Avengers: Endgame review

In 1986, the Star Trek movie franchise took a diversion from the drama to situation based comedy. The film, Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home was funny, and smart. It was also a risk that worked as it was well received by the critics, general audience and fans. Avengers: Endgame takes a risk also. It is the sequel to last year's Avengers: Infinity War, an extremely fast and kinetic superhero movie. Endgame decides to focus much on the characters and has quite a bit of humor.

Endgame takes place after Thanos (Josh Brolin) has snapped away half of life in the universe with the Infinity Gauntlet in Infinity War. And if you're lost at this moment, I'm not going to go over all twenty one films in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. (MCU) Did I get all of them? I think I've seen almost all of them with the exception of The Incredible Hulk. (2008) As a kid, I was never a fan of the jolly er... angry green giant. Just accept the fact that earth's mightiest heroes have lost.

Anyway, the surviving Avengers find out which planet that Thanos has his retirement home on. They decide to go and pay him and see if they can borrow the Gauntlet and snap every one back into  existence. I mean not really "borrow." Unfortunately, Thanos has destroyed the Infinity Stones that power the gauntlet. Stop looking at me that way. I know it's geeky. Well, Avengers lose again.

 Flash five years forward. Tony Stark aka Iron Man (Robert Downey Jr.) is living a happy life because he has a family with a daughter. Steve Rogers aka Captain America (Chris Evans) is leading group therapy sessions with Bob Newhart just kidding about Bob Newart. You remember his show? Too old. Okay. Natasha Romanoff aka Black Widow (Scarlett Johansson) is leading what's left of the Avengers but there ain't that much too do since half of the universe  ceases to exist. Look, let's face box office reality here. You don't think half of Marvel's heroes are going to stay dead, do you? I'm pretty sure Disney is going to fix this in the script since Black Panther (Chadwick Boseman) was a gigantic box office movie. And Sony is going to want Spider-Man (Tom Holland) back, especially since he's got a movie out this summer!

Well, Scott Lang aka Ant-Man (Paul Rudd) reappears from the movie wrecking end credits scene in last year's Ant-Man and the Wasp. You see he's been in the Quantum Realm but hasn't aged. He has an idea. Go back in time and steal the Infinity Stones.. Bring them back to the future and voila. Snap everybody back into existence.

Okay, anytime you have time travel in a movie, some in the audience are going to sit there and think about the "grandfather paradox." I do.  But as the movie correctly points out in a couple of places, this ain't Back to the Future or Star Trek, the original series' episode  "The City on the Edge of Forever."   Going back into time does not change the present. It may create parallel universes or an alternate reality. But our heroes have that figured out.  They will also return the stones back to where they found them. I'll save the problems in this plot for another post. At this point, stop thinking about this, okay?

Well, if you've been watching any of the MCU films, you know the Infinity Stones are in many of them.  And Endgame takes our heroes back to visit some of the scenes. . This creates a wonderful valentine to the fans to see the Avengers visit the great movies of years past.  It also creates hilarious opportunities for the heroes as they see themselves in the past timeline.  There are also touching moments as well.

Congratulations to screenwriters Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely for creating a script that takes an adventurous, original route into more character than action. It's warm and funny. And yes, you will weep along with  the laughing. But this is a superhero movie and there's going to beepic  heroic action.  It all works beautifully.

Composer Alan Silvestri sticks to classical, swing and jazz. A great choice in music not because those are some of my favorite genres. This film is meant to be classic. So use music that fits and stands the test of time.  The score is just lovely and worth listening as you watch the credits because there's no end credit scene.

As for the cast, there are no false moments with their performances.  Robert Downey Jr., Chris Hemsworth, Chris Evans, Mark Ruffalo, Scarlett Johansson, Paul Rudd, Josh Brolin, Brie Larson and Karen Gillan all are more than adequate. But let me praise everybody for their comic timing more than anything.

Directors Joe and Anthony Russo are back from Infinity War.. They are actually better at directing the quiet, touching and funny scenes than action. While their action direction is too frenetic to be able to see clearly. I wish they would slow down and use more bodies in action than fast cutting. Still, they absolutely know how to stage a great moment. When Captain America says, "Avengers assemble" you'll want to join the fight. (That's Captain America's line from the comic books.)

If you've loved the MCU movies, go see Avengers: Endgame. If you love cinema, go see Avengers: Endgame. It's exciting, inspiring, touching and funny. The grade is A.

Captive State review

Captive State sounded like a good idea for a movie. It's a story about aliens invading earth and forcing their will on the population and that includes making humanity live by the aliens' rule of law. But good ideas for movies need execution.

The film starts out in flashback. Gabriel Drummond sees his mother and cop father killed as they try to escape the alien invasion. We flash forward where the aliens have conquered the planet and have placed their political syetem on Chicago. Ashton's father's partner, William Mulligan (John Goodman) works for the aliens enforcing the laws and hunting down human resistance. Gabriel is now a young man and is played by Ashton Sanders from Moonlight. He works at some factory doing something. I have no idea what he does except he seems to be a runner for the resistance. Folks, that's all you need to know about the plot as he disappears from the middle of the film The resistance has an assassination plan but because there are problems with this screenplay, I'm going to stop here in talking about the story.

So, I'm sitting in the theater when a woman in the back says, "I have no idea what is going on." I nodded in agreement. The utter lack of exposition in this movie kills it. I had no ideal what Gabriel does or why he does certain actions. And why is the resistance trying to assassinate this particular alien? How do the human tracking devices work? We, humans love our freedom but why are the people resisting? I had so many questions that I didn't care what happened towards the third act of this movie.

I also have a rule in monster movies. The film must clearly show the monster. Director and co-writer Rupert Wyatt (Rise of the Planet of the Apes) has many of the scenes where the aliens are filmed at night or in dark garages. I couldn't see them. The best I can describe the main aliens as looking like a big hair brush with arms and legs. You want a top grade from me? Clearly show the monster.

This film may have been better off as a longer film or even a TV series. Of course, it would have to compete with the better resistance versus alien occupation TV series of Falling Skies. The confusing screenplay, and badly shot scenes make this movie a non-rental and wait for cable. The grade is C Plus.

Replicas review

Look as an amateur film critic, I should judge a movie on how good it is not reasons I want you to see a flick. But there are three reasons I like Replicas as a guilty pleasure. I'll tell you two of them now so you can skip this or read this short review. One. Trump really hates the people of Puerto Rico. And they've suffered from Hurricane Maria. No matter how you feel about Trump, the people of Puerto Rico  are our citizens. Replicas was filmed there. And I hope more films are made there to help the economy. Two. Alice Eve co-stars. Look, she took a bad rap from politically correct Trekkies for the underwear scene in Star Trek Into the Darkness (2013) She's an excellent actress who deserves more work.

Replicas is about scientist William Foster (Keanu Reeves) who is trying to map a dead man's brain onto an android, giving control of the android's functions over to a human albeit a dead one. And it's not working well. His assistant is an expert in cloning, Ed. (Thomas Middleditch) Living with William on Puerto Rico is Foster's wife Mona (Alice Eve) and their three children. They're pretty much your normal, happy family until disaster happens. On a family outing, Foster has an auto accident. Mona and the kids are killed. Well, this being a science fiction movie, you can guess what happens next. William will attempt to bring his family back with the use of cloning and the brain mapping technology.

I'm not a big Keanu Reeves fan. I like many of his films but have found his acting to be stiff as if he doesn't seem to understand who his character is. At times he sounds like he's merely reading his lines. Here, he is no different than his other performances. Inconsistent. There are times he's quite good, other times not so much. English Alice Eve does a good American accent and is excellent in this film. She demonstrates the confusion of the horror, curiosity and emotional attachment to her family needed for this movie. John Ortiz is the William's boss, Jones. He's appropriately harsh and mercenary.

Director Jeffrey Nachmanoff is competent. Action scenes are clear and he relates the drama well. One big problem. The film clearly has budget issues. The decision to use CGI for the android was a mistake. It looks like an old fashioned stop motion character. The better decision should have been to use an actor in costume. The movement would have been smoother.

Stephen Hamel's story and Chad St. John's screenplay is fascinating. It made me think, "What does it mean to be a human?" I wondered do we have souls? One issue though. Jones' actions are barely explained and the screenplay expects you to accept how he knows things. It would have been better to have scenes that demonstrate his motives. I'm talking about a scene in the third act where you will ask yourself, "How did Jones figure that out?" And while it's explained with a throwaway line, it comes off lazy.

Replicas will surprise you. Because you will expect this movie to go down the horror movie path. I mean bringing back loved ones from death almost never works. It's the unexpected direction into William's agony that makes this movie work. Rent this one.   The grade is B.

Robin Hood review

There have been many productions of the English folk tale of Robin Hood. The last movie version I saw was Ridley Scott's dour Robin Hood. (2010) And to be frank, none have bested the classic Errol Flynn version, The Adventures of Robin Hood. (1938) Now comes this year's Robin Hood to take on the legend of the man who steals from the rich and gives to the poor.

Lord Robin of Loxley (Taren Egerton) is drafted to fight in The Crusades is taken away from his love, Marian. (Eve Hewson) While in the Holy Lands. he becomes disheartened by war and tires to prevent the execution of Yahya's (Jamie Foxx) son. Robin returns to England to find that the Sheriff of Nottingham (Ben Mendelsohn) is seizing property and taxing the population to fund the war. Yahy had come to England to discover who is funding the war and try to stop it. He sees Robin and offers to help him rebel against the Sheriff.

Okay, you've got to be wondering how a hip African American actor like Jamie Foxx is going to be fit into a thirteenth century English folk tale. And if you're thinking it's a bit silly, you would be right. I mean this version of Robin Hood with Foxx reminded me of 1991's Robin Hood: The Prince of Thieves with it's cramming of the talented African American Morgan Freeman into that movie And don't get me wrong, I'm all for diversity when it's not artificial. The problem with this casting will become apparent. By the way Mel Brooks had some fun with the cramming of a hip African American in an English folk tale. In Robin Hood: Men in Tights (1993) it was with Dave Chappelle in the Freeman role. Brooks also added some rap music.

David James Kelly and Ben Chandler'screenplay tries to put some modern touches in this folk tale. I mean the Sheriff is a tyrant and he decries the migration of foreigners. Sound familiar? And there is a theme that war is perpetuated by men in power. But if you are going to go with this type of metaphor, you better write an interesting and entertaining movie. I did not really care about what was happening to the people. And get this. Robin's merry men are given a short shrift. We don't even get the fabled Sherwood Forest until the end and then it's a throwaway line. And then there is Foxx's character. Robin Hood is supposed to be unknown to the authorities because most of the time he's wearing a hood. But Foxx runs around medieval England without a mask. Think about it. He's a hip black guy in the middle of lily white England. And no one notices.

But what about the performances? Well, they're okay given the material. That being said, I couldn't help but notice that Egerton and Mendelsohn looked like they just got a five hundred dollar haircut from a Beverly Hills stylist. I mean didn't guys in the thirteenth century have long hair? Good to see F. Murray Abraham again even if it's a stereotypical villainous Cardinal.

Director Otto Bathurst doesn't handle the action scenes well. He relies on fast cutting and the choices
in the editing don't allow the audience to enjoy the stunts or the action. Second, this movie looks low budget as it feels as if every scene has been shot on one set. And it's a set that looks like one street. If the script would only allow the Robin Hood to say venture into Sherwood Forest but alas it was not to be.

Look if you're going to do a fresh take on the Robin Hood legend, then get it out of the thirteenth century.  I have fond memories of a science fiction take in the late sixties.  It was a cartoon called Rocket Robin Hood. Of course there's Robin and the Seven Hoods (1964) featuring Frank Sinatra.

Robin Hood hints at a sequel.  I'm guessing that the producers are optimistic that  this movie will do great at the box office or home video. .  I say to them, I believe that Republicans will support Medicare for All.  Keep waiting, America.  Both have equal chances of happening.   And hey Taren Egerton, don't hold your breath for a sequel. Get ready for the next Kingsman. The grade for Robin Hood is C.

Best Science Fiction Film of 2018

This year's best science fiction film of the year could be considered a family movie.  It's all about family.  Just turn it off once the credits roll because the mid-credit scenes wreck it unless you've see Avengers: Infinity War.  The "coveted"  Basement Blog Science Fiction Film of 2018 goes to:

Ant-Man and the Wasp.

It's a mix of quantum mechanics, The Incredible Shrinking Man, Honey I Shrunk the Kids, a family's love, and comedy.  It's better than its predecessor.

Best Film of 2018

While the Oscars have no host and are afraid of offending people, here at the Basement Blog, we have no such fear. We also don't have a show, host, or staff.   You see it's just me. But I digress. There's one film in 2018 that deserves the 'coveted"  Basement Blog Film of the Year for 2018. It is:

BlacKKKlansman

Director Spike Lee mixes beautiful filmmaking, humor and social commentary in a tale of an African American police officer infiltrating the Klan. When one listens to the racist ideas of the Klan, one can hear them echoed today with our current president. President Trump.  Lee sends a strong message against hatred in America.

The Mule review

It's sad to say this but the reality of life is that those that we admire age and will face the end of their lives. Legendary actor and director Clint Eastwood is eighty eight. And to be honest, it is the twilight of his career. But like the late director Akira Kurasawa, he's not going out gentle into that good night. In The Mule, Eastwood stars and directs a story based on a real life a man in his eighties named Leo Sharp who ran drugs for a Mexican drug cartel.

This story does take some fictional turns but the gist is the same. Illinois resident Earl Stone (Clint Eastwood) is an old man in his nineties who was a Korean War veteran and expert horticulturist. It's the early two thousands and he sells his flowers from his farm but does not see the advent of the internet. Stone is involved in his prize winning lilies that he neglects his daughter Iris played down to earth by Eastwood's daughter, Alison Eastwood. This also aggravates Iris' mother and his ex-wife Mary. (Dianne Wiest) His closest familial relationship is his granddaughter, Ginny. (Taissa Farmiga)

A decade or so later, the internet with its ability to sell flowers online kills his business. And while visiting Ginny and seeking help, a Mexican friend of hers offers Earl a chance to drive his truck for some buddies who turn out to be drug dealers. Earl agrees and after a couple of "errands" he becomes an extremely capable drug runner or mule. He's so successful that he is earning hundreds of thousands of dollars. Meanwhile, DEA agents Bates (Bradley Cooper) and Trevino (Michael Pena) are tracking Stone's connections looking to bust the operation.

As usual, Eastwood attracts a very talented cast. His daughter, Allison is good as he neglected daughter. Taissa Farmiga is quite real as a working class granddaughter. Ignacio Serricchio plays Julio, a cold cartel handler and he's excellent in depicting the humanity in guy who's bad but has some goodness somewhere in him. Eastwood is good but it's tough for him to play a guy who's probably a little goofy and should be afraid of who he's dealing with. I mean when was the last time, you've seen Eastwood play as a character who was in fear. That doesn't hurt this film but one problem is that Eastwood and Nick Schenk's screenplay gives too much time to everyone, including Eastwood himself. From Wiest's scenes to Eastwood's party celebrating the restoration of a VFW, it's an excess that the film needed to be cut so it would be tighter.

One should applaud Eastwood and Schenk for not making Stone a perfect hero. He's not. He's a guy who at times is generous but the film always reminds you that he's a drug mule working for some really bad "hombres." Eastwood's direction is clean without interfering with his actors and the story. His shots are clean and clear. He's able to convey the tension of the story of an elderly guy who trying to stay ahead of the law and not anger the dangerous cartel.

Eastwood still has it as a director. And more importantly, he knows a good story. The grade for The Mule is B Plus.