12 items found for your search. If no results were found please broaden your search.
(03/16/22 8:45pm)
The Texas Chainsaw Massacre franchise has a long and storied history of sequels, remakes, and reboots. The sheer number of new timelines is convoluted even in this age of constantly reviving long-dead franchises for nostalgia’s moneymaking powers.
(10/23/21 7:30pm)
The first Venom movie was not a hit with critics, but was more popular with audiences, or at least the audience members that know how to have fun. Those who enjoyed Venom were eagerly awaiting a continuation of Eddie Brock and his strange symbiote partner's escapades.
(03/08/21 5:00am)
Well… another day, another reboot of a beloved childhood property. And yet somehow, I never saw this coming. Didn’t they already try making a Tom & Jerry movie back in 1992? And wasn’t it a widely-panned disaster that failed to make its money back, relegating Tom and Jerry’s “cinematic” presence to direct-to-TV specials on Cartoon Network? Yes, to all of the above. And yet, apparently, someone thought they could do it better this time. Luckily, this one doesn’t make the mistake of having Tom and Jerry talk, but it does make the mistake of writing in human characters that we’re supposed to care about.
(03/08/21 6:22am)
By Aaron Dwyer
Well… another day, another reboot of a beloved childhood property. And yet somehow, I never saw this coming. Didn’t they already try making a Tom & Jerry movie back in 1992? And wasn’t it a widely-panned disaster that failed to make its money back, relegating Tom and Jerry’s “cinematic” presence to direct-to-TV specials on Cartoon Network? Yes, to all of the above. And yet, apparently, someone thought they could do it better this time. Luckily, this one doesn’t make the mistake of having Tom and Jerry talk, but it does make the mistake of writing in human characters that we’re supposed to care about.
In this family comedy, Tom and Jerry find themselves stranded in New York with nowhere to sleep - apparently, the cost of living there is so high now that even street animals have to pay rent - and Jerry finds the perfect solution: sneaking into a ritzy hotel to live a life of luxury and resume his usual trouble-causing ways. Meanwhile, a young lady named Kayla (Chloë Grace Moretz) has lied her way into getting a job at the Royal Gate Hotel right as it's preparing to host a wedding for one of New York society’s hottest couples. The last thing she needs is a mouse sneaking around, so she enlists Tom to hunt down Jerry through various slapstick routines. Throw in an uptight manager that’s onto Kayla’s scheme, some oddball hotel workers, the bumbling high society guests, and you’ve got… well, kind of a mess, to be honest.
(02/08/21 9:42pm)
(11/20/20 11:30pm)
By Aaron Dwyer
Body swap stories are nothing new. They’ve been used for horror films like Invasion of the Body Snatchers and comedies such as Freaky Friday, but never before has there been a movie that deliberately combined the two.
In a gruesome twist on the classic tale, Millie Kessler (Kathryn Newton) is about to find herself in the body of a wanted murderer. She’s a shy, humble girl, just trying to work up the confidence to make a move on her crush, but the school bully and a tyrannical shop teacher are making that pretty difficult for her. Things only worsen when Millie encounters her town’s fabled serial killer, the Blissfield Butcher (Vince Vaughn). He stabs her with an enchanted dagger, and this has some weird consequences. The next day, Millie and the Butcher wake up stuck in each other’s bodies. They have 24 hours to switch back before the change is permanent, and those hours are about to comprise the freakiest Friday of her life.
It’s a simple set up, almost deceptively so. You might not think you’re in for a fun ride that stops being hilarious or horrifying only for a sweet, touching moment, but you’d be wrong.
(10/10/20 1:15am)
2020 hasn’t been a great year for children’s book adaptations so far. Remember this summer when a lot of people were suddenly really mad about the Artemis Fowl trailer, and even more so when the movie was released? We saw it as not only a terrible adaptation but a very mediocre film. Well, it’s nice to know that in the case of Enola Holmes, that kind of outrage isn’t required.
(10/09/20 5:00pm)
By Aaron Dwyer
2020 hasn’t been a great year for children’s book adaptations so far. Remember this summer when a lot of people were suddenly really mad about the Artemis Fowl trailer, and even more so when the movie was released? We saw it as not only a terrible adaptation but a very mediocre film. Well, it’s nice to know that in the case of Enola Holmes, that kind of outrage isn’t required.
The Netflix film adapts the first installment in the Enola Holmes book series by Nancy Springer, The Case of the Missing Marquess. In this mystery adventure, Enola Holmes discovers her beloved mother has disappeared from their home. Enola seeks the help of her older brothers, Mycroft and the famous detective, Sherlock. They prove to be less than useful; however, and plan to send her away to boarding school while the search for their mother continues. Defiant of the prospect, Enola follows a trail of clues left by Mrs. Holmes and runs away on her own, resolved to put her sleuthing skills to the test. However, the process becomes entangled in a much larger mystery involving Viscount Tewkesbury, a young runaway lord. Predictably, hijinks ensue.
Overall, sounds like a fun little romp, doesn’t it? Well, it is. For the most part.
Things were going great…
The setting of Enola Holmes, 1880’s England, is shown here with some lovely set designs. From the grand stone mansion overgrown with greenery that Enola occupies with her mother, to the dingy, crowded streets of the London slums, there’s always something to look at. The frame is filled enough to keep your attention, but rarely so much that it feels too busy. There’s also some great fast-paced editing, accompanied by a sweeping, upbeat instrumental score which makes it a pleasure to watch.
A notable feature of the film is the director, Harry Bradbeer of Fleabag fame, choosing to translate Enola’s internal monologue into fourth-wall-breaking addresses to the audience. Whether or not this is a problem really depends on the viewer, but Millie Bobby Brown carries it off with enough wit and good humor that it didn’t bother me. She really gives the performance of her thus far short but illustrious career here. Brown’s portrayal of the spunky young heroine is so thoroughly convincing that during the lowest point of Enola’s journey, I was on the verge of crying along with her.
Another point in Enola Holmes’s favor is that it’s superbly acted across the board. Helena Bonham Carter as Mrs. Holmes is a highlight, if only her character wasn’t missing so we could see more of her.
The real drawback is, well... I’m just gonna come out and say it. Henry Cavill is miscast as Sherlock Holmes. He’s clearly everywhere right now, especially given his previous Netflix appearance in The Witcher. There's nothing especially wrong with his performance, but he feels too generically dreamy for this character. This is not to say that all Sherlocks have to be hawkish and gangly, wearing the traditional deerstalker cap. After all, Robert Downey Jr. didn’t fit that bill, and his portrayal was generally well received, but the cognitive dissonance of Superman as the world’s greatest tightwad detective is a lot to handle. That, and he doesn’t really do much. Ostensibly, Sherlock is the one Enola should be afraid of while she’s on the run, given that he’s the brilliant detective, but he’s so nice to her in this movie that he doesn’t feel like a real threat to her goals. This takes some of the thrill out of Enola’s escape, and here’s where the movie starts to show it’s weaknesses.
…Until they weren’t
Much like the city of London, the movie's dazzling exterior does have something of a dark underside. Changes must be made for any adaptation, but they should, in theory, be changes that help the story work better as whatever new medium it's being adapted into. Enola Holmes stretches a 160-page middle grade mystery into a two hour film, and that stretch shows.
The pace of the film moves at a fun, breakneck speed in some places but drags to a halt in others. Usually these drags are plot threads that the film added on top of the books’, which would normally be fine, but they feel much more shoved in than woven in. There’s also a disheartening recurring story beat of Enola figuring something out, only for it to be revealed that someone else already figured it out before her. She’s always a step behind instead of a step ahead, which feels like a detriment to both her character and the story. What she does successfully figure out for herself is hastily put together from conjecture, and it feels hard to follow. When your main character confidently announces her theory of the villain’s plan shortly before the climax, and an audience member isn’t quite sure how she came up with it after they’ve watched two hours of buildup, it might be time for a few little script edits.
Once Enola decides to help find the runaway marquess while she’s in the neighborhood, the goal of finding her mother is waylaid and almost forgotten entirely until the very end. Between those points, there’s something about a price on Lord Tewkesbury’s head and a controversial reform bill that floats in the background, but this political intrigue fails to be very intriguing.
It’s not a movie-ruining problem. Sure, they made the order of events confusing and the pace a stop-and-start ride, but at least they were able to add a cute teen romance between Enola and Viscount Tewkesbury, right? Honestly, that particular addition had me longing to reach for the book. But if one can get past that, there's nothing stopping an audience from enjoying Enola Holmes. It's fine for what it is, even great in some places. Even the strictest completionist Sherlock fan may find something to like in its uplifting tone.
(09/18/20 10:33pm)
The Sleepover is a family action-comedy, the sort that moms use to wrestle all their children into a row of theater seats, either as a treat or—in the case of a summer blockbuster like this one—because it’s too hot to play outside. Nowadays, due to the pandemic and the rise of streaming, you can find it released directly to Netflix.
(09/18/20 9:30pm)
By Aaron Dwyer
The Sleepover is a family action-comedy, the sort that moms use to wrestle all their children into a row of theater seats, either as a treat or—in the case of a summer blockbuster like this one—because it’s too hot to play outside. Nowadays, due to the pandemic and the rise of streaming, you can find it released directly to Netflix.
In The Sleepover, siblings Clancy and Kevin haven’t been getting along with their parents lately. Their mother, Margot, never wants them to do anything fun, and their father backs her up by making them stay home on a Friday for the world’s lamest sleepover. As it turns out, Margot has good reasons for wanting to keep the kids safe: she used to be a high profile thief before she settled down, and is now in witness protection. Margot’s old boss has tracked her down and requested that she complete one final heist, and he’s made it clear that he won't be taking no for an answer. Margot goes along with the plan but leaves clues behind for the kids to figure out where she’s gone. Clancy, Kevin, and their friends are determined to rescue Margot, the trail of clues leading them all over her old hideouts and into various wacky predicaments as they attempt to track her down. The story splits its time between both sides of the family as they try to make it out in one piece and, hopefully, reunite with each other by morning.
Now, that sounds like a movie concept designed to be fun for the whole family if I’ve ever heard one. But despite its surface-level appeal, The Sleepover could hardly be called fun for the whole family, because it isn’t really fun at all. It would be very easy to label this movie as simply "meh" and move on, but looking closer, there is some nuance to how underwhelming it is.
(02/19/20 7:23pm)
In this day and age, it’s hardly surprising to see a film adaptation of classic horror literature in theaters. What is even less surprising is Hollywood presenting us with a case of “the book was better.” It may be an age-old complaint, especially from avid readers, but it has persisted for a reason.
(02/07/20 6:30pm)
by Aaron Dwyer
In this day and age, it’s hardly surprising to see a film adaptation of classic horror literature in theaters. What is even less surprising is Hollywood presenting us with a case of “the book was better.” It may be an age-old complaint, especially from avid readers, but it has persisted for a reason.
The Turning is an adaptation of Henry James’ 1898 horror novella The Turn of the Screw, but in name only. All the basic ingredients of the story are there: A young woman named Kate is hired as a private tutor for Flora, a little girl in need of company following the death of her wealthy parents. At first, things are great between them until Flora’s older brother, Miles, arrives home from boarding school. The strained relationship between Kate and Miles, as well as the presence of a disapproving housekeeper, puts a lot of pressure on Kate. The fact that the house also seems to be haunted by the ghosts of two former staff members also isn’t helping.
On paper, this seems like an ideal setup for a classic historical horror story. It has orphans, a creepy old house, mysterious deaths, and most importantly, people who refuse to talk about them. What more could you want? Unfortunately, somewhere in the process of adapting it from page and screen, something went screwy. There are so many trademarks of a typical scary movie: an abundance of cheap jump scares, multiple creepy dolls and mannequins, and fake-out dream sequences, just to name a few. The Turning actually ignores several of the story elements of the novella it’s based on, not in favor of being its own entity, but more in favor of being like every other horror movie you may have seen in the last decade.