BQB here with a review of Christopher Nolan’s World War II flick, “Dunkirk.”
It’s May of 1940. The Nazis have swept into France and pushed allied British and French troops to the sea. 400,000 troops await evacuation while being pinned down by Nazi fighter/bomber warplanes.
The stakes are high. The loss of 400,000 troops would be a terrible loss for the allies, hindering their chances of victory. However, Churchill has surmised that to send in Navy warships to pick up the men would be a suicide mission, essentially sinking the much needed ships.
Thus, it’s a death defying escape mission. The film switches back and forth between various parties. British Fighter Pilot Farrier (Tom Hardy) patrols the scene, shooting down German fighters and watching the backs of those on the ground below. Meanwhile, Mark Rylance plays Mr. Dawson, one of the many private citizens who volunteered to take their commercial/fishing boats into the war zone to help rescue the troops. He dukes it out with Cillian Murphy, a battle weary soldier he’s picked up who, for obvious reasons, is scared to return to Dunkirk.
Soldiers trapped in the hold of a ship hunker down to avoid the constant gunfire piercing the ship’s hull. Kenneth Branagh, the highest ranking officer on the scene, makes a lot of sullen facial expressions every time one of his subordinates delivers bad news, essentially capturing the fear that death might be certain and imminent.
If you’re looking for a plot driven film, you might be disappointed. There isn’t much intrigue. There aren’t any twists. There isn’t much in the way of getting to know the characters or their backstory. It’s basically a battle reenactment caught on film.
It’s a pretty intense ride. Nolan makes ample use of ominous music, making you feel as though a Nazi fighter pilot might drop a bomb on your head at any minute. He also works wonders with sound, the explosions are so loud and jarring you can feel them rattle you, probably the closest experience to war that can be provided through a film.
History flicks are always a risk. The general public does not want to be educated. They want to be entertained. However, Nolan earned his bones through Batman, giving him the ability to preserve this heroic tale on film, one where the military and private citizens came together in a swift, massive effort to avoid a defeat that could have been staggering.
STATUS: Shelf-worthy. Worth a trip to the theater.
Are you going to bark all day little 3.5 doggies, or are you going to bite?
BQB here with a little green bag of a discussion about Quentin Tarantino’s 1992 film debut, “Reservoir Dogs.” What can you 3.5 aspiring writers learn from this flick? A lot.
Non-Linear Storytelling
Tarantino was the main pioneer of this type of storytelling, namely, when a writer starts at the end and works back to the beginning, rather than start from the beginning and work the story until its conclusion.
In this case, we get an introductory scene where a group of criminals are sitting down for breakfast in a diner. They trade jokes and we get a sense of each individual’s style.
Next thing you know, Mr. White (Harvey Keitel) is driving Mr. Orange (Tim Roth) to a hideout. Mr. Orange has been shot in the gut, an apparent sign that a planned diamond store heist went bad.
You’re never actually shown the heist. Most of the film takes place in a warehouse/hideout as the characters try to figure out how their heist went so wrong, why the police were waiting for them, and most importantly, which member of the crew is the rat who told the cops about the job?
From there, the film goes into flashbacks where we see bits and pieces of the escape from the heist that went wrong, as well as some past “get to know” some of the characters scenes. The film always returns to the warehouse as the characters move the story forward, trying to figure out who did the crew wrong.
Tarantino could have done this a different way. He could have started with the backstory of the characters in the beginning, put the heist that goes wrong in the middle, and have the fighting over who the rat is at the end.
Wouldn’t that have been boring though? Instead, Tarantino chooses to put the most exciting part first. You jump right into the action – a blood soaked back seat, a pained Mr. Orange screaming out in terror about his impending demise, a calm Mr. White driving a getaway car while holding Mr. Orange’s hand, telling him he’ll be ok.
Your mind immediately asks the question, “How did this heist go so wrong?” And now you want to sit back and let Uncle Quentin tell you how.
Doing More with Less
This was the first film Tarantino directed. Sure, he had a bigger budget than any of us indie writers, but still, he didn’t have much compared to other big name films of the day.
Even so, he did a lot with very little. Consider:
Mr. Blonde’s soda cup – We have a scene where Mr. Pink (Steve Buscemi) and Mr. White (Harvey Keitel) have turned guns on each other, both men starting to lose it as they’re trying to figure out who the rat is and how to avoid going to jail. Suddenly, we are interrupted by a tell tale sip. Mr. Blonde (Michael Madsen) is sipping soda out of a fast food cup through a straw. The implication? Mr. Blonde does not give a shit. He is an unfeeling psychopath. Any rational person would be scared out of their minds, consumed with fear that the cops will bust down the door any second. Mr. Blonde? He murdered a bunch of people in a heist, and then during a citywide search, he stopped at a drive-through to get some food. He literally did not give a shit that he’d get killed or sent to prison, he was not unsettled by the murders he committed, he was perfectly content to stop for fast food and have a bite to eat while there was a manhunt for him and his crew in progress. Keep in mind this is not stated. It’s all about show and tell. Here, for the price of a ten cent soda cup, Tarantino told us an epic shit ton about Mr. Blonde’s character.
Steve Buscemi’s gunfight with the cops – So many gun scenes are cliches. Both sides fight. No one gets hit. No one has to reload. The guns are easy to control, there’s no kickback, everything works out. Here, Tarantino shows us the furious side of a gun battle. Buscemi empties his gun at incoming police until his clip runs out. You see police officers fall in pain, you see the stress on Buscemi’s face. The message? Real life gun battles aren’t all summer blockbuster hocus pocus. Shit gets really terrifying, really fast.
The nonlinear format itself – I have a hunch that the nonlinear format helped Tarantino save money. He could have dropped a ton of dough on a major heist scene, show the criminals in an elaborate robbery, followed by epic gunfights and car chases. Instead, he trusts the actors to tell us about it as they try to piece together the mystery of the rat and the actors do well, the stress they are obviously feeling tells us they were just involved in some heavy shit.
Setting Your Story to a Soundtrack
Tarantino invents a 1970s music station that everyone is listening to throughout the film. It makes for a retro vibe, and Tarantino was surely trying to pay homage to the cheesy Beretta style crime dramas of his youth.
Playing “Little Green Bag” as the criminals walk down the street gives us a sense that these are some hardcore pricks.
Meanwhile, in an iconic scene, Mr. Blonde tortures a police officer set to the sounds of “Stuck in the Middle with You.” This song is a happy song, one that makes you want to smile and dance…but it shows what a psycho Mr. Blonde is, namely, that he is enjoying dancing to this happy beat while he’s cutting off a cop’s ear and setting him on fire.
Most people would never do such a thing. The few that would usually know that this would be no time to dance. Mr. Blonde is a special kind of crazy.
Of course, you don’t have the rights to use popular songs like Tarantino did. However, I find that my writing is helped when I listen to songs related to time periods I am writing in. It puts me in the mood.
How Nonlinear Storytelling Can Fix Plot Holes
Suppose you are a hardened criminal fresh off a botched diamond heist that went wrong due to a rat. Who would you immediately suspect?
If you said, “The New Guy,” congratulations. You’re acting like a stylish, early 1990s diamond robber.
The irony is the film goes for most of its length with the characters fighting over who the rat is. We aren’t told there is a new guy until we get towards the end. Then we discover Mr. Orange is the new guy and also an undercover cop. Spoiler? Shut up, you’ve had since 1992 to watch this thing.
But that’s the thing. You’re not a stylish early 1990s diamond robber, so you weren’t thinking like one. Maybe “the new guy” might have popped into your head, but you don’t find out until the end that there was a new guy. Once you do, you realize the whole crew is apparently very, very, ridiculously stupid. I mean, they knew he was the new guy. Why didn’t any of them go, “Hey, I think the new guy might be the rat…”
Had Tarantino followed a linear format and told us up front that Mr. Orange was the new guy, he’d of been the obvious rat suspect, giving away the story’s most vexing question.
Conclusion
With this film and its followup, “Pulp Fiction,” Tarantino inspired a generation of filmmakers and writers, challenging them to abandon the rules in favor of coolness, style, and better yet, to grab the viewer’s attention and draw them in.
Think about writing like dating. If you are super rich and have a ten foot King Kong penis, you might want to drop that information sooner rather than later. If you make your date wait until the tenth date to find out your most amazing qualities, she might get bored by then and switch you off, like your audience will do with your writing.
In other words, Tarantino dares us to start with the ice cream first, and then we’ll work our way to the meat and potatoes. Give us that bloody gunshot victim screaming in pain in the backseat right away, and then we’ll stick around to fight out how he got into such a terrible state.
You can do this too, if you dare. Begin with the most awesome part of your story, then explain how we got there.
Strap on your web slinger, true believer. It’s going to be a bumpy ride.
BQB here with a review of Spider-Man: Homecoming.
I’m just going to say it, 3.5 readers. This is the best movie ever made about America’s favorite wall crawler. The first two Tobey Maguire films were great. The first Andrew Garlfield one was decent but this one blew me away.
In this incarnation, a very young, inexperienced Peter Parker (Tom Holland) is fresh off his big mission helping Tony Stark fight a rogue Captain America. Months have passed and Stark has named Peter his “intern.” Peter hopes this means another awesome mission is coming his way but alas, Stark thinks Peter is too young. He has a point. At a mere fifteen years old (and being played by an actor around that age), this is the youngest Spidey we’ve seen on film.
Not willing to rest on his laurels and take the time to hone his skills (as Stark advises), Peter seeks action and finds it in the form of the Vulture, Michael Keaton as a contractor who is screwed out of a contract to clean up they city after an Avenger vs. aliens fight and decides to use the alien technology he finds for nefarious purposes instead.
The movie moves fast, putting Peter in all sorts of trouble, ranging from a rescue mission at the Washington monument to a showdown on the Staten Island ferry. Throughout this whole ordeal, Peter tries to balance out his social life, trying to score babes at parties, building lego sets with buddy Ned, competing in the Academic Decathlon and bringing dream girl Liz to the Homecoming dance. The film brings just enough high school drama so you realize what pressures a teenage hero is under without turning the whole thing into American Pie with tights.
Overall, Disney/Marvel has spent nine years building an extensive cinematic universe, filled with its own backstory and folklore. This film is the ultimate payoff. Because so much has been built already, we can dive right into the action and be spared the origin story that’s been drilled into us so many times before. There’s no need for us to see Peter cry as he realizes he failed to save Uncle Ben. Been there. Done that.
STATUS: Shelf-worthy. Worth a trip to the theater. Check it out, 3.5 readers.
BQB here with a review of the totally twisted psychological thriller/horror flick, “The Belko Experiment.”
In Bogota, Columbia, 80 Americans work in a high rise tower owned by the international corporation, “Belko Industries.” High security cuts the building off from the outside as the employees conduct their business in South America.
One day, completely at random, a scary voice comes over the loudspeakers. The employees are told they are expected to kill a certain number of their fellow co-workers by a certain time. Should they fail, even more employees will be killed. Even worse, actions are taken to assure the employees that this demand is real and not a joke.
As you might expect, chaos reigns supreme as a group of once mild mannered office workers go batshit crazy. Factions are raised. Sides are taken. Lines are drawn and crossed.
Employee Mike Milch (John Gallagher Jr.) takes the noble position that murder is not acceptable under any circumstances, that everyone should just remain calm, refuse to kill anyone, and it will all pass. He and his followers focus on survival and escape.
Meanwhile, company boss Barry Norris (Tony Goldwyn) takes the utilitarian approach, i.e., it would be better to kill the number of people demanded rather than allow even more people to get killed. To that end, he creates his own murder squad with his sidekick, the uber creepy Wendell Dukes (John McGinley in his douchiest role yet and that’s saying a lot for a man who has made a career of playing douches.)
Overall, the movie is more than a bit sick and twisted. There’s gore aplenty and the body counts really rack up, with mass executions being put on full display in which employees are rounded up, herded like cattle and summarily murdered. It’s definitely one of the scarier, more gruesome horror flicks I’ve seen in a long time.
There’s definitely a disturbing theme throughout. I mean, how well do you think you know your co-workers? Sure, that guy who plugs along at work all day and gives you a warm smile when you pass him in the hallway seems nice enough, but do you really have any way of knowing that he wouldn’t hack you to pieces if it ever came down to you or him?
What is a life worth? Are older people worth less than the young? Are parents worth more than those without children? All these questions are asked and more as Norris attempts to come up with the most efficient formula for committing utilitarian murder.
Who is right? Is Milch right that there is never a circumstance where murder is justified? Is Norris right that it’s better to kill some in order to save many?
Just how much chaos needs to be introduced into a normally sane environment before everyone goes nuts, picks up whatever implements of destruction they can find and start chasing each other down?
Overall, the film is tight. It moves fast. There are many parts that are downright gross and disturbing to say the least. While we hope that a “Belko Experiment” is never conducted, I have a hunch that this film has, more or less, accurately predicted how a building full of office workers would react if somehow their usually comfortable work environment were to descend into a “Lord of the Flies on Acid” situation.
This one has been getting bad reviews and honestly, I can see why. When you’ve got Will Ferrell, Amy Poehler and Jason Mantzoukas of “Raffi” from “The League” fame, you’d expect better, but if you did, you were disappointed.
The premise is simple enough. Will and Amy are parents to Alex, who has just been accepted to the university of her dreams. Alas, when an expected scholarship falls through, Will and Amy realize they have done Jack Squat when it comes to saving so…yeah I know most people might take out a second mortgage, maybe ask the kid to get a part-time job and extend college out by an extra year or two to cover the cost but ok, they create an illegal, underground casino right in the middle of the neighborhood instead.
Their partner in crime is Frank (Mantzoukas), a degenerate gambler who has lost his wife due to the debt he has racked up. Together, the trio works to make their underground casino the tightest club in their little town, making boku bucks so Will and Amy can send Alex to college and Frank can save his home from foreclosure and get his wife back.
Along the way, the trio comes into contact with typical casino problems. Cheaters try to game the system. Mobsters pay a visit. Soccer moms engage in fist fights. The usual nonsense.
Nick Kroll play’s the film’s villain, a city councilman who has hatched a scheme to abscond with the trio’s dough.
There’s a lot of stupidity in this film, and not the good, fun kind. My first reaction to Will and Amy’s money woes is that they appear to have a pretty sweet, above average house, so they probably could get a loan to help their kid out. Also, it seems unlikely that a family who had it together enough to maintain a sweet house like that didn’t have any kind of savings but ok, comedies break the rules and require us to suspend disbelief.
My rule if a comedy is good? Did it make me laugh? Yes. I laughed one time, when Amy made an inappropriate gesture with a small hand torch. Other than that, it was a pretty predictable comedy with a lot of flat jokes.
All I can say is with three top notch comedians, I expected more.
STATUS: Borderline shelf-worthy. Don’t bother seeing it at the theater, but it’s worth a rental if you have nothing better to do.
BQB here with a review of the schlock fest, “CHiPs.”
It seems like every old show of yesteryear is destined to be brought back as a parody today, and CHiPs, a 1970s-1980s show about a duo of California Highway motorcycle patrolmen is the latest victim.
In this go around, Dax Shepard plays Jon Baker, a motorcycle daredevil turned rookie patrol officer and Michael Pena plays Ponch, an FBI agent assigned to infiltrate CHiPs in order to expose corrupt cops within the unit.
The critics have lambasted this movie wholeheartedly. I have to admit, it is a movie that I could take or leave. To its credit, there were a few things I found funny that made me laugh, always a good sign of a comedy. However, by the end, I found myself fiddling with my phone and letting it play in the background, so it wasn’t able to capture my interest all the way through.
There are some cool bike chase scenes and part of me wonders if just a straight up serious film about California bike cops vs. crooks minus the comedy might have been more successful.
STATUS: Bordeline shelf-worthy. I laughed a couple of times but had I never rented it, I don’t think I would have missed much.
BQB here with a review of the movie that took his money and time and refuses to give either one back.
Yeah, it stinks. It’s pretty bad, so thank me for watching it so you don’t have to.
Charlie Day and Ice Cube are teachers at a high school. On the last day of the year, the senior pranks are out of control, ranging from paint bomb explosions to a mariachi band getting paid to follow the principal (Dean Norris) wherever he goes.
Charlie inadvertently gets Ice Cube fired. Ice Cube’s response? To challenge Charlie to an after school fight, a move that so many students have used to resolve their differences in the past.
Charlie is presented as a wimpy worm who then goes on a series of adventures throughout the day in an effort to keep the fight from happening. Perhaps that would be humorous except for the reality that Ice Cube is twice the size of Charlie and twice as menacing, ergo anyone in their right mind would avoid a fight with him. Somehow, the writers want us to think, “Ha ha what a wuss Charlie is for avoiding a fight with Ice Cube” but who wouldn’t want to avoid a fight with Ice Cube? Ice Cube has put at least thirty years and some change into developing a “don’t mess with me” persona.
I realize in comedy, the rules often go out the window in the name of humor. However, there is usually at least some kind of premise that the jokes can build on. Here, there isn’t one.
It’s unlikely that a teacher would challenge another teacher to a fight, but we’re shown Ice Cube’s character is a hot head so, ok, we’ll go with it. But even after Charlie fixes the mess he made of Ice Cube’s career and smooths it all over, Ice Cube wants to fight anyway. There’s literally no making sense of any of it. No matter what happens, Ice Cube wants to fight.
At some point, the writers need to create a villain, someone to blame the fight on, so Norris and the Superintendent (the guy from the All State commercials whose name I don’t feel like looking up right now) are briefly shown as firing teachers, making a lot of budget cuts…somehow we’re told the fight is the result of all the stress the bosses cause teachers except, well, if you watch it, that really had nothing to do with it. In reality, Ice Cube’s character did something worthy of being fired and most teachers in Charlie Day’s position would not have hesitated to tell on him.
Tracey Morgan as the school’s incompetent coach who can’t win a game, Christina Hendricks as the hot French teacher who mistakenly believes Charlie is a pervert who deserves to be beaten down by Ice Cube and Jillian Bell as a sex crazed guidance counselor were not able to save the movie.
Bell’s character is particularly disturbing. She lusts after male students, openly declaring her love of “teenage penis” or “tenis.” I get that it’s done to parody so many news stories where a teacher has been caught doing inappropriate things with a student, to say, “hey, look, teachers who do that are bad people” but I don’t know, the jokes just seemed more gross and inappropriate than funny. Maybe it’s because it’s so sad and disturbing when teachers abuse their position of trust like that, that somehow it just doesn’t seem like a laughing matter.
The movie culminates in a Daddy/Daughter talent show competition, as Charlie has been concerned all day that the impending fist fight will cause him to miss performing with his daughter. At the last minute, the daughter changes the song from the theme to the musical “Rent” to a vulgar, profanity laced rap song by Big Sean. Charlie is unaware of the song’s content so goes along with it, only to be horrified when his little girl, who can’t be more than eight years old, starts rapping and spewing out F-bombs to a horrified crowd of little kids, parents and teachers.
I get there was supposed to be a joke somewhere in the shock value, but it just made me want to pick up the phone and call child services. I mean, I guess it’s legal to hire a little girl to say the F-word over and over again on film…but should it be?
That’s the rub when it comes to shock comedy. When done right, it can leave you slapping your knees and rolling in the aisles. When done wrong, it just leaves you questioning the comedy chops of the people behind the film.
STATUS: Not-shelfworthy. I watched it so you don’t have to. Go ahead and skip this one.
BQB here with a review of the heist/car chase/romance/action/quasi-musical film, “Baby Driver.”
3.5 readers, I have to be honest. When I first saw the trailer for this movie, I thought it would be crap. It looked like a lame attempt to marry a youthful pop song vibe to a heist film, two genres whose audiences don’t mix and mingle well together.
Turns out, I was wrong. I know. You all look up to me but yes, it does happen once in a blue moon. This movie is great and quite frankly, one of the best and most original I have seen all year.
Director Edgar Wright has wowed us with comedies like Simon Pegg comedies like “Shaun of the Dead” and “Hot Fuzz” and even brought us musical silliness with “Scott Pilgrim vs. the World.”
Here, Wright brings us some serious stakes but he does so with style…oh, so much style. And that’s no easy feat, for whenever an attempt at style falls flat, a movie buff like me is standing by to shout, “lame!”
But shout I did not, unless you count shouts of joy.
Baby (Ansel Elgort) is maestro behind the wheel…literally. He’s obsessed with good tunes and never goes anywhere without a pair of ear buds in his ears. Sadly, he’s also forced to be the getaway driver for a heist ring led by Doc (Kevin Spacey), with robbers including Griff (Jon Bernthal of “The Walking Dead” fame), Buddy (Jon Hamm of “Mad Men” fame), Darling (Elza Gonzalez of gives me a boner fame), JD (Lanny Joon, I’m not sure what he’s famous for but he has the funniest line of the movie), and Eddie (Flea of “Red Hot Chili Peppers” fame).
When the cash has been grabbed and the police sirens begin to wail, Baby tunes out all that noise and focuses on his tunes, letting the music take control, allowing him to push his driving skills to the limit. This makes for some pretty sweet car chase scenes where the getaway car’s movements are timed to coincide with the beat of whatever Baby is listening to. Epically stylish.
But Baby doesn’t like this life. He knows his foster father Joe (CJ Jones) does not approve and wants him to walk the straight and narrow path. Plus, he falls for waitress Debora (Lily James) and envisions a life with her. The kid just wasn’t meant for a life of crime, and he doesn’t care much for the violent actions of the criminals he’s forced to transport.
Will Baby write the ultimate getaway playlist? Or, will he sing his final swan song? Can’t tell you. You’ll have to see it for yourself.
Speaking of playlists, the film’s score is great, featuring hits from a plethora of decades and genres. No matter when you were born or what your preferred genre is, it is unlikely you’ll get out of the film without hearing at least one tune that strikes your fancy. Music from 1970-present (with an emphasis on the 1970s if I’m not mistaken) and some of the genres I recall include pop, rock and yes, even rap. Baby’s got an iPod for every occasion and a song for every mood and Wright uses those songs to clue the audience in on what mood they should be in.
Kevin Spacey is his usual “I’m smarter than all of you” self. Jon Hamm finally gets a role where it doesn’t look like he just shows up on the set and says “Hi I’m Jon Hamm. Film me because I’m a beautiful man.” Jamie Foxx is the scary wild card and if his intention was to make me pee my pants in fear…well, I didn’t pee but otherwise, yes, I think I would if I had actually met his character in real life.
Ansel Elgort has a future and there are some touching scenes between him and CJ Jones, a deaf actor who play’s Baby’s deaf foster father.
STATUS: Shelf-worthy, a great example of what Hollywood can accomplish when they take a break from all the sequels and prequels and give a director permission to let his freak flag fly. I also love it whenever I go into a movie thinking it will be a pile of crap and end up being a big fan. It’s so much better than when I go into a movie as a big fan only to be disappointed when it turns out to be a pile of crap.
King Arthur meets the Transformers in this, the fifth attempt by Michael Bay to score boku cash over you wanting to share your love of 1980s based robots with your kids.
BQB here with a review of “Transformers: The Last Knight.”
I’m not sure what to make of this one, 3.5 readers. The critics are ripping it apart, saying it’s basically a big old stink burger that transforms into a poop burger. Actually, I said that because I think it’s funny, but the critics have been rough on this movie just the same.
I heard one critic say that at no time was he able to figure out what the plot of the film was. I’m not going to go that far because, in my opinion, this was the franchise’s most concerted effort to actually make a flick with a plot, be it a far flunk, wonky, wobbly one.
Apparently, Transformers have been visiting Earth since ancient times and at one point, even chilled with Merlin and became robotic knights of King Arthur’s round table. Merlin was able to control them with a magic staff.
Flash forward to the present, where Optimus Prime has gone off on his own and humans and transformers are waging all out war against one another. Cade Yeager (Mark Wahlberg) is hiding from authorities who are after him for assisting auto bots. I just wish Mark could have assisted this film more but you know what? He tried. He really did. Hi Optimus Prime. Say hello to your mother for me.
Blah, blah, blah, some brown stuff hits the fan and its a mad cap search for Merlin’s long lost staff. Along the way, Mark teams up with Sir Edmund Burton (Sir Anthony Hopkins) a British nobleman and the last of a long line of “Witwiccans” or those charged with keeping tabs on Transformers’ doings on Earth.
Rounding out the crew is Professor Vivian Wembley, an expert on British folklore and the King Arthur legend in particular, played by the epically boner inducing Laura Haddock. (Haddock? You know when it comes to that fish, I prefer it “bone-in.” Bah ha ha! I’m so funny.)
It’s been a good summer for Haddock. You might have seen her as Meredith Quill aka the younger version of Peter Quill’s mother in “Guardians of the Galaxy Volume 2” earlier this summer.
While this role seems ridiculously below the stature and dignity of a legend like Anthony Hopkins, my main impression was that, just based on the looks on his face alone, he had the best time of his life on this film. Check him out in the car chase scene when his robot butler Godwin is driving for him. He’s clearly having a blast and good for him. He’s earned it. Without him, the film would have fallen flat.
Though many are saying this film is the worst of the franchise, I think that award goes to the second one, “Revenge of the Fallen.” Personally, I think the best three are the first one (just because of the initial wow factor), “Dark Side of the Moon’ or the third one, and this latest one.
My main complaint? It’s too long. And do you know when a film is too long? When entirely new plot points are introduced at a time that would normally serve as the 3/4th of the film being halfway over mark. Wahlberg and Haddock become a buddy cop duo turned budding lovers at this point and yet, there’s still much after it to go.
A movie is just too long when you end up sighing, looking at your watch, praying for the Deceptions to be dispatched already just so you can leave the theater and return to your life. “Is this my life?” I thought. “Will I never do anything but watch this never ending movie from now on?”
My main criticism about the entire franchise is that in past films, Bay has tended to overlook a good story involving the Auto bots vs. Decepticons and instead, focuses on the disaster aspect. Michael Bay is, if nothing else, a big budget disaster movie expert, so his films in this series tend to focus on the explosions, the mayhem, the people on the ground running away frantically as big ass robots smash each other and knock down buildings in the process.
Don’t get me wrong. That’s good popcorn munching entertainment right there. But the 1980s cartoon had a good story. Kids liked it and when the story was tinkered with in an effort to put merchandise sales over story, kids walked away from it. (i.e. they killed off Optimus prime and a bunch of the other characters in order to replace them with new toys for your kids to buy….because, I don’t know, someone thought that would be better than just telling the kids that Optimus and the other robots just went on a sabbatical for a little while.)
But I also get it. This film isn’t made for me. Hasbro already got money out of my parents. Now they want money out of today’s parents who have little boys who want to recreate their own robot battles. And those kids don’t really care about story as long as crap blows up.
One point about this franchise being for kids though. There was a lot of low level swearing in this flick. “Shit” and “bullshit” and just a lot of “shits.” I think “dickhead” was used at least twice and Anthony Hopkins flips someone the bird.
Look, I’m no prude but, remember, this film isn’t for me anymore. It’s for today’s kids and I’m not sure they should be exposed to language like that. Then again, we could probably talk for hours about why it’s ok for them to watch explosions, gunfire, car crashes, violent fight scenes, etc but it gets dicey if someone uses an inappropriate term for “poop.”
Personally, I just think in a film like this, the swearing doesn’t do much for adults. Adults who check these out are a) bringing their kids or b) doing it for the nostalgia factor because they used to play with Transformers – in short, the studio has these adults anyway and it’s not like there’s a big contingent of adults out there demeaning that the Transformers have potty mouths.
The adults don’t care and the kids don’t need it.
STATUS: Shelf-worthy. Worth a trip to the big screen.
They used to be awesome, millennials. Eh, in a way, they still are.
BQB here with a review of one of the best action films of the late 1990s.
I don’t think my millennial readers believe me when I tell them that Nicolas Cage was a big time action movie star around the turn of the new millennium. But he was and between this film and “Face/Off” he was box office gold.
I know. It’s hard to believe. People with a hairline like that are lucky if they’re even allowed to enter a movie theater let alone appear on the big screen.
Anyway, in this film, a group of tourists visiting the long shutdown island prison Alcatraz aka “the Rock” are taken hostage by General Hummel (Ed Harris) and his men, a group of special soldiers who believe they have been betrayed by the government.
From their new island base, they point a bunch of poison gas laced rockets at San Francisco. If they are attacked, they’ll kill the hostages and destroy the bay area.
Enter Stanley Goodspeed (Cage), the world’s cockiest poison gas expert because apparently, that’s a thing. Actually I don’t mean to jest. That probably is a thing. Some dude somewhere is being paid right now by the government to study poison gas. I’m sure of it.
Cage teams up with John Mason (Connery), the only prisoner to have ever escaped Alcatraz. Goodspeed knows how to disarm the gas bombs (I usually disarm my gas bombs by taking a Tums tablet after a good bowl of chili) and Connery knows how to get Goodspeed inside the joint.
It’s a fast paced ride full of car chases, explosions, etc. And personally, I’d put it up against any action movie released today.
Bookshelf Battle 