I was rooting for this one and it did not let me down. If you've spent any time reading this site, you probably already know that I'm a fan of writer/director Eric England. In full disclosure, he and I have been friendly online and he has even joined me on the podcast a couple of times. If you think this means I cannot give his latest film as objective a review as I am capable of giving, you should stop reading now. I am going to do my best to be fair, but keep in mind that no single review you have ever read -- not from any critic -- is 100% objective. It is not possible when examining art. I'm not particularly interested in objectivity in my film discussions, anyway, but rather curated subjectivity. I want to hear how a person feels, not some detached position.
But this is a conversation for another day. We're here to talk about Get the Girl, Eric England's fourth feature and his most accomplished film to date. It's a super fan, super entertaining bloody black comedy starring Justin Dobies as Clarence, a quote-unquote nice guy who loves beautiful bartender Alex (Elizabeth Whitson) from afar. If only she would get to know him, she'd understand just how right they are for each other, you know? To finally get some face to face time, he enlists the help of Patrick (Noah Segan), a sort-of scummy stranger who agrees to stage a kidnapping -- he nabs Alex and Clarence can come to her rescue, not only introducing himself in spectacular fashion but getting to be hero in the process. Things do not go as planned. They hardly ever do.
With its crime-gone-wrong plot and the manner in which it uses violence as a punchline, there's a very late-'90s quality to Get the Girl. For once, I don't mean that as a pejorative. This isn't some bullshit post-Tarantino rip-off that's 20 years too late, but it is slick and brightly colorful in a way that reminded me of late '90s/early 2000s horror even though it's really not a horror film. Though England is best known for his work in that genre, Get the Girl is more of a comic thriller in the vein of Very Bad Things or early Coen Brothers than it is his earlier horror efforts like Madison County or Contracted. Reuniting with his cinematographer Mike Testin, England uses the full width of the 2.35:1 widescreen frame for long, ambitious tracking shots and bathes the film in neon blues, pinks and purples for his best-looking and most polished film to date. It feels like a big step forward for hime on a technical level, and enjoying the filmmaking on display is a big part of the fun I had with the movie.
There are ways in which the screenplay by England (from a story Graham Denman) acts as a commentary about the "friend zone" and guys who feel somehow entitled to a woman's heart simply because they have some kind of one-sided affection. At the same time, though, the movie never quite overcomes its White Knight problem despite making an effort with a couple of reveals. There is something fundamentally icky about all of Clarence's actions in the film and Get the Girl isn't quite willing to take responsibility for that; again, some lip service is paid and there are developments that speak to the problem, but the character is ultimately meant to be entirely sympathetic and that might be an impossible feat to pull off for any filmmaker. The resulting outdatedness of the movie's gender politics are another major reason the movie feels reminiscent of a late '90s thriller -- though, again, I should stress that the comparison is to one of the good ones like Go, not lame WB shit like Teaching Mrs. Tingle. The distinction matters.
Beyond some of that stickiness, Get the Girl is wicked sharp fun. Dobies does his best to make Clarence likable given the circumstances and Whitson gives Alex a fierceness that belies her "damsel in distress" role, while Noah Segan and co-star Adi Shankar (who is also the producer responsible for many of those "bootleg universe" fan films like Joseph Khan's Power Rangers and Joe Lynch's Truth in Journalism) more or less steal the movie with their off-kilter comic timing that makes each laugh a well-earned surprise. This is a story populated by mostly reprehensible characters -- only Alex is really an innocent -- but we never sit there hating them because we're having too good a time. It's a difficult trick that England pulls off.
Get the Girl is the kind of movie I suspect I'll watch a bunch more times. It has great energy, great comedy, a genuine emotional hook (more within the plight of soon-to-be-divorced Alex than in Clarence's unreciprocated pining) and some excellent violence -- England, never one to shy away from splashing some gore around, lets things get bloody and stages one of the best headshots I've seen in years. The film feels different from his past work while still retaining his voice (England grew up on '90s genre movies, so I don't think the similarities are accidental) and represents an exciting leap forward for him in the way that it moves. His next film, Huntsville, has already been shot, and it already promises to be another change of pace. This is an exciting time to be an Eric England fan, and Get the Girl is the kind of movie that makes being an Eric England fan easy.
The review duo with twenty-three competing personalities, all of them the nation’s top film critics. Adam: Welcome to Reserved Seating. I’m Adam Riske.
Rob: And I’m Rob DiCristino. Split is the new film from my hometown boy M. Night Shyamalan, fresh off his recent success with The Visit. It’s the story of Kevin Wendell Crumb (James McAvoy), a man with twenty-three personalities fighting each other for the limelight: Barry is a fashion designer. Dennis has OCD. Patricia is overbearing and matronly. Hedwig is nine years old and loves Kanye West. They exist in a jumbled cacophony that drives Kevin to kidnap high schoolers Marcia (Jessica Sula), Claire (Haley Lu Richardson), and Casey (Anya Taylor-Joy). While they try to bite and claw their way out of their basement prison, Crumb’s psychiatrist Dr. Fletcher (Betty Buckley) makes a horrifying discovery -- a twenty-fourth personality more dangerous than anything she’s ever seen.
Adam: In this early scene, we see Kevin, as Barry the fashion designer, visiting Dr. Fletcher but she’s not so sure which of Kevin’s personalities she’s dealing with.
Rob:Split is a fun enough concept that runs out of steam about an hour in.
Adam: I don’t even know if it makes it an hour. Those scenes between McAvoy and Betty Buckley are dead weight. And there are a lot of them.
Rob: And I kept waiting for a single one of them to matter. There’s no doubt that McAvoy earns his money with a fun cocktail of performances, but Shyamalan’s attention drifts too far away from narrative and character for an effective or satisfying payoff that makes it all feel worth it.
Adam: McAvoy is a talented guy and he does what he can, but I don’t think the script does him any favors. It’s a character that’s not written very well; the various personalities feel like caricatures an improviser would create at a comedy show. There’s no depth there. At the end, he’s just saying things that sound crazy for the sake of saying things that sound crazy. It doesn’t inform anything and it just makes the whole picture drag.
Rob: Exactly. It’s a series of impressions rather than fully-drawn characters.
Adam: I liked when he would say “Etc.,” but if I’m cherry picking that moment we’re in real trouble.
Rob: One of them exists solely to accidentally show Casey where some keys are! It’s obnoxious. Maybe my biggest issue, though, is that the final act meanders too long on foregone conclusions before pivoting into a ridiculous bit of fan service that had me shouting at the screen.
Adam: We’ll get to that. And don’t shout at the screen, Rob. At best it annoys the other people in the theater and at worst you’re being hyperbolic and none of that really happened.
Rob: Last spoiler warning, everyone!
Adam: They know it’s a spoiler review, Rob.
Rob: Anyway, I’m glad that Shyamalan has moved away from mainstream blockbusters and into smaller genre fare (where he belongs), but I’m still waiting for an idea as cohesive and engaging as his first three films.
Adam: What’s with the “where he belongs?”
Rob: I think the second phase of his career faltered largely because he was a genre director being pushed (by Hollywood or his own ego) into angling toward blockbusters. It feels like the pressure is off of him now, which makes me happy.
Adam: I’ve been an apologist for the guy more than most, based mostly on his run from 1999 to 2002, but the degree of cynicism and ugliness that comes with Split makes me wonder how much longer I want to stick with this guy. Let’s talk about the twist.
Rob: With all due respect to Unbreakable and its fans (who I know are legion), I hated the end of this film. The David Dunn cameo is a cop out, a sneaky way around an actual ending. The Beast’s decision to spare Casey because she’s as damaged as he is rings false and unearned; we spent a long time rooting for her so that she can do all of nothing to save the day. The final intersection of their two storylines is clunky and dull. It’s worth noting that I have the same issue with Unbreakable, a film that tells us all about a very cool final battle that it never shows us. I get that both films are meant to be origin stories. But, you know what? So is Iron Man. That movie has an ending.
Adam: I really like Unbreakable and didn’t have a final battle problem with that movie because I think it resolves its themes and a final fight or something wouldn’t have added anything. But saying all that, as a fan of Unbreakable I couldn’t have hated the ending of Split any more than I do. Let me explain why. There are four reasons. You ready?
Rob: I was born ready, Timmy.
Adam: My name’s not Timmy, Rob. I’m Adam. Or Riske. Or Mr. Riske. Or Mr. Adam Riske. Or Butch. Or Butchie. Or Butchie Boy. It’s not Timmy.
1. The way the ending is executed is terrible. The Unbreakable score is cued in the last scene with McAvoy. That’s fine. But then we cut to a diner where the news have to give McAvoy a villain name, “The Horde,” which is dumb. Then if people still don’t get it, we have an extra saying “Wasn’t there a supervillain that got locked up 15 years ago?” If you still don’t get it they continue “What was his name?” “Mr. Glass” answers Bruce Willis AND IF WE STILL DON’T GET IT he’s wearing a shirt with a name-tag revealing that he’s the same guy from Unbreakable. It’s so idiotic. Why not just show David Dunn then driving away from the diner and we see a sign for Amity Island. THEN OMG! IT’S IN THE JAWS UNIVERSE, TOO????!!!!
2. I didn’t like Split already before the Unbreakable shared universe reveal, so now that it’s tied to Unbreakable my enthusiasm for the earlier film is diminished because I have to associate it with something I don’t like. Unbreakable is about something. Split is about nothing other than franchise-building.
3. Shyamalan is basically telling us he wasted an entire movie in service of delivering a twist. He could have removed all of the therapy stuff and just told a David Dunn story in parallel with Bruce Willis and James McAvoy intersecting in the climax. If you introduced David Dunn and revealed this is an Unbreakable sequel it would have still been a huge twist (just one revealed in the middle) and been a complete movie. As it stands now, we have to wait another entire movie to tell the story Split should have told.
4. I don’t want to see an Unbreakable sequel, particularly one with a 2017 Bruce Willis, who only projects laziness and contempt on-screen these days. In 2000, he was still a guy I can root for, but 17 years later he’s completely become his unappealing public persona on-screen.
The ending of Split is a miscalculation of such a huge degree. It point blank tells the audience all that matters is shared universe building when the movie was sold as a standalone thriller without some sort of tie-in. It’s about as cynical as you can get. The movie is a clickbait article, not a story.
Rob: I couldn’t agree more. The entire thing boils down to a smug wink at the audience that made me want to rip my theater seat from the floor and throw it at the screen.
Adam: You’re not CrossFit enough for that.
Rob: I’ll never be CrossFit enough for you. Anyway, there’s been a bit of hubbub about the way Split portrays mental illness. Should we get into that?
Adam: Go ahead. I’m going to pee a little and really fast. Save my seat.
Rob: Personally, I don’t see the film as offensive to those suffering from DID (though, as a neurotypical, I might not deserve an opinion). Much like The Silence of the Lambs or A Beautiful Mind, it’s using the illness as a piece to fuel a larger character arc. Split mostly succeeds in that, I think, but it does the same character work in two hours that many superhero films do in ten minutes. Casey’s flashbacks have the same problem -- they take up way too much time for what they end up accomplishing narratively.
Adam: I found the movie much more offensive in its treatment of the Anya Taylor-Joy character than for those suffering from psychological illness. Shyamalan puts her through the ringer with her kidnapping, explains in disgusting backstory that she’s living with her sexual predator uncle and then leaves her at the end of the movie still in the care of the sexual predator uncle. I’ve heard a couple of theories saying she might tell the police woman about her uncle (which the movie doesn’t support, it’s too busy getting its kicks off the final twist) or that it sets up her as being a “super” like David Dunn and they’re going to join forces to which I say “good luck to you, because that’s too dumb for me to even comprehend.” Shyamalan uses the “flashback tragedy to inform a reserve of strength when dealing with a big bad” thing he did in Signs here in Split to a much less impactful effect. The way he exploits this girl and her history of sexual and physical abuse for the purpose of thriller mechanics offended me. You can’t introduce material like that with such insensitivity.
Rob: And with absolutely no payoff! Fan theories aside, the actual text of the film doesn’t at all imply that she’s going to do anything about anything. Kevin leaves her in the cage, the staffer finds her, and she gets in the cop car. Fade out. There’s ominous music and a thousand-yard stare. This isn’t some complex tone poem I’m too dense to understand. This is poor storytelling and a firm Mark Off for me. It’s actually the first film I’ve seen in a while that left me physically angry at the end.
Adam: Split is a big Mark Off for me too. It’s a garbage picture.
Next week Rob and I pay homage to the late Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert with a special Oscar show based on their classic “If We Picked the Winners” episodes. Join us then for our special episode - “If We Decided Who Won.”
The things I do for my country. xXx: Return of Xander Cage is a stupid movie. Like, it's so stupid. It's such a stupid movie that when it ended, I had to reach down under my theater seat and collect my eyeballs, which had rolled out of my head somewhere around the 20 minute mark. I mean, it is so stupid. Imagine something that's really, really stupid, and then remove any shred of intelligence that's left and you still wouldn't have something as boneheadedly stupid as Return of Xander Cage. Seriously, it's, like, so stupid.
None of this is to say that it is a bad or unenjoyable movie, of course, just that it is staggeringly stupid. The movie returns star Vin Diesel to the series he launched in the long ago time of 2002 but then left for the 2005 follow-up, xXx: State of Union, in which Ice Cube took over as a new xXx agent and helped turn this thing into a franchise. Don't worry; Return of Xander Cage marries the previous two films (and even acknowledges the embarrassing Vin Diesel-less "Death of Xander Cage" short film included as a DVD extra when the director's cut of xXx hit home video) and sets up the potential for future sequels that focus much more on the ensemble than just Vin, because some people have clearly learned the right lessons from the Fast & Furious franchise. Whether or not there is every another xXx movie, I cannot say. It doesn't seem to be setting fire to the box office in the United States. There is a reason for that. I'm anticipating it does much better in foreign markets. There is a reason for that, too.
Diesel reprises his role as Xander Cage, former EXTREME ATHLETE turned secret agent who faked his own death and has been living in hiding since the events of the first movie. We pick up with him in the Dominican Republic, where he has become some kind of folk hero: beautiful young woman throw themselves into his tank-topped sausage casing and he does some EXTREME skateboarding that there is no way 50-year old Vin Diesel can ever do in order to create an illegal cable hookup and bring FUTBOL TO THE PEOPLE. It's here that he's approached by Special Agent Marke (Toni Collette), who gets him to return to action to recover Pandora's Box, a super high tech device capable only of making satellites crash back down to Earth. Xander is tasked to take down the team who stole Pandora's Box -- including Bollywood superstar Deepika Padukone, plus international martial arts superstars Donnie Yen and Tony Jaa -- so he enlists some members of his old crew. Or are they just his friends? Whatever. They include sniper Ruby Rose, stunt driver Rory McCann and a DJ played by Chinese recording artist Chris Wu. Yes, a member of this EXTREME crew is a DJ. At one point he foils an assassination attempt with the power of his DJing. Did I mention this movie is so stupid?
So you may have noticed something about that plot description and cast list: it's clear that the filmmakers involved with Return of Xander Cage both are 1) hoping to pivot away from this just being the Vin Diesel show and more towards an ensemble and 2) stacking the film with international stars in the hopes of raking in that sweet, sweet foreign box office. I'm happy with both rationales, because I think it results in a better, more interesting action movie. It's nice to see the latest Hollywood blockbuster and the lead actress is an Indian woman, plus any movie with both Donnie Yen and Tony Jaa is a movie worth seeing. This double casting is never really capitalized upon at all, though, in part because Tony Jaa is given nothing to do but sport a bleached blonde fauxhawk and in part because director D.J. Caruso is rubbish at shooting action and fails to really capitalize on what either man can do. Donnie Yen fares considerably better, and in fact comes very close to make the movie worth seeing completely on his own. He's super cool and charming and every time he's on screen I found myself wishing he was the new xXx and that this was his movie.
Actually, I could say that about a few of the supporting cast -- not just Yen (who is the best by a wide margin, making this the second big movie he's stolen in a matter of months), but also Deepika Padukone (who also has very little to do but say things like "Pandora's Box must not fall into the wrong hands!") and Ruby Rose, who has good presence and cuts a good action figure when the moment calls for it. Unfortunately, she's done in by the screenplay's need to always make her "cool" with her tattoos and her edgy attitude and her ability to kill anyone and anything from very far away. This constant emphasis on COOL is one of the great downfalls of xXxIII (still a better title), because this is a movie that insists every character be VERY COOL. Everyone postures. Everyone gets the one liner. Here's the problem with this approach: when every character is set up to "the cool one," no one is actually the cool one.
I dare you to ever stop laughing
Which brings us back to this movie being very, very stupid. The dialogue, by screenwriter F. Scott Frazier, is some of the most laughably terrible shit I have heard in any movie not directed by Michael Bay. I couldn't believe what I was hearing most of the time, and I regretted not being able to accept my friend and colleague Adam Riske's invite to see the movie with him on opening night because it meant seeing it by myself on a Saturday afternoon with no one there to bear witness or to prove that I was really hearing the dialogue I was hearing. I feel actively bad for Toni Collette, an Oscar-nominated actor who I hope was paid a huge stack of cash in exchange for the shit she is asked to say in this movie. It's embarrassing. Vin Diesel, of course, is Vin Diesel: his dialogue is growled in short, punchy bursts that exist to seem funny and cool but manage to be neither. All it manages to be is stupid. In the EXTREME.
To the movie's credit, at least it doesn't take itself very seriously. The original xXx, a kind-of modernized James Bond for the Mountain Dew set, was lacking in self-awareness because director Rob Cohen was busy buying into the myth of emerging superstar Vin Diesel and made deifying him as the new great action star his top priority. DJ Caruso isn't beholden to making Return of Xander Cage into purely a straight-faced star vehicle, so Diesel seems to be having a good time and Caruso allows for a much greater sense of playfulness throughout the film. But then he also does those freeze-frame character stat screens every time a new person is introduced into the movie like it's fucking 1996, because it turns out DJ Caruso is not that great of a director. He's competent and xXxIII is competent. It's also really, really stupid. Maybe I should have led with that.
In some ways, xXx: Return of Xander Cage is the best movie in the series. In other ways, I don't care. I mean, this is now the third film in a franchise that probably didn't deserve a second; I've seen them all and feel no compulsion to revisit any of them (except maybe the first, but only because Asia Argento). This is a series that's being willed into being by some producers hungry for a franchise or by Vin Diesel, who twice walked away from the series that made him a star so as to not get locked into doing just one thing and twice returned because he realized that the one thing is how audiences want to see him. This isn't like the Riddick franchise, though, which is a clear labor of love for which Diesel exhibits a real passion (and which endears him to me with his nerdiness totally lacking in irony). This seems purely driven by a desire to package something profitable. If they do end up making another one, I really hope they go the ensemble route -- the casual representation and diversity here is just as heartening as it was in Rogue One even if it's getting none of the same credit (which may be because Rogue One starred a woman as its main hero and this one stars a pan-racial Golem in a fur coat). Maybe next time they can also make it a little less stupid.
The review duo that sleeps by day and CrossFits by night! Adam: Welcome to "Reserved Seating." I’m Adam Riske.
Rob: And I’m Rob DiCristino.
Adam:Live by Night is the fourth directorial effort from the multi-talented Ben Affleck and his second adaptation of a Dennis Lehane novel.
Rob: It tells the story of Joe Coughlin (Affleck), a Prohibition-era (era) stick-up man caught between warring mafia families in Boston. After running afoul of Irish boss Albert White (Robert Glenister), Coughlin renounces his vow of neutrality and joins up with rival Italian boss Maso Pescatore (Remo Girone), who sends him and his partner Dion (Chris Messina) to supervise their rum smuggling operations in Florida. Coughlin then faces-off with corrupt cops, the KKK, and an assortment of other threats vying to bring him down.
Adam: In this clip (), Affleck and Messina discuss partnership terms with a Cuban faction in Tampa, which includes Zoe Saldana, who later develops to be a new love interest for our lead. Live by Night has a lot of scenes like this one of people talking while Ben Affleck seems like he is either just waking up or falling asleep.
Rob: I like this scene. It makes it seem as though Live by Night has real interpersonal conflicts and dramatic stakes. It’s one of two or three in the whole film.
Adam: For a movie with so many characters, there is very little development to any of them. The movie starts out somewhat disappointingly based on Affleck’s previous directorial efforts (Gone Baby Gone, The Town, Argo), but at a certain point Live By Night became clearer to me and I found myself enjoying it for what it is - a trashy gangster movie like Mobsters or Hoodlum. The trouble is that my expectations were initially set higher because of Affleck’s previous directing pedigree. I had a lot of fun watching Live by Night, maybe even more the nuttier it got. It feels almost like an entirely different film in each and every scene. By the time Chris Cooper is shooting two guns and screaming “Repent! Repent!” like a 10th billed actor in a Wild West show, I was laughing out loud and having a pretty great time. I can’t say Live by Night is a success, but I may have enjoyed this movie more than anyone else on Earth.
Rob: Well, here it is. Our first fight. You absolutely enjoyed Live by Night more than I did. It’s a tonal disaster, like you said. A big, sprawling gangster epic has to have a strong handle on who these characters are, what they’re doing, and why we should care. This film was frankly just grating and boring, and I say that as a lifelong Affleck apologist. I really think he missed the mark on this one.
Adam: I don’t know if we’re going to have as big of a fight as you think because I don’t disagree with any of what you said, except for maybe that it’s boring. I did have a beer and some boneless buffalo wings before the movie, so maybe that factored into my enjoyment of Live by Night. Did you find it distracting that Ben Affleck was so damn wide that he looked like he barely fit on-screen? Talk about period-inappropriate. He looked like CrossFit Corleone.
Rob: Now that you mention it, my experience may have been ruined by the couple in my theater who were talking literally at full volume the entire film. It made it really hard to focus on whatever the hell Brendan Gleeson was saying half the time. As for Affleck, I honestly think he miscast himself in this role. He’s a forty-year-old man built to smash people with toilet seats and yet I’m supposed to relate to him as the scrappy upstart? It would have been nice to have seen his character built up through some backstory involving the war or a few more bits with the Brendan Gleeson character. There’s this thematic interest in “changing who you are” that might have been nicely served there.
Adam: Every interaction Gleeson has with Affleck in the movie is basically “You’re a garbage person but I’m not going to do anything about it. See you Sunday!”
Rob: How about that dinner scene where he tells Sienna Miller, “If my son likes you, you must be horrible!” Thanks, Dad!
Adam: I want to get back to what you said about Affleck being miscast. Absolutely! We are led to assume he’s deceitful and cunning, but every scene is him playing it in the same flat note. It’s like he succeeded in Tampa because he was too dull to notice. Maybe Affleck bit off more than he could chew by producing-writing-directing and starring in Live by Night. I’ll say this, though: I’d take all of this, whatever this is, over his other garbage picture The Accountant from last year. Rob: You know that isn’t fair. The Accountant has Anna Kendrick, so I’m beholden to it. Anyway, yeah, Affleck definitely seems overwhelmed here. Again, the classic gangster formula: You’ve got all these moving parts and fun characters, but they never intersect or affect each other to create meaningful change in the people involved. Without getting into spoilers, this film could have used fewer female characters whose mandates were “stand around,” and more with something to actually do. I liked Chris Cooper and Elle Fanning a lot, but they barely had any scenes together. And we never get to see what actually changes Affleck’s character because all we know about him is that he’s built like a brick shithouse, he’s very sleepy, and he loves him some Zoe Saldana. I couldn’t understand him, so I couldn’t understand the film. Anyway, what did you think of the whole KKK subplot? That scene in the cigar factory with the Grand Wizard guy was my one moment of joy in the whole picture. We should have had a lot more fun with that thread.
Adam: I didn’t have a problem with it. They’re portrayed as detestable and a lot of them get killed. I was satisfied.
Rob: “A lot of people got killed...I was satisfied.” -- Adam Riske, F This Movie!
Adam: You bet I was. Also, don’t misquote me…some of the words were wrong. Slap your hand with the ruler I gave you.
Rob: Speaking of slapping, the whole Elle Fanning subplot with the religion stuff is a perfect example of how Affleck’s development of his own character really fails. Like at the coffee shop: she’s sharing all these deep existential feelings that are supposed to pivot his character or introduce something new, but it’s hard to tell at any given time what particular conflict he’s feeling pressure from because he refuses to emote or, you know, say and do things. I had no idea where his head was at or what I was supposed to feel.
Adam: He’s sleepy from CrossFit. Rob: Those giant tires on chains aren’t going to pull themselves.
Adam: So you’re voting Mark Off?
Rob: My love for Ben Affleck is secondary to my responsibility to the public, Adam. Mark Off.
Adam: Every part of me says “vote Mark Off.” To hell with it. “Mark Ahn” for Live by Night. It’s not one of my favorite Ben Affleck roles or movies, but I admire the guy and I’m more with this one than not. Rob: That’s the spirit. Live free or die hard, dammit.
Adam: I loved that in the last 10 minutes of Live by Night it could have ended on any scene and it would have made just as much thematic sense as any other.
Rob: But we needed to pay off that subplot with his brother that was apparently happening in the movie! And the chess board because symbolism! Maybe he was just so sleepy he didn’t realize he left all that in. Because of all the CrossFit. Alright, I’ll stop.
Adam: Join us next week as I try to get my critical bearings back and we review Split, the latest thriller from M. Night Shyamalan starring James McAvoy.
Rob: I’m still never sure if it’s cool to like M. Night Shyamalan again or not.
Adam: He’s made some bad movies but also some great ones. We should give him the benefit of the doubt. Until next time… Rob: These seats are reserved.
Emily Hagins keeps growing up, but now I'm missing the kid a little bit. I have been eagerly awaiting the next movie from writer/director Emily Hagins since seeing her last film, 2013's Grow Up, Tony Phillips, on the very first night of the very first Chicago Critics Film Festival. Hers is a career I have followed since Zombie Girl: The Movie put her on my radar -- the 12-year old with a feature film already to her credit and a bright future ahead of her. I've watched her grow and improve as a director over the course of the next 10 years and several features (though her 2009 movie The Retelling is impossible to come by, and Hagins admitted on a recent episode of The Movie Crypt podcast that she plans to keep it that way). Tony Phillips represented a big leap forward in both craft and in balancing a delicate tone, so I was excited to see where Hagins would go next.
Her new Netflix Original movie, Coin Heist, is another creative leap: it's her best looking, most polished film, one that no longer carries any of the "child prodigy" baggage and feels like it could have been made by any professional filmmaker. This is a double-edged sword, of course. With over a decade of experience, five features and an anthology segment under her belt, Hagins is very much a professional filmmaker. She knows how to tell a story, and better yet knows how to pull the emotional beats out of said story to make it resonate beyond the plot. The flip side of that Coin Heist, however, is that there's something a little impersonal about her latest effort. It feels more like a for-hire job than her past work, probably because it is in some ways; instead of generating her own material, for the first time Hagins is adapting a popular YA novel by Elisa Ludwig. It's good work -- one that clearly wants to be honest about the teenage experience in a way that another director would probably ignore (and did, when Brian Robbins made The Perfect Score). But I'd be lying if I said I didn't miss the unique personality that Hagins brought to her other films.
When the headmaster of a Philadelphia prep school is caught embezzling funds, all clubs and activities are shut down and the school is in danger of closing. A group of four students from different walks of life -- your basic Breakfast Club archetypes, though never nearly as broadly drawn -- band together to rip off the United States mint and make enough money to save the school.
For a movie with "heist" in the title, Coin Heist is almost totally uninterested in the actual heist -- a teenage Ocean's Eleven this ain't. Hagins' script is far more focused on the teenage drama that exists between all of the characters: these two used to date, these two like each other, this one has a mean boyfriend, this one feels like an outcast, etc. etc. etc. (having not read the novel, the same may be true of the source material, too). The investment the movie has in its characters helps supplant the lack of an interesting or exciting scheme; we want these kids to get away with their plan because Hagins has made sure we care about them as people. If there's a bummer to the approach, it's that what seems like it might be a fun and bouncy adventure -- kids have to steal coins! -- instead gets weighed down by the emo-ness of it all. No one really seems to have having any fun in Coin Heist.
So much of the actual heist feels like an afterthought that I felt less tension in the will-they-pull-it-off-or-won't-they of it than I did in wondering if the band would be able to play the big dance. The movie is so focused on the smaller day-to-day problems of these teens that it can't work up much excitement for the more "movie" aspects. To Hagins' great credit, she is always sure to really listen and empathize with these characters, never allowing them to become teenage stereotypes when it very easily could have gone that direction. She clearly wants to portray young people who feel authentic, and between her adaptation and the actors' portrayals (which are authentic even though they veer into "mopey" too often), there is real attention paid to never condescending to both these young characters and what I assume is the film's intended young audience. Like the classic movies of John Hughes, Hagins has created a film that tries to reflect the way being a teenager feels, even when we adults know better.
What's missing is any levity, and with a lighter touch or at least the occasional comic bit, Coin Heist could be a home run. This, of course, is a case of me reacting to the movie I want it to be rather than the one that it is, but don't we all? If I see something and feel like a piece is out of place or missing, am I wrong to take note of it? This doesn't mean that the filmmaker has failed. Emily Hagins made the movie she wanted to make, and made a good version of that movie. But there are ways in which it didn't connect with me that her past efforts have, and I miss the specificity of the worlds Hagins' previous movies inhabit. Coin Heist is her most accomplished, most commercial movie and I hope it leads to more big opportunities. I just don't want her to lose her 12-year old self.
Let's look forward, shall we? What a year! Many films were released! A good deal of them were successful, while others were not so successful! The one with that guy was good, but I really liked the one with that girl (because I’m woke as fuck). If it sounds like I’m deflecting, I am! That’s because I can almost guarantee that you saw more movies in 2016 than I did. I missed Blair Witch. I’m still working up the nerve to rent Nine Lives. And yet, despite my massive ineptitude, our best-of lists probably match up pretty well: I loved The Witch and The Nice Guys. 10 Cloverfield Lane and Green Room rocked my socks. The Neon Demon made me tingle in ways I’m not yet ready to talk about. So far, so familiar. Since I’m clearly not enough of an authority on 2016 to recommend any hidden gems or make any Oscar picks, let’s talk about next year. In no particular order, these are the films I'm most looking forward to seeing in 2017:
Blade Runner 2049 (October 6th)
I know Blade Runner. I own Blade Runner. Blade Runner is a friend of mine. But honestly, I’ve never really absorbed Blade Runner. It’s beautiful and influential and Jan B. loves the hell out of it (so it must be great), but I’ve never found my road into the film the way a lot of people have. I’ve studied it academically without getting attached, which means I’m far enough removed from the fandom that the very existence of Denis Villeneuve’s upcoming sequel doesn’t infuriate me. It’s an opportunity to immerse myself in the universe in a way that I’ve never had the incentive to before. I’m looking forward to prepping with at least two of the twelve cuts of the original film, spending the seven hours after that on its TV Tropes page, watching some of the crazy-ass conspiracy videos that I’m positive are clogging up YouTube, and walking into 2049 with a totally open mind. I’m excited to join a new fandom. Plus, Villeneuve rules and I’m hoping Harrison Ford will go 2-for-3 on his “I’m Still That Guy You Remember Me Being” retirement tour.
Baby Driver (August 11th)
Edgar Wright is my favorite director not named Scorsese. Everything he makes is so full of energy and wit and love and…well, he’s a lot like Scorsese, I guess. Anyway, I have no idea what Baby Driver is about, but it absolutely could not matter less. I know there’s a guy named Baby who drives a car (or several cars?). I know it’s going to be funny and smart. I know it’s going to have great music and ballsy action. I know the Blu-ray will sport a commentary track in which Wright talks about thirty films I’ve never heard of, and that I’ll immediately look up every one of them when it’s over. Most importantly, I know it’s going to feel like a warm blanket and yet still somehow push my expectations of what a movie can be. It’s hard to tell right now how bruised Wright was by his experience with Ant-Man, but I’ve seen Marvel Studios grind up enough good directors to be happy that one of my favorites went for a passion project instead. I hope 2017 gives him a massive hit film and a return to the loving arms of My Girlfriend Anna Kendrick.
T2 Trainspotting (February 10th)
Here’s the thing: I really like Clerks 2. Aside from all that donkey show nonsense, I think it has a lot of really interesting things to say about turning 30 and still not really having your shit figured out. I think it’s Kevin Smith firing on all cylinders in a way he rarely does (I say that as a Kevin Smith fan), and I think it’s both a great companion piece to the original Clerks and a significant statement about the autobiographical nature of filmmaking in general. The trailer for Danny Boyle’s sequel to his seminal comedy Trainspotting gave me the same vibe: it feels like a sincere way to explore the original film’s themes after twenty years of experience and growth (or possibly depression and self-destruction) and find out if all that sneering defiance from our youth holds up to the scrutiny of adulthood. What does it actually mean to Choose Life, and what did our boys make of it? This one is super high-risk for “soulless sequel produced for nostalgia’s sake,” but Trainspotting isn’t exactly the Ninja Turtles, so I don’t seeing it being a desperate cash-grab.
Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets (July 21st)
Because why the hell not? If Luc Besson is making a movie, it’s your duty to watch it. Just look at that title! It makes absolutely no sense, but it still sounds amazing! I mean, I’ve never read the comic it’s based on — and I have only a passing understanding of who Cara Delevingne is — but what do I really have to lose? The guy’s written, produced, and/or directed some legitimate classics, and even his bad films tend to be ambitious and trashy. Like Wright, he makes movies from his gut; he embraces genre and tradition while still speaking his own language (admittedly, he speaks a lot of gibberish, but who doesn’t?). This one is set in a 28th century in which The Matrix happened in real life but seems to have worked out way better for everyone. There’s apparently also time travel, hyperspace, paradoxes, and a ton of crazy French weirdness. It looks like it has a chance to be one of those wacky Fifth Element deals with a really fun tone and energy. It could also end up being an incoherent CGI shit-fest that I forget ten minutes after it’s over. Might as well roll the dice. I’m not doing anything else.
The Fate of the Furious (April 14th)
My love for the Fast and Furious series is a lot like my love for ‘80s power ballads: at first, it was ironic. I respected how willing it was to be violent, melodramatic nonsense, but I wasn’t ever willing to call it art. The more I lived with it, however, the more I realized that it was doing something much more interesting and important than I was giving it credit for. I was the problem, not Fast and Furious (and certainly not ‘80s power ballads). Now, not only does the trailer for F8 ramp up the insanity with tanks and explosions and Kurt Russell and all that, but it introduces the first legitimate internal Family conflict since…ever? It’s time, I think. Brian and Mia are gone. Han and Gisele are dead. It only makes sense that the Family would be in crisis. I respect the way this franchise never rests on its laurels. It keeps pushing itself; it keeps trying. Seriously, though: what’s going on with Dom? And is Shaw really in the Family? How can they let that happen? See what I’m saying? My investment in this stuff really snuck up on me.
Yeah, yeah, I know. No John Wick. No Alien. No Episode VIII. I leave all that to you, F-Heads. What are you looking forward to this year?
Plenty of Awards hopefuls getting their wide release, some garbage and a few other promising choices. Note: I dog out a few of these movies, but don’t doubt that I will probably still see most of them. I’m like the guy who goes to see Why Him? and comments that the trailers before the movie look stupid. It’s like “dude, you’re there to see Why Him? EVERYTHING looks good to you!”
• Life’s too short to see a movie starring both Greta Gerwig and Annette “Is that an Oscar? Can I hold it?” (Runs away) Bening. And why are there so many shots of people dancing in the trailer? WE GET IT! YOU’RE QUIRKY! #20thCenturyWomen
• I’m down for Hidden Figures. The story doesn’t hook me necessarily but I’ll watch any movie with that cast (COSTNER! DUNST! HENSON! MONAE!). Why is Sheldon in this?
• I’ve heard good things about A Monster Calls but I’m not sure I can handle a sick Felicity Jones. I mean, she just led a rebellion and this is the thanks she gets?
• I will see any movie Martin Scorsese directs and you should too! #Silence
• I’ve successfully gone from 2003 until now having never seen an Underworld movie. I will break that streak in 2017 with Underworld: Blood Wars and you will soon learn why.
• I’m not sure why, but The Bye Bye Man having a PG-13 rating is really upsetting. I mean, if you’re going to make a movie called The Bye Bye Man and you’re expecting us to believe in a legend for a Bye Bye Man then fucking go for broke, kid!
• I’ve heard Live By Night is the least successful of Ben Affleck’s directorial efforts. I’ll still see it, but I’m not surprised because Gone Baby Gone > The Town > Argo.
• Why is Jane Levy in Monster Trucks? Was she nice on set at least?
• I’m getting to the point where Adam Driver being in a movie makes me want to see it. Dude’s talented. #Paterson
• I’ll probably see Patriots Day because Deepwater Horizon was surprisingly good, although I’ve read some reviews saying Patriots Day is in poor taste so I don’t know.
• I’ve seen Sleepless already when it was called Waist Deep.
• The Founder seems like an interesting movie. I eat a lot of McDonald’s, so I’m probably going to be on Michael Keaton’s side here.
• Am I the only one left that gets really excited for new M. Night Shyamalan movies? #Split
• I’m convinced Toni Erdmann only exists as a screener for critics.
• xXx 3: The Return of Xander Cage is a movie I can only see with either Patrick and/or Mark.
• I’m so down for The Red Turtle. Studio Ghibli gets me and it’s an excuse to drive down to the Music Box Theatre to see something.
• I don’t even think Owen Wilson and Ed Helms want to see Bastards. And they star in it! Hasn’t the world passed this test already? We’re done with these guys. How many times do we have to prove it?
• Ugh! A Dog’s Purpose. Two questions: Since Dennis Quaid is in this and in the trailer he throws a football, does that mean he’s playing Miami Sharks QB Cap Rooney again? Also, between this and The Space Between Us, do we need another movie where Britt Robertson falls in love in the heartland?
• Gold doesn’t look that good, guys. And that’s all I have to say about that.
• You’re pushing your luck, little man. #ResidentEvil:TheFinalChapter
• There are a lot of bad movies coming out. #Rings
• Same Kind of Different as Me has Greg Kinnear in it ,which is asking too much of this country.
• I think it’s amusing how “Crazy in Love” has become the anthem of the Fifty Shades of Greyfranchise. That aside, I have very little interest in Fifty Shades Darker. Whatever pervy delights I was going to get out of the series I’ve surely obtained from the original, right?
• Look. I like John Wick. I’m excited for John Wick: Chapter Two, but I have to admit that part of me is pretending to be more excited than I really am to fit in with my action loving peers.
• The trailer for The Lego Batman Movie is funny but it’s kind of weird to me that they’re making a movie that is essentially a joke to begin with. Is it just going to be hitting that note over and over for 90 minutes?
• A Cure for Wellness looks like one of those movies from the late ‘90s that cost $100 million dollars and makes $8 million at the box office. Who is this for? Dane DeHaan fans? Gore Verbinski completists?
• Fist Fight is the type of movie where funny people get together, don’t make a funny movie and then talk about how they’re better than it on podcasts 5 years from now.
• Back in the day, a movie called The Great Wall would have starred Matt Damon and been a drama for adults about China. Nowadays it’s about protecting China from monsters. G-D have we gotten dumb if Hollywood thinks this is what we want.
• A United Kingdom looks well-intentioned. I will never ever see it.
• I’m excited to see Get Out. The trailer is really strange and intriguing and I’m curious to see what kind of director Jordan Peele is like, considering he’s a big fan of horror.
• What is Rock Dog? (Watches trailer) Oh, ok. Yeah, I don’t have kids so there is no reason for me to see Rock Dog.
