MOVIE REVIEW: BLADE RUNNER 2049

Officer K (Ryan Gosling), a new blade runner for the Los Angeles Police Department, unearths a long-buried secret that has the potential to plunge what's left of society into chaos. His discovery leads him on a quest to find Rick Deckard (Harrison Ford), a former blade runner who's been missing for 30 years.

Director: Denis Villeneuve

Release Date: Oct 06, 2017

Cast: Ryan Gosling, Harrison Ford, Ana de Armas, Robin Wright, Lennie James.

Rated PG-13 for language, Brief Suggestive Content, Sequences of Sci-Fi Action and Violence

Runtime: 2 hr. 43 min.

Genres: Suspense/Thriller, Sci-Fi/Fantasy

Review:

Making a sequel to a seminal sci-fi film is a huge task, especially 35 years after the fact.  Denis Villeneuve and his cinematographer Roger Denkins deliver a visually mesmerizing film that’s gorgeous from start to finish.  It’s an impressive accomplishment that honors the original but also expounds on it.  Ryan Gosling ably leads the film with an understated performance that’s surprisingly nuanced and layered.  Those expecting a heavy dose of Harrison Ford’s Deckard will be left disappointed since he’s only in the film for a small amount of the film’s runtime.  While it’s hard to ignore the high level of craftsmanship and artistry, you do have to wonder if Villeneuve fell a little in love with his creation.  The film’s nearly 3 hour runtime isn’t necessary since some scenes seem inconsequential to the overall plot.  That’s not to say the film isn’t enjoyable or engaging but I can’t help but feel like there’s a tighter more efficient film in there somewhere.     

B+

Cindy Prascik's Reviews of Blade Runner 2049 & The Mountain Between Us

Dearest Blog, yesterday it was off to Marquee Cinemas to see the highly-touted Blade Runner 2049 and not-at-all-touted The Mountain Between Us.

 

Spoiler level here will be mild for 2049, somewhat elevated (see what I did there?) for Mountain, but nothing really plot-related.

 

First on my agenda: Blade Runner 2049.

 

A young Blade Runner unearths a secret that sends him on a dangerous quest.

 

Ohhhhh...Ryan Gosling...you owe me. La La Land. Lars and the Real Girl. The Place Beyond the Pines. Only God Forgives. (Worst. Movie. Ever.) At this point, *I* could be forgiven for thinking this guy willfully takes only projects he hopes will bore me to death. Slowly.

 

In the interest of full and fair disclosure, here I'll confess that I haven't seen the original Blade Runner in about a hundred years and thus I remember very little (read: nothing) about it. I had good intentions of revisiting it before the new one hit cinemas, but never got around to it, so I know there were certain "recognition" moments that were lost on me. I should also note that I was in no way predisposed to dislike this, so the degree to which I did came as something of a surprise.

 

Blade Runner 2049 actually does have a fair few things going for it. The principal roles are carried by well-known and well-decorated actors who do as much as they can with wooden characters. Gosling is never less than watchable, and Robin Wright is the same. Harrison Ford takes his sweet time showing up, but when he does it's welcome, even if it seems a rehash of pretty much everything Harrison Ford does these days. The picture boasts astonishing, Oscar-worthy visuals and an ominous score that I can't wait to torture my coworkers with. For at least the first half of the movie, all of that was enough that I didn't hate it, but the longer it dragged on, the less interested I became in finding that silver lining, and there you'll find the movie's chief handicap: it is just too long to be as slow as it is (or too slow to be as long as it is). Yes, it's pretentious at times (lots of times). Yes, Jared Leto is ridiculous. Yes, it's often too dark to see anything at all, and yes, the 3D is utterly pointless.

 

BUT...2049 likely could have gotten away with most of that if only it weren't So. Damn. Long. I saw a few social media posts yesterday saying that the film leaves many questions to be answered by a potential "next installment," but the only question Blade Runner 2049 left me was: "Can Robin Wright take a drink without slamming it like a belligerent pirate?" The world may never know.

Blade Runner 2049 clocks in at a painful 163 minutes and is rated R for "violence, some sexuality, nudity, and language."

 

Blade Runner 2049 is a flaming bag of poo left on my cinematic doorstep, but it sure looks and sounds pretty! Of a possible nine Weasleys, Blade Runner 2049 gets four.

 

Next up: The Mountain Between Us.

 

Two professionals who HAVE TO BE SOMEWHERE charter a small plane and end up not getting anywhere.

 

The Mountain Between Us is nothing more than badly-done fanfiction, Twilight for grownups, minus the sparkling. How on Earth anyone got one--nevermind TWO--actors the caliber of Kate Winslet and Idris Elba to sign on for this drivel is beyond me. The most entertaining thing about the whole mess was the two older folks in my screening who loudly admonished the screen: "You should have waited for the other plane!" "You should have brought warmer clothes!" (It's a testament to just how bored I was that I found that amusing instead of infuriating.) The picture plods on for nearly two snowy hours, hitting every tired AO3 tag you can think of, and often turning very specifically reminiscent of 1993's Alive. (Spoiler alert: Except they never ended up having to eat each other. At least not literally.) By the time the movie reminds you for the last time that this horrible experience has made someone FEEL ALIVE, you'll be wishing you weren't.

 

The Mountain Between Us runs 103 minutes and is rated PG13 for "a scene of sexuality, peril, injury images, and brief strong language."

 

If ever I am stranded somewhere with Idris Elba and you send someone to "rescue" me, I will end you. 

 

Of a possible nine Weasleys, The Mountain Between Us gets three.

 

Until next time...

Cindy Prascik's Reviews of Get On Up & Guardians of the Galaxy

Dearest Blog, yesterday it was off to the pictures for Guardians of the Galaxy and some afterthought that dared turn up the same weekend as Guardians of the Galaxy.

Spoiler level here will be mild, nothing you wouldn't know from the trailers.

First on the docket was the afterthought, Get On Up.

Get On Up tells the story of James Brown's self-made rise from dirt-poor childhood to the Godfather of Soul.

Okey-dokey, readers: confession time...and this is an embarrassing one. I don't particularly care for James Brown. There, I said it. I respect the influence of his music on all the music I love, but I've never been a fan of the man himself. As such, my expectations for a movie full of music I don't like were middling at best.

If there's one thing Get On Up does have going for it, it's Chadwick Boseman, who follows up his stunning turn in 42 with an even more amazing performance...and some pretty terrific dance moves.

True Blood's Nelsan Ellis is especially noteworthy as Brown's best friend and longtime professional collaborator, Bobby Byrd, but, truly, the entire cast is well above average. The story is kind of a mess, but never dull. It's not told in linear fashion--beginning to middle to end--but rather jumps among various periods of Brown's life. The order is seemingly random, but the segueways are so flawless that, while I wouldn't say I precisely liked it, I will say it was effective.

I don't imagine it ever felt like there was much order in Brown's life for himself or those around him.

The movie also does a fair job of not painting Brown a saint just because he's: a.) talented, and b.) no longer with us. Then of course there's the music, LOTS of it. My understanding is Boseman lip-synched to actual James Brown recordings, and there were a couple times I felt it was a little obvious, especially having recently seen Jersey Boys, where numbers were performed live on set. If you like the music, you'll be a World Champion Chair Dancer by the end, but for me some of the numbers seemed to drag.

Get On Up clocks in at 138 minutes and is rated PG13 for "sexual content, drug use, some strong language, and violent situations." It was far more enjoyable than I anticipated, but still not the spiritual experience I expect from movies about music legends.

Of a possible nine Weasleys, Get On Up gets six.

Next up was the movie the about which I (and the rest of the Internet) have been frantically abuzz for months now, Guardians of the Galaxy.

A ragtag bunch of villains-turned-heroes faces a foe set on mass destruction.

Admit it, reader(s), even if you aren't usually into superhero movies, you took one look at this trailer and were completely sold. The self-deprecating hero. The gun-toting raccoon. The green hottie. The humor. The tunes...oh, the TUNES!! The buzz has been so overwhelmingly positive for so long that, by the time showtime finally rolled around, I was a little nervous about a letdown. I needn't have worried.

There's a joke going around the Internet, something along the lines of DC Comics being all worried the world isn't ready for a solo female super-hero movie, but Marvel says, "Here's a talking raccoon."

I'm a DC girl myself, but Guardians of the Galaxy, to me, is everything Marvel does right.

The overall tone of Guardians is humorous. The movie never bogs down with backstory, yet it tells enough about each character that he's more than just the sum of his actions in this particular film.

Everyone is sympathetic to some degree...yes, even the raccoon. There's plenty of big, explosive action, yet none of those seemingly-endless scenes of run-on destruction. (Lookin' at you, Avengers and Man of Steel.)

The art and effects are beautiful and realistic. I'll happily be the latest in a long line to mention the soundtrack that's about to become the most-played thing on your iPod, filled with great 70s nuggets like 10CC's I'm Not in Love and The Runaways' Cherry Bomb.

Finally, each and every Guardian deserves credit for a solid performance full of heart and wit...though I still wonder who thought it was a good idea to give Bradley Cooper a role where we don't see his magnificent face.

Guardians of the Galaxy runs 121 minutes and is rated PG13 for "intense sequences of sci-fi violence and action, and for some language." It is that very rare item that actually lives up to the hype.

Of a possible nine Weasleys, Guardians of the Galaxy gets eight and a half.

Until next time...

 Karen Gillan + Zoe Saldana? Yes, please.

MOVIE REVIEW: LOCK OUT

IN THEATERS

LOCK OUT



The U.S. government strong-arms a man accused of treason into rescuing the president's daughter from a maximum-security space prison that's been taken over by the inmates in a brutal riot. Guy Pearce, Maggie Grace, and Peter Stormare star. ~ Jason Buchanan, Rovi

Director: James Mather

Cast: Guy Pearce, Maggie Grace, Vincent Regan, Joe Gilgun, Lennie James

Release Date: Apr 13, 2012

Rated PG-13 Language, Intense Sequences of Violence, Intense Sequences of Action and Some Sexual References

Runtime: 1 hr. 35 min.

Genres: Action/Adventure, Suspense/Thriller

Review:

There’s not an original note in Lock Out’s runtime. Every element is “borrowed” from somewhere else with the most obvious being John Carpenter’s Escape from New York. Director James Mather shoots his film with a choppy hand. Occasionally he’ll hit a fun note but it’s rarely sustained. His biggest failing is never getting much out of his actors. Guy Pearce, who I’ve always thought should have been a bigger star, does the best he can even if his dialogue comes off clunky from time to time. Maggie Grace is equally stiff and shares very little chemistry with Pearce. Peter Stormare mugs through a few scenes adding very little. Even with its obvious failings, Lock Out is extremely watch able as pulp sci-fi fun. The first 2 acts breeze easily with the film coming to a screeching halt in the final act which saps the film of any energy it had.

C-