Category Archives: Film Review

The Tomorrow War, Review by Case Wright

Posted on by casewright

I loved this movie and really loved live tweeting it with Lisa Bowman. There are some critics (killjoys) who want to pick on the movie because it doesn’t “make sense.” No one said this was being made for the Science Channel; so, just cool it and enjoy! Do I think that time travel is a bunch of nonsense? Yes, but so what?! I don’t believe in “Letters of Transit,” Facehuggers, or the Force.

I can relate to the hero A LOT; he’s a Veteran with Daddy issues who is trying to get a career going in STEM and he has a young daughter. The film opens with us learning he is teaching high school science and can’t get a private sector job. He feels like he’s meant for more, but can’t get there. He and his wife are hosting a Christmas party and watching soccer. Dan, I know that times are tough, but why bring soccer into it? I don’t think that people watch soccer on purpose. How could they? Why make your life harder? Our future-selves appear and ask for help in fighting aliens who are turning us into snacks. We agree to help and mobilize a global draft.

This is where most critics get worked up. Why help fight a battle that is already lost? I’ll tell you! The movie makes more sense than people think. Why send Dan Forester (Chris Pratt) and millions of other people from our time to fight aliens from the future? They needed cannon fodder while they protected researchers who created a toxin to kill the male and female aliens. Without that toxin, Dan would not have been able to defeat the alien queen. Take that! The whole plan is to get the toxin finished and have Dan go back and kill all the aliens with it. Without it, she would’ve eaten him. Yes, we needed the cannon fodder. If Dan succeeds, wouldn’t that bring all the draftees back to life? Yeah, maybe? Einstein didn’t really didn’t have to deal with too many aliens and wormholes. I would put that in the column of …. relax.

Back to the movie, Dan gets drafted and his wife wants him to get his estranged father to help him remove his draft tracking device. Dan’s father abandoned him and his mother; so, Dan gets angry at his father and decides to honor his draft commitment and fight aliens. He goes to the future with no training, fights aliens, and retrieves the toxin. Way to go, Dan.

These monsters are gross and good adversaries. They’re fast, they shoot spikes, the eat you, they have natural armor, and can coordinate attacks. We are doomed. After he gets the toxin, he meets his grown daughter Muri who is the head of the resistance. We learn Dan fell into a depression because he couldn’t live a bigger life and he abandons his family just like his father did. This is why Muri drafted Dan: She wanted him to be his best self and to be the special person that he needed to be after his military life was over. She gives her father a chance to be a hero again. When Muri finishes the toxin, he goes back to save the future or the past …it’s kinda confusing.

I have given quite a bit of the film away, but it’s still amazing. I appreciate the critique that Charlie (Sam Richardson) brought too much humor to the film. I actually liked it, but I could’ve lived without it as well. Instead of the endless jokes, I would’ve liked more development of Dorian (Edwin Hodge). His lines popped more and brought more seriousness to the film. Were Charlie’s jokes funny? Yes, but while the jokes went on, I thought- I really wish I could hear more from Dorian interacting with Dan.

The direction was very well done. I love a well choreographed action movie without a lot of cutaways. This delivered. I was surprised to learn that Chris McKay’s filmography was heavily in animation. I hope he gets more opportunities for live action. The final battle scene was a lot of fun. I liked that the female characters had depth, kicked ass, and had real arcs. Because of that, my daughters love watching the movie with me. I can only write that we haven’t seen the movie six times.

Documentary Review: Downfall: The Case Against Boening (dir by Rory Kennedy)

Posted on by Lisa Marie Bowman

On October 29th, 2018, Lion Air Flight 610 crashed into the Java sea, killing all 187 passengers and crew.  It was the first accident to involve the Boeing 737 Max series of aircraft and it was also one of the first major air disasters after a period of relative safety in the sky.

A few months later, on March 10th, 2019, Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302 crashed juts six minute after taking off.  All 157 passengers and crew were killed.  Like the Lion Air flight, the plane was a Boeing 737 Max.

At the time, Boeing insinuated that pilot error was to blame for both crashes but several investigations revealed that Boeing, which previously had a reputation for being one of the most safety-conscious companies around, cut corners when it came to the 737 Max series.  In order to cut costs, not all safety protocols were followed.  As a result, many concluded that the 737 Max jets should never have been approved for service to begin with.  After a lengthy congressional hearing, Boeing CEO Dennis Mullenburg stepped down as a result of the scandal.  Despite the fact that over 300 people had been killed in the two crashes and the fact that he left the company in shambles, Mullenburg left Boeing with a 62 million dollar severance.

That’s the story that’s told in the new Netflix documentary Downfall: The Case Against Boeing.  It’s the type of thing that will and should leave you outraged.  Due to the company’s negligence, over 300 people are dead and their families and friends have been left behind to mourn their loss.  Boeing, at first, blamed the pilots, with the implication being that Indonesian and Ethiopian pilots just weren’t as good as their western counterparts.  When the inevitable investigation was launched into just what exactly was going on over at Boeing, the company was less than forthcoming.  There’s a lot to be angry about and the majority of the people who watch the documentary will be angry.

That said, the actual documentary itself is typical of a lot of the docs that turn up on the streaming services.  It deals with an important subject but it does so in a rather superficial manner.  It brings up the relevant issues but it doesn’t actually bother to dig too deeply into them.  “Wow, this is really messed up, right?” the documentary seems to be saying and yes, it is messed up.  But, at the same time, Downfall doesn’t really explore how it came to be so messed up or what can be done to make it less messed up.  Instead, there’s a lot of archival news reports and enough footage of U.S. Rep. Peter DeFazio grilling the Boeing executives that the documentary could pass for a campaign commercial if not for the fact that DeFazio is retiring at the end of his current term.  Aesthetically, the documentary feels more like an extended episode of Dateline or 60 Minutes than an actual examination as to just what exactly was going on at Boeing.  As far as documentaries directed by Kennedys are concerned, Rory Kennedy’s public service docs are certainly preferable to the anti-vax nonsense pushed out by RFK, Jr.  (Rory, it should be noted, is pro-vaccination and has publicly condemned her brother’s anti-vax activities.)  But still, it’s hard not to wish that Downfall had dug just a little deeper.

Film Review: Texas Chainsaw Massacre (dir by David Blue Garcia)

Posted on by Lisa Marie Bowman

Leatherface is back but don’t worry!  He’s mostly just killing hipsters.

The newest version of Texas Chainsaw Massacre is a direct sequel to the classic 1975 film.  50 years after the murders the shocked the world, Leatherface is still missing.  True crime shows still do specials about the massacre at Harlow, Texas and the mysterious murderer who were a mask made out of human skin.  The only survivor of that massacre, Sally Hardestry (Olwen Fouéré, taking over the role from the late Marilyn Burns), went from being a half-crazed hippie to being a Texas Ranger.  She spent decades searching for Leatherface but she never found him.

I can only assume this means that Sally was terrible at her job because this film reveals that Leatherface is still living in the small rural town of Harlow, Texas.  Harlow has been largely abandoned since the original massacre.  But Mrs. Mc (Alice Krige) still owns the orphanage where Leatherface apparently grew up and Leatherface still lives with her, which is weird since Leatherface had a very tight-knit family in the first film and all of the subsequent sequels.  (As opposed to what David Gordon Green did with his Halloween reboot, the new Texas Chainsaw Massacre does not go out if its way to specifically deny the canonicity of the other Chainsaw films.  I, for one, appreciated that.  Regardless to what the critics may say, there’s always been a rather appalling smugness to the way that Green’s Halloween franchise casually wiped out everything that came after Carpenter’s original film.)  Unfortunately, the bank has foreclosed on most of Harlow and the town has been bought by a bunch of Austin hipsters, who are planning on turning the town into a Marfa-style artist’s colony.  I guess the idea is that artists will be attracted to the town by its cannibalistic history, just as some are attracted to Marfa’s frequent UFO spottings.  Of course, the Marfa Lights have never killed anyone but who knows?  Austin’s weird.

When the main hipster and the sheriff order Mrs. Mc to leave the orphanage, she has a heart attack.  Leatherface accompanies her in the ambulance because, apparently, no one finds it odd that there’s a silent, hulking man wandering around in the same location where a silent, hulking man previously killed a lot of people.  About halfway to the hospital, Mrs. Mc dies and Leatherface decides that it’s time to retrieve his tools and go hipster hunting.

The new Texas Chainsaw Massacre isn’t terrible as much as its just generic.  Everything about it feels like it’s been lifted from other recent horror revivals.  The film opens with some stabs at modern relevance, with scary rednecks glaring at the Yankee invaders and Dante (Jacob Latimore) declaring the Harlow represents the “joys of late stage capitalism.”  Lila (Elsie Fisher, who previously starred in Eighth Grade and who gives a good performance here, despite getting stuck with a poorly written character) is a survivor of a school shooting and she gets upset when she sees that the local mechanic owns an AR-15.  The film then turns, very briefly, into a social satire when the smug hipsters are revealed to be just as greedy and superficial as the people that they’re looking down on.  However, once Leatherface grabs his chainsaw, it turns into just another slasher film.  Sally does eventually show up and calls Leatherface a “motherfucker” while pointing a rifle at him but that moment feels a bit too derivative of the recent Halloween films.  Perhaps if Marilyn Burns were still alive and had returned to play the role, Sally vs. Leatherface would have been the iconic horror moment that it was obviously meant to be but, with a new actress who doesn’t even have a Texas accent, it just feels a bit forced.  The problem with this slasher film being generic is that it’s called Texas Chainsaw Massacre.  That’s quite a legacy to live up to and, for a lot of horror fans, generic simply won’t cut it.

Indeed, as I watched this latest version, I couldn’t help but think about what made the original version a classic.  The original version used its low budget to its advantage.  It had a rough, raw feel to it, one that made you feel as if you were watching real people as opposed to local actors.  It also had very little gore, leaving it to the audience to imagine what horror truly went on inside of Leatherface’s kitchen.  (Needless to say, the imagination can always come up with something far more disturbing than anything that could actually be captured on film.)  This new version takes the opposite approach.  If the original worked because it haunted you after the final frame, the new version is all on the surface. There’s a lack of authenticity to this new version of Texas Chainsaw Massacre.  The first film was made by Texans and it was filmed in Texas.  You could look at any scene in the original and feel the heat and the humidity.  This new version was filmed in Bulgaria.  Texas may be in the title but it’s nowhere in the film.

(Indeed, one of the main reasons why the original film was a success was because it was identified as taking place in Texas, a state that scared a lot of people when the film was originally released and a state that, admittedly, probably still scare scares a lot of people, even though we’re all pretty nice down here.  People would laugh off a Vermont Chainsaw Massacre.)

There’s also no family dynamic in this new version.  There’s no sign of Leatherface’s brothers or their ancient grandpa.  Once Mrs. Mc dies, it’s pretty much just Leatherface and no one, not even Sally, comments on the fact that Leatherface didn’t work alone in the first film.  Without his family around, Leatherface just becomes another silent serial killer.  There were times, in the sequel, where he seemed like he had more in common with Rob Zombie’s version of Michael Myers than with the overwhelmed but hard-working Leatherface of the original film.

That said, on the positive side, I did appreciate the remake’s final scene.  It was a bit predictable but it still managed to be enjoyably chaotic.  What’s more annoying?  Leatherface or a self-driving car?

Film Review: My Best Friend Anne Frank (dir by Ben Sombogaart)

Posted on by Lisa Marie Bowman

The year is 1944 and 16 year-old Hannah Goslar (Josephine Arendsen) and her younger sister, Gabi, are among the many Jews being held at the Bergen-Belsen concentration camp.  Death is all around.  At night, when Hannah is sent to empty out the buckets of waste that have been filled up in her barracks, she sees another prisoner being casually shot by the guards.  Whenever things get to be too much for her, Hannah closes her eyes and asks herself, “What would Anne do?”

As terrible as things are where Hannah is being held, it’s rumored that things are even worse behind the wall that runs through the center of the camp.  The less “privileged” prisoners are kept there.  The wall is thin enough that Hannah can talk to the people on the other side, even if she can’t see them.  Hannah asks them if her best friend, Anne, is among them.  “She has beautiful hair,” Hannah says.  The voice on the other side of the wall explains that no one in the other half of the camp has hair.  Everyone on the other side of the wall is being starved and worked to death.

Occasionally, Hannah remembers what life was like before she and her family were arrested by the Nazis.  Two years earlier, she was a student in Amsterdam and her best friend was Anne Frank (Aiko Beemsterboer).  Hannah was shy but Anne definitely wasn’t.  Hannah was often naïve and fearful but Anne was always intellectually curious and up to try almost anything.  Occasionally, they fought as friends sometimes do.  But Hannah always considered Anne to be her best friend.

The Amsterdam scenes do a good job of contrasting Hannah and Anne acting like ordinary teenagers with the evil that’s always lurking in the background.  Haughty soldiers in German military uniforms stroll the streets of Amsterdam, moving with the arrogance of men who know that no one can defy them.  Because Hannah and Anne wear gold stars on their clothing, they have to sneak into the movies and, when they do, they find themselves watching a propaganda newsreel about how much better life is in the Netherlands now that the Germans are in charge.  Hannah often sees her father having hushed conversations with other nervous-looking adults.

Of course, those of us watching at home know what is going to happen.  We know who Anne Frank was.  Or, I should say, I hope we know who Anne Frank was.  I tend to assume that everyone knows about the horror of the Holocaust and that everyone knows about the anti-Semitism that fueled the rise of Adolf Hitler and the Third Reich.  Unfortunately, over the past year or so, my faith has been shaken.  Anti-Semitism has never gone away but, in recent years, it seems as if it’s become socially acceptable within certain parts of mainstream society and that really should scare the Hell out of anyone who has any knowledge of history.  I have seen reportedly intelligent people either playing down the horrors of the Holocaust or trying to act as if the Holocaust was not about the Third Reich’s obsession with wiping out a race of people.  Whoopi Goldberg may have been the most famous person to have recently gotten the facts of the Holocaust wrong but she’s hardly the only one.

To me, that’s why a film like My Best Friend Anne Frank is important because it reminds us of not only what happened at camps like Bergen-Belsen but also what happened beforehand.  The camps and the ideology that fueled them didn’t just spring up out of nowhere.  Instead, they were built while the rest of the world tried to deny what was happening right before their eyes.  The concentration camp scenes in this film are harrowing but even more disturbing are the Amsterdam scenes where people casually walk by signs that declare that no Jews allowed and almost everyone merely averts their eyes.  When Anne and Hannah walk through Amsterdam, they are insulted not just by the Nazis but also by the Dutch citizens who don’t wear gold stars, many of who seem to take an attitude of, “At least it’s not me being othered.”

My Best Friend Anne Frank is currently on Netflix.  Josephine Arendsen and Aiko Beemsterboer both give good and heart-breaking performances as Hannah and Anne.  The film is not just a story of survival under the worst of circumstances but it’s also a tribute to the power of friendship.  Though Anne did not survive the camps, Hannah was liberated after 14 months at Bergen-Belsen and now lives in Jerusalem.  She is now 93 years old.

I Watched Old Fashioned (2014, dir. by Rik Swartzwelder)

Posted on by Dazzling Erin

Clay (Rik Swartzwelder) is a former frat boy who has spent the last nine years trying to find love the old fashioned way.  He won’t accept a kiss on the lips.  He says that all dating does is make people act in superficial and dishonest ways.  He says that he cannot even be alone with a woman unless she is wife.  (Clay’s not married.)  Because he’s so old fashioned, it makes sense that Clay would open an antique store in a small town.  (Of course, he’s named the store Old Fashioned.)  When a single, free-spirited woman named Amber (Elizabeth Roberts) runs out of gas in the town and then impulsively rents the apartment above the shop, Clay is forced to reconsider his rigid rules about dating.

At first, I didn’t know what to make of Old Fashioned.  I can be old fashioned about some things myself but Clay took it to extremes and I wasn’t sure why anyone would want to waste their time trying to get his attention.  Yes, people can be superficial when they’re dating and they act differently once they’re in a committed relationship but what’s the other option?  Arranged marriages?  Only getting to know people through church socials and holiday picnics?  Clay didn’t have the answers for that.  Instead, he just said that he would get married when he met the “right woman” and that he would instinctively know who she was.  Nice plan, Clay. Too bad the real world is a little more complicated than that.

Luckily, it turned out that the movie agreed with me, with Amber challenging Clay’s beliefs and regularly calling him out for his holier-than-thou attitude.  Clay wasn’t presented as being wrong for choosing to be old fashioned but instead for being so extreme about it.  Some good things came about as a result of Clay’s beliefs, like the scene where Clay keeps his best friend from cheating on his fiancée.  But, by being so judgmental and unwilling to compromise, Clay was also intentionally shutting himself off from the world.  He was using his beliefs as an excuse to build walls and keep anyone from getting too close to him.  The movie takes its time in explaining Clay’s backstory and the events that led to him becoming so old fashioned and it turns out that Clay used to be bad even by the standards of the typical frat boy.  Trying to make up for the past, Clay has swung from one extreme to another but he’s never learned how to forgive himself or others for their mistakes.  I still had a hard time believing that Amber would have ever put up with him in the first place but it’s good that she did because Clay really needed someone to help him snap out of it.

Old Fashioned is less about how people should date and more about the importance of being willing to forgive and to accept that no one can ever be perfect.  That’s a pretty worthwhile message, especially in today’s day and age.  Forgiveness should never become old fashioned.

A Blast From The Past: Big Man On Campus (dir by Sid Davis)

Posted on by Lisa Marie Bowman

The 1963 educational short film, Big Man on Campus, tells the story of Jerry, a 13 year-old with the attitude of a 16 year-old.

Jerry thought he was the coolest kid at his middle school.  He thought throwing a milk carton was no big deal.  He thought not studying for his classes wasn’t the worst thing in the world.  He thought all of his classmates would like him if he rode his bicycle into traffic.  He thought starting fights was no biggie.  He thought everyone wanted to listen to another chorus of Grease Lightning.  He thought Sandy was just a summer fling and that having the Ramones play at the local high school wouldn’t be a big deal.  Jerry thought a lot of things.

Jerry was wrong.

Fortunately, the Vice Principal was there to set Jerry straight.  That’s right, the vice principal.  Jerry may thing he’s a big man on campus but he’s not even important enough to rate a meeting with the principal.  Instead, he has to make due with the guy who teaches Chemistry.  It takes a while for the vice principal to step out of his office but when he does, it’s obvious that the vice principal, with his navy haricut and his eyeglasses, isn’t going to stand for any nonconformity.  Most afternoons, the vice principal would be busy tracking down and tearing up flyers for the Fair Play for Cuba Committee.  Instead, on this day in November of 1963, the vice principal is having to discipline Jerry.  Not only has Jerry caused a disruption at the school but he’s also allowed for the proliferation of pro-Castro propaganda.  Can Jerry be saved or is he destined to become a pinball wizard with his own holiday camp?

You probably already know the answer.  This educational film comes to us from Sid Davis, whose films were best known for their use of an extremely judgmental and rather dramatic narrator.  The Sid Davis narrators were the ones who wouldn’t only explain what had happened but who would also offer up questions like, “You never thought one little action could ruin your life and the lives of so many others, did you?”  That narrator is heard in Big Man on Campus but we also hear the voice of Jerry, trying to convince himself that his actions were no big deal and that everyone is totally overreacting.

Of course, deep down, Jerry knows that he’s no good.  He knows that his mother is setting him up for a life of crime by arguing that “boys will be boys.”  He knows that he’s destined to end up at juvenile hall and, after that, a life of unemployment.  He knows all of this but he needs the help of a seriously annoyed adult to help him truly understand it.  He needs the hard-earned, war-scarred, and apparently nearsighted wisdom of the vice principal.

Can Jerry be saved or is he destined to end up working a prop comic in Wichita Falls?  Watch and find out!

The TSL’s Grindhouse: C.C. and Company (dir by Seymour Robbie)

Posted on by Lisa Marie Bowman

As our long-time readers know, I’ve seen my share of bad movies but it’s been a while since I’ve seen one as bad as 1970’s C.C. and Company.

C.C. and Company is about a drifter named C.C. Ryder (played by Joe Namath, who was a pro football quarterback at the time).  Ryder rides through the desert on his dorky motorcycle.  He doesn’t have a job.  He doesn’t have much money.  He does have a lot of hair and he also has a lot of teeth.  We know that because it’s rare that there’s ever moment when C.C. isn’t smiling.  C.C. is perhaps the most cheerful amateur criminal that I’ve ever seen.  Even when C.C. really shouldn’t be smiling, he’s smiling.  There are moments when people try to kill C.C. and he responds with a smile.  This could be a sign of C.C.’s devil-may-care-attitude but I think it has more to do with Joe Namath being a really bad actor.

C.C. is apparently a member of a motorcycle gang.  I say apparently because no one in the gang seems to like him and they’re constantly beating up on him.  The leader of the gang is Moon (William Smith) and among the members of the gang is an intimidating figure named Crow (Sid Haig).  Smith and Haig were both professional actors and genuine tough guys.  They not only knew how to act on camera but they also knew how to throw a punch without faking it.  Having them act opposite Namath doesn’t really accomplish much beyond emphasizing just how terrible an actor Namath was.  Even though Moon is a Mansonesque creep, you still find yourself rooting for him whenever he and C.C. get into a fight because Smith creates an actual character whereas Namath…. well, he doesn’t.  I sat through this entire film and never once did I find myself wondering what C.C.’s initials stood for.  That’s how uninterested I was in C.C.’s life.

Anyway, C.C. meets the wealthy and chic Ann McCalley (Ann-Margaret) after Ann’s limo breaks down in the middle of the desert.  C.C. not only fixes the limo but he also saves Ann from Crow and Lizard (Greg Mullaney).  It’s love at first sight but, unfortunately, Ann has places to go so she drives off and C.C. returns to the biker camp and watches as Moon sends his girlfriend, Pom Pom (Jennifer Billingsley), out to make money on the highway.  As I watched all of this, I found myself wondering how everyone else in the gang got stuck with names like Moon, Lizard, Crow, Rabbit, Pom Pom, and Zit-Zit (my favorite) but somehow C.C. was able to keep his innocent initials.  The movie never explained the ritual behind receiving motorcycle gang names and I think that was a missed opportunity.

Eventually, C.C. trades in his dorky motorcycle for a Kawasaki, largely because Kawasaki apparently paid the film’s producers a lot of money.  C.C. enters a race and wins.  Ann sees him win and falls even more in love with him.  C.C. gets into a fight with the gang and then he and Ann head to …. well, it looked a lot like Reno but honestly, who knows for sure?  Eventually, Moon and the gang track C.C. and Ann down and it all leads to one last fight.  We never do find out if the “company” of the title referred to Ann and her rich friends or Moon and the gang.  Not even C.C. seems to know for sure.

So, there’s a lot of reasons why C.C. and Company doesn’t really work but mostly it all comes down to the lead non-performance of Joe Namath as C.C.  There’s nothing tough or intimidating or rebellious about Namath.  C.C. is the biker you can bring home to meet your parents.  William Smith and Sid Haig are a lot more fun but they’re playing totally disreputable characters.  Namath and Ann-Margaret have zero romantic chemistry and the entire film has the look of a cheap made-for-TV movie.  Between C.C. and Company and Altamont, 1970 was not a good year to be a biker groupie.

That said, there is one good scene in C.C. and Company, where C.C. and Ann go out dancing.  While Joe Namath awkwardly shakes his shoulders while flashing that ever-present grin, Ann-Margaret dances as if the fate of the world depended upon her.  One year after the release of this movie, she would prove herself as dramatic actress and receive her first Oscar nomination for Carnal Knowledge.

Film Review: KIMI (dir by Steven Soderbergh)

Posted on by Lisa Marie Bowman

KIMI, the latest addition to Steven Soderbergh’s interesting but frustratingly inconsistent filmography, stars Zoe Kravitz as Angela Childs.  Angela is an agoraphobic tech worker who is living in Seattle during the COVID pandemic.  A sexual assault survivor, Angela spends her days and nights safely locked away in her apartment.  She works from home.  She always keeps her mask some place near.  Occasionally, she’ll have a video session with her therapist.  Her mom calls and scolds her for not going outside.  She exchanges texts and occasionally more with Terry Hughes (Byron Bowers), an attorney who lives across the street.

And, she’s watched by Kevin (Devin Ratray).  Kevin also lives across the street and, throughout the film, he’s occasionally seen watching her from his top floor apartment.  It’s creepy but it’s not surprising.  KIMI is a film in which everyone is being watched by someone else.  Sometimes, they realize it and often they don’t.  Welcome to the Surveillance State, where privacy is the ultimate illusion.

Angela works for the Amygdala Corporation.  Under the leadership of CEO Bradley Hasling (Derek DelGuado), Amygdala has created KIMI, the virtual assistant that is superior to Alexa because all of KIMI’s errors are corrected not by a pre-programmed algorithm but instead by human workers who are constantly listening to KIMI’s data stream and correcting errors.  Angela is one of those engineers.  Usually, her job consists of programming KIMIs to play individual Taylor Swift songs as opposed to building Taylor Swift playlists.  When one owner calls KIMI a peckerwood, Angela programs the KIMI to understand that peckerwood is an “insult; vulgar.”  However, one data stream contains the sounds of what Angela believes to be a sexual assault and a subsequent murder.

Uniquely, for a film like this, Angela’s struggle is not to get people to believe that she heard what she heard.  Instead, her struggle is to get the evidence to the people who need to hear it for themselves.  Angela is terrified of leaving her apartment and, once she finally does, the outside world confirms all of her fears.  KIMI is a film about paranoia, a portrait of a world where everyone can be tracked and no one — from Angela’s too-helpful boss (Rita Wilson) to the man who casually walks by with an umbrella — can be trusted.

As I’ve said in the past, Steven Soderbergh has always been hit and miss for me.  It’s remarkable how many Soderbergh films that I love but it’s equally remarkable just how many Soderbergh films I absolutely loathe.  At his best, he can be a clever stylist and, at his worst, he can be painfully pretentious.  And yet, regardless of anything else, you do have to respect Soderbergh’s willingness to experiment with different genres and styles.  Soderbergh never stops working, despite the fact that he announced his retirement years ago.  Despite getting off to a slow start, KIMI is one of Soderbergh’s more entertaining thrillers, one that does a great job creating an atmosphere of paranoia and one that is also blessed with excellent performances from Zoe Kravitz and Rita Wilson, who makes good use of her limited screen time.  KIMI is a well-made Hitchcockian thriller and, along with No Sudden Move, it’s a return to form for Soderbergh after the two terrible movies that he made with Meryl Streep, The Laundromat and Let Them All Talk.  Yes, Soderbergh can be inconsistent but when he’s good …. he’s very, very good.  (Sometimes, he’s even brilliant.)  Narratively, KIMI may be a relatively simple film by Soderbergh standards but it’s undeniably effective.

Along with being a portrait of our paranoid age, KIMI is very much a pandemic thriller.  Angela mentions that her relationship with Terry started during the lockdowns, a time when no one found it strange that someone would be unwilling to leave their apartment.  When Angela does finally step out of her apartment, she is, of course, fully masked up and her paranoia about being followed severs as a metaphor for the paranoia that many people felt (and continue to feel) during the pandemic.  KIMI is not the first pandemic thriller and it certainly won’t be the last.  Still, what’s interesting to me that the pandemic subtext will probably be more noticeable to those who lived in states with mask mandates and aggressively regulated lockdowns than it will be for those of us who live in states that never had mandates and which, for lack of a better term, re-opened last year.  Half the people viewing KIMI will nod in recognition as Angela grabs her mask before walking up to her front door and as she quickly dashes down the street, careful not get too close to anyone else.  The other half will feel as if they’re watching some sort of dystopian science fiction film.  It all depends on where you’ve lived for the past two years.

Film Review: Shut In (dir by DJ Caruso)

Posted on by Lisa Marie Bowman

Shut In is not a political movie.

It’s important to point that out because much of the online reaction to Shut In will be totally political.  That’s because it’s the second film to have been produced by The Daily Wire.  And yes, Ben Shapiro is listed as one of the film’s producers.  For many, it doesn’t matter that the film’s script appeared on The Black List of the best unproduced scripts in Hollywood.  (Of course, some notoriously terrible movies have been made out of the scripts that appeared on The Blacklist — remember Cedar Rapids? — so maybe it’d be best not to call too much attention to that.)  It won’t matter that the script was initially purchased by a major studio or that Jason Bateman (who is hardly a right-wing media figure) was originally set to direct it before the project was delayed by the pandemic.  All that will matter is that the film was produced by the Daily Wire and therefore, it will be judged as being some sort of political statement.

Indeed, when the film’s premiere was streamed on YouTube earlier tonight, I kept one eye on the movie and another eye on the chat comments.  About 80% of them were from people saying, “Let’s go Brandon!”  18% were from people saying, “Biden 2024 Harris 2028.”  And 2% of the comments were from some group of weirdoes who were obsessed with Liz Cheney.  The film itself might not be political but the film’s audience definitely was and probably will continue to be so.  I imagine most hardcore online liberals will automatically hate the film because of who produced it while most hardcore online conservatives will be tempted to overpraise it and cite it as proof that a good film can be made outside of the Hollywood system.  It’s tempting to say that’s just the way of the world nowadays but, to be honest, it’s really just the way of the extremely online world.  Most people won’t care one way or the other.  They’ll just view it as a being an effective thriller.

And, make not doubt about it, Shut In is not a bad film.  It’s an effectively tense thriller, one that has plenty of suspense and which makes good use of its limited budget.  If it’s never quite a great film, that’s because there’s a few pacing and plausibility issues, especially early on in the film.

Shut In stars Rainey Qualley as Jessica, a former dug addict who has escaped from her abusive ex and who is now trying to start a new life, with her young daughter and her newborn son, in an isolated farmhouse.  Unfortunately, when her ex, Rob (Jake Horowitz), and his scummy friend, Sammy (Indie film legend Vincent Gallo, making his first film appearance in ten years), show up at the house, Jessica ends up getting locked in the pantry while Rob and Sammy ransack the house and, most importantly, steal her phone so she can’t call for help.  Trapped in the pantry, Jessica tries to figure out a way to escape while also trying to instruct her young daughter on how to take care of her baby brother.  The whole time, of course, she’s aware that Sammy and Rob could return at any minute.

Director D.J. Caruso does a good job of building and maintaining tension throughout the film.  The majority of the film’s action takes place in that pantry and, just like Jessica, we find ourselves forced to try to interpret the sometimes random footsteps and snippets of conversation that we hear throughout the house.  Rainey Qualley, who is the daughter of Andie MacDowell and who has a Southern accent that is almost as prominent as her mother’s, is sympathetic in the role of Jessica and does a good job of playing up not only her fear but her strength.  Jessica is a survivor and it’s difficult not to admire her as she searches for a way to escape.  Vincent Gallo is older but still as uniquely photogenic as he was during his indie heyday.  He’s memorably creepy as Sammy.

As I said, it’s not a flawless film.  It takes a while for things to really get going and, towards the end of the film, a few of the characters behave in ways that defy logic.  One key moment depends on a character surviving something that, by all logic, should have easily killed them.  It may not be a political film but there are a few bits of heavy-handed religious symbolism, including an injury that deliberately calls to mind stigmata.  That said, when Jessica finally begins to fight back, it’s an enjoyably cathartic moment.

Shut In is an effective thriller and a determinedly non-political one.  If nothing else, it’ll keep you out of the pantry.

International Film Review: Into the Wind (dir by Kristofer Rus)

Posted on by Lisa Marie Bowman

Ania (Sonia Mietielica) is the privileged daughter of a wealthy doctor.  She’s graduated from an exclusive high school in Warsaw and now, she’s about to start studying medicine in London.  The plan is that she’ll eventually take over her father’s medical practice and that she will, of course, marry someone from her upper class social circle.  Ania is haunted by the death of her artist mother and still struggles to get along with her stepmother (Sonia Bohosiewicz).

Michal (Jakub Sasak) is a handsome but poor athlete who works at the local beach resort.  At night, he’s a waiter.  During the day, he’s a kitesurfing instructor.  He may not have money or an education but he’s sensitive and artistic.  He likes good music, good weed, and hanging out good people.  He’s laid back but he cares about his friends and he’s got a romantic soul.

Together …. they solve crimes!

No, actually, they don’t.  There are no crimes to be solved in Into The Wind.  Instead, they meet when Ania accompanies her father, her stepmother, and her new baby brother to the resort for the summer.  While Ania listens to her father talk about how the pandemic has not really effected his practice (this is a 2022 film so, of course, there is talk of COVID in the background), Michal serves food and wine and is largely unseen by the other guests.  (The wait staff, as he explains it, is meant to be invisible.)  However, Ania sees him and he sees her.  And soon, they’re in love, they’re hanging out on the beach, they’re listening to music, and they’re kitesurfing!  But they’re also from two different worlds.  Ania’s father does not want his daughter to end up with a waiter.  And Michal’s friends are convinced that Ania will eventually return to her safe, upper class existence and Michal will be left heart-broken.

This Polish film is narratively predictable but visually stylish.  The plot should be familiar to anyone who has ever seen Dirty Dancing but then again, it’s not exactly as if Dirty Dancing was the most original film ever made.  That said, though the plot may be predictable, the film has enough lovely shots of the beach and the two leads have more than enough romantic chemistry to keep things watchable.  This is a good film to watch after a long and exhausting day, when you just want a simple story, a happy ending, and some nice pictures to go along with it.  Speaking for myself, as someone who spent last week dealing with below freezing temperatures and ice on the ground, the beach and the ocean looked very inviting and, for that matter, so did Jakub Sasak.  The beach and the cast are pretty and that’s pretty much all that a film like this really needs to work.

That said, I did really like the Kitesurfing scenes.  Kitesurfing is something that I personally would never do, seeing as how it would mean confronting not only my fear of drowning but also, potentially, my fear of heights but, even with that in mind, the film still made it a look like something that everyone should try at least once.  The scenes of people skimming across and occasionally floating above the water take on an almost religious grandeur as the surfer becomes onr with the forces of nature and fate.  Those scenes are exciting to watch, even if the story taking place around them is thoroughly predictable.