'Dumbo' (2019) Review

Synopsis: Struggling circus owner Max Medici enlists a former star and his two children to care for Dumbo, a baby elephant born with oversized ears. When the family discovers that the animal can fly, it soon becomes the main attraction - bringing in huge audiences and revitalizing the run-down circus. The elephant's magical ability also draws the attention of an entrepreneur who wants to showcase Dumbo in his latest, larger-than-life entertainment venture.

Runtime: 112 minutes

MPAA Rating: PG (for peril/action, thematic elements, and brief mild language)

Who should see it? Families with young children.  

I've admittedly grown disillusioned with Disney's recent practice of adapting their animated classics into live-action. The gimmick is tiresome because the new versions either safely regurgitate the same story through the lens of live-action with superfluous CGI ala Beauty and the Beast (2017) or radically retell the story audiences know and love (Maleficent). An unchanged edition hardly seems worth the time of day while an interpretation that deviates too far from the original will upset those who grew up watching it. There's a tricky balance in retelling the story so that it will satisfy everyone. Very few of Disney's recent reimaginings have balanced these extremes to deliver something which champions the same spirit as the original while finding something new and worthwhile to say. The 2016 adaptations of The Jungle Book and Pete's Dragon accomplished this feat, but the studio has otherwise seen mixed results.

With Dumbo, visionary director Tim Burton and screenwriter Ehren Kruger aim for the middle ground by quickly branching off from an abbreviated retelling of the 1941 animated feature to explore the elephant's antics flying under the big top. The additional material was likely intended to inflate the runtime since the original is barely over an hour. The extended portion offers Burton and Kruger many avenues to explore, but that's the problem. Burton and Kruger are unsure which direction to take the story, and the addition of many shallow human characters only serves to further convolute the simple premise of the original. If you've recently rewatched the 1941 film, you're probably aware of certain problematic story elements. Thankfully, racial stereotypes and Dumbo drinking champagne are omitted.

Regardless, this remake has more pressing concerns. Kruger's script is unfocused on account of stuffing this narrative with a multitude of bland caricatures. Tonally, I'm not sure Burton knew how he even wanted to approach the material as the heightened reality he presents doesn't jive with the cartoonish performances or saccharine story. You're never quite sure what Burton expects the audience to take seriously, and the editing actively undermines the viewer's emotional connection as scenes abruptly end before they can register with a crowd. This frequent occurrence compromises the general flow of the film as Burton seems to be in a hurry to move past the sentimental sections. That's not even mentioning the artificial aesthetic evident in many exterior scenes (much of the green screen work looks remarkably fake). Since learning Tim Burton would be helming this reiteration, I've felt Dumbo peculiarly paired director and source material, so it shouldn't surprise that it's genuinely the most bizarre thing I've seen in a while.

In spite of my reservations towards Disney's remakes, Dumbo piqued my interest for a few reasons. As I alluded towards already, matching Tim Burton with this source material was an interesting choice, to say the least. Elephants are also my favorite animal, so a story about an adorable baby elephant naturally appeals to me. And Dumbo sure is cute. In fact, the precious pachyderm practically steals the show... However, Burton hardly concentrates on Dumbo in the movie entitled Dumbo. The inclusion of several new human characters reduces Dumbo's role in his own feature. It's a shame since most of Dumbo's scenes are quite charming and serve as an elaborate vfx showcase.

Concerning the ensemble, Colin Farrell is joined by young newcomers Nico Parker and Finley Hobbins to portray the family responsible for Dumbo. To put it lightly, these child actors aren't the best... but I don't think it's entirely their fault. They're saddled with stale dialogue, and Burton's vision is very scattered. Even a veteran actor like Farrell suffers under Burton's direction, and he's certainly not the only one, as Eva Green's also relegated to an insubstantial role.

Reuniting for the first time since Batman Returns, the trio of Tim Burton, Michael Keaton, and Danny DeVito are working together once more. Unfortunately, Keaton and DeVito are operating at polar opposites as Keaton's depicts V.A. Vandevere as a hokey, over the top entrepreneur in one of his worst roles to date while DeVito embraces the campy and sentimental sides of the story to provide a hysterical, layered portrayal of an eccentric ringmaster. 

Perhaps, like Dumbo, Burton put all his faith in a magic feather and flew through production on auto-pilot because his distinct creative stamp barely registers on this middling remake. For all its faults, the titular pachyderm's trunk still manages to firmly grab hold of your heart, so clearly Burton did something right.

Film Assessment: C 

'Widows' Review

A police shootout leaves four thieves dead during an explosive armed robbery attempt in Chicago. Their widows have nothing in common except a debt left behind by their spouses' criminal activities. Hoping to forge a future not their own terms, Veronica joins forces with the other three women to pull off a heist that her husband was planning.

Based on an '80s TV miniseries of the same name, Widows is director Steve McQueen's follow-up to the Academy Award-winning film 12 Years a Slave. In addition to helming the crime drama, Mc-Queen co-wrote the screenplay alongside Gone Girl and Sharp Objects scribe Gillian Flynn. The prestige names circling the picture don't stop there though, as the ensemble is stacked with all-star acting talent I'll discuss momentarily, and acclaimed film composer Hans Zimmer even scores the intricate heist flick. Whether Widows will be a prominent player in the awards race remains to be seen, but I believe it's rightfully earned its spot in the conversation for some coveted Oscars.

From the get-go, McQueen captivates audiences with an intense getaway intercut by glimpses of the tranquil domestic life shared by the four thieves and their spouses. Throughout the film, false reflections are employed as a reoccurring symbol which is not only beautifully photographed by cinematographer Sean Bobbitt, but indicative of the struggle of grieving a loved one as Veronica is often haunted by an image of her deceased husband Harry when she looks out the window. It's also worth mentioning that Widows contains the most unique camera placement I've seen all year, as a one-take conversation inside the back seat of a car is shot from the front passenger side exterior to highlight the change in locale from a poverty-stricken neighborhood to a wealthy one (there's deeper meaning to it, I promise).

On that note, Widows is loaded with commentary related to race, gender, socioeconomic status, political corruption, police brutality, and violence to name the topics most prominent in the narrative. However, the film never feels overburdened by the abundance of subject matter. In fact, everything eventually coalesces in an incredibly satisfying manner within a tense, enthralling thriller. Though it should be mentioned that Widows is not an action-heavy heist movie as it's being marketed. Action is present and incredible in execution, but not abundant. McQueen and Flynn are much more concerned with exploring the ensuing character drama, and Widows is all the better for it.

As I alluded to earlier, Widows has a star-studded cast, and everyone brings their A-game. Viola Davis is sensational in the lead role, demonstrating extensive range that should garner her another Oscar nomination at the very least, while Elizabeth Debicki and Michelle Rodriguez each turn in career-best performances. Cynthia Erivo, who was recently a highlight of Bad Times at the El Royale, continues to show a knack for acting as she matches her experienced costars at every opportunity while Liam Neeson, Jacki Weaver, and Carrie Coon are relegated to small but vital roles.

Brian Tyree Henry and Daniel Kaluuya portray Manning brothers Jamal and Jatemme respectively, lending a sense of gravitas to their characters which makes their screen presence all the more intimidating and impressionable. Kaluuya is only onscreen for about ten minutes, but he really makes the most of it by exhibiting a razor-sharp intensity and collected composure which will surely place him among the year's best supporting performances and most intimidating antagonists. Meanwhile, Colin Farrell and Robert Duvall juxtapose them as a father-son duo of scheming politicians.

I still need to watch American Animals, but for now, Widows easily curb-stomped Ocean's Eight and snatched its crown as the year's best heist film. Unlike the year's other diverse female-lead heist, Widows rejuvenates the genre with stylish filmmaking techniques and a sense of purpose. McQueen's got plenty to say and a lot of ground to cover but somehow gets away executing a complex smash-and-grab without ever sacrificing quality or entertainment value.

Film Assessment: A+

'The Killing of a Sacred Deer' Review

[This review was originally written in October 2017 and is now being published that my internship is over. For an explanation of this, visit my Fall 2017 Important Update post.] 

The Killing of a Sacred Deer opens with Dr. Steven Murphy performing an unsettling open-heart surgery. The patient dies, and it's not too soon afterwards that we're introduced to his son. The boy appears to approach the doctor out of nowhere, but it's soon revealed the two exchange gifts and Murphy has been going on walks with the boy. The nature of their relationship is shrouded in mystery at first, but the threads come undone and a more sinister plot unravels. Martin isn't just an average boy, he's an evil force seeking justice for the death of his father. Martin informs Dr. Murphy that he must kill either his wife or one of his two children, and if he doesn't then all three will slowly sicken and die.

The Killing of a Sacred Deer is written and directed by Yorgos Lanthimos, who some may be familiar with as the director of last year's The Lobster. I haven't seen The Lobster yet myself, but if it's anything like The Killing of a Sacred Deer, I imagine it would be extremely unique and off-kilter. Lanthimos has made a horror film, but not in the traditional sense. The imagery in The Killing of a Sacred Deer is just as grotesque, but the unease is largely derived from the viewer's own psyche. In fact, it's quite brilliant how the paranoia creeps up on the viewer. 

It's first established by the eerie dissonance that can be heard in the background (compliments of Johnnie Burn, Sarah Giles, and Nick Payne), which automatically generates a feeling of unease when combined with the detached cinematography (Thimios Bakatakis' fine work) and monotonous dialogue delivery. None of it feels right, and that's just what Lanthimos wants the viewer to be thinking. I'd find it difficult to imagine this will film will be embraced with open arms by general audiences. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised to see casual viewers skip out on the film entirely because it's simply too unusual. I don't really blame them because it's not meant for mass consumption anyways. However, The Killing of a Sacred Deer is probably one of the more interesting horror films I've seen all year because of its quirks. 

The central conflict posed by Lanthimos and second screenwriter Efthymis Filippou is compelling because it's a choice that lingers. As an audience member, you know there inevitably has to be a resolution. You just don't know what it will be or when it will happen, and Lanthimos draws out the suspense for as long as possible. An unexpected element that I found quite fascinating was witnessing Dr. Murphy's rationale throughout the entire ordeal as he seemed to consider the strangest solutions. In the beginning, he believes the boy is bluffing, but the doctor starts to realize what he's dealing with once illness strikes his family members one-by-one. He weighs insignificant human attributes against one another, and resorts to the oddest authorities to dictate how he should proceed. 

Almost every line of dialogue in The Killing of a Sacred Deer is spoken in deadpan, which is a precarious approach because it rarely pays off, but there are actors who are an exception to this rule. Thankfully for this film's case, the actors at Yorgos Lanthimos' disposal are more than up to the task. Colin Farrell and Nicole Kidman seem to be on the same wavelength as Lanthimos and Filippou as they channel complexity with limited expression. Farrell plays Dr. Murphy as a man of science grappling with an outwards confidence that science offers a solution for everything and an inner cowardice in the face of something he can't understand or ever hope to control. It's exceptional how Farrell walks the tightrope. Kidman, on the other hand, is utterly remarkable at exhibiting a cold demeanor, bottling up Anna's anger like nobody's business. Her external vacant expressions are perfectly matched with an inner intensity. 

However, it's Dunkirk's Barry Keoghan who will unnerve you at every turn. Simply hearing the teenage actor engage in such cynical conversation when it's spoken so softly and straight-faced is extremely unsettling to say the least. Keoghan successfully emits a drastic darkness and inhospitable aura so you'll inevitably be creeped out by the kid.

The Killing of a Sacred Deer isn't exactly something I'd recommend someone to see, unless I knew for certain they would appreciate the artistry on display. The film is a psychological horror in the strongest sense, and definitely not something for the faint of heart. The Killing of a Sacred Deer is a film that manages to be both insightful and perturbing, something I thought to be long lost to the studio system of pumping out an excess of ordinary horror every year.

Film Assessment: A

'Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them' Review

I attended an early screening of Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them Wednesday evening after months and months of anticipation build-up. Since I hadn't formerly reviewed the Harry Potter films and Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them fit into J.K. Rowling's Wizarding World, I thought it would be fun to re-read each novel, rewatch the corresponding film and then review them here on my blog over the course of the previous four months. If you happened to miss any of my previous Harry Potter reviews you can find them at the subsequent hyperlinks: Sorcerer's Stone, Chamber of Secrets, Prisoner of Azkaban, Goblet of Fire, Order of the Phoenix, Half-Blood Prince, Deathly Hallows: Part 1 & Part 2.

'Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them' Review

Nominated For: Best Costume Design and Best Production Design.

Won: Best Costume Design.

Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them follows Newt Scamander, a Magizoologist (an expert on magical beasts) with a case filled with magical creatures, and the insane shenanigans that ensue once he reaches New York City in 1926 and an accident leads to the escape of a few creatures. Scamander winds up teaming up with a M.A.C.U.S.A. Auror (American magic detective), a Legilimens (mind reader), and a No-Maj (American for Muggle or non-magical folk) to round up his escaped beasts and prevent the wizarding and No-Maj worlds from colliding and overturning the International Statute of Secrecy (legislation intended to keeps the magical community hidden from the non-magical). 

Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them is the first Wizarding World spin-off that will supposedly be the first in a series of five Fantastic Beasts films and likely spawn other spin-off franchises under the Wizarding World umbrella if all are successful. It's connections to the Harry Potter series are few but intriguing to say the least. The first thing you should probably know is that Newt Scamander is the author of one of Harry Potter's textbooks also titled Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them, that's the primary connection but there are some other threads fans will pick up on. 

David Yates, who directed the last four Harry Potter films, returns to explore a new corner of the Wizarding World crafted up by J.K. Rowling in her screenwriting debut. Yates brings the same energy and enchantment to Fantastic Beasts as he did in his Harry Potter films, conjuring thrilling sequences and maintaining a sense of wonder. The technical crew behind Fantastic Beasts also ought to be commended as the cinematographer, costumers, visual effects artists, and production design team work together seamlessly to produce 1920's New York City and the underlying magical community. Composer James Newton Howard effectively blends John Williams' classic theme with some original Jazz-like compositions into a fabulous score that serves as a nice undercurrent to the ongoing adventure.

J.K. Rowling, author of the Harry Potter book series, treads new ground as a screenwriter and her first foray into screenwriting wasn't bad but she still shows room for improvement. Rowling's script finds itself to be a little bloated thanks to extraneous plot lines solely included to lay the groundwork for future installments. I was much more interested in the quartet of heroes and the beasts then the avenues Rowling explored and was slightly disappointed the film didn't center around finding the beasts as I was hoping it would have. 

It's almost as though Fantastic Beasts is two films morphed together, one about Newt Scamander and his beasts and the other about Gellert Grindelwald, so it wasn't quite what I expected but enjoyable nonetheless. The film suffers from some pacing issues throughout as it must cut from one superfluous sequence about the Second Salemers to the adventurous quest to find Newt's beasts. However with all that being said, Rowling shines in exploring the magical mythology and simply creating an enchanting atmosphere for her characters to thrive in. 

The beasts themselves are the real stars, stealing the spotlight for either a laugh or look of amazement. Some beasts are adorable while others will just leave the viewer awe-struck. The CGI made some very convincing likable creatures, so much so that when the film shifts away from the beast storyline it will likely annoy the viewer and wear their patience since the other storylines are slower paced. 

The cast bring about many new characters the viewer will likely latch onto through some solid performances. Eddie Redmayne's Newt Scamander made for a charming and simultaneously awkward lead character and his compassion towards his characters is one of the character's strengths. My only issue was that Redmayne's accent was so thick I had difficulty understanding a some of his dialogue when his character mumbles. 

Dan Fogler plays Jacob Kowalski and will likely be an audience favorite as his character is very endearing. Fogler plays Kowalski as the comedic relief, humorously reacting to the wizarding world through a No-Maj's eyes, and also manages to be grounded in the film's emotional core for the more touching moments. The friendship between he and Newt is one of the better developed character relationships in the film and also the most entertaining one for they make a very odd pairing. 

Katherine Waterston and Alison Sudol portry a pair of magical sisters Tina and Queenie, Waterston imbues confidence, dedication, and loyalty in Tina while Sudol brings a kindred spirit to Queenie. The quartet have a natural chemistry about them and are delightful group of heroes I hope to follow in subsequent installments. 

Ezra Miller's Credence is painted to be a pathetic wimp who's scared of showing the world what he truly is and cowers from any sign of danger, Miller dedicates himself to the role but I found that the characterization crippled the character.

Colin Farrell carries forth gravitas and an air of confidence to Percival Graves, proving to be a formidable foe with murky motivations. For those of you that are kept up with the news cycle it's likely been spoiled for you that Johnny Depp was cast in the franchise and I won't divulge his role to ensure I don't ruin the surprise, but be aware he's in the film for a quick minute with minuscule dialogue if any at all. 

At the end of it all I can say that I'm very curious to see where Newt will be headed next as Rowling has stated she has plans for at least five Fantastic Beast films, but can say this was a sufficient setup for them should Warner Bros. choose to carry forward. Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them is a charming and spellbinding return to the Wizarding World that doesn't have to hold the scrutiny of being measured to any source material and is simply a delightful filmgoing experience. 

Film Assessment: B-