Friday, March 31, 2017

Film Review - "Beauty & The Beast" (2017)

Beauty & The Beast 
Directed by Bill Condon
Starring Emma Watson, Dan Stevens, Luke Evans, etc.

It's not much of a secret as it used to be,but let me just put in print: The original animated Beauty & The Beast is my favorite Disney film, and just my favorite film in general. Dare I say, it's one of the few films I could arguably label as "perfect".

So when Disney got on it's "live-action self-remake" kick, and this film was on the docket, I was more than skeptical. But as the casting announcements, production updates and trailers started to come out I started to feel more confident. It looked like Disney was treating one of its greatest properties with thought and care. After having seen the film twice now, I can say that while the original will always be superior, this one is a wonderful but not perfect tribute to it.

You know the story. A young girl named Belle (Watson) lives a provincial life in a French village. While on his journey home from the market, her father Maurice (Kevin Kline) ends up in the wrong place at the wrong time, as the prisoner of of a cruel prince-turned-Beast (Stevens) in an enchanted castle. Belle finds her father, offers herself in his place, and the Beast accepts. Belle and the Beast grow closer, as does the hope that she might be the one to set him and his subjects free from their curse, while the wicked Gaston (Evans) schemes to make Belle his wife.

I'll be honest, this is a tough review to write. It feels like a betrayal to praise this film, because I love the original and when it comes right down to it, this is still an unnecessary remake. Hell, I think all these Disney remakes are but more on that later. Let's look at the remake of The Jungle Book for a second. That film managed to rework the story in a way that actually improved upon the original's script. Beauty & The Beast, there's not much to improve upon in the original, so really the changes here are minimal, and the result is mostly a shot-for-shot remake.

The film does suffer because of it. I'd say that until we got to the "Gaston" musical number I wasn't truly enjoying myself. As it progresses, the film does allow itself to become its own thing, but there's still a hesitance to stray too far from the source material. But to play devil's advocate, the film is a beautiful, touching homage to the animated classic. Nostalgia is one of the film's greatest strengths. Those who look fondly on Disney's original film will find it hard to not have their heartstrings pulled at. I found myself getting emotional as some iconic scenes were brought to life anew, particularly "Be Our Guest" and the dance in the ballroom to the title song.

I should mention that while the film does play its cards close to the chest, Bill Condon and his team do make some changes to the story, and they attempt to fill some plot-holes that have bugged fans for years. Some changes work well, and some not as well as others. I felt some key story moments were glossed over or not given enough attention. For example the scene where Belle saves her father and first meets the Beast feels rushed, like a drive-by plot point. The pacing of some songs and scenes, like "Something There" are reworked to let the audience see Belle and Beast's relationship grow overtime. The personas and development of some characters, like the Beast, Maurice, and LeFou are changed in ways that I thought worked really well.

Another one of the film's greatest strengths is that they got Alan Menken back to do the music, and it pays off gloriously. The songs feel almost grander, and more cinematic, not to say that all renditions outshine their predecessors. Some personal favorites are "Gaston" and "The Mob Song". The new songs work well too. "Days In The Sun" is a lovely, warm-hearted replacement for "Human Again" (but I did miss that song). "Evermore" is so powerful and heartbreaking. "How Does A Moment Last Forever" is fine, but its too fleeting to leave a lasting impression like the other two. Maybe its from decades of listening to the soundtrack of the original over and over, but the score for the remake is almost forgettable.

The cast is fantastic. Emma Watson plays a pitch-perfect Belle, but unfortunately the same can't be said about her singing. She does a fine job, but there is evidence of auto-tuning. Dan Stevens is an amazing Beast. The real scene-stealers are Kevin Kline, Luke Evans, and Josh Gad as Maurice, Gaston, and LeFou. Kevin Kline is at his best as Maurice. Luke Evans is delightfully wicked as Gaston, and is a highlight among the ensemble. Josh Gad gives a great performance as LeFou, who is an actual character here and not a one-note sidekick. Ewan McGregor is a fine Lumiere, and his performance in "Be Our Guest" is pretty fantastic, but his "French" accent is meh. Ian McKellen is a spot on Cogsworth, and Emma Thompson plays Mrs. Potts with just the right amount of warmth and maternal sass.

So in conclusion, I really enjoyed this film and will always admire it for what it does, which is give a loving and well-crafted tribute to the animated classic. I encourage all fans of the original to give this film a shot. I will revisit this film in future, but it will not replace or overshadow the original Beauty & The Beast. As good as this remake is, it doesn't do enough to stand on its own or justify its own existence. There's the age old debate of what makes a film "necessary" to make, and while I find this film falls in the "unnecessary" category, it's not a bad thing that it was made. It's not exactly a bad thing to revisit a tale as old as time.

PS: If you'd like to see me interview audience members on their hopes and reactions to the film on opening night, click here.




Tuesday, March 14, 2017

Film Review - "Logan"

Logan
Directed by James Mangold
Starring Hugh Jackman, Patrick Stewart, and Dafne Keen

Have I mentioned I'm not a big X-Men fan? I have? Okay, well despite that I have always loved Hugh Jackman as Wolverine. It's just a shame this great character and performance has had to survive in a film series that I describe as mediocre to lame, with a few high points. But Jackman and Wolverine get a hell of a send off in Logan, which I find to be one of the best X-Men films ever made.
I'm hesitant to call it one of the best superhero films ever made too, because it hardly feels like a superhero film.

Set in the year of 2029, mutants are almost extinct and an aging, broken Logan (Jackman) works as a chaeuffer on the edge of Texas. He cares for Charles Xavier (Stewart), who's mind is deteriorating and in turn losing control of his powers, with the help of mutant tracker Caliban (Stephen Merchant). Their peaceful but downright miserable existence is interrupted when a mysterious girl named Laura (Keen) is left in Logan's care.

They soon learn that there's more to Laura than meets the eye, and a powerful organization is on the hunt for her. Logan and Charles soon uncover a greater, sinister plot and take it upon themselves to take Laura to a safe haven. As they travel cross-country, Logan slowly starts to rediscover his humanity and get back in touch with his inner Wolverine.

The film pretty much abandons any tropes and cliches a superhero film could have, and acts much more as a drama or western, that just happens to star X-Men. It's emotional, it's depressing, but it's glorious. The Logan/Wolverine character reaches a poignant, profound conclusion that just makes sense. Hugh Jackman gives it his all in a performance that is both badass and heartbreaking. Logan thinks himself a monster, and he has to live in pain and isolation, for all that he's done. He's never been much of a team player. This film's all about him being confronted by those ideals.

The filmmakers take advantage of the R-rating, and the action is so gloriously brutal it might even make Deadpool look tame. It works though, because this is a dark film, and it allows the brutality of the Wolverine character to really come out. They do get a bit eager with the f-bombs early on in the film, but they start to show restraint as the film progresses.

As I said, Hugh Jackman is giving it his all for his final time as Logan. He's magnificent, making you believe every bit of pain, rage and heartbreak Logan feels. This is a completely different Professor Xavier than what we've seen before, but Patrick Stewart is still the best, providing both levity and emotion to this heavy picture. Young newcomer as Dafne Keen does stellar work in her breakout role, holding herself incredibly well against these two powerhouses.

One issue I have with the film is the pacing is a bit off. We go at a steady pace for the majority of the runtime, then almost rush to climax. It's not necessarily a bad thing though because the pace is slowed down for more important character moments, and the cast is allowed more time to shine.

Logan has quickly made itself known as one of the best X-Men films ever made, and in completely abandoning the typical characteristics of one, ironically becomes one of the best superhero films ever made. It reaches the emotional and sophisticated heights of Christopher Nolan's Dark Knight trilogy, something I thought an X-Men film could never do. Sometimes all it takes is for all the right pieces to fall into place I suppose. It's a beautiful send-off to Wolverine and Hugh Jackman. Thanks for over seventeen years of adamantium claw-fueled rage and smart ass-ery. We'll miss you, bub.



Monday, March 13, 2017

Film Review - "The LEGO Batman Movie"

The Lego Batman Movie
Directed by Chris McKay
Starring Will Arnett, Michael Cera, Rosario Dawson, and Zach Galifanakis

I'm just gonna say it, Batman was a pretty expendable character in the first The Lego Movie. I've grown to love the film since I shared my initial thoughts on it, but from an extremely critical perspective, if you were to take the Bat-suit, name, and cowl away it would pretty much be the same character. It's kind of cynical for me to say that the filmmakers probably just went, "Well we have the rights to Batman, and he has a Lego, so let's make him a character in The Lego Movie." but I'm paying devil's advocate to get to a point.

That point being that while Batman being a character in the first Lego film wasn't necessary but it paid off immensely, the same could be said for this spinoff film, which wasn't needed but I think most can say they're glad to have because by God, it might be one of the best Batman films ever.

I mean we could get philosophical for a bit and debate what makes a film "necessary" or "needed" or what stories are worth telling or not telling…but we're here to talk about the next installment in the…Lego Cinematic Universe? I guess that's a thing now. Anyway.

The Lego Batman Movie follows the adventures of the titular character (Again played by Arnett) back in his home of Gotham City, which mostly include taking down all of his rogues gallery and just hanging out by himself in his big, empty mansion.

Batman (and Bruce Wayne's) life are about to get hit with a series of major changes, when he must comes to terms with a new police commissioner (Dawson) who wants to change how he and the force and work together, his newly adopted son Dick Grayson (Cera) that he must take responsibility for, and The Joker (Galifanakis) going to the extremest of lengths to get Batman to admit he is his greatest foe.

The film manages to juggle these three plot threads well by making the driving force of the film what makes Batman who he is, and I mean the legendary character Batman, not just this film's iteration. Bruce Wayne/Batman is a loner. He keeps to himself, he chooses a life as a caped crusader over a simple life with a family, because of his painful past. This is not new to Batman. We've seen it explored in previous films and comics before. The Lego Batman Movie manages to successfully honor these character traits while putting a spin on them that both children and adults in the audience can understand, which is kind of brilliant.

Is this the same serious Batman that Ben Affleck or Christian Bale portray? No but this film is meant to both honor and poke fun at Batman, and somehow both there's and every other version of the character get a nod or a jab. I have to talk about how the relationship between Batman and The Joker is portrayed. It is cheesy and sometimes cringeworthy, but The Joker always has sort of operated with some need to have Batman oppose him and acknowledge him as a threat. Soooo it's actually pretty clever in how its spins this age-old conflict in a comical new light.

Will Arnett is again pitch-perfect as this Batman, getting much more to do with the role this time around. Michael Cera is adorable and hilarious as Robin (God I can't believe I just said that about Michael Cera). Rosario Dawson fits the Barbara Gordon role so well, and Zach Galifanakis is absolutely delightful as The Joker. Ralph Finnes also gets some great material as Alfred, and there are plenty of hilarious little cameos throughout the film.

If I had to say anything bad about the film, is that I wish that the writers had taken more advantage of the Lego universe and setting, and the climatic "battle"sort of pales in comparison to big fight in the second act, but this is all nitpicking.

The Lego Batman Movie is not a movie the world necessarily needed to see, but I think most who see it will very glad they did. It manages to do something fun and new with the character while paying homage to The Dark Knight. Honestly, I'm very excited to see what other famous characters will…could, get a Lego film.

My God could we get The Lego Batman VS Superman Movie?!?!