Maggie Moore(s) (2023)

It's probably obvious from the frequency of my blog entries that I didn't have time, and honestly neither much mood for movies lately. I'm considering to compensate a bit more during this summer time, but we'll see... For now I stopped at "Maggie Moore(s)", which I also mentioned in the previews entry a couple of months ago, a title that afterwards received some mediocre ratings on various sites, but which I still decided to watch. And I liked it. Therefore, the current subject.

Probably the best fit for mapping this movie to a genre would be dark comedy, drawing apparently some inspiration from some creepy true events. In the suburbs of some town, some Mr. Moore doesn't get along well with Ms. Maggie Moore, his wife, and Mr. Moore also has some shady relation with an expired foods supplier for his franchise restaurant. When Ms. Moore finds out and threatens to call the police, Mr. Moore decides to hire a local thug to scare her. Unfortunately the scare goes a bit too far and Mr. Moore loses his wife. Through some unfortunate coincidence, Mr. Moore finds out about some other Maggie Moore living in the same area, and an idea pops up... What if, for building a solid alibi as a grieving husband, to hire again the same "assassin" to execute the same scare job on the second Ms. Moore, which would make the first "accident" to really look like an accident with a wrong address. To add more to this plot, the second Ms. Moore proves to be a likely target for some other people, which results in the most complicated case the local police chief ever encountered. Top that with a side romance + a comic relief offered by the bad jokes thrown in by the deputy.

The movie clearly doesn't fit the trend of the last years, and is more likely close to a TV production or to an episode from some crime mystery series. Overall though has some particular charm of a calm story but not a boring one, funny but not childish, "spicy" but not exaggerated. It's a perfectly fine movie if you're looking for one hour and a half of chill time, but still active for your brain, because the script is dense enough and well written. It probably becomes dull for the expectations of the mainstream critics who I guess got used during latest years either with the action box office standard not delivering much substance, or with the range of Scorsese, Paul Thomas Anderson and others. Something in between... bit more hard to get accepted. For me it seems way too underrated. But, watch it and then judge it... Maybe I'm just tired :)

Rating: 4 out of 5

Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves (2023)

I know that I'm relatively behind the release date of what seems like a first iteration of a novel "Dungeons and Dragons" series, but 1) I didn't have much time for movies lately and 2) I didn't really trust the subject. So it took a while to decide watching this. But probably both 1 as well as 2 had a subjective contribution to my final impression = it was clearly beyond my expectations.

To clarify a bit point 2 above, I'm not a complete stranger from the D & D universe. Sometime, like 15-20 years ago (when my amounts of free time were different) I had some contact with the video games niche placed in the same fantasy setting, which originate from board games started long long ago. The contact was enough to realize that the bunch of repetitive quests like talking to character X who can be found in tavern Y for finding the object Z from location Q were usually mingled in a gordian knot, making hard to believe that this kind of stuff can be easily adapted for a screen story. But it seems it can. If there's something to appreciate most about this movie it's the screenplay. In a fantasy universe that's pretty common with what we know already = people, dwarfs, druids, good wizards, bad wizards, dragons, etc, somehow we can find a story that's not told so many times to bore you. For the connoisseurs it keeps the D & D feeling using a series of nuances like: the ensemble of different characters typical to a game - "the party" - where each has specific abilities, the NPCs = non-playable characters who you can add temporarily to a party but at some moment they go on with their lives, the classic quests mentioned above, and others. For who's not familiar with the D & D lore, these nuances are difficult to observe but don't bother either because the movie adds anyway an excellent dose of humor set in such manner to mock all aspects that would bore even an experienced gamer = why a spell meant to interogate zombies must really force you to ask 5 questions when you need only 2, why do you need a path more convoluted then everything you've seen in a Indiana Jones movie to cross a trapped bridge, and again many others.

I didn't really say much about the subject, right? That's because the subject is typical to D & D, meaning exactly what I was mentioning above - we have the heroes of the story trapped in untangling some tangled threads of what proves to be a diabolical plot of a necromancer to corrupt the living world via an evil witch, who raises to power with the help of a crook that manages to usurp the throne of... Whatever, it really doesn't matter that much how many threads we have but more how these are tangled, with anything that comes by along the script = acting, sound, camera, for which the description here is useless; it's better to watch the movie. It's refreshing ;) And I'm not really in a moment to say this about anything, no matter how subjective I might be after my low expectations.

Rating: 4.5 out of 5

Summer-Fall 2023 Movie Preview

As it happens lately, my mood for writing new entries is "incapacitated" due to various reasons. I'm still trying though to keep this blog alive, and since we reached the usual time for the preview of the next six months, that's making my job easier. After all, here it probably matters more what trailers I include in the enumeration than what I'm rambling besides these => it allows me some economy with the extra comments. So, let's check out what we have on a short list...

In June, "Maggie Moore(s)" makes a difference in the typical scenery of summer blockbusters, reason why I decided to choose it to start the list, hoping for something more original. It looks like a mix of a mystery thriller and a dark comedy. We'll see how that works out.

It's rare when I refer to biopics on my blog, because it's definitely not among my favorite genres. However, for "Oppenheimer", announced for July, I decided to make an exception. One reason is the direction by Nolan. The second reason is because (unfortunately) the topic seems to become more and more timely.

I didn't have much choice of trailers for August, so I'm skipping through to September when we have "The Creator". The movies's baseline is overused, and I doubt it can reach the heights of predecessors like "Terminator", "Matrix" and others. But at least is a "clasic" SciFi (not a SH = "superhero" movie), which is a genre that we don't see very often.

In October we have the official release date for "Killers of the Flower Moon", the most recent film by Scorsese. After the Cannes pre-screening, the reviews look good.

I'm closing the list with "Dune: Part Two". All I can say is that I hope they'll keep some limits on the adaptation freedom we've seen in the first part, although what's already done is done. Except that, we'll see how it goes in November... Let's get there first.

Puss in Boots: The Last Wish vs. John Wick: Chapter 4

I wanted to write this entry, or at least the first half of it = "Puss in Boots", before the holidays but I couldn't find the time. So, since then I added to the pack the last episode of "John Wick". Where do these two connect? There's not much in common apparently, but wait... First, both somehow seem to end their series, or at least try to send a "good bye" (not really an "adieu") from their main character. Besides that, more or less ironically, after watching JW, I can't say it's very far from an animated movie.

I've never been very caught by the DreamWorks' fairytale universe that began with "Shrek", maybe except "Shrek 3" (despite what critics said about it). So, I didn't rush watching the last "Puss in Boots", but finally I can say that's probably the best animation I've seen since "Isle of Dogs", 5 years ago. The story goes like this: Puss in Boots finds itself reaching the last of the nine standard cat lifes, and followed by Death impersonated by a bounty hunter armed with two sickles, decides to move out from the public life of a fairytale hero. That's until finding out about a star fulfilling any wish, but only one, and implicitly opening a path to gaining back the peace of mind in front of the deathly perils of the world. However, Puss in Boots is not the only one wishing for that wish - so we end up with a race of who's the first to find the magic star. And obviously to a duel when we're finally getting there.

I didn't find either the "John Wick" universe too compelling, the notable exception being the second part, which clearly stands out in comparison to the rest. Here the story goes pretty much as it went before: John Wick has a big price on his head and a bunch of bounty hunters on his tracks, and he also tries to find some peace getting through the intricate customs of the assassins guild of which he's part of. The quest implies reaching various locations. So finally, we have again a race from death, heading up to a final duel - an actual classic one this time = pistols, 30 steps, witnesses, and all the rest. Well, does the title of the entry make more sense now?

Ok, let's be fair. Looking at the reviews I was expecting much more from JW4, and after what I've seen I felt it deserves this comparison. Practically, it recycles a lot from previous movies, from some locations = clubs, mirror or glass walls rooms, etc. up to the same tiringly long sequences of gratuitous violence = I ask myself how do screenwriters, directors, or whoever decides, choose the optimal number of henchmen beaten in an action movie scene. Really, does it make any difference if we see more than 7-8? In this type of movie, I can get over inconsistent plot parts or story threads left hanging, but it's hard to accept senseless attempts to get a record on the body count. I don't have an issue with violence in a movie, but when it takes, in a repetitive manner, over a quarter of the movie time, I think it's legitimate to ask yourself if it wouldn't be more reasonable to watch wrestling, mma, or some other contact sports instead.

There are some good parts in the last JW - especially concerning the camera work. But unfortunately it's not enough. We have some witty lines, but overall the script is quite shallow. In "Puss in Boots" at least I found enough humor to make me smile a bit, not that I was expecting this from JW4, but it seemed even more dry than the previous installments. Even the soundtrack in JW4 has its ground in the one introduced in Chapter 2, an excellent one otherwise, but there's not much novelty here. For instance, "Puss in Boots" comes up with a memorable score (composed by Heitor Pereira), at least for the pieces where Death makes an entrance, reminding somehow of Morricone's western music tones. If we're to talk about villainous characters, again JW4 fades when compared to "Puss in Boots". I would've never believed that an antropomorphic wolf with red eyes and two sickles can have more charisma than the head of a criminal organization, but well... it does. Fortunately there are more in the JW cast that somehow compensate, but I found Bill Skarsgard to be a very poor choice for the main villain.

To sum up the comparative overview, as forced or hilarious this might seem, there's the substance of the story, which in essence is represented by running out from death in both movies. As unlikely it might sound, I'd say this is much more maturely presented in "Puss in Boots" then in "John Wick". The sense you get from there is stop de run, face the problem, live your current life and not the past one. We even have a symbolic "ressurection" of Puss in Boots at some point. Probably JW's action attempts some similar direction, but the whole idea is much more fuzzy and lost between fistfights and guns + (spoiler) it "encouragingly" wraps up with a tombstone. So, surprisingly.. in the end, at least for now, Puss vs. John: 1-0.

Rating:
Puss in Boots: The Last Wish - 4 out of 5
John Wick: Chapter 4 - 2.5 out of 5

Im Westen nichts Neues (2022)

"Im Westen nichts Neues", incorrectly translated with the more positive sounding title "All Quiet on the Western Front", is an anti-war movie, based on the novel written by Erich Maria Remarque after his experience on the World War I frontline. In the review I wrote three years ago for "1917", set in the same context, I was saying it should be included on a mandatory to-watch list for some state leaders. I can't say about "Im Westen nichts Neues" that's in any way superior as cinematic experience, but I can say that it should probably be on the to-watch list for even more people.

The movie, or the novel, which I didn't read, but that's the source for this, is somehow particular by showing you the perspective of the "evil" soldier in the finally defeated German army. Shocking, or actually not really, we come to terms quickly with the idea that at the frontline level there's not much separation between good and evil. The perspective of the individual tormented by the phyisical and psychical pressure finally reaches a neutral stance concerning the conflict's reasons, or to approximately quote one of the lines - we're nothing but a pair of boots with a rifle, what do we know? This is probably one of the key moments of a movie that doesn't have basically other subject than showing us repeatedly that the outside vision on a war at some point becomes quite different from what the person within the line of fire feels, despite any "expert" opinions on conflict reasons from outside observers. Obviously, there might be exceptions to this, and in a cynical evaluation, probably the impact of WW1's hand-to-hand combat is not exactly equivalent with killing the enemy from a distance specific to modern warfare, but that doesn't change the reality that on a war front lots of people die for purposes set from a safe distance by much few people. The same reality, well expressed by the movie, says that any war ends with a negociation and any postponing of this does increase the body count, which number, again in a cynical logic, might have some sense (but not for the dead ones) if it would at least change something on the front. But to move back to the harsh reality and the final statistics displayed by the movie, the West frontline during the 4 years of WW1 barely moved but left within the trenches more than 3 millions of dead bodies. Probably a partial explanation for such absurdity is provided by some other sequence of linse: half century without a war; what's a soldier without a war? The problem is that these lines don't come from a soldier's mouth, but from a general longing for the glory that his father gained in three victorious battles.

The saying that a war doesn't have victors but only losers is a naive cliche, real though but only if we refer to masses. Unfortunately, there are winners in a war, at least during the conflict timeline, either gaining material profits or bolstering their public image, or simply knowing that if the conflict ends this will change their lives, and not for the better. If there wouldn't be any winners, as ephemeral they might be, we wouldn't have wars. It's true that their number is small, but they're typically highly influential. But let's leave the history and politics for experts to discuss, and let's move back to the movie. Although I don't have much left to say there :)

I didn't like "Im Westen nichts Neues". I doubts it's a movie meant to be liked. It's violent, repetitive, without a rich narrative, although the screenplay is quite good. The casting is ok. The cinematography is fine but inevitably you'll compare it with "1917", which is almost imposible to match on this. What's more interesting is the soundtrack here that shows some fine tension notes, but overall I can't qualify this as a remarcable movie. It's, however, a necessary movie. Despite the fact I'm typically against political correctness in cinema, this time I'll pass on blaming BAFTA for throwing all awards towards this, although I can't say I'd list this objectively as the best film of the year. I can risk blaming in advance the AMPAS = the Oscars, because I'm almost certain they'll pick a weaker title that checks all their criteria that don't have much in common with the cinema. Anyway, considering how relevant these awards got to be in the latest years, who cares anymore? Conclusion: watch the movie, enjoy the peace as long as you have it ;)

Rating: 3.5 out of 5