The Colony

Jeff Renfroe, 2013

IMDB

2/5

We are now reaching an age where the dystopian film genre is saturated - and there are a handful of just plain shitty ones. The special effects are no longer an issue. They can be created on the cheap. It's the execution of a dystopian narrative. It has to be fresh. The Colony is in no way refreshing. The Colony feels like a film very envious of it's better neighboring films. It even struggles with identity. It's almost as if Renfroe struggled throughout the film on whether or not the villainous forces were cannibals or zombies. Mortal vs. immortal confusion. But both concepts are a lost cause. If he were to somehow make it a zombie film where a virus was released in an apocalyptic Ice Age - we would be sitting here talking about how far fetched and campy the film is. If they are clear cut cannibals, we would probably be talking about how it's a weak premise that never succeeds in its attempt to sustain quality storytelling. But the struggle with what the villains actually are not the only problem with this film. There are many problems. The Colony is misguided, not really using good actors like Fishburne and the late Paxton well. Not so great script here, not such great direction. If you really want to watch a better ominous forces in the snow film, just watch 30 Days of Night. At least there you know you are dealing with vampires and there is no confusion as to WHAT they are.

Deadpool

Tim Miller, 2016

IMDB

4/5

You can't really look at Ryan Reynolds filmography and see winner after winner. But to be fair, who can you really do that with? It's unlikely that any actor is going to bat 1000 in terms of always picking something that is going to be artistically fulfilling and please an audience. A respectable actor takes on risky roles, are willing to put themselves out there. Reynolds has proven that he is willing to do this when you consider his roles in The Nines, Buried and The Voices. Clearly he had better hopes for Green Lantern and he wouldn't be to blame for the film's flaws. You also can't blame him for his first portrayal as Deadpool in 2009's X-Men Origins: Wolverine. As director Gavin Hood explained in an interview with The Independent, the studios had too much control and mishandled the character.

Fortunately the studio heads didn't ruin this Deadpool. Which could have been so easy to do. They could have stripped away the R-Rating and made it PG-13 to put more bodies in theaters. That would have been an early kiss of death, as this movie just wouldn't work with much restriction. Instead Deadpool becomes the R-Rated superhero film that we didn't we know we needed. In a way it's very refreshing after enduring so many safeguarded Marvel universe films. Deadpool has some real grit and danger to it. It's also probably the most self-aware superhero film to be released. From the opening credits where it makes fun of the category's tropes to the latter points of the movie where it's still poking fun at other superhero films. It will be interesting to see if the trend continues of the studios providing superhero films for adult audiences and not just for mid-puberty teenagers borrowing $9 admission from their parents. People have accused Deadpool of being too topical, as if it's going to date itself. But I didn't have that reaction. It is certainly topical, but it feels like it will have a longer shelf life. Certainly more than an Eminem song. Go listen to one of those early tracks (with the Backstreet Boys and Mariah Carey references) and tell me they don't feel dated.

I Don't Feel At Home In This World Anymore

Macon Blair, 2017

IMDB

4/5

Anyone familiar with Jeremy Saulnier's films is going to recognize Macon Blair. Blair has had roles in every one of Saulnier's feature films from Murder Party to 2016's Green Room. The pairing is almost like a dark art-house variant of Scorcese and Dicaprio where Saulnier has clearly found someone he can remain confident in who shares similar sensibilities. All of Saulnier's films have dark elements to them and Blair is responsible for carrying a bulk of the weight of those very tones to the screen in Saulnier's movies. He is a very distinctive actor. More of an internal force, playing more reserved characters who have a certain level of unpredictability to them. With them having so many cinematic collaborations with each other of course one of the big questions going into this directorial debut of Blair's is going to be "does it feel like a Saulnier film in any way"? The answer is yes, but to avoid marginalizing this very good film we should just say it feels inspired by Saulnier in ways but also feels like it really has some identity on it's own.

You could describe this film as an adventure into the underbelly of society, if, say, you caught a junky stealing from you and you followed him home. But junkies don't live in modest homes. They live in condemned houses, or in the woods. So now imagine that you continued to follow this junky into the woods. Instead of getting too creeped out when you find a bum-camp in the woods you decide to get out of your car to further confront the person. Of course the depths that you could venture down with these types of people will continue to descend lower and lower. These are the types of people who lurk in the shadows. They come out at night. Ruth (Melanie Lynskey) is not this type of person. She is a 9-5er who is bound to a mundane daily routine.

Lynskey (who has a lot of indie credits under her belt now- Happy Christmas, Perks of Being a Wallflower, etc) is completely fitting and really nails the Ruth character. Ruth is a person that is having one of those totally identifiable bouts of misfortune. When you feel like the world is just shitting on you over and over again. She drowns her sorrows at home, and when she discovers the break-in the theft of her aunt's silver is the last straw. I Don't Feel at Home reveals itself to be the black comedy that it is when Elijah Wood's Tony character appears. Wood is so great in this movie and it's really refreshing to see him continuing to take on indie roles like this when he could just take a pass on everything and enjoy his Hobbit money.

A lot of elements of this film continue to stick with me days after viewing. Blair has veteran indie sense and clearly understands pacing and character development. I Don't Feel at Home is a movie I will be pushing on the people around me. I am actually eager to get another look at this one again soon. 

Hacksaw Ridge

Mel Gibson, 2016

IMDB

3/5

Mel Gibson probably doesn't get the credit that he really deserves from his work directing films. Most people probably praise him for his work directing Braveheart, which was really the closest thing that we had to Game of Thrones in the mid-1990's. Then there was the controversial Passion of the Christ, Gibson's violently honest offering to his Christian faith. But I will come out and say it was his next film Apocalypto that had me convinced that he is a solid filmmaker. Apocalypto still didn't get nearly the same amount of eyes on it as the previous two films did. Probably never will. It's not necesarilly a film intended to please the masses, being a quite brutal depiction of the Mayan civilization.

Hacksaw is another tribute to Gibson's Christian faith. It tells the true story of Desmond Doss (played by Andrew Garfield), a Seventh Day Adventist Army Medic who saved the lives of 75 soldiers in one night and was awarded the Medal of Honor without ever firing a shot. Doss, because of his devout faith, intended on going to war but never had any interest in even holding a rifle - considering it to be a killing machine and going against his principles. This didn't go over well early on, with much of the first act focusing on the adversity that Doss was up against. He refused to engage in basic rifle drills in basic training - causing tension amongst his peers and ultimately causing him to become court martialed. I personally had my doubts about Garfield in a leading role going into this film. That's not to say he isn't a good actor - he certainly is. For me his standout performance was as Eduardo in David Finscher's The Social Network. But after seeing what kind of actor the Doss character would require, I could see why Garfield was cast here. There is a softness for the Desmond character thats required for it to be authentic, Garfield is able to deliver that. I still have no intention of seeing the Spiderman reboots but Garfield was totally capable here.

There is a defining moment in his film, and it's in the second act when they enter the battlefield. Uncomfortable silence erupts into complete pandemonium in a way that I've never seen. Gibson is able to create a World War II battle sequence that not only looks original, but will probably go down as one of the best ever. Right up there with the D-Day sequence in Saving Private Ryan. It's done in a way that feels authentic and doesn't glamorize war. You get a sense of the desperation and shock on both sides. It's the first battle sequence that really punches the gas pedal. From that point on the film doesn't really change. It becomes more intense, more magnetic, more gripping. This movie should only continue to reinforce Gibson's ability to really direct a film. He's told very different stories at this point, it seems like there's no topic that he really can't manage.

Narcos (Season 1 & 2)

Carlo Bernard, Chris Brancato, Doug Miro, 2015-2016

IMDB

5/5

When I think about really detailed gritty crime dramas, I think of Jean-Francois Richet's Mesrine: Killer Instinct films. Split into two films, it's a biopic of "Public Enemy 1" Jacques Mesrine. Mesrine was a French gangster responsible for several bank robberies and kidnappings in France and Canada. He managed to elude the law and even escaped from prison. Jacques Mesrine and Pablo Escobar have a lot in common. They are both solitary figures both considered to be highly dangerous & sought after to their respective countries. They were both incredibly elusive and constantly in hiding. They both managed to escape from prison. They were both considered to be "Robin Hood" figures to the common people.

But Wagner Moura's Pablo Escobar will have more of a lasting impact on the cinematic landscape than Cassel's Mesrine. This is probably because through a television series, he's really able to cultivate the Pablo character and let it build rather than try to let it build through 4-6 hours of two movies. But the similarties between the two don't stop at the leading performances. They both have an elaborate backdrop. Mesrine in urban France. Narcos in urban Colombia. Through fly over shots of Colombia, tracking shots through the streets, it creates an detail rich world that pulls you in. As dangerous as the city may be there is still something that draws you back to it.

As each episode continues in Narcos, the stakes continue to elevate as does Escobar's wealth and influence. As his empire grows, his moral concessions do as well. Almost like Breaking Bad, he's a figure in slow deteriortion. Someone that has concrete morals at the beginning turns into a comprimised villain with blurred vision. Escobar is undoubtedly an interesting figure. Someone who has unimaginable wealth and power. Yet there is a hunger for more. More of what? Well, that's what the series is all about. Legacy, respect, family. These are all important things to Pablo. In a sense the money is just secondary. It really becomes a disposable thing. We are constantly seeing stacks and stacks of money thrown around like napkins through the series. Buried underground, thrown in bags, throwns in boxes. There's so much of it they don't even know what to do with it all.

I gave Mesrine 5 stars back when I reviewed the two films. I feel the same for Narcos. It's hard to find any noticeable flaws with this series. It's just so well filmed, so well acted, so well put together. Everything from the production design to the intricate sound design - it's all top notch. It's all just top notch. Call me a sucker for gritty crime dramas, I deserve it. Cutting my teeth with Scorcese's great body of work has set a certain standard. Narcos meets and exceeds these standards.

Season 2 manages to keep raising the stakes, the only difference being that we finally get to see some pieces of Escobar's empire finally breaking down. But the mystique around him builds. There are times that, even if you are aware of the historical facts, it feels like he's never going to be caught. One of the constant thoughts I have while watching Narcos is what if Pablo had never run for that political office early on? By doing that he put the spotlight on him, a spotlight that never went away. It seems possible that if continued to lurk in the shadows of Colombian society rather than trying to become such a mainstream figure that he could have gone on growing his empire and wouldn't have to spend his life on the run.

A Scout's Guide to the Zombie Apocalypse

Christopher Landon, 2015

IMDB

3/5

The zombie comedy / zomedy genre is a growing one and thats a good thing. If it weren't for these variations on the genre we would just have a stale template with slightly different tones in six new cinematic installments every year. Edgar Wright's 2004 Shaun of the Dead could easily be regarded as the harbinger of this new generation of zomedy films and is the reigning jewel. Romero's decades of contributions certainly had comedic elements in it, but they were all still rooted in serious tone where people feared what was going on around them. One of the distinctive attributes with the Zomedy genre is the oblivious nature to it. The people aren't distracted by the collapse of civilization. There's more of a silly video game fun-ness involved.

Scouts Guide is more like Zombieland than some of the other Zomedies in it's sandbox model and conspicuous stylism. But it's much sloppier than Zombieland. In fact, it's quite the mess. But there is one thing that saves Scout's Guide from pure spoil. It's the unique scenarios that it creates. These scenarios excuse the movie to a certain degree. Cat zombies, Zombies on trampolines, stripper zombies, zombie Britney Spears fan. Absolutely ridiculous, yes. But absolutely entertaining and undeniably funny. If someone can sit there and watch a zombie mumbling Britney Spears lyrics and not at least chuckle, I'm not sure what will make them laugh. These scenarios make you laugh and make you laugh a little again the next day just thinking about them. You will want your friends to see them too so you can laugh together. Scout's Guide isn't breaking any ground by any means but it's a junk-food Zomedy delight.

Hell or High Water

David Mackenzie, 2016

IMDB

4/5

There was the period in time in the first half of the 20th century where the Western genre dominated movie screens. Many viewers could vicariously live the life of a Ranger; preserving justice and maintaining order the small dust-ridden towns. In 2016, we look back on the genre with nostalgia but that plot model is certainly passe. Those are generations gone. The prosperity isn't so obvious. The future doesn't show as much promise. The modern day America is built for a different type of Western that meet the screen.

Hell or High Water is a Southern Gothic / Neo-Western set in West Texas that is constantly looking back. Ranger Marcus Hamilton (Jeff Bridges) is looking back on his long career that is about to end, much to his dismay. His partner Alberto (Gil Birmingham) is the future; but even he is looks to the past. He looks around the town filled with run down strip malls and recognizes it as a place his family owned before it was taken from them. The town doesn't stop with the run down strip malls. The sidewalks are empty, there's an obvious sense of desperation. 

In the middle of the forlorn town are brothers Tanner (Ben Foster) and Toby (Chris Pine) who have decided to rob banks to come up with the money to save their family ranch from foreclosure. Very ironic; stealing the money and giving it back to the very people who you took it from - just in a different setting altogether. This is a concept that comes up a few times in the film, with some peripheral characters understanding and even supporting the brothers' actions. There's not much certainty in High Water though. You never feel certain that you are witnessing what will be a successful bank robbery. The brothers are impulsive and not always on the same page. But watching them is tense and riveting. Watching Marcus' skillful but relaxed pursuit is compelling in its own right, watching a tired expert just work on instinct. Not surprising at all if Jeff Bridges gets an Oscar nod for his performance here. Somehow he is able to bring an original and fresh character to the screen this late in his career. While actors like Pacino are bringing caricatures, Bridges is still bringing new characters. High Water is a slow burn that exudes something solid and impactful. Solid filmmaking, solid writing, solid performances. It offers characters are not black and white by any means, and instead are all intricate in their own ways. 

The Invitation

Karyn Kusama, 2016

IMDB

2/5

Do you know that feeling when you go to a restaurant and you are totally hungry and eager for some food. You sit down and order your food, only to wait another 1 hour and 20 minutes to actually be served? Well, in a sense that's what this film is like. The table is set early, as a group of friends gather for a dinner party. They haven't seen each other in 2 years. You slowly are served little tiny pieces of backstory. There was a divorce between main character Will (Logan Marshall-Green) and Eden (Tammy Blanchard). You soon find out why, and its important to hold back details here because it's an easy film to spoil. But she has changed to say the least. Will doesn't like this change. Because she appears to be numb, to be drugged up somehow or in some kind of trance. So after the figurative table is set, you are now waiting to see why they are there at this party. And you wait, and then there is some more waiting, and then you wait some more. Finally there is a payoff in this film, but it just comes too late. There is clearly not enough story here to create an elaborate film. There's the Hitchcockian method of skillfully building tension and then releasing it masterfully. Then there's this more elementary method of relying too much on that very tension and then not offering up enough when it is released. When the big revelation comes toward the end, there's not a whole lot of shock. Then the film just becomes gratuitous. Frustrating. None of the characters other than Will are really believable characters. Nobody you would encounter in real life. In any real life situation everyone would have walked out and left after they were forced to watch the awkward cult video. Perhaps its the weak script. Perhaps its the inconsistent casting choices. Marshall Green and Michiel Huisman offer good performances but the rest of the cast is just kind of blah. I think the script and inferior direction is to blame here. But there is one redeeming factor in this film.  There is a detail in the end of the film that is quite clever. Clever enough that you could say that this is one of the rare Bad Movies with Good Endings. 

Byzantium

Neil Jordan, 2013

IMDB

3/5

Next to the zombie genre, the next sub-genre of horror movies could certainly be vampire movies. Although lacking in offerings over the last five or so years (Twilight fatigue perhaps?), its a category sure to continue contributing to the world of film. I will start right off the bat by saying I believe the best vampire film of all time is Let the Right One In, and I don't even have to think about it. There are things done in that film that I still think about from time to time, and it has one of the best movie endings ever made. It is a horror film full of confidence, not afraid to break the vampire conventions. It's unique, bold, darkly beautiful. It examines eternal life fully, negative aspects and all. Something that Interview with a Vampire wasn't able to fully do. But Byzantium is actually more like Let the Right One In in the sense that it gives a more broad examination as well, while also breaking some of the stale vampire conventions that dull the genre.

You could argue that its a character study; mostly focusing on Eleanor's (Saoirse Ronan) struggles. She never had a choice when it came to becoming what she is. Spared by death but cursed by eternal life, she is lonely in her perpetual existence. Eager to share her story with anyone interested in hearing it, not able to keep it bottled inside of her, most people aren't able to comprehend. And of course when she meets an elderly man who is able to understand what she is, he looks at it as more of a swift exit for him and an offering for her. Byzantium has a stylistic aesthetic that is also similar to Jim Jarmusch's 2013 film Only Lovers Left Alive in the sense that it follows two floating bloodsuckers through a decaying modern landscape. But Byzantium manages to make the story more compelling. While Lovers is more of a draining (no pun intended) bought of depression that you are forced to endure for 2 hours, Eleanor's struggles are more compelling and the backstory is ripe with intrigue.

One of the best parts of Byzantium is it doesn't struggle to offer you a complete story. It literally gives you a modern day storyline with flashbacks going back to 200 years prior, and still manages to wrap things up with a good sense of closure and a satisfying ending while maintaining balance. And that is by definition a good movie.

Vikings (Seasons 1-4)

Michael Hirst, 2013-2016

IMDB

4/5

Vikings is probably what Kurt Sutter wished The Bastard Executioner could be. Being quite obvious that Sutter wanted to make his version of Game of Thrones, Vikings has the period aesthetic of Thrones while also managing to possess the volatile relationships and sometimes calculated deception of Sutter's owns Sons of Anarchy series. Vikings own set of characters often generates memories of the Sons characters, most notably the similarities between Ragnar and Jax Teller. I'm certainly not the only one who sees this. But Sutter is not involved with Vikings at all. Who knows if he is even aware of it. In 2016 Game of Thrones continues to get all of the love when it comes to the Fantasy Drama genre, but hopefully Vikings will continue to build an audience because it's pretty great.

Vikings creates an immersive world, at the center of it is the anti-hero Ragnar Lothbrook. Ragnar has big ambitions, an urge to explore the world around him and make his mark in the pages of history. It's this very hunger that made the Vikings important people. Their ability to travel and and make broad impacts on what was considered a small world at the time. They were able to make that world bigger.

Vikings is the first scripted series created by The History Channel, and hopefully it inspires them to continue to create original scripted content rather then mediocre scripted cheap reality shows (*cough* Pawn Stars). And while Vikings is certainly unique and original on it's own, it's probably always going to be compared to Game of Thrones on some level because they exist at the same time. To be fair, there are certainly similarities between the two. Gratuitous violence. Seemingly endless battle. Sudden twists. Successes and failures. Deception. But where Vikings takes a turn is it's focus on the duality of Paganistic religious faith and the spread of Christianity. The evolution of military technology. Of course the biggest difference is Vikings is rooted in some real historical context and Thrones is pure fiction.

Killer Joe

William Friedkin, 2012

IMDB

3/5

Two years before Matthew McConaughey wowed audiences with his Rust Cohle character in HBO's True Detective, he got some reps playing the morally obscure man of law enforcement in title character Killer Joe. Joe is a Dallas police officer who moonlights as a hit-man.

Chris Smith (Emile Hirsch) is in debt to some shady characters and he has reached the end of his rope with time to pay them back. He hires Joe to kill his mother to collect a $50,000 life insurance policy which would be split among himself, his father, and his sister after paying Joe off.

Killer Joe is a film filled with despicable figures. There is really only one redeeming person, that being sister Dottie (Juno Temple). Dottie is sort of written off by her other family members because she is of inferior intellect so she therefore gets some special treatment. But Dottie is surrounded by chaos. Their father (Hayden Church) is a heavy drinker / low-life. Brother Chris is just an untrustworthy dirtbag. Their mother is virtually out of the picture. Joe comes into the situation and it's interesting because while is slightly above them in terms of the social hierarchy, he is not too far above them in the sense that he gravitates to Dottie for companionship. You get a sense that Joe, while he may be a capable hitman, really doesn't have much going on in his own personal life.

It all ends up being a tornado of malevolent deception, with Dottie unfortunately too close to it all. It's an enticing story not because you are so concerned with the characters well-being but you just want to see how it all plays out. It's pretty clear early on that it's not going to work out well for everyone involved in the whole assassination scheme. One of the things I had heard prior to seeing this film was "you'll never look at fried chicken the same again". I had to bring that up, because they were so right. You won't.

Green Room

Jeremy Saulnier, 2016

IMDB

3/5

Jeremy Saulnier certainly creates an environment that viewers would not have any interest spending time in in real life. A rural white supremacist rock club where blaring punk rock is played to crowds of aggressive skinheads. But that’s one of the best things about cinema; that it can transport you to places you would otherwise never visit. And he transports you in the company of a group of young punk kids that are struggling to make ends meat, living out of their van. Scraping by, taking any gig willing to pay a meager wage. They find themselves driving into the backwoods of Oregon to take an ambiguous gig given to them by a shady promoter. After their set one of the bandmates forgets a cell phone in the green room. Upon opening the door to the green room, Pat (Anton Yelchin) quickly discovers there is a woman’s dead body on the floor. Realizing that a murder has just taken place, he panics and attempts to call for help. They are soon trapped inside this claustrophobic green room, as the club owner and his aides attempt to cover up the whole situation.

Saulnier carefully plays with stylism and tension in this limited storytelling thriller. Basically the entire film takes place in this rock club, which is a glorified industrial corrugated metal shed in Bigfoot country. Saulnier is committed to his environment his builds; the Neo-Nazi imagery is strewn across every nook and cranny in the building. Stickers, graffiti, Sharpie doodles. The tension sets in from the second they get out of their rinky dink van and are quickly escorted inside the building. What follows is a violent display of a group of rather innocent punk kids trying to escape the worst gig of their short-lived music career. Outside the building, club owner Darcy (Patrick Stewart playing one of the most unexpected roles of his career) attempts to delicately clean up the situation rather than kicking the doors down and massacring them. But you realize that Darcy is totally capable of this. The fact that he doesn’t do this almost makes him more frightening.

The movie ends and you will be happy to leave this horrible universe you spend 95 minutes in. But Saulnier creates some unforgettable images, very much like he did in his last film Blue Ruin. He finds new ways to shed blood. People will probably remember this film as being one of Anton Yelchin’s last projects, as he tragically died in 2016 after the film was released. He was good in this film, although he was guilty of doing something Stewart also did a little too much of, whispering. I don’t know if it was the audio track or just the hardware I was viewing the film on. At times it was so difficult to hear the dialogue. Yelchin was often mumbling to the others. Patrick Stewart spent a lot of time whispering orders to his cohorts, and it was also very difficult to make out what he was saying when he was on the other side of the metal green room door. But the technical complaints aside, this is a film that should be seen. And surprisingly, even with such disturbing imagery, it’s a film that I will want to rewatch sometime soon.

Cold in July

Jim Mickle, 2014

IMDB

3/5

Any fan of Dexter probably believes that Michael C. Hall has paid his dues enough to give his future work a shot. Even those (I among one of them) who gave up in the final season on the mostly great series. That wasn’t his fault. Dexter showed he is a guy who has range, constantly having to shift from the unassuming blue collar guy to the struggling-to-keep-restrained serial killer. And although in tone Cold in July is a dark film, it’s quite a departure from his work on Dexter. His character Dane is an everyman character, mullet and all, living in Texas as a picture framer working out of a mom and pop storefront. Awoken in the middle of the night by an intruder in his home, he impulsively takes action to protect his family and finds that his life is immediately turned upside down. What transpires is an attempt to return his life to it’s normalcy, but he soon finds that the disruption in the routine has shaken things up to a point that he can’t help but venture into the depths of the mystery surrounding that intruder.

This pursuit leads him to the company of two men, Russel (Sam Shepard) and Jim-Bob (Don Johnson), men who are living the complete opposite life as himself but men that he can’t seem to distance himself from. And while there are moments where your eyebrow is raised, wondering why Dane doesn’t just move on with his life and let sleeping dogs lie - it sort of makes sense. It sort of makes sense that he is hungry for some disruption from the routine. And also a sense of closure on everything. Cold in July is an ultimately satisfying film, not without it’s flaws. You are introduced to Russel quite abruptly without much explanation, you really have to do the quick work yourself to realize who he is. But the movie is well shot, sounds good (especially with the period-fitting synthwave soundtrack). And the chemistry between the three men are enough to fuel your engagement. When does Sam Shepard NOT deliver?

The Hunger Games: Catching Fire

Francis Lawrence, 2013

IMDB

4/5

I have to start this review with a bit of an apology. After seeing the first Hunger Games film, a lot of memories of the 2000 Japanese bloodbath thriller Battle Royale surfaced. It felt so similar. I went on to do a little research, discovering that The Hunger Games books actually stirred a bit of controversy because of the similarities to the Royale films. Some argued that because of the Royale films being released before the books, that author Suzanne Collins must have lifted the premise. I was one of the people who felt that Collins had ripped off Kinji Fukasaku’s idea. The whole kids getting put on island forced to fight it out to the death couldn’t have been conceived by both purely on coincidence. But the second installment of the Hunger Games comes into it’s own. It builds off the first film, and takes on a different form that sets itself apart. The detailed dystopian landscape, as unforgiving and tragic as it is, is alluring. The film does what so many of the great dystopian films (Children of Men, The Road, The Matrix) do so well. It creates a dreadful end-of-days scenario where the state of humankind is haunting. Through fascist political overreach and highly evolved technology, we see what humans are capable of doing to each other in such horrid circumstances. You continue to stay invested in Jennifer Lawrence’s Katniss Everdeen character as she tries to find independence / solitude from the Snow regime. But because her character has become an iconic figure, it becomes evident that she is forever changed and unable to escape the public spotlight. A symbol of hope for the poverty-stricken people but a symbol of rebellion to the leadership. Francis Lawrence does a good job of making you completely despise the Snow regime and really get behind the plight of Katniss. From the detailed visual effects to the sound design, Catching Fire feels very much like a Battle Royale meets Snowpiercer meets novel Ready Player One by Ernest Cline (soon to be adapted to film by Steven Spielberg). I am glad I gave the second one a go. I plan on continuing on. Catching Fire certainly leaves you hanging, eager to see what happens next.

Sicario

Denis Villeneuve, 2015

IMDB

3/5

A common theme in Canadian-director Villeneuve's films is uncertainty. Particularly uncertainty about a person, if that person is the person that you think they are. It's certainly a theme in Sicario, Villeneuve's seventh feature film. When it comes to the Mexican cartels, finding someone you can actually trust is a rarity. With the Mexican State Police on the Cartel's payroll, the CIA working covertly underneath the nose of many other government agencies, the list of people you really know is very short. So it isn't unusual for Kate Macer (Emily Blunt) to be suspicious of why she is thrown into the middle of the fray. She is told by her higher ups that she will be helping them "shake things up" and "make noise". She is told that it's a thing that they do to force Cartel members to act impulsively and make mistakes. Kate is definitely the moral force at work in the film, never really comfortable with the circumstances she is put in and the decisions that she is forced to make. Blunt is a proven acting force at this point and holds her own alongside Benicio del Toro and Josh Brolin. 

What transpires is skillful filmmaking in line with good storytelling blended with skilled acting, which one comes to expect from Villeneuve at this point. He has yet to make a disappointing picture. While none of this films are as impactful as the very much under-rated Incendies, you see constant improvements in his craft. At times Sicario is reminiscent of the night vision sequences of Zero Dark Thirty. Certainly up there with some of the intensity fueling everything. The story certainly doesn't hide it's comparisons to the Mexican Cartel and the U.S. Government, and whether or not they are actually that different from each other. One interesting consideration is how you notice the Cartel members are family men, or at least have people to go home to. The American characters are more career-focused, married to their jobs.

Sicario certainly blends elements from films like the aforementioned Zero Dark and even some of the southern border bloodshed of Breaking Bad. But it feels like a movie that might be too stable, too uniform. His other work leaves you with images and story-threads that you will never shake. Sicario feels like a solidly made film that won't leave you with the same memories.

On the Job

Erik Matti, 2013

IMDB

4/5

On the Job is a very well made Filipino crime thriller. It's a film that forces you follow two perspectives. On one hand you are following a mentor/protege dynamic involving a veteran assassin trying to teach a young guy the ropes. On the other hand you are following a career-focused clean cop that is trying to do what's right, despite the questionable ties to crime that his in-laws have. But fortunately it's not a simplistic good guys / bad guys film. Both sides are nuanced. It's a fruitful film that leaves you with quite a bit to remember. The production skills are evident within the first twenty minutes. One early big treat is an impressive long take. Daniel (Gerald Anderson) returns from his "outside work" to the grimy prison. The camera pans, capturing all of the various characters inside the prison. Recreational activities, laundry-doing in an outside nook. The attention to detail doesn't stop at the decorated jail. Your eyes will be fixed as the camera moves through the shanty villages of the Philippines. When you enter the claustrophobic abode of partner assassin Mario (Joel Torre), there are images of the tiny little home that are sure to be ingrained in your mind for some time. Makes you kind of wish you could spend more time just exploring the dirty, yet intriguing home.

On the Job is really a blend of a crime thriller with a prison drama. The exterior crime elements certainly take away from the sense of confinement and isolation of pure prison dramas. In a sense it's like a blend of Corsican prison film A Prophet and the Vincent Cassel-led Mesrine films. Everything is executed really well. You spend the duration of the film caught up in both sides of a captivating narrative, all set in a system full of corruption.

Frankenstein's Army

Richard Raaphorst, 2013

IMDB

3/5

On paper, it’s a film that probably won’t pull a lot of people in. A group of Russian soldiers push into German territory during World War II, only to stumble upon a building filled with undead monsters. It feels like a tired premise, and Nazi zombies have certainly been touched on before with Tommy Wirkola’s 2009 indie-horror Dead Snow. Some of the early moments of the film feel blaringly under-funded, fighting sequences that are lacking in numbers. You need to move past that. You need to move past the idea of Russian and German troops speaking to each other in English. You need to get past the ridiculousness of a World War II-era found footage film. Because if you can past all of this, the building awaits. This building, is filled with some of the most horrifying, provocative creations ever built in the horror genre. Oh you know, things like reanimated soldiers with sawblades for arms. Army certainly has some hints of fellow brutal indie-horror The Human Centipede. Dr. Frankenstein’s creations that he unleashed upon the outsiders are a showcase of great makeup work and artistic ability. A small treasure of a film that’s just begging to be put on during the Halloween season, it’s a movie that knows what it is and is certainly comfortable enough attaining cult status rather than classic status. If you’re a fan of the genre it’s possible to buy into spending a bit of time in an undead carnage-factory led by an insane genius with a magic switch.

Wyrmwood: Road of the Dead

Kiah Roache-Turner, 2015

IMDB

3/5

Any fan of zombie cinema probably has some degree of fatigue at this point. Oh, another movie about a zombie outbreak where everyone has to fight them off to survive. And it's turned into an inescapable theme. They are everywhere. Zombies have crept out of the cult-category and are now ubiquitous. They aren't underground, they are in the mainstream. The Walking Dead is the highest rated series on cable. World War Z brought Max Brooks zombie novel out of the literary world and into big budget Hollywood. So this means there are books, television series, small budget films, big budget films. Half of the Halloween outfits you see this year will probably be zombie related.

So at this point, for the most part, we aren't likely to see anything revolutionary or groundbreaking in the genre. With an over-saturation present, filmmakers should be more focused on aiming to create something that has some stylistic integrity, something individually artistic.

Wyrmwood, the most pirated Australian film in recent history, does just this. It's a self-aware zombie film with a rather simple premise. A rapidly spreading virus has hit the Outback infecting basically everyone that comes into contact with it unless they have a specific blood-type. Nothing new, right? But it's the execution of this basic premise that makes Wyrmwood a rather engaging zombie film. 

Equipped with a terrific makeup and special effects team, Wyrmwood is able to create a 90 minute zombie picture that doesn't get slowed down with unnecessary character development. It's intention is not to create depth but more sudden shifts and frantic pacing. The disease itself is relentless and unforgiving, spreading to friends and family with unhampered force. Unlikely friendships are forged quickly because the only choice you have is to team up with any living soul in close proximity to you. Not really much time to build trust by feeling someone out. It's another zombie film where life has become cheap very quickly, and the key to survival is not hesitating and being as resourceful as you can in whatever situation you find yourself in. 

Mad Max: Fury Road

George Miller, 2015

IMDB

4/5

In this era of too many reboots, forced franchises and unnecessary sequels, Mad Max seems to come out of nowhere and surprise everyone by outdoing itself and it's predecessors. Fury Road takes the franchise out of cult status and gives it a fresh aesthetic while also preserving what made the original films appealing.

Tom Hardy is a good fit for the role of Max; the guy that you are supposed to learn a lot when given little about him. What you do know is he is a man haunted by his past, the lost souls that he wasn't able to save. Now the world that he wanders through is a dystopian wasteland, where the world is run by various warlord-led factions. In the early moments of the film the pacing is set and it doesn't slow down much for the duration. Someone who doesn't typically enjoy the action genre can still get something out of Fury Road, especially stylistically. There is so much visual invention going on, so much attention to detail. It seems to be a movie that probably took a lot of effort to film in the desert, from a logistical perspective but also from a pure engineering perspective. There is a wide array of vehicles assembled by the war dogs in the film. A good portion of the story is the variety of these war-mobiles in pure battle with each other whether it's to protect territory, gather resources, or retain what one feels is rightfully "theirs". It's interesting to think of how many mechanics must have been on set to help with any operational quirks that must have occurred here and there. Fury Road seems like a really good candidate for the dvd / blu-ray extra features of the behind the scenes footage and directors commentary. The grand scale of the films stunts / choreography seems almost unfathomable. While all of this chaos was in front of the cameras, there must have been boom lifts, helicopters and drones shooting frantically.

Miller's world is really a hot rod hellscape. At times it almost feels like a Steampunked Sin City. Filled with deranged and death-inducing drag racing. It's an unforgiving universe that nobody would really want to spend any time in other than in a voyeur role. In fact, one could argue that it's one of the dilemmas with the story. The sense of pointlessness to it. The fact that in this world there aren't really any "good guys". The Mad Max world shows us that our race has failed. Yet, at least for the sake of the Mad Max narrative, there is a level of human resilience. Many of the remaining inhabitants live to serve a leader, live with some kind of religious ideology. The warlords manage to keep a grip on their populations, usually by limited their resources like food or water. But there are still babies being born in this horrifying society. And they won't ever know what the world was like before everything was destroyed.

Complimenting the attention to visual detail, there is a real impressive use of sound. A great synergy of music to action, whether it's transitioning from a death to an ambient heartbeat in the song to the heavy metal guitarist that is riding on a flat bed with dozens of amplifiers raging behind him. Fury Road is chaotic yet managed. Energetic but not to the point of pure lunacy. It's a style over substance movie that manages to go so heavy on style that the imagery will take root in your mind for some time after. Out of all of the 2015 films, it's one that basically lives up to the hype. Now let's just hope that this doesn't start some trend of motor-heads souping up their Dodge Rams and putting all sorts of unnecessary equipment on the exterior to look like some kind of badass. Who knows, maybe Fury Road will inspire countries at war to have their own heavy metal guitarist standing on top of a tank or something to get the soldiers amped up. 

Snow On Tha Bluff

Damon Russell, 2011

IMDB

3/5

One of the first thoughts that you will likely have when watching Snow and being introduced to the Curtis Snow character is “this reminds me of The Wire”. You aren’t alone. Even The Wire’s Omar Little himself, Michael Kenneth White, discovered the film and felt so connected to it that he hopped on in an executive producer role.

In a sense it’s a more raw film than the Wire. Perhaps it’s because The Wire had so much structure, with significant character build-up over the course of its five season run. Snow is completely absent of structure, a quality of the found footage genre but also because the movie is built around the premise of a drug dealer stealing a handheld camera from a group of college kids and filming his life. Because of that foundation, the movie has such a realness to it, an honesty to it. Curtis is not really a good guy in any sense. It’s very difficult to extract any real redeeming qualities from him. He’s a absent father, showing up to be a spotty father when he feels fit. When he is forced to spend time with his child, he exposes the toddler to all sorts of drugs, alcohol and firearms that no child should be in close proximity of. Actually, while we are on that, that’s probably the most disturbing element in the entire film. He also takes pride in the street violence that he was a part of. He talks about fallen friends that died in the streets as though they were soldiers that died fighting honorably. To him a short life expectancy is just a given where he comes from. He is vengeful, using guns / force as a first resort. He demonstrates leadership qualities which is why he is able to surround himself with some thugs. Probably because when he does succeed in ripping off a group of dealers, he does share the rewards. It’s another film with a rather despicable central figure that still somehow pulls you in.
The rawness and lack of structure is one of the best attributes because it is able to create a 90 minute docudrama that feels unique stylistically. But it’s also what separates it from pure quality street-crime pictures like the Mesrine films or City of God.