Last Holiday, released in 1950, is an early-film-career movie from Alec Guinness (a recurring actor today, through no planning on my part; he was just very active in the 50s UK film scene). He plays George Bird, a very average man in a very average job, for whom nothing seems to have ever gone right in his life. The latest ill luck: the doctor (rather too cheerfully) informs George that he has Lampington’s Disease and has weeks to live. George has no family, no relationships, no ties, but he does have £300 in the bank and an insurance policy that he can cash in for an additional £500, so he decides to take the money and go on the first vacation of his life. He books a room at a ritzy resort, with secondhand luggage that makes it appear that he’s been traveling the world, and so the other posh vacationers think that George is a well-to-do mystery man. George quickly confides in a housekeeper (without telling her that he is dying) that he is out of his element, and she helps school him on how to approach the other guests. Even so, George nudges them to take chances that they normally wouldn’t, which leads several of them to personal and financial successes. They take a liking to George, offering him money and job prospects, the kind of which he’s never experienced before. All, of course, coming at the wrong time of his life. But when Lampington himself shows up at the hotel and knows what the disease for which he is named looks like, it may change George’s outlook. Very funny movie, but with a powerful ending too that will stick with you, and proof that Sir Alec Guinness, known by so many only as old Obi-Wan, is worth delving deep into. ★★★★

More Alec Guinness in 1958’s The Horse’s Mouth (and he also wrote the screenplay), from director Ronald Neame. A comedy, Guinness plays Gully Jimson, who is getting out of jail when the film starts. We quickly learn that Jimson is a “free spirit,” part shyster, part artist, and completely eccentric in everything he does. As a talented painter, he is obsessed with any blank wall he comes across, envisioning it as a canvas for his latest masterpiece. And he wholeheartedly believes that everything he paints is a masterpiece. Now out of jail, he takes to harassing the people who have come into possession of his works, including a wealthy former sponsor named Mr Hickson, and his (Jimson’s) ex-wife, the newly remarried Mrs Monday. Unable to secure them, he cooks up new means for displaying his talent, such as squatting in a wealthy apartment when the owners are on vacation for 6 weeks and painting a mural on one of their expansive walls, or charging for painting lessons and getting students to just paint the side of an abandoned building slotted for demolition. Jimson’s antics are laugh-out-loud funny, and his interactions with everyone around him are comedy gold, whether it be because they “just don’t understand his talent” or, in the case of a sculptor who crashes his squatting party, because they are just as crazy as he is. Some of the laughs come because Jimson actually is talented; he just can’t get out of his own way for the world to realize it. ★★★½

Green for Danger is an old-school whodunit with a classic Poirot-like character to guide us to the killer. It takes place in 1944 over an English town which is constantly under the threat of Nazi bombing. The town’s postman, Higgins, is hurt when a bomb falls on his building, but at the hospital, it is determined that he’ll be fine after some minor clean-up surgery. However, something goes wrong in the prep to the surgery, and Higgins dies, but not before he recognizes the voice of one of the nurses from somewhere. A day or two later, another dies: a different nurse. This murder prompts Scotland Yard to send a detective, and this guy is not convinced that Higgins’ death was an accident, and that there are actually 2 murders to solve instead of one. The suspect is one of the 5 remaining doctors and nurses at the rural hospital, and he tells them all to be on the lookout, as one of them is the guilty party and will almost certainly kill again. He’s not wrong. I absolutely loved most of the movie, with the twists and turns, the clues and the “hunt” for the guilty. The end is just a bit too clever for its own good, but sill, a very engaging murder mystery. ★★★½

Based on a play, The Prisoner, from 1955, stars Guinness as an unnamed priest falsely accused of treason by the new communist government. The interrogator brought in to wring out a confession knows the priest well: the two fought side-by-side in the resistance against the Nazi’s (hinting that unnamed country is Poland). After the war, whereas the interrogator has thrown in with the communists, the priest claims that they’ve just substituted one oppressor for another. The government fears religion, as it gives the people a power outside of the state in which they can put their trust, and thus are targeting this popular priest. The interrogator knows, from their time together in the war, that the priest is strong willed and will not succumb to physical torture, so he sets up psychological torture in order to bend the priest. But will he break? Great acting, but the story falls apart and lacks substance. What should be a fantastic psychological thriller is left wanting by the end. Solid stars for the performances though! The film was, oddly enough, one of those that faced criticism on all sides when it came out. Some called it anti-communist, some called it pro-communist, some called it anti-Catholic, while some thought it was in favor of the church. Sometimes you just can’t win. ★★½

One more Alec Guinness film to close it out, and this is his best role yet. Tunes of Glory (also from director Ronald Neame) follows a Scottish battalion in the late 40s as it sees a handover of power. Sinclair (Guinness) is the longtime commanding officer, though he lacks the sufficient rank. He has, however, come up through the ranks in the historical battalion, having been a piper and front-line combat soldier. As such, he’s popular with those under his command, and isn’t as strict with them as he maybe should be. In fact, the night that his replacement arrives, Sinclair is leading a drunken dance with his men. The newcomer is Barrow (John Mills), who is everything that Sinclair is not. Barrow is an Oxford man who came from a military upbringing, with little combat experience as he has spent much of his career behind a desk. But he has the correct rank and the brass love him, so he will be taking over, much to Sinclair’s chagrin. Barrow immediately lays down the law and enacts the regulations that Sinclair has let slide, causing Sinclair to become unruly and a malcontent, whispering to the other soldiers about Barrow’s shortcomings. When Sinclair strikes another officer, a young man dating his daughter, Barrow must decide if he will play it by the book, bringing up court-martial proceedings, or if he will try to make the more popular move for the troops. As it turns out, Barrow has no choice at all. Outstanding acting all around, but especially from Guinness, who shows that he really is one of the best English actors of all time.  ★★★★½

• TV series recently watched: Foundation (season 3), X-Files (season 1), Dexter Resurrection (series)
• Book currently reading: Crossroads of Twilight by Robert Jordan

I honestly didn’t know much about Polish director Andrzej Wajda, but have heard good things about his War Films trilogy, fictionalizing events of the Polish effort during World War II. First up is 1955’s A Generation, the first film to deal with the Warsaw Uprising. I had a hard time getting into this movie, despite its heavy subject matter. It follows two young men, both with boyish faces and seemingly not much more than boys, but it shows how fast boys have to grow up when war is in your backyard. One of the boys falls for a pretty young woman who has been getting men to join the communist party, and by extension, the resistance to Germany. The other boy is initially resistant to joining the anti-Nazi group, not because of love for Germany but because he is the sole breadwinner and if he were to get arrested, his elderly father would be alone. But he too gets caught up in the fight by the end. Sometimes these two (again, very young looking) guys seem like kids playing at dress up, or attempting to impress “the grownups,” but their actions get very serious very quickly. Again, I couldn’t quite get into it for some reason, but the film is highly thought of, so I’ll admit it’s probably me. ★★½

The director’s followup, however, is one of the best war films I’ve recently seen, and hits on all cylinders. Set a couple years after the above movie, it shows the final days of the Warsaw Uprising in 1944. The Polish resistance is hanging on by a thread. They keep expecting the Russian army to swoop in and blow the Germans out of the city, but as we know from history now, the Soviets stayed away for political reasons, letting the resistance (who was supported by the Polish government in exile, based out of London) fall to Germany, so that the Soviets could then set up their own Communist-friendly new government. As the film begins, the Polish resistance knows they can’t hold out much longer, so the decision is made to literally go underground, to go down into the sewers, in hopes of getting outside of the city to escape and live to fight another day. Down in the sewers is where their nightmare truly begins. Initially the troop is led by a young woman who knows the sewers well, having been smuggling goods around the city through them for awhile, but when she decides to hang back with her boyfriend, who has been wounded and is slowing everyone down, the rest of the group proceeds without her, and end up getting separated from each other, and finally completely lost. As minutes become hours become days, surrounded by the stench, threats of gas, fear of Nazi soldiers overhead, and no signs of fresh air or escape, madness creeps in. A movie that will make you feel claustrophobic as the walls come closer and the dark seem just a bit darker, it pulls you into the plight of these last soldiers, trying everything to hold on to a losing cause when we know there is no hope. ★★★★★

We had a film at the beginning of the Warsaw Uprising, a film at its end, and we conclude the trilogy with a film at the end of the war. Ashes and Diamonds begins on VE Day, and Poland is prepping to celebrate. However, the battle for the future of the country is not yet over. A couple former resistance fighters try to assassinate the secretary of the pro-Communist Polish Workers Party, but accidentally kill the wrong person. As they plan to take out their target at an upcoming banquet, the lead killer, Maciek, who has been able to set emotions aside until now, falls for a pretty young woman tending bar at the hotel. As the night moves on, the two grow close, and now, suddenly, Maciek has something to live for, something to lose, that he didn’t have before, and it changes his perspective on his mission. The first 10 minutes and the final 25 minutes were great, but honestly it felt like a lot of filler in the middle. I know it had a purpose (showing the slow transition Maciek made as well as exploring the inner workings of some of the tertiary characters) but it was awfully slow. ★★★

Wajda was never shy about his anti-Communist views (even if he was very successful at hiding subversive themes in his movies to get past Polish censors), so for a time in the 80s he turned to other countries for more freedom in filmmaking. In 1983 he made Danton, portraying a popular figure in the French Revolution. In 1794, the Revolution is hanging on by a thread. The Committee of Public Safety, essentially the seat of execute power in the country, is led by Maximilien Robespierre and is not very popular by the citizens nor the legislative assembly, the National Convention. The people’s champion is Georges Danton, which puts him at odds with Robespierre, and they are clamoring for Danton to depose Robespierre and lead the nation. However, Danton is tired of fighting and bloodshed, and while he doesn’t like Robespierre’s tactics (he has been silencing newspapers, and jailing and beheading critics), he doesn’t want to see anyone, himself included, be made king again, after he’s fought so hard to do away with the monarchy. As the two circle closer and closer to each other, the fate of the nation hangs in the balance. Great film, buoyed by Danton’s speeches as delivered by lead actor Gérard Depardieu. The only off-putting thing was the fact that half the actors are French, and the other half are transplants from Wajda’s native Poland, who had their voices dubbed over by French speakers for the film. You can clearly tell, as their lips don’t match… That’s my only quibble. For a film with little “action” and almost entirely fought over words, it’s very exciting. Lots of people drew lines between Robespierre’s totalitarianism and the state of Poland at the time, though Wajda (maybe with a wink) always denied any parallels. ★★★★

• TV series recently watched: Back to the Frontier (series), Wednesday (season 2), Frasier (season 1), Jessica Jones (season 2)
• Book currently reading: Crossroads of Twilight by Robert Jordan

I’m generally a big fan of director Darren Aronofsky, who’s had far more hits (Black Swan, Requiem for a Dream, The Whale) than misses (*cough*), and I’ve been wanting to see Caught Stealing since it’s first high-speed trailer dropped. It stars Austin Butler and takes place in the late 90s (as if this Gen-X’er needed another excuse to see it!), about a man caught in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Hank was once a promising baseball player with a bright future, but he was drinking one day when he wrecked his car and tore up his knee, on the eve of the baseball draft where he would have stamped his ticket to stardom. Now he’s a late night bartender and alcoholic in the Lower East Side of Manhattan, with the two bright spots in his life being his love of the San Francisco Giants and his girlfriend Yvonne (Zoe Kravitz), maybe in that order. One day his apartment neighbor, brit punk rocker Russ (Matt Smith) asks him to watch his cat as he has to fly to London on a dime’s notice to see after his ailing father. Russ isn’t gone a day before Russians are banging on the door looking for him, and Hank gets caught in the middle. The Russians think Russ handed something of importance off to Hank, and despite Hank’s protestations, they beat him badly enough that he ruptures a kidney and ends up in the hospital for days after emergency surgery. It only gets worse from there. In addition to the Russians, before long Hank has a gang of Hasidic Jews (Liev Schreiber and Vincent D’Onofrio), a Puerto Rican night club owner (Bad Bunny), and a police detective (Regina King) all on his tail as well. Whatever everyone thinks he has is important enough that many people are willing to torture and kill to get it. When Russ shows back up, he’s got some ‘splaining to do.

This is a fast-paced film with a lot of action and a raw, authentic feel, and I loved it all. The action is intense and I caught myself gasping aloud several times. I also appreciated that it takes place in 1998, and as I was near the age of the “hero” at that time, there were tons of throwbacks to that little sliver of time. Great film that I can’t wait to watch again. ★★★★½

Barron’s Cove is marketed as a crime drama thriller mystery. It gets at least 2 of those wrong. Caleb is basically a hired thug for a construction company, who puts pressure on clients who try to back out of their deals with owner Benji, a gangster moonlighting as a businessman. At the beginning of the film, Caleb’s son Barron is killed by a train as he lay on the tracks. The police quickly call it a suicide, but Caleb isn’t buying it, and wants to ask the other two boys, who were there, what they saw. One of the boys is Ethan, son of an up-and-coming politician in the area, and Ethan is a little shit. An obvious bully, Ethan is hiding something, and Caleb kidnaps him and takes him to a secluded cabin, threatening violence to get Ethan talking. Up to this point, the movie was pretty good (in the solid 3 1/2 star range), because you are wondering if Caleb, despite his rough-and-tumble past, is really going to torture a child. But from here, the film starts to go off the rails, and it only got worse as it goes along. People attack the cabin trying to kill Ethan instead of Caleb, dirty cops get involved, Benji is unmasked as being in league with the politician (who has plenty of dirty secrets too)… it all starts cascading pretty quickly. 3 1/2 stars became 2 1/2 and, finally, by the end, I couldn’t wait for it to end. Started out with so much promise too. ★½

Meeting With Pol Pot is a fictionalized story about a real-life event, when Cambodian dictator and despot Pol Pot invited 3 French journalists to come to his country in 1978 in an attempt to dispel rumors of genocide and government collapse. In France and the rest of the western world, there are whispers that Pol Pot’s regime has emptied the country’s largest city, Phnom Penh, and killed thousands of dissidents (later, we would learn the number was over a million, nearly a quarter of the country’s population). One of the journalists, Alain, went to school with Pol Pot when he attended college in Paris (and where he received his idealistic communism views) and is keen to justify his old college pal’s actions. The other two, Lise and Paul, get bad vibes from the very beginning. They instantly recognize that they aren’t being shown the whole story. People they interview are obviously being fed what to say, and they have no access to actual communities, and instead are shown only Potemkin villages. When Paul escapes his escorts one day and gets out into the countryside, he witnesses first hand the rampant famine, disease, and death that is tearing the country apart. When he is found, Paul is only with his friends for a couple days until he “runs away again” (as the official word says), but Lise suspects he has come to a deadly end for his previous actions. The whole time, as the journalists continually ask if they will ever actually meet Pol Pot, we start to wonder too if the whole thing is just a set up. Great film, about a dark time in that country’s history, and a stark reminder of what a totalitarian government is capable of, as we watch the teachers rewrite history, deny things that are happening right in front of their eyes, and explain away evils as “being caused by the enemy.” ★★★★

Friendship is a dark comedy starring Tim Robinson as Craig Waterman, a boring man with a boring life, where even his wife and son don’t show him much respect. He doesn’t go out, doesn’t have any friends, and even the stuff/hobbies he is interested in are lame. His life takes a turn when new neighbor Austin (Paul Rudd) moves in, and invites Craig out for some guy time. Austin’s a normal dude but he is not prepared for the insanity that follows Craig around like flies after a dead animal. His behavior is absurd from the beginning, but Austin gives him a few shots until Craig finally does something that crosses the line, and then Austin gives him the “maybe we shouldn’t be friends anymore” spiel. Then Craig goes all fatal attraction on Austin, and his behavior around his family spirals out of control too. For once Paul Rudd isn’t providing the comedy, all of it comes from Craig’s cringe-worthy dialogue and actions. I imagine some (many?) people will laugh often and hard at Craig, but honestly I didn’t even crack a chuckle once. Not once. Just too cringy for me. ★★

Another banger starring Guy Pearce. I’ve said it before, but man does this guy have a knack for finding good roles. Inside is the story of 3 convicted murderers doing time in an Australian prison, and how each deals with their sentence in their own way. The film follows Mel (newcomer Vincent Miller), who, as a 12-year-old, killed a classmate, and he’s been serving time in juvenile hall ever since. Now 18, he’s being transferred to an adult prison to serve out the final year of his sentence before parole. He doesn’t know how to handle that, and he still has flashbacks to his crime, and we see glimpses of the shitty life he was having that led up to it. If he thought juvie was rough, he’s unprepared for adult gen pop. His first roommate will open his eyes, because he is housed with  the country’s most notorious inmate, Mark Shepard (Cosmo Jarvis, the main guy in the wildly popular show Shogun). We don’t immediately know Mark’s crime, only that he is whispered about everywhere he walks, which is incongruous with the man Mark is now: he’s found God, preaches salvation at a weekly church service he runs (he asks Mel to provide music), and takes Mel under his wing to protect and guide him. Only later in the film does a news story airing on TV in the background update the public on Mark’s crime, and we see a picture of a little girl, so you know it was bad. After Mel’s initial complaint about housing with Mark, the jail takes their time, but eventually moves Mel to Warren’s (Guy Pearce) room. Warren has been serving a long time but the end is near, with a parole hearing a couple months away. If the public thinks that Mark is evil incarnate, we the viewer can see that Warren, while maybe not as notorious, is certainly capable of anything. The first time we see Mark and Warren cross paths, he is Mark who becomes wary, so immediately we know that this is a man to watch. Utterly captivating, with excellent tension, top-notch acting, and an ending that will stick with you. ★★★★★

Karate Kid Legends continues the franchise that we all thought was dead, until it was revived by the surprise hit show Cobra Kai, though it only loosely references the show. More so, it combines the earlier Ralph Macchio movies with the 2010 Jackie Chan reboot (though, thankfully, Jaden Smith is nowhere to be seen). In Beijing, young student Li Fong has been studying kung fu from Mr Han (Chan) but his mother is now moving him to New York. There, we get the same old Karate Kid story: boy meets girl, girl falls for boy, boy must deal with girl’s ex-boyfriend, who happens to be a karate expert. Once again, there’s a big tournament coming up where Li will have to prove his worth and take out the competition. Mr Han comes to NY to help Li train, and when he realizes his kung fu won’t be enough, he brings Daniel LaRusso and his karate training in for help. It all goes just as you’d expect. Like the TV show, the plot and acting are as hokey as it gets, with some truly cringy moments. The “family fun” is a bit over the top for sure. But if you can look past some of its shortcomings, and if you are a child of the 80s and practiced the Daniel LaRusso kick to the head like all little boys back then, then there’s enough nostalgia to at least provide a modicum of entertainment. ★★½

Been awhile since I took in some Japanese films. Starting off today is Kill! from 1968. From the beginning, it almost has the feel of a spaghetti western, with some non-traditional music and the opening shot of a lone man walking down a dusty road towards a small village. The man is Genta, a former samurai who is seeking a simpler life. He comes across Hanjiro, a farmer with delusions of grandeur of becoming a samurai. The two become embroiled in a local spat between warring factions in the town, and end up on opposite sides of the conflict. I couldn’t get into this one at all. It throws so many names and places at you in rapid succession in the beginning, that my head was spinning and couldn’t remember who was who or who was on who’s side. I tried to like it, but just not for me. ★

If the above movie is a samurai western, then Samurai Spy is a take on the classic spy film. I was a little worried in the beginning because, once again, lots of names and places were flying at the viewer, and I thought, “Here we go again.” But it settles in soon and (thankfully) reminded me often of who we were talking about. In 17th century Japan, the Tokugawa shogunate has unified Japan but its power is being threatened by the Toyotomi Clan. Both sides are employing spies to watch each other. The main character, a samurai named Sasuke, is of the Sanada Clan, who fought in the wars for one side, but Sasuke is now trying to stay neutral. He’s tired of war and just wants peace, but he keeps getting pulled back in. Throughout the film, he comes across various spies with their own agendas, some faithful to their clan, others double agents, and even one or two only out for themselves and the power their secrets can bring. Ultimately Sasuke tries to solve two murders (both of which he himself is accused of), all while being pursued by a mysterious figure in white who seems to have his own agenda. Lots of twists and turns, and honestly I got a bit lost with all the double crosses, but it all comes together in the end. The finale, when the evil mastermind is unmasked, is fantastic. ★★★½

Sword of the Beast is another samurai film (will need to pick a different genre next…) about a fugitive samurai named Gennosuke, on the run. He is accused of killing a clan boss and is pursued by the dead man’s daughter, her fiancé, and the clan’s sword master. It’s hard to believe Gennosuke is guilty, because he seems like a real standup guy, but we learn later that his is culpable, but for a reason that is explained. Gennosuke teams up with a farmer, and the two hatch a plan to pan gold off the mountainside, in hopes of getting enough money to flee the area. In their way is another former samurai, Jurota and his wife, who are also panning gold, and they are killing anyone who sees them, as panning gold from the shogun’s mountain is illegal and punishable by death. Jurota initially fights off Gennosuke, but as they get to know each other, they team up to keep Gennosuke’s pursuers at bay. I liked it for the most part, but the ending was a bit off kilter for my tastes. ★★★

For a change of pace, I went with Japanese horror film Jigoku. It follows the ill luck of a young man named Shiro, who seems to have catastrophe follow him around like his own shadow. It starts when he and his friend Tamura are driving one evening when they strike and kill a pedestrian. Turns out the dead is a yakuza gang leader, and the group is hot to find out who killed their boss, none more so than the deceased’s mother, who swears vengeance. Shiro is wracked by guilt and tells his girlfriend Yukiko, and she rides along with him towards the police station to confess, but along the way, they are in an accident and Yukiko is killed. To try to get away from it all, Shiro goes to visit his parents in their old folks home, only to find his mother is dying and his father has taken a mistress. The characters around the community are right out of a novel, including one of the resident’s daughters, who strikes an uncanny resemblance to his dead Yukiko. It becomes crazier when Tamura shows up and explains how everyone there has been involved in one murder or another. Deaths continue to mount, including the gang leader’s mother when she confronts Shiro on a bridge and falls off, plummeting to her death, shortly before Tamura too meets the same fate. When Shiro finally dies himself (in a bizarre death extravaganza), that’s not the end of his story, as he must then navigate Hell (what Jigoku means in Japanese), and see the fates of all the sinners throughout the film. Fascinating movie, and easily one you can watch again and again to glean more from. ★★★★½

I was hesitant about Empire of Passion due to a so-so experience with director Nagisa Ōshima, but it is a kaidan (Japanese ghost story) and I usually really like those, so I gave it a go. Glad I did! In 1895 in a tiny rural village, housewife Seki runs the home while her husband Gisaburo toils all day as a rickshaw driver. Seki’s days are brightened when she is visited by the boisterous young man Toyoji, their neighbor. Toyoji coyly makes comments about how young Seki looks, and when he one day makes aggressive sexual advances, she doesn’t try too hard to keep him at bay. Their clandestine relationship continues for a little while until Toyoji admits that he cannot live with the idea that Seki sometimes sleeps with her husband too, so the two hatch a plan to take Gesaburo out. One evening, they ambush him and strangle him to death, dumping his body in an old abandoned well in the woods. To explain his absence, Seki tells the town that he went to Tokyo for work, but as the years go by, people start to whisper, even though she and Toyoji continue to be secretive about their affair. After three years though, Gesaburo’s spirit has refused to rest. His ghost starts being spotted around town, and he regularly visits Seki. She starts pouring his favorite drink down the well, but that doesn’t silence the ghost. Seki and Toyoji must contend with the spirit, the town that is growing suspicious of misdeeds, and a law officer who has finally come to investigate Gesaburo’s disappearance. There’s some great cinematography in this film. The scene from inside the well as they drop the body down is haunting, and immediately after the next scene is a serene, picturesque forest the next fall. Great juxtaposition that stuck with me. Like most kaidan films, it’s a hauntingly good time, with a powerful ending. By far my favorite film from this director. ★★★★

I was 30 when the first How to Train Your Dragon animated film came out, in the “in between” age where you are too old for cartoons and too young for a warm-hearted family film. Thus, I never saw them, so while my son (who did at the time, and is now an adult) had no desire to mess with his childhood and see this newest live-action remake, I had no such qualms. The film takes place in a Viking village and follows 16-year-old Hiccup. The village has fought off attacking dragons for generations, but Hiccup has never been good at it, so he’s been relegated to the sidelines even as others his age are ready to step up with the adult warriors. Hiccup does manage to shoot down the fabled Night Fury dragon (called so because it is black and no one has ever seen one because the dragons attack at night). Hiccup goes out into the forest the next day and finds the wounded dragon, but rather than slay it as he is supposed to do, he befriends the beast, naming it Toothless, and nurses it back to health. By hanging out with the dragon, learning how to fly on its back, Hiccup learns all about dragons and is able to wow his fellows and the adults during their tests, but he also learns what causes the dragons to continually attack his village: there is a massive “queen dragon” who drives the smaller ones to bring it back food. Hiccup and Toothless must learn how to unite the humans and dragons to take down the huge beast and free the rest of the dragons from their servitude. A little too “kidsy” for most adults, which is a bummer because the actions scenes are heart-poundingly good, but solid entertainment. ★★★½

I’m a big Coen brothers fan, but it has been awhile since they made a film together (2018’s The Ballad of Buster Scruggs) and of late, they’ve been going their own ways. Joel’s first solo film wasn’t great, and Drive-Away Dolls, Ethan’s first solo project, is worse. After a short intro in which a man (Pedro Pascal, who is in everything these days) is killed for a briefcase he is carrying, we meet the main characters: Jamie (Margaret Qualley) and her friend Marian (Geraldine Viswanathan). Jamie has just been kicked out of her apartment by her girlfriend for cheating on her, and with Marian stating that she needs to go down to Tallahassee, Jamie decides to tag along and make it a road trip. Of course the car they rent to make the trip has the briefcase in the trunk, setting off a pursuit by a set of bumbling hoodlums, led by Colman Domingo. It’s your typical buddy road film, with one (Jamie) being a promiscuous party girl and the other (Marian) being an uptight A-personality who hasn’t had sex since breaking up with her girlfriend 4 years ago, so of course these lesbians are going to get together at some point. I can only assume, because I gave up on this movie about halfway through. All of its attempts at humor (which is constant) fell flat, and the action wasn’t exciting enough to carry my attention. Ethan Coen is calling this the first film in his “Lesbian B-Movie Trilogy” and the second is hitting theaters soon; it can’t be any worse than this one. Let’s get the Coen brothers back together stat! ★

If you know what you are getting when you go into a typical Chinese drama, then you’ll enjoy it a lot more. Caught by the Tides is exactly what I thought it would be, which is to say a slow, pensive, meandering (at times) drama. If you expect it and it delivers, that can be a good thing. Ostensibly, it’s about a woman traveling around the city of Datong trying to find her boyfriend Bin, but that’s not really the story. Director Jia Zhangke started filming this movie in 2001 as a documentary, filming the area that was being irrevocably changed by the building of the Three Gorges Dam. This is the world’s largest power station, and during its construction and the subsequent flooding and new lakes, over 1 million people were displaced and entire villages wiped out, with no recourse to the powerful government. The movie was to be Jia’s way of protesting the project, in a subtle way that wouldn’t get him in too much hot water. It was filmed over the course of 20 years, and ends around 2022. Interspersed throughout, we get stories about the big events that are happening around China to remind us what year it is (the Beijing Olympics, the launch of China’s first human spaceflight mission in Shenzhou 5, COVID) but the dam and its impact is always front and center. When our two star-crossed lovers finally meet again post-COVID, the man who promised to gain wealth before returning for his girl has had a rough life, limping around on a cane, and by now she has moved on. It’s a subtle knock against the communist government in more ways that one. ★★★★

Bob Trevino Likes It is a movie that will get the tears flowing. Lily Trevino has had a rough life; when she goes to a therapist for the first time early in the film and tells her life story, it is the therapist who ends up crying. The center of much of Lily’s anguish in her life is her deadbeat dad, Bob, who is probably the most self-centered, narcissistic person you’ve met, always putting his needs first and belittling Lily if she ever didn’t go along with his latest scheme. When Lily misspeaks one night in front of Bob’s latest woman, Bob cuts Lily out of his life. Distraught, Lily goes online trying to reconnect to him, and sends Bob Trevino a friend request on Facebook. He accepts and likes her recent post. Problem is, it’s a different Bob Trevino. This Bob (played by the always affable John Leguizamo) lives an hour away with his wife. Initially trying to make him something that he’s not, Lily tells her one friend (really her boss, but she has no one else) that this Bob is her dad, and Lily finds happiness every time Bob likes her posts or sends her a message. But Bob is not her dad, and he has never faced the pain of losing his only child many years ago himself. So the movie becomes a bit of healing for both people, but man oh man, you will not see the ending coming. I’m not ashamed to admit I was ugly crying by the end, so make sure you have your tissues handy. Very funny, very heartwarming film. ★★★★★

I watched Sharp Corner mostly because it stars Ben Foster, an underrated actor who often seems to find quiet, indie films that deliver (see Leave No Trace). In this one, he plays husband/father Josh who has just moved his family to their dream home, a huge secluded house an hour outside of the city, where they can enjoy the space and quiet while commuting in for work. On the first night in their new house, a car crashes into a tree in the front yard, sending a tire through their expansive window and almost hitting Josh and his wife Rachel. Son Max was in his bedroom, but he later becomes disturbed that a person died at their house. The next morning, Josh walks outside to the street, and notices things that he failed to before buying the house, namely, the sharp, blind turn leading to his front yard, and all the tire skid marks on the road around it. Obviously cars are hitting that turn hard, and sure enough, a few weeks later, two cars collide and other person dies in their front yard. Rachel wants to sell the house and move, but Josh becomes obsessed with thinking he can remedy the situation. He takes CPR classes, and waits for crashes with an almost giddy excitement, thinking that if he can save someone’s life, it will all be worth it. Even as his marriage crumbles, Josh is consumed with the road in front of the house and his need to prove his abilities. When he starts to openly try to cause an accident, you know he’s taken a step no one else would. The movie takes some pretty wild leaps obviously, but it is interesting watching Josh go down that rabbit hole to see where it takes him, and Foster is good as expected. ★★★

As a teenager in the early- to mid-90s, I was aware of the Bosnian War but didn’t really know why they were fighting. I’d suspect even a lot of adults didn’t; in the time before household internet access was a thing, if it didn’t affect you, it was often “out of sight, out of mind.” Before the Rain shone a light on the region, and showed the animosity the peoples of 2 distinct cultures had for each, while being forced to share a space. A film told in 3 parts, it begins in Macedonia. A young monk, 2 years into a vow of silence, hides away a runaway woman hunted by the Macedonians. The woman, of Albanian Muslim decent, is wanted for murder, and the Christian Macedonians want blood. After the brutal conclusion to their story, part 2 of the film moves to New York, where a photographer (who photoed the above story) has come to visit his editor. The two are having an affair, and the editor has decided to finally tell her boyfriend. In the final act, the photographer, who turns out is from the same village where the movie started, returns there. He is purportedly there to visit family, but his ulterior motive is to see Hana, an Albanian woman with whom he was once very close when they were children. With the tensions in the area, what should be a nice reunion turns into threats of death. In a Finnegan’s Wake sort of way, the film ends where it begins, and this cyclical story won’t be for everyone, but I loved it. ★★★★½

Homicide is a lesser known film from celebrated playwright, writer, and director David Mamet. It stars Mamet regular Joe Mantegna (longtime actor in Criminal Minds) as Bobby Gold and William H Macy as Tim Sullivan, two homicide detectives in New York*. They are on the cusp of wrapping up a case, barely keeping the shootout-happy FBI at bay, when Bobby stumbles upon a crime scene on his way to a meeting one morning. An elderly Jewish woman has been murdered in her bodega in a rough part of town. Bobby wants to stay on his own case, but once the Jewish community hears that Bobby is of Jewish descent (though he is non-practicing), they pull some influence and get him reassigned to this new murder. Bobby was so close to finishing his last case that he is initially very reluctant to help, thinking it was just a case of a woman killed because of the rumors that ‘the old Jew had a hoard of treasure in the basement.” However, as he starts digging into the clues, he finds a whole world of conflict going on under the surface between antisemites in the area and a Jewish community willing to fight back. Bobby will have to pick a side, between a police force which has always shown a bit of bias towards him for his ethnicity, and “his own people” who are willing to break the law to protect themselves. Really good movie, with lots of 90s “cop dialogue,” some action, and even some thought-provoking moments in the end. An early-career Ving Rhames plays the bad guy the cops are hunting throughout. ★★★★½

*I later learned that the city is never given: I just assumed it was NY based on the gritty feel and the very “New York-ish” fast talking of the cops.

Gas Food Lodging was a critic’s darling upon release in 1992 and triumphed on the indie circuit. It is narrated by teenager Shade, who introduces us to her family in the tiny desert border town of Laramie, New Mexico. The family lives in a trailer park, with single mom Nora barely paying the bills as a waitress, while Shade’s older sister Trudi is more interested in boys than contributing to the family. Trudi and Nora butt heads constantly over Trudi’s late night antics, with Nora finally laying down the ultimatum of “get a job or move out” after Trudi is expelled from school. Shade could work too, but spends her days going to the matinee in town and devouring film after film, especially foreign films featuring her favorite Spanish actress. The movie ambles along like this for awhile, while Shade tries to find a man for her mom and Trudi ends up pregnant, but just when I thought this film was going nowhere, it all comes together, in grand fashion. It surprised me too: at first, I thought the movie would focus on Nora (Shade tells us so in the beginning, and like a sucker, I believed her), and then I thought Trudi would be the glue in the picture (her troubles play a big part in the middle act of the film), but ultimately, of course, the film is more about Shade than anyone. Shouldn’t be a surprise, but it was, and I loved how it coalesced in the end. ★★★½

Clean, Shaven attempts to put the viewer inside the head of a man suffering from schizophrenia. Peter has recently been released from a metal hospital and is immediately struggling with his condition. He constantly hears bits of conversations and static, like what you’d hear if you were scrolling through the radio (for those of us who remember knobs on the radio). This continuous noise permeates the film, so that even we as viewers grow used to it after awhile. Peter wants to get in touch with his daughter, but no one seems to want this to happen. He’s living with his elderly mother, who urges him to get a job, but it is obvious that he can barely function, much less hold down employment. Peter covers up every glass/window he sees with newspaper (so “they” can’t see him?), and in a gruesome scene, goes at his scalp with a pair of scissors in an attempt to “cut out the transmitter” that is buried in there. He’s also been carrying around a bundle in his trunk, which we are lead to believe is the dead body of a girl he confronted early in the film, and is caught up in a police investigation for a separate murder. What’s crazy is we, just like Peter, never know what is real and what isn’t. When Peter is driving down the road one day and is hearing police sirens, he sees no one in his rearview. Was anyone ever there, or did he elude them? It’s a very interesting movie to watch, but not sure it moved me one way or the other, other than to acknowledge how much it would suck to live with this condition. ★★½

How did I ever miss Trainspotting?! I was always aware of the film, but someone never sat down to watch it. Directed by Danny Boyle and starring a young (pre-Star Wars) Ewan McGregor, the film follows Mark Renton and his gang of friends in Scotland, most of whom are addicted to heroine. There’s almost too much plot to get into; despite only being about 90 minutes long, so much happens at breakneck speed that it will make your head spin. Basically, throughout the film, Mark makes several attempts to get off the drug, always to come back, and the film follows his exploits and those of his buds. They each do different things to amuse themselves or to make some cash, but ultimately it always comes back to how to score their next hit, and when they are high, they don’t care about anything else. The movie does a good job of not condemning them as people, and presents very matter-of-factly the pitfalls that await them if they can’t turn it around, but I couldn’t help but feel sorry for Mark, who seems like a good guy, a smart guy, with good parents who care for him, but he’s never going to free himself of the monkey. Boyle does an amazing job of conveying life on and off the drug: when Mark is clean, the picture is crisper, slower, more defined, and makes sense. When he’s high, nothing makes sense, but just like for Mark, it certainly seems like a good time. ★★★★

Just about everyone knows Christopher Nolan’s big hits (the Batman trilogy, Inception, Interstellar, Oppenheimer) and many are fans of his less “grandiose” films (The Prestige, Memento), but 2 years before Memento, Nolan’s first film was Following, made on a shoestring budget and released in 1998. You can see the budget constraints from the get-go, with its handheld (often shaky) black-and-white 16mm camera, but the story gets going quickly, and I was immersed. The film follows an unnamed writer with severe block, who narrates that he has taken to following random strangers out of curiosity, just to see where they go. He breaks his own rule about never following the same person twice, and admits it immediately gets him into trouble. The person he has been following confronts him. He introduces himself as Cobb, and gets the writer to tag along for some hi jinx. Turns out Cobb is a thief, breaking into apartments, not really for money, but just because he too has a curiosity for people. Right about here, the film starts jumping around in a very Memento-like way. We see a few times in the future, where the writer has changed his appearance and is going under an assumed name, Daniel. He’s started dating one of the women he had previously followed, and he’s in deep with Cobb now. The woman he’s dating starts talking about being in fear of her ex-boyfriend, a gangster of some kind. There’s also some other unknown future time when Daniel is walking around with a cut nose and black eye, having been worked over pretty good by someone. There’s a lot going on here, and while it leaves you wondering how it all fits together, it does meet at the end. Very good film, and you can see how even a young Nolan would excel at storytelling in future films, and his style, while developing, is there. ★★★½

• TV series recently watched: The Punisher (season 1), ST Voyager (season 1), Its Always Sunny in Philadelphia (season 17)
• Book currently reading: Amber and Iron by Margaret Weis

L’enfance Nue (“Naked Childhood”) comes from director Maurice Pialat, his first film, and was released in 1968. It follows 10-year-old François as he is continually kicked around France’s foster system. Some of it is of his own doing: like a lot of foster kids, he holds a lot of anger inside from a feeling of being unwanted, and he is always lashing out. In his latest family, they aren’t making it easy on him, having him sleep in a hallway with little attempt to decorate it or make it welcoming. When the parents’ girl makes one-too-many snide remarks at him, François throws her cat down the stairs, leading the family to call the foster system to take him back. The mom maybe realizes a little too late that he’s a good boy underneath and they didn’t give him a fair shake, but the damage is done. François next ends up with an older couple, who have become lonely since their child grew up and moved out, and have a couple foster children now. The adults have a lifetime of experience and are better equipped to deal with François’ antics, and he slowly starts to settle in. I wanted to like this film, but man oh man was it boring. I’m giving it one and a half stars because it kept my attention just enough to the end, mostly because I wanted to see how François turned out.  ★½

15 years later, director Maurice Pialat had learned a lot and his sixth film, À nos amours (“To Our Loves”) is much better. Suzanne is a 16-year-old on the cusp of womanhood. She has a woman’s body and knows how to use it, flaunting in front of any man who walks across her path. After breaking up with her boyfriend, she loses her virginity to an American tourist, and then sets out to sleep with practically any man she meets. She does seem to have a type though: she steers clear of people like her ex, who she may be emotionally attached to, and only goes for fleeting men who are physically attracted to her. As all of this is going on, her home life is a breaking up. Her father, who berates her for her increasingly promiscuous lifestyle, finds a girlfriend and moves out of the house, deserting Suzanne, her other brother Robert, and their mom. The mom starts drinking heavily and becomes an emotional wreck, and Robert, who takes his “man of the house” role a bit too seriously, starts beating Suzanne in a (seemingly, though there’s more going on there) attempt to get her to “straighten out.” Seems that even her own brother has sexual feelings towards Suzanne, which he masks through his anger. The whole family is a mess, but the one person who really knows everyone’s motives is the departed father, who (thankfully) drops his knowledge on Suzanne and us viewers in the end. Honestly I didn’t know what was all going on until that very end, but it all comes together like the clouds departed, and made for a very good film. ★★★½

Has it really been 5+ years since I last watched some Jean-Luc Godard films (and more (and more) before then)? Made in USA even has his early muse, Anna Karina, so I have no idea how this one slipped past me. She plays Paula Nelson, who’s boyfriend Richard P (the film has a funny way of always hiding his last name, through car honks, planes flying over, etc) has recently been murdered. Paula, a journalist, decides to hunt down the killer, in French New Wave style. In her hunt, she is either aided or obstructed by friends of Richard P, a local police inspector, the inspector’s assistant (a Jean-Pierre Léaud sighting!), and Richard P’s nephew. The plot gets a little convoluted, involving Richard P’s involvement in the communist movement and either being killed or being set up by officials targeting that movement, but like many French New Wave films, the devil is most definitely not in the details. This film oozes style in its bold, vibrant colors, and I could watch Karina read the phone book and be mesmerized. Not ground breaking, but a wonderful throwback to the 60s. ★★★½

I kinda knew I wouldn’t like Tout va bien (“Everything’s All Right”) going into it. Never shy to express his left-leaning views, Jean-Luc Godard teamed up with writer/director Jean-Pierre Gorin in the late 60s/early 70s and made a serious of political films, later dubbed his “radical period.” This movie was made during that time, and stars Jane Fonda as an American journalist married to a French TV director (Yves Montand), and their experiences during a factory strike in 1972. There’s not much of a story here (the narrator even tells us so at the beginning of the picture, saying “What is needed for a film? A couple actors and a stage? OK, here you go,” after which Godard proceeds to ignore most of that) and instead the movie is just giving us Godard’s and Gorin’s views on labor, the bourgeois, owners/management, etc. No target is safe, from consumerism, capitalism, and even those on the left who may espouse Godard’s general ideas: the workers who are striking and causing a big hullabaloo seem to just want an excuse to sit around and not work, ridiculously demanding a utopian workplace. Too often, actors just turn towards the camera, breaking the 4th wall, to criticize the evils of the other side’s arguments. It’s just a political statement made to look like a narrative film, and I can do without that for my entertainment. ½

Classe tous risques (literally “All-Risk Class,” but released in the US as “The Big Risk”) comes from director Claude Sautet and was a good change of pace. It is an old school gangster film. Abel Davos (Lino Ventura, who was a huge leading man in France in the 60s and 70s) is a career criminal and long been on the run with his wife and two children in Italy. The heat is getting close, so he and his partner Raymond decide it is time to go home to Paris, where hopefully enough time has passed that they can be safe. The trip isn’t a sure thing from the very beginning, involving shootouts and fleeing road blocks, and even when they think they’ve found a safe route, police intercept the group, leading to the deaths of Raymond and Abel’s wife. Now with 2 boys to look after on his own, Abel makes it to Nice but is stranded there with no hope of finishing the trek to Paris. Police are everywhere and know he is close by, so Abel calls ahead to Paris seeking help from his former crew, who, for the most part, have done well without (and because of) Abel. In the past, Abel helped get one of them out of prison, and financed another one’s business, which is now doing well. Despite their long friendships and the help he’s provided before, they are unable or unwilling to reciprocate, and only begrudgingly hire a smalltime crook, Eric (a Jean-Paul Belmondo sighting!) to travel to Nice under the guise of an ambulance driver to bring Abel through. And all of that is only the first half or so of this film. It does seem to lose traction in the second half, as Abel finds that his friends will never come around to help him get his feet settled, and only Eric seems to be willing to help as Abel dives back into the underworld, but still it’s an entertaining flick with lots of twists and turns. ★★★

• TV series recently watched: Untamed (season 1), ST Deep Space 9 (season 3)
• Book currently reading: Tess of the d’Urbervilles by Thomas Hardy

An Affair to Remember is a remake from the same director (Leo McCarey) of his 1939 film Love Affair. Loved that one, so immediately put this one on the watch list. This “newer” version follows the original nearly scene-for-scene, with just new actors. Replacing Charles Boyer is Cary Grant, and in for Irene Dunne: Deborah Kerr. I don’t have much to say about this film, just go read what I wrote about the other, since the story is the same. I will say I liked the original better (as is so often the case). I like Cary Grant as much as the next film lover, but there’s something about Boyer that really excelled in this role, and overall the original had a bit more of a “natural” feeling to it; less Hollywood and more artistic. An Affair to Remember is really good, but not as good as the original. Since I rated Love Affair 4 stars, this one gets a ★★★½

The Big Knife, from director Robert Aldrich, stars Jack Palance as Charlie Castle, a Hollywood star who is tired of the limelight and what being a star has done to him: hurt his marriage, made him a heavy drinker, and turned him into all of the things he used to despise. He wants out, but the movie studio boss who is pressuring Charlie to sign a new 7 year contract has some dirt on him that could not only ruin his career, but send him to jail. While he struggles with a way forward, the studio head looks for new ways to apply pressure, Charlie’s estranged wife starts seeing his best friend, and Charlie continues down a path of self destruction. It should be a neat early film about the darker side of Hollywood, but it has several shortcomings. First, it was based on a play, and while there are some phenomenal film adaptations of plays, I couldn’t shake the feeling that this would come off much stronger on a stage; it loses something, some of its personal connection, on screen. And it probably hit much harder in 1955 than it does today, where we are used to the shortcomings of the “glamorous life.” ★★

Gregory Peck was one of the greats, yet I’ve surprisingly seen few of his films. He is the lead in 1950’s The Gunfighter, where he plays Jimmy Ringo, a well-known gunman with a reputation that gets him into more trouble than he cares for. In fact, it seems all Jimmy wants to do is settle down, but every bar he walks in to, as soon as his name is whispered, some young man with dreams of stardom tries to pick a fight, to be the “one who killed Jimmy Ringo.” Ringo knows he has only killed 11 men (12 after a young man in the beginning of the film tries make a name for himself), but the legends have his number over 50. While on the run from a trio of men hunting him for killing their younger brother, Jimmy heads for the town of Cayenne, where his old girlfriend lives, raising their unknowing son. The boy has no idea Jimmy is his dad, and his mom would prefer to keep it that way. In Cayenne, Jimmy’s presence gets the whole town aflutter, with school letting out just so the boys can gather outside the saloon in hopes of catching a glimpse of the legend, women begging the sheriff to haul him into jail or outta town (which falls on deaf ears, as the sheriff used to be gunfighter alongside Jimmy before “retiring” from that life), and yet more would-be-heroes set their gun sights on Jimmy, as is always the case. All Jimmy wants to do is see his son for a few minutes before moving on, but it seems everything and everyone is trying to prevent just that. In every seen, Jimmy looks tired; tired of killing, tired of being a legend, tired of being the center of everyone’s attention. When some young gun tries to pick a fight, we see Jimmy heave a giant sigh before standing up to do what knows he will do, because he’s done it 12 times so far. ★★★★½

Stanley Kubrick is obviously one of the best directors of all time, but in his first feature Hollywood film, 1956’s The Killing, he’s still learning the ropes. It’s an old school film noir, about a group of criminals and their plan to rob a horse racetrack for an expected haul of $2 million. The brains of the heist is Johnny Clay, a lifetime criminal recently out of prison. He has teamed up with workers at the racetrack (a bartender and a cashier) as well as a wealthy financial backer for logistics and a corrupt cop. He even has a sniper hired with the sole job of shooting down a horse during a race to provide the needed distraction. What’s great about the movie is the story itself, which is laid out in great detail, with voiceover narrating parts here and there, which really draws you into the crime and makes you feel like one of the gang. However, it has almost too much detail, and you can easily get bogged down in the minutia. The always-in-control Kubrick obviously ran away with this one, but he would learn later that less is sometimes more. If it sounds like I’m ragging on it, I’m not, I still enjoyed it, but I’m a huge Kubrick fan and this film doesn’t hold up to his later films. Still, you can easily see Kubrick’s style in every shot. Supposedly he had every shot planned to the smallest detail before filming ever began; they breezed through production and finished in 22 days. ★★★

I went into Terror in a Texas Town with no expectations and as it started, got a feeling of a low budget western that probably didn’t offer much. Boy was I wrong (more on that in the end). In a little town in Texas, a rich man has been buying up land from farmers, or having them killed if they refuse to sell. We find out later than there’s a mountain of oil in the ground that no one but the rich guy knows about. His hired killer is Johnny Crale, who has lost one hand in a gunfight awhile back, but the other is still as fast as ever. The devilish Johnny, clad all in black, is sent to kill a Swedish farmer named Sven Hansen, after Sven refused to move. The murder is witnessed by Sven’s neighbor, Mexican immigrant Jose Miranda, but Jose keeps quiet for fear of his own life. 3 days later, Sven’s adult son George comes to the town after 19 years off whaling around the world. His dreams of joining his father on the farm are dashed when he learns of the death, and the town’s sheriff, obviously under the payroll of the rich investor, is no help. George sets out to unmask his father’s killer, and if the law won’t help, he’ll seek vengeance himself. This movie is fantastic, gripping from the very beginning (it opens near the end of the movie, with George and Johnny facing off in the street, before flashing back to whole story), and tensions continue to build throughout. If I had bothered to look at the team behind the camera before watching, I would have known it would be good. Directed by Joseph H Lewis in his last Hollywood project before retirement, he didn’t shy away from working with McCarthy’s blacklisted entertainers, including writer Dalton Trumbo. And while it is easily recognized as a low budget flick (filmed on a backlot in just 10 days), it’s a great film. ★★★★

• TV series recently watched: Dept Q (season 1), Breaking Bad (season 1), Eyes of Wakanda (series), Adaptive (series)
• Book currently reading: Tess of the d’Urbervilles by Thomas Hardy 

I’m often a victim of expectations. If I were a “real critic” I would keep an open mind going into any movie, but often I expect a lot and am let down, or, as in the case of Happy Gilmore 2, think it’s going to suck and am pleasantly surprised. I really only watched this movie because my wife wanted to (sorry babe) but I’m glad I did. A child of the 90s, I was as big of a fan of the original as anyone, but I thought I’d outgrown dick and fart jokes (of which there are both in this movie). Apparently not. The film picks up in present day. After becoming a successful golfer and winning multiple championships over a decade, Happy accidentally killed his wife with an errant golf drive in 2014 and subsequently gave up the game. Now broke and with 5 teenage-to-young adult children, the youngest of which has aspirations of going to Paris to pursue ballet, Happy is pulled back into the sport that made him a star but which brought so much pain later. If you were a fan of the original, you’ll most likely enjoy the sequel, as it’s more of the same, and even carries over a lot of the same recycled jokes. Adam Sandler doesn’t really act here (though we all know that he is capable, if you’ve seen Punchdrunk Love or Uncut Gems), but he doesn’t need to. He just relies on those good ol’ dick and fart jokes. ★★★½

His straight-to-Netflix film Henry Sugar notwithstanding, it’s been awhile since Wes Anderson wowed me. His last couple theatrical films emphasized style over substance and were big bores, but he has righted the ship with The Phoenician Scheme. It stars Benicio del Toro (with a page-long list of A-list supporting actors) as Zsa Zsa Korda, an international arms dealer in the 1950s who has already survived a half a dozen assassination attempts, and who does so again at the start of the movie. His latest business venture is a risky one in which he wants to overhaul the economy of the small country of Phoenicia. The US government gets wind of it and drives up the prices of his building materials, forcing Zsa Zsa to meet with each of his (illicit) investors one-on-one in an attempt to renegotiate terms. Traveling with him while he meets them is his estranged daughter Liesl, who is in training to become a nun, and the family tutor Bjørn, who may have an ulterior motive. The movie is hilarious, with Anderson’s trademark deadpan delivery that hits time and again (when Zsa Zsa laments his 9 adopted sons (“Why so many? Because I’m playing the odds. Some of them have to turn out ok.) or Liesl’s constant religious reactions to Zsa Zsa’s illegal activities). My problem with his last couple movies is they felt aimless, but there’s a clear story and plot this time. We know it from the beginning, and that makes all the difference. ★★★★

The Amateur has been on my radar since I first saw its trailer. It stars Rami Malek as Charlie Heller, a socially awkward techie who works at the CIA headquarters in Langley. His wife leaves one morning for a business trip to London, where she is the victim of being in the wrong place at the wrong time, and is killed by terrorists during a botched transaction there. With his connections at the CIA, Charlie goes to his bosses, not to ask for vengeance, but for them to train him up so that he can seek revenge on his own. They balk at the idea, but Charlie, with his computer know-how, digs up dirt on his boss and blackmails him for what he needs. A handler (played by Laurence Fishburne) is assigned to give Charlie a crash course in combat, shooting, and being elusive to enemies and authorities alike, but before Charlie’s bosses can turn the tables on him, he’s in the wind and off to complete his objective. Charlie knows the identities of the 4 terrorists and where to find 3 of them, but the fourth, the mastermind and the person who pulled the trigger killing his wife, remains hidden. As Charlie goes from country to country, taking out each progressive bad guy in increasingly complex ways, he gets closer to his ultimate goal. Very good action/thriller with some science built in to make it interesting, and Malek is always good. Small but important part for Jon Bernthal too, who seems to be in everything these days. ★★★½

Josh Hartnett isn’t the teen idol he once was and he’ll never win a serious acting award, but he has always been entertaining, and that’s true again with Fight or Flight. A government agency’s latest op goes sideways, and it seems to be due to a notorious hacker who goes by the moniker Ghost. Ghost has long been able to stay in the shadows, and even their image on security cams is blurred out due to some tech they carry on their person. But they messed up this time, because their blurry image is spotted and tagged heading towards an airport. The agency wants to nab them, but doesn’t have any operatives in the area. Thus, the director reaches out to disgraced former secret service agent Lucas Reyes (Hartnett). Lucas has been in hiding too, after the bounty the government put on his head awhile ago, but with the promise to be let back into the country and given a life again, he agrees to catch that flight and find and subdue the Ghost. Unfortunately, somehow word leaks that the Ghost is on the plane, and plenty of bounty hunters, hired by all the groups the Ghost has wronged over the years, show up for a piece of the pie too. What follows is bloody battles in the sky. The movie is part comedy and part action/thriller, and while the laughs don’t always hit, the fist fights most definitely do, and get more and more ridiculous as the film goes along. Certainly not great cinema, but it’s a fun diversion for less than 2 hours. ★★★

Warfare is the latest from writer/director Alex Garland (who also wrote 28 Years Later, released this summer), and he co-did this movie with Ray Mendoza, based on Mendoza’s experiences in the Iraq War. A tidy film at just about 90 minutes, it is show in real time and follows an op in Ramadi in 2006. A Navy SEAL team takes over a house, basically booting the families that live there down to one room on the ground floor, so that they can provide eyes on a couple houses down the street, noting its comings and goings for other troops in the area. Of course, at some point during their stay, shit goes sideways. They are discovered, and are attacked by insurgents. Gun fights, grenades, and IED explosions ensue. The film is about as authentic as I imagine an operation can be. For a long time in the beginning, there’s a whole lot of silence, while the team is hunkering down, watching, and waiting. Lots of the “hurry up and wait” mentality. And when the fighting starts, since it is presented in real time, we see a lot of the little things that aren’t shown in other military films, like soldiers taking the time to gather all their gear in an effort to leave nothing behind for the enemy. I liked the movie, but it was almost too technical for me. The tension before the battle is great, the battle itself is great, but there’s a lot of down time here and there where nothing is going on. Probably my least favorite Garland film yet, but considering how high a bar he’s set for himself, that’s not hard to do. ★★★½

• TV series recently watched: Duster (series), Mobland (season 1), The Defenders (series), Cheers (seasons 9-11)
• Book currently reading: Aftermath: The Covenant of Water by Abraham Verghese