2012’s “Skyfall.” Despite the fact that I didn’t personally care for Sam Smith performance or the song, it definitely still had that Bond theme flare about it. Between the graphics and editing, you still knew that you were watching a 007 movie without needing to see the poster or title. Looking to the next vocal artist, I’d like to see Elle King perform the next Bond theme song after her very Bond-ish sounding “Under the Influence.” Regarding the film score, Thomas Newman shines as he so often does with his remarkable talent for capturing the soul of a film in the score that accompanies it.

Facing the popularity of Skyfall, it was definitely a monumental task for Mendes to direct this Bond film. And although I do not feel that Spectre is better than Skyfall and at times I felt that I enjoyed the previous one more, I still thoroughly enjoyed this present installment of the anthology. And to my pleasant surprise, Dame Judi Dench makes a small cameo appearance as the M we’ve had for nearly 20 years. In respect to the characters in and of themselves and their personal/interpersonal relationships with one another, I really felt that the chemistry between M, Q, 007, Money Penny, and Blofeld was right on the ‘money.’ There really isn’t much in the way of traditional or conventional character development but that is commonplace in high-concept films. However, the glimmer of development in both M and 007 was enough to show that these characters and actors were almost made for each other. It was never awkward or boring to watch their interactions with one another.

Ready for an actual spy movie filled with assassins, intrigue, espionage and romance–especially after having sat through Bridge of Spies??? Then definitely watch the next chapter in the Bond, James Bond 007 anthology SPECTRE! Prepare yourself for over two hours of excitement, explosions, and dynamic car chases. Return to old school Bond! Watch as many plot elements through the years and even the villain who started it all make it full-circle.

“Steve Jobs” movie review

Posted on by
Reply

SteveJobsA mesmerizing and controversial bio-pic. This seems to be the year for the biographical motion picture. Universal Pictures and Legendary’s Steve Jobs takes you on a journey through the most signifiant product launches of the late co-founder of Apple’s career. Despite the fact that Jobs is revered as a genius and one of the most influential men in American history, this movie does not shy away from painting an accurate portrait of his personal and professional life. Although he is loved and admired by so many people, his character is one that you will most likely dislike through most of the narrative. From open to close, you will be glued to your seat in awe and surprise. This is definitely one of the most intriguing and intense bio-pics I have seen in a long time. Throughout the narrative, there is a constant theme of control and design. Complete with a brilliant cast and impeccable writing, this is definitely one to watch out for at the next Academy Awards.

Steve Jobs is about the early career of the co-founder of Apple. You will go on a journey through the most important product launch successes and failures of Jobs’ (Fassbender) career. From being fired from the very company that he co-founded to the love-hate relationship he has with his daughter and the hatred for her mother, you will learn what prompted Jobs to make the decisions he did and how each decision affected his relationships with friends and colleagues. Discover why “end to end control” was so important to the designs of the MacIntosh and Apple computers.

Michael Fassbender truly shines as the genius behind Apple’s phoenix-like return from the ashes of its darkest days. Not only does he resemble Jobs in appearance, but he also captures the very essence of what made Jobs tick and why he became the success he was professionally. Fassbender also delivers powerful performances in his altercations with colleagues and his presumed family. The intenseness of his conflicts and triumphs transcends the screen and compels your attention through the entire film. Often in movies, you either want to love or love to hate the protagonist; and that element rings very true in this film. For nearly the entire movie, I hated Steve Jobs. Funny, because I use all Apple products. But, during the end of the third act, I made a radical shift and saw the glimmer of hope that has caused millions of Apple fans to adore him so much during the latter years of his career. More than anyone else, he believed in his designs and methods of product launches. Only his director of marketing Joanna Hoffman (Kate Winslet) seemed to be the one he confided in most or could control the man who was insistent on “end to end control” throughout his dynamic career. Winslet also delivers a commanding performance as Hoffman who stuck by Jobs from product to product, advising him when he wouldn’t hear of anyone else’s opinions. She is the single person who held helped the public not to despise him as much as most everyone else did behind the scenes.

So often I find that bio-pics can tend to romanticize the protagonist by glossing over the more negative events of his or her life. Not so with Steve Jobs. The remarkable element of the writing is the commitment to reality and just laying all the positive and negative events and encounters out there for the audience. Highlighting the more negative events is extremely important to this film because that is where the very dynamic character arc comes from. If you loved or hated Jobs the entire time, it would not be nearly as impactful. But because you will likely hate him for most of the movie until the end and then quickly turn a 180, that is where the magic of this movie lies. There are times that you think that he will budge from his stances on design teams and products, but then he is just as stubborn or relentless as he is throughout the story. Oddly enough, his penchant for complete control is what tanks and then resurrects the tech company. The story is gripping and whether you are an Apple product fan or not, this movie is an excellent example of how a completely candid bio-pic can still prompt the adoration of the public despite the dark elements and poor decisions in relationships with friends and lovers.

If you are an Apple product fan, this is definitely a film to catch because it takes you behind the sleek product displays and technology launches. Learning about Steve Jobs the man actually gives a new-found appreciation for the company he helped start, got fired from, and rehired again. The amazing cast and brilliant writing enables this film to be admired for its commitment to the art of biographical motion pictures.

“Bridge of Spies” movie review

Posted on by
2

BridgeofSpiesA spy movie with very little in the way of intrigue and espionage. Touchstone, DreamWorks, and 20th Century Fox’s Bridge of Spies is a very traditional biographical film. There is nothing innately wrong with it, but there lacks anything truly remarkable or memorable either. Tom Hanks plays a very Tom Hanks character and Spielberg provides us with a very classy historic movie. Perhaps it is all just as well because the Cold War was a war of information and not high powered action. And, that is pretty well what you get in this movie. The most thrilling scenes are ones that are already in the trailer. Even James Donovan’s (Hanks) testimony before the U.S. Supreme Court was anti-climactic. Despite the fact it is based on a true story, for cinematic purposes there should have been more emotionally trying scenes or surprise. We seldom get Cold War era movies, so this is a nice addition to historic/bio pictures. Although the descriptive “thriller” has been attached to this movie, I do not find sufficient evidence in the movie to support such a claim. It is a moderate drama–neither heavy nor lite. Perhaps if John Grisham had written a book on this event and that book adapted for the screen, the film would play off more accurately as a spy thriller. As it stands, it is a historic drama. Nothing more, nothing less.

Bridge of Spies is about a Cold War era spy swap in the late 1950s in East Berlin. Suspected Soviet spy Rudolph Abel (Mark Rylance) is apprehended by the FBI in New York and placed under the counsel of successful insurance attorney James Donovan (Hanks). In an effort to show due process, even to suspected spies, the U.S. government provides Abel with a trial by his peers. Following a conviction, Hanks persuades the sentencing judge to allow Abel to live in the event they need him as leverage to trade for captured suspected American spies in Soviet Europe and Russia. Quite the brilliant move because an Air Force pilot and graduate student were both captured by the Soviets shortly after the apprehension of Abel. Follow Donovan as he makes his way to one of the most dangerous parts of Europe during the height of the Cold War in an effort to successfully negotiate a spy swap.

There really isn’t much to add besides what I have already mentioned in my opening. This movie is very par for the course. Hanks and Spielberg provide us with the quality that we are accustomed to receiving from them. I was never bored during the movie, but I was never on the edge of my seat either. Typically, I look to espionage movies for some sense of surprise or intrigue; but, this one plays it like a typical drama based on a true story. As this is not a story or event that many Americans likely know about, it provides insight into what many of the operations during the Cold War may have been like. I do feel that the dialog and character development were lacking. Hanks and the rest of the cast pretty much remain static through the whole movie. Often in movies based on true stories, I like to see dynamic character arcs or redemptions. What I find in this movie is a realistic depiction of this event that likely felt more intense at the time than what is shown of the screen. Perhaps that is it. Maybe, I would have liked the movie a lot more had there has been a pronounced thrilling nature or contained emotionally intense scenes.

If you are looking for a thrilling movie of government espionage, then this is not it. If you are looking for a well-produced biographical movie based on a true story, then this is it. I am certain that Tom Hanks plays the role of Donovan accurately and I commend him for bringing this real-life American hero alive for the screen. At the end of the day, this is a good example of an accurate biographic motion picture and Spielberg proves that he can deliver a classy true story as well as he can an action-adventure movie.