Cindy Prascik's Triple Feature Weekend: Sherlock Gnomes / Peter Rabbit / Pacific Rim: Uprising

Dearest Blog: Yesterday it was off to Marquee Cinemas for that rarest of treats: a triple feature. On the docket: Sherlock Gnomes, Peter Rabbit, and Pacific Rim: Uprising.

 

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

 

First up: Sherlock Gnomes.

When all of London's garden gnomes go missing, it's up to the world's greatest detective to solve the case.

 

Like it's predecessor Gnomeo and Juliet, Sherlock Gnomes banks on good-nature and likability for its appeal. It's not a game-changer and and it won't be remembered by awards voters when that time rolls around again, but it's the most enjoyable movie I've seen in a good long while. The movie is blessed with a terrific cast, including newcomers Johnny Depp and Chiwetel Ejiofor, returning favorites James McAvoy and Emily Blunt, and...yes...Ozzy Osbourne, whom the filmmakers are wise enough to use in moderation. The art and animation are pretty, bright, and colorful, if not revolutionary, and the cute story bounces along to a cheerful score by Chris Bacon, peppered with familiar snippets of Elton John songs. Sherlock Gnomes expertly rides a fine line, working for kids of all ages while also entertaining adults. There is nothing here that will disturb or upset the young ones, but, in addition to the tunes, there are several adult gags that aim far enough over kids' heads that parents won't be left answering uncomfortable questions afterward. If the message is familiar, the movie delivers it in such charming fashion you won't even mind. Sadly, there's no Jason Statham gnome this time around (*sobs*), but I still loved Sherlock Gnomes exactly as much as I expected, and I expected a LOT.

Sherlock Gnomes runs a quick 86 minutes and is rated PG for "some rude and suggestive humor." (Though the more crass bits from the trailer are missing from the finished product.)

 

Sherlock Gnomes is great fun for all ages. Of a possible nine Weasleys, Sherlock Gnomes gets eight.

 

Next on my agenda: Peter Rabbit.

 

Rabbits and humans jockey for territory in a somewhat abrasive fairytale.

 

Well, dear reader(s), if there's one thing I want you to know right off the bat, it's that Peter Rabbit probably isn't as bad as you'd think from the trailers or from everything you've heard. Make no mistake, it has BIG problems, but it overcomes most of them for an enjoyable outing.

 

Getting the bad news out of the way first, we'll begin with the obvious: Those damn rabbits. They are utterly insufferable, like the brattiest, most annoying kids you've ever met. It makes rooting for them impossible, even when the film hits that "delivering the message" point where the relevant parties are supposed to become the best versions of themselves. While the physical comedy mostly works, and Domhnall Gleeson's expressions and timing are impeccable (more on that later), the film's "jokes" are painfully bad, especially a couple awkward attempts at social commentary. The movie struggles mightily to settle on a tone, doubling-down on unfunny attempts at humor and, especially towards the beginning, coming across rather nasty. Finally, though the parental guidelines don't mention it, there are a couple things in this movie that may be upsetting to younger kids. At one point when the rabbits' well being is threatened, there was a small boy in my screening screaming, "I don't like it! I DON'T LIKE IT!" so...um...take care with those little ones, will ya?

 

Now the good news, and there's more of it than I expected. Leads Domhnall Gleeson and Rose Byrne are ridiculously adorable and have great chemistry. Gleeson, who seems to be in every single movie these days and continues to prove he's pretty amazing at everything, shows off some solid comic chops, working mostly opposite a tennis ball on a stick that would later become the film's talking woodland creatures. An almost-unrecognizable Sam Neill is also great (as always) in too little screen time. The story never really goes anywhere you don't expect, but I'm not sure you'd want it to. Songs pop up awkwardly throughout the movie, but there are some great pop nuggets that are no less enjoyable for the weird placement. Ultimately, the charm of Gleeson and Byrne outweighs the negatives just enough to make Peter Rabbit worth your while.

 

Peter Rabbit clocks in at 95 minutes and is rated PG for "some rude humor and action."

 

I'd taken a pass on Peter Rabbit weeks ago, and only saw it this week by virtue of a cinema schedule that left a huge gap between Sherlock Gnomes and Pacific Rim. In the finest example of backhanded praise you're likely to find today, I can tell you it was certainly better than spending two hours sitting in the hallway. 

 

Of a possible nine Weasleys, Peter Rabbit gets five.

 

Closing yesterday's triple-header was the sequel Pacific Rim: Uprising.

 

Hey guys...guys...we're cancelling the apocalypse again, 'kay?

 

Uprising is a big step down from the original Pacific Rim, and I can assure you with a reasonable amount of certainty, dear reader(s), that I didn't find it so only because it's missing Charlie Hunnam and Idris Elba. (Though that won't ever help in my eyes, obvs.) The film suffers from paper-doll characters and painfully bad dialogue, but is salvaged somewhat by its likable cast. Though the action is solid, the plot is weak and filled with predictable twists. Lorne Balfe's score is properly epic, and the effects are as massive as a movie-hugeness junkie like me could hope, but, ultimately, if you want brainless fun with big robots, Transformers is a better option.

 

Pacific Rim: Uprising is a witless good time that you'll forget almost as soon as you exit the cinema. 

 

Of a possible nine Weasleys, Pacific Rim: Uprising gets six.

 

Until next time...

 

Cindy Prascik's Review of Demon House

Dearest Blog: Today I elected to pass on lackluster offerings at the cinema in favor of Zak Bagans' documentary Demon House.

 

Spoiler level here will be mild-ish. I'm including some particulars, but nothing that would make it less worth your watching the film yourself.

 

Renowned paranormal investigator Zak Bagans documents experiences at the famous "demon house" in Gary, Indiana.

 

Well, dear reader(s), this may be the easiest review I'll ever write. If you're a fan of Zak Bagans and his Travel Channel series Ghost Adventures, you'll likely enjoy this documentary. If you aren't, maybe take a pass. I am a fan, and I was not disappointed.

 

Demon House is basically an extended Ghost Adventures episode. It's got more swearing (just to let you know we aren't on cable anymore), but is missing GA's most entertaining aspect, Aaron Goodwin. In fact, Goodwin is the only GA principal missing from Demon House, as Billy Tolley and Jay Wasley both make appearances. (Wasley also shares a producer's credit.)

 

Bagans adopts a morose demeanor throughout, as if to let viewers know he's still carrying the burden of the experience. As does the Travel Channel series, Demon House offers interviews with many who experienced the house's malevolence firsthand; it does not, however, include any first-person accounts from the family that last lived there. Initially, another family member states they will not speak with Bagans because he has been in the house and the demon already may have attached itself to him, but later the film suggests they were simply pirated by a big Hollywood producer who hoped to adapt their story for the big screen. Following Ghost Adventures' model, Demon House features cheesy reenactments and reserves its most shocking bit of evidence for the second act. Several of those involved complain of lingering effects that timing allows them to chalk up to their encounters with the creepy abode.

 

Demon House is unlikely to change anyone's mind on the paranormal in general or demonic possession in particular. If you are a believer, you will see things as the film intends: something evil was afoot in Gary, Indiana. If you are a skeptic, it's likely you'll think the evidence is a scam, despite experts' assertations to the contrary. 

 

Demon House clocks in at 111 minutes and is unrated. It does have a fair few f-bombs, as well as many images and scenarios that will be unsettling to believers or to those who are suggestible. As the film itself warns: "View at your own risk."

 

Renting Demon House from XFinity On Demand cost me about fifty cents more than I would have paid to see something at my cinema this weekend, and I'm reasonably confident I enjoyed it at least fifty cents' more than I would any of the weekend's new releases. 

 

Of a possible nine Weasleys (or should they be Wasleys here?), Demon House gets seven.

 

Until next time...

MOVIE REVIEW: TOMB RAIDER

Lara Croft is the fiercely independent daughter of an eccentric adventurer who vanished years earlier. Hoping to solve the mystery of her father's disappearance, Croft embarks on a perilous journey to his last-known destination -- a fabled tomb on a mythical island that might be somewhere off the coast of Japan. The stakes couldn't be higher as Lara must rely on her sharp mind, blind faith and stubborn spirit to venture into the unknown.

Director: Roar Uthaug

Cast: Alicia Vikander, Dominic West, Walton Goggins, Daniel Wu,  Kristin Scott Thomas

Release Date: March 16, 2018

Genres: Action, Adventure 

Rated PG-13 for sequences of violence and action, and for some language

Runtime: 1h 58min

Review:

The rebooted Tomb Raider is a solid if paint by the numbers origin story which also makes it one of the better video game adaptations.  Of course that’s hardly high praise since video game adaptations have a fairly terrible track record.  Luckily Norwegian director Roar Uthaug, who directed the impressive 2015 Norwegian disaster film The Wave, gives his film a palpable plus even if the script is fairly basic.  Uthaug delivers some solid action set pieces throughout along with a shipwreck sequence which could serve as a solid test for epilepsy.  Uthaug film feels strangely like a 90’s Michael Bay film if you removed all of Bay’s bombast.  It’s an interesting bit of alchemy that works more often than not.   

Tomb Raider wouldn’t work at all if Alicia Vikander couldn’t pull off the role of Laura Croft which she did incredibly well. For the uninitiated, the video game character was rebooted in 2013 as a younger, more grounded take which serves as the basis for this film. So all the cartoonish proportions of the video game and caricature of Angelina Jolie’s 2001 portrayal are thrown by the wayside for a more realistic and grounded approach which works in the film’s favor.   

Vikander is fully committed to the character and she’s clearly enjoying herself as the heroine.  She pulls off a steady balance of strength while still being green and learning her way.  Outside of her childlike grunts, Vikander is always the best thing on the screen and gives the film its heart.  

The supporting cast though is sadly underused and developed.  Walton Goggins is given one of the most basic villain characters to play which is a shame since Goggins is such an interesting actor.  It’s a fairly large misstep mainly due to the script which doesn’t provide any depth.  Daniel Wu’s character is the very definition of a one dimensional character, sure he does some things during the film but he’s more a function than a full-fledged character.  Dominic West also isn’t given much to do outside of a wear a terrible wig and look slightly confused and nuts.  

Tomb Raider is a perfectly watchable film and fans of the video game series will enjoy seeing certain sequences from the 2013 game lifted and woven into this film’s narrative but it all feels incredibly safe.  The door is left wide open for a sequel should this film prove to be successful, which with Alicia Vikander in the lead isn’t a bad thing.

B-

April Sokol's Review of A Wrinkle in Time

Movie review: A Wrinkle in Time

A Wrinkle in Time is the latest adaptation of the beloved children's book of the same name.

Directed by Ava DuVernay

Starring: Storm Reid, Oprah Winfrey, Reese Witherspoon, Mindy Kaling, Levi Miller, Chris Pine, Zach Galifianakis and Michael Pena

My review:

Before I start writing I feel as though I should introduce you all to the 12 year old version of myself that was. I was awkward. Lonely. Bookish. Isolated. And completely saved by this book. Meg Murray was one of my very first heroes. Ever. So this movie is directed at a very personal area of me. Even with a stern talking to....my own personal expectations for this movie was pretty high. I'm going to do my level best to divorce the movie from the book. But as any avid book lover knows, that is far easier said than done. But here goes:

A Wrinkle in Time is the story of Meg and her little brother Charles Wallace on a quest to locate their missing father. They are guided on their travels out of our known galaxy by 3 celestial beings (Mrs Which, Mrs Whosit and Mrs Who played by Winfrey, Witherspoon and Kaling respectively). The epic quest quickly goes from lighthearted to dangerous as they're forced to confront the growing evil entity known as The It.

Let's get right to it. Is it any good? Well yes, it is. Is it as good as the book? Of course it's not.

We'll get the bad out of the way. All of the goodwill that was built in the 1st and 2nd acts of the movie is lost as the 3rd act slowly careens off the rails. I found the last 30 minutes or so of the movie to move at a snail's pace. The set up for the final showdown between good and evil was laborious. Were the problems so egregious that I ended up hating the final product? No. But it does feel like a sort of almost miss when you step back and examine the final product as a whole.

Let's get back to the good, shall we? The visuals are stunning. Mrs Whosit (Witherspoon) was really the stand out for me. Her perfect amount of whimsy was spot on. I was pleasantly surprised by how engaged I was with the young actress who played Meg (Reid). The success of this movie was always going to rise or fall upon her shoulders. It's a heavy weight for one so young (Reid is only 14 years old). The themes of this movie are timeless and were handled with deft hands. I felt more than once as though Momma Oprah was speaking wisdom directly to the bruised 12 year old child that still lives inside of me. Loving yourself, not in spite of your flaws, but because of them is a wonderful lesson for children and adults alike. Yet DeVernay never allowed this to creep into the saccharin territory of the too sweet.

A Wrinkle in Time clocks in at 2 hours and is rated PG for thematic elements and peril. I give it a very solid 3 ½ stars out of 5.