Holiday Watch: Hot Frosty (2024)

Watched:  11/24/2024

Format:  Netflix

Viewing:  First

Director:  Jerry Ciccoritti

Selection:  Jamie

Every Christmas, we're inundated not just with Hallmark-style Christmas films - we also get a few comedies, many which that involve some straight up magic as the premise.  After all, it is Christmas, and Christmas includes Heat Misers and flying reindeer and Mariah Carey.

But those Christmas comedies are not always winners.  Last year, I nominated two magical Christmas comedies for some of the worst films I'd seen all year.  Those included Genie and my selection for worst of 2023, Candy Cane Lane.  So I am not just easily in the bag for anything that comes along, Christmas-wise.  (I do remember liking parts of Dashing Through the Snow, but that may have just been Teyonah Parris smiling on screen).

Mostly, this movie made me happy for Lacey Chabert, who accidentally fell backward into being the second-most-popular Hallmark star, and then was promoted to full-Hallmark status when Candace Cameron Bure decided Hallmark was now too woke for her.*

Chabert had been kind of pushing the envelope at Hallmark the last few years, finding movies that didn't exactly fit the Hallmark mold as we knew it.  Haul Out the Holly, por ejemplo, was an attempt to just do a plain 'ol family comedy.  It even has Gen X's favorite Ned, Stephen Tobolowsky.  

Hot Frosty (2024) is a leap into a straight, goofy comedy, as evidenced by some of the casting, from Schitt's Creek's Dustin Milligan to Katy Mixon Greer, who I particularly loved in Eastbound and Down.  I also was delighted to see Lauren Holly show up (and she was really funny, as pre-usual).  And, lastly, if you don't know Craig Robinson and Joe Lo Truligio, well...  your life is a poor shell of an existence and I pity you.  

Christmas Watch: The Best Christmas Pageant Ever (2024)

Watched:  11/23/2024

Format:   Cinepolis Theater

Viewing:  First

Director:  Dallas Jenkins

Selection:  KareBear

So, yes.  This was not entirely my idea. 

The book which inspired the film The Best Christmas Pageant Ever (2024) was a staple in our household while I was growing up.  In it's way, the book was as familiar as Judy Blume and Beverly Cleary for me (I can't speak for Steanso).  But I honestly haven't revisited the book in decades or seen the older movie version with Loretta Swit.  But every Christmas, whether it's at church with my folks or watching someone at the Vatican read scripture, when they get to the right part, I think of Gladys yelling "Hey!  Unto you a child is born!"

For context - While growing up, we were very involved in any church we attended, and my mom, The KareBear, ran the Sunday School at a couple of them.*   My mom's perennial draw to the book likely stemmed from seeing herself in several roles in the book - from the hard-scrabble kid growing up figuring things out, to the pious girl who loves church (our narrator, Beth), and culminating in herself as the overextended mom running a Christmas Pageant wherein things are not ideal.  

I'll admit, from the kid participant perspective in Christmas pageants - this thing lands.  (My earliest memories include my mom making me be an angel in a Vacation Bible School production and having to explain to me that angels are also dudes despite the felt-craft imagery I'd seen to date.)

And, lo, this fall my mother declared that *all she she wanted for Christmas* was for the fam to gather and go see the movie.  So, last night my folks (The Admiral and KareBear), Jamie, Steanso, Cardboard Belts and the kids all went to the theater and caught the film.  

Doc Watch: National Geographic's "Endurance (2024)"

Watched:  11/10/2024

Format:  Disney+

Viewing:  First

Director:  Jimmy Chin, Natalie Hewit, Elizabeth Chai Vasarhelyi

If you have any passing interest in the the Shackleton expedition, this is both a good summary of what happened - giving the viewer a pretty good idea how Shackleton's expedition to cross Antarctica did not, in fact, work out - but somehow the crew survived two years of nightmare conditions after their ship was first iced-in and then sank.  

The story is paralleled by the contemporary search for The Endurance - lost in the ocean at almost 2 miles down.  

The doc is Nat Geo-worthy, and therefore very watchable.  But here's the thing - Shackleton's expedition was launched in 1914 (it's amazing how small the world got in a 100 years) - and so he was smart enough to bring a filmographer and photographer.  So!  Get ready to see actual filmed footage of the expedition.

Perhaps more controversial - because everyone survived, they were interviewed later.  And so we get snippets of their interviews (not an issue) but excerpts from their diaries are then read by AI versions of those people's voices derived from the interviews.  Which... I guess we can do that now? 

It's a good effect - especially mixed with the silent footage an some re-creations of the events that couldn't be filmed.  

I'm gonna try to let all of that pass without too judgment.  We're in a new era of media, and I'm not sure that didn't have an interesting effect.  I know we're all supposed to be mad at AI all the time, but it's an interesting use of the technology.

There is a moment in the doc that left me dumbfounded where the scientists say "hey, we ran this program to guess the drift of the Endurance based on some details in the original logs" - and if you're me, you're staring goggle-eyed that they mounted this whole expedition and are more than 10 days in when they thought this up.  Like - not to be a dick, but I literally *assumed* they'd done this just to get funding.

All's well that ends well, and the film does wrap up with nice footage of the Endurance at the bottom of the Antarctic waters

Crime Watch: Wolfs (2024)

Watched:  11/09/2024

Format:  Apple+

Viewing:  First

Director:  John Watt

We've fallen into a pattern on the weekends.  Fridays - we watch something silly, funny, etc...  On Saturday, if we aren't busy, we watch something we've meant to catch on streaming.  And, Wolfs (2024) is one of the films, as is the Matt Damon one also sitting in queue over on Apple+, a service I'm not all that interested in minus MLS soccer.  But it's free through T-Mobile and was the home for Ted Lasso, and so here I sit.

The draw, of course, is that you liked George Clooney and Brad Pitt's dynamic in the Oceans 11 movies that happened more than 20 years ago.  And I did.  And the movie was essentially free, so... we watched it.

I will confess - I am not in love with the work of writer/ director John Watt, and so when his name popped up at the beginning, I kind of braced myself.  Watt turns in movies that are... fine.  They're never bad, but they're also never exactly sparking with auteurism or breaking new ground.  

The central conceit of the movie is that a Manhattan DA (Amy Ryan, always welcome) is frolicking with a young man who is not her husband, in a hotel room, when he falls off the bed and seemingly dies after hitting his head.

She has a phone number for a cleaner - a job I assume might exist? - who covers up the accidents and mis-doings of powerful and wealthy people.  We got this idea from Pulp Fiction, where Harvey Keitel was absolutely amazing as The Wolf - which is where I assume they took the name for this film.  And let me tell you how old one feels when a movie they watched 30 years ago is referenced this way.  But this is how culture works.

If you were counting on loving the banter between Clooney and Pitt, you basically get the idea and then it just keeps happening for 1/2 of the movie.  Which is a real YMMV proposition.  I get the feeling Clooney and Pitt and Watt were having a grand time doing this.  But it feels like the movie just takes forever to get going, and the gags it wants to do - this is a comedy - are a light chuckle more than a laugh-out-loud proposition.  Plus, it takes a minute to figure out how goofy this world is that we're in, as there's really no clues about it until... I dunno, 45 minutes in?

I also cannot for the life of me figure out why Amy Ryan's character was picking up this absolute dweeb of a guy.

Anyway, the movie is fine.  It really doesn't mark out any new territory, but if you're looking for a lower-budget hang with the guys you liked around 2001, you can do way worse.  I do like a good hang with these guys!  And a walk-on by Richard Kind (who publicly said this year he doesn't turn any roles down, which is hilarious).  

SPOILERS

The movie ends in a sort of Butch and Sundance moment, but apparently they're making another one.  Which... I think Butch and Sundance also got an off-brand sequel so maybe that's fine.

The back 1/3rd of the movie is, for my dollar, what the whole movie could have/ should have been - a sort of absurdist fantasy of this world.  And maybe the sequel will lean into what worked, now that we've gotten past the squabbling part.

Doc Watch: Music By John Williams (2024)

Watched:  11/06/2024

Format:  Disney+

Viewing:  First

Director:  Laurent Bouzerau

I don't have a special relationship with the music of John Williams - we *all* have that relationship.  

Music lays there in your mind somewhere next to the smells of your grandparents' basement that will come back to you when you smell something similar, or the taste of the food from your youth.  And John Williams' music was as important to us as pop, as Christmas music, as *anything* we heard growing up.

Of course there are other great movie composers... but probably the vast majority of them I'd put anywhere in the category of Williams are dead.  And none who seemed to hit with every score.

My earliest memories are of John Williams' music.  As a very small kid, post-Star Wars, we'd Imperial March around the house.  I remember the Christmas after Empire came out, my cousin Susan had purchased me the two-record soundtrack, and I lay on the floor listening to it over and over. 

Now, I get teary hearing Leia's theme - and have since Force Awakens reused it as Leia came off the ship. I still feel my pulse quicken to the Indiana Jones theme, or Superman.  I feel that pit in my stomach when I hear the Schindler's List score, or swell with wonder with Jurassic Park and Close Encounters.  Or ET.

We could probably rattle off his scores all day.  He's made plenty (I about gasped when I saw Home Alone for the first time since high school a couple of years ago and John Williams' name was on the film).  Honestly, it's staggering how prolific he's been, and that's part of what the doc tries to cover.  It's not just one Star War - it's 9.  It's not one Indy movie, it's 5.  

For reference, IMDB has him with the following telling stats for credits

• Music Department:  321
• Composer:  177
• Soundtrack:  517 (this is a mish-mash of work he did used on films - like "Superman Main Titles" being used on Superman IV)

I will be honest - I found out I knew absolutely nothing about John Williams while watching the doc.  My assumptions about who he was, his background, his education... all completely wrong.  I won't get into his background - that's in the doc.  But I will say that if I appreciated Williams before, I'm in absolute awe of him now, and don't just think he's a genius, he's a prodigy.

I was also unaware of his personal tragedy, or how he fell in with the biggest filmmakers of the past several decades.  

The doc trots out a who's-who of personalities, none of them a lightweight, to make their arguments for Williams, to talk about their experience working with him, and it's all a delight.  I am fine with the narrative that Williams' genius is innate, he's kind, etc...  the man is the greatest possible argument for the value of sound in movies, and maybe the last great orchestrator for film.

And, yes, I don't understand why - in this era of franchise pictures - we don't have more folks emulating Williams.

What I agree with - and looking at the listings for the Austin Symphony bares this out - is that film music is now as serious and important to symphonies as anything.  Sure, you still have the heavy hitters - some Mozart, Dvorak - but there's the show the whole family will dig.  John Williams.  

Anyway - watch the doc.  I found myself getting a bit emotional.  That music has a hold on you and taps into something pretty serious, and hearing all of it together is *a lot*.  But watch the doc and learn more about the man and the myth.

Happy 70th Anniversary Watch: Godzilla Minus One (2023)

Watched:  11/03/2024

Format:  AMC

Viewing:  4th

Director:  Takashi Yamakazi

So... I think today, November 3rd, 2024 - is the 70th Anniversary of the release of Gojira.  

If you've never seen the original Gojira, do so.  It's a moody meditation on impossible odds, destruction brought about by one's own hand, and the impossible decision to use unthinkable science to end a conflict.  All pretty big stuff for Japanese audiences back in 1954.  

It's a solid movie, and it's amazingly weird that within a few movies that walking metaphor was battling Mechagodzilla and teaming up with Mothra.

Since then, there have been a few attempts to bring Godzilla back to his roots as a fearsome product of nature and man's bungling with science.  Godzilla 1984/ Return of Godzilla is a notable version.  And I thought Shin Godzilla from a few years ago was a slam dunk - and continue to think so (and am ready for a rewatch).  

But for those who follow this site, Godzilla Minus One is the one that landed with me.  I wound up seeing it three times in the theater during the initial run from November of last year, through January of this year.  

• Screening 1
• Screening 2
• Screening 3

To celebrate G's 70th Anniversary, Toho re-released Minus One in limited theaters and for a limited time.  Honestly, I'd have gone to see any Godzilla movie except maybe All Monsters Attack.  But on the heels of an Academy Award win and with Godzilla's big birthday, Toho announced they're going to make a second installment by writer/ director Takashi Yamakazi just this week.

Big news in my world.

look at these nerds

At the screening, Toho provided about 15 minutes of interview/ Q&A footage with Yamakazi and his creative partner, whose name I failed to get.

I do love me some Godzilla in all of his forms (more or less).  It was good to spend a couple of hours with the big guy once again.

Somehow Not 1998 Watch: Canary Black (2024)

Watched:  11/3/2024

Format:  Amazon Prime

Viewing:  First

Director:  Pierre Morel

I always intend to watch the espionage-ish movies I see go by on streaming services.  They're usually shot in Eastern Europe and with women with cool hair.  And let me tell you - Kate Beckinsale's hair is so cool in this movie, it's its own character.  This is not a complaint.

The basic pitch of Canary Black (2024) is that there's a MacGuffin, and if Kate Beckinsale doesn't get it and deliver it to the baddies, then they'll kill her poor husband, who is just a nice Doctors Without Borders doctor who doesn't know his globe-trotting wife is a bad-ass spy.  Avery agrees, and this sends the CIA after Avery Graves (Beckinsale), and now she's in a dilly of a pickle.  

The plot is mostly an excuse to give Beckinsale tons of opportunities to (a) look amazing in all black on the nighttime streets of Eastern-Europe-Land, and (b) kick so many people's asses that John Wick would raise a glass to her.

Geriatric Watch: Thelma (2024)

Watched:  11/02/2024

Format:  Prime

Viewing:  First

Director:  Josh Margolin

So, Thelma (2024) is basically every one of my anxieties about what's coming with my parents - and, god willing, eventually myself - but with a laugh track.

I want to be clear, this is a good movie.  I died laughing at some parts.  But I also did not laugh at other parts I know were supposed to be funny, and that's on me and my hang-ups and not on the movie.  

The basic set-up is that an elderly woman, Thelma (June Squibb), who loves her 24-year-old grandson, is scammed by someone pretending to be her grandson on the phone and sends $10,000 to a PO Box, lest he rot in jail.* When she finds her grandson is safe and it was a scam, she goes on a mission to retrieve her money, against the express wishes of her daughter - Parker Posey, typically *great* - and her son-in-law, good ol' Clark Gregg.

There's certainly some valid critique of how the elderly adults and the adult children are infantilized by the functional adults, as it's maybe more convenient for the middle-aged adults to feel they have everything contained.  The movie also has a nice story of a young man realizing maybe he is slightly capable if he stops living with his parents guard rails.

The cast is solid - June Squibb is the definition of "working actor" and it's amazing to see her get a starring role at this point in her career.  Richard Roundtree plays her pal, and he's... really good.  Which I guess isn't a shock (RIP, Richard Roundtree).  The grandson is Fred Hechinger, who manages to take a character I'd normally have minimal sympathy for and make him likable.  

The movie is not as wacky as I'd believed it would be, but more absurdist and a lot depressing in ways I was unclear it intended to be.  But you can't beat the senior citizens home's take on Annie.  I kind of get the feeling the people find this particularly funny are not the ones living with the absolute certainty they're getting tapped to handle everything when the time comes and have already been thinking about these things for a decade or two.

Anyway, it was fine.  Any issues with it are my own issues.

*this is a real scam, and people are now using AI to mimic people's voices.  What doesn't make sense is that the US mail apparently finds and sorts the mail the same day.  Also - why Thelma doesn't just ask the cops to go to the local PO Box.  A huge number of these scammers are overseas or VPNing from across the country.

Hallo-ReWatch: M3GAN (2022)

Watched:  10/11/2024

Format: Amazon

Viewing:  Second

Director: Gerard Johnstone

So, this is my second viewing.  I picked it because I thought K would like it (The Dug's better half), and I believe that was a slam dunk.

It was fun to see with people, especially two folks who work at high-end IT companies losing their minds about the badly portrayed technology development process of the film.  Which, of course, would have ruined the film if anyone did their job correctly, so we can't have that.  Also - I hate to tell people working for real companies how things work everywhere else.*

Anyway, the idea for this viewing was:  a fun horror movie with folks who do not want to watch a current Rated-R horror movie because everyone needs to be able to sleep.  And M3GAN is PG-13 and fun, but I don't think anyone is going to get freaked out - one to watch with your middle-school-aged kids.

I still like Allison Williams in this.  Horror seems to be able to have main characters, or characters in general, that are not all sunshine and roses.  It's a subconscious tell that maybe our lead *could* get killed by movie's end, but, here, I think it gives her a viable arc from workaholic to seeing what she will need to do to be close to Cady (her niece) , but, also...  she's not unlikeable.  Do I find a person who mostly worries about their niche interest and doesn't want kids touching their stuff to be relatable?  MAYBE.  But... She just seems like someone who is way into their work, not a bad person. But...  (goofy voice) a woman? Who likes work over babies????

We wouldn't think twice about a male engineer being solely focused on their technology job in a movie - we'd expect it.  Here, it clashes with expectations of women to automagically be maternal, which is both a movie trope and something society sure thinks is real.  And Williams' character does not naturally have those tendencies, and, boy howdy, is there some low key judging of her by certain characters.  Not that she doesn't suddenly need those tendencies when life throws her a child to raise, but - as a childless cat-lady, I am deeply sympathetic to Williams' desire to outsource the child-rearing to a lifeless droid so I can do my thing.  Also, Williams' character has an objectively cool toy collection.

If you *did* watch this movie with your kids, I think some of this is worth unpacking.  Why is the social-worker in the movie such a B to Williams?  Why is Cady going so nuts at the 2/3rd mark?  Do you need a mishap with a killer android to figure out the power of family?

Maybe! 

But I also really appreciated the stuff in the film, like M3GAN singing to calm Cady, sort of weird, saccharine songs.  The goofy, horrifying fake, annoying-as-hell Furbies, and all the ways kids toys actually do work in someone's household - and the things people seem to want to do with them.  

Toys these days absolutely have the capacity to learn from as well as manipulate our kids.  The tots want screentime more than sugar, to disappear into oddball worlds of skibidi toilets and crafting of mines, and we're shocked they can't sit through a 90 minute movie.

As the toys are getting smarter, whose to say they won't "know" our kids as well or better than ourselves as parents.  When they can freestyle a convincing song about their particular trauma?  While also not understanding how kids grow and change thanks to non-comforting stimuli?

As Ian Malcolm would say:

and this is in real life, not the movie.

Dug rightly pointed out the movie raises a host of questions about AI and then leaves them all on the table.  And, there's a very interesting, grown up version of M3GAN (where James Wan is not allowed anywhere near it) and we get a chance to explore the ideas around AI in our lives, and our lives in AI's lives, and we should have that movie.  

Recently, I've been monkeying with CharacterAI and NotebookLM, and - we aren't ready for what we're making out there.  We're at the "peasants diving under tables because they're watching a film of a train coming" stage with this technology, and it's not just coming - it's here.  Right now humanoid robots are being made, while we're also improving AI on a minute-by-minute basis.  Someone is going to realize they can bluetooth their OmniBot to a thousand turks and we're all going to have a weirdo friend we didn't expect to have.  Let's see that film.

Anyway - M3GAN is not a great movie, but it does have things I like in it, and is a dire warning about ignoring your QA process. 

Sequel comes out next year.  We'll see what we get.

*they mostly get by on a wing and a prayer

Vax Watch: The Fall Guy - extended cut (2024)

Watched:  09/28/2024

Format:  Peacock

Viewing:  Second

Director:  David Leitch

Huh.

So, as Hannah Waddingham was in a thing, I watched The Fall Guy (2024) in the theater back this spring.  The movie was right in the middle of the curve for me.  It was funny-ish, had decent stunts - but was basically what I figured it might be.  It had a flimsy story to hang it all on.  I like Gosling, Blunt, Waddingham, Duke and Hsu.  I can give or take Aaron Taylor-Johnson (sorry, dude), but he's good in this!

On Friday at noon, I got my COVID-booster, and felt maybe a little funky on Friday night, and then fine most of Saturday - and then in the late afternoon the effects hit me like a ton of bricks.  Unable to take in new information as we headed into evening, I decided the only thing for it was to see some stunts and have some chuckles.  I put on the Extended Cut of The Fall Guy, now streaming on Peacock.  And - what do you know?  The movie was literally much better.  

It became pretty clear to me that the vibe director Leitch was going for had been cut down to smithereens in someone's drive to make this movie much shorter.  Suddenly, the plot of the movie felt like it gelled.  The characters aren't speaking in bullet points and a lot of the humor and meta-ness of the movie is restored.  Character-based gags make more sense, and because what was supposed to be there is there, things just work better.  We're not racing through the movie so we can get in another showing that day. Ie:  The pacing is, in my opinion, fixed.

In short - the theatrical cut was a hatchet job. and I cannot begin to guess how and why that happened the way it did.  

I don't know how often I'll put this movie back on, but it's a case-study in how editing impacts the intentions of a film.  Leitch clearly meant for people to really enjoy the goofy dialog, repeating gags, and character moments, and a lot of what gets restored is that stuff.  We still get the very cool "one shots" like the opening sequence with Gosling going from his trailer to the top of the elevator and falling (sorry for spoilers, but that's the first five minutes).  But what's going on with the plot really feels more solid this time - and I think we get some additional murders that weren't there in the theatrical.

Anyhow, if the movie wasn't for you the first time, sorry.  I don't think this will fix it.  I do think if you were kinda lukewarm on this, it turns it up a notch.  If you liked it (I did), huh.  You may like it more.

I like Waddingham in the giant glasses. Very cute.

Drama Kid Watch: Theater Camp (2023)

Watched:  09/07/2024

Format:  Hulu?

Viewing:  First

Director(s):  Molly Gordon, Nick Lieberman

From 8th grade through high school graduation, I was a drama kid.  And for seven weeks between my Junior and Senior year, I attended drama camp at  UT Austin.  There's a story there about how - at that camp - I realized I was, in fact, a bad actor and realized this was a high school hobby and not a career-path.  That insight was something for which I am eternally grateful, but acting, set building, lighting, etc... is what I did in high school after realizing I didn't want to play sports anymore (which I was 1000% sure even in middle school that I was not very good at).

So, while I have *that* experience, I was not part of the culture of drama kids who started much younger.  Or, certainly, New York theater kids who go out into the woods for the summer to hone their craft.  

I only know Molly Gordon, who co-writes, co-stars, co-directs from a small role on Winning Time and her outstanding performance on The Bear. Co-Star Ben Platt spent his past couple years making people mad by making a movie out of his award winning performance from Broadway in Dear Evan Hansen.  And Co-Director is nepobaby Nick Lieberman (you can look him up).  

Based on a short film involving the same people, Theater Camp (2023) is about a mix of counselors and campers at an all-summer theater camp (surprise!).   The owner of the camp (a too-briefly seen Amy Sedaris) falls into a coma and her son, American Vandal's Jimmy Tatro, is thrust to the fore to run the business side.  And the camp is failing.  Badly.

Meanwhile, the show must go on, including an original work by Amos and Rebecca-Diane (Platt and Gordon) about their fallen leader.  

It's movie by theater kids about theater kids, and they even insert some slobs versus snobs camp rivalry that goes nowhere, so you're not there for a gripping story, necessarily.  But the jokes are there, the kids and counselors are both pretty hysterical, and we get lots and lots and lots of drama-kid specific stuff that may click with non-Theater-kids, but is aimed squarely at the theater kids out there, gently poking fun at the culture from a million angles but rarely mean.

The plot about the camp's financial status is.. wonky.  It feels like an SNL sketch tucked into the movie as it seems wildly unlikely a camp wouldn't understand its finances heading into the summer, even if the movie tries to make it all make sense.  But it does give us Patti Harrison as the corporate raider, and she's pretty darn funny.  But - in general, it's not that hard to figure "X campers = Y dollars" and "Y dollars - Z operating cost = y/n ability to run the camp".  So just a little something as to how it's been run every year on a deficit would be... helpful.

The idea of a camp for the weird theater kids is sweet and funny, and I like the notion that there are cliques, like the Fosse kids.  It seems... buyable while also absurd.  But theatre can be absurd.  Watching grown adults ask kids to tap into emotions they can't possibly have experiences is so much a part of my theatrical experience, I was dying inside watching some scenes.  (I was in a play as a 17 year old in the 90's being asked to play a man traumatized by WWII, and... ya'll...).  Not to mention the assumptions made by the theater kids as they deal with each other, and host a dinner to raise money for the camp.  Or the director jealous of the talent of one of the young performers and finding ways to criticize her.

It's a sweet movie, and I liked it a lot.  It's not going to win any awards, but in the era of mid to low-budget comedies not succeeding, it's the kind that should have had more attention and would have made back its small budget.  Once upon a time, this would be a mild summer sleeper hit, like School of Rock.  But it was barely advertised and mostly dumped on streamers.

The biggest problem this movie has isn't the movie's fault.  Once you see Ayo Edebiri show up, the natural response is "hey, let's follow HER."  And she's just playing a small part that is hysterical, anyway, and then funnier with her in it.  (I imagine Molly Gordon was super pumped to get her The Bear castmate in the movie, and a co-star from Winning Time).  

I do not know if some of the older stars were people I was supposed to know.  I didn't know them.  I watch movies and live in Austin - I don't know Broadway.  

Anyway, check it out sometime.  Jamie requested something fun for her Saturday viewing, and this popped up - and it fit the bill.  

Schadenfreude Watch and TL;DR discussion: The Spectacular Failure of the Star Wars Hotel (2024)

Watched:  08/19/2024

Format:  YouTube

Viewing:  First/ Second

Director:  Jenny Nicholson

This will be a TL;DR post.  Heads up.  If Nicholson can drop a 4-hour video, I can drop a jumbo-sized post.

I've provided headings if you want to scroll through to get to certain sections.

Nicholson is an Online Person

I'm counting Jenny Nicholson's in/famous Disney's Star Wars: Galactic Starcruiser  four hour YouTube opus as a documentary.  Because that's what The Spectacular Failure of the Star Wars Hotel (2024) is - a document of a particular thing, told with a specific point of view. 

I was introduced to Nicholson via the Dug a few years ago, and, during COVID, I wound up watching several of her older videos, after watching her near four hour discussion of the Utah-based "immersive" experience, "Evermore".  I highly recommend that video as well - and it gives a lot of street cred to Nicholson as a non-crank when it comes to role-play experiences.

For years, Nicholson was a pop-culture YouTuber - somehow not adopting the weird quirks of YouTube stardom - likely because she came pre-loaded with her own bag of quirks.  She discussed Star Wars movies, Harry Potter, whatever was in cinemas, and was very into theme parks and nerdy experiences.

I think I would describe Nicholson as the quiet, kinda nerdy girl you saw in the hallway in high school and you assumed you had nothing in common, and then you sat next to her in Government, found out she's actually hilarious, and then you're buds, even if you don't hang out much outside of school.

Nicholson is a small woman, and she's unassuming.  She wears costumes during parts of her videos, knowing that just seeing her staring at the camera is probably a lot.  And she surrounds herself with plushies - some of which are mind-boggling, like what I think is a 4 foot high Porg.

Vamp Watch: Abigail (2024)

Watched:  08/11/2024

Format:  Peacock

Viewing:  First

Directors: Tyler Gillett, Matt Bettinelli-Olpin  

Spoilers

A vampire movie opening with Tchaikovsky's "Swan Lake" is a cheeky move.  And it really sets the tone for what's to come for vampire movie fans, both signaling an awareness of *your* awareness of the genre, but also using it as diegetic music as a young girl takes to an empty stage in an empty auditorium.*

Fox/ Marvel Watch: Deadpool & Wolverine (2024)

Watched:  08/03/2024

Format:  Alamo

Viewing:  First

Director:  Shawn Levy

SPOILERS

And also a forewarning - this is going to be scattershot.  There's so much going on in this movie.

Franchise Watch: Ghostbusters - The Frozen Empire (2024)

Watched:  07/23/2024

Format:  Netflix

Viewing:  First

Director:  Jason Reitman

The expansion of a good movie or two into sprawling franchises makes for a curious environment as we have been seeing again and again and again - especially as we resurrect decades old concepts.  In the mid 2010's, because everyone else had franchises popping, it seems Columbia looked at their catalog of perennial favorites that could possibly withstand transformation into a franchise and came up with the 2016 Ghostbusters, which - at best - enjoys lukewarm and damning praise of "well, it's kind of funny" from it's defenders. 

No matter where you landed on that movie, it failed to meet Sony/ Columbia's financial expectations, and - with no path forward for those characters and Jason Reitman in the wings, Sony immediately greenlit an un-reboot, and put out Ghostbusters: Afterlife - dropping it squarely in the middle of the pandemic shutdown.  

The movie meant only the most ardent fans would go see it, pulling in only $204 million.  I have no idea what the studio's expectations were but we weren't quite done thinking a franchise film should make $800 million or more at the time.  Here in 2024, I think getting more than $5 and some pocket lint is considered a win.  

To maybe set the tone, and give people a chance to opt out of the rest of this post, I'll put my cards on the table: I deeply did not like Ghostbusters: Afterlife.  I am not even sure I'd describe it as a competently made movie.  Not that there are exactly *technical gaffes* like boom mics falling into frame, but from a "what is Ghostbusters, and are we delivering something that fosters the multi-decade enthusiasm for at least that one movie?" 

I think... it kind of sucked.  

Undaunted, and with the promise of action figure sales, Columbia made a follow up.

Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire (2024) is, perhaps, as bad or worse for many of the same reasons, but also finding all new ways to make me not want to watch any more of these movies.  

So now is your chance to run away, fair reader.  Because here we go.

Kid Movie Watch: Despicable Me 4 (2024)

Watched:  07/23/2024

Format:  Regal Cinema

Viewing:  First

Director:  Oh, who knows...?

It has been a long time since I sat and watched entertainment built directly for kids.  I don't mean Disney's all-ages cartoons where they want the story and everything to work for the parents, too.  I mean - this is for kids, and if adults like it, fine.  

I kept thinking I'd seen the original Despicable Me, but when the movie started, I realized - I think I watched a few minutes of it on cable 10 years ago and that's my familiarity with the actual movies.  So, yeah, here on movie 6 or 7 or something of this franchise is when I decided to check in.

Why?  you are currently asking.  Why would you do this?

Well, I have a niece, nephew and sister-in-law whom I get along with pretty darn well.  And all summer we were planning to go see a movie, but camps, fate and other factors kept inserting themselves.  So I missed Garfield, which I was planning to go see, because Hannah Waddingham has a supporting part, and I think it's a good idea to throw money at Ms. Waddingham.  Anyway, with Garfield now streaming, this is what the kids wanted to see in the theater, so when Amy had a day off and was looking to entertain the kids and my brother was working, she asked "Despicable Me 4?", and I was, like:  sure.  Whatevs.  

It's not that I was *lost*, exactly, for large stretches.  But without the now well-established lore of Despicable Me at my fingertips, it is fair to say I was *guessing* at what was happening and why and to whom and if that was good or bad for long stretches of the movie.  It had some genuinely funny moments.  Whatever.

What struck me was the experience of watching a movie with two kids - one of whom was all but vibrating in his chair, he was having such a good time, and my niece, who locks in with laser focus when she's enjoying something and just gets real still.  Like, you-want-to-put-a-mirror-under-her-nose still.  Also, I think I owe the niece a bag of Sour Patch Kids.

So, success there, Dreamworks.  

Look, my cartoons are Quick Draw McGraw, Looney Tunes and Disney.  I have my comedy animation, and my graphic-tees are a pretty good representation of what I like.  And while this stuff is not in that school, it is the stuff the kids will know and love, and that's a cool thing.  

Disney spends it's time and money trying to crack and re-crack the ineffable factors of art, story and comedy.  This movie seems far more formulated to pack a gag per second into the runtime, and make sure things fall down, things explode, etc... and the story is just a vehicle for that to happen.  It's not wrong, it's just very different.

All of that is to say, no, this was not my favorite movie, and there were parts that just made me feel tired (I may not be the target audience for Minions as a concept).  But I also know I am 49, not 9.  So, go nuts, kids.

Western Watch: The Far Country (1954)

Watched:  07/23/2024

Format:  TCM

Viewing:  First

Director:  Anthony Mann

I have a few beliefs I will drop on people that seem to get a puzzled look, but one of those is that Jimmy Stewart was one of the 20th Century's best actors.  After playing "nice guys" (and a casual murdered in After The Thin Man) as a young actor, post WWII, he sought out more challenging roles, and showed he could also play a real SOB.  Never a villain that I've seen, but reluctant heroes.   The Far Country (1954) is one of those films in which he is an ambivalent dick until, oh, the last few minutes of the movie.  

Directed by Anthony Mann, the movie takes place during the Yukon Goldrush, which I know about almost exclusively via how it shows up in comic books (hello, Uncle Scrooge) and movies.  And, frankly, this movie left me wondering if Don Rosa's take on Glittering Goldie was influenced by Ruth Roman from this movie.*  And, yes, I'd put this in queue in part because it co-stars Roman.    

The movie is full of familiar faces from Westerns - Walter Brennan, Jay C. Flippen, Jack Elam, Royal Dano, etc...  and some others like Harry Morgan and Kathleen Freeman who I relate more to the modern era (Ie: They were still in new things while I was coming up).  It also has someone I'd never seen before, French actor Corinne Calvet, who plays an unrequited love interest to Stewart, more or less trying to follow him around The Yukon.  

I'd seen John McIntire in other things, but he's kind of great as the devious lawman, Gannon, playing Sheriff, judge and executioner in Skagway - the waypoint for people entering the Yukon territory before they cross into Canada and reach Dawson.  He's more or less taking advantage of the relative lawlessness of the area to seize whatever he can, throwing anyone who complains into jail - or into a noose.

Meanwhile, Roman plays Ronda Castle, who runs a saloon in Skagway, where she also pays out for gold, while finding ways to skim from and screw over the miners in order to make a healthy profit.  

After a brief legal skirmish that puts Stewart in a bad spot, Roman hires him out to lead her ride up to Dawson.  Along the way we learn that Stewart is dedicated to covering his own ass above all else, and - this matches pretty well with Roman's worldview.  But along the way and in Dawson, they begin to see people trying to build a town out of the seasonal camp.

Gannon, the shady lawman shows up, and we get a pretty rote Western where some bad dudes push around a bunch of seemingly helpless people.  He may be a bad guy, but you kind of like him, anyway.  He's such a heel, but honest about being a heel.

A few things make this an A picture over a bit of Saturday afternoon B programming.  

In 1954, Stewart was a box office draw, and Ruth Roman was doing well enough that she gets second billing, despite limited screentime.  It may be folks you know from Westerns, but this is a collection of some of the greatest-hits-type supporting actors.  No one is dialing it in, even if they're playing to type.  And Stewart and Roman's mutual arcs toward realizing you really can't live out your libertarian fantasy on the back of a saddle if you want a civilization - or any human connection - is well written if not particularly moving/ telegraphed.

I quite liked Corinna Calvert, and am surprised I don't know her from other things.  

The movie is shot in part in Canada, on location.  And, holy cats, is it beautiful.  That's a part of the world that's on my bucket list, and now maybe even more so.  It's actually shot in Alberta at Athabasca Glacier,  Jasper National Park and other locales.  So while you do get some scenes clearly shot on sets, others are out there in the wild, and it adds considerably to the movie.  

The look is enhanced by careful lenswork of William H. Daniels, who knows how to get that sweeping vista you're looking for.  

But, yeah, if you only really know Jimmy Stewart as George Bailey, this is a good one to see his range (not that you don't see a bit of everything in It's a Wonderful Life).  And a chance to see a Western that's pretty darn far west and muddier than it is dusty.  

*I'll have Stuart ask next time he haunts Mr. Rosa's signing table.  

Doc Watch: The Ashley Madison Affair (2023)

Watched:  07/22/2024

Format:  Hulu

Viewing:  First

Director:  ABC News?

Uh.  Yeah.  If I was ABC News (this doc lives on Hulu), I'd be looking into whether suing Netflix were a possibility.  This series interviews a stunning number of the same subjects, and even pulls the same quotes as the Netflix doc, but is from several months to a year before.

But this is "news" or "documentary", so a legal case can't probably be made.  

Anyway - of the two docs, this one is the less juicy way to deliver exactly the same information.  It does seem they interviewed real users of the site, male and female, and then had actors re-create the transcript so as not to expose the users - and while it's a bit clunky and has an "I'm ACTING!" vibe from time to time at least you're not stuck with morons.  

There's also interviews with real users like a journalist who started doing a story on Ashley Madison and then found himself about to fulfill the site's promise.  And a bit about a near-miss of a case that would have exposed Ashley Madison's fake profiles well before the data hack - which I can't sort why Netflix didn't get into that.

There's also a name named for who was a suspect, until that trail reaches a literal dead end.  And a suggestion that maybe the guy's online pals may have been behind this.  

Of the two, I don't really have an opinion which one I'd recommend.  This feels like - had they worried more about a complete picture - getting more former employees on camera, etc...  it would feel more complete.   But this one also feels marginally more interested in trying to look like the product of a news organization and I suspect that has a lot to do with how it's managed.  But at the same time, feels maybe more... naive?

I dunno.  Neither of these are great.  

Christmas in July Watch: Rescuing Christmas (2023)

when the marketing team needs a poster, and they needed it yesterday

Watched:  07/19/2024

Format:  Hallmark

Viewing:  First

Director:  Emily Moss Wilson

"Oh, Rachael Leigh Cook!  I haven't seen her in a minute!" I said to myself when I saw that - for unknown reasons - my YouTube TV started just playing this movie at me from the beginning when I went to go to the menu.

You may recall that last Christmas I was discussing that the Hallmark Christmas movie formula has mutated a great deal, and, really, aside from the idea that "Christmas is good" and a lack of violence and sex, I'm not really sure what constitutes a Hallmark Christmas movie anymore.  What I didn't think I'd be saying is "hey, this one maybe could have been a regular 'ol movie at the theater", but here we are.

Yes, the budget doesn't make you think this is anything more than a Hallmark film, but the ideas in it could have gotten a bit more budget, and I assume you'd cast more known actors in a few parts.  But the overall concept is... good?

This one kind of takes a leap off of the tried-and-true Hallmark sub-formula of making a Christmas wish and sees what their life would be like if, say, they chased that corporate job or married that other guy.*  Instead, this one shows a woman (Cook) who had a bad Christmas the year prior, and is feeling overwhelmed at Christmas again.

Meanwhile, some elves in the North Pole are going to try to boost Christmas cheer with a "Grant a Wish" program, where they give some lucky person 3 wishes.  

After blowing her first two wishes - in a moment of frustration with the holidays - Cook wishes there was no such thing as Christmas.  Which causes alarms at the North Pole (and Santa - played by a jolly, funny T. Mychael Rambo - takes as his cue to take a vacation.

The most recognizable other player is Sam Page, who you may know from Mad Men or a handful of other Hallmark movies.  

It's not that the world is worse without Christmas - they don't go full Pottersville on anyone.  And, in fact, the main character doesn't even really hate Christmas - it's more about "oh, @#$%!  The wish was real!  What did I do?"   

Cook tries to fix her problem and remind people of Christmas, and, so, pitching the holiday as an "art installation about a forgotten, ancient holiday", Cook gets her family and Sam involved.  Thus, the gag of the majority of the movie is "how do you explain what Christmas is to people who have no context?" ex:  we're cutting down a perfectly healthy tree and putting it in the living room for 3 weeks before we throw it out.  We're also hanging arts and crafts on the tree.  And how insane Christmas sounds if you've never seen it before.

Meanwhile, the elves come to try help her along without her really knowing what's what.

It's a simple premise.  And it's remarkable how it manages to not fall into some easy pitfalls, or make things harder than they have to be.    

Look, the bar is so low for Christmas movies, it's buried.  And I include studio films in this statement.  To teach the inevitable lesson of "learning the true meaning of Christmas", our leads usually begin as misanthropes.  This movie never goes there, really.  No one is miserable and has to learn the meaning of Christmas - which is usually, on Hallmark, the promise of a single, dry kiss more than anything.

Instead, this movie takes the more relatable notion that: sometimes Christmas can be a lot of work, and people get stressed in the middle of it.  But that doesn't mean you wish harm on others.

It's.... fine.  Of the forgettable and goofy movies, this one actually had... jokes.  And funny bits.  And leads who didn't sound out of breath with every line.

*I suspect this comes from the notion of "I wish I'd never been born" from It's a Wonderful Life, but keeps the star from running from the cops

Remake Watch: Road House (2024)

Watched:  07/19/2024

Format:  Amazon Prime

Viewing:  First

Director:  Doug Liman

What an odd movie.  And it's not bad as far as these things go.   

Yes, Road House (2024) is a remake of the OG Road House, but in only the loosest sense.  It certainly carried enough of the original concept that calling it something else was just going to draw knowing comparisons.

For my dollar, this is the more self-aware, but more fun version of this same concept.  With this latest version, you spend less time wondering "why hasn't anyone ever just shot the villain?" and "were are the cops?", and, certainly "are they kidding?  I can't tell"   But as the plot is essentially that a Miami Vice villains wants the land a shitty Gulf Coast bar sits on, you may wonder why the solution for the villains isn't a can of gasoline and a match at 4:00 AM instead of all the effort and violence.

This is a movie about Jessica Williams coming to hire you and somehow not being the romantic interest - which I suspect is for plot reasons in the third act.  It's mostly about Elwood P Dalton* (Jake Gyllenhaal in ropey muscular form), as a former MMA fighter who is basically a vagabond.  Jessica Williams' character, Frankie, owns a bar in the Keys, and she's been having some trouble.  

Yadda-yadda, see my notes above.

There's also some local color in the form of a precocious bookstore dwelling kid, an alligator, and... not much else.  Glass Key, the fictional location of the film**, is oddly sparsely populated.  We're told there's civilization there, schools, parks... but you'll never see anything but about four locations, and those feel oddly deserted, too.  In fact, The Road House bar, on its busiest nights, looks 2/3rds empty.  Which may be a COVID thing.  But it never feels like the bar is bumpin'.

The movie does have a sense of humor, which certainly helps things along.  The henchmen are a bit wacky, and dispatched in occasionally humorous ways.  The mid-film addition of Irish-born MMA champ Conor McGregor adds a certain escalation to the narrative while also adding a madman to the proceedings, and he happens to be pretty funny from time to time.  He makes a good baddie you want to keep on screen.

The love interest is once again a doctor, played by Daniela Melchior - and she fulfills the spot admirably if thanklessly.  But there's also a bartender who has her moments, played by BK Cannon.

The fight choreography is something else, and its possible/ likely it was assisted not just by dynamic cinematography, but some CGI.  I dunno.  I don't see very fast, so this kind of chaotic stuff just blows past me sometimes as my brain tries to process the information.  But it did seem impressive!  Gyllenhaal is buyable as a guy who can take down a few dudes at once.  

Anyhow - it's silly to spend too much time on this.  It's a good way to spend a Friday night, and thus achieved it's goal, but it's unlikely you'll spend a lot of time pondering the meaning of life through the lens of a Road House remake.  I was just surprised by how self-aware it is (they actually have scenes talking about where they are in the comparable plot of a Western movie) and appreciate its lean approach.  They know you're not here to see Dalton ponder philosophy, and stare into sunsets.  You want to see face punching, and it delivers.

Maybe it lacks some of the "wtf were they thinking here?" charm of the original, and every movie is better with Sam Elliot, but its not a bad actioner.

*the name here itself is a joke that goes nowhere.  "Elwood P Dowd" is the name of Jimmy Stewart's character in the play and film Harvey, which is about a polite drunk who happens to pal around with a 6' white rabbit that most other people can't see.  If that sounds like the greatest film that ever was, it IS.

**The Glass Key is a terrific Dashiell Hammett book and film, and you should check it out.  I suspect this was an Easter Egg, but I have no idea why.