Isle of Dogs

 

Set in the fictional Japanese city of Megasaki, Mayor Kenji Kobayashi has decreed that all dogs that fall under a mysterious canine flu-like sickness must be exiled to an offshore site called Trash Island. One such canine that contracts the sickness is named Spots, whose master happens to be a young boy named Atari, the adopted nephew of Mayor Kenji Kobayashi. Atari attempts to find Spots by escaping the confines of his uncle's residence, and making his way to Trash Island in order to look for his lost pet. Along the way Atari meets up with five other dogs stranded on the island - Chief, Rex, King, Boss, and Duke. The group of dogs work together with Atari in order to find out the fate of Spots on Trash Island, all while avoiding Atari's uncle, as well as murderous mangy dogs also trapped on the island.

Isle of Dogs is my third attempt at watching something directed by Wes Anderson. The first one was Moonrise Kingdom, and the second was Fantastic Mr. Fox. The quirky, sarcastic, quick-witted and dry style of humor is very hit-or-miss with me. Most of the time, I'd say I do enjoy it. I do kind of wish I knew what it was exactly that makes it a success for me, and what misses the mark. For instance, I saw Moonrise Kingdom, and thought it was kind of funny in places, but I didn't think it was as good as some of my friends and other people who had recommended it to me made it out to be. Fantastic Mr. Fox on the other hand, I thought was a hilarious movie. Good thing too, as I went ahead and bought it first before ever watching it by going off the recommendation of some family and friends who loved it. Isle of Dogs falls somewhat in the middle of the road for me. I loved the story, I thought it was a well crafted story filled with many great characters throughout. I loved seeing the evolution of the friendship between Atari and each of the dogs helping him find Spots. The humor was the part that was hit-or-miss. There were times where I had tears in my eyes I was laughing so hard, and others where I was just like "I don't get it..." Overall though, I would definitely see it again, and will probably be getting it on DVD/Blu-Ray soon.

Equalizer 3

 

Robert McCall is enjoying a quiet, secluded retirement as a U.S. government assassin-turned-vigilante in a little town in Italy. Unfortunately that retirement is soon disrupted as he gets wind of a plot involving the local Italian mafia and drug money that is putting his newfound friends and community in danger. McCall attempts to control the situation on his own, but must soon call upon his former compatriots at the FBI to assist him in his efforts.

The Equalizer franchise has been a very good action series despite being somewhat on the predictable side of things involving the plot(s) and characters throughout. I'd say the first Equalizer is still the best, yet Equalizer 3 is ever so slightly better than Equalizer 2. In his second outing as Robert McCall, I mentioned that while Denzel Washington was still excellent as McCall, I couldn't help thinking that he seemed a bit bored throughout the movie. I also mentioned that the story veered into some pretty predictable elements which I thought could have been crafted better to enhance the overall experience. With this latest installment, I don't know what the difference was, whether it was the story itself, or the overall experience of making the film, or something else, but Washington's performance was much better and the overall film is much better than the previous one. I've still to this day have never seen a performance or film of his that I just didn't enjoy overall, and that continues with this latest installment. 

That said, the Equalizer trilogy still seems to struggle with developing its supporting characters. It's a little disheartening when you realize that one of the characters with the development issue is an FBI agent played by Dakota Fanning, Denzel Washington's former co-star in Man on Fire. This is their first on-screen interaction since Man on Fire. It was great seeing them together again, but as I mentioned, I wish Dakota's character was given more to do within the confines of the story. As it stands, her character didn't seem to have much of an impact on the story's conclusion. There was a distinct lack of a good subplot point as well such as the old man in Equalizer 2 who is searching for an old, lost family heirloom. The audience kind of gets it in the form of an Italian shopkeeper who is being accosted by the local crime lord for protection money, but there was still something missing there where it wasn't as impactful for me personally like the subplot of the old man trying to find his heirloom in part 2. 

If you're a fan of the first two Equalizer films, or just in general a fan of Denzel Washington like I am, Equalizer 3 is still a very good thrill ride with some excellent action scenes, and a great performance by Denzel. Not to mention it was still fantastic to see Denzel and Dakota Fanning back together again on screen after so many years. I personally just wish the surrounding story and supporting characters were just a bit more polished. Especially if this is the final outing for the character of Robert McCall.

Triangle of Sadness

Celebrity model couple, Carl (Harris Dickinson) and Yaya (Charlbi Dean), are invited on a luxury cruise for the uber-rich, helmed by an unhinged boat captain (Woody Harrelson). What first appeared instagrammable ends catastrophically, leaving the survivors stranded on a desert island and fighting for survival.

Triangle of Sadness was one of the disturbingly worst experiences I’ve had in a theater in a long time. I don’t like using the word ‘pretentious’, (I feel like describing something as pretentious is such a subjective opinion) but Triangle of Sadness comes as close as I’ve ever seen to get me to use it. Interestingly enough, it actually starts out decently well. We meet our two main protagonists as they're on a date and the discussion throughout the dinner touches on subjects of gender roles, influencer status, and others. If the film had stayed like that I actually might have considered Triangle of Sadness a decent-to-possibly-good movie instead of a disaster. However, there’s a scene about halfway through where a storm is brewing, and the social elite are eating dinner with the captain of the yacht they’re on. The crash of the waves mixed with the dinner results in a far too drawn out scene reminiscent of the pie eating scene in Stand by Me that results in everyone…uh…relieving themselves from both the attic and basement, if you catch my drift. It’s paired with a weird drunken discussion between the captain and a Russian man arguing about the merits of socialism vs capitalism, Marxism, and a couple other things. I did some research after the fact as I was confused on just what the heck exactly the scene was going for. From what I could gather in my research, it looks like the point was to paint the pompous, obscenely rich idiots as simply ignorant of their actions, as earlier in the film they had forced the entire crew to go swimming with them, resulting in the food going bad before being prepared for the meal. The scene was gross all by itself, but it was odd being paired with the conversation/argument between the captain and the Russian man. That kind of lesson about the ultra-rich could have easily been done a multitude of more effective ways that were not so disturbing and gross. Once the storm scene is over, the film then veers into Lord of the Flies territory where the survivors of the capsized ship argue about how to get back home, and who is in charge. It felt like Triangle of Sadness couldn't decide whether it wanted to be a dark comedy, a tragedy, or some kind of weird action/adventure romp with a touch of satirical lessons peppered throughout. Due to this, I cannot for the life of me figure out why it's received such good reviews, and I cannot recommend sitting down to watch it unless you can stand to watch an overly long scene of dozens of people throwing up and soiling themselves during a storm being weirdly paired with a politically charged conversation intertwined throughout.

Dungeons and Dragons: Honor among Thieves

A charming thief, Edgin, and a band of unlikely adventurers (Holga, Xenk, Simon, Doric, and Forge) embark on an epic quest to retrieve a lost relic. Things go dangerously awry when they run afoul of the wrong people. They must then work together to save the world from destruction.

Dungeons and Dragons: Honor among Thieves is such a cheesy as heck movie, but thankfully it’s the best kind of cheesy. I loved every second of it. I don’t really know or have experienced much about D&D outside of currently watching the third campaign of Critical Role on YouTube or Twitch, an episode here and there of Dimension 20, and Amazon Prime’s animated series of the first Critical Role campaign The Legend of Vox Machina - though I recently have been wanting to get into a one shot campaign or something to experience it for myself - so I couldn’t tell you all of the Easter eggs. The good thing is that the movie has enough there to be good fun for even people like myself who don’t know what any of the terms used mean or types of characters, etc. I mean, I knew enough to know what some of the spells used were (Eldritch Blast, Speak to the Dead, among others). I also understood a couple references here and there to some special magical items used within the game, but that's about the extent of my knowledge of D&D. Honor among Thieves has the humor, action and adventure I've come to expect from a typical session of D&D, which made it all the more entertaining. I wish it had been a little longer, despite being just over 2 hrs long. It felt like it went by too quickly. But that’s my only real complaint. Chris Pine, Michelle Rodriquez, Justice Smith, Sophia Lillis, Regé-Jean Page, and Hugh Grant were all wonderful in each of their roles, and made me look forward to a sequel. No, seriously, PLEASE let there be a sequel to this one!

Women Talking

Women Talking was a tough movie to both watch and to review. If you haven't heard of it, it's based on the novel of the same name and follows a group of women in a religious colony who are constantly attacked and abused by the men in their community for years until one particular incident where someone is caught and finally sent to jail along with the other perpetrators. While the men are gone the women hold a meeting to decide whether or not to leave the community and strike out on their own, to stay and fight back against the abuse, or do nothing.

This is not a movie for a widespread audience. It's basically a one-location, very little action, "talky" type of movie that most will probably skip. Personally, I found the discussions intriguing, and actually did a slightly better job of presenting the different sides of arguments surrounding what is essentially the Me Too movement than what Tár or some other movies have tried to do. I say slightly, as there were moments where the arguments did kind of bend toward a more "preaching" stance instead of presenting the arguments and letting the audience decide for themselves. The process of actually writing out a set of pros and cons of all arguments was kind of an odd choice as well. I think framing the discussion from a religious perspective was interesting. Having been raised in a biblically-based household myself, I appreciated both the questions raised throughout, particularly those on the subject of forgiveness, as well as the framework in which those questions were asked. One question raised in the film was whether or not forgiveness that was forced out by someone else and not freely given was true forgiveness; as well as the question of whether or not one could ever forgive someone for such an act, or whether or not it would take time and distance in order to do so. None of these questions are easy to answer - if they ever truly could anyways - but the movie attempts to do so. The acts of abuse are shown onscreen, but only in brief flashes throughout and (mostly) not terribly graphic. I think I'd say this is a recommended movie, and I daresay an important movie to watch. I feel a bit weird using the phrase "I liked it" given the topic. However, with the subject matter the way it is, as well as how it's presented in more of a roundtable discussion style than truly a conversation on the subject (which isn't necessarily a bad thing btw), I'm not so sure of many people who would appreciate the movie. I would still encourage people to check it out, but keep that in mind.

Cold Pursuit

Nels Coxman's quiet life as a snowplow driver comes crashing down when his beloved son dies under mysterious circumstances. His search for the truth soon becomes a quest for revenge against a psychotic drug lord named Viking and his sleazy henchmen. Transformed from upstanding citizen to coldblooded vigilante, Coxman unwittingly sets off a chain of events that includes a kidnapping, a series of deadly misunderstandings and a turf war between Viking and a rival boss.

When I first heard of Cold Pursuit, the trailers were a little bit misleading. They made me think this was going to be a Taken-esque action thriller, much like most of Liam Neeson's recent movies in the last few years. What I didn't realize, was 2 things: First, Cold Pursuit actually ended up being more along the lines of Ocean's 11-13 with it being an action comedy. Or more accurately, a dark comedy, given the nature of the story. Secondly, I never realized this was an American remake of a Norwegian film titled In Order of Disappearance. It also had the same director for both movies. I'd never seen nor even heard of the Norwegian film before, so I'm definitely going to have to watch that now.

Since I wasn't expecting that tone, the first 15-20 minutes threw me for a loop before I was able to relax into it and enjoy the rest of the movie. After that, I really did enjoy it. Sure, it's not anywhere near Liam Neeson's best role(s), or movie in general. It's certainly not the type of movie to be in any conversations during Oscar season. But for what it's worth, I thought it was really good. Also, now that I know what to expect, I'm planning on going back through and watching it again with a clearer and more open mind to get a sense of the entire movie, not just after the first 20 minutes. 

I feel confident in saying that fans of the Ocean's series, as well as Fargo will enjoy Cold Pursuit. I know I did. There are some people who might be a little uneasy about the over exaggerated stereotypes throughout the movie, but if you can get past that and the dark humor, then I would highly suggest checking this out.

The Predator

From the outer reaches of space to the small-town streets of suburbia, the hunt comes home. The universe's most lethal hunters are stronger, smarter and deadlier than ever before, having genetically upgraded themselves with DNA from other species. When a boy accidentally triggers their return to Earth, only a ragtag crew of ex-soldiers and an evolutionary biologist can prevent the end of the human race.

I love the Predator franchise, almost as much as I love the Alien franchise. That being said, this latest addition to the franchise is hands down one of the worst movies of 2018. It's sad too, I actually was intrigued with the story, particularly a couple of the twists it throws in. And yet, the humor (and dialogue in general) and some of the acting from several of the characters brought it down so much that I almost walked out from the theater. Pretty much all of the characters were bland and uninteresting, making me not care about any of them, especially when some of them died. Thankfully, I only paid two bucks for a ticket instead of full price. Otherwise, I would've been even more ticked off. 

There really isn't much, if anything, positive I can say about The Predator. Despite all of the crap, though, I actually hope there's another one that involves one of the bigger twists from the movie. I won't specify what, but the twist was interesting enough for me that I would like to see more.