Cindy Prascik's Reviews of The Girl in the Spider's Web & Dr. Seuss' The Grinch

Dearest Blog: Yesterday it was off to Marquee Cinemas for the strange-bedfellows double-bill of The Girl in the Spider's Web and Dr. Seuss' The Grinch. Spoiler level here will be mild, nothing you wouldn't know from the trailers.

First up: The Girl in the Spider's Web. Lisbeth Salander finds herself tangled in a dangerous plot with a personal twist. Well, dear reader(s), about the nicest thing I can say about The Girl in the Spider's Web is that I had the theater to myself, but for one other couple that sat far from me, so I really enjoyed that bit.

Otherwise... The Girl in the Spider's Web is a joyless, violent exercise that fails to engage on any level. I'm not such a ninny that I expected sunshine and lollipops from the Dragon Tattoo series, but...yeeesh...almost everything about this is deeply unlikable. The plot holds no surprises, and the performances frankly aren't that interesting.

That's not to say Claire Foy doesn't do a fine job in a role that's fraught with physical and emotional challenges; it's just that there's nothing, really, to make it stand out from a dozen others who will undoubtedly compete for the big hardware come awards season. (The trailer for Nicole Kidman's Destroyer that ran beforehand only served to underline that point.) Wallander alum Sverrir Gudnason is appealingly earnest as journalist Mikael Blomkvist, and the bleak landscapes and grim, fractured score provide a perfect backdrop for the film's misery, but otherwise there's not much good to be said about this one. I struggled mightily just to stay awake. The Girl in the Spider's Web runs 117 minutes and is rated R for "violence, language, and some sexual content/nudity."

The Girl in the Spider's Web is yet another sequel that nobody wanted.

Of a possible nine Weasleys, The Girl in the Spider's Web gets two. Fangirl points: Stephen Merchant!

Next on the docket, Dr. Seuss' The Grinch. Benedict Cumbergrinch can come down my chimney any ol' time. The Grinch is one of those timeless holiday tales that could be made a hundred times for a hundred different generations and it'd probably always work. This current incarnation is a real joy, thanks to bright artwork, bouncy holiday tunes, and a delightful turn by Benedict Cumberbatch as the green holiday killjoy. Glorious visuals are the star of The Grinch, with cheerful holiday decorations coming alive to get viewers into the spirit LIKERIGHTNOW. Snippets of new and classic Christmas carols--while vexing to our anti-hero--pile on the cinematic cheer, culminating in a well-known, teeth-rottingly-sweet finale that hits you right in the feels no matter your age. There are some stocking stuffers for adults (note the tune Mr. Grinch is playing on the organ midway through) that willfully aspire to keep the movie from being kids-only fare, but, even minus those little winks, The Grinch is the sort of picture that should get pretty much anyone into a holiday frame of mind. Dr. Seuss' The Grinch clocks in at a quick 90 minutes and is rated PG for "brief rude humor." The Grinch has holiday magic to spare.

Of a possible nine Weasleys, Dr. Seuss' The Grinch gets eight.

Fangirl points: Cumbergrinch said my name. TWICE. (Christmas is the only time it pays to be named after a resident of Whoville!) Until next time...

MOVIE REVIEW: BOHEMIAN RHAPSODY

Bohemian Rhapsody is a foot-stomping celebration of Queen, their music and their extraordinary lead singer Freddie Mercury. Freddie defied stereotypes and shattered convention to become one of the most beloved entertainers on the planet. The film traces the meteoric rise of the band through their iconic songs and revolutionary sound. They reach unparalleled success, but in an unexpected turn Freddie, surrounded by darker influences, shuns Queen in pursuit of his solo career. Having suffered greatly without the collaboration of Queen, Freddie manages to reunite with his bandmates just in time for Live Aid. While bravely facing a recent AIDS diagnosis, Freddie leads the band in one of the greatest performances in the history of rock music. Queen cements a legacy that continues to inspire outsiders, dreamers and music lovers to this day

Director: Bryan Singer

Cast: Rami Malek, Lucy Boynton, Gwilym Lee, Ben Hardy, Joseph Mazzello, Aidan Gillen, Tom Hollander, Allen Leech, Mike Myers

Release Date: November 2, 2018

Genres: Biography, Drama , Music

Rated PG-13 for thematic elements, suggestive material, drug content and language

Runtime: 2h 12 min

Review:

Bohemian Rhapsody is a serviceable if sanitized rock biopic that’s helped greatly by great performances.  Bryan Singer’s film bears some of his style but there is a sense that after he was let go there was a bit of committee thinking going on resulting in some generic decisions.  Even though the film plays out in a predictable paint by the number pattern, there’s plenty to love about it.  Rami Malek makes the film by delivering a star making performance.  Malek transforms into Mercury and he’s always the most interesting person on screen.  He captures the look and feel of Mercury especially during the musical portions that it makes it easy to overlook some of the film’s short comings.  Helping matters is the supporting cast which delivers equally impressive work as the rest of the band mates.  The music itself is irresistible and through some impressive blending of actual singing and lip syncing you really feel the performances which drive the film ending with the iconic Live Aid show. 

B

MOVIE REVIEW: SUSPIRIA

Young American dancer Susie Bannion arrives in 1970s Berlin to audition for the world-renowned Helena Markos Dance Co. When she vaults to the role of lead dancer, the woman she replaces breaks down and accuses the company's female directors of witchcraft. Meanwhile, an inquisitive psychotherapist and a member of the troupe uncover dark and sinister secrets as they probe the depths of the studio's hidden underground chambers.

Director: Luca Guadagnino

Cast: Dakota Johnson, Tilda Swinton, Mia Goth, Chloë Grace Moretz, Angela Winkler, Renée Soutendijk, Ingrid Caven, Sylvie Testud

Rated R for horror violence, disturbing images, language, drug use and brief graphic nudity

Genres: Fantasy, Horror, Mystery

Runtime: 2h 32min

Review:

Remaking Suspiria was an interesting choice and one that could have gone terribly wrong.  The fact that a high end director like Luca Guadagnino decided to undertake the task made the idea of a remake interesting to say the least.  Luca Guadagnino decision to reimagine as oppose to simply remake it was a wise one.  Fans of the original techincolor fever dream may not enjoy this version for a variety of reasons.  Guadagnino ditches the highly stylized visuals and delivers a dense Polanski type horror film.  It’s engaging and always interesting but it feels overly complex and obsessed with itself at the same time.  There are plenty of sequences that will leave a lasting impression such as an early dance sequence which is beautiful, brutal and vicious.   Guadagnino talent as a director is on full display but at times it does seem to lack forward momentum.  To say it’s a slow moving film is a bit of an understatement, the film moves at a glacial pace and it feels every bit of a it’s 2 and half hour run time.  It can be a detriment but there is so much to appreciate in terms of craftsmanship that you can enjoy it multiple levels especially once the final reveal uncorks an insane sequence.

B+

Cindy Prascik's Reviews of Disney’s The Nutcracker and the Four Realms & Bohemian Rhapsody

 

 

Dearest Blog: Yesterday it was off to Marquee Cinemas for The Nutcracker and the Four Realms and Bohemian Rhapsody.

 

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

 

First on the docket: Christmas comes early with The Nutcracker and the Four Realms.

 

On Christmas Eve, a grieving young lady is transported to a mysterious world where her help is needed.

 

The Nutcracker and the Four Realms wants to know two things: How soon is too soon to go full Christmas? and: How is it possible to go so wrong with this story, this cast, and the full weight of Disney in your corner?

 

We'll start with the positives, because there are a few. The Nutcracker and the Four Realms is a spectacular production with gorgeous sets and costumes, and the CGI is astonishing throughout, avoiding those missteps that have become common in even the priciest productions. The cast is top notch and mostly seems to be having fun despite the poor material. James Newton Howard's lush score perfectly compliments familiar excerpts from Tchaikovsky's Nutcracker Suite. All of those things ordinarily would keep the Four Realms spreading its cinematic cheer all the way through the new year, but...

 

...the Nutcracker and the Four Realms is a lousy movie. All the bells and whistles in the world can't offset a paper-thin story, an easy-to-spot twist, and a mysterious world that looks beautiful but feels more mundane than magical. An underused Helen Mirren is the only principal who seems to recognize just how badly it's all going to turn out, and she appears uncomfortable every second of her too-little screen time. The movie runs well shy of two hours, but feels very long indeed. Setting itself up as a new family holiday tradition, the Nutcracker and the Four Realms is likely to disappear from cinemas and from the memories of those who see it long before ol' Santa slides on down the chimney.

The Nutcracker and the Four Realms clocks in at 99 minutes and is rated PG for "some mild peril."

The Nutcracker and the Four Realms is a criminal waste of some wonderful resources. 

 

Of a possible nine Weasleys, The Nutcracker and the Four Realms gets three.

 

Fangirl points: Matthew Macfadyen! Jack Whitehall! Gustavo Dudamel! The divine Misty Copeland!

Next up, the much-anticipated Queen biopic Bohemian Rhapsody.

 

The story of one of the world's most revered rock n' roll bands, from inception through their performance at 1985's Live Aid.

 

Well, dear reader(s), as I've mentioned a time or twelve, I make every effort not to read reviews prior to writing my own, to ensure nothing outside of the film itself informs my opinion. Having said that, I spend a LOT of time online, and there's no avoiding headlines and friends' posts all the time. From what I've seen, it appears fans absolutely love Bohemian Rhapsody, and critics are somewhat less enthusiastic. I understand both sides, and I'll talk a little about each, but mostly I want you to know why I come down firmly on the side of the former.

 

Bohemian Rhapsody is less a grittily-realistic biography than it is a loving tribute to Freddie Mercury. While his less-flattering diva moments aren't entirely missing, they're easily outweighed by the affection with which the film presents him. The surviving members of Queen come off very well, as people who live to tell their own stories tend to do.

 

Though the trailers promised to tell "his story," Bohemian Rhapsody doesn't delve too deeply into Mercury's difficulties with a disapproving father, nor the painful reality of being a gay man in the 70s and 80s. It's all there, but none of it is really the focal point it might have been in a Very Serious Film releasing into awards season. It feels like filmmakers backed off a bit for fear of alienating the broader audience for which they clearly are aiming, which results in some unfortunate missed opportunities, but a happier film overall. Bohemian Rhapsody navigated a tumultuous road to the big screen, so of course there are those who feel it would have been better served by other talent that had been attached along the way. Personally, I think it does beautifully with the talent it has. Though they aren't necessarily A-List (yet), I am more than a little familiar with Rami Malik, Gwilym Lee, Ben Hardy, and Joe Mazzello, yet I never saw anyone other than Freddie Mercury, Brian May, Roger Taylor, and John Deacon up on the screen, so effectively do they embody their characters. The supporting cast is equally extraordinary. If the film is guilty of glossing over some of the lower moments in the band's and Mercury's histories, it more than makes up for it with iconic performances, perfectly mimicked by four fantastic actors. Choosing to end on a high note--with the rousing Live Aid performance--might be considered contrived, but it's a fitting tribute to a legend and that's good enough for me.

 

Bohemian Rhapsody runs 134 minutes (could have gone another 134 with no complaints here) and is rated PG13 for "thematic elements, suggestive material, drug content, and language."

 

Bohemian Rhapsody may be a less-than-factual biopic, but it's a joyful tribute to one of the greatest bands of all time, and I enjoyed every minute. Of a possible nine Weasleys, Bohemian Rhapsody gets nine.

 

Fangirl points: Gwilym Lee!! Rami Malek! Tom Hollander! Aidan Gillen! (This might be my favorite cast ever!)

 

Until next time...

 

Cindy Prascik's Review of Hunter Killer

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dearest Blog: Yesterday it was off to Marquee Cinemas for the only (*sob*) Gary Oldman movie I'll see in 2018: Hunter Killer.

 

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

 

When a coup attempt within the Russian government threatens to start World War III, it's up to Gerard Butler to save the world...as it so often is.

 

Well, dear reader(s), I flippin' LOVED this movie. I'm going to make fun of it a little, or maybe a lot, because it deserves it and because that's what I do with things I love (just ask the Wheeling Nailers), but let nothing give you any impression other than that it has instantly earned a spot in my year-end top ten from which it cannot be unseated.

 

Hunter Killer has so much testosterone it'll put hair on your chest. An almost exclusively male cast spends a great deal of time posturing and exchanging steely glances to mark territory and convey Man Understanding. Coupled with a whole lotta submarines, torpedoes, and missiles...well...Hunter Killer is basically a Sharpie penis that somebody drew on the forehead of passed-out-drunk Hollywood. By no means should any of that be construed as an insult--on the contrary, it is the very reason I still drag out to the cinema instead of waiting for Netflix--but...well...forewarned is forearmed.

 

If you require further justification for shelling out your big-screen bucks for Hunter Killer, the film features exquisite photography...air, sea, and land. The movie looks just glorious, and the locations and scenery are spectacular. Battles and effects and everything else about the picture are huge, so definitely see it on the biggest screen you can find. Though it's silly and often predictable, Hunter Killer maintains a genuine tension throughout which helps hold interest even through way too many kumbaya moments. As an added bonus, Gerard Butler utters classic lines such as, "When somebody's shooting at you, you know their intentions!" and Gary Oldman chews the scenery with relish. A couple weird little notes: Though everything on the American side is state of the art, the Russian technology appears to have been dragged kicking and screaming from decades long past, and Russian sailors look like they've only just escaped from a 60s Broadway musical. In only their own company, Russians generally speak Russian (no subtitles) but every now and again they're conversing in English with no reason for it other than clearly the filmmakers decided that these were the bits that we, the viewers, really needed to understand. Would have worked better to go all or nothing with accented English or subtitles. Oh, and can we get a dialect coach to teach Linda Cardellini how to pronounce "nuclear" correctly, please?

 

Hunter Killer clocks in at a quick 122 minutes and is rated R for "violence and some language."

 

Hunter Killer won't tax your brain overmuch, but you'll be hard pressed to have more fun at the cinema. 

 

Of a possible nine Weasleys, Hunter Killer gets eight.

 

Until next time...

MOVIE REVIEW: FIRST MAN

On the heels of their six-time Academy Award®-winning smash, La La Land, Oscar®-winning director Damien Chazelle and star Ryan Gosling reteam for Universal Pictures’ First Man, the riveting story of NASA’s mission to land a man on the moon, focusing on Neil Armstrong and the years 1961-1969. A visceral, first-person account, based on the book by James R. Hansen, the movie will explore the sacrifices and the cost—on Armstrong and on the nation—of one of the most dangerous missions in history. 

Director: Damien Chazelle

Cast: Ryan Gosling, Claire Foy, Jason Clarke, Kyle Chandler, Corey Stoll, Ciarán Hinds, Christopher Abbott, Patrick Fugit, Lukas Haas

Release Date: October 12, 2018

Genres: Biography , Drama , History

Rated PG-13 for some thematic content involving peril, and brief strong language

Runtime: 2h 21 min

Review:

First Man is an incredible achievement on multiple levels.  Damien Chazelle’s film is a technical achievement as it puts you in the ships and modules on a visceral and claustrophobic level.  All of the flight sequences are just trilling but that shouldn’t come as a surprise considering Chazelle’s talent.  The quieter moments, there are plenty, are just as engaging thanks to a pair of wonderful performances from Ryan Gosling and Claire Foy.  Gosling’s turn is understated but you can sense the simmering emotions behind his eyes.  Neil Armstrong is always guarded but driven by past pain as portrayed by Gosling.  Claire Foy is just as strong throughout; so much so that you wished the film spent a bit more time with her but the film is focused on Neil.  It’s an introspective yet epic tale about the man who achieved such a landmark moment in human history.  The flag controversy is thoroughly overblown as the film couldn’t display American achievement anymore than it already does.  First Man is an engaging character study that tries to get us into this pioneer’s headspace and does it with class.

A-