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.

The release of Kasi Lemmons’ “I Want to Dance With Somebody,” a music biopic on the life of the late Whitney Houston, has a surprising correlation with Houston’s highly touted film debut.

It’s been more than 30 years since “The Bodyguard,” starring Houston and Kevin Costner, overcame horrendous reviews, became a word-of-mouth blockbuster and spawned what remains, to this very day, the top-grossing soundtrack of all time.

Is the film itself any good or, like Lemmons’ film, does our fondness for Houston, Costner and those killer music cuts deliver goodwill the movie can’t? Despite some dopey screenplay choices and a famously campy showdown at the Oscars, “The Bodyguard” remains quite beguiling.

That has a lot to do with Houston and Costner.

Houston stars as Rachel Herron, an enormously successful music pop star who has been receiving death threats, creepy letters and the unwanted attention of a pale, menacing mouth breather. Enter Frank Farmer, played by Costner.

Famer is a bodyguard with, literally, the discipline and skills of a samurai, a no-nonsense attitude and no interest in the glamourous world in which Herron exists.

Farmer has been hired by Herron’s family friend, Devaney (the indispensable and always wonderful Bill Cobbs), much to the distrust of Herron’s fame-hungry producer (Gary Kemp of Spandau Ballet) and the current bodyguard (Mike Starr, another supporting actor MVP).

When the attacks on Herron’s life cut closer to home, it’s Farmer’s always-watchful eye and swift actions that keep Herron alive. A problem that they both recognize is that they’re falling in love with each other, making Farmer’s job impossible.

The screenplay for “The Bodyguard” was famously written by Lawrence Kasdan and intended as a vehicle for Steve McQueen and Diana Ross. Indeed, the script was dusty by the time the film was finally lensed decades later, though there were benefits in a delayed start.

Costner, with a distinctly McQueen haircut, is playing the role with exactly the kind of sturdy gravitas and humorless edge that McQueen would have brought. Houston, even in her first movie where she is sort-of playing herself, has a sassy warmth and joy that makes her a better choice over Ross.

As a tortured love story, and a keen fit for both its stars, “The Bodyguard” works.

What doesn’t always connect is how director Mick Jackson handles the story. The one-on-one scenes between the leads are always enjoyable but, as an action movie, it’s underwhelming.

Jackson, whose prior work was the wonderful Steve Martin-led and penned “L.A. Story” (1991), can’t even give “The Bodyguard” the injection of cracked energy he brought to his previous movie.

Jackson succeeds in making the film slick and engaging but fails to visually connect with the themes of the two contrasting worlds the way Ridley Scott did with similar material in his underestimated “Someone to Watch Over Me” (1987).

Kevin Costner Calls Clive Davis Whitney Houston’s ‘Bodyguard’: ‘You Were a Miracle in Her Life’ https://t.co/83TpEGEPnN

— People (@people) February 5, 2023

A quality I love about the lead performances is how both actors go out of their way to make their characters messy and, at times, hard to root for. Costner, likely trying to shed the goody-goody image playing a symbol of righteousness in “The Untouchables” (1987) and “Field of Dreams” (1989) makes Farmer gruff and emotionally impenetrable.

In fact, this is exactly why his work in “JFK” (1991) and especially “Waterworld” (1995) are so good – Costner pushes against this being a star vehicle by leaning into what is so frustrating about Farmer.

Likewise, Houston doesn’t let this become a vanity turn and makes Herron impulsive and, at times, even irritating. The screenplay doesn’t always develop plausibly, but Costner and Houston (who gives her best film performance here) are consistently good here.

Long-term memories of “The Bodyguard” are likely infused with the MTV videos far more than the film itself. I wish Jackson knew how to stage the action (his subsequent “Volcano” in 1997 at least has that), but this has a refreshing darkness and an uncompromised bleakness at the heart of the story.

Kasdan’s screenplay provides a sadly timeless commentary on how the music industry exploits its talent, and even gets away with an ending that manages to mimic both the romanticism and doomed outcome of “Casablanca.”

A key subplot involving the true nature of Rachel’s sister doesn’t make a lot of sense once you really think about it. Better are the little ways its suggested that Farmer isn’t just trained like a samurai and admires Toshiro Mifune (there’s even a clip of “Yojimbo”) but there’s a striking moment involving a sword that, oddly, acts as the film’s love scene.

This is the kind of movie where Entertainment Tonight provides exposition and, for all the chutzpah it exudes, the wild Oscar ceremony climax can only manage cameo appearances from two real celebrities playing themselves (in this, Robert Wuhl and Debbie Reynolds).

Yet, the finale at the Oscars has one of the film’s most bruising moments: after the fracas, Kemp’s sleazeball producer picks up the bloodied Oscar card, wipes it off and takes it home, an honest character choice.

Whereas Costner could have simply given his audience what they wanted, there are two big anti-mainstream choices here: this is a love story about two people who can’t be together, and a Whitney Houston vehicle that never lets Houston sing a song in its entirety. The former touch is an asset, while the latter is baffling (what were they thinking?).

FAST FACT: When Dolly Parton first heard Whitney Houston’s version of her song, “I Will Always Love You,” she had to pull her car over to hear it without distractions. “I was shot so full of adrenaline and energy, I had to pull off, because I was afraid that I would wreck.”

Released a year after the prior, sleazier Warner Brothers-distributed fallen secret service thriller “The Last Boy Scout,” Jackson’s film (despite vicious reviews) became a giant hit. Sporting the all-time bestselling movie soundtrack (as of this writing) and a far grimmer tone than most remember, “The Bodyguard” was viewed as more of a commercial than a creative success upon its release.

Looking at it today, there’s a bitter pessimism and melancholy quality to it and Costner and Houston connect with the tragic romance at the film’s dark core.

The post The Two Reasons ‘The Bodyguard’ Became a Sensation first appeared on Hollywood in Toto.

The post The Two Reasons ‘The Bodyguard’ Became a Sensation appeared first on Hollywood in Toto.

Here’s a list of great movies you may have missed over the years.

“American Honey” (2016) — To compare this movie to “Death of Salesman” is too high a praise, but in the future that’s exactly the kind of comparison people will make as it captures the downfall of the United States to near perfection.

“The Other” (1972) — How is this little gem of a horror movie not more appreciated? Identical twins are at the center of several unexplained deaths in a small farming community in the 1930s. If the concept sounds cliched it’s only because many have borrowed from this film since its release.

“Southern Comfort” (1981) — The film, a metaphor for the Vietnam War, is set in the rural South. We follow a platoon of National Guardsmen who get lost in the woods during a training mission and must fight for their lives.

“The Croupier” (1998) — Clive Owen’s breakthrough role is about a wannabe writer who goes looking for inspiration in a casino as a croupier. He finds himself in multiple love triangles and eventually breaks even with a great story to tell.

“Pixote” (1981) — Set in Brazil, the movie follows a band of local delinquents and the corrupt police that use and discard them at random. It feels like a documentary at times, but “Pixote” is a chilling reminder of what poverty can do to families and children.

“Antonia’s Line” (1995) — A beautiful and poetic movie about loss and love and the latter’s ultimate triumph over death.

“Strange Days” (1995) — How could a movie made 28 years ago so accurately predict the fallout from George Floyd’s murder in 2020? They say science-fiction is predictive of our future, but normally that’s about technological advances like Star Trek’s “communicators.” “Strange Days” offers a prescient insight into social upheaval.

“The Neon Demon” (2016) — This quirky horror movie takes place in Hollywood’s world of high fashion, but it’s the vibe “Demon” deploys that makes it exemplary. The notion that women can be killers, too, has been explored (maybe over-explored lately), but this was one of the first and still the best takes on that theme.

“Black Death” (2010) — Being distracted by Sean Bean in a movie about the plague by wondering when he’s going to die will have you miss this tasty little knight’s errand movie set in Medieval England.

“Brotherhood of the Wolf” (2001) — It’s martial arts meets horror with the sexy Monica Bellucci thrown in for good measure. The film recalls the real-life serial killings in rural France circa 1764, and the ensuing horrors prove as complex as they are engaging.

“Love” (2015) — Gaspar Noe’s film turned off many potential viewers with its graphic depictions of sex. If you catch the vapors that easily, “Love” isn’t for you. Those who can hang with the idea of what love looks like in your early 20s will discover a film full of wry humor and a sense of terrible sadness.

“Shame” (2011) — A haunting movie about a brother and sister who share a tragic past that’s never explained. We only see the aftermath like a horrible car crash that impacts their adult lives as these two avoid their past by drowning themselves in sensual escapes of one kind or another.

“84C MoPic“ (1989) — The best movie about the Vietnam War you’ve never seen.

“Tigers Are Not Afraid” (2017) — The Mexican drug war is leaving behind a trail of bodies, many of whom turn into ghosts. Those ghosts now haunt a band of street kids along with a magical tiger sent to keep them safe.

“Nymphomaniac” Vol. 1 and 2″ (2013) — Lars von Trier’s “Depression Cycle” isn’t for the faint of heart, but this two-part film has so many nuanced stories within stories it’s worth watching more than once.

“Lone Star” (1996) — The best Western you’ve never seen.

“A Walk on The Moon” (1999) — Diane Lane made two movies about infidelity in the 1990s. This drama is, by far, the better of the two. “Unfaithful” turns silly in the end while “Moon” stays true to the characters and the struggles of marriage that seem very relatable.

“First Reformed” (2017) — The film’s ending offers such an unexpected twist, and it perfectly balances the heaviness of the first hour. Love always finds a way.

“Zola” (2020) — This movie, based on a real Twitter exchange between two strippers on a road trip to Hollywood, feels “gonzo” in all the best ways. It has a humor you’ll appreciate and the story, maybe the tamest “Florida Man” story told, but still is very engaging.

The post 19 Criminally Underrated Movies first appeared on Hollywood in Toto.

The post 19 Criminally Underrated Movies appeared first on Hollywood in Toto.

Director Sylvester Stallone’s “Staying Alive” (1983) is not quite the debacle Reagan-era movie reviews would have you believe, though it does offer a whopping dollop of camp.

Until its third act, it’s a simple-minded but involving portrait of a creatively unsteady artist trying to establish himself as a force of nature beset by poor professional and personal decisions.

Perhaps I’m writing about Stallone during this era (maybe, or perhaps not) as much as protagonist Tony Manero, the lead played once again by John Travolta.

It opens … no, that’s not right. The film doesn’t “open.” It explodes, with the titles and ’80s headband/leg warmer-enhanced dancing flying at you.

A young but no less curmudgeonly Kurtwood Smith is observing an energetic Broadway audition, as Stallone is already in full MTV-fueled montage mode.

Manero now works at a low-rent disco club, serving the kind of young and dumb patrons he used to be. While Manero exudes on-again-off-again interest in Jackie, his enormously patient, long suffering quasi-girlfriend (well played by Cynthia Rhodes), Tony becomes obsessed with another dancer, the rich and awful Laura (Finola Hughes, very good at being an alluring, loathsome actress).

Tony, Laura and Jackie all wind up performing together in a state-of-the-art Broadway production called “Satan’s Alley,” which, hilariously and with total accuracy, is described as “a journey through hell.”

One of the most 80s intros of the 80s during the 80s. This is Staying Alive (1983), the sequel to Saturday Night Fever (1977). Starring John Travolta and written and directed by Sylvester Stallone. It’s the oldest film to receive a 0% rating on Rotten Tomatoes. pic.twitter.com/fMTTPF80DM

— The Sting (@TSting18) April 12, 2023

“Staying Alive” is kinetic and highly entertaining, exactly what a follow-up to the late-’70s/disco-centric original should be. The worst thing about it is its cinematic lineage, as Stallone’s approach, both as a storyteller and filmmaker, is a flashy counterpoint to John Badham’s observant, grittier take via “Saturday Night Fever.”

Stallone’s film can’t truly compete with Badham’s and doesn’t even try to.

If anything is watered down substantially, it’s the grit of the tougher-than-anyone-remembers “Saturday Night Fever” (1977). A reference to sex from a club patron is as edgy as this PG-rated movie gets.

However, considering how popular the PG-rated version of “Saturday Night Fever” was, there is something shrewd about making the follow up more accessible. How’s this for authenticity- alongside “Nighthawks,” this is the ugliest looking Stallone movie to ever be set in New York City, during the Ed Koch/garbage-in-the-streets era.

RELATED: HOW THE VILLAIN STOLE ‘NIGHTHAWKS’ FROM STALLONE

Travolta has never looked better on film and his performance presents a consistency – the character is still driven and talented but no smarter than he was in the previous decade.

Tony isn’t watered down – he’s the same bone-headed lunk he was in Brooklyn, though, in Stallone’s hand, he’s more Balboa than Manero. The movie lives for shots of Travolta turning around and staring right into the camera, as Stallone ogles his star.

Helping keep this grounded, with any sense of a moral dilemma, is Rhodes, cast as the long-suffering girlfriend. Between this and “Dirty Dancing,” Rhodes was the Meryl Streep of ’80s dance movies.

Stallone’s approach reflects the MTV aesthetic and storytelling that would maintain a firm grip on most mainstream movies throughout the decade. The actor-turned-director may not be respected for his work behind the camera, but if you watched this and “Rocky IV” (1985) back-to-back, you’d know it was the same director.

Is Stallone an auteur? It’s probably too early for the film critic community to give him that much credit, but the answer is technically yes.

Stallone’s storytelling abilities get muted, as this is as simple as it gets. Just listen to his dance lingo: “Lay back, Butler, extend!” “I thought I was going downstage- now its upstage!” Stallone’s dance acumen is questionable, as is his understanding of how a Broadway show runs.

Considering how dramatic the events are on opening night, you’d think Stallone was treating this as the ultimate climax and not the beginning of a long run of shows.

The montage of Tony getting turned down for a series of jobs is, no joke, awfully like a sequence that appeared a year later in “The Muppets Take Manhattan” (1984). The scene between Tony and his mother (Julie Bovasso in a welcome return to the role), where the film belatedly embraces its lineage as a sequel to “Saturday Night Fever,” is golden.

So is the big scene between Travolta and Rhodes, where Tony finally says exactly the right thing to her. The scene is Stallone at his best, though it’s not hard to see why it works – Stallone frames it just as he would a Rocky and Adrien scene.

Stallone also knows how to shoot and pace a montage in the editing room, which serves him well during the climax. The good news is that the third act of “Staying Alive” is unforgettable. The bad/actually even better news is that “Satan’s Alley” is hilarious.

Was Stallone thinking that, instead of “Cats”, why not just do Demons? A weird touch is how the movie isn’t about “Satan’s Alley” but essentially becomes it, as we’re knee deep in the dry ice/concert lighting/grunt n’ jump world of a gloriously bad Broadway musical.

The amount of laser lights, jumping and thrusting is astonishing, as is the Heavy Side Layer-like finale.

FAST FACT: “Staying Alive” couldn’t match the box office prowess of 1977’s “Saturday Night Fever” ($94 million) but still earned a respectable $64 million according to Box Office Mojo.

Stallone failed to make a film with a legacy like “Saturday Night Fever” and, instead, made a box office hit that most have sneered at both then and now. However, Stallone deserves credit for making a backstage theater rehearsal drama that didn’t just outdo Richard Attenborough’s stodgy “A Chorus Line: The Movie” (1985) in every way, but also predicted how bombastic and MTV-fueled future Broadway attractions would become.

This being 1983, a year into the seemingly eternal reign of Andrew Lloyd Webber’s “Cats,” Stallone’s film take place before Broadway got ridiculous, with the likes of “Starlight Express,” “Carrie- The Musical” and “Spider-Man: Turn Off the Dark” right around the corner.

If anything, Stallone’s insistence that the audience becomes a witness to “Satan’s Alley” seems downright prophetic. Today, the show would hardly seem outrageous, let alone commercially risky, alongside “The Book of Mormon.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

View this post on Instagram

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A post shared by The Book of Mormon (@bookofmormon)

Tony’s mother asks him to do a show where there’s “no nudity”: apparently, she has seen “Oh! Calcutta” and “Hair.”

The only thing more involving than the question of whether Tony will or will not lose his soul to a career (or “Satan’s Alley”) is who will win the battle of the “Staying Alive” soundtrack; for roughly 90-minutes, it’s a battle between the Bee Gees and Frank Stallone for soundtrack dominance (Frank Stallone’s “Far From Over” gives him the edge, as does appearing in a supporting role in his brother’s movie).

By the way, before “Satan’s Alley” begins, we hear someone backstage say, “Yo, Adrien, break a leg!”

Mr. Stallone, you are shameless.

The post Why ‘Staying Alive’ Isn’t the Clunker Rotten Tomatoes Claims first appeared on Hollywood in Toto.

The post Why ‘Staying Alive’ Isn’t the Clunker Rotten Tomatoes Claims appeared first on Hollywood in Toto.

Quick show of hands – who loves laughing at babies plunging from tall buildings?

Anyone?

The creators of “The Flash” sure do, and while it’s never in doubt the tykes will survive it shows the commitment the film has to nuclear-grade silliness.

It trumps all, especially storytelling and logic.

Ezra Miller’s solo DCEU project isn’t without laughs. Far from it. It’s still such a smorgasbord of juvenile antics it breezes by without leaving much behind.

Miller is back as Barry Allen, the super-speedster now awaiting his father’s trial for the death of his mother (Maribel Verdú). He’s innocent, Barry says, but he knows there’s not enough evidence to spare pappy (Ron Livingston) serious jail time.

Right away it’s clear “The Flash” isn’t sweating many story details, a harbinger of things to come.

Barry discovers he can go back in time by running at lightning speed, so he does just that to stop the events leading up to his mother’s death.

Naturally, as we’ve learned in “Spider-Man: No Way Home” and the recent “Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse,” tampering with time has … consequences.

Our hero doesn’t listen.

Suddenly he’s standing beside a younger version of himself (Miller, again) in a time loop where his mother never dies. Except that changes the course of history, leaving mankind unable to ward off a Kryptonian menace, General Nod (a disinterested Michael Shannon).

We definitely need another hero beyond the titular one, and if you’ve seen the trailers you know some of what’s coming next.

“The Flash” starts strong, albeit a baby gag that doesn’t know how quickly it wears thin. Director Andy Muschietti (“It”) delivers some eye-popping action, complete with familiar super faces.

The frothy tone is disorienting at first. Yes, we’ve seen Batfleck before, but he’s usually grim and uncompromising. Now, he’s cracking wise as if the SnyderVerse never happened.

(Just wait for the next DCEU tonal snap when James Gunn officially takes over)

Still, the movie is full-on entertaining, and Barry’s grief over losing his mother grounds some, not all, of the scenes.

The plot is straightforward, too, and we know the tidal wave of Easter eggs is but minutes away. Yet the return of Michael Keaton as Batman still disappoints. He’s introduced in a ludicrous fight scene, suggesting the older Bruce Wayne gave up crime-fighting decades ago. (the reason why is, yet again, absurd)

The next moment, he’s springing into action like it’s 1989. Is any of this gonna make sense?

Not really.

 

 

 

 

 

 

View this post on Instagram

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A post shared by The Flash (@dctheflash)

Other plot devices soak up too much screen time and make the logic gaps in the “Fast & Furious” saga look quaint by comparison.

We still have Miller, whose geeky hero is a welcome change from the usual fare. The actor, who uses they/them pronouns off screen and boasts a gargantuan rap sheet, proves curiously endearing no matter how much an individual “Flash” scene stumbles.

“The Flash” plays out like “Justice League Lite,” complete with the introduction of Supergirl (Sasha Calle). It’s hard to know if she’s either a terrible casting choice or Muschietti’s direction dooms any chance of Calle deserving future Super gigs.

The best superhero movies are as insanely long as “The Flash” (2 hours, 24 minutes) but manage to let characters breathe between the CGI madness.

And “The Flash” is all about CGI, often in ways that suggest the studio cut corners at the worst possible times. Much of the superhero action plays out like a video game, disconnecting audiences from the humans allegedly portraying various heroes.

It’s 2023. Middling FX should never take us out of a blockbuster experience. Unforgivable.

RELATED: SNYDER’S ‘JUSTICE LEAGUE’ WAS WORTH THE WAIT

We’re already exhausted by the multiverse gimmick, intended to bring back beloved characters/actors for a tall, sweaty glass of Member Berries. “No Way Home” made that gimmick matter, and it’s now clear how difficult that task remains.

“The Flash” is all about squandered potential.

Seeing the mighty Keaton resume a role that silenced all the naysayers 30+ years ago? Meh, let’s just pretend he’s 30-something and let CGI/stuntmen do most of the heavy lifting. Oh, and make him repeat some classic lines from the Tim Burton feature but without any of the gravitas.

Miller’s singular screen presence? The actor’s character is too busy striking Flash poses to get lost in the role.

The return of Shannon as Zod? A great screen villain reads his lines like a Trump voter is standing behind the camera.

You’ll laugh, early and often, at “The Flash.” Once the laughs subside you’ll realize just how inferior the film is to both the hype and previous super epics.

HiT or Miss: “The Flash” isn’t a dud, and it’s never dull. The super silly saga reminds us the genre’s better days remain behind us.

The post Super Silly ‘Flash’ Not Worth the Drama first appeared on Hollywood in Toto.

The post Super Silly ‘Flash’ Not Worth the Drama appeared first on Hollywood in Toto.

Conservatives have dramatically upped their game in the documentary space.

Thank both technological advances and the rise of talented, right-leaning filmmakers like Justin Folk (“What Is a Woman?“) and Eli Steele (“How Jack Became Black“)

“Civilization in the Danger Zone” offers a throwback experience. The film’s production design is straightforward and clean, and the talking heads prove sober in their analysis.

What’s missing? A greater sense of theatrical flourish and an ability to lure skeptical viewers to the film’s admittedly powerful point of view.

“Civilization” breaks down why so many Americans fear the country’s best days are behind it. Forces have aligned to disrupt societal pillars like faith and family, and our youth are taught to reject the country’s core strengths.

“On a tissue of ignorance and lies, we have come to think that the founding of America is an evil thing,” says Hillsdale President Larry P. Arrn, summing up much of the film’s critique of the modern school system.

An impressive array of talking heads, including Rod Dreher, Victor Davis Hanson, Powerline’s John Hinderaker, Heather MacDonald, Rich Lowry and more methodically share how the modern Left, without being aggressively name called, is loosening the bolts on the American superstructure.

This isn’t an overtly partisan affair, at least on the surface.

Those weaned on political podcasts won’t hear much name calling … or names in general, at least along the lines of Biden, Bush, Trump or other hot-button politicians. The themes are broader, with director Gloria Z. Greenfield interweaving them into the sweep of history.

The film also taps Jewish intellectuals to broaden its spiritual approach and give greater context to the problems embedded in modern America.

Thrilled to announce that Civilization in the Danger Zone is streaming on SalemNOW! Watch now and share! https://t.co/ZcBGPY8n1B pic.twitter.com/LYPjzy36v3

— Doc Emet Productions (@DocEmet) May 1, 2023

The film quickly assumes its visual format, darting from cogent interviews to the “Ken Burns Effect,” where still images come to life, gently, with a crush of zooms and pans.

It makes the experience akin to a power point presentation, one with dynamic information that still may make the viewer’s attention drift elsewhere.

The film’s villains are numerous, from schools that fail to teach students Judeo-Christian values to an entertainment industry beholden to China’s propaganda machine. That segment proves powerful, in part because conservatives rarely address it in the fashion it deserves.

RELATED: ‘WHEN THE MOB CAME’ BRINGS CANCEL CULTURE TO TOXIC LIFE

Clocking in at a little over an hour, “Civilization” is a bracing experience, a roll call of societal ills with no easy answers.

Pop culture may lead the way, at least if conservatives can mirror the Left’s ability to weaponize films and TV shows to debunk narratives corrupting the Body Politic. 

“Civilization in the Danger Zone” understands the necessity, and power, of pop culture but struggles to rally its resources to open otherwise shuttered minds.

HiT or Miss: “Civilization in the Danger Zone” offers a chilling explanation for the nation’s decline, but it may not coax the unconvinced of that fact.

The post ‘Civilization in the Danger Zone’ Offers Bleak Peek at America’s Future first appeared on Hollywood in Toto.

The post ‘Civilization in the Danger Zone’ Offers Bleak Peek at America’s Future appeared first on Hollywood in Toto.

“Flamin’ Hot” stretches the “based on a true story” line to the breaking point.

The story of a janitor turned marketing guru Richard Montañez got debunked by the L.A. Times two years ago with Frito Lay’s blessing. It’s still possible to savor much of Eva Longoria’s feature directorial debut which proves snappy, sincere and impossible to hate.

The film’s eagerness to tweak our emotions hits a critical point mid-film, though, and won’t give up until the end credits role.

Jesse Garcia stars as Richard, a good-natured soul battered by American racism and a disapproving Daddy (“Sons of Anarchy” alum Emilio Rivera). Richard flirts with hood life until he meets Judy (Annie Gonzales) and becomes a father.

That leaves little time for thuggery, so Richard finds work as a janitor with Frito-Lay’s Rancho Cucamonga plant.

He refuses to settle for that entry-level gig. He plots ways to creep up the corporate ladder, knowing his family demands more than what a janitor’s salary can afford. He befriends a talented mechanic (Dennis Haysbert, who oozes gravitas as well as any living actor) but is continually rebuffed by casually racist superiors.

Richard won’t give up, and when he tinkers with a signature Frito-Lay chip he stumbles onto a snack that could revolutionize the company.

Longoria keeps the tone light and comedic, using snappy musical cues and clever camera work to boost that spirit. It’s in sharp contrast to the forces aligned against Richard. He faces oppression in nearly every sequence, which sometimes proves as dubious as Richard’s Frito-Lay claims.

There’s little doubt Mexican immigrants from the era faced their fair share of bigotry, but it’s trotted out early and often here in a manipulative fashion. The same holds true for Richard’s long, slow professional ascent. We’re led to believe racism reared its head in every part of an immigrant’s life, but Richard’s story belies that reality.

The film also fails to grant Frito-Lay CEO Roger Enrico (Tony Shalhoub) the nuance the character demands. His soft spot for a fellow entrepreneur is touching, but the movie spends so much time shredding the capitalistic system that it’s odd to worship an industry titan like Enrico.

Shalhoub is a fine actor and handing him a more complicated role would have elevated the story beyond a straight-to-streaming vehicle.

 

 

 

 

 

 

View this post on Instagram

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A post shared by Hulu (@hulu)

“Flamin’ Hot” plays fast and loose with more than the core story in play. It showcases gang life as an adorable part of Mexican culture, a running gag that grows stale over the film’s otherwise efficient running time.

Longoria is one of Hollywood’s most outspoken progressives, and she confirms that status with an out-of-the-blue swipe at President Ronald Reagan’s economic record.

Really.

“I didn’t know politics affected people, especially hard-working people like us,” Richard says via one of many narrated moments. It’s like the progressive Longoria broke the fourth wall to remind us of her off-screen inclinations.

The irony is obvious.

“Flamin’ Hot,” whether marginally accurate or complete fiction, honors hard work and refutes the Left’s victimhood narrative.

Richard could have given up at any point in his journey. Others might have done just that. He knows that as a proud Mexican, and a father of two, he couldn’t take the easy way out. He had to keep hustling, and keep innovating, until his breakthrough moment arrived.

And it did, later than expected but full of rich, satisfying rewards. That’s the American dream many immigrants crave.

Another irony?

DeVon Franklin co-produced a film that takes lazy jabs at both faith and those who embrace it without much of a corrective arc. Rich and Judy pray at one point in the movie, but it’s played more for laughs than any spiritual balm.

Richard Montañez, creator of the Flamin’ Hot Cheeto and inspiration behind the new @FlaminHotMovie, talks about success for all Latinos in the business world and beyond. #LALIFF2023 pic.twitter.com/Y0REDy1kFY

— LALIFF (@LALIFF) June 1, 2023

It’s impossible not to cheer on Garcia’s performance, gritty and uplifting, but the screenplay is so nakedly devious it’s equally hard not to cry foul. Every step Richard takes is met by ignorance, bigotry or just de facto cruelty.

The movie clicks when it lets the characters and the gentle moments that capture their community lead the way.

There’s a more accurate story to be told here, one in which a corporate giant wakes up to the blossoming Latino market and starts speaking to them with their chips.

Even better?

The tale of a shrewd marketer who knew the public would eat up a fake but accurate story like so many Flamin’ Hot chips.

HiT or Miss: “Flamin’ Hot” serves up a spicy take on the American dream, albeit one which manipulates viewers at every turn.

The post ‘Flamin’ Hot’ – Burns with Humor, Heart and a Dubious Narrative first appeared on Hollywood in Toto.

The post ‘Flamin’ Hot’ – Burns with Humor, Heart and a Dubious Narrative appeared first on Hollywood in Toto.