James Mangold’s “Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny” is not the hang-up-the-hat-and-whip career capper it wants to be.

In fact, that’s still “Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade” (1989), which not only ended in perfect fashion but remains Steven Spielberg’s best comedy.

Mangold’s attempt to match both the style and feel of Spielberg is as hit and miss as the film itself. Sometimes it’s enough just having Harrison Ford return as the unflappable archeologist/awful college professor Henry “Indiana” Jones, and sometimes this final entry chokes on its big swings and overdone attempts to wrap up something that ended decades ago.

It begins with an extended flashback sequence, showing Ford’s Dr. Jones battling the Nazis for the possession of not one but two desired objects, with one of them revealed as a fake- this is the first mistake the movie makes. If you’re going to declare the existence of a wild McGuffin (I won’t reveal it here) that the Nazis are after and then call it a fake-out, make sure your actual/second McGuffin is as intriguing as the first (it isn’t).

The first 20-or-so minutes of the film present the most ambitious use of de-aging CGI effects yet, as a “younger” Harrison Ford is front and center for this entire portion. It works in moments, but the illusion doesn’t hold for entire scenes. Much worse is how we’re looking at the digitally de-aged Ford but hear his gruff older voice, which is nothing like the vocal range he had in the 1980s.

As in Martin Scorsese’s “The Irishman” (2019), my desire for this f/x illusion to work and how it holds up for a couple of seconds is not the same as succeeding in fooling me. Hiring a younger actor as a stand-in (as Mike Flanagan cleverly did for “Doctor Sleep”) would have worked much better.

Or, hire a young actor for this portion to stand in for Ford, as River Phoenix once did, brilliantly, in “Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade.”

Anyway, Toby Jones co-stars as Basil Shaw, a new colleague who accompanies Jones on a mission to obtain a new totem, which is sought after by a Nazi named Dr. Voller (played by Mads Mikkelsen). Decades later, Jones is now a geriatric, retiring from teaching and seemingly disconnected from the late 1960’s counterculture youth movements around him.

When Basil’s daughter Helena (played by Phoebe Waller-Bridge) appears, a worldwide chase begins for the still-desired totem, as Dr. Jones struggles to keep up with all the running and swashbuckling.

A problem from the prior film presents itself immediately: there are far too many characters here, as I often struggled to keep track of who all the new people are on a scene-to-scene basis, and I rarely cared about anyone aside from Indiana Jones.

“Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull” (2008) presented Dr. Jones with too many side characters in his entourage or chasing him in the background and the same goes here; considering the most beloved entry in this series is about a father and son reconnecting on an adventure, you’d figure the filmmakers would take a hint, but no.

Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny unveils fate of Shia LaBeouf’s Mutt, Indy’s son
Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny addressed what happened to Shia LaBeouf’s Mutt, the son of Harrison Ford’s adventurer, after the events of Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. Article credi… pic.twitter.com/PzwBn38Fzc

— Dr.LyndaBarnes (@MrsBarnesII) June 28, 2023

I was happy to see Ford and not his digital facsimile take the film by the reigns, but the first act of the film is much worse than anything from the unloved but not entirely disastrous prior entry. Despite Mangold previously helming “Ford vs Ferrari” (2019), “The Wolverine” (2013) and “3:10 to Yuma” (2007), his ability with action sequences is touch and go here.

Waller-Bridge has the breakout scene stealer performance of the film, but her character is hard to like for much of the movie. Considering how forceful Mikkelsen’s presence is, it’s a wonder that the supporting cast is cluttered with so many other, lesser villains.

FAST FACT: Fans may dislike the 2008 “Kingdom of the Crystal Skull,” but the fourth film in the Indiana Jones saga earned an impressive $317 million stateside along with $473 million from international theaters.

I was feeling underwhelmed for most of the way, but a funny thing happened an hour in: the movie mostly grew on me. In addition to liking the acknowledgement that our favorite film characters do grow old, I appreciated how the film referenced the prior entries. A conversation about both Mutt Lang and Marion Ravenwood is my favorite emotional aside here.

Likewise, the reprise of Jones’ fear of snakes and even a verbal mentioning of the divisive, thrilling “Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom”(1984) really works.

Mangold’s film picks up once Antonio Banderas shows up and an old school underwater dive is something new for the franchise. The politics here aren’t fleshed out – while a reflection on the personal losses of the Vietnam War are touched upon, the bit where Jones smacks a Nazi across the face with an anti-war sign doesn’t really connect (exactly what Jones feels about Vietnam, let alone the draft and developing movements, is never fleshed out).

RELATED: HiT REWIND: ‘INDIANA JONES/KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL’

Without describing anything explicitly, I’ll carefully state that the third act goes in welcome, unexpected directions that will divide fans, likely outrage many but, really, isn’t any more or less insane than where this series has gone before.

Lingering complaints that this and especially the prior installments are “unbelievable” can be countered with reminders of greatest hits moments like melting Nazis, three people jumping out of a plane in an uninflated raft (and surviving!) and a Knight who hangs out in a cave for centuries, only to act like an unforgiving game show host.

These movies have always been ridiculous and it’s part of the appeal. The question is whether the movie takes its story gimmick as far as it could go; in the prior sequel, I’d say the extraterrestrial angle was only half-there. Here, the final scenes could have gone even farther, but I was grateful for how wild things get.

Ford’s final lap in this role has enough going for it to be seen once, though it’s the least in the series (yes, I prefer the one with Cate Blanchett’s Russian villain and cinema’s most infamous refrigerator).

Not only does “The Last Crusade” remain the unmatchable swan song for this series, Ford’s final return as Han Solo and Rick Deckard are more fleshed out and engrossing.

The appeal of “Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny” (ugh, that title!) is that its “old fashioned,” aimed at grownups and has exhilarating moments. As much as I liked how this ended, it didn’t make me want another installment, which was certainly not how I felt the first time I watched the first and best entry, “Raiders of the Lost Ark” (1981).

Sorry, Dr. Jones, but the man in the hat was right: you belong in a museum.

Two and a Half Stars

The post ‘Dial of Destiny’ and the Lowering of Indiana Jones’ Expectations first appeared on Hollywood in Toto.

The post ‘Dial of Destiny’ and the Lowering of Indiana Jones’ Expectations appeared first on Hollywood in Toto.

Every once in a while a movie changes everything.

Al Gore’s “An Inconvenient Truth” nailed the global warming (update: Climate Change) zeitgeist like nothing before or since. “The China Syndrome” made everyone pay attention to nuclear power’s worst-case scenario. “Super-Size Me” had us re-think our trips to the nearest fast-food joint.

“Sound of Freedom” wants to join that unique club.

The drama, wrapped in 2018 but released at long last via Angel Studios, recalls Tim Ballard’s remarkable work setting children free from the clutches of sex traffickers. It’s a battle cry for us to do more against a side of global slavery rarely explored on screen, and it wears its heart on its sleeve.

Even better?

It ensures the narrative beats are just as important as its mission. Star Jim Caviezel brings his signature intensity to the main character, while the cinematography captures both the natural beauty of far-off lands and the ugliness lurking within.

And, as the film’s end credits scroll reminds us, few countries are immune to child trafficking.

Caviezel stars as Tim Ballard, a special agent with the Department of Homeland Security who brings pedophiles to justice. A colleague shudders at the task, noting their work does little to stop the problem at the source. 

He’s right, Tim thinks.

He shifts his focus to finding those who capture children in the first place, successfully locating a stolen boy in the process. The youngster’s sister is still out there, and Jim vows to do whatever it takes to reunite her with her father.

We often know what that means in movie-talk, but Tim’s heroism never rises to the cartoonish levels of a Bond adventure. Phew.

Our hero aligns with characters who either prey on children or work outside the law to save them, including a remarkable Bill Camp as an ex-con who uses his curious clout for good. The reason why is the film’s most powerfully acted sequence.

“Sound of Freedom” isn’t as gritty as some may expect. The film tastefully walks us up to the point of several harrowing encounters but pulls away at the last minute. The technique retains that PG:13 rating while sharing all that needs to be shared about the children in harm’s way.

The story’s confident pacing leaves room for character-driven morsels that freshen what could have been a soul-sucking voyage.

We’re robbed of Tim’s home life despite the fleeting appearance of Oscar-winner Mira Sorvino as Mrs. Ballard. The star’s contributions may have landed on the cutting room floor given how little she’s seen.

That matters. We’re never given a full look at Tim’s family or what he risks by traveling overseas to dangerous locales.

Jim Caviezel, a Christian actor of “The Passion of the Christ” fame, said he wants his upcoming thriller “Sound of Freedom” to shed light on the reality of child sex trafficking in the US and warn parents of what he called a “pedophile agenda.” https://t.co/dUCpHtuA8b

— The Epoch Times (@EpochTimes) June 27, 2023

Several sequences threaten to overwhelm our tear ducts, and rightfully so. Director Alejandro Monteverde (“Little Boy”) doesn’t go for cheap sentiment, nor does he deny the beauty of the vistas in play, including its Colombian locales.

“Sound of Freedom” slips in some staggering facts about child trafficking, although some of Tim’s heroics fall on the hard-to-believe scale. A few schemes find little resistance, which might have rung true in real life but rob moments of dramatic texture.

The third act features an artfully staged fistfight but lacks the pulse-pounding style that’s warranted given the stakes in play. Sometimes going Hollywood matters, even in a story inspired by real events.

Minor complaints, aside, “Sound of Freedom” offers Caviezel’s spot-on performance and a screenplay worthy of its sobering subject matter.

HiT or Miss: “Sound of Freedom” is a slick, engaging thriller with real-world consequences, and it might just open up the right people’s eyes.

The post ‘Sound of Freedom’ Doubles as Heartbreaking Drama, Call to Action first appeared on Hollywood in Toto.

The post ‘Sound of Freedom’ Doubles as Heartbreaking Drama, Call to Action appeared first on Hollywood in Toto.

Neil LaBute’s “The Shape of Things” (2003) was viewed by some as a return to form for the playwright-turned filmmaker.

Following his controversial breakout, “In the Company of Men” (1997), the confrontational LaBute made the even pricklier (and much harder to love) “Your Friends and Neighbors” (1998), an out-of-character and wonderful “Nurse Betty” (2000) and the forgettable “Possession” (2002).

While LaBute was building his name as a playwright of caustic character dramas with misanthropic protagonists, his movies were stuck in the art house. “The Shape of Things” was intended as a big swing that mimicked the forcefulness of “In the Company of Men” and offered a movie-star cast (though most were at the beginning of their careers).

Aquí viene mi recomendación: The shape of things. Neil LaBute + Rachel Weisz + Paul Rudd = peliculón. pic.twitter.com/Q1TN435xX5

— Francesc M. (@senyorfrancesc) November 11, 2021

Paul Rudd stars as Adam, a painfully awkward college student who falls hard for Evelyn, an intense and fascinating grad student played by Rachel Weisz. While Adam can’t believe his luck with winding up with someone he finds so appealing, his best friends (Gretchen Mol and Frederick Weller) are uneasy with his new relationship.

Perversely fascinating, often funny and surprisingly frank at times, LaBute’s cast is taken from his original stage production, creating a cinematic facsimile of the play.

Weisz’ performance is something special, particularly in the remarkable closing scenes, which is the portion of LaBute’s film is unforgettable. Even audiences who can correctly guess where the film is going are likely to squirm during the dread-inducing finale.

Public humiliation is rarely depicted in such a cruel, direct manner.

Sometimes the actors are going big, as though still accustomed to performing on stage and haven’t entirely toned it down for a camera crew. More often than not, the film provides an encapsulation of a riveting stage drama and opens the work up enough that we’re not always aware that this talky work originated as a theater piece.

Compare this to the two-person rom-com “Destination Wedding” and note how, even with a megawatt movie star two-person cast, the material and the performances have to be strong enough to carry a dialogue/character-driven work made up of two-hander scenes.

LaBute’s works genuinely anger audiences and, most vitally get them talking. Unlike insufferable trying-too-hard films like “Closer” or “August: Osage Country,” LaBute’s scripts lean into discomfort, don’t allow moral certainty or even sympathetic characters to throw us a line.

There are no relatable characters here, only ideas we can all relate to, albeit queasily.

The more pretentious aspects of “The Shape of Things” (and yes, if LaBute is guilty of any of the things he’s so often accused of, it is pretension) are the general questions of what qualifies as art and is creating an original, vital installation worth creating if it means leaving emotional ruin?

The more down to the ground questions are, how much do we compromise ourselves in a relationship and where should we draw the line? Is there a point where, whether we realize it or not, that we are no longer ourselves because of how hard we’re trying to please the other person?

For that matter, are we guilty of being manipulative if the person we’re deceiving is blissfully unaware? These are all questions LaBute brings up and correctly assumes there are no easy answers.

Unless LaBute makes a comeback, (and I sincerely hope he does and with something this potent), his time as a respected filmmaker may have ended. It’s hard to bounce back from a mega bomb (just ask “Gigli” director Martin Brest) and LaBute’s “The Wicker Man” (2006) has acquired an unearned infamy.

Truthfully, while that Nicolas Cage-led misstep has its moments of unintended camp, the entire movie and not just the juicy YouTube clips, are worth seeing. Once could do a lot worse than an ambitious and typically provocative retelling of a folk horror tale in which Cage’s cop struggles to solve a mystery on an island with a matriarchal community.

I’m not defending it as a great or misunderstood film, but “The Wicker Man” is interesting for its quirky choices, even as its third act is fatally unsteady.

Whereas LaBute’s “The Wicker Man” wraps up in a manner of cinematic infamy, the conclusion of “The Shape of Things” positions the writer/director at his most provocative and hurtful. It’s a bruising and unforgettable conclusion, with worthwhile debate and discussion to follow if viewed with others.

The post ‘Shape of Things’ Is Neil LaBute at His Most Confrontational first appeared on Hollywood in Toto.

The post ‘Shape of Things’ Is Neil LaBute at His Most Confrontational appeared first on Hollywood in Toto.

Wes Anderson’s twee meter doesn’t have a red zone.

The auteur’s films are as precious as they are divisive. You love ‘em or hate ‘em, the in-between crowd hardly exists. Nor is Anderson reaching out to the unconvinced with his latest effort.

“Asteroid City” represents more of the same. Mostly.

Same embarrassment of riches in the casting department (Tom Hanks! Scarlett Johansson!!). Same camera framing that’s become the hallmark of the Anderson method (much like the Ken Burns effect in documentaries).

Another color palette you’ll never forget once you’ve seen it.

The difference this time around? How the film intersects, perhaps by accident, with the tenor of the times.

Once again Anderson’s cast dutifully recreates the director’s droll method, a far cry from the Method method.

Jason Schwartzman co-stars as Augie Steenbeck, a war photographer holding back the news of his wife’s passing from his children. He drops by the quaint small town of Asteroid City so his oldest son can compete in the annual Junior Stargazer Convention.

And, at some point, he’ll tell him and the family’s three adorable girls about their mother’s fate.

Also on hand for the convention? General Grif Gribson (Jeffrey Wright, adding a fast-talking twist to Anderson’s banter), Scarlett Johansson as a jaded movie starlet named Midge and Tilda Swinton seeming … normal amidst the “Napoleon Dynamite”-level players.

There’s more, of course, including Liev Schreiber, Matt Dillon (funny but under-employed) and Bryan Cranston narrating the theatrical framing device enveloping the story. Oh, it’s endlessly clever, droll and twee.

Unexpectedly!

Then an alien swoops into town, makes a jaw-dropping appearance and zips away. Suddenly, the characters must assess the new situation in light of their trauma while the U.S. military locks the small town down.

Hard.

Is Anderson commenting on government overreach in the age of COVID-19? It seems unlikely. Anderson is committed to depicting dysfunctional families, not culture war bromides. The commentary lands all the same.

“Asteroid City” makes us keenly aware of the creative temperament and the various filters that exist between actor and audience. It’s an artist revealing all the ways a story mutates en route to the audience.

Layers upon layers. You’ll get lost in them, and getting out isn’t as easy as it looks.

EXCLUSIVE: Bryan Cranston, Jeffrey Wright, and more talk the magic of Anderson, reuniting the band Pulp, and working in a fully functional mini-town #AsteroidCity https://t.co/F08IfWLJmt

— Total Film (@totalfilm) June 22, 2023

Anderson’s latest isn’t as humorous as “The Grand Budapest Hotel,” but the former has its moments. A sudden musical number, for example, is explosively funny. Anderson’s humor, when dialed in, is unlike anything else in the creative marketplace. It’s neither raw nor predictable, and no one comes close to his style of delivery.

That’s probably wise. Quentin Tarantino imitators duplicate the grind house violence without the wit and style. Imagine a half-baked Anderson tribute?

Shudder.

The growing bond between Schwartzman and Johansson should be the film’s moral compass, but Anderson won’t let his characters breathe, short circuiting his intentions.

The film’s waning moments suggest more dramatic knots than a single viewing can untangle, meaning Anderson devotees have a whole new reason to watch “Asteroid City” as many times as needed.

HiT or Miss: “Asteroid City” will frustrate those who resist the Wes Anderson cult. Longtime fans will relish its curated collection of characters and note how the filmmaker may be expanding his reach, even if it’s accidental.

The post Is ‘Asteroid City’ a Sly Take on Pandemic Lockdowns? first appeared on Hollywood in Toto.

The post Is ‘Asteroid City’ a Sly Take on Pandemic Lockdowns? appeared first on Hollywood in Toto.

Ike Barinholtz isn’t shooting fish in a barrel with his new mockumentary. He’s blasting them with an AK-47.

“Maximum Truth” turns the camera on soulless grifters out to squeeze every last penny from our warped political age. Think Jacob Wohl and Jack Burkman, the far-right poseurs who often land in hot water for their stunts.

What co-writer Barinholtz does, though, is let us sympathize with these pathetic con men.

Just a little, mind you. Maybe an ounce of empathy. It’s enough to give “Maximum Truth” a satisfying core to build its story.

Barinholtz plays Rick Klingman, a grifter who stumbled into his craft after winning some frivolous lawsuits. Now, he’s a hired gun, taking down any politician by digging through their personal dirt.

Even if said dirt doesn’t exist. Why would that matter? It’s politics, right? You can find dirt anywhere. You just have to look hard enough and believe any outlandish story you hear online.

Just ask Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh.

Rick is joined by Simon (Dylan O’Brien), a self-absorbed influencer (redundant?) punching over his intellectual weight.

Together, they’re hoping to torch a candidate (Max Minghella) by finding damaging stories from his past.

“Maximum Truth” stars slowly, offering a few overt laughs while letting us get to know Rick. He’s clearly gay, labeling his male roommate as his professional “assistant” to avoid the obvious. It’s a running gag the film doesn’t lean into enough.

Rick has an answer for everything, a positive spin for any disastrous pivot he’s forced to make. There’s something noble about his ignorance, a willingness to see the glass of spoiled milk as half full.

Simon, given an unexpected comic jolt by O’Brien, is more of a wrecking ball. He’s unbound by morals and eager to hawk his “Shreded” supplement brand (even if he doesn’t know the word has two “Ds” in a row).

The mockumentary never finds its gut-busting moment, but the laughs bubble up as the efficient story movies on. You’ll smile, wince and recognize too much of what happens on screen.

RELATED: ‘INFLUENCER’ NAILS HORRORS OF OUR INSTAGRAM AGE

Barinholtz, who contributed to the disappointing “History of the World Part II” project, is an unabashed liberal. He proved that with “The Oath,” a political satire that sank, in part, due to overt partisanship.

Here, the actor/co-screenwriter is tweaking GOP types, but “Maximum Truth” targets a deeply flawed system first and foremost. Yes, a scene where a gun devotee brandishes a weapon goes exactly where you expect it to, but the film understands grifters hail from both parties.

It’s the political climate that needs to be destroyed.

Plus, the scene in question delivers the biggest laugh of the film.

#MaximumTruth FACTS: You ain’t cool if you ain’t late pic.twitter.com/Lkr4YDhEQW

— Momentum Pictures (@Momentum_Pics) June 20, 2023

“Maximum Truth” hits the target over and again, but one deserving party comes out unscathed, and it’s the film’s regrettable flaw.

Journalists.

Here, they’re treated like sober, responsible truth-tellers when anyone who follows the news these days knows that’s no longer true.

Reporters even get a “truth to power” moment late in the film that is both unearned and unnecessary. Nauseating.

Otherwise, “Maximum Truth” offers a crush of low-budget laughs hitting targets both sides of the political aisle can agree have it coming.

HiT or Miss: “Maximum Truth” has plenty to say about the state of political theater, and much of it is amusing and spot-on.

The post ‘Maximum Truth’ Shreds Politics of Personal Destruction first appeared on Hollywood in Toto.

The post ‘Maximum Truth’ Shreds Politics of Personal Destruction appeared first on Hollywood in Toto.

Judd Apatow would have crushed the gimmick behind “No Hard Feelings” … had he directed it in 2006.

Back then, Apatow was coming off his breakout hit, “The 40-Year-Old Virgin,” and the culture embraced hard-R comedies with a sentimental side.

Apatow’s comedy instincts have faded over time, and “problematic” jokes now get nixed before the first draft.

That leaves “No Hard Feelings” in a pickle. It’s neither as outrageous as needed, nor the finely tuned character study it desperately wants to be.

Jennifer Lawrence stars as Maddie, a terrible person in a terrible bind. She needs to make enough cash via Uber to save her family home, but her car just got impounded by an old boyfriend.

What’s a gal to do?

Luckily, she reads a Help Wanted ad seeking a 20-something woman to “date” a rich couple’s 19-year old son. Young Percy (Andrew Barth Feldman) is going to Princeton in the fall, but he’s never been intimate with a woman, has few friends and spends all day playing video games.

His parents (including a bored Matthew Broderick) want him to come out of his shell, thus the outrageous job opening.

Maddie lunges at the offer, but wooing Percy won’t be so easy.

Huh? 

The head-scratching starts early in “No Hard Feelings,” as do the grating woke asides.

A male character is repeatedly dressed down and told he’s not allowed to talk about women’s issues. A Native American character, introduced early and ignored the rest of the way (Inclusion alert!), lets Maddie whine about rich people ad nauseam.

“These people use us, why can’t we use them?”

Lawerence is a millionaire many times over, but her character keeps railing against the rich as if it’s the star/producer’s way of saying, see? I’m just like you.

Nice try.

Watching Maddie insult a rich patron for requesting a drink minutes before the bar opens isn’t speaking truth to power. It’s being a [bleep].

Her anti-rich posture is as lame as her struggle up a massive flight of stairs on roller blades. Anyone with two brain cells knows you take the blades off first. Director/co-writer Gene Stopnitsky (the superior “Good Boys”) needs that visual gag so badly he’ll step on common sense to grab it.

Oscar winner Jennifer Lawrence, who leads her first major comedy in “No Hard Feelings,” says “it really is hard to make a comedy where you’re not offending people.” https://t.co/vRyGcFj8Ps

— Variety (@Variety) June 21, 2023

“No Hard Feelings” gratefully ditches the monologuing to get to the main story. Can Maddie make a man out of Percy, or will the teen’s moral compass teach Maddie the error of her ways?

Maddie is self-centered, sex-starved and just plain unpleasant. We’re supposed to care that she could lose her childhood home, but audiences will shrug at her plight. That even Lawrence can’t rally us to her side speaks volumes of the screenplay, a malnourished affair that fails its tacky premise.

We know Percy will blossom at some point, but his transformation is so jarring, so poorly executed, it robs us of seeing him become a man. He also ditches his rule-following mania in short order, another whiplash moment.

The jokes miss more than they hit, and even when they land it’s but a grazing blow. One sequence finds Lawrence fully committing to both nudity and comic violence. It should be a corker, the movie’s signature moment that you’ll be talking about on the way home from the theater.

Instead, you marvel at an Oscar winner slumming it for cheap yuks.

Worst of all, the story makes little sense from scene to scene. One moment Percy is willing to risk everything to date Maddie. The next? He’s ignoring her to flirt with a classmate, his dating skills suddenly firing on all cylinders.

A subplot involving Maddie’s missing father figure goes nowhere … why bring it up in the first place?

“No Hard Feelings” occasionally shines thanks to Lawrence’s undeniable star power. Give her a withering insult and she’ll nail like few of her peers. The comedy still isn’t raucous enough to live up to its premise, nor sensitively told to let us care about the cloying, third-act resolutions.

HiT or Miss: “No Hard Feelings” proves Jennifer Lawrence will try almost anything to make us laugh, but she forgot to channel her inner Apatow to prove it.

The post ‘No Hard Feelings’ Squanders Its Raunchy, ’90s-era Premise first appeared on Hollywood in Toto.

The post ‘No Hard Feelings’ Squanders Its Raunchy, ’90s-era Premise appeared first on Hollywood in Toto.

It’s starting to get hot, which means our minds drift to the birds and bees

Spring rolls into the lazy days of summer, and it’s not just the 1978 musical “Grease” that has summer lovin’ top of mind.

The following movies feature many aspects of romance, from scorching stories to tales that remind us of love gone too soon.

Erotic Summer-Worthy Movies

• “9 1/2 Weeks”
• “9 Songs”
• “Gaspar Noe’s Love”
• “Cash Back”
• “Two Moon Junction”
• “The Unbearable Lightness of Being”
• “A Walk On The Moon”
• “The Center of the World”
• “Secretary”
• “Shame”
• “Cat People” (1947)
• “The Postman Always Rings Twice”
• “Body Heat”
• “The Girl Next Door”

But maybe you want a little more tenderness, love and affection from your cinematic romance? I’ve got just the movies for you.

The Best Movies About Heartbreak and Humor of Love

• “Casablanca”
• “The Unbearable Lightness of Being”
• “Seems Like Old Times”
• “African Queen”Excalibur”
• “Gaspar Noe’s Love”
• “Love”
• “When Harry Met Sally”
• “Amelie”
• “Against All Odds”
• “Out of Africa”
• “A Walk On The Moon”
• “The Shape of Water”
• “3000 Years of Longing” (which I’m watching again for the third time)
• “Closer”
• “Twister”
• “Unfaithful”

Perhaps you’ve experienced a recent breakup, or Facebook has you longing for some lost ex… okay here are a few love movies that hurt so good to watch.

The Absolutely Saddest Movies About Love

• “Her”
• “Blue Valentine”
• “The Unbearable Lightness of Being”
• “Shame”
• “Gaspar Noe’s Love”
• “Sleeping Beauty”
• “A Walk on the Moon”
• “The Piano”
• “Laurel Canyon”
• The Sessions”

If your time is limited, just know some films made it onto all three lists: “Love,” “A Walk on the Moon” and “The Unbearable Lightness of Being.”

Are those movies the “best” cinematic love stories?

Not necessarily. Each has elements of all three categories, though, and that matters for many movie fans.

The post Summer Lovin’ … Hollywood Style first appeared on Hollywood in Toto.

The post Summer Lovin’ … Hollywood Style appeared first on Hollywood in Toto.

The “Airport” films were a major staple of commercial 1970s cinema, a popcorn and cotton candy alternative to a decade of movies that included “The French Connection” (1971) and “Coming Home” (1978).

While a generation of comedy lovers grew up on the Zucker-Abrams-Zucker masterpiece “Airplane!” and its sequel, most who can quote those movies may not be aware that those pair of parodies are based on the “Airport” dramas.

In the same way a lot of ’90s teens loved the “Austin Powers” movies but had never seen the Sean Connery era-007 thrillers of mod comedies they’re based on.

William Wellman’s 1954 “The High and the Mighty,” starring John Wayne, was another major inspiration for “Airplane!” as well, though that film lacked dialogue between seatmates Jimmie Walker and Charo (more on that later, I promise).

Now that the “Airport” thrillers are on Netflix, it’s time to revisit one of the most successful and wildly uneven franchises to emerge from the ’70s.

The original “Airport” builds two dueling narratives that eventually intersect: while the crew of a Boeing 707 is preparing for a packed flight, someone on the passenger list is planning to bring a bomb onboard.

“Airport,” the biggest movie blockbuster of 1970, is uneven but very entertaining. It maintains interest, even as it has nothing to say about its era, aside from the way it provides total escapism from its Hollywood Golden Age ensemble cast.

You won’t find real issues here, or any reference to the escalating Vietnam war or the counterculture revolution taking place. This is escapism, though its depiction of air travel as being fraught with fear and danger was ahead of its time.

The film recalls when air travel was still considered sexy and exotic, with two-story jets with a piano bar and first class that felt like another planet. “Airport” went so far as to depict one of the members of The Rat Pack as the pilot.

Remember, this was released at the time the legendary “Hi, I’m Judy…Fly Me” ads were ubiquitous on television.

Director George Seaton makes great use of widescreen cinematography, particularly in its opening and a great point-of-view shot of the pilot inspecting the aisles. Seaton, who also directed “Miracle on 34th St” (1947), is a good storyteller, even when the tale itself is this pulpy and tonally inconsistent.

FAST FACT: “Airport” scored an impressive $100 million in 1970, coming in second for the year behind “Love Story” ($106 million).

The screenplay by Seaton, faithfully based on Arthur Hailey’s 1968 novel, is so jokey, it undermines the tension, going the crowd-pleasing route when it should be building suspense. The frequent use of split screen is inventive and so are the simple but still lovely special effects.

The all-star cast isn’t enough to counter the uneven tone. As the airport manager, Burt Lancaster isn’t great in this (I blame the role) and Dean Martin is not who you want playing an airline captain and hard to buy in a dramatic part.

The two should have swapped roles.

All-star cast of “Airport” (1970)--can you name these actors? pic.twitter.com/qbZkGQ5dr0

— Michael Beschloss (@BeschlossDC) February 4, 2023

Helen Hayes’ Oscar-winning performance as a stowaway starts strong but becomes a series of opportunities to mug for the camera. On the other hand, Maureen Stapleton, playing the wife of the bomber, is very effective, providing a complex emotional center the film badly needs.

As the chief mechanic called in to help when things get bad, a blustering George Kennedy ultimately (and easily) walks away with the whole movie.

As expected, the attitudes on hand are incredibly sexist and chauvinistic (no surprise when Rat Packer Martin is flying the plane!). “Airport” is never tense enough once the big incident occurs- after the stunning explosion, the crew is far too calm and kept considering what is taking place.

It’s classy but corny.

“Airport 1975,” by director Jack Smight (who had better luck with “Midway” in 1976), depicts another Boeing 747 and the disaster that the crew and passengers face mid-flight. In this case, a small plane crashes into the Boeing and forces an emergency landing.

This first sequel frontloads the disaster at the top of the second act, immediately distinguishing it from the original, which at least took time for character development and atmosphere.

Charlton Heston has the Lancaster role and is, likewise, neutered by the assignment. In fact, despite top billing, Heston is barely in this. Kennedy continues to prove his worth to the series by giving a lot to his role.

The dopey list of co-stars doesn’t fare as well, as this really needed Helen Hayes and Maureen Stapleton’s touch. A post- “Exorcist” Linda Blair is barely utilized- ditto Erik Estrada. Sid Caesar’s character is grating, Myrna Loy plays a one-note lush and Gloria Swanson hams it up.

We also get a crew of horny airline workers and many cliché-ridden passengers. While less quip and joke-heavy than the original, it’s still drawn out and dull.

“Airplane!” cribbed much from this.

While “Airport 1975” was made during the height of the ‘70s Disaster Movie Era (a genre it ostensibly created with the first film), it lacks the elegance of the original or the more dynamic showmanship of most Irwin Allen thrillers of its era.

There’s a nice surprise with a failed rescue attempt, but those rear projection effects aren’t fooling anyone. It’s hard to believe this was a hit, let alone the second of what would become a four-part film franchise!

“Airport ‘77” is a wilder film than its predecessor, with a hijacking plot out of James Bond and a concept that aims to recreate the thrills and visuals of Allen’s “The Poseidon Adventure” (1972).

Until the hijacking finally takes place, this has the look and feel of “The Love Boat.” Directed by Jerry Jameson (who helmed “Raise the Titanic” after this and mostly directed for TV afterward), the dialog is bad from top to bottom and none of the performances are enough to elevate it.

Jack Lemmon tries hard as the captain but looks foolish giving so much to this. Lee Grant is painfully over the top playing a drunk, Olivia De Haviland doesn’t match Helen Hayes but tries, and James Stewart does little and appears lost.

Kennedy barely registers this time, Christopher Lee’s fine work is cut short and Brenda Vaccaro winds up faring best. Kathleen Quinlan being serenaded and wooed by a blind pianist is the eye-rolling low point.

The appeal here is the disaster – it’s a cleverly staged spectacle, with effective exterior visual effects shots. An extensive sequence of in-cabin flooding knocking over bystanders impresses, as is the audacity of the salvation through flotation finale.

There are also long scenes of spouting lousy exposition, undermining the action. “Airport ‘77” is better than “Airport 1975,” but not by much. The film’s teaser trailer famously touted it was “Bigger and More Exciting Than ‘Airport ’75,” which is correct.

“The Concorde…Airport ‘79” is among the worst movies I’ve ever seen. Let’s start with the title- which appears drab and tired looking, like the whole movie.

This feels very much like a TV-movie from its era, with no sense of scope, wonder or even a need for widescreen. Directed by David Lowell Rich, whose filmography includes the notorious TV movie “Satan’s School for Girls” (1973) and, perhaps the reason he landed this gig, two other TV movies about commercial airlines in peril: “The Horror at 37,000 Feet” (1973) and “SST: Death Flight” (1977).

The former stars William Shatner and Buddy Epson, while the latter was featured during the first season of “Mystery Science Theater 3000.”

Somehow Eric Roth wrote this- clearly, he got better.

The messy plot involves an arms dealer and a crisis that can be solved by a commercial plane being able to dodge the efforts of a missile in midflight. Lalo Schifrin’s score is the only plus. Otherwise, the awful aspects stack as high as 20,000 feet.

Behold the terrible Russian athlete subplot, the woman who can’t leave the restroom, the gratuitous Jimmy Walker and Charo cameos, the corny and the nonsensical Robert Wagner plot line (his evil plan is to crash a plane to get rid of a file!).

There’s also the wretched dialog (“Why do you think it’s called a cockpit, honey?”) and accompanying sexism, Charo talking to her dog, the maudlin deaf girl, David Warner’s banana joke and the hot tub scene(!).

Series MVP George Kennedy can’t save this, either, as his hambone performance is arguably the film’s most embarrassing.

The special effects are awful, but at least that aspect and the upside-down plane sequences are unintentionally hilarious. Notice how the closing shot of the plane and the Concorde logo in flames is then quickly followed by a pretty shot of the Concorde in flight because, after all, this is just an all-star commercial for the Concorde, right?

“The Concorde…Airport ‘79” wound up being to the class act “Airport” what “Jaws The Revenge” is to “Jaws.” It’s an unfortunate, campy end to a formerly prestigious film franchise.

On the other hand, “Airport” not only inspired those brilliantly funny “Airplane!” spoofs but continues to fly high on the fumes of every subsequent disaster movie. When an official remake (and not a shameless rip-off) is eventually and inevitably announced, fasten your seatbelts.

The post ‘Airport’ Franchise Deserved Leslie Nielsen’s Epic Takedown first appeared on Hollywood in Toto.

The post ‘Airport’ Franchise Deserved Leslie Nielsen’s Epic Takedown appeared first on Hollywood in Toto.

Renny Harlin’s “Cliffhanger” (1993) is bookended by a scene in which its stars are perched atop a summit so high, they must’ve been lowered from a helicopter to make the shot.

Before the days of Tom Cruise putting himself in entertainingly dangerous positions for our entertainment, here’s Sylvester Stallone and Michael Rooker clearly placed on surfaces miles above the ground.

We meet Gabe (Stallone), a veteran mountain climber who is rescuing his friend and colleague Hal (Rooker) stranded high above the Colorado Rockies. Hal is waiting for Gabe on a peak with his girlfriend, Sarah, played by Michelle Joyner, who’s excellent for only a few minutes of screen time.

Why wasn’t this a breakout role for her?

A simple rescue goes horribly. A year later, Gabe and Hal aren’t speaking, Gabe hasn’t been on a mountain and a plane full of professional criminals crash lands into the Rockies. Led by the sadistic Qualen (John Lithgow), the armed thieves aim to find three missing suitcases that are stuffed with $100 million, which was roughly the budget of this movie.

Joining Stallone on the ledge is Janine Turner, terrific on “Northern Exposure,” but suffering the same Teri Hatcher/ Dana Delaney limbo of finding success on television but not in movies. Admittedly, Stallone and Turner, who are supposed to be playing an estranged couple, lack any chemistry.

The dizzying cinematography, superbly timed editing and clever sound effects place the audience in vertigo-inducing spaces. Coming post-“K2” (the forgotten 1992 adaptation of the spellbinding stage play) but long before “Cliffhanger” wannabe “Vertical Limit” (2000), the knockout opening scene still stuns for its unbearable intensity and cruel conclusion.

If “Cliffhanger” resembles any film from the ’90s, it’s the forthcoming “Twister” (1996), which is also dopey with dialogue and characters but phenomenal when it’s on its feet and sprinting.

There’s an in-air money transfer that, truly, seems pointless but results in some amazing stunt work and a delightfully implausible action sequence to rival anything in a “Fast and Furious” sequel. What follows is a great plane crash, in a year full of similarly outstanding, scary sequences in “Fearless” and “Alive.”

Speaking of implausible, we’re supposed to believe that, at one point, Gabe can bench press a villain into a spike over his head but is unable to simply pull a damsel in distress to safety in the opening?

RELATED: HOW THE BADDIE STOLE ‘NIGHTHAWKS’ FROM STALLONE

This was Stallone’s post-comedy comeback, as the mild success of “Oscar” (1991) and the embarrassment of “Stop! Or My Mom Will Shoot” (1992) was enough to remind the stars and his fans that the road to “Rhinestone” is paved with good intentions but horrendous reviews and meager box office.

Hitching his return to form on the popcorn movie maestro Harlin made for a shrewd pairing.

The screenplay is notably “Based on a Premise by John Long” and, for all the spectacle, lacks depth, though I’m unsure if the aim here is to do anything beyond entertaining the masses.

Harlin’s film could certainly be tighter (there’s far too many reaction shots) and there’s also two snowboarder characters whose premise can only be explained by the success of “Wayne’s World” (1992) signaling Stallone that he’d need a young demographic to maximize his return to glory.

The dialogue is often unintentionally funny, mostly B-movie dialogue (“A lot of things fell apart on that ledge!”). A hall of fame howler comes in the form of Stallone’s protesting, “Look Jessie, I haven’t climbed in months! You just lose the feel!”

We never learn what Cabe has been doing in Colorado for all those months (my guess: a professional cliff diver at Casa Bonita’s). Here’s a bit of dialogue I wish were in this movie: On the ground, he’s just Gabe, but up here…he’s The Cliffhanger.

No such luck.

A sequel to ‘CLIFFHANGER’ is in the works with Sylvester Stallone set to reprise his role.

(Source: Deadline) pic.twitter.com/iN3F0vb4x1

— DiscussingFilm (@DiscussingFilm) May 1, 2023

A typical Hollywood touch is how the story piles on a massive body count but, following a scene of peril, clearly shows us that a rabbit did, indeed, escape a torrent of machine gun bullets.

It becomes increasingly funny how these characters mountain climb all, casually meeting each other on summits that, under normal circumstances, would have others calling Guinness Book of World Records.

Stallone recognized that this vehicle would elevate him back on top (of the cliff and of the movie star list), and he’s in good form. Lithgow’s performance as Qualen is constantly better than the material. Paul Winfield is on hand to do the walking and talking exposition scenes.

Like most of Harlin’s films from this era, “Cliffhanger” is gruesomely violent and unnecessarily so – as in his entertaining, pulpy “Die Hard 2” and “The Adventures of Ford Fairlane” (both 1990), Harlin’s bloodletting and pummeling muffles our feeling for the characters.

During one especially gratuitous scene, Rooker lets out a spittle of blood all over the snow. That said, Harlin’s best film is still the ultraviolent, hilarious and impossibly exciting neo-noir “The Long Kiss Goodnight” (1996).

If this is what “’Die Hard’ on a mountain” looks like (and I suspect Harlin pitched it that way when offered the job), then it likely will still never be topped.

Hold on, indeed.

The post How ‘Cliffhanger’ Brought Stallone Back from the Comedy Brink first appeared on Hollywood in Toto.

The post How ‘Cliffhanger’ Brought Stallone Back from the Comedy Brink appeared first on Hollywood in Toto.

Jonathan Mostow’s “Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines” (2003) had the misfortune of being the first new film in the franchise since James Cameron’s “Terminator 2: Judgement Day” (1991) and the first without his involvement.

Imagine being in Mostow’s shoes: you not only have to follow up a beloved series minus the key ingredient behind the camera but make a sequel to one of the greatest, most influential action movies of all time.

Twenty years ago, when “Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines” was first unveiled, it was 12 long years since the summer smash of “T2.” Aside from some video game spinoffs (on DOS, Sega and Nintendo) and comic books series (from NOW Comics, Dark Horse Comics and Malibu Comics), Mostow was only competing with “Judgement Day.”

Now, post-“T3,” there’s not only three additional Terminator installments but two seasons of “Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles” (2008-2009).

With “T3” now two decades removed from its mostly well-received unveiling and current fears regarding the speed and use of A.I. (and no, I didn’t use ChatGPT to write this), it’s a good time to look back at “Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines.” It’s not just one of the better 21st century takes on the franchise, but a much stronger machine than most remember.

The establishing scenes reveal that John Connor, now played by Nick Stahl, is on the run, living off the grid and taking jobs from town to town. Since the prophesied events of Judgment Day didn’t happen, and it appears that the prior destruction of Skynet and the dueling Terminators did the trick, Connor’s cautious optimism about his life appears justified.

On the same night, Connor gets into a motorcycle accident, a T-X Terminator model (Kristanna Loken) and an original model (Arnold Schwarzenegger) both appear from the future, with dueling missions to protect and destroy not only Connor but someone else.

Spoilers from this point on.

What most will remember uneasily is how much humor is infused into Mostow’s film, with Dad Joke bits of The Terminator wearing Elton John glasses (though exactly where he gets it is a clever bit), spouting “Talk to the Hand” (which was not even cool in ’03) and uttering would-be variations on the classic catch phrases.

For some reason, “She’ll be back” just doesn’t land.

Another big complaint was the T-X herself, as Loken’s steel-eyed, hard-working performance is chilling in the first act (her drop-of-the-hat killing sprees are shocking) but she’s never as scary as Robert Patrick in “T2.”

While much of “Rise of the Machines” fails in its efforts to match or surpass “T2,” there are some major assets here that stand out just for being so different. The dynamic of Stahl (very good and grounded as Connor, though unquestionably less gritty than Edward Furlong) and co-star Claire Danes as Kate Brewster grounds this.

Both are the film’s human center and give performances strong enough that the action and spectacle don’t overwhelm their acting.

Schwarzenegger manages to invest everything he has in a role that would limit most actors but suits him perfectly. The droll humor and emotionally detached line readings are all spot on, as though Schwarzenegger couldn’t wait to get back in the leather jacket.

Mostow’s approach to directing lacks the chilly precision Cameron brought to the first two (and, it goes without saying, the absolute best) Terminator films. However, the director of “Breakdown” (1997) is more than capable of generating suspense and staging jaw-dropping action.

The act-one auto chase, which involves a firetruck and miles of storefronts turned to rubble, is an incredible set piece (minimizing the score during this sequence only demonstrates the confidence Mostow has in the spectacle).

In between the giant action scenes, screenwriters John Brancato and Michael Ferris lean into the element that gives this franchise a thematic distinction: existential dread. A key second act turnaround comes not from a conversation about the right thing to do, but Connor putting a gun to his head and forcing The Terminator to consider the ramifications of his suicide.

The scenes of David Andrews playing the Lieutenant General who makes the final decision about hitting the GO button on Skynet have the discomfort of hindsight (you wish anyone would step forward and stop him).

RELATED: SCHWARZENEGGER’S ‘RUNNING MAN’ DELIVERS MORE THAN ’80s CHEESE

The story device pitting Connor and Brewster together is, likewise, a real bummer: Connor’s horrific childhood memories were countered with the assurance that he and his mother had saved the world, which he now realizes didn’t happen.

Brewster has been abducted and traumatized and, on top of that, is not only briefed on an insane explanation regarding the future of humankind but learns that one of her abductors will eventually be her husband.

Connor and Brewster are pushing back against destiny and inevitability, only to learn, again and again, that, in this world, there is no free will. Survival, and not prevention of an apocalypse, is the only obtainable goal.

Schwarzenegger’s last two scenes here give him a real chance to act and he’s up to the challenge. I wasn’t expecting to be moved by The Terminator expressing his dark role in Connor’s present and future life, but the former Mr. Universe (and, at that point, soon to be Governor of California) pulls it off.

Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines (2003)
Directed by Jonathan Mostow pic.twitter.com/CdFUicuduU

— Mace (@Mace2Space) June 14, 2023

Likely the biggest objection most longtime fans have lobbed at “T3” is over the abrupt, Rod Serling-esque ending. No question, it’s a big surprise and a real downer but not a thematic betrayal of the Cameron films (in fact, it’s much bleaker than the ending of either predecessor).

In the closing moments, Connor and Brewster become fully aware of how they have lost, and that the only option is to go forward fighting and leading an awful war. After contemplating killing themselves, a distress call snaps them out of their self-defeat and gives them a sense of purpose.

As the concluding imagery (shades of “Dr. Strangelove”) and narration indicate, Skynet couldn’t be defeated, since the carried mythos of its origins never explained exactly how it would take over. Or, as a favorite Nintendo game from my youth would declare every time I lost: “You and your friends are dead. Game Over.”

The extermination of the human race has always been the sad thematic core of these movies – do we fight the future or face the inevitable? While the subsequent Terminator films are less successful at being idea-driven and more showcases for Cameron-inspired action, only one of them is truly objectionable.

That’s the 2015 “Terminator: Genisys,” with its MCU-inspired future sequel set ups, miscasting and ambitious but unsuccessful plot alterations, is the one that doesn’t work. The others are hit-and-miss but still impressive and underestimated.

The first three Terminator films all have this in common: despite the awesome visuals and iconic leading man, here’s a summer popcorn movie franchise that will leave you too depressed to finish every cornel in the bucket.

The post ‘Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines’ – No Cameron, No Problem first appeared on Hollywood in Toto.

The post ‘Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines’ – No Cameron, No Problem appeared first on Hollywood in Toto.

“Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny” answers several burning questions right away.

• Is Harrison Ford, in his late 70s at the time of the production, too old to play the iconic swashbuckler? Shockingly, no.
• Is the de-aging technology sufficient to make audiences believe we’re watching a 40-something Ford in the film’s prologue? Absolutely.
• Is Phoebe Waller-Bridge, the subject of many pre-release rumors, the film’s Mary Sue figure? No doubt.

It’s also clear the saga’s fifth film is both competent and uninspired, flirting with excellence before succumbing to mediocrity. It won’t inspire the backlash of its predecessor, nor will fans view it as worthy of the first three installments.

“Dial of Destiny” starts strong, delivering brisk character beats and blistering action.

The prologue finds a younger Indiana Jones (a de-aged Ford) scrambling to recover an artifact swiped by a Nazi scientist (Mads Mikkelsen). Indy and his archeologist partner-in-crime (Toby Jones, the best new franchise character by a mile) narrowly escape the Nazi menace and, along the way, get their hands on the titular Dial.

Or at least part of it.

The device, created by Archimedes, is rumored to let users travel back in time. The artifact has been split in two, and when the film flashes forward to 1969 Jones and the remaining Nazis want to unite the pieces.

For Jones, the artifact – stay it all together now – “belongs in a museum.” Mikkelsen’s character has more nefarious plans for the doohickey.

Indy teams with his goddaughter Helena (Waller-Bridge), who has less noble reasons for acquiring the Dial. To quote ABBA – “money, money, money!”

Director James Mangold (“Ford v. Ferrari”) takes over for Steven Spielberg and can’t help fan-servicing himself into a corner. We get lines recalling the franchise’s better moments, cameos meant to fire up our nostalgia circuits and even a new sidekick in the Short Round tradition.

Sadly, young Teddy (Ethann Isidore) never makes us forget Ke Huy Quan. The script does the child star few favors, treating him like a plot device, and a shoddy one at that. Making him pilot an airplane is one of the third act’s biggest eye rolls.

And it has plenty of company.

The lad is more authentic than Helena, who is smart, can brawl like a Marine and knows every detail about the Dial, ancient history and whatever else the scene requires.

She’s the Ultimate Mary Sue with one exception. The “Fleabag” alum has charisma to burn, making some of her character’s tics more endearing. It’s still galling for franchise fans to see Indy become the Damsel in Distress while Helena repeatedly rides to the rescue.

Much has been made of the CGI-heavy action sequences, but seen in the context of the film they’re less distracting than advertised.

Mangold is no slouch in the action department (“Knight and Day,” anyone?) but his visuals can’t compete with what Spielberg delivered in the first three Indy films. There’s no one “wow” sequence you’ll be talking about after leaving the theater.

We’re still talking about Indy escaping that rolling boulder from “Raiders of the Lost Ark.”

“Dial of Destiny” offers some compelling reasons to make a fifth film after “Kingdom of the Crystal Skull” soured many on the series. An older Indiana Jones could deliver something novel, a combination of wisdom and regret for his colorful lifetime.

The story aggressively time stamps the action via a parade for the U.S. landing on the moon as well as the late ’60s anti-war protests. Both are introduced early, then discarded.

An early laugh comes when Indy tells his neighbor to turn down the music. It’s a “get off my lawn” moment that could yield something potent. Alas, a screenplay credited to four scribes, cares more about setting up an endless array of chase scenes than telling us more about our legendary hero.

Indy and Helena bicker throughout the film, but it feels mostly lifeless. She’s Mary Sue-ing on full blast, and we’re not allowed to see her flash sorrow for her money-grubbing lifestyle.

It’s ironic that Helena mocks capitalism but cares about cash above all. Projection, anyone?

still got it#TheFabFord pic.twitter.com/yz28vtedeS

— Mark Hamill (@MarkHamill) June 15, 2023

Mangold may deliver solid, if not spectacular action, but he routinely undercuts the sequences with “Fast & Furious” style logic. Plus, the film assumes a repetitive pattern where our heroes travel to a critical spot, and the baddies miraculously show up five or so minutes later.

Even worse?

The hunt for the dial leads Indy to a veteran diver (a wasted Antonio Banderas). Together, they accomplish their task in such short order it’s laugh-out-loud ludicrous.

“Dial of Destiny” stumbles upon a fascinating finale for our hero, something we never see coming but feels like a perfect fit given Indy’s back story The film quickly scraps it for a traditional, and sappy, denouement.

Happy trails, Indiana Jones!

HiT or Miss: “Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny” is neither a “Crystal Skull”-sized letdown nor a return to the franchise’s glory days.

The post ‘Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny’ Raids the Lost Franchise first appeared on Hollywood in Toto.

The post ‘Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny’ Raids the Lost Franchise appeared first on Hollywood in Toto.

Wanna mock horror movies? Been there, seen the “Scary Movie” franchise and the “Scream” saga. That’s a total of 11 films, all skewering the genre with glee.

That’s not including two “Haunted House” features.

So right away “The Blackening” faces some tall odds at being both different and satirically sharp.

Things go downhill at breakneck speed once the story settles into place. A group of black friends reunites at a cabin in the woods (get it???) where they find a racist game and an insidious killer behind the challenges.

A few smiles emerge, nothing more, but the story lumbers on for 96 brutal minutes while the characters spout BLM-approved talking points until we cry, “uncle!”

The aforementioned friends gather to do drugs and re-open old wounds when they discover a board game displayed within the cabin. The game features a disembodied voice demanding they answer the game’s questions or people will die.

The games in question involve racially-charged questions like, “Name Five Black Actors Who Appeared on the Show ‘Friends,'” (as if that meme isn’t hopelessly stale by now) and the Black National Anthem.

Soon, the cabin mates are running for their lives around a cabin that can’t find a single scare within its halls.

“The Blackening’s” slack prologue is a warning of what’s to come. Even worse? “Saturday Night Live” alum Jay Pharaoh boasts more presence in his brief screen time than all the major players we’re about to meet.

That includes X Mayo, Sinqua Walls, Dewayne Perkins and Grace Beyers, none of whom distinguish themselves. Then again, the ham-fisted script (co-written by Perkins based on his short film) does them few favors.

The most insufferable character, and that’s a real foot race, is played by Jermaine Fowler attempting a fifth-rate Uriel impression.

‘The Blackening’ Star Dewayne Perkins on His Gay Horror Spoof Character and Mining His Coming-Out Story for Comedy https://t.co/UdvnIw3DHS

— The Hollywood Reporter (@THR) June 14, 2023

The characters’ thoughts on white people will be studied years from now, stoked by a cultural tide that made such views acceptable in elite circles.

• “White people scare me,” one character complains
• The story’s biracial character, played by Beyers, loathes her white heritage
• “Are there any white people who wanna kill us? Potentially all of them.”

Director Tim Story isn’t Scorsese or Peele, but he’s capably delivered socially aware comedy (“Barbershop”) and action heroics (“Shaft”) in the past. Here, it’s like he’s forgotten everything he’s learned over two decades in Hollywood.

The film is poorly lit, but not in any way that heightens the fear factor. A fight sequence between one of our heroes and the villain is so amateurishly staged it’s hard to tell what’s happening at any given moment.

We’re also treated to limp jump scares, another sign of creative indifference.

Audiences can disagree with the characters’ core beliefs and still howl at the high jinks if the jokes are funny or inspired. Maybe the audience’s preconceived notions on race could be nudged by a film’s commentary.

That’s why pop culture can be so challenging and vital. None of the gags come close here, even if a few punch lines hit their targets.

Another unforced error?

The film assumes black people hold monolith views on race, the police and much more. It’s all woke, all the time, and “The Blackening” misses a satirical opportunity by ignoring divergent views.

The Urkel stand-in votes for Trump, a rare exception, but he aligns with his chums on every other topic. The MAGA hate here is considerable, but once again it’s never clever enough to warrant its inclusion.

A killer laugh line can make even cruel commentary well worth a smile. The latter are in short supply with “The Blackening.”

HiT or Miss: “The Blackening” asks us to cheer on unlikeable characters in a horror-comedy that skimps on both counts.

The post ‘The Blackening’ Offers Few Laughs, Zero Scares first appeared on Hollywood in Toto.

The post ‘The Blackening’ Offers Few Laughs, Zero Scares appeared first on Hollywood in Toto.

Richard Lester’s “Superman III” (1983) opens with such a strong scene it creates false confidence in its audience about how good the rest of the film is.

A pre-title sequence introduces us to August “Gus” Gorman, played by legendary comic Richard Pryor. Gus is trying to get the upper hand while in line at the unemployment office.

The comedian has always excelled at playing blue-collar workers struggling to make a living; the surprise casting of him in a Superman movie seems to connect in these introductory moments.

Once the opening credits kick in, we witness a terrible phenomenon that is plaguing Metropolis – no, not crime. We witness an all-out attack of Slapstick, as it breaks out on every street corner. It’s far from the only scene here that doesn’t work and is embarrassingly corny.

Gus eventually becomes an employee for Webster, a cruel tycoon played by Robert Vaughn, whose far-reaching goals include stopping Superman (Christopher Reeve) from standing in his way of controlling the world with a super computer.

“Superman III” followed the massive success of Richard Donner’s “Superman – The Movie” (still the most charming popcorn movie of the 1970s) and Lester’s troubled but enthralling “Superman II” (1981).

It not only shows signs of trouble for a once spotless franchise but also pinpoints why other comic book movies of this era didn’t work: a condescending attitude, actors going “big” because they’re in a comic book movie and cynicism in place of awe.

#OnThisDay 1983: Christopher Reeve explained why he felt that Superman III should be his last stint as the Man of Steel. pic.twitter.com/McCNJ8tIDp

— BBC Archive (@BBCArchive) July 18, 2021

There are some choice moments here that are undermined by some truly bad ideas. During Gus’ initial, massive computer hack, he manages to make electronic crosswalk signs join together and inspires a husband to smack his wife with a fruit (an ode to “The Public Enemy,” I guess?).

Later, Gus literally skis down the side of Webster’s skyscraper. There’s also a sequence where Pryor plays Gus impersonating General Patton, an unfunny bit that goes on too long.

To be blunt, Pryor was the greatest stand-up comedian who ever lived, but he rarely found film roles that suited him well. Studios clearly had little idea of how to properly utilize his talent. Aside from “Silver Streak” (1976), “Blue Collar” (1978), “Jo Jo Dancer Your Life is Calling” (1986) and “Harlem Nights” (1989), Pryor was mostly wasted in movies.

When Pryor was cast in “Superman III,” he famously received a payment greater than Reeve and, despite the edginess of his humor, was a household name. A year after appearing in “Superman III,” Pryor starred in another family-friendly project, a weekly TV show called “Pryor’s Place,’ which lasted ten episodes and didn’t turn him into a Saturday morning icon with kids.

Casting Pryor in “Superman III” was an intriguing idea, but the Gus Gorman subplot doesn’t always mix well with the rest of the movie.

It’s not Pryor’s fault that “Superman III” doesn’t work, as he has both some of the funniest and cringe-worthiest scenes in the film. Gus can alter the weather through satellites, an idea that also wouldn’t work 14 years later in the failed “The Avengers” (1998).

Here’s another early ’80s popcorn thriller that wanted to showcase the potential of computers but had no idea how they work.

While the special effects (especially during the flying scenes) remain strong and the massive sets are impressive, much of this fails to capture the magic of the first film. Annette O’Toole is very good as Lana Lang and those scenes of Clark reconnecting with a high school crush truly connect.

However, Vaughn’s Webster is a C-rate Lex Luthor and Pamela Stephenson and Annie Ross are poor substitutes for Ned Beatty and Valerie Perrine. Whether Margot Kidder’s Lois Lane was shoved into the background was the result of script changes or, as rumored, due to Kidder’s having a falling out with the producers, her scenes here make little sense.

RELATED: WHY CHRISTOPHER REEVE’S SUPERMAN STILL MATTERS

Maintaining his dignity through all of this is Reeve, who is excellent at playing dual roles and finds the perfect touch for each scene, even when the screenplay is letting him down. Similarly, Reeve would elevate the unsteady “Superman IV: The Quest For Peace” (1987).

The scenes of Superman gone bad range from unsettling (his terrorizing a bar is an ugly bit) to hokey (has anyone, good or evil, ever fantasized about straightening out the Leaning Tower of Pisa?). Thankfully, this leads to the film’s best scene, where the morally poisoned Superman has a showdown with Clark Kent.

Comic book movies during this decade ranged from George A. Romero’s radical, ahead of its time and affectionate “Creepshow” (1982) to cringe inducing misfires like “Brenda Starr” (1989).

The Man of Steel franchise began as the sparkling breakthrough for big-budget comic book movies, only to see it wane, which began with “Superman III.” Tim Burton’s “Batman” (1989) would ultimately return the luster to comic book movies as a genre where works that are daring, faithful to the source material, personal and visionary could be made on a massive scale.

The Superman franchise would come back admirably in 2006 with “Superman Returns” and is currently being reconfigured before the next installment is formally announced. I recommend that the filmmakers find an actor as remarkable as Reeve and avoid the only force more painful to Superman than Kryptonite:

Slapstick.

The post Never Mind Kryptonite – Slapstick Crushed ‘Superman III” first appeared on Hollywood in Toto.

The post Never Mind Kryptonite – Slapstick Crushed ‘Superman III” appeared first on Hollywood in Toto.

The genre mashup “Unwelcome” might want to see a mechanic. All that tonal shifting is bound to require a tune-up at some point.

An expecting couple flees urban crime to discover something even more sinister in this goofy, creepy horror-comedy pileup.

“Unwelcome” doesn’t know when to end, and the screenplay teases an intriguing take on masculinity before losing interest. Still, you won’t be bored for a nanosecond and star Hannah John-Kamen provides a grounded, but feisty, horror heroine.

Maya (John-Kamen) and Jamie (Douglas Booth) leave London after thugs break into their home and nearly kill them. They want something safer for their unborn child, and they think they’ve found it in a quiet North Ireland hamlet.

They’ve got a new home, a baby on the way and the sense that they’ve finally put the past behind them.

Except the present looks just as unsettled.

They hire the Whelans to fix up their home, not realizing the family watched “Straw Dogs” once too often and took copious notes. They take turns further emasculating Jamie, who retreats to his punching bag workout to blow off steam.

The Whelans are kept (mostly) in check by the family patriarch (reliable Colm Meaney), whose pleasant demeanor isn’t fooling anyone.

Call him Daddy, he insists with a smile. Not creepy at all.

Nothing feels welcome to Maya and Jamie, and that’s before they learn a quaint local tradition has literal teeth.

Well Go USA Entertainment has acquired North American rights to Jon Wright’s horror film, “Unwelcome,” with plans to release it in U.S. theaters on March 17, 2022 https://t.co/fmG6JGqTtX

— Deadline Hollywood (@DEADLINE) October 26, 2021

The couple is told they must leave a plate of food out every night to appease the Redcaps, ancestral critters who lord over the land. Maya plays along with the charade, but every movie goer knows how often traditions spring to life in horror movies.

“Unwelcome” understands none of this matters if we’re not actively rooting for Maya and Jamie to reach the end credits alive. The film painstakingly details their relationship, the bond they share and the frustrations that bubble up when a couple is under extreme duress.

Hiring a contractor is stressful under the best of circumstances. Pay the Whelans to renovate your home? Yikes.

RELATED: ‘RENFIELD’ PUMPS FRESH BLOOD INTO HORROR-COMEDY MIX

Jamie’s rage at watching his wife being beaten in the film’s prologue powers his character. He won’t let that happen again, he insists, but director Jon Wright (“Grabbers”) seems less interested in seeing that arc through.

Maya is the film’s primary focus, at least until the creepy Redcaps enter the frame. The FX here are plain and perfunctory, but a wiser move would be to see these critters far less and keep some of their mystery intact.

(Warning: R-rated gore)

 

 

 

 

 

 

View this post on Instagram

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A post shared by Well Go USA Entertainment (@wellgousa)

“Unwelcome” offers a brisk pace and intriguing color choices. Some scenes unfold like a fractured fairy tale, the screen bathed in unearth reds and greens. Other sequences are awash with old-school, grindhouse-approved blood.

You never know which tone will take over next, creating a whiplash effect that diminishes the overall story. It still keeps viewers off guard, a valuable element in any genre affair.

Plus, no matter how many crazed twists “Unwelcome” throws our way, you’ll never be less than entertained.

HiT or Miss: “Unwelcome” bounces from goofy horror to blood-splattered mayhem, but it’s always visually precocious.

The post ‘Unwelcome’ Rolls Out Blood-Red Carpet for Genre Fans first appeared on Hollywood in Toto.

The post ‘Unwelcome’ Rolls Out Blood-Red Carpet for Genre Fans appeared first on Hollywood in Toto.

In Steven Caple Jr.’s “Transformers: Rise of the Beasts,” Anthony Ramos stars as Noah Diaz, a Brooklyn-raised military veteran struggling to find his way as a civilian.

An ill-considered car theft results in Noah carjacking a Porsche that is actually a Transformer named Mirage (voiced by Pete Davidson). Meanwhile, Elena, a museum intern played by Dominique Fishback, discovers a secret hidden within an artifact that could either maintain or destroy the universe, depending on who possess it.

“Beasts” is one of the best entries in this Hasbro toy/film series, though I’m trying to make that sound genuine and not the backhanded compliment that it ultimately is.

I normally hate these movies, and the slightly better than expected “Bumblebee” was a small step up, not the total franchise tune up that some claimed.

The animated “Transformers: The Movie” (1986) gets better with each passing year and always put the live-action spinoffs to shame.

A welcome touch in “Beasts” is how elements from “Transformers: The Movie” are actually in the film, though not all of those characters and plot devices pan out.

Caple Jr. is a filmmaker who doesn’t seek to assault us with seizure-inducing editing, a camera that can’t hold still and action sequences that are incomprehensible toilet bowl swirls of CGI nonsense. Ramos and Fishback have given better performances in better movies but they’re both solid here and can hold the screen the way movie stars do.

I liked these characters and found the human story to be, at times, much more engaging than the robot brawls. As “Bumblebee” proved, all you need is a strong actor to center this and not a cluster of slumming it A-list actors screaming and overacting while they fail to compete with the onslaught of special effects.

The use of early ’90s hip hop is a welcome, at times enthralling touch- De la Soul and LL Cool J serve the imagery well.

 

 

 

 

 

 

View this post on Instagram

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A post shared by Transformers (@transformersmovie)

Yet, this silly, over-plotted toy commercial runs out of steam during the final battle. In fact, I’m still unsure exactly how things turned out the way it did for the winners (something about a teleporting bomb, but why does it work the way it does and not finish the job?).

Setting the story primarily in 1994 allows for the great soundtrack choices but little else. We briefly see the O.J. Simpson trial on TV, adding a sliver of historical grit but for no real purpose. Likewise, the amusing moment where Noah points out that one of the Transformers sports a stereotypical accent; a wise thing to point out, but why?

Were the filmmakers preemptively striking against those who wrote negatively about the character? There’s no real point to any of this- it’s a smash n’ bash giant robot action movie and nothing more.

At a few minutes over the two-hour mark, the steady pace keeps a welcome momentum that rarely stalls.

RELATED: WHY ‘LAST KNIGHT’ IS HOLLYWOOD AT ITS WORST

Let’s talk about the absence of Bay from behind the camera. It’s clearly working.

Bay’s MTV-fueled style of filmmaking was fun for a while but, by the time “Pearl Harbor” (2001) arrived, the fun was over.

Bay’s contribution to cinema is like high fructose corn syrup to a chocolate bar – we think we love it, until we realize how bad it is for us.

The “Bad Boys” franchise got better once he stopped directing them – if they ever make a sequel to “The Island” (which I’ll admit is the only Bay movie I really like), don’t let him direct it. So far, the “Transformers” movies that Bay only produces but doesn’t direct are more tolerable.

The live action “Transformers” movies always existed in this strange place where they don’t know who their audience is, so they try to engage everyone. The result is a Frankenstein’s monster of a carnage and chaos-heavy military action movie fused with a cutesy kiddie flick.

Bay’s shameless indulgences, like leering obsessively over his female leads, encouraging his actors to shriek their lines, and staging/editing action into spastic mini trailers on Fast Forward, are unquestionably a style that needs to go away.

Recent movies featuring Ethan Hunt, James Bond, Mad Max and John Wick show us action (as well as plot and character development) done right, while Bay has always come across like an overeager protégé of Tony Scott.

The latest “Transformers” still has too much profanity for a kiddie film (even one set in ’94) but at least the hyper-sexualized depiction of women is gone, and, unlike Bay, Caple Jr. knows how to hold the camera steady and stage action that makes sense.

The biggest problem with “Transformers: Rise of the Beasts” is a subplot involving a sick little boy. Neither the character nor the subplot ever connects and it’s a maudlin touch that easily could have eliminated.

Weekend Box Office:

1) #Transformers – $60.5M
2) #SpiderVerse – $55.4M
3) #TheLittleMermaid – $22.7M https://t.co/otqNCUIJSG

— Rotten Tomatoes (@RottenTomatoes) June 12, 2023

The Peru-set ending allows for great use of some widescreen action, particularly a car chase that is the film’s best action sequence. The grand finale fails not because of a lack of spectacle but because of how it overstays its welcome, leans too heavily on just-go-with-it cartoon logic and doesn’t build as much as it just gets bigger until it randomly stops.

A before-the-end credits scene that suggests a fusion of two different film franchises plays like a self-parody that, I fear, the filmmakers are all too happy to make if the box office suggests interest.

I’m still not a fan of these movies, but much of “Transformers: Rise of the Beasts” works. This is one small step for Hasbro, one giant leap for mankind.

Two and a Half Stars

The post ‘Transformers: Rise of the Beasts’ Might Be Best in Series first appeared on Hollywood in Toto.

The post ‘Transformers: Rise of the Beasts’ Might Be Best in Series appeared first on Hollywood in Toto.