Operation Fortune: Ruse de guerre

6/10 

In this new Guy Ritchie spy/action/comedy mix, secret agent Orson Fortune (played by Jason Statham) and his team blackmail actor Danny Francesco (Josh Hartnett) into helping them gain access to arms dealer Greg Simmons (Hugh Grant) in order to stop him from acquiring a mysterious device known as “the Handle.”

I'm guessing that after The Wrath of Man, which might be Ritchie's darkest work, he wanted to do something fun and just lighthearted. (This also kinda has Man from Uncle vibes; Ritchie stated he liked that one and due to its poor box office, this is probably the closest he can get to doing a sequel.)

Unfortunately, this is the weakest of the several films of his I've seen (no, I haven't watched Swept Away yet). The worst part is that this the has bones of a good film in it. If parts had just been tweaked and some jokes cut, this might've worked. To be clear, this isn't straight up bad, just lackluster.

On the plus side, the movie looks great. It's very colorful, echoing the look of the Sixties' Bond films. Though this is a more tongue-in-cheek spy film, the action can be surprisingly intense at points. Also, it's got a strong cast (more on them later).

I know the part about Danny getting into the good graces of Simmons (who's a fan) sounds very similar to that film Nicholas Cage made recently, and yeah, it does a little, but much not as much as you think. The trailer makes it look the whole movie is focused on that, but it's only a subplot. (Danny's really just a supporting character not a main player.) I'm glad that section didn't wear out it's welcome, because some of the most enjoyable moments come from the actor and arms dealer interacting. (I won't spoil how it plays it out.)

On the negative side, the tone is all over the place and the movie gets too complicated for it's own good. There's a repeated bit about how Orson has expensive tastes and constantly tries to finagle extravagant benefits from his employer. It's not funny or done well, and the writers really go all in on it. It is clear that this had parts cut and reshoots. The problem is that they don't cut the parts setting up later scenes. There are three plot points that are never followed up on.

As I said, good cast. Statham and Cary Elwes as Orson's boss both play the roles they usually play, tough guy and stereotypically British person, but to be fair, they do it well. Hartnett is amusing, and Grant does an admirable job of continuing to prove in his recent years that he's a character actor. Aubrey Plaza is Orson's team's computer person. Yeah, this isn't her best work and is given dialogue beneath her, but she is still AUBREY PLAZA and brings her trademark energy.

Not a must see. It can make for a nice timewaster/background film. There are good parts. Just don't make this a film you're spending too much on.

Poker Face- Season 1

9/10

In Poker Face on Peacock, Charlie Cale (played by Natasha Lyonne), who has the ability to tell when someone is lying, travels across the United States and keeps running into murderers, whom she tries to bring to justice.

This is a clear attempt by creator Rian Johnson (the Knives out movies and Last Jedi director) to revive the Columbo howcatchem formula. (Heck, Charlie's personality and delivery is clearly modeled off a little from the show's lead.) For those who never watched or were too young for Columbo, the stories weren't mysteries. You always knew who did it. Rather the episodes were about how Columbo was going to catch the killer (and also as character pieces about the murders). Poker Face also revives pre-2000's episodic storytelling. The stories are mostly self-contained. Charlie doesn't have a back-up crew like most crime-solving shows these days, and there are barely any reoccurring characters.

And yeah... This attempt to revive old school television hits it out of the park. The episodes are interesting and diverse (due to Charlie traveling around, one location and story is never quite like the others). Though these aren't mysteries, the show is very good at twists and turns (far more creative than the original Columbo). The writers really wring out the suspense as you try to guess who'll get killed, who'll do the killing, and sometimes the motives.

Charlie is the lynchpin that keeps everything together. She's just a cool gal and personable and is the kind of person without big dreams but just lives in the moment. Natasha Lyonne's star has been rising these past few years, but this is the show that will make her a household name. She's one of those actors with a unique appearance and style and is the perfect type of person to gamble on for a show that is reliant on only one main character.

This has a TON of known or veteran actors. Really, it's a performance showcase much like the classic Columbo. I wouldn't be surprised if there are some nominations come next Emmys.

The cinematography is pretty good for television. It's clearly trying to evoke the look of the 70's and works without feeling straight-up gimmicky.

The show does have a couple points of criticism. Whereas Columbo had movie-length episodes (like today's Sherlock), these are all an hour long, so each episode has introduce the characters and the plot in a short amount of time and the strain can be evident at points. There's also a recurring plot device in this that's innovative the first couple times but soon becomes tired.

Highly recommended. If you liked the Knives Out movies' spin on classic crime stories, you'll probably like this.

Shazam: Fury of the Gods

7.5/10

In this sequel, Billy Batson/Shazam (played by Asher Angel/Zachary Levi) and his team of superpowered foster siblings, who mostly turn into adults when they go into action, have to go against the daughters of Atlas, dangerous goddesses who have beef with humanity and the Shazam team.

I know that there are those online who miss the more human drama of Billy and company from the first film, but I won't lie, I'm okay with this focusing more on the adventure and comedy. My biggest problem with the first film was that it was a tonal mismatch. This one feels a lot more consistent. The best part of the last movie was that you saw a kid become a superhero, and this one realizes that and completely rolls with it. This time you see the characters as adults a lot more than as kids and seeing grown-ups act goofily makes for a good time. (Admittedly, if you liked the child actors, this will be a letdown. Billy actually gets the least amount of screentime here.)

The movie doesn't break the superhero mold, but it's having fun. The humor's pretty good and it really doubles down on the fantasy aspect, which does surprisingly well working with old tropes and makes for some good spectacle.

Like the last film, there are some dark moments. Again I felt there were too forced and more nihilistic than "fun dark." (I feel that one of the biggest weaknesses writers have for superhero or supernatural films or shows these days is that they feel that random civilian casualties to fill up time makes for good storytelling.) However, visually they don't get as graphic as before.

The movie didn't need to be two hours and ten minutes. It's not like it ever felt slow (there's no having to wait through Billy's character-growth/bullying scenes to get to the superhero stuff like in the first movie.) It's just that they threw a lot at you, and they could've cut some bits down.

Strong costume/set/creature design in this. Everything looks nice.

Levi is the main draw of the film, he has excellent timing. Unfortunately, they do have him act too dumb and immature at times (to put things in perspective, Billy is supposed to be almost eighteen). Another show stealer is Meagan Good as the adult form of the youngest child Darla. She does such a great job acting like a child. One of the biggest points of criticism from the last film remains, which is that Shazam really doesn't act like Billy, who is more composed and mature, and I'm afraid that Good also doesn't quite match the mannerisms of child Darla (Faithe Herman). On the other hand, Ross Butler and D.J. Cotrona do a great job of portraying adult versions of their respective child counterparts.

The one young actor who gets the most screentime is Freddy Freeman (Jack Dylan Grazer), and he again does a fine job as the snarky, funny one. The West Side Story remake's Rachel Zegler also puts in a strong performance as a new student at school who befriends Freddy.

Djimon Honsou as the Wizard gets a lot more to do. Whereas the last time the character had to be all busy, here you get more time to get to know his personality, and he's surprisingly funny and works really well off of one of the characters in this movie, which I won't spoil.

This is the first of the DCU films to feature original villains. While I won't deny I wouldn't mind seeing some of the classic Shazam rogues given a chance (sorry Mister Atom, your time may never come.) I'm especially disappointed that we didn't get the threat that was promised in the last movie, but the Sisters of Atlas, while not great (they can be a little one note) aren't too shabby either, and they at least leave more of a presence than some failed superhero movie villains like Thor: The Dark World's Malekith. Helen Mirren, who plays the sister Hespera, as a supervillain is something I didn't realize I've always needed. The woman's got a commanding presence and she does a wonderful job of reacting when things don't go the way she expects. The one scene where Levi and Mirren were working off of each other is probably the best scene. Lucy Liu as the sister Kalypso is unfortunately saddled with the weakest character in the movie. She delivers the role as written but is given nothing to work with.

Recommended, not the most unique superhero or fantasy movie, but it's a generally good time, and I'm far more likely to rewatch this than the first film.

Scream VI

8/10

In this new entry in the horror series, the Carpenter sisters and friends have moved to New York City, only to become the targets of a new Ghostface killer.

The trailers are completely accurate in that this may be one of the most intense Scream films. The last film had already escalated things, but this one goes even further with some unforgettably brutal kills. This Ghostface is a lot gutsier and eyes-on-the prize than some of the others, even going as far as attacking in public. This also has one of the best openers and really invigorates the concept.

I won't lie, I wasn't loving the move to New York (I guess I prefer the films to happen in less crowded areas), but I was wrong. The filmmakers do a wonderful job of making use of the big city and how threatening it can be.

However, I'd rank this as second-to-last in the films. Don't think of this as a dislike of film, it's just that there's tough competition as the franchise has been surprisingly strong for a horror series, and I 'd consider 3 the only bad one.

Love the beginning, but I felt this had the weakest killer reveal. This is also the only film where I figured things out, at least partially, before the end of the film. The writers really show their hand in this. This may also be the Scream movie with the biggest plot holes (why don't the characters get a police escort?)

This movie carries the last film's slow break from the feel of the previous films. Like the current Jurassic Park trilogy when compared to the original, the tone and dialog never 100% feel like they're in the same world. Also, this movie has more of a grainier style of filming to it, and I miss the brighter camerawork of the first two movies.

The return of Kirby Reed (played by Hayden Panetierre) from Scream IV, who I and most people liked, lacked the punch she had before. Dialogue wasn't as fun. I understand she's now at a different place in her life than many years ago, but I didn't buy her as an FBI agent, and if they were trying to show change in her, it wasn't working.

Recommended, despite my complaints, I was still drawn in with the tension and what was going on (this flows pretty well) and will definitely watch this again.

Creed III

8.5/10

In this third installment of the Rocky franchise spin-off, boxer Adonis Creed (played by Michael B. Jordan, also the director of this) finds a monkey wrench thrown into his life when childhood friend Damian Anderson (played by Jonathan Majors), comes back into his life after spending eighteen years in prison. He once had a promising future as a boxer, and he's hungry to achieve the dream he lost. REAL HUNGRY.

Creed has become that rare trilogy where all the films are good. This is a solid, engrossing entry fueled by the conflict between Adonis and Damian and the specter of what went down years ago hanging over the former like a ghost.  

This is the second Creed film that's managed to revive the glory days of the memorable Rocky antagonist. The writers remembered what worked with Creed II's Drago and continued rolling with it: make the guy intimidating but also completely tragic and sympathetic. Majors does a great job and convinces you of the character's buried resentment and the fact that this is clearly a man that's been outside of society for a while. He's also a good physical successor to Drago. Majors is super swole in this and dwarfs Jordan, and the character is differentiated from Drago, who was a relentless animal, by being a "anything goes/push the rules as far you as you can" fighter.

Jordan gives another excellent performance. I think he and the writers realized they couldn't make another installment where the guy's being cocky, and you see growth with the character, now as a family man and running a gym.

Jordan delivers a surprisingly confident work, considering this is the first time he's directing. If you missed the fight in the first Creed film where it's one uncut shot, you'll be pleased to see a couple interesting visual ideas in this.

There is one thing about this movie that may turn off a lot of people. As with the first two movies, a lot of this is about the story and dialogue. The constant talking scenes and deliberate pacing might bore some.

Highly recommended. This is just a well written and acted film that keeps what you like about the Creed movies while naturally evolving them.

Cocaine Bear

8/10

In this movie based on a true story, a bear in the 1980's eats cocaine that was airdropped from a plane and goes on a rampage across its national park. (This is loosely based on the true story. The actual bear just died of a heart attack. However, what happened to the person who dropped the cocaine appears to be fairly accurate.)

Cocaine Bear is one of those rare theatrical films these days that are intentionally campy. Writer Jimmy Warden (of the movie The Babysitter: Killer Queen) and director Elizabeth Banks (yes, THE Elizabeth Banks) decided to see how nuts they can go with this.  The kills can be delightfully over-the-top and you're kept guessing as to what'll happen next (especially since it's hard to predict how the drug-addled bear will react) and who'll survive. This has the goofiest Mexican stand-off scene you'll ever see.

Great cast in this, especially considering how silly the subject is, including Keri Russell, Margo Martindale, Isiah Whitlock Jr., and Ray Liotta in what was the last role he filmed before he passed. The majority of characters are surprisingly fleshed out. The stand-outs are definitely Solo's Alden Ehrenreich and Outta Compton's O'Shea Jackson Jr. as two drug dealers, the former of which being retired and reluctantly dragged back into the business, who've been sent to retrieve the cocaine. They have this real every guy reaction to the insanity they find themselves in.

Admittedly, some of the bits and exposition scenes that don't feature the bear could've been edited down in order to make them stronger. Some of you may get bored with the people characters. A subplot about Whitlock's detective and his pet dog feels half-baked. Also, the clothing and personalities of a group of punk teens roaming the woods doesn't feel that Eighties.  

The computer generated bear doesn't look too bad. You can tell it isn't real, but it works, and I was impressed that the effects guys put more effort into its anatomy than you'd think.

Recommended unless you're not big on R-rated violence. This is an enjoyable brains-off, sit-back-and-enjoy-the-ride situation.

Antman and the Wasp: Quantumania

8/10

Scott Lang/Ant-Man (played by Paul Rudd), Hope Van Dyne/The Wasp (Evangeline Lilly) and company are shrunken and sucked into the Quantum Realm and have to survive and find a way out.

I'm seeing a lot of criticism of this film online. I'm not seeing it. It's not the best Marvel movie but there were weaker entries more deserving of a rotten tomato score. Yeah, not much about this, except maybe the villain, really bucks the Marvel/big-budget popcorn film mold at all, but it's exactly the type of movie I was looking for to have a nice time. I found the story to be entertaining with a decent amount of humor, plus it's well-paced.

Though a traditional Marvel film, this is a change of pace for the Ant-Man films. Whereas the Ant-Man movies have been more lighthearted escapades, the characters are suddenly thrown into a Guardians of the Galaxy/Thor big strange worlds adventure. Whereas the stakes were smaller in the past, Ant-Man has to go against a truly serious Thanos-level threat in the form of Kang the Conqueror (Jonathan Majors). 

Paul Rudd remains the heart of the films. Scott is just a likable guy, and I love his sort of every man reaction to events. (Also, compared to the last two films where Scott started in not the best situations, he's finally in a good place, and it's kind of nice seeing him actually being treated well by society.)  A big part of this is his relationship with his daughter Cassie (Freaky's Kathryn Newton) which works pretty well. 

Kang may be the most intimidating villain in the entire MCU. He's the speak-softly-but-carry-a-big-stick type who doesn't let anything deter him and has the immense power to back himslef up. I won't go into much detail about the film's secondary villain who isn't featured in the trailer that much, but it's one of the prominent Marvel villains you're surprised they haven't done yet, and I was rather pleased with how they were handled.

Visually, I'm afraid this would look a little too much like the worlds of GotG/Thor, but this ended up more distinct than I thought it would. Some creativity went into to making the lands and creatures of the Quantum Realm distinct. 

While I don't think this movie deserves a lot of complaints, this isn't like it doesn't have it's weak points. The epilogue feels rushed and there are a couple editing issues, an abrupt transition and it felt like scenes (seen in the trailer) had been cut which made a line near the end feel off. 

There are way too many characters in this. The Good Place's William Jackson Parker has a fun role, but he isn't given much to do. They make it seem like Bill Murray's character is going to be a key player but then they don't use him much. Due to this taking mostly place off Earth, you lose several of the supporting human characters you've grown to know including Scott's trio of ex-con buddies who were never crucial to the plot but were fun.

Recommended. I'd rank this above the first Ant-Man and below the second, which I felt did the best in being diverting. In the grand scheme of the MCU, I'd rank this near the middle, but of phase 5 I find this to be one of the most rewatchable. (Not better than Spider-Man: No Way Home, I'm not nuts.)