Tag Archives: film critic

“Nocturnal Animals” movie review

Posted on by
Reply

nocturnalanimalsA meta-thriller that is equally shocking, seductive, bizarre, and beautiful all at the same time. Tom Ford’s adaptation of the best-selling novel Tony and Susan (1993) will either repulse or intrigue you from the opening credit sequence. There is definitely a pronounced shock value in this cinematic erotic mystery that includes an incredible amount of symbolism and theming just eager to be interpreted and dissected. Not typically found in mainstream cinema, the avant-garde seems to be the inspiration for many films this year. Nocturnal Animals is one of those films that is destined for discussion in a film or media studies graduate class. With solid acting, writing, and cinematography, you will be sucked into this twisted mystery within the world that the wealthy live in and the real world that most of us live in. You will likely find yourself thinking about what everything means, how it might apply to you, or simply appreciate non-linear storytelling. Although the film certainly rests upon the flashback as a chief storytelling method, Ford plays his cards right and creates a film in which all three stories are equally interesting. You may have heard it said–even by me–that some good movies are poor films; but, this is a case of a good film but a poor movie. That is usually the case with films that fall into the artistic or avant-garde stylistic way of conducting a visual story that contains a strong emotional impact.

Susan Morrow (Amy Adams) is an incredibly successful art gallery owner in Los Angeles. However, the marriage to her second husband is not nearly as successful. He’s often away on business trips to New York. One evening, Susan receives a manuscript written by her first husband (Jake Gyllenhaal)–a once struggling writer and graduate student turned college professor and now professional author. She finds the novel gripping and disturbing. As she continues to pour over the pages dripping with intrigue, she is impacted on a personal level as she uses the world of the novel as a mirror on her own life. Taking her to dark places in her past, Susan finds herself on a path of self-evaluation as she is presently going through emotional and financially hard times.

Cognitive cinema. Focus Features’ Nocturnal Animals is one of those films that requires higher thinking in order to truly appreciate the symbolism and theming. Not that it cannot be enjoyed as a beautifully dark and disturbing story, but there is so much that can be analyzed in this film. From the sequence of obese nude females dancing with sparklers, ringmaster hats, and cheerleader regalia to the reoccurring imagery of crosses and death–both in terms of emotional and physical–director Tom Ford provides audiences with a film that can only be characterized as a mystery that is meta-thriller meets hints of erotica. Even now, I am analyzing the symbolism and theming as I write this review. There are so many elements to talk about. And I think that is the best part about a movie like this. Don’t watch it alone. Not because it is too intense or scary but because you will want to talk to someone about the theming or emotional commentary. I find myself with a deep desire to analyze the film with someone, but none of my friends or colleagues have seen it yet. Visually driven. Even without the dialog, Ford’s Nocturnal Animals can be understood through the imagery in and of itself. Trace amounts of Tom Ford’s legacy as a high fashion designer can easily be seen in the design of this film. And I am not just talking about Adams’ stunning wardrobe and hair/makeup. In many ways, this film–as a whole–is symbolic of high fashion clothing. It can be read in some of the same ways fashion is read and appreciated. Because this is only the second feature length film from Ford, there are elements of the story that give the impression that his talent for visual storytelling is still in the development process as there are times that his method of directing is that of an observant student or scholar of cinema.

There are three distinct narrative threads in this film. (1) is the main story that we open up to at the interpretive and conceptual art exhibit establishing Susan, her gallery, her husband, and lavish lifestyle (2) is the narrative of her first husband Edward Sheffield (Gyllenhaal)’s novel Nocturnal Animals and (3) is the story of the rise and fall of the relationship between Susan and Edward. Juggling three plots is no easy task. Contrary to how it may appear, the narratives are not confusing or incoherent. Each plays an important role in the overarching theme and story of the film. The incoherency is found in the interpretation and analysis of what everything means. It’s as if the film is providing the audience with puzzle pieces that can be arranged to depict something different for everyone. Perhaps you want to read the film as commentary on the relationship between Susan and Edward. Maybe you view it as symbolic of the estranged relationship between Susan and her current husband. Or maybe the novel is self-reflexive of the life Susan has created for herself.

Each story is stylized in such a way that they complement one another–do not necessarily correlate or match each other, but the narratives are complementary. Although the audience is asked to draw their own respective conclusions to the story, presumably Susan’s once lavish and charmed life will continue to rot and crumble as her husband is likely cheating on her just like she cheated on Edward. Still, there is a lot left up to interpretation in the best possible way. The Roger Ebert website review of this film commented that there are parallels between this film and Alice Through the Looking Glass. Fascinating take on this film. That is probably the best analogical interpretation of Nocturnal Animals. Looking at the film in such a way that Susan is Alice and the two other narrative threads are her adventures in Wonderland opens a whole new window through which to view the events as they unfold. On the surface level, there is a clear theme of revenge woven throughout the plot. This is indicated by a painting that catches Susan’s attention on her way to a board meeting. The metaphysical thrilling aspect to the subplot of revenge is the revenge the past has on the present and the present on the past. In a manner of speaking, Susan is listed by ghosts of her past, present, and future. Okay, perhaps not in the same way Scrooge was visited, but there are certainly some commonalities.

If you enjoy films that make you think, then this is definitely one to watch! As it was on a limited release until this weekend, you may not have heard of it but look for it at your local movie theatre. Fans of Blue Velvet will likely enjoy this film as well. Intriguing writing, solid acting, and beautiful cinematography make this a fascinating movie to prompt deep discussions afterwards.

 

Disney’s “A Christmas Carol” (2009) movie review

Posted on by
1

d_a_christmas_carolAn exhilarating visual array of breathtaking motion-capture animation with a touch of the macabre! Disney’s A Christmas Carol directed by Robert Zemeckis is an outstanding adaptation of the literary classic. Instead of attending the cinema this week, with the box office offerings on the anemic side as we gear up for the bulk of Oscar season heavy hitters, I decided to rewatch Disney’s A Christmas Carol. Charles Dickens’ masterpieces have long sense been a source of inspiration for film adaptations of literature. Specifically, A Christmas Carol was actually one of the earliest films period–let alone adaptations. The first adaptation of A Christmas Carol was a British film in 1901 titled Marley’s Ghost. This classic work has been adapted for film, theatre, radio, and television more than 100 original/separate times, collectively. But why??? Why this novel? Quite possibly, this single work of literature has been brought to life for the stage, speaker, or screen more than any other with only a few possible exceptions. Perhaps, because it is simply timeless–transcends all generations. Writer-director Robert Zemeckis showcases his ability to put his spin on the timeless tale by perfecting the motion-capture animation techniques that made his adaptation of The Polar Express so visually stunning. Although Patrick Stewart’s Scrooge in the TNT original movie from 1999 is my favorite Scrooge, I feel strongly that Zemeckis’ film is closest adaptation to the spirit of the novel and brings it to life in the way Dickens himself may have imagined.

London may be anxiously awaiting the arrival of Christmas Day, but the old miser Ebenezer Scrooge (Jim Carrey) could not care any less. He much prefers the company of his money and micro-managing his humble clerk Bob Cratchit (Gary Oldman) at his counting house. After begrudgingly allowing Cratchit to have Christmas Day off, Scrooge heads home. Upon arrival to his stately but lonely townhouse, Scrooge encounters the ghost of his dead–and there is no doubt about that–business partner Jacob Marley (Oldman). In an effort to spare Scrooge his horrifying fate, Marley informs Scrooge that he will be listed by three spirits (Carrey). The ghosts of Christmas past, present, and yet to come respectively take Scrooge on a terrifying journey through his his life in hopes of transforming his selfish bitterness and embrace the selfless love and joy of Christmas.

Prior to analyzing this adaptation, as it is a story most of us know and cherish, I’d like to look at why. Why has this work of literature been adapted for nearly every storytelling medium? The short answer is that it is a story that is as relevant today as it was in the 1800s. Much like with his other masterpieces, Dickens captures so much about the human condition, in what amounts to a short story. The novel is not terribly long. With many in the U.S. feeling as though, much like in Dickens’ world, that we are being divided up into the rich and poor, this novel rings especially true. In fact, there are definitely high profile people in our economy echoing Scrooge’s words “have we no prisons; have we no work houses???” Not that we have a physical debters’ prison or work houses (in the old fashioned sense), but there are certainly elements of our society which parallel them. The story hits close to home for many. Furthermore, the novel, and subsequent adaptations, are regarded so highly because Dickens encapsulated every aspect by which mankind judges one another: past, present, and future. This is the foundation of a single person or people as a unit. Through Scrooge, Dickens shows us that if we look at our past, present, and future, then we can see the impact we have on those around us and even ourselves. By seeing how we really are, we can make the decisions to develop an approach to change ourselves to be about the business of mankind.

Interestingly, the ghosts show Scrooge how Christmas past was a time of magic (although it ended in heartbreak for Scrooge), Christmas present depicts how commercialism and greed have all but wiped out the magic with a glimmer of hope as shown by Cratchit and Fred, and Christmas yet to come shows Scrooge–and us–a world without the magic of Christmas: a world that we created. Another reason why this story is so powerful is because Dickens wrote the character of Scrooge to be a complex, multi-layered human who acts very much like a mirror to many of us. On the surface, he looks like a stereotypical old miser, but after looking into his past, we are given a glimpse of how he evolved–not unlike many of us. This story is also powerful for those who recognize the religious origins of Christmas or not. The focus of the story is on generosity, hospitality, love, compassion, as well as selfishness, greed, and sociopathy; but, it very much includes and makes reference to the religious underpinnings of this special time of year. Simply stated, this is a dynamic story of redemption that transcends generations of people.

Zemeckis’ adaptation is a beautiful usage of 3D storytelling technology. Ordinarily, I am not a fan of 3D movies, but this one is an exception for sure. I did not watch it in 3D last night, but I remember watching it in 3D when it came out in 2009 at the [then] Downtown Disney AMC. Zemeckis is one of few directors who knows how to use 3D effectively without it seeming like a gimmick. His use of 3D in A Christmas Carol greatly enhances the visceral appeal of the movie. One of the principle differences between this and other adaptations is just how supercharged it is with visual effects, intense chase scenes, and flying through the street of London. But, as Scrooge himself acknowledged, spirits can do anything–they’re spirits. Zemeckis does not hold back on the dark elements of the story. If you have read the novel, you will recognize that there are very dark parts. In many respects, A Christmas Carol is a supernatural horror film. After all, how else was Scrooge going be so scared that he would make a 180 and change his miserly ways???

It’s no surprise that Jim Carrey can be seen in the character of Scrooge; however, it is not as apparent that he is the infrastructure of the look of the characters he voiced, as was the case with Tom Hanks’ characters in Zemeckis’ The Polar Express. And this trend is even less apparent with Firth’s, Oldman’s, and Wright’s, respective characters. I love Zemeckis’ embrace of the macabre mood of the story. So often, adaptations of this story lose the very horrifying elements that absolutely terrify Scrooge. Although I remember hearing parents comment that this version was too scary for their kids, I think that having a version that is skewed towards teens and adults was important. Another great element in this film: the score! Alan Silvestri’s score sneaks in some traditional Christmas carols, but you have to listen for such as “God Rest Ye Merry, Gentlemen” when its distinctive cadences turn sinister during a perilous flight through London.

There are few Christmas movies that capture the spirit of the season better than A Christmas Carol. Zemeckis’ adaptation is my pick for best translation of page to screen. The cinematic excellence of Disney storytelling is woven throughout this film and makes for a thrilling journey. If you are planning to watch some Christmas movies this holiday season, I highly recommend this version of A Christmas Carol. But if you have very young children, it may be a little too scary for them. Whether you are young or young at heart, the magic of Christmas rings all too loudly in this timeless story brought to screen once again.

“Arrival” movie review

Posted on by
1

arrivalposterYou’ll want to see it again. Prepare yourself for an extraordinary cinematic journey in this science-fiction thriller complete with commentary on the human condition. From the exhilarating cinematography to the incredible awe-inspiring visual effects, Arrival will have you hooked from the very beginning. Based on the book Story of Your Life and Directed by Denis Villeneuve (Sicario & Prisoners), Arrival boasts an outstanding cinematic experience that is as much cerebral as it is visceral. Your very perceptions of time and memory will be questioned and force you to open your mind to endless possibilities. Poignantly, this film takes you on a journey that will show you that we need to change and that we can change. On the verge of avant-garde, Arrival pushes the limits of traditional visual storytelling and creates an innovative method for conveying social commentary within the science-fiction genre. Following the final fade to black, you’ll want to discuss this film with your friends. Reignite your sense of wonder. Arrival is more than a story; it’s an experience!

After twelve egg-like unidentified objects land on earth, the U.S. Government calls upon expert linguist Dr. Louise Banks (Amy Adams) and theoretical physicist Ian Donnelly (Jeremy Renner) to crack the mystery and develop a means of communication with the homogenous alien species. While much of the world is on the brink of an all-out assault on the aliens, Banks is determined to establish a rapport and open communications with the species. Starting with basic words and working up to complex sentences, Banks knows she has to learn the aliens’ language in order to better understand why they have come. When things take a turn for the worst, Banks and Donnelly have precious little time to stop countries from engaging in battle with risk of war. With so little time to unravel the mystery of why the aliens are here and what they want, Banks will find herself on a mind-blowing journey of her own.

You’ve just got to see it. There is so much that I want to talk about, but it would spoil so much of the film. I’ve mentioned before that there are great ‘movies’ that are mediocre ‘films,’ but this is a prime example of an excellent movie AND brilliant film. The brilliance of this film is not in the stunning visuals, although that is certainly part of it; the brilliance lies within the cinematic and experiential storytelling. During the big reveal at the end of the film, your mind will be blown. You’ll find yourself wanting to watch it again to more clearly understand the strategic placement of the pieces of the puzzle. During a time in which the country appears so incredibly fractured, this film will provide audiences with a renewed sense of wonder and appreciation for that which one may not fully understand. Making the tough calls and putting one’s life at risk of what is right is also woven throughout this story. The theme of Arrival is not fully realized until the latter half of the film. More than a surface-level story about that which I cannot mention without giving it away, this film possesses a dynamic range of themes just beckoning for interpretation. As this film bares much similarity to avant-garde cinema in the reimagining of traditional storytelling, it will evoke a powerful emotional response.

Amy Adams and Jeremy Renner deliver outstanding performances in the lead roles. Taking center stage for most of the film, Adams breaks new ground as an actor in this role that is nearly a complete departure from most of her other roles. Both Adams and Renner display excellent chemistry in their respective characters. Although Adams is the central character and responsible for the drive of the plot, Renner is strategically placed to reinforce the affects Adams’ character has upon the plot. Forest Whitaker also plays a strong colonel and was an excellent choice for his role as well. The success of the cast can be attributed to both the outstanding direction from Villeneuve and the incredible screenplay by Eric Heisserer. Bradford Young’s cinematography is so simple but yet so beautiful and profound. It is of no surprise that this film is being touted as one of the best movies of the year and has a nearly unprecedented 100% on Rotten Tomatoes.

Whether you are a linguist yourself or just enjoy an exhilarating cinematic journey, Arrival is definitely the film to catch this weekend. For the Star Trek TNG or Voyager fans out there, you will find that Arrival possesses some of the same great content that sets Star Trek apart from other science-fiction shows due to the human condition being central to the overall plot. If you enjoy movies that prompt you to revisit how you perceive your life, time, or space, then you will not be disappointed. There are so many levels to this film. You’ll likely find yourself wanting to see it again after fully realizing the innovative plot. Hopefully this film receives some Oscar noms in the upcoming award season.

“Doctor Strange” movie review

Posted on by
3

drstrangeA perfect blend of stunning visual effects, character development, and even a hint of the avant-garde in this strange superhero film of East-meets-West. Unpredictable. That is definitely not a word typically associated with superhero genre movies. Not that the plot was entirely unpredictable, but Benedict Cumberbatch delivers a very Patrick Stewart-esque performance as the neurosurgeon turned mystic Dr. Strange in the film that bares his name. This is a superhero film that strikes a strategic balance between traditional superhero storytelling and social commentary. Not without the trademark explosions and dynamic action sequences, Doctor Strange is clearly concerned with and focusses on the character development of Dr. Strange. In a film that could have so easily rested its laurels upon the innovative, intriguing, and exquisite visual effects, it chose to place more emphasis on the drama between characters. Ordinarily, if you follow my blog, you know that I do not typically write positively about superhero films, with some exceptions such as: Batman Returns, Deadpool, X-Men: Days of Future Past, or Guardians of the Galaxy; however, Marvel/Disney’s Doctor Strange was incredibly enjoyable as both a movie AND film (and yes, there is a difference). For those in the audience who perhaps struggle with being self-centered, the plot and character development in Doctor Strange will likely ring true and act as a mirror of how you may actually come across to people; and furthermore, how to break the cycle. Although this is clearly a typical blockbuster movie, there are trace-amounts of many elements often found in art house films in the stylistic way some of the sequences are shot. Doctor Strange, a truly multidimensional experience.

From Italian sports cars, European watches, and Armani suits to a rundown far eastern temple, famous neurosurgeon Dr. Stephen Strange’s life radically changes after a severe car accident leaves him without full use of his hands. As an expert in the field of bio-medical science, Dr. Strange seeks assistance from traditional western medicine. Convinced that no one except he alone can repair the nerve damage in his hands, Dr. Strange turns to eastern medicine following an encounter with someone who now walks who was paralyzed. Learning that the mysterious enclave of monk-like mystics is a front to a battle beyond the plains of normal existence, Dr. Strange is faced with the decision to use his newly acquired abilities to help fight against the evil seeking to rip the fabric-work of the earth from beneath the feet of millions of innocent citizens or use his powers to regain full use of his hands. With such a deep desire to go back to his successful life in western medicine and to repair a relationship he squandered (Rachel McAdams), he is faced with a monumental decision.

No slow wind up here. Doctor Strange‘s prologue is a breathtaking array of choreography and a dizzying spectacle of Inception-like folding of matter and energy visual effects. Instead of wondering why or who, the audience will be in sheer amazement at the beauty of it all. Opening with a prologue like this was critically important for this comic book icon that many had not heard of prior to the announcement of the movie (‘many’ as in those who are unfamiliar with the comics). Director Scott Derrickson (Exorcism of Emily Rose and Sinister) has clearly approached the Marvel universe from a different direction that most others, and it shows just how perfect a decision it was of Marvel/Disney to select him for the job. Although I was greatly impressed with the visual effects and fight choreography, I was worried that I was going to need to take a dramamine to make it through the majority of the movie. But then, it happened. A veritable bait-and-switch. From an action-packed Matrix-y sequence through a view of Manhattan as seen through a kaleidoscope of shapes and distortions to an operating table, I did not know the direction this film was going. Perfect. So often superhero movies are basic–fun–but basic. I also appreciated the humorous juxtaposition between the seriousness of surgery against the backdrop of late 1970’s rock music. Just within the first few minutes of this film, I was convince that this movie was going to be unconventional but strangely enjoyable.

Such a great cast! Part of the success of any movie is the cast and the respective roles they deliver. Not merely selected for their respective appearances, the main cast of Doctor Strange each brings a unique blend of talent into the mix. Cumberbatch plays an eccentric ego-maniacal self-centered high on himself doctor extremely well. So well that his development was quite convincing on his journey from selfishness to selflessness. Playing opposite him most of the movie is Tilda Swinton (Wes Anderson veteran actress seen in movies such as The Grand Budapest Hotel, Moonrise Kingdom, and more recently in the Cohen brothers’ Hail, Caesar!) as the Ancient One. She provides the ideal counterbalance to Strange’s over-inflated ego. Difficult to read, I was never quite sure which team she was on, and you’ll have to watch the movie to find out. Her performance was dynamic and convincing. Cast in the role of spurned lover Dr. Christine Palmer, Rachel McAdams does her McAdams thing so incredibly well. I also greatly appreciate how even when dressed in hospital scrubs she still graces the screen with her beauty. She may have bet spurned by Strange, but she gives it right back to him. Each and every member of the principle and supporting cast truly contributed to the success of the storytelling in this film.

At the core of this film is solid writing. The characters are multidimensional and the writing contains a bountiful buffet of bright, brisk entertainment that typically seems to do justice to the feel of the comics. Not saying the all the Marvel Movies (whether Disney or Fox) are better comic book adaptations than D.C. (Warner Bros), but they operate on a tried and true method of delivering a visually driven story that appeals to general audiences. Due to the fact that Doctor Strange and other Marvel movies DO rely upon tried and true methods of cinematic storytelling, there is little to no risk for the production and distribution companies. On that note, the D.C. movies are typically more edgy and riskier. Despite the rather dark plot of Doctor Strange, there is sufficient humor here and there to keep the audience from entering into a stagnate emotional state.

Whether you are familiar with the comic book series Doctor Strange or not, this is definitely a movie and film worth watching. Even if you have not seen the other Marvel movies (which is doubtful but possible), you can watch this one and not feel lost at all. That is likely due to the fact that Disney/Marvel knew that most people were unfamiliar with this character and needed to be introduced to him and his universe. If you’re into innovative visual effects, then you will be in awe at the effects and editing of Doctor Strange as well.

“Inferno” movie review

Posted on by
Reply

infernoFamed symbologist Robert Langdon is back in a fiery installment in the franchise that bears his name. Sony Pictures and Imagine Entertainment’s Inferno is a non-stop rollercoaster of an adventure film that combines art, history, literature, bio-medical science, and weapons of mass destruction in a heart-pounding thriller that makes academia and public health look sexy. As expected, Tom Hanks delivers an outstanding performance as the Indiana Jones of symbols and puzzles and the visual storytelling is excellent. From the moment the film opens with incoherent subjective flashes through the eyes of Langdon suffering from amnesia, shaky camera movements, and glimpses of disturbing apocalyptic imagery to the final showdown beneath Instanbul’s Hagia Sophia, Inferno will command your attention for the two-hour runtime. Unlike the two previous installments in the Langdon franchise, there is a conspicuous lack of commentary on organized religion by deciphering puzzles and revealing coverups and more of a focus on art history and rhetoric. This focus provides a far more believable plot than found in The Da Vinci Code and lesser so in Angels and Demons. With bio-medical warfare being at the center of this film, the movie paints a realistic portrait of how a Dante-spouting sociopath might try to fix the world’s problems by wiping out half the population with a destructive plague.

Waking up in a state of incoherency and amnesia in an Italian hospital in Florence, Robert Langdon (Hanks) is thrust into running–or hobbling, rather–for his life. Under the guidance and protection of a beautiful ER doctor (Felicity Jones), Langdon barely escapes with his life. Dazed and confused, Langdon must concentrate on piecing together a puzzle–no surprise there–but this time, the puzzle begins with how he got to Italy and why he is carrying a bio-medical tube. From puzzle to mystery, Langdon and Dr. Brooks (Jones) are forced into an adventure that blind-sided them. After discovering a connection between a dead sociopathic billionaire madman and the Italian poet Dante (The Divine Comedy), Langdon and Brooks race across Europe to stop a devastating plague from killing off more than half of the world’s population. Between stopping the plague and constantly under siege by the WHO (World Health Organization) and a private security firm, Langdon is truly racing against the clock to piece together his own life while making the connections in the puzzle left by the deceased sociopath to save the world.

Although in previous installments in the Langdon franchise have the symbologist traversing across Europe and even the world, this film’s plot is mostly concentrated in Florence. Home to some of the most notable works of art in the world, Inferno might work as an unconventional travel guide for the tourism industry in Italy. Far less cerebral than The Da Vinci Code and to a lesser extent Angels and Demons, Inferno is far more visceral, exciting, and thrilling. The lack of religious/historic irony will definitely stick out to those who either read the books and/or watch the movies (I am the latte); however, that does not hinder the film’s delivery of an action-adventure taking place within the worlds of the arts and medical science. With the previous installment Angels and Demons being released in 2009, the high-impact feeling of Inferno is incredibly important because there has been such a long gap between the films. Still, the plot of Inferno does not have the finesse that both previous films have. Although this installment is incredibly enjoyable and entertaining, it lacks the opportunity to question, think, and analyze the mystery at hand.

Another contrast between this present installment and the previous two is the character-heavy plot. Occasionally, the film felt overrun with characters. Albeit, most of the characters are interesting and also possess brilliant minds, at times the plot is overcrowded. Perhaps that was intentional since the billionaire madman claims that the population should be reduced because of overcrowding the earth; however, it’s more likely that writer David Koepp and director Ron Howard were attempting to get as much of the novel on screen as possible. Not having read the novel, I am unable to comment on the translation from page to screen beyond inference. Despite the character-heavy plot, the film is not without the trademark art, history, literature, and enigmas that are synonymous with the Langdon series of books/films. Beginning with a reimagined map of Hell based on the one described by Dante in The Divine Comedy and illustrated by Botticelli, the film’s plot does come back to the puzzles but most of the time is spent being chased by nearly everyone.

The best part about this film is just how exciting it is. If you are even remotely interested in it, you won’t be disappointed. As this is a franchise, and franchises tend to have intentional or unintentional patterns of behavior within the cast of characters or similarly functioning plot devices, there are definitely elements in this installment that are found in the previous two. There is one plot twist that bares a striking resemblance to one in The Da Vinci Code. The non-stop action will likely kindle an interest in pursuing a career as an academic or official with the WHO. Perhaps, the study of symbols, numbers, and taxonomy, will be of greater interest to current students. There are just enough loose ends and unanswered questions that keep the film from being too predictable.

Looking for an exciting cinematic adventure for the weekend? That is, when you are not either at or recovering from a Halloween party. Check out Inferno! Not Halloween-themed at all, but it is a fun adventure full of excitement and you’ll learn a thing or two about art, history, and literature.