Tag Archives: george clooney

‘The Midnight Sky’ Review

Leave a reply

As far as blatant rip-offs go, I’ve seen worse than this.

“The Midnight Sky” is the latest directorial effort from George Clooney, based on the novel “Good Morning, Midnight.” The film follows a lone scientist in the Arctic (Clooney) who must journey to a radio tower to warn off a returning spaceship (containing Felicity Jones, David Oyelowo, Tiffany Boone, Demián Bichir, and Kyle Chandler) after a global catastrophe on Earth.

George Clooney is a very interesting director. When he hits, he hits, with serious dramas like “The Ides of March” and “Good Night, and Good Luck.” However he has recently fallen into a bit of a rough spell, with missed opportunities like “Monuments Men” and the awful “Suburbicon.” His latest (and most ambitious) effort, “The Midnight Sky,” is his first attempt at both a blockbuster and at taking part in the Netflix machine, and while the results are mixed, I think there is enough here to be worth checking out from your couch.

As far as his direction here goes, I appreciated Clooney’s humanistic approach. He had to take a “crash course” on visual effects (more on that in a second), but as far as his handling of the actors go, I think he did a good job getting personal performances from his cast. As far as the story goes, it’s a bit more mixed, because while Clooney’s personal “Revenant” journey through the Arctic with a young girl (Caoilinn Springall) is intense and emotional, the sequences aboard the spaceship belong in a completely different movie (and that movie is “The Martian”).

Half of the special effects are solid here, but in 2020 it takes a lot to wow an audience (especially without seeing them on a big screen). Some of the greenscreen moments are a bit wonky, but Clooney does manage to take a page out of his “Gravity” playbook and create a few “wow” moments when he pans back to reveal the full scope of the universe. In a year where “Birds of Prey” is going to end up as the highest-grossing superhero movie, I could see “Midnight Sky” slipping into the awards talk for its production value, but in a normal year this wouldn’t earn any additional talk for its VFX.

The familiarity of the film certainly hinders it, and for some viewers may even ruin things. However I found myself enjoying a fair amount, whether it was with the film (an exciting snowstorm sequence shot in real-life 50 mph winds at 40-below) or at its expense (the astronauts break out into a carpool karaoke of “Sweet Caroline” like its the 7th inning at Fenway; dumb). Alexandre Desplat’s score, while on-the-nose at points, is also very good, and is one of my favorites of the year.

“The Midnight Sky” thinks it is being slick trying to be a half-dozen better films rolled into one, but given our limited amount of big-budget fair in 2020 I think this latest attempt by Netflix to break into the blockbuster game is admirable-enough to warrant checking. Sure, you could watch “The Revenant” or “Interstellar” or “Ad Astra” instead (and likely should), but for those who demand little and want something “new” (used in the loosest of terms), I think this works.

Critics Rating: 6/10

Bullock Saves ‘Brand’ from Being a Crisis

Leave a reply

Our_Brand_Is_Crisis_(2015_film)_POSTERWell this movie may not be a crisis, but it isn’t that good, either…

“Our Brand Is Crisis” stars Sandra Bullock as a political strategist who comes out of retirement to help a Bolivia presidential candidate. Billy Bob Thornton, Anthony Mackie and Joaqium de Almeida also star as David Gordon Green directs. The film is partially based on the true story of the 2002 Bolivia election.

The film is produced by George Clooney, and was at one time supposed to feature him in the starring role as well as the director’s chair. But somewhere along the line the role went to Bullock and the character was rewritten as a woman, and we have the movie we have. The movie may have been different with Clooney in the starring role, however I can’t imagine it would have been much better. As I’m sure Clooney would have done, Bullock is the saving grace of the film, lifting it up and at some points saving it from a script that is scattershot and features major shifts in tone.

The interesting thing about Bullock in “Our Brand Is Crisis” (a role that screams Golden Globe nomination) is that she seems blissfully unaware of how poor the movie around her is. She skates along, spewing out quotes from politicians and military leaders, and occasionally gives passionate speeches. It is an interesting character and by far the best part of the movie. Every time things seem to be slowing down Bullock gives it a shot of energy, however her flare may expose the flaws the film has.

The tone of the film is all over the place. There are a few chuckles that come out of nowhere (thanks to the always likable Anthony Mackie) but the film isn’t constantly funny enough to be a comedy. On the flip side the film’s dramatic heft stems from randomly inserted story points, like Bullock’s character disclosing randomly halfway through the film that she suffers from depression; and then never touching on that topic again. There’s a point where Mackie’s character says negative ad campaigns are like a bomb, you can blow your opponent up but you don’t know where the votes are going to land. The tone of this film is a lot like that; they just set off an explosive in the genre factory and prayed things ended up in the right place (they didn’t).

Oh, and can we talk about Billy Bob Thornton’s character because what the heck was that? He plays the political adversary to Bullock and when he’s not making sexual innuendos at Bullock (a storyline that never reaches fruition), he’s coming off very uncomfortable for the viewer. And one may say that’s the point, he’s a sleaze ball; well the presidential candidate is a scumbag human, too, but at no point did I feel a sense of awkwardness just seeing his character on screen.

Some of the behind-the-scenes of political campaigns is fun, and like I said Bullock steals the show (and made me want to start researching quotations that I can spew out at random) but all too often I found myself disinterested in “Our Brand Is Crisis.”

Here’s the bottom line: I saw this film yesterday, and it already feels like it was a month ago, that’s how far this thing has already faded into my mind. If you’re a Bullock fan is this worth checking out if it’s on TV one Friday night? Sure. But to most everyone else, you’ll find the film about as fun as watching a real presidential debate; maybe less because there’s no Donald Trump.

Critics Rating: 5/10

our brand

Variety

Don’t Have Your Future Involve ‘Tomorrowland’

Tomorrowland_posterFor a movie that is all about trying to succeed, this film sure fails a lot.

“Tomorrowland” stars George Clooney as a former boy genius who embarks on a mission with a teen (Britt Robertson) in order to uncover the secrets of a distant place caught between space and time. Hugh Laurie co-stars as Brad Bird directs.

I really didn’t know much about “Tomorrowland” going in. I avoided trailers, but from what I was hearing even the trailers divulged very little about the film other than it involves George Clooney and spaceships. So I went in with an open mind, and what filled that mind was over two hours of sci-fi guns, robots and other futuristic gadgets, but all leading to very little avail.

Because the trailers don’t give much of the plot away, I won’t do the same here, but just know that it is incredibly simple yet somehow widely convoluted. While things are hinted at throughout, you don’t really get a clear view of what is happening and where our characters are going until the final act of the film, and I for one was not a fan of the mystery.

The film runs 130 minutes and oh boy does it feel like it; the pacing really is poor. It takes a while for things to get going, and Clooney doesn’t really come into play until around the first hour mark. When he finally does show, he is a breath of fresh air in an otherwise mundane “run away from the bad guys who want to catch me for reasons I don’t know why” plot, but that air can only stay fresh so long.

The script, written by Bird and Damon Lindelof, is all about never giving up, thinking positively, and trying to better humanity. Lindelof has never been one to write coherent works (just take a look at “Lost” or “Prometheus”), but the fact that this has Bird’s fingerprints on it is a bit of a letdown. He has two Oscar nominations for Best Original Screenplay (for “The Incredibles” and “Ratatouille,” both of which earned him Best Animated Feature statues), but some of the dialogue and plot points here just really had me cringing or rolling my eyes.

The film is rated PG, and since it makes sure to slap the Disney name on it you know that the film is meant for kids and families of all ages. I’m sure kids will be wowed by the towering future buildings and people soaring on jetpacks, but they also will have to put up with a teenage girl driving a truck and asking a lot of questions that never get answered, as well as images out nuclear holocausts. Fun stuff.

I don’t hate “Tomorrowland” because it is overly opportunistic or because it tries to get political (revealing what about would ruin the film, but it does make some good points). No, I disliked “Tomorrowland” so much because it is conflicting in its messaging and felt like each scene was disjointed moving from one the next.

The underlying message of the film is to think positively, so fine, here it goes: I’m positive “Tomorrowland” is a bad film.

Critics Rating: 3/10

TOMORROWLAND

Variety

‘Batman & Robin’: Cinematic Gold

Leave a reply

In honor of April Fools Day, here is a sarcastic, positive review of “Batman & Robin”, one of the worst (but, hilarious) films ever made. Please don’t take anything in here seriously. If you’ve never seen the film, it’s really, really bad… But without further adieu…

220px-Batman_&_robin_posterForget Christopher Nolan and Christian Bale: Joel Schumacher and George Clooney are the masterminds behind the greatest Batman movie of all-time.

Released back in 1997, “Batman & Robin” remains not only the best film about Bruce Wayne’s alter ego, but quite simply one of the greatest superhero films ever made (right up with “Green Lantern” and “Superman IV: The Quest for Peace”). Directed by Joel Schumacher, B&R is a continuation of the original Batman franchise. George Clooney is the 3rd actor to put on the tights, after Michael Keaton and Val Kilmer both (I can only assume) realized they weren’t good enough for the role. Chris O’Donnell returns as Robin, while Alicia Silverstone portrays the character everyone was asking for, Batgirl. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Uma Thurman play Mr. Freeze and Poison Ivy, our villains.

Right from the opening scene of “Batman & Robin”, you know this will be unlike anything you’ve ever seen in a Batman film. The very first shots are close up on the crotches, butts and nipples of Batman and Robin. Now, the first three films were alright, but let’s be honest: there was a serious lacking of overly detailed rubber butts.

Then we get one of the greatest exchanges in maybe the history of ever. After the Batmobile appears, Robin says, “I want a car. Chicks dig the car”, and Batman quickly responds, “this is why Superman works alone”. This line is important because, on top of being hysterical, it means we are in a world where Superman exists. So we should get excited for the inevitable crossover.

Of course, a superhero film is only as good as its villains, and B&R has one that would put Heath Ledger’s Joker to shame. Schwarzenegger portrays a scientist gone mad, and it works because I always thought he was wasting his muscular physique in those action films. Speaking strictly in hilarious puns like, “what killed the dinosaurs? The ice age!” and “allow me to break the ice” (get it? Cuz he’s Mr. FREEZE), this is one cool character (ha! I made one myself!).

His plan is brilliant, too. He wants to steal diamonds to fuel a freeze ray to freeze Gotham City and hold it hostage so he can afford to save his dying wife. “Why couldn’t he just sell the diamonds to save his wife?” you may ask. The film never tells us; it makes us think, only adding to the brilliant depth of it all.

The action in the previous Batman films was alright, but they made attempts to stick to something resembling the rules of physics. But not “Batman & Robin”, oh no! It has Robin climb rocket ships that are way past the livable atmosphere, as well as the crime-fighting duo sliding down a dinosaur’s tail ala Fred Flinstone.

I’m sure by this point you’re itching to see “Batman & Robin”, so I’ll end the review here. All you need to know is it’s a fun, masterfully written portrayal of Batman, and I’m so glad that it was the last adaption that Bob Kane, the man who created Batman, ever lived to see.

Critics Rating: 10/10

NOTE: Please don’t watch “Batman & Robin”. Like, ever. This part is not a joke. It’s really, really awful.

‘Monuments Men’ a Big Bowl of Meh

monumnets

 

            I personally love historical movies, especially those set in the 1940’s. Seeing as “The Monuments Men” is set in the end of World War II, and boasts an impressive cast that includes George Clooney, Matt Damon, John Goodman and Bill Murray, it had all the makings of a fantastic film. Unfortunately, it does not live up to its lofty ambitions.

Directed by and starring Clooney, “Monuments Men” is the true story of a team of artists and architects assigned to find and protect paintings and statues that have been stolen by the Nazis.

The film was originally slated to be released in December of last year; however, it was postponed until this February in order to finish editing the special effects. When a film willingly bows out of Oscar season, it is usually not a great sign. And after seeing the film, my suspicions and worries were justified.

The movie is not awful, but it just falls short on almost every level it was striving for. The trailers implied it was going to be a blend of comedy and drama; that was in fact one of the reasons the movie was delayed, to properly edit the two genres. Every attempt at humor falls flat, or the scenes are just plain unfunny. This is hard to blame on the actors, who feature established comedians such as Murray and Goodman. Instead, the fault lies on the screenplay (written by Clooney and his production partner Grant Heslov), for writing jokes and one-liners that are as stale as a week-old sandwich.

The pacing and narrative are also a large issue. Because there are so many characters in the film, it is hard to feel any real connection to them; it also makes the story arch a little stretched, and thus slow. There are quite a few dull moments in this movie, most of them coming whenever Cate Blanchett’s French art expert is on screen. Her side story however is uninteresting and, for the most part, unneeded.

The film does have some positives. The chemistry between the star studded cast is at times entertaining to watch, and all the actors do seem to try their hardest. The production value and scenery are also very well-done, and at times you are immersed in the ruins of a bombarded, war-torn European city. It was also interesting to see the pictures of the real life Monuments Men at the end of the film.

Its ambitions are large and its intentions are pure, but “The Monuments Men” fails to be anything more than a history lesson, and more often than not it is a pretty boring one. If you are a lover of historical art and monuments, then this may be worth checking out once it hits video. Otherwise this is an ever-so-slightly entertaining, albeit forgettable, George Clooney vehicle.

Critics Rating: 5/10

‘Gravity’ Visually Stunning Andrenalin Rush

Leave a reply

gravity-poster

You know how people complain CGI is overused, replaces story and make films mindless? Well “Gravity” takes that stereotype and throws it out the window. The film stars Sandra Bullock and George Clooney as two astronauts who are stranded in space when debris hits their station. They then must work together to make their way to another ship on the other side of the globe. Alfonso Cuarón directs.

Do not drink Red Bull before you see this movie; you will die. The film is so intense that your heart may just explode. The amount of tension that Cuarón builds, especially in the film’s climax, is just unreal. Every scene is better than the last as we follow Bullock and Clooney in space, a black abyss where no one can hear you scream. And Tom Hanks thought he had it bad in “Castaway”…

You’ve probably heard it in every review of this movie, but it warrants clarifying: this movie is visually stunning. I can now put “I have been to outer space” on my job application. At no point in the film did I think that what I was looking at was computer generated or green screen. As far as I know the actors actually went on the most expensive location shoot ever and filmed the movie in space. From the aerial shots of different continents to the sea of stars in the background, every shot in “Gravity” is stunning and will leave you breathless.

What is holding the film back from being a masterpiece is the lack of character development. The running time is only 90 minutes and we are thrust into the action, so we learn near nothing about the characters except that Bullock is a rookie and Clooney is on his last ever mission (so of course something bad is going to happen). The only attachment we feel towards the astronauts is that they are fellow human beings and they are in a situation that we can all agree is horrifically terrifying. But maybe that is enough.

“Gravity” is a Hollywood rarity: a blockbuster with intellect. You have to see this in a theater; experiencing it on anything short of a 40 foot screen will not do it justice. Full of amazing visuals, great performances and intense direction, “Gravity” is just unique in all the best ways.

Critics Rating: 8/10