Fluke_Skywalker Reviews

Midway (2019)

Midway is Middling

[6/10 · 9 May 2025]

Like the battle of Midway itself, historical epics are a thing of the past. For a variety of reasons, Hollywood has lost the stomach for the kind of grand, sweeping "real life" events tale that Midway aspires to be. It's a shame really. Dubious historical accuracy or not, those kinds of movies help to shed light onto the kinds of people and stories that tend to get lost and forgotten in a world that's increasingly become more about what's "now".

Even a kid who went to public school knows at least something about Pearl Harbor (the actual event, not the bloated Michael Bay movie). But how many people could tell you anything about one of WWII's most critical battles? In that sense, Midway might act as a bit of a Cliff Notes for the actual event and even spark enough curiosity to dig deeper. If that's all it did/does, it's a worthwhile endeavor, but a Hollywood movie's first task is to entertain, and there Midway kinda succeeds. Sorta.

With a first act featuring the Pearl Harbor attack and a chunk of act two even throwing in the Doolittle raid, it attempts to squeeze too much into its two hour and change runtime. More focus on the behind the scenes Intel and planning and less on tangential preceding events would've served the story much better in my opinion.

Those issues aside, the cast is up to the task, spitting out their ropy dialog with believable sincerity while has-been director Roland Emmerich manages to shake off the rust and deliver some above par action; even if the digital heavy special f/x aren't always up to the task.

Ultimately Midway never quite finds its footing. Is it a serious historical drama? No, but it seems to want to be at times. Is it a popcorn flick? Again, no. It's almost like they weren't comfortable going the full Michael Bay route, with modern pop tunes playing as beautiful people posed dramatically in front of a wind machine.

At least it manages to avoid heavy-handed messaging and finger waving, so that at least is a feather in its cap.

Con Air (1997)

The most 90's movie ever

[6/10 · 3 May 2025]

Put on your plaid shirt and crank up some Hootie and the Blowfish, because we're heading back to a time when SNL was still funny. I'm talking about the 90's, perhaps humanity's most absurd decade ever. And few movies epitomize that more than 1997's 'Con Air'.

I hadn't watched this since it first came out, and while I remembered the basics, there were a few surprises. For one, it's not directed by Michael Bay. It just looks and feels so much like one of his films that I wouldn't be surprised if *he* thinks that he directed it. It even has members of the Michael Bay acting troupe and is scored by 'Armageddon' and 'Bad Boys II' composer Trevor Rabin.

The premise is, of course, ridiculous, but it also promises some fun if you can switch off your brain for 2 hrs or so. Unfortunately some of that fun is ruined by a surprisingly mean-spirited undertone. I get that we're dealing with a group of characters mostly made up by convicts of various stripes, but this is supposed to just be a dumb action movie, and the amount of genuinely hateful interaction between the convicts is a little jarring. Particularly some of the racial undertones.

As usual Cage brings his hammy best; dodgy Alabama accent aside. The rest of the cast are his equal, with John Malkovich providing a classic "I'm too good for this material, but I'm also too much of a pro to mail it in." type of performance.

I like these kinds of movies as much or more than the average person, but I can't say that I walk away from 'Con Air' quite understanding its cult classic status. I mean, it's fine. But I can rattle off dozens of similar action movies from the era that I prefer way more, and it's not a flight that I ever plan on boarding again.

Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith (2005)

Sticks the landing

[7/10 · 27 April 2025]

As someone who came of age with the Original Trilogy, I've always had a complex relationship with the Prequels. They feel different. They ARE different. The look and the tone are radically so. The former is due mostly to the heavy use of CG special effects technology. The latter is because the prequels take place in a much different story environment and on a grander stage than the Original saga. But at their core the two trilogies share enough DNA to play believably together as one story, and that feeling was only enhanced when I revisited Revenge of the Sith for the first time in well over a decade for its 20th anniversary theatrical release..

Revenge of the Sith is easily the best of the three Prequel films. The first two had the burden of doing a lot of (clumsy) world building and story setup, and despite some really cool and iconic moments, they suffer as a result. Lucas was clearly rusty when he made The Phantom Menace, and Attack of the Clones plays like a movie made by someone who never had his ideas challenged by the sycophants around him. But ROTS sees a more assured Lucas at the helm. The dialog is still ham-fisted and clunky, and there are massive plot holes, but there's more stylish flair and the basic story beats are handled well.

Of the performances, only Ewan McGregor comes out unscathed. His performance as Obi-Wan Kenobi is the highlight of the film. Hayden Christensen is a terrible actor, but he is brilliant with the physical stuff. As for the rest of the cast, Portman is godawful, Jackson is miscast and McDiarmid is embarrassingly hammy. In a different kind of movie their "performances" would've ruined the entire thing, but here the rising tide of the operatic action lifts all boats.

Revenge of the Sith is a very flawed film, but not fatally so. The important stuff works, and works well, and when we iris out to the credits it manages to have satisfyingly completed the story of how Anakin Skywalker becomes, well, you know.

Star Wars: The Clone Wars: The Lawless (2013) Season 5, Episode 16

Captures the spirit of Episode III

[7/10 · 15 March 2025]

I was never a big 'Clone Wars' fan while it aired. For one, I hate 3D/CGI animation with a passion. But I have cherry picked select, highly regarded episodes over the years, and that's worked out better than tuning in every week.

I got an itch for something Star Wars related that I haven't seen before, so I perused various online reviews and 'The Lawless' sounded interesting. And it was. Kinda.

I don't share the breathless fawning that so many reviewers do, but I do think that this is a solid enough episode, and it's easy to see why Prequel fans would eat it up.

The scope of this story really needed a two-parter, and what we get feels a little rushed and thin as a result. But the action is good, and the animation is top notch aside from the uncanny valley faces of the characters.

All in all I would give this a slight recommend to casual fans and to kids and young adults who may just be getting into Star Wars.

Timeline (2003)

From another Time

[6/10 · 8 March 2025]

Today we often hear the phrase "They don't make 'em like that anymore," and that is certainly true about "Timeline". The difference here is that it's both a compliment and a criticism.

Released in 2003, but still carrying a whiff of the late 90's, most of the contemporary cynicism and other tiresome tropes are mostly missing. Whatever I think about the ultimate outcome here, I did appreciate that it's just trying to be an entertaining, agenda-free action/adventure story. Notice that I said "trying to be", because it's only entertaining in fits and starts and it falls well short of the potential of its premise.

For me the highlight is Gerard Butler. His is the most interesting character, and his charming performance helps carry a lot of the dramatic water here. The rest of the cast is likable enough, and that goes a long way in helping to choke down some of the movie's many flat moments.

I've read the Michael Crichton novel that it's somewhat loosely based on, and while the book isn't a classic by any means, it's definitely better than the film.

The Last Kumite (2024)

We're gonna need a montage

[5/10 · 28 February 2025]

If you grew up in the 80's/90's like I did, you experienced the Gold Age of the martial arts action movie. Sometimes the hero was a cop, others a special forces soldier. But they were always out for justice (quite literally, in the case of the now portly and indifferent Steven Seagal). But the most memorable trope was the good guy in a karate tournament of some kind. Often one with life or death stakes.

The king of this sub-genre was undoubtedly Jean-Claude Van Damme. The physically gifted and charismatic Van Damme became a huge star in the early to mid 90's thanks in no small part to classics like "Bloodsport" and "Kickboxer", which followed this formula to a "T".

Today Gen-Xers are nostalgic for the kinds of movies, music and shows that they grew up with, and that's where the crowd funded "The Last Kumite" comes in.

It certainly checks off most of the genre boxes, but it's not done quite as skillfully as the movies that inspired it. While the production values are fine for what it aspires to be, and the great Stan Bush lead soundtrack wouldn't be out of place in a classic karate move, the acting is subpar, with star Mathis Landwehr having the charisma of a box of raisins and the martial arts on display weak and unexciting. Even the various 80's/90's karate movie stars here can't lift the material.

If you are a fan of the genre and you can adjust your expectations to fit the sort of homage that the movie tries rather earnestly to be, you just might get enough enjoyment out of this movie to make it worth your 1 hr. And 45 minutes.

Ace Ventura: Pet Detective (1994)

Jim carries it

[6/10 · 26 January 2025]

Sometimes "dumb" comedy is actually deceptively clever. Other times it's just dumb. 'Ace Ventura' is the latter. That isn't necessarily a strike against it, just a point of fact. The bigger question is "Is it funny?". Or, if you're like me and you saw the film when it first came out and loved it, "Is it still funny?". The answer there is... yeah. Sorta. If you set the bar really low and you're in the right mood (which I did but apparently I wasn't).

Look, when I watched 'Ace Ventura' the first time I was not quite twenty years old. Upon this re-watch I'm a few months shy of fifty one. Tastes change. It's not that I'm over here listening to Bach and watching art house films. Far from it. It's just that whatever worked for me about 'Ace Ventura' in 1994 works less so for me in 2025, and what does work for me now is %100 Jim Carrey, and even he isn't enough for me to give this movie more than a very, very weak thumbs up.

The Saint (1997)

This Saint is a Sinner

[5/10 · 26 January 2025]

It's frustrating how close this movie is to being good, or at least entertaining. I mean, the ingredients are all there. It has a good cast, a fun premise and a competent director. But while it kinda works in fits and starts, it just never gels into anything cohesive.

Star Val Kilmer is clearly having a blast with all of the various disguises, but it sorta plays like a comedian who is laughing at his own jokes. And we're supposed to buy beautiful co-star Elizabeth Shue as a mousy wallflower, but she somehow makes it work. Sadly she and Kilmer have extremely poor chemistry and any chance that we give a crap about what happens to them goes up in smoke with it.

The rest of the cast is made up of your standard 90s Eurotrash, and backed by an annoying and headache-inducing electronica soundtrack, it will have you reaching for a bottle of Excedrin and/or the stop button.

Star Trek: Section 31 (2025)

Star Dreck

[3/10 · 25 January 2025]

Longtime 'Star Trek' fans may not want to hear this, but the franchise is well past its sell-by date (as you can probably tell by my user name, I'm a 'Star Wars' fan, and believe me, it is on the mark down shelf at this point as well). It has no pop culture currency. Young people simply do not care about it. Period.

J. J. Abrams temporarily resuscitated it w/his take on the universe, making it sleek and "cool" with younger viewers, but since it lacked any semblance of substance, it was quickly tossed aside for the next "thing".

In the years since Abrams moved on to help ruin 'Star Wars', the powers that be have pumped out a series of embarrassing 'Trek' shows that neither pleased old school fans or grabbed the fickle attention of younger viewers. It's clear that Paramount, or whoever controls the rights these days, simply does not get 'Star Trek'. Enter: 'Section 31'.

It would seem like a good idea to mix things up every now and then considering this franchise is 60 y/o, but with it having already alienated fans by staying too far from the essence of what 'Star Trek' is all about, a return to basics would probably have been a better idea. But this new take could have worked if it didn't stink like a pair of old gym shorts.

This is just bad. The writing is terrible, the production values are subpar and the acting isn't nearly good enough to patch its many holes or lift the material. It's sad to see the saga in this state.

R. I. P 'Star Trek' (1966-2025). You lived long and prospered.

Superman: The Mechanical Monsters (1941)

Man of Steal

[7/10 · 18 January 2025]

Sometimes you don't realize how drab something is until you see it juxtaposed against something really bright. And so it is with this old Fleischer Superman short.

Acting as the "bright", it illustrates just how "drab" the modern world, and by extension its pop culture, has become.

The animation here is just incredible. That it was done over 80 years ago makes it even more so. Can you imagine seeing this on a big screen in 1941? They must've been scraping the audience's Jaws off of the floor.

Completely free from the ironic, relativistic and naval-gazing zeitgeist of the 21st century, this "Oh, boy!"/"Gee whiz!" little serial is a breath of fresh air.

Demolition Man (1993)

Wry Sly

[5/10 · 17 January 2025]

You could put Bill Clinton, Lallapalooza and Hootie and the Blowfish into a blender and hit "Frappe" and it wouldn't be half as 90s as "Demolition Man". As someone who regards the 90s as a pimple on the left butt cheek of mankind, that isn't a compliment.

The main appeal here, besides a cute turn by a young Sandra Bullock, are the occasionally clever digs at the Politically Correct zeitgeist of the era. Some of the zings still hit their marks today, and more than a few things we see have kinda come true. So while the filmmakers may not have made an entertaining action flick, they were prescient.

The Maltese Falcon (1941)

A classic... disappointment

[5/10 · 11 January 2025]

I tend to like movies, not films, if you get my meaning. Thus, if you look at a checklist of "classic films" you'll see quite a few blank boxes on mine. Oh, I've meant to watch more of them, but with free time being a precious commodity these days, the idea of plopping down and dedicating 2+ hours to an 80 year old movie just never sounds all that appealing. To be fair, I rarely watch new movies these days. Hollywood has largely forgotten how to make a good popcorn yarn. Thus, I tend to stick to my old favorites.

Anyway, to "The Maltese Falcon". It's a movie I was familiar with. I knew it had Bogart and I knew the "twist". It's kinda hard to keep that a secret for 80 years.

I've always liked the idea of Noir more than the execution, but this movie in particular always sounded promising. Sadly it just didn't do it for me.

Bogart is great here. I mean, he's essentially Bogart in everything. He's a caricature, but that's okay. But aside from some occasionally snappy dialog, he's about the only thing that I enjoyed.

I was expecting more atmosphere and intrigue, but both are absent here. It's all kind of flat. About half way through my eyes began to glaze over and I started to keep one of those eyes firmly fixed on the progress bar.

Look, I know that I'm firmly in the minority. This is a film that most film lovers consider to be a classic, if not exactly a masterpiece. I'm sad to say that I'm not among them.

Andor: That Would Be Me (2022) Season 1, Episode 2

Slow burn. Emphasis on slow

[5/10 · 6 January 2025]

Starting 'Andor' over two years after its debut, I had no illusions that it was a white-knuckle action series. I'd heard it many times. "It's more of a cloak and Dagger story. You know, Spy-craft. Intrigue. Character driven.". Fine, I'm up for that. But it's still obligated to be compelling, and thus far 'Andor' is not.

All of my problems with the first episode remain, compounded by the fact that nothing we see there has any pay-off here. It's just more of the same muddled "plot", made even worse by an ever increasing number of flashbacks.

Perhaps this is all setup and clarity is just around the corner. But at this point I'm just not sure that I want to give it any more chances.

Andor: Kassa (2022) Season 1, Episode 1

An uneven start

[6/10 · 5 January 2025]

I'm not going to spend too much of this review complaining about Disney's handling of the 'Star Wars' IP so to be brief; I haven't liked it. Hence why it took so long for me to give 'Andor' a try despite having enjoyed 'Rogue One', even with its many flaws.

To make my thoughts more clear, I'm gonna just use bullet points for the good and the bad from the first episode.

The Good

• The production values are outstanding. This apparently cost North of $600 million to produce, and it's all on the screen.

• So far it's intriguing... assuming the lack of clarity is on purpose. I had no idea what in the Hell was going on, but I felt like that was on purpose. Time will tell.

The Bad

• Diego Luna is a charisma vacuum and no one else stands out thus far.

• None of that $600 million went to the wardrobe department because the costumes here are embarrassing.

• It doesn't "feel" like 'Star Wars'. I get that this is a dark corner of the Galaxy far, far away and not the epic good vs. Evil stuff from the episodes, but it doesn't even look like that galaxy. Combined with the tone, this often feels like a 'Firefly' knock-off, and I have absolutely no doubt the latter was an influence here.

Ultimately I came away from this first episode a bit underwhelmed, but there's just enough here for me to commit to giving the show another few episodes to find its stride and hook me.

Plane (2023)

Not what I was expecting

[6/10 · 4 January 2025]

People tout this as a 90's action throwback, but they're wrong. I boarded "Plane" expecting a straight to streaming quality knock-off of "Con Air". What I got instead was something more akin to throwing "Rambo 4" and "13 Hours: The Secret Soldiers of Benghazi" into a blender. It was jarring at first, but once I decided to roll with it I mostly enjoyed it.

If its low budget, VOD heritage gives you Nicholas Cage, Jean-Claude Van Damme/Steven Seagal style PTSD, don't let it. This looks and feels like a movie with twice the budget. The filmmakers do a good job of hiding the seams, never allowing the air based action to be too ambitious, and most of the F/X blend in quite believably as a result.

Thankfully there isn't much focus on the various passengers, allowing star Gerard Butler and actor Mike Colter to be front and center. Butler, like fellow straight to streaming brother Nicholas Cage, always brings his best. But unlike Cage, Butler never goes full ham. He takes it seriously, and as a result we do too.

If you think this is a second tier Jerry Bruckheimer style action flick, think again. This is a tense and often violent drama. If you adjust your expectations, I think you'll probably enjoy it.

Gladiator II (2024)

I was not entertained

[5/10 · 23 November 2024]

If you've seen the original 'Gladiator'--and I suspect that you have-you know that it didn't need a sequel. It told a complete story with no obvious loose ends. But modern Hollywood is bankrupt of original ideas, so here we are.

The fact that 'Gladiator' didn't need a sequel doesn't mean that a sequel was destined to fail, but it would certainly have its work cut out for it. Not only did it need to find a reason to be, dramatically speaking, it had to find a way to escape from the shadow of its predecessor. Unfortunately 'Gladiator II' fails on both counts.

This is basically a beat for beat remake of the original. It takes absolutely no risks and doesn't endeavor to do anything fresh. Again, that doesn't mean that it still can't be a good film, but you've got to execute even a time-tested gameplan, and 'Gladiator II' just doesn't. The characters are weak, saddled as they are with lame motivations and poor performances from nearly everyone involved. It lacks powerful and exciting moments. The cinematography looks bad and it has some of the worst CGI effects that I've seen in years. And besides Russell Crowe, it misses Hans Zimmer most of all, as the score is generic and fails to lift and support the action and drama. In short, this is a movie that fails to deliver on its own, and never even comes close to matching the original.

Music by John Williams (2024)

The Maestro

[7/10 · 2 November 2024]

You know the music. We all know the music. But do you know the man? "Music by John Williams" endeavors to tell that story. Does it succeed? Kinda.

"Music by John Williams" is somehow both overindulgent and thimble deep. Playing like a patchwork of DVD extra features, it ultimately becomes a nearly two hour gush-fest about the undeniable greatness of Williams and the cultural impact of his iconic work. As a lifelong fan of his, I've heard many of the anecdotes repeated here multiple times before. And as for the man himself, I didn't walk away from this feeling as if I had a deeper understanding of him, which seemed to be at least half the point of it all.

In my opinion, John Williams is not only the greatest film composer of all-time, I'd argue he's the most important musical figure of the 20th century. No artist--not The Beetles, Elvis or Michael Jackson--moved souls and ignited imaginations the way Williams and his music have. The movies of Lucas, Spielberg and others simply don't work without his genius. They may be the engine, but Williams is the fuel.

If you love the music of John Williams, you'll no doubt be moved by the well worn anecdotes here. Not unlike when you get together with old friends and recount the same stories you've heard time and time again.

New York Ninja (2021)

The Big Crapple

[6/10 · 1 November 2024]

How do you review a movie like this one? Obviously it's not "good" in the traditional sense of the word, so you have to judge it based on a scale of "So bad it's good", and on that metric "New York Ninja" is only a bit above average.

I grew up as a kid during the Ninja craze of the 1980's, so I've seen my share of cheesy martial arts revenge flicks. Most of them were actually approaching the material seriously. The cheese came as a result of poor production values, a lack of talent behind the scenes and the general silliness of the genre itself. With "New York Ninja", I initially couldn't tell if it was trying to be silly on purpose or if the above criteria was just turned up to a ten. Some research provided the answer for me.

If you know anything about the history of the movie, you know that it sat incomplete in a warehouse for nearly forty years before a company called Vinegar Syndrome acquired the rights and finished it. It would be easy to assume that they intentionally turned up the goofiness to help sell it as a comedic cult classic, but they insist that they were attempting to be true to the spirit of the original filmmaker's vision and took the completion of "New York Ninja" sincerely. If that is indeed the case, the result here was the original production team and by proxy Vinegar Syndrome trying to make a "serious" martial arts action movie. In that they failed spectacularly, but not spectacularly enough to make this movie the cult classic Vinegar Syndrome aspired it to be.

The Penguin: After Hours (2024) Season 1, Episode 1

What 'Gotham' should have been

[8/10 · 20 October 2024]

A Batman show with Batman? It's been done before. 'Gotham' was a pretty good show. Really good at times. But it got bogged down trying to lay the track for the entire Batman mythology in an hour-long network TV series. Too often it got sidetracked and lost focus. It was also hampered a bit by having to play things too safe due to being a broadcast network series. 'Penguin' doesn't have either of those problems.

The obvious inspiration--maybe a bit too obvious at times--is the classic HBO series 'The Sopranos'. If you remove the few (and I mean very few) direct references to Batman lore, this would be easy to mistake as a spin-off of that show. That's not a criticism. It's what makes 'Penguin', or at least this first episode, work so well. It's not a comic book series, it's a crime drama.

The cast here is just fantastic. The transformation of Colin Farrell into Oswald "Oz" Cobb is nothing short of astounding. You would never, ever recognize him. And I don't just mean physically. His performance is one of the best I've seen in a TV/streaming series in a long time. I hope he is recognized come award season, because he deserves to be.

'After Hours' is a very strong first episode that sets the stakes for what's to come. And they won't need to shine a signal in the sky to get me to show up for it.

Buffy the Vampire Slayer (1992)

Like a Vampire...

[5/10 · 4 October 2024]

...it kinda sucks. It's not "bad" bad, but unfortunately it's not "so bad that it's good" bad, which would at least redeem it a little. It's just blah. Blah! Blah, blah! Okay, enough of the vampire humor.

The script--written by Joss Wheedon but apparently altered to the point that he disowned it and later turned the premise into a popular television series--is witless and the directing is lazy and uninspired.

About the only saving grace here is the cast. Donald Sutherland and Rutger Hauer class things up with performances that never belie the fact that they're only there for the check, and Paul Reubens and David Arquette are a lot of fun in supporting roles. But the real surprise was Kristy Swanson as Buffy and Luke "90210" Perry as Pike. They're likable and charming and I found it easy to root for them. Something you can't say about many modern protagonists.

If you're a 90's kid, nostalgia grease may coat your gears enough to enjoy your return to the era of Lollapalooza and Zubaz pants, but for others your mileage will definitely vary.

Twisters (2024)

Borenados

[5/10 · 7 September 2024]

Every sin this movie commits is forgivable save one; It's just not any fun. The characters, particularly Glen Powell's raucous band of hillbilly storm chasers, certainly try and fool you into thinking that you're having a good time, but you aren't. Or at least I wasn't.

Stars Daisy Edgar-Jones and the aforementioned Powell have the chemistry of oil and water and their "romance" is about as predictable as the tornadoes are in this movie (another problem, but I digress). Edgar-Jones is likable enough, handling the girl next door flashback stuff capably, but she lacks the gravitas to make you believe that she's some highfalutin weather scientist. At least the story doesn't turn her into the stereotypical girl boss that has grown so tiresome the last few years. And Powell is... well, he's Hangman. Dude has the range of a spitball. Again, he's likable enough, but that doesn't make him interesting to watch.

The science is dubious. And I don't care. The characters are one note and generic. Again, I don't care. There are no surprises whatsoever. Nope, don't care. What I do care about is that a film like this has one job, and that's to be fun, or least diverting. 'Twisters' is neither.

The Beekeeper (2024)

Ridiculous... and ridiculously fun

[7/10 · 6 September 2024]

Jason Statham is the McDonald's of actors. He's not very nutritious and rarely fresh, but he's tasty. Oh, and his shake machine is never broken. He makes the kind of movies that Hollywood at large just refuses to these days. Either because they're obsessed with IP's (that are increasingly losing big money by the way) or because they feel that they're too "masculine". Why try and appeal to the latter? They only make up half of the world's population. It's no wonder why you're losing your audience to video games. Anyway...

"The Beekeeper" is pure Statham. It's absurd if you think about it too much, but you don't watch a movie like this to think, and that's perfectly okay. It's fun. Remember when that wasn't taboo?

John Carter (2012)

A noble effort

[6/10 · 30 August 2024]

Ever since the massive success of 'Raiders of the Lost Ark', Hollywood has seemed intent on trying to mine old fashioned pulp adventure gold. Most have failed--including Indiana Jones himself of late. But while 'The Mummy' and 'The Mask of Zorro' found success, films like 'The Rocketeer', 'Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow', 'Flash Gordon' and 'The Shadow' failed to find an audience and ended up on the ash heap of forgotten films. With that kind of track record, did 'John Carter' even stand a chance? It turned out that the answer was "no".

I love this genre. Love it. Many of the films listed above are in my personal top-20. A couple are in my top-10. So when I went to see this back in '12, I was pretty excited. I hadn't read the novel then, but this felt like something that was totally in my wheelhouse. But... meh. So, disappointed, I left the theater and John Carter stayed on Barsoom. Until now.

It took revisiting many of those other pulp "failures" to truly appreciate them, so I decided to finally return to Mars with the title character. And... meh. It turns out I just don't love this movie like I'd hoped I would.

To be sure, 'John Carter' looks incredible. How this didn't even get an f/x Oscar nod is mind-blowing. And the score, while generic, certainly evokes the genre in its very DNA. But at two hours it's way too long, dull despite tons of action and the cast is bland and detached, as many such casts are when they're only there for the check. To be fair, star Taylor Kitsch does at least try, but he's woefully miscast.

I'm sad to say that this revisit did nothing to change my opinion about 'John Carter'. It took two re-watches and nearly twenty years to discover my love for 'Sky Captain', so maybe I'll come back here in another decade or so and try again.

Dune: Part Two (2024)

Frustrating

[6/10 · 23 August 2024]

Like the first film of this two part adaptation of Frank Hebert's sci-fi classic, 'Dune: Part Two' was a very mixed bag for me. On a technical level it's brilliant. Easily one of the best looking films of this century. If nothing else, director Denis Villeneuve sure knows how to shoot a movie. I just wish he were better at telling a story.

His 'Blade Runner 2049' was also gorgeous, but it suffered from being cold, soulless and without any real sense of purpose. Unlike the latter, 'Dune: Part Two' has a purpose (thanks to whatever is left here from Frank Herbert's vision), but it also lacks any semblance of emotion or genuine humanity. It somehow manages to be both epic and flat. Quite a feat, but not one to be proud of.

The film is also tragically miscast. Timothée Chalamet finally starts to rise to the occasion in fits and starts once he becomes "the one", but everyone besides Rebecca Ferguson and Javier Bardem are just dreadful. Enough can't be said about how awful Zendaya is here. Even in her wheelhouse she has the range of a spitball, but she's in way, way over her skis on this one. And don't get me started on Christopher Walken as the Emperor. Christopher Walken?! Are you kidding me! This needed an actor with some gravitas and regality. Walken feels far too contemporary for this sort of thing.

Look, 'Dune' is my favorite novel of all-time, and my cool reaction to the first part of this adaptation is why it took me nearly six months to watch this. It's not the changes that bother me, save for the ending with Chani, which is an unforgivable sin in my opinion. It's that this whole thing ends up feeling like a pretentious, preening bore instead of the grand spectacle space opera it should have been.

Megaforce (1982)

Are you man enough for Megaforce?

[6/10 · 16 August 2024]

If you get the reference in my title, we can be friends.

Megaforce is simultaneously a very bad film and also a very fun movie (there's a difference between a film and a movie btw). The two aren't mutually exclusive; or at least they didn't used to be. You see in the 80s we were far less lactose intolerant. In fact, we liked our cheese and often asked for seconds. And make no mistake, there's plenty of cheese here and then some. But that's half of what makes it so charming.

So, you may ask, what works? The production values are very good. There are dozens of the various Megaforce vehicles and their HQ is impressively rendered. The action is well staged and occasionally epic, the score is great (as is the theme song by AOR rock legends 707) and the performances are energetic and charming. What doesn't work...

The blue screen stuff is legendarily awful. Probably the worst that I've ever seen. The villain doesn't get nearly enough screen time, and he's about as threatening as a neutered house cat. And besides Barry Bostwick's Ace Hunter, only one other Megaforce member really gets to be a character (Dallas, a charming good 'ol boy played by Michael Beck). All the rest are glorified extras. But as you can see, nothing fatal.

Sure, the geopolitics here make zero sense. But who cares? The entire thing takes place in some nebulous desert environment that's apparently supposed to be several different places. So what? There's exactly one woman in the cast. Oh well. Abandon logic all ye who enter. It's fun and that's enough.