'It Chapter Two' Review

Synopsis: In the sleepy town of Derry, the evil clown Pennywise returns 27 years later to torment the grown-up members of the Losers' Club, who have long since drifted apart from one another.

Runtime: 169 minutes

MPAA Rating: R (for disturbing violent content and bloody images throughout, pervasive language, and some crude sexual material)

Who should see it? Adult fans of Stephen King and It (2017).

Directed by Andy Muschietti and penned by Gary Dauberman, It Chapter 2 adapts the remainder of Stephen King's beloved best-selling novel. Often, book fans are disheartened to discover specific scenes lost in the transition to the big screen. Well, fans of the source material will surely be delighted to learn It Chapter 2 is two hours and forty-nine minutes long. Though I haven't read the novel myself, I imagine It Chapter 2 is a faithful adaptation by virtue of its lengthy runtime. Not to mention, the added benefit of splitting the book into two movies. However, a film's running time can feasibly make-or-break the storytelling on display. In this case, It Chapter 2 felt drawn out and overstuffed.

Burdened by an over-reliance on flashbacks, It Chapter 2 must contend with advancing the present-day plot while "The Losers Club" confront their past trauma. The flashbacks are necessary to fill in gaps from its predecessor and inform the adult Losers' emotional response to their surroundings, but they derail the story's pace substantially. I suppose the filmmakers were reluctant to trim out the glut and hone in on a more focused narrative, but several scenes could have been abbreviated. Muschietti and company seem interested in delivering the most faithful adaptation possible, and though the ambition is admirable, a more economical use of screen time was achievable. On a brighter note, transitions between past and present were quite impressive, so hats off to editor Jason Ballantine for a job well done.

To take a detour from drawbacks, I appreciate the well-intentioned efforts of all involved. The cinematography, production design, and score effectively blend to establish a creepy atmosphere that the film scarcely abandons. Like the first, there are some cheap jump scares and I'd be reluctant to classify the onscreen events as "scary" (though horror's subjective). And also akin to its predecessor, It Chapter 2 is at its best when focused on "The Losers Club."

The teen and adult incarnations of "The Losers" are portrayed well by their respective casts. Depicting the middle-aged "Losers," Jessica Chastain, James McAvoy, Bill Hader, Isaiah Mustafa, Jay Ryan, James Ransone, and Andy Bean channel their striking characteristics to great effect. They're so well-cast that you conceivably envision the younger "Losers" maturing into them. Chastain, McAvoy, and Hader are notable stand-outs while the lesser-known cast members also demonstrate solid acting chops. Mustafa and Bean noticeably have less screen time as Mike and Stanley (a recurring issue from Chapter One), but their narrative significance somewhat compensates for that.

Jaeden Lieberher, Jeremy Ray Taylor, Sophia Lillis, Finn Wolfhard, Chosen Jacobs, Jack Dylan Grazer, and Wyatt Oleff each reprise their roles for flashbacks via the CG de-aging technique frequently showcased in Marvel movies as of late. However, the effectiveness of this technology varies drastically. Some of the children genuinely resembled their younger selves while the others had what I'd describe as unnaturally rubber faces. Given that most of these actors underwent puberty in-between installments, their voices are also altered in post-production, which was also quite noticeable. In an ideal world, this footage would have been shot during production of the first chapter, but I understand budgetary restraints, scheduling, and an incomplete script likely prohibited that from happening. In spite of these technological flukes outside their control, the young actors lend ample nuance to these characters once more. 

Returning as Pennywise, Bill Skarsgård plays the deranged clown quite well. However, as an antagonist, Pennywise put up a lousy effort attempting to stop the Losers where he'd often come and go as the plot dictated. While the Loser's mindset (realizing it's not real) occasionally resisted him, that wasn't always a factor in his sudden disappearances. 

Despite its flaws, fans of Stephen King needn't fear for the second chapter's buoyancy. Ambition, top-rate production value, and a skillful ensemble are enough to keep this sequel afloat, but It Chapter 2 is a bloated and uneven follow-up.

Film Assessment: B-

'Power Rangers' Review

Power Rangers follows five teenagers in the small town of Angle Grove as they stumble across mystic power coins and are granted exceptional abilities. The teens then must band together and learn to work as a team of heroes if they're to stand any chance defending Angel Grove from the ruinous Rita Repulsa. As I mentioned in my Mighty Morphin Power Rangers: The Movie review, I didn't grow up watching Power Rangers and this week was actually my first time to watch anything Power Rangers-related in its entirety so it goes without saying I've never been a part of the Power Rangers fanbase and therefore this review won't be biased with nineties-nostalgia. I did find it immensely interesting to watch a blockbuster for a fervent fandom I didn't have much prior knowledge on as contrasted to a new Lucasfilm, Marvel Studios, or DC production where I'm able pick up on the major easter eggs and references with ease. I mention all of this to highlight how successful Power Rangers is in being somewhat accessible to new viewers and to incorporate my own personal background (or lack thereof) with the franchise considering this is a blog and not an editorial review. 

Power Rangers is directed by Dean Israelite with a screenplay penned by John Gatkins and story elements pooled from Matt Sazama, Burk Sharpless, and Michele and Kieran Mulroney. Israelite does a fine job juggling the responsibilities of director, maintaining momentum in the character-driven storytelling while helming some serviceable action sequences. I wasn't too big a fan of the shaky-cam cinematography Israelite and Matthew Lloyd chose to utilize or the slo/fast-mo editing incorporated in the third act finale but the action is fine for the most part. The visual effects looked great and really sold the more outlandish elements that accompany Power Rangers. The suit's have garnered a lot of comparison to Iron Man's armor but I thought they looked cool in the action scenes and are miles better than the '90s outfits.

One of my concerns going into Power Rangers was that the filmmakers were going to strive to be a gritty, dark reboot of a silly, campy concept and while the film was serious, I was pleasantly surprised with the middle ground discovered by the creative team, even though Power Rangers can be tonally inconsistent on occasion. Gatkins did a wonderful job as screenwriter positioning the lead characters to be both authentic and relatable teenagers without leaning too heavily on teen angst or any other perpetual overblown teenage stereotypes.

All the characters are outcasts but they're outcast in a believable manner; Jason and Kimberly are both twists on the typical popular kids, Billy is on the spectrum, Zack is a rebel with a cause, and Trini is lesbian. I don't think there's nearly as much controversy on that as what surrounded Beauty and the Beast (2017) but Trini is portrayed as the first openly LGBT superhero so that's worth noting I guess. The film doesn't draw much attention to it though so it never felt like a distraction and honestly it didn't do much to affect the story whatsoever. In fact, the element of the screenplay I was mostly interested with was the character dynamics and background opposed to the generic third act battle against a CG-army. If you're going to Power Rangers for the action alone, you may be bored for a good hour and a half due to the nature of being an origin story but I personally liked the decision to flesh out the characters. 

Yes, the script has plot holes, clichés, and the writing isn't particularly strong but the cast assembled really elevate the material. Dacre Montgomery seems to have what it takes to be a star and certainly exemplifies all the attributes of a leading man with his take on Jason (The Red Ranger). Montgomery managed to capture charisma and a vulnerability you wouldn't expect from his character that made him a likable leader. Naomi Scott made for a nice leading female character as Kimberly (The Pink Ranger), who thankfully wasn't there for either sex appeal or to be the damsel in distress but rather turned out to be a compelling character in her own right.

RJ Cyler however, was without a doubt the standout with his portrayal of Billy (The Blue Ranger), channeling autism in a manner that seemed authentic and respectful to those on the spectrum while just being a good-spirited likable presence. Ludi Lin's Zack (The Black Ranger) and Becky G's Trini (The Yellow Ranger) probably have the least to do of the five and feel underdeveloped in comparison but their characters didn't draw my interest so I was ok with that. Across the board, the five Rangers felt well-cast and suited to their respective roles and managed to sell the team dynamic thanks to their friendly chemistry. Elsewhere, Bryan Cranston does as much as you'd expect an actor of that caliber to possibly put forth as a floating head and Bill Hader was a nice source of comedic relief as Alpha 5.

If there's one thing I absolutely hated in this movie, it would have to be Elizabeth Banks' over-the-top portrayal of Rita Repulsa. I got some Suicide Squad Enchantress vibes from Banks' performance and that's not a good thing... Banks goes full-in on the hammy villainy you'd expect to see in the campy children's television series but in the context of this more grounded iteration of the Rangers Banks comes across to be absolutely ridiculous. She's almost singlehandedly the source of Power Rangers' tonal issues and I'd put her up for worst performance of the year with no questions asked.

One thing I'd be remised to leave out of this review is that this film has the plenty of blatant product placement, like most other blockbusters in this day-and-age. However, Power Rangers highlights one specific company to the extent that this company actually became an integral plot point and I thought it was hilarious that Power Rangers ended up being a feature length commercial for this company (I won't mention it for those who'd consider it a spoiler).

In conclusion, Power Rangers doesn't do much to stand out from the packed superhero genre but it offers an entertaining escapade for those seeking a fun time. Power Rangers ultimately suffers from being a tried-and true team superhero origin story but the core cast impressed me and helped make the film an enjoyable experience. I can highly recommend this to hardcore Power Rangers fans, who probably don't need my endorsement to begin with, and would say it's worth at least checking out once for those on the fence. While I may not have left the theater jumping up and down screaming "GO GO POWER RANGERS," I did enjoy it as the superficial popcorn blockbuster it was meant to be and would be up to go go see any sequels.

Film Assessment: C

'Sausage Party' Review

I walked out of Sausage Party wondering what in the world I had just watched, and that's coming from someone who had a general idea what he was in for. Essentially it's about marketplace food discovering what actually happens to food when it's purchased and the insane shenanigans that follow.

At it's core, Sausage Party clearly mocks many tropes of Disney/Pixar style animation opening with an outrageously humorous song composed by Alan Menken, known for scoring Disney films such as Beauty and the Beast (1991), Aladdin, and Hercules, and borrowing the central idea of living inanimate objects and their lives from Toy Story but trust me, they are distinctly different in terms of appropriateness and quality.

Sausage Party is a raunchy animated comedy, and I feel that's something that's important and should be expressed if you plan on watching it, because this film doesn't hold back on it's jokes and crosses the line fairly quickly with no plans to tread backwards. If you are easily offended by racial stereotypes or inappropriate humor, this is not the comedy for you. Greg Tiernan and Conrad Vernon's direction lends itself perfectly to the filthy comedy as every creative choice is certainly a bold one.

The animation is sub-par and never near the heights of Disney, Pixar, Dreamworks, or even Illumination Entertainment but that's no surprise considering Sausage Party had a budget of $19 M and the Sausage Party's aesthetic isn't the film's primary focus. It's purpose is to make you laugh and Sausage Party's biggest hurdle for me was that it's rarely as it funny as makes itself out to be.

The screenplay from writers Kyle Hunter, Ariel Shaffir, Seth Rogan, and Evan Goldberg offers up some gags that had me laughing hysterically but not every joke landed. There are some sequences that offer up plenty of shock and awe as things unfold that are absolutely bananas, so I can give them props for daring to go that far, but at the same time I was very weirded out by it all. Surprisingly the screenplay does offer up some fairly smart social, political, and religious commentary, but once again not as high brow as it'd like to be since it juxtaposes these messages with some grungy jokes and racial stereotypes for cheap laughs.

However with that all being said, Sausage Party boasts a massive ensemble of comedic talent including Seth Rogan, Kirsten Wiig, Jonah Hill, Michael Cera, Edward Norton, Paul Rudd, Bill Hader, and Nick Kroll along with many, many more brilliant comedians. Some voices are instantly recognizable while others had me on the ropes and part of the fun of seeing the film is trying to figure out which celebrity talent is associated with which character so I won't discuss their performances individually.

Overall, Sausage Party is definitely not for everyone, but if you love raunchy comedy this will scratch your itch. Oh and please DON'T bring your children to see Sausage Party as it may appear to be a cute animation, it's nothing of the sort. I also didn't find the experience to be heightened by seeing it in a theater so if you're iffy on Sausage Party, wait for the home media release and check it out then. In conclusion, Sausage Party is a brilliant parody, but only a passable comedy. It offers up enough unique humor for at least one viewing, but honestly I don't feel as though I would ever watch Sausage Party again.

Film Assessment: C-

'The Angry Birds Movie' Review

The Angry Birds Movie is an adaptation of the formerly popular mobile based game, Angry Birds. I say formerly because the game seemed to rise and fall in popularity over the span of about a year or two and I know absolutely no one that still plays the game. 

Therefore, I found it odd that Rovio would be eager to make an feature length animated film based on a mobile game that's become irrelevant. For one, it seems a stretch to make a movie on a mobile game with very little narrative to begin with, but I guess anything's possible now that we have seen The LEGO Movie, and almost no one thought that would work including myself (and I even grew up playing with LEGOs so it's not like I was disconnected from them). 

I'd seen The Angry Birds Movie advertised as this year's The LEGO Movie and so I held out hope and must say that that faith was ill placed. Now it's possible that Rovio wanted to reinvigorate interest in the franchise and it has yet to be seen if the film will impact downloads of the mobile game but one things for sure, the film itself is pretty successful. It opened at the number one spot for this weekend's box office with a sizable debut of $38 Million managing to barely edge out Captain America: Civil War in it's third weekend (This was expected given The Angry Birds Movie's family friendly appeal). Despite it's financial success the film has indeed been met with poor critical reception (Deemed rotten by both critics and audiences on Rotten Tomatoes). So is The Angry Birds Movie truly horrific? 

Not exactly. I'd say it's more along the lines of a waste of time and price of admission knowing that there's higher quality family friendly content out there such as The Jungle Book and Zootopia, two notable examples from the past two months. The Angry Birds Movie isn't necessarily "bad" though, while I can say there wasn't too much effort being made in regards to expanding the concept of the game and story development, there are some redeeming qualities to be found. While I was reflecting on the film to write this review I managed to come up with a simple idea for a stronger basic premise for the film that would add more complex emotional layers in about ten minutes. I actually am making a video about it and will share it below because I think it's a quick and easy fix to raise the quality the feature significantly.

As I said, there are some redeeming moments. First and foremost, the animation was quite impressive as the amount of detail in a single feather was astonishing and the attention to detail in all areas was just remarkable. This isn't the best animation I've ever seen per say but great nonetheless and I felt it needed to be commended.  

The voice cast assembled fit their roles well, but no one really gives a  "truly worthwhile performance." Jason Sudeikis voices the temperamental protagonist, Red, and the character was very unsympathetic as he had extreme overreactions to small annoyances and it's odd to have a protagonist that you can't identify with and have difficulty finding any common ground for that matter. 

Among the supporting characters, there are some that will surely be crowdpleasers in Josh Gad's hyperactive speed demon Chuck, basically Frozen's Olaf on caffeine, and Danny McBride's combustable Bomb. Sean Penn grunts his way through the film as Terrence and Peter Dinklage's role as the Mighty Eagle is amusing. Bill Hader also gets to have a little fun as Leonard, the king of the nefarious pigs who are up to absolutely no good. 

These characters are essentially one-note individuals with no character growth, which made the characters a little stale during the one and half hour run time. Really, The Angry Birds Movie's weakness is the lack of plot. 

There is very little actual story to and I realize the film is marketed towards children as family friendly entertainment yet seemed anything but family friendly with overt adult gross-out humor. That's not all, the film takes profanity and sloppily replaces it with bird terminology. There's literally a line of dialogue where Red says "Pluck my life." I'm aware that plenty of family friendly films hide some adult humor but they do it subtly, The Angry Birds Movie practically boasts it's inclusion. It's likely that children won't pick up on these things but I'm not sure I would want to risk it if I were a parent. The humor isn't really funny either, but some pee jokes will probably earn cheap laughs. 

The film is marketed towards children and treats itself as though it has family appeal, but I found myself losing interest in the choppy, sloppily edited first and second acts. The third act where the birds set up the mechanic of the actual mobile game is admittedly enjoyable as all the characters have a moment to shine with their own unique charm. 

Overall, the film just failed to provide any room for the story or events to breathe and never relished in any of it's bright moments. Children actually started just running around the theater in the last five or ten minutes so I guess they weren't able to maintain interest in the film either. 

However when I arrived home I was expressing my thoughts and my younger siblings completely disagreed, so it appears as though children are enjoying it. Actually, the reason that my Film Assessment score will be a little higher than I would like as I'm taking the child entertainment value into account (I did the same thing with Minions as I would have rather given that a score of C). For those that want to know my true score is C+ but taking children's enjoyment into account is important when reviewing an animated feature, especially when it lacks plot. 

My opinion of The Angry Birds Movie is that it's ok. I can't say that it's awful, but I can't say it was wildly entertaining either. Frankly, it's a waste of both time and money, but I'm sure it will keep children's eyes glued to the screen.

Film Assessment: C+

'Inside Out' Review

Nominated For: Best Animated Feature and Best Original Screenplay.
Won: Best Animated Feature.

Yesterday I was able to see Inside Out after returning from a trip to Los Angeles and I must start off the review saying that this is one of Pixar's greatest original ideas yet! This is the best original (non-sequel) Pixar film since Up, which is personally one of my favorites from the studio. The plot of the film is quite intriguing. The film is about emotions inside of a 12 year old girl who is experiencing many unsettling changes in her life because of moving to a new house. 

The main voice cast for the emotions consists of Amy Poehler as Joy, Phyllis Smith as Sadness, Mindy Kaling as Disgust, Lewis Black as Anger, and Bill Hader as Fear. Each character is able to provide many laughs by being a gimmick of their own emotion (Anger is a hothead, etc.). 

The cast is quite enjoyable but the two characters with the most depth are definitely Joy and Sadness who are able to convey a wide variety of emotions despite being one emotion. Amy Poehler is hilarious as Joy and energizes the lead role  with jokes and charisma but despite her name she has has her own range of emotions in her character. Phyllis Smith brings a great depth to Sadness who is the butt of several puns and jokes but actually is very important to the film's most impactful scenes. 

Oh and if I haven't said it already, you will cry while watching this film which is something expected from Pixar and means that Pixar can make a film with such deep intellectual themes that really connect to the average Joe and can really convey heartfelt scenes quite well. My entire family that saw this film at least shed one tear at the film's impactful moment, including one of my sisters who never cries during movies. 

Overall, Inside Out is a great comeback for Pixar and hopefully they can continue producing more original films along with sequels to their other beloved films (ie. Finding Dory, Incredibles 2, and Toy Story 4).  It's great for both kids and adults as there are many deep messages about life, psychology, etc. and many jokes for adults as well as some humor all ages can appreciate. I highly recommend watching Inside Out if you have grown up with Disney or Pixar or even if you haven't.