'Mamma Mia! Here We Go Again' Review

Mamma Mia! Here We Go Again fluctuates between the lives of Donna circa 1979 and her daughter Sophie in the present day to intertwine two tales and show how relationships formed in the past resonate in the present. Determined to live out her mother's dream, Sophie prepares for the grand re-opening of her hotel the Bella Donna with the guidance of her mother's friends. As she becomes overwhelmed by the daunting tasks, Sophie learns more about Donna's past as she discovers how she ran the hotel, met each of Sophie's dads, and raised a baby all on her own.

Written and directed by Ol Parker, Mamma Mia! Here We Go Again is a prequel/sequel to the decade-old jukebox musical motion-picture, Mamma Mia!. Story writing credits go to Parker, Richard Curtis, and Catherine Johnson (a writer/producer on the first film), but I noticed Here We Go Again's storytelling structure seems to have been inspired by The Godfather Part II. The film cuts between timelines on a dime which occasionally allows for some creative transitions, but there were also several switches that were just jarring, unnecessary, and awkward in execution. This decision to split the screentime between these two storylines is an interesting one, but ultimately the fractured focus holds each narrative from reaching its full potential. The audience is then left with a half-baked musical memoir. 

I'm sure some of you are already upset that I'd dare critique the plot of a musical because "that's not the point," but I can rattle off plenty of marvelous movie musicals with both a quality story and incredible music. La La Land, Sing Street, Into The Woods, Les Misérables, Enchanted, West Side Story, Phantom of the Opera, Oliver!, Singing' in the Rain, The Sound of Music, The Wizard of Oz, and most Disney productions. I could go on, but I won't for the sake of length. I'm actually getting war flashbacks to December when I was unimpressed with The Greatest Showman and am already aware this will likely be a contested review as well, but I don't really care because I feel like I need to share my genuine opinion on things rather than conform to what others deem to be appropriate. There's not really a way around it... Mamma Mia! Here We Go Again is a lackluster sequel and mediocre musical in nearly every way imaginable.

As I've already addressed, the story's stretched thin by the decision to tell a story on two fronts. There's somehow even less of a plot holding this thing together than the first film, no regard for continuity, and some baffling choices were made as to how to best progress the series (I presume there will be an unnecessary third installment as well). While I certainly enjoyed the first two-thirds for the most part due to some energetic, entertaining musical numbers, the third act lost all momentum and dragged so much. It was only an hour and fifty four minutes, but towards the end I kept thinking to myself "when is this going to end?..." It seriously felt like I was watching a three hour film because the energy and sense of pacing completely disappeared. At that point, it was torturous to say the least... but I'll get to that momentarily... Just be patient and remember that this is coming from someone who LIKES musicals... 

One story element that was handled quite distastefully was Donna's trio of romantic entanglements. Here We Go Again was already put in a tough spot when it decided to depict this because the first film dictated that these encounters happened within quick succession of one another. Otherwise, Donna would have immediately known who Sophie's father was. However, Donna basically slept with each guy after a quick musical number and you didn't really buy the chemistry between the actors because everything happened so fast... Next thing you know, she's moved on. There didn't seem to be much effort being made to flesh out the relationships whatsoever. To me, it really painted Donna in a bad light and I wish I could have bought into the bonds being formed between Donna and the three men. 

If Here We Go Again got one thing right though, it was casting Lily James as a young Donna. Between this, Cinderella (2015), and Baby Driver, James has proven herself to be a captivating, charismatic screen presence and I'd love to see her as a female lead in more musicals. She has the looks, an exceptional singing voice, and a genuinely uplifting aura. She wound up being a great stand-in for Meryl Streep in a weird way as well, but more on that in a moment...

Alongside Lily as younger versions of characters from the first film are Jessica Keenan Wynn, Alexa Davies, Jeremy Irvine, Josh Dylan, and Hugh Skinner. They play young Tanya, Rosie, Sam, Bill, and Harry respectively, but each actor did an excellent job channeling the persona and mannerisms of the older actor while making the role their own.

Meanwhile, returning cast members Amanda Seyfried, Christine Baranski, Julie Walters, Pierce Brosnan, Stellan Skarsgård, Colin Firth, and Dominic Cooper do a swell job reprising their respective roles. None of them are really given any substantial material outside of Seyfried, but their presence definitely won't go unnoticed either.

You can't really write a review of a film which stars Meryl Streep without addressing her whatsoever, and I've gotta say she was is in like two scenes at most. There really wasn't much of a legitimate reason for her conspicuous absence either... The actress is still alive, so you think a film banking on her name would want to make the most of her, but they really wasted her to be completely honest. I'm guessing it was to keep the budget down because I presume she commands a big paycheck and they didn't want to pay her an unreasonable amount. 

I try not to be overly negative, but there's no polite way to get around the fact that Cher sounded god-awful in this. Like I'm pretty positive my ears got some form of cancer after listening to her... I was baffled at how such a beloved pop singer could sound so terrible. I guess it makes sense that she's basically a has-been now... To make matters worse, her role had absolutely no bearing on the plot and was clearly written with the intention of shoe-horning a cameo appearance for Cher. My entire family agreed that she sounded terrible, so it wasn't just me either. 

To put it simply, Here We Go Again is a disappointing follow-up to a feel-good musical. There are some bright spots, but not even more ABBA could save this thing from its sealed fate as an inferior sequel. I realize it's called Mamma Mia! Here We Go Again, but Mamma Mia! Let's Please Never Do This Again would have been a more fitting title. 

Film Assessment: C+

Throwback Thursday Review: 'Mamma Mia!'

Sorry for the slight delay, but I decided to share two Throwback Thursday Reviews this week since there are two major sequels being released this weekend. I've also decided to go ahead and share the post recapping my best and worst films of the year so far on Sunday regardless of whether I finish watching the films I missed out on or not. Later this weekend, you can expect my Throwback Thursday Review of The Equalizer as well as my reviews of Mamma Mia! Here We Go Again, The Equalizer 2, and You Were Never Really Here. Next week, I aim to review Teen Titans Go! To The Movies and complete my Mission: Impossible series of reviews with reviews for Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol, Mission: Impossible - Rogue Nation, and the upcoming Mission: Impossible - Fallout.

'Mamma Mia!' Review

Mamma Mia! follows an independent, single hotel owner in the Greek islands as she prepares for her daughter's wedding with the help of her two old friends. Meanwhile, the spirited bride-to-be secretly invites three men from her mother's past in hopes of finding her real father and having him escort her down the aisle on her big day.

Based on a 1999 stage musical, Mamma Mia! is a jukebox movie musical directed by Phyllinda Lloyd and written by Catherine Johnson which revolves almost entirely around songs from the renowned pop group ABBA. I'd previously seen bits and pieces of Mamma Mia! in passing (largely because my youngest sister is OBSESSED with it), but this was my first time to watch it from start-to-finish. As a fan of musicals, I went in hoping to at least be charmed by the renditions of ABBA's delightfully catchy show tunes, but that of course proved to be an inevitable outcome.

Given the irresistibly upbeat nature of their music, it's difficult not to be won over by this whimsical musical in a matter of minutes. It's silly for sure, but in an endearing way. There's a peppiness that permeates from the ensemble and their insatiable delight at the opportunity to groove to ABBA. On that note, it's remarkable how coherent the plot turned out when you consider that it essentially just stitched several ABBA songs together to tell a story.

With that being said, it's an interesting premise that runs out of steam from a narrative perspective. The mystery of which man is Sophie's father is quite compelling, but that gets thrown out the window towards the end and my interest began to wane as a result. At that point, the music is no longer driven by the story and all the song-and-dance numbers turn into surface level celebration. It may be pure, harmless fun, but it suddenly becomes devoid of any substance.  

Otherwise, the lighting was wildly inconsistent between shots and it drove me absolutely insane... I wish Lloyd and her cinematographer Haris Zambarloukos had simply settled on a constant aesthetic. I will however concede that the choreography was flashy and well-done, the island made for an effective luscious backdrop, and the ADR and sound mix were fairly decent. The singing from the cast also wasn't half-bad either, ranging from mediocre-to-pretty good. 

The all-star ensemble amassed are really the film's saving grace though. Meryl Streep and Amanda Seyfried sell their mother-daughter dynamic and are able to service the script as best they can. Christine Baranski and Julie Walters are scene stealers as Donna's homegirls while Dominic Cooper is stuck on the sidelines as Sophie's choice fiancé.

Lastly, Pierce Brosnan, Colin Firth, and Stellan Skarsgård lend their respective personalities to Sophie's prospective fathers and are a hoot to watch. Brosnan was panned by critics for his singing abilities, but I actually don't think he was THAT bad... He at least matched pitch, so he was nowhere near being one of the worst singers I've ever heard or anything... His singing voice was just alright. Firth and Skarsgård both sung pretty well though. 

As far as feel-good musicals go, Mamma Mia! hits that sweet spot between being totally ridiculous and obnoxiously overbearing. Certainly not one of my favorite movie musicals, but a worthwhile watch nevertheless!

Film Assessment: B

'Warcraft' Review

Warcraft is a fantasy film based on the longstanding Warcraft franchise, which includes most notably the popular MMORP games, novels, and other media. I have never played a Warcraft game and I'm unfamiliar with it's expansive world so keep that in mind throughout this review. 

Warcraft tells the story of two worlds converging as the orcs must flee their dying world of Draenor and find a new home while humans must take up arms to defend their home world of Azeroth from said orcs. From the lengthy plot description alone, it's evident that this film had an agenda to simultaneously establish this fantasy world cinematically while attempting to set the stage for sequels, an evident issue with many recent comic book movies including The Amazing Spider-Man 2, Iron Man 2, Avengers: Age Of Ultron, Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice, and X-Men: Apocalypse.

I can say Warcraft succeeds in fulfilling this endeavor, but at the expense of this film's quality, utilizing a "shot-gun approach." Meaning, Warcraft has a narrow scope in terms of restricting the audience's immersion into the world with a wide spread of characters, breaking basic plot structure by eliminating the lead character and following at least six major characters through their various points of view. 

In comparison to another fantasy film based on a property beloved by many, The Lord of the Rings, Warcraft never focuses on one key character or central protagonist like The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring centers on Frodo Baggins, which is obviously an issue. On the bright side, this allows viewers to become familiar with multiple characters and their philosophies but leaving the viewer confused as to who is good and bad in this fantasy, thankfully this feeling of confusion settles towards the end of the film. 

As I said earlier, Warcraft restricts the expansive world to a few key locations and actions set pieces and as an audience member I felt the borders of the sandbox since there were some areas of the world that I want to see further explored but I guess that will come in a sequel if a Warcraft sequel is indeed green lit, although the likelihood of a sequel is strong given Warcraft's international box office performance and strong numbers from China. 

Duncan Jones directs with Warcraft being his first enormous budget endeavor after his smaller films Moon and Source Code, and while I haven't seen either film, I've heard nothing but praise for them. One nitpick of mine derives from the film's editing that would jump elsewhere as soon as I settled into a scene. Literally right when I would become invested in ongoing events, the film would cut and pick up another character's story and while I understand some of the logic behind it, it did hinder my experience. 

Aesthetically, Jones and his team of visual effects artists, motion capture actors, and production designers create an incredible gorgeous world effectively balancing the tricky stability between practical sets and CGI that seemed true to the world while appropriately bringing the sense of massive scale to the epic confrontations between humans and orcs. 

The action sequences are without a doubt entertaining, but none are quite as memorable as those to be found in The Lord of the Rings. I'll do my best to avoid any more comparisons between the two from this point on. 

On the subject of visuals, I really took to Jones' depiction of magic as the effects for them looked awesome and felt unique and fresh as opposed to Harry Potter's sleek fast wand bolts and The Lord of the Rings' paranormal approach, Whoops did it again, but at least this time it was a more positively skewed comparison. Here's to hoping Marvel's upcoming Doctor Strange can deliver on that as well! The sound design and underlying wondrous epic score composed by Ramin Djawawadi service the visuals superbly and fits the world like a glove, not game changing but I felt they were worth mentioning. 

Jones and Charles Leavitt devise a screenplay that's surprisingly not exposition heavy, ignores tropes of the fantasy genre, and invokes some bold creative choices that payed off in the end. However, when forced to expunge a film from the script, Jones failed in making the first act of the film accessible to casual moviegoers. I was lost for a good thirty minutes of the movie and was confused as to what characters were doing, where they were going, and why they were doing such and such. 

And this is coming from a fan of fantasy films, so I'm sure someone who has never heard of Warcraft would be even more bewildered. The confusion derives from a very complex story with lots of moving parts and characters that I'm sure WoW (World of Warcraft) players are already familiar with but are never fully explored for those new to the franchise. While I did criticize the intricate convoluted plot, I will say the filmmakers were bold in regards to creative decisions even going as far to kill off some seemingly crucial characters, a decision that certainly implies the stakes are sky high in this fantastical world. On the flip side, it was difficult to care about these deaths as I wasn't emotionally invested in many of these characters. In large part to the awful acting to be found in the film. 

Don't fret though as there are a few bright spots to be found in the film's cast that I will get to, but across the board there were some dreadful casting decisions made. This casting director should probably be fired in all honesty. I'm going to start positively by praising Toby Kebbell who delivers without a doubt the standout performance as the orc Durotan, and one of his best motion capture performances yet, a great followup to his turn as Koba in Dawn of the Planet of the Apes. Andy Serkis better watch out, because Kebbell may be up for stealing his spot as the motion capture king. Kebbell manages to humanize Durotan and even make him a relatable character that I was emotionally invested in thanks to the character's path in Warcraft. 

Beyond Kebbell, the other motion capture orc performances were fine and serviced their respective characters well but didn't match the gravitas Kebbell brought by extrapolating human qualities from the least humane character. Anna Galvin comes close as Draka, Durotan's wife, by actually helping to bring out Durotan's humanity in their personal moments due to the great chemistry from the mo-cap performances. Robert Kazinsky and Clancy Brown both make for efficient orcs serviceable in the capacity used as Durotan's right hand orc Orgim Doomhammer and the fearsome war chief Blackhand respectively. 

Last but not least for the orcs is Daniel Wu as the orc warlock Gul'dan who seeks to claim Azeroth with his dark magic. Wu makes Gul'dan come off like Emperor Palpatine but with some surprising physical force to back him up as both a physical and magical threat and in that capacity did just fine. It's only fitting as I transition out of the orcs I next discuss the middle ground as Paula Patton portrays a half orc slave Garona. 

Patton is just fine as Garona, and her dialogue's a bit hard to comprehend thanks to her tusks (I believe that's what they are) but I did find Garona's arc to be intriguing and would love to see it continued onward as her character is left in a complicated situation that points to potential peace between humans and orcs down the line. Patton is okay in the role but from this point onward it's clear that better actors could have been found. 

On the human front, the line delivery is stale amounting to a lot of monotonous line delivery devoid of emotion, it's as if the actors were literally forced to recite their dialogue in robotic fashion. I have no idea if this was due to some communication barrier between the actors and Jones, poor direction on his part, or just poorly cast actors trying their best but regardless of where the problem stems from, it's something that can't be ignored. Travis Fimmel plays Stormwind Knight Anduin Lothar and I can say he fills the action capacity nicely, but lacks in regards to his emotional reactions to a few significant events. I can't quite discuss that point as much as I'd like without spoiling the film but I'll say he didn't react to a certain death the way any other emotional human being would by screaming in anger or frustration or even appearing to be saddened by the occurrence. 

Ben Schnetzer portrays the mage Khadgar, and looked cool while casting spells, but seemed out of his element in regards to acting. He had many awkward moments that were unintentionally humorous so I guess if you really want to defend his acting say he'd be a great comedian. 

Ben Foster brings another mage to the big screen as the Guardian, Medivh, and seemed too young to be believed as a wise magic mentor so I think the casting department skewed too young here but Foster is serviceable in the role. 

Dominic Cooper is an actor that I enjoy, as I like his portrayal of a younger Howard Stark in Captain America: The First Avenger and Agent Carter, but he is tragically miscast as the king of Stormwind, Llane Wrynn. He too seemed a bit young for the role as I think of kings to typically be aged and rugged, although a case can be made that they had to start ruling at some point and I guess this was the beginning of his rule? Cooper isn't bad.. actually making for a serviceable young king, but rather comes across as miscast more than anything. 

Yes, the acting is bad as a result of uninspired casting choices and there are story flaws, but the film makes up for it with technical elements. The world of Warcraft is one brimming with visual splendor that unfortunately suffers from choppy editing, a convoluted plot, and some truly atrocious acting to make for a bloated fantasy epic. 

Despite my mixed reaction to Warcraft, I can say I think a sequel is at least warranted based on the groundwork laid and hopefully can improve in the areas which Warcraft falters. Hardcore WoW fans will love Warcraft and those with a soft spot for the fantasy genre will be able to walk away admitting they had a good time, but if you don't fall into either of those categories, this isn't the summer blockbuster for you. When it comes down to it, Warcraft certainly isn't as bad as the 27% Rotten Tomatoes score makes it out to be, but it's not great either.

Film Assessment: C+