Saturday, July 15, 2023

Unicorn Store

Year 15, Day 196 - 7/15/23 - Movie #4,493

BEFORE: Well, I've been to the movie theaters twice this month, which means I've seen the "Blue Beetle" trailer twice, and also I learned that for some reason, there's another "Trolls" film coming out at some point. Why? Really, I don't have to watch it, so it shouldn't affect me, but yet somehow it does.  The second movie I saw in the theaters will be reviewed tomorrow, so today's film got moved to this position because it links to that movie, and it's a more solid link than Nicolas Cage was.  I told you I would get there, and I was right. 

We drove out to Long Island today, for cigarettes and lunch at Friendly's, then I bought some new pillows, we'll see if that helps me sleep any better.  I also called in for jury duty, and found out I need to report on Monday at 9 am.  Geez, that's way too early for me, but if I don't show up I'll be in comtempt of court.  So I've got to adjust my sleeping schedule so I can be at a courthouse on Monday morning 

Chris Witaske carries over from "The Bubble". 


FOLLOW-UP TO: "Horse Girl" (Movie #3,982)

THE PLOT: Kit, a twenty-something dreamer, receives an invitation that would fulfill her childhood dreams. 

AFTER: Finally, I'm making some work clearing off the Netflix list - it's still going to take some time, but I'm getting there.  Two this week and two more next week - I've got to get to them before they start disappearing from that platform... 

Wasn't sure what this one was about, exactly, but it's about what it says it's about, a store where a woman has the opportunity to buy a unicorn.  Yep, a real unicorn.  Maybe this is a metaphor for something, but I'm not sure what.  Kit got kicked out of art school, apparently for being too artistic or something, and now she's got to move back in with her parents and feel like a failure.  So she goes to work at a temp agency, which sends her to a public relations firm, but I think perhaps some screenwriter didn't know the difference between a P.R. firm and an ad agency, because the boss encourages her to work on a vacuum cleaner campaign.  

But Kit starts finding mysterious messages from "The Store" - you know, the place where you buy stuff?  She finds the address and it turns out to be an upscale boutique where Samuel L. Jackson wants her to use a certain credit card.  JK, he makes hints that what she's really wanted all of her life, and somehow he knows this is a unicorn, will soon be available for purchase.  Yes, a real unicorn for sale - but first she has to pass a few tests to prove that she's an appropriate person to be able to buy one.  She has to build a suitable stable, and then prove that she can provide a loving environment, by reconciling with her parents.  Yeah, at that point maybe she should just give up on the dream of getting that unicorn.

The final test is to prove that she can financially support the unicorn - and to do that she has to win the presentation for the vacuum cleaner account.  Yeah, it does not go well, probably because Kit spent the whole weekend trying to make peace with her parents, and this left little time to put together a killer pitch for Mystic Vacuums.  At some point confetti and glitter can only take you so far.  OK, well, there goes the temp job and any chance of some weird relationship with the weird president of the company.  Instead Kit forms a relationship with Virgil, the guy from Home Depot that she hired to build the stable for her unicorn.  Hey, a lot of relationships have started from weirder places, right? RIGHT?

Virgil goes back with her to the Unicorn Store, and they find that it's no longer there - or maybe it never really existed and was all in her mind, who can tell?  Virgil's convinced that maybe the guy at the Unicorn Store was a con man of some kind - really?  How could a guy offering to sell her a unicorn be anything but legit?  Especially when the store has somehow disappeared overnight... Look this is a weird movie and then the ending didn't really help or explain anything, it just made everything harder to understand, which seemed pretty impossible to do but it managed.  Now I'm not sure if she ever got the unicorn or not - or she got it, but then realized she didn't need it after all?  Again, I'm wondering if this is a metaphor for love or something, because quite often a solid relationship isn't going to come your way until you've got the other aspects of your life figured out.  You can't sustain a relationship until you've made yourself ready for it, and you've got a proper source of income. Right?  Is that it?  Not sure.

Also starring Brie Larson (last seen in "Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings"), Samuel L. Jackson (last seen in "The Protégé"), Joan Cusack (last heard in "Klaus"), Bradley Whitford (last seen in "How it Ends"), Mamoudou Athie (last seen in "Underwater"), Hamish Linklater (last seen in "The Big Short"), Martha MacIsaac (last seen in "For a Good Time, Call..."), Karan Soni (last heard in "Trolls World Tour"), Annaleigh Ashford (last seen in "A Rainy Day in New York"), Ryan Hansen (last seen in "Friendsgiving"), Mary Holland (last seen in "Senior Year"), Todd Jeffries (last seen in "The Fabulous Baker Boys"), Nelson Franklin (last seen in "Sweet Girl"), Kimia Behpoornia, Emily Robinson (last seen in "Eighth Grade"), Cody Sullivan (last seen in "Wish I Was Here"), Susan Park (last seen in "Always Be My Maybe"), Samantha McIntyre, Janie Haddad Tompkins (last seen in "Between Two Ferns: The Movie"), Van Epperson (last seen in "Hesher"), Chris Smith, Nathan Kelly, Leila Pieroni, Alex Greenwald, Matt Luern.

RATING: 4 out of 10 confessions in the "truth circle". 

Friday, July 14, 2023

The Bubble

Year 15, Day 195 - 7/14/23 - Movie #4,492

BEFORE: Does this happen to you, do you find out about a new film on Netflix that sounds kind of interesting, and the same day, as you're logging it in you realize it's the exact film you need to watch to make a connection between two superhero films, one from DC and the other from Marvel, because you found out too late that the filmmakers didn't hire Nicolas Cage back to voice the character of "Spider-Man Noir", but with just a few minor changes you could add this film and another one on Netflix, and your viewing chain can continue in, more or less, the same order, and the connecting actor-actress chain for the whole year will still be intact?  Nah, I'm guessing not - it's probably just me. 

Pedro Pascal carries over from "The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent". 


THE PLOT: A group of actors and actresses stuck inside a pandemic bubble at a hotel attempt to complete a film. 

AFTER: What a stroke of luck that I've landed on a film about making movies JUST after they've announced that all of SAG-AFTRA is on strike, for the same reasons that the Writers Guild went on strike in May.  Just to prove that I am really sort of Forrest Gump, in my own way, I was there at the WGA meeting in NYC earlier this year, when I think the issues about getting more royalties and protection from A.I.-written scripts, and the guild voted to strike.  They had their annual meeting at the theater where I work part-time, however I'm usually forbidden to talk or blog about what happens at the theater, after the fact I think it's OK.  (I was also there when non-vaxxed actors picketed against the SAG Awards telecast, but that's another story...)

This film is also about making a movie during the pandemic, which is what those non-vaxxed actors were complaining about - SAG was supposed to ease the protocols so that non-vaxxed actors could work again, but months later they had not taken actions to do so.  And who gets stuck dealing with the angry protestors with picket signs? Me, of course.  (But you know what, if you want to work on the movie set, just get the damn shot.  If your religion is more important than maybe you're just not cut out to be an actor, since it involves sacrifice.  I said the same thing when that tennis player wouldn't get the jab and couldn't play in the Australian Open or something.  Tough titty - either get the shot or go away and shut the hell up.)

So we've got two shutdowns to deal with tonight - the pandemic one, and the actors on strike.  Let's deal with the first one first, then move on to the second.  Remember when the world shut down?  Remember quarantining?  If you weren't able to stay at home and if you had to travel, then sometimes if you had to go to another country you could be confined to a hotel for TWO WEEKS before they let you run free among the populace.  Thanks, I'd rather stay at home.  Though my wife and I did have a standing agreement that if one of us got COVID-19, we would go and take NYC's offer to go stay in a city hotel for two weeks so we didn't infect the other.  Or maybe the non-sick person was going to stay in a hotel, I don't remember - it doesn't matter because we both tested positive at the same time, even though we were double-vaxxed.  So OK, two weeks at home it was, what's another two weeks when you've already been (mostly) stuck at home for 15 months?

Across the board, movie and TV shoots were shut down or put on hold - and then a year later when Hollywood started running out of the movies they never wanted to release but needed to anyway, film shoots started up again, but with an abundance of caution (supposedly).  After quarantining and testing negative, the cast and crew of a movie were allowed to interact with each other but nobody else, meaning they were in their own "bubble".  The NBA teams did this too once they started playing basketball again - meaning that NBA players had to either bring their families into the bubble, or spend months away from their families. (Most players probably opted for the latter, just a theory...). And on the movie sets, they hired people to work as COVID "handlers", responsible for testing everyone once a day and making sure that the rules were followed properly.  Yeah, I'm sure they got the best medical professionals to do this for $10 an hour - this was an intern job. 

Back in the real world with normal people, we'd hear stories about people who moved in with each other as the pandemic started and bonded well, and other people who'd been together for years but couldn't stand each other in such close quarters, so they broke up.  Everyone's lives changed, people stopped going to the office and started working from home, and then when the restrictions eased, many just never went back to the office.  Why would they if they didn't have to?  Ah, but actors still have to go to the set or the location and BE there for movies to happen.  Or they at least have to go to the set full of green-screens and let the tech guys make the magic.  (My first gig was painting walls "ultimatte green" on music video shoots, before long every pair of pants and sneakers I owned were speckled in that horrible shade of green, and I still get the shakes when I see that awful color.)

So, as you might imagine, things got difficult on movie sets - actors had to spend more time AWAY from their families and more time WITH their co-stars, and nobody's really talked about this, but I'm betting that a lot of "special bonding" went on behind the scenes with all those dirty no-good actors in such close quarters.  Then they had to do love scenes together, one thing leads to another, before long the movie shoot is over and they're in a different relationship than they were before.  (OR they have a life partner at home, and another one on the set, who am I to judge?  Whatever gets you through your life, it's all right, it's all right.)

So yeah, along comes this movie that says, "You know, a lot of weird stuff probably went down in the bubbles on those movies that shot during the pandemic."  "The Bubble" shows how weird it got during the making of the sixth film in the fictitious "Cliff Beasts" franchise, which seems kind of like a low-rent "Jurassic Park" (or a classier "Sharknado") but so many people have been in and out (and in again) of the franchise over six movies, it's like a really messed-up family away from home.  These actors are all neurotic, sex-starved, drug-addicted, overly sensitive and quick-tempered, but honestly, they were probably all like that BEFORE the pandemic, and then suddenly they're all twice as bad as before.  Yeah, this tracks.

On top of the high-strung type A personality issues that take place - the lead actor and the lead actress in the "Cliff Beasts" franchise were married for a while, and divorced just after adopting a son, and now they have to work together again, for example - there are the issues caused by the quarantining (basically sitting around a nice hotel room moping, eating ice cream, gaining weight and working out in a vicious cycle) and the constant testing, masking and trying to not interact with anyone outside the bubble.  Time apart from their loved ones is another problem - one actress finds that her boyfriend has moved on to another partner just DAYS after she left for the set. Now THEY'RE in their own bubble, but in her house!  Not cool. 

As the shoot wears on, past day 100, past day 130, it becomes too much for some of the cast - they try to leave the set, even though that means they can't return.  And if they successfully manage to leave the compound, it could mean that their character then gets killed off in "Cliff Beasts 6", those are the breaks.  Other cast members try to get the word out via social media that the cast is being held against their will, the set is unsafe and their lives are in danger - only to find out after months of shooting that the studio wants to keep them in the bubble and go right ahead with shooting "Cliff Beasts 7"!  

Now, how does this all relate to the actors strike?  The film depicts the actors as having no rights, they're little more than pieces of walking meat to the executives.  Or trained monkeys who are assigned to do their little dance, flash their tits (men, too) and get back in their cages.  Meanwhile, the studio executives call in from the island of Fiji or an African safari to check in on the progress of the movie shoot.  Again, this tracks.  If you've ever wondered why so many actors form their own production companies and try to transition to producing or directing, it's really not that hard to figure out why.

So I guess I'm with the actors on this one - they've got my sympathy, look, I'm under-employed for the summer but I know exactly when I'm going to return to my second job, about a week before student orientation and classes start again in September.  The striking actors have NO IDEA how long the strike is going to last.  And there's a point to be made when the CEOs of Netflix and the big studios are making 7-figure salaries for - umm, doing WHAT, exactly? - and getting rich off the hard work of all the monkeys in the cages.  Sorry, actors on the sets. It's long hours working and weeks away from home and family, unless you're Adam Sandler and you cast your wife and kids in every movie and take them with you to Hawaii or Africa as a working vacation. (Again, I don't hate Sandler for this, it's a savvy set of perks that not everyone gets to pull off...) 

But I've just got to point out to the SAG leaders that if one of their complaints is that they want protection against actor roles being taken over by A.I., sure, maybe some legal protections need to be put into place to preserve the rights of actors to their own face images.  However, by going on strike and refusing to work, they're actually creating an incentive for the studio executives to replace flesh-and-blood actors with digitally created ones.  Just saying.  Also, every time that someone like Harrison Ford agrees to be made to look digitally younger for an entire Indiana Jones film, and you just KNOW some of the older actresses are dying to have this technology applied to them, then they're working at cross purposes with themselves.  If it's not right to replace actors with CGI pixel-driven versions of themselves, then actors should STOP agreeing to let this happen for their own vanity.  If you let the special FX guys take away a wrinkle here or a gray hair there, then before you know it, you've been replaced by a digital model of yourself that works for free.

Look, I'm not saying this film is going to change the world, or even that it's an accurate portrayal of what went down on movie shoots in 2021.  Honestly, I haven't even SEEN that many movies come out about the pandemic, and you'd think that would be a no-brainer source of comedy.  Why did this take so long?  Probably because when movie shoots resumed, the goal was to create films that would take people's minds off of their problems, not remind them about them.  But then comedy is just tragedy over time, or something like that.  There was "Locked Down" and "Alone Together" fit right into my romance chain, those are really the only pandemic-related movies that I can recall watching, and this one is the third?  Yeah, that seems about right. 

Also starring Karen Gillan (last seen in "Thor: Love and Thunder"), Fred Armisen (last seen in "Clerks III"), Iris Apatow (last heard in "Sausage Party"), Maria Bamford (last seen in "Stuart Little 2"), Leslie Mann (last seen in "Blithe Spirit"), David Duchovny (last seen in "Things We Lost in the Fire"), Keegan-Michael Key (last heard in "Wendell & Wild"), Guz Khan, Peter Serafinowicz (last seen in "Last Christmas"), Rob Delaney (ditto), Vir Das, Maria Bakalova (last seen in "Borat Subsequent Moviefilm"), Samson Kayo (last seen in "Dolittle"), Ross Lee, Harry Trevaldwyn (last seen in "The King"), Nick Kocher, Galen Hopper, Kate McKinnon (last heard in "DC League of Super-Pets"), John Lithgow (last seen in "Miss Sloane"), Austin Ku, Danielle Vitalis, Chris Witaske (last seen in "Lady Bird"), Audrina Woolrich, Grant Woolrich, Ben Ashenden (last seen in "Jurassic World Dominion"), Alexander Owen (ditto), Celeste Dring (last seen in "Cyrano"), Raphael Acloque (last seen in "The 355"), Zanda Emlano, Donna Air, Ivy Wolk, Kathryn Drysdale (last seen in "Vanity Fair"), Vivian Full (last seen in "Skyscraper"), Chloe Delanney, David Cheung, Katie O'Brien,  

with cameos from Maude Apatow (last seen in "The King of Staten Island"), Beck (last seen in "The Sparks Brothers"), John Cena (last seen in "The Suicide Squad"), James McAvoy (last seen in "Welcome to the Punch"), Daisy Ridley (last seen in "Star Wars: Episode IX - The Rise of Skywalker") and archive footage of Hugh Grant (last seen in "Glass Onion"), Martine McCutcheon (last seen in "Love Actually").

RATING: 6 out of 10 actors who played Batman

Thursday, July 13, 2023

The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent

Year 15, Day 194 - 7/13/23 - Movie #4,491

BEFORE: I figure in another week my summer exile will be half over, first I have to call in for jury duty on Friday, which might mean MORE time off, or maybe I'll get lucky and I won't have to show up anywhere, just call in for a few days.  It's happened before, but I've also served in person before, so I can't really make any job plans until I know for sure if I have to show up and serve next week.  Hey, at least they pay $40 a day for jury duty.  I've also got an appointment to get my hearing aid fixed, then a dental check-up the week after that.  At least I've got time this summer to attend to these things, even if I'm not raking in the cash.  

I also had some time yesterday to back up my computer, something I never seem to have time for on a regular basis, and also go through some old photos on my computer and dump a bunch of duplicate photos that the application seemed to have created.  You know how you delete a bunch of photos from your phone, but they're not really "gone" for like 30 days?  It's a great feature, until you realize that your phone also backed up all those photos you didn't want to your computer, just to be on the safe side.  And I usually take two or three photos of something just to be on the safe side, so between the multiple photos I take of things, and the extra duplication that all the multiple back-ups created, I had thousands of duplicate photos taking up space on the computer - and that's just on the Photos application, I also had the photos in regular folders and posted on Flickr.  So do I need so many copies of every photo?  I do not.  So it took a few hours last night and this morning, but I went on a tear deleting dupes, and got the total number of photos from 18,000 down to about 12,000.  The problem seemed to start when I got my iPhone 8 while we were on vacation in Vegas in 2019.

So, I spent half today remembering vacations and meals and events at the theater - I didn't need to keep about 99% of the photos I took for work, because the important ones are stored in the event notes on the school's system, and I don't need hundreds of pics of chairs, tables and stanchions taking up space on my computer. I just kept the photos of celebrities that I wasn't supposed to take.  Then I went back through all the pandemic photos, and finally pictures from that Vegas vacation - and then when I got to 2018, I found a lot of photos of things I don't remember doing or eating, so I guess my memory really only goes back so far. If I have a little more time this weekend I can go back further and try to remember the before-times, but the chances aren't looking good, my brain memory can only hold so much, too.  Anything that happened to me more than five years ago is difficult to remember - but hey, that's why we take photos, right? 

Nicolas Cage carries over from "Arsenal". This film hit theaters last year just a short while after I did my big Nic Cage marathon - because of course it did.  But I don't think I would have gone out to the theater to see it, I had too many other films to see in theaters.  I'll be damned if I can remember what they were, though.  ("Spider-Man: No Way Home", "House of Gucci", "The Batman", "The Bad Guys", "Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness", "Jurassic World Dominion", "Thor: Love & Thunder", and "Minions: The Rise of Gru"). Damn, that was a year, wasn't it?  I may only be good for four trips to the theater this year. 

And I want to send a very rare (these days, anyways) birthday SHOUT-out to actress Shannon Horgan, who appears in today's film.  Life was actually a bit easier when I planned my chain around actors' birthdays, and the linking was great if it happened, but it wasn't required. 


THE PLOT: Movie star Nicolas Cage is channeling his iconic characters as he's caught between a superfan and a CIA agent. 

AFTER: Of course, this film is over the top and quite ridiculous, not based in reality at all, probably - at least, I hope not.  As a biopic it's not QUITE as over-the-top as "Weird: The Al Yankovic Story", but of course that one was all spoof and parody and not meant to be taken seriously.  But in a similar vein, this film uses the real career of Nicolas Cage as a jumping-off point and then says, "OK, where can we go from here?" and Cage plays a fictional version of himself, as a mega movie-star who's got a messed-up personal life (don't they all?) and is also very neurotic and insecure at heart (aren't they all?).

When he fails to land a role that he really wanted, he decides that he's going to quit acting - that'll show 'em! - and live the life of a "housecat".  Before retiring, he's got to settle his debt with the Chateau-Marmont, where he's been living for six months, so he accepts an offer to attend the birthday party of a Spanish billionaire who made his fortune in the olive business, or something.  At the same time, an arms dealer kidnaps the daughter of a prominent Spanish anti-crime politician - but those two events can't possibly be connected, could they?  Wait for it...

Upon his arrival in Mallorca, the actor is recognized by a CIA agent, who pretends to be a fan, gets a selfie with him and plants a tracker on him.  After forming a bromance bond with the Spanish billionaire and agreeing to read his screenplay, Nick gets contacted by the CIA who tell him his new friend is an international gangster who's probably got that politician's daughter held somewhere in his compound.  So the actor gets enlisted to find the girl while agreeing to stay over in Spain longer and collaborate on a screenplay for a new action movie with his new buddy Javi.  Sure, because what action movie star doesn't feel that they're one step away from doing real spy work after appearing in so many movie shoot-outs and fight scenes?  

There's a typical three-act structure here - Nick and Javi bond over their love of movies (mostly his movies) in Act 1, but Act 2 puts them at odds with each other, thanks to the CIA and the real gangster the two new friends almost kill each other, and then in Act 3 they team up to take down the real villains in typical "Mission: Implausible" style, with Cage putting on prosthetics to impersonate a different Spanish gangster and going undercover.  What good fortune, that Nick's ex-wife has experience as a movie make-up expert, and also that Javi had Cage's ex-wife and daughter brought to the island!  Note - the real Nic Cage has been married five times, but never to a make-up artist.  And he does not have a teen daughter named Addy, he has two sons and a baby daughter as of 2022.  This follows the trend of other films like "Space Jam: A New Legacy", where you wouldn't expect to see Lebron James' REAL wife and son in the movie, for many reasons, one of which is to not divulge too much about a celebrities family to the audience.  

Look, all things considered, this film could easily have been a lot worse - they could have had Nic Cage entering some kind of multiverse and jumping between digital recreations of movies he's been in, or trying to gain the abilities of characters he's played to save the world, like some kind of "Every Nicolas Cage Movie Everywhere All at Once".  Hey, that's not a terrible idea, but it would be hell to license the rights to footage from all the movies he's been in, which are all probably owned by different parties.  Sure, things get out of control when Cage and his new friend take LSD and then go driving through the hills - and if you think an actor could go up against the real Spanish mob and come out on top, then you must be high on something yourself.  But it's all in fun, and as I always say, that intent tends to go a long way. 

Oh yeah, there's also a younger, more impulsive version of Nic Cage that only exists in his imagination, but he can see young Nick and have conversations with him, and ask him for career advice.  Yeah, I can believe that - surely he must be taking advice from some inner source, especially if his agent is nothing but a fawning "yes man".  Some kind of CGI is used to re-create this younger-looking Nic Cage, and a similar technique was used to depict Cage's character in the "Flash" movie - also, it's not the first time this week that an actor appeared on screen twice at the same time, playing different characters.  The "split-screen" effect was also used in "The Flash" and "The Devil's Double".  (Earlier this year, I also saw it in "Glass Onion", in addition to "Everything Everywhere All at Once")

Hey, any movie that shows appreciation for "Paddington 2" is worth a watch. 

Also starring Pedro Pascal (last seen in "Wonder Woman 1984"), Sharon Horgan (last seen in "How to Build a Girl"), Lily Mo Sheen (last seen in "Everybody's Fine"), Tiffany Haddish (last seen in "The Card Counter"), Ike Barinholtz (last seen in "Moxie"), Alessandra Mastronardi (last seen in "Life" (2015)), Paco Léon, Jacob Scipio (last seen in "Without Remorse"), Neil Patrick Harris (last seen in "The Matrix Resurrections"), Katrin Vankova, David Gordon Green, Demi Moore (last seen in "My Best Friend's Girl"), Anna MacDonald, Joanna Bobin (last seen in "Gunpowder Milkshake"), Luke McQueen, Laszlo Szivos, Ricard Balada, Jaime Ordonez, with archive footage of Monica Potter (last seen in "Bulletproof"), Shirley MacLaine (last seen in "Breslin and Hamill: Deadline Artists")

RATING: 7 out of 10 therapy sessions

Tuesday, July 11, 2023

Arsenal

Year 15, Day 192 - 7/11/23 - Movie #4,490

BEFORE: OK, before going any further, we've got to have a talk about what constitutes an "appearance".  In the past I've counted some questionable things to keep my chain going, like an actor appearing in a non-speaking role, like seen in the background in a party scene, or seen sleeping on a train (true).  But in those cases it was REALLY that actor, just making a cameo.  Now, in this new world of digital deep-fakery, I have to wonder if a digitally manipulated set of pixels that APPEARS to be that actor should count.  "The Flash" pulled a couple of tricks at the climax of the movie, including digital appearances by past actors like Adam West and Christopher Reeve, who are no longer alive.  So...was it them?  Or just a bunch of pixels arranged to LOOK like them?  How do I treat that, does that constitute an "appearance"?  My heart says yes, but my brain says no.

But a little research tells me that Nicolas Cage DID film scenes for this movie, he showed up and put on a motion-capture suit, probably, and then the digital team got to work manipulating that footage - so I'm going to count that as an "appearance", and he carries over from "The Flash" to today's film, "Arsenal".  That's one thing sorted.

But my original plan was to go from here to "Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse", since Cage voiced a character in the first "Spider-Verse" film, he played Spider-Man Noir.  While this character apparently appears in the sequel, there were reports that the actor was NOT hired to reprise his role.  Wikipedia states that they used "archival sound" for the character's dialogue, but IMDB is not listing Nicolas Cage as part of the cast - perhaps they will later.  But what is "archival sound"?  It could be a repeat of Nic Cage dialogue from the first film, or an out-take that wasn't used before.  They used outtakes of Paul Newman's dialogue from the first "Cars" film for his character in the third film, after he was deceased.  Or perhaps the filmmakers used another actor who sounds a lot like Nic Cage, just so the character could say one line, and the bean counters couldn't justify hiring an A-list (?) actor just to say one line.  It's all unclear to me, because I haven't seen the film yet (but it is "discount Tuesday" at the theater where I used to work, so perhaps I will learn more later today....)

I can't take the chance of breaking the chain - so I reworked my order a little bit, added one new film from Netflix to be my outro from this little Nicolas Cage mini-chain, and moved another Netflix film up from August to July, and the chain remains unbroken.  This just moves "Across the Spider-Verse" a couple links down the chain, I get there through a different link, and then I don't have to worry about whether they used Nicolas Cage's voice or not.  All good? 


THE PLOT: A Southern construction worker attempts to rescue his kidnapped brother from the mob. 

AFTER: It's funny, I could tell just by looking at the cast list what production company made this movie - the same one that made all those Bruce Willis and Nic Cage cheapo action films that I watched last year.  "First Kill", "Hard Kill", "Extraction" and so forth.  (And from those films, I learned that Jonathon Schaech is who they call when Frank Grillo isn't available...)  They must use some kind of random title generator or something - come on, "Arsenal" is really a terrible title, it tells you NOTHING about what's going to happen in a movie.  OK, an arsenal is a bunch of weapons, so we can assume there will be guns in the film, but surely there MUST have been a better, less generic title for this film.  

On top of that, it's got the most basic plot possible - a mobster kidnaps, or pretends to kidnap, an ex-con that he knows, and tries to get money from the ex-con's brother for his return.  I guess maybe there's some intrigue because the ex-con appears to be in on the scheme at first, and then later the mobster kidnaps him for real, and also his daughter for good measure. The younger brother takes matters into his own hands, there's a final shoot-out, end scene.  Big flipping deal - I won't remember this movie in a month's time, that's for sure.  Heck, I forgot about this movie WHILE I was watching it. 

It's just a weird set of priorities, that's all. We're shown certain things as if they're very important, and then they're just...not. As a boy, Mikey sees the body of his uncle, who committed suicide.  So what?  This never has a larger meaning in telling us who Mikey is, except that he then gives his little brother JP a bunch of quarters to play at the arcade, so he won't see the uncle's body.  Then later, in the back room of the arcade/bar/pool hall, Mikey sees mobster kill a guy in the most complicated way possible (involving a lead pipe and a baseball bat for some reason).  So Mikey agrees to never tell anybody what he saw, and then tells JP to never go back to the arcade.  Go to the arcade, don't go to the arcade, would you make up your damn mind?  

Flash forward to adulthood, and Mikey's getting out of jail while JP is running a construction company (The synopsis on IMDB says JP is a "mobster", but this isn't accurate.  How good can a film possibly be if nobody takes the time to get the IMDB plotline correct?). JP loans Mikey $10,000 to get his daughter braces, but Mikey instead takes the money and buys drugs to sell for a profit.  Hey, maybe that's a smart business plan, who's to say?  His daughter might need both braces and a college education, just saying.  But them somebody sneaks in at night and takes the drugs, maybe somebody working for the original seller, that's all just a bit unclear.  But either way, Mikey "owes" the mob now, in particular Eddie King, the guy who Mikey saw kill somebody in the arcade all those years ago.  The way Eddie King sees it, Mikey already "owes" him because he let him live back then.  So now this leads to the fake kidnapping scheme, which becomes a real one when the fake one doesn't work.  

I guess this is just how things go down in Mississippi - there's a detective character, too, who never really acts like a detective, he keeps saying, "Well, I'm not gonna bust him..." so I guess he gets paid well to not do his job?  But his knowledge of the streets does come in handy when it's time to take down the mobster through very non-legal means.  Then of course, there's Eddie King, played by Nic Cage in a bad wig, fake nose and a terrible accent.  All part of the game, I guess, but by no means is this an A-level film like "Training Day" or "American Gangster".  For that matter, it's not even a B-level film like "Frozen Ground" or "Fire with Fire". 

But hey, we survived our encounter with the mob, so by all means, let's celebrate with a picnic and some fireworks....

Also starring John Cusack (last seen in "Identity"), Adrian Grenier (last seen in "Marauders"), Johnathon Schaech (last seen in "Reprisal"), Lydia Hull (last seen in "Empire State"), William Mark McCullough, Abbie Gayle, Kelton DuMont (last seen in "Logan"), Zachary Legendre, Megan Leonard (last seen in "First Kill"), Shea Buckner (last seen in "Escape Plan: The Extractors"), Tyler Jon Olson (ditto), Dylan DePaula (last seen in "The Campaign"), C.J. LeBlanc (last seen in "Project Power"), Christopher Coppola, Christopher Rob Bowen (last seen in "Acts of Violence"), Tamara Belous (ditto), Robert Harvey (last seen in "That's My Boy"), Todd Jenkins, Catherine Ashton (last seen in "Geostorm"), Sean Paul Braud (ditto), Heather Johansen (last seen in "The War with Grandpa"), Carrie Jo Hubrich, Vivian Benitez,    

RATING: 3 out of 10 Biloxi Shuckers

Sunday, July 9, 2023

The Flash

Year 15, Day 190 - 7/9/23 - Movie #4,489 - viewed on 6/27/23

BEFORE: Yeah, I'm under-employed so I had a chance to go see a movie on a Tuesday afternoon, which is the cheapest time to see a movie in Manhattan, once you figure in the matinee pricing and the "Discount Tuesday" promotion, I got a $19 ticket down to $7.  That's a good deal if you're short on cash but you still want to keep up with your summer blockbusters. And all I had to do was return to my previous place of employment - I bought popcorn and soda, when it would have been SO easy to sneak in snacks, so I'm at least that considerate. The older ticket ladies are still there, and one of my old managers, but I didn't see any ushers or concessionaires that I recognized - well, it has been two years and that's a job with a high turnover rate.  If my ex-co-workers all got out of there, good for them.

Michael Keaton carries over from "Worth".


THE PLOT: Barry Allen uses his super speed to change the past, but his attempt to save his family creates a world without super heroes, forcing him to race for his life in order to save the future. 

AFTER: SPOILER ALERT, this film is still playing in movie theaters - you know, the place you used to go to watch films before they all started streaming to your phone.  

I'm a bit down on myself because I'm under-employed for the next two months - I'm trying not to panic because I grabbed every shift I could during the two big festivals in May and June, so I worked so many hours that my paychecks in July were larger than normal, and I just let the bank balance build up a bit.  Will it be enough to get me through to August?  I'm not sure because I may not get paychecks from that job until late September, that's how the payroll works. So I still have to think about finding some temp work maybe, but I want to wait until after I serve on jury duty in mid-July. I just don't want to have to start something and then have to put it on hold.  And then there's also partial unemployment payments, I should qualify for that. 

Whatever - I can't fix my life in a day or a week, no matter what I want to do or try to do, so instead I'm taking baby steps each day to try and improve things.  Like I can watch a movie a day, and by the end of the year that's a huge list - so each day I'm trying to also check something off the to-do list or take a step on each bigger project so that even if I can't cross off something today, I've gotten a little bit closer to crossing that thing off, eventually.  (I know it's a poor excuse, but I do have jury duty coming up in July, if I took a new job then I'd very quickly have to ask for time off from that job, and then where would THAT get me?).  But fixing one's life is what "The Flash" is all about - 

This is really "Flash: No Way Home", and I did warn everybody that if they allowed that Spider-Man film last year to be really successful, that it would lead to more films set in the metaverse.  Sure, we got "Everything Everywhere All at Once", where an Asian woman had to learn from her counterparts in parallel universes to become a better mother (is that what happened?).  Anyway, that film won Best Picture, so I guess it was a success, but now we have the same concept in "The Flash", where Barry Allen has to travel the metaverse and interact with other versions of himself and other versions of the DC universe in order to become a better son?  Why can't he just be better without breaking the universe?

Also, just as "No Way Home" featured every actor who'd ever been Spider-Man, suggesting that each actor's movies took place in a different parallel universe - well, sure, by all means let's bring all the various villains from those universes TOGETHER in one place, how could that possibly go south?  Why, because Tom Holland's Spider-Man got exposed and Dr. Strange cast a spell?  Is that enough reason to cast Tobey Maguire and Andrew Garfield again?  And to say, "Oh, THIS is how the Spider-verse works?"  I'm still not sure, it still feels like such a cash grab, and an after-thought on how to keep the old Spider-Man movies still relevant. Now here comes the "Flash" movie to do the same damn thing with Batman - every Batman movie with a different actor apparently takes place in a different DC universe.  It's OK, there are at least 52 of them to spare at last count.  

It's a very cheeky way to not have to do an origin movie for the Flash - that would have made the most sense, maybe, but DC instead decided to hit the ground running and go forward, not back - although we do see how Flash got his super-powers, but we see it through one Barry Allen's eyes as he tries to give super-powers to an alt-universe Barry Allen.  It's a lot like how Marty McFly had to avoid the other version of himself in "Back to the Future II".  Which, the movie reminds us, was a movie that almost cast Eric Stoltz as Marty McFly, and maybe did just that in an alternate version of our universe.  This somehow caused a ripple effect that meant Tom Cruise was not the star of "Top Gun" in that world. 

By interacting with another version of himself, Barry Allen comes to a few realizations about himself - he tends to talk fast, and not let other people finish their sentences.  OK, good to know, something for him to work on - self-realization can only help.  Younger Barry is also quick to leap into situations before being completely briefed on them - it must be hard asking the world's fastest man to just slow down, take a breath and make sure he fully understands the situation before leaping into it - but then again, in his defense, lives are on the line usually, so time is of the essence.  

Now, in the comic books, the Flash usually used a device called a cosmic treadmill to travel in time - but here he just has to run really fast, faster than the speed of light.  Oh, sure, that's simple, why didn't you just say so?  But don't the physicists tell us that nothing can BE faster than the speed of light?  What about the speed of dark, is that faster or slower?  Anyway, just keep running faster and I guess you'll get there - er, then. 

Flash means well, of course - his mother died when he was young and his father was accused of killing her, and is still in prison, so if he could only go back, and change one small thing without interacting with anybody, surely there can't be anything wrong with that, right?  RIGHT?  So he reasons that if only his mother had bought just ONE more can of tomatoes at the store, then his father wouldn't have gone to the store, and then he would have been at home to protect Barry's mom.  This is the seductive nature of time travel - but how does Barry know that his father wouldn't have died instead, or also?  NITPICK POINT: Why can't Barry just go back and not change anything, just SEE who killed his mother?  Like, take a picture, wouldn't that help without destroying the timeline?

That darn butterfly effect states, though, that you can't just change one thing and hope that everything after that goes smoothly - after all, it's Barry's mom's death that inspired him to get a job in the crime lab, and then also to become a superhero.  So if you take away that incident, don't you mess with Barry Allen becoming the Flash in the first place?  Similarly, if you save Batman's parents, don't you also kill Batman, or at least take away the NEED for Batman?  Well, the movie ends up dealing with all of these issues, eventually, it just takes its sweet time doing it. 

Time, as the Michael Keaton Batman tells us, is not linear like a piece of uncooked spaghetti - and when you change something, you don't just create a branch off into a new, slightly different reality.  A timeline is more like a piece of cooked spaghetti, it's curvy and it overlaps and touches the other pieces of spaghetti in the bowl and that's what the multiverse is. Once you add some pasta sauce it's all one giant mess, which, OK, seems about right for DC Comics - so every creator can tell the story THEY want to tell, and we'll just say it's a new timeline.  Timelines are twisty and messy and covered in parmesan cheese, if you like that sort of thing. And we know that this is the way the universe works because the writers tell us so - notice that real scientists don't weigh in on this, because there's really no such thing as the multiverse. Then there's the Alan Parsons theory, which states that time is "flowing like a river, to the sea, until it's gone forever."  That seems simple enough, but it's just too simple for comics and now movies. 

This was loosely based on the "Flashpoint" crossover in the DC Comics, which the writers used to alter the DC universe temporarily, then put it back together again with some upgrades and improvements.  But it's not the exact same story - in the comics Flash changes the past and finds himself in a world where Bruce Wayne was killed as a boy and Thomas Wayne, his father, became a much tougher Batman after losing his wife and son. And there was no Superman, because his spacecraft got intercepted by the guvmint and he was raised in a lab, with no sunlight or human contact.

But the film goes in a different direction - in the alt-reality that Flash created with his time-travel, there's no Superman at all, which becomes really bad news when General Zod comes to Earth (as he did during 2013's "Man of Steel) with his terraforming machines to turn the planet into New Krypton - Flash and the alt-Batman team up to track where the spaceship from Krypton landed, and bad news, it was in Russia (shades of the "Red Son" Elseworlds comic), and they go there to find not Superman, but an alt-version of Supergirl.  Well, I guess you take what you can get, so Supergirl and Batman and the two Flashes take on Zod and his crew, but in a world without Superman, Wonder Woman or Aquaman, they're hopelessly outmatched.  

The alt-Flash sees the solution, though - keep rewinding time and fighting the battle against Zod until they win.  Sure, that's what a young Flash would do - but the older Flash realizes that rewinding time was what started all the trouble in the first place, and they could replay the battle a thousand times and never come up with a good outcome.  So, inevitably, older Flash has to fix everything by going back to the divergence point and putting things back the way they were, so that the alternate reality never happens.  It's a good thing they put General Zod in the film, though, because otherwise there wouldn't have been a villain, except for The Flash himself, who broke the universe trying to fix one small detail and make his life better.  But he learns that you can't just change one thing without changing everything, and that's important not just for him, but for everyone who has regrets or has lost someone and wishes that things had happened differently - that's all wasted effort, for the most part, and it's a valuable lesson.  On the other hand, undoing everything that was done means that I spent two and a half hours watching a film that ultimately negated itself, so where do I get a refund?  

The opening sequence where Flash saves 10 babies, a nurse and a dog from a hospital wing collapse is, of course, very thrilling, and is a great display of what Flash can do with his powers, BUT the bad news is that we've seen this all before, when Quicksilver saved all of Xavier's students from an exploding building in "X-Men: Apocalypse".  Essentially, it's the same scene, so couldn't they have found a better way to show us what Flash could do without ripping off a Marvel movie?  Flash also has very bizarre ways of saving the falling babies, like he puts one inside a microwave (it's not plugged in, obvi) but this is a bad look, you shouldn't ever show a baby inside a microwave in a movie, it just gives people at home bad ideas.  Flash also has to stop and eat before saving everybody, because food is fuel and he's running low - I get that this is the way his powers work, but it's still a bad look, grabbing a bite to eat before saving somebody's life.  

We also get a look, late in the film, of the chaos that got caused, on a multiversal scale, by messing with the timestream.  All of Barry's over-fixing and traveling through time causes some kind of chain collapse, and so we see giant colored spheres representing the various timelines crashing into each other - but it's a visual representation of something that we should NOT be able to see, not even from the space between the timelines.  So gotta call a big NITPICK POINT on this one, because we as humans are tiny specks within the universe, we can barely see a mile in any direction, we can't see another planet without a telescope, so how the hell can we see one timeline crashing into another?  Also, you just got done telling me a timeline is shaped like a piece of spaghetti, and now, all of a sudden, they're spherical?  Would you please make up your mind?  

Another big NITPICK POINT is that we never find out who DID kill Barry's mom.  Sure, we knew it wasn't his dad, but then, who did it?  Flash went through all of this and broke the universe and put it back together again, and he STILL doesn't know?  Bogus. 

Maybe another NITPICK POINT with Flash's powers, where getting hit by a second bolt of lightning takes away his speed powers, requiring a THIRD bolt of lightning to turn them on again.  Really, his powers are THAT simple and binary, that's it's like an off/on switch?  Have you tried unplugging your Flash and plugging him back in again?  

Wait, wait, another NITPICK POINT that's Flash-power related.  I get why Barry Allen is always late for work, because there's a building collapse or he has to do some Justice League thing at the most inconvenient time.  But why is he always BEHIND in his police work?  The film states that he wants to be thorough in his work at the crime lab, because he's ultra-careful that he gets the evidence right and no innocent person gets proven guilty.  But he's STILL the Flash, he should STILL be able to do his work at super-speed and be thorough at the same time.  He could do every test three times and still process everything faster than anyone else, so how does this even make sense?  Can't he also think at super-speed if he can do everything else at super speed?  

And then there's the irony that "The Flash" took so long to make - they first planned to release a film about the Flash in 2016, but then "Justice League" came out in 2017 so they moved the date of "The Flash" to 2018.  Then there were re-writes and scheduling conflicts and personnel changes, and in the end 45 different writers worked on this film at various times.  So the original plan was for this film to fit in with "Aquaman" and "Wonder Woman" and "Justice League", but the process took so long that it almost seems apt, that this film about multiversal collapse ended up being released just as DC/Warner decided to tear its movie universe down and start over with a new set of interlocking films.  So maybe this "Flashpoint" storyline can be useful in justifying that scorched-Earth policy and the cleaning of the slate?  Not sure. 

I (sort of) met Michael Shannon last month - he directed a film that was in the Tribeca Film Festival, and came to the theater where I work to speak to the audience after the screening.  I had just watched "Bullet Train" two weeks before, so I tried very hard not to freak out when he came out of the theater and asked me where the men's room was. It's a common enough question that's only weird because it came from General Zod.

Also starring Ezra Miller (last seen in "Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore"), Sasha Calle, Michael Shannon (last seen in "Bullet Train"), Ron Livingston (last heard in "The Tender Bar"), Maribel Verdu (last seen in "Pan's Labyrinth"), Kiersey Clemons (last seen in "Dope"), Antje Traue (last seen in "Seventh Son"), Ben Affleck (last seen in "The Tender Bar"), Jeremy Irons (last seen in "Kingdom of Heaven"), Temuera Morrison (last seen in "Aquaman"), Gal Gadot (last seen in "Shazam! Fury of the Gods"), Saoirse-Monica Jackson, Rudy Mancuso, Luke Brandon Field (last seen in "Jojo Rabbit"), Sanjeev Bhaskar (last seen in "Yesterday"), Sean Rogers, Kieran Hodgson (last seen in "See How They Run"), Ian Loh, Karl Collins, Andoni Gracia, Bastian Antonio Fuentes (last seen in "Jurassic World Dominion"), Rosie Ede, Andy Muschietti (last seen in "It Chapter Two"), Lynn Farleigh (last seen in "Miss Potter"), 

with cameos from Nicolas Cage (last seen in "Val"), Nikolaj Coster-Waldau (also last seen in "Kingdom of Heaven"), Christopher Reeve, George Reeves, Helen Slater (last seen in "The Secret of My Success"), Adam West (last heard in "Once Upon a Time in Hollywood"), REDACTED (last seen in "Scandalous: The Untold Story of the National Enquirer"), ALSO REDACTED (last seen in "Sweet Girl")

RATING: 6 out of 10 candy bars from the vending machine