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-

MOVIE REVIEW: HALLOWEEN

It's been 40 years since Laurie Strode survived a vicious attack from crazed killer Michael Myers on Halloween night. Locked up in an institution, Myers manages to escape when his bus transfer goes horribly wrong. Laurie now faces a terrifying showdown when the masked madman returns to Haddonfield, Ill. -- but this time, she's ready for him.

Director: David Gordon Green

Cast: Jamie Lee Curtis, Nick Castle, Judy Greer, Andi Matichak, Will Patton, Virginia Gardner

Release Date: October 19, 2018

Genres: Horror , Thriller

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

Runtime: 1h 44 min

Review:

David Gordon Green’s Halloween franchise refresh can be considered a success on multiple levels.  Green and Danny McBride wrote the script and their fandom shines through multiple times with specific call backs or camera techniques throughout the efficient but effective film.  Green occasionally flashes some visual flourishes which give the film a stylish look that makes for a better quality film overall.  The main thing they are able to inject into this entry in the franchise is a sense of fun.  There are well timed jump scares and tension throughout the film but there’s also some well placed comedy which keeps the film from being another soul less sequel.  Michael Myers is scary again even if some of the slasher tropes feel a bit goofy here and there.  Jamie Lee Curtis comes back to her cornerstone franchise and plays her part very well thanks in part to an interesting take on her character.  There are a few surprises here and there but ultimately the film goes exactly where you think its going.  Typically this is a major draw back but the film is so lovingly crafted that fans will be hard pressed not to be impressed by a return to form for one of the hallmark horror franchises. 

B+

MOVIE REVIEW: BAD TIMES AT THE EL ROYALE

The El Royale is run-down hotel that sits on the border between California and Nevada. It soon becomes a seedy battleground when seven strangers -- a cleric, a soul singer, a traveling salesman, two sisters, the manager and the mysterious Billy Lee -- converge on a fateful night for one last shot at redemption before everything goes wrong.

Director: Drew Goddard

Cast: Jeff Bridges, Cynthia Erivo, Dakota Johnson, Jon Hamm, Cailee Spaeny, Lewis Pullman, Nick Offerman, Chris Hemsworth

Release Date: October 12, 2018

Genres: Mystery , Thriller

Rated R for horror violence, and language including some sexual references

Runtime: 2h 21min

Review:

Bad Times at the El Royale is a solid twisty thriller from Drew Goddard.  You’d be remiss if you didn’t feel some very strong Tarantino vibes throughout mixed together with some Agatha Christie as each individual story plays out.  The film is stylish and engrossing even if the ultimate payoff is bit of a letdown.  Goddard cast is made up of strong performers and a bevy of recognizable faces but Broadway star Cynthia Erivo really leaves an impressive mark.  Jeff Bridges centers the whole thing with a tangible sense of heart with healthy shades of grey.  Jon Hamm does solid work in a limited role and the film is lesser for taking him off the board as early as it does.  A perpetually shirtless Chris Hemsworth is clearly having a blast hamming it up as the cult leader that brings all the plot threads together.  For all the strong performances and stories, you d start to get the sense that Drew Goddard fell in love with his own creation as the film starts to meander towards the end.  There’s really no reason for the film to be nearly 2 and half hours and the film suffers since this type of pulpy fare is best in short doses.  

B

Cindy Prascik's Reviews of First Man and Bad Times at the El Royale

Dearest Blog: Yesterday it was off to Marquee Cinemas for First Man and Bad Times at the El Royale.

 

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

 

First on my agenda: First Man.

 

Some stuff you know and probably a lot you didn't know about Neil Armstrong, the first man to walk on the moon.

 

First Man is approximately 90% Things-I-Hate-About-Awards-Type-Movies, but I still enjoyed it more than I expected to. Ryan Gosling is terrific in the lead, and his supporting cast--led by the extraordinary Claire Foy--has no trouble keeping pace. The story of Armstrong's personal life is almost as fascinating as his road to the moon, and the film gives equal screen time to each. An over-abundance of extreme close-ups is effective in depicting claustrophobic cockpit conditions, but it gets awkward when it's just folks talking science or eating dinner. Likewise, jiggly camera work and very dark shots work well in putting the viewer inside the craft--often under terrifying circumstances--but otherwise are plain annoying. The movie could have used a bit of a trim, but it never really drags or feels bloated; ultimately the amazing story outweighs any flaws in the filmmaking. Closing with full disclosure: for the duration, all I could think of was Lincoln Osiris trying to re-enter the Earth's atmosphere in an old refrigerator box, which is why they don't let me vote for the Oscars.

First Man clocks in at 141 minutes and is rated PG13 for "some thematic content involving peril, and brief strong language."

 

First Man is a flawed telling of a great story, well worth your movie dollar. 

 

Of a possible nine Weasleys, First Man gets seven and a half.

 

Fangirl points: So many much-loved faces in this one! Shea Whigham! Corey Stoll! Ciaran Hinds! Pablo Schreiber! Brian d'Arcy James! Mister Cory Michael Smith!

 

Next on the docket, one of my most-anticipated titles of the year, Bad Times at the El Royale.

 

Mystery abounds at a past-its-prime hotel that straddles the state line between California and Nevada.

From the trailers, I expected Bad Times at the El Royale to be darkly funny, but instead it's mostly just dark. Smart, twisty storytelling and an exceptional cast should be the envy of Hollywood, with Chris Hemsworth, Cynthia Erivo, and Jeff Bridges turning in exceptionally strong performances. El Royale has layers to spare, and just when you think you've got it figured out, another one peels off to reveal something unexpected. The film boasts superb production design and a strong score by Michael Giacchino. I can't go into much detail without spoiling important plot points, but there are some disturbing and uncomfortable moments that lend a grim tone to the whole, ultimately making it less fun than it might have been, but no less brilliant.

 

Bad Times at the El Royale runs 141 minutes and is rated R for "strong violence, language, some drug content, and brief nudity."

 

Bad Times at the El Royale is one of the best movies I've seen this year...but I probably wouldn't watch it again. 

 

Of a possible nine Weasleys, Bad Times at the El Royale gets seven, which would have been eight but for a mean and unnecessary dig at my beautiful home state of West Virginia.

 

Fangirl points: You know it's officially awards season when Shea Whigham starts turning up in everything!

 

Until next time...