Spy is the latest collaboration from Melissa McCarthy and Paul Feig. They’ve worked together on such films as The Heat and, of course, Bridesmaids.

Melissa McCarthy works at the CIA.  She plays Susan Cooper, a support agent for Bradley Fine (Jude Law).  Bradley is the perfect spy, suave, smooth, and talented, essentially an American James Bond.  Sharon acts as his external eyes and ears, directing him to where the action is, and where he can make a quick escape.  He’s hot on the trail of a someone who’s about to sell a small nuclear weapon to the highest bidder.  Bradley confronts him, and accidentally kills him before he reveals the location of the bomb.  Chaos ensues, and escapes, but only with Susan’s help.

Undaunted by this tremendous setback, Fine chooses to follow his target’s daughter Rayna (Rose Byne), who will be resuming the negotiations ASAP, so time is short. He sneaks into Rayna’s home and is found out.  He is killed, but not before Rayna reveals she knows who he is, and also claims to know every current field agent who would stop her.

The head of the CIA’s operations, Elaine Crocker (Allison Janney), realizes what’s at stake, but also that they can’t send their top agents anywhere near Rayna.   Crocker is forced to choose Susan, who had passed all the requirements of field service, but was commandeered by Fine.  This angers agent Rick Ford, who wants to avenge Bradley’s death, as well as find the bomb. So, off goes Susan, and the typical spy sequences occur. She’s given a cover, but it’s of some frumpy, middle aged woman on vacation. Her best friend/co-worker Nancy (Miranda Hart) becomes her handler, and guides her onward, who behaves as one expects Miranda Hart to behave.

At this point, one would expect the bumbling-agent-stumbles-toward-victory kind of movie, but that’s not exactly what happens. Susan is more than competent, and manages to stay focused enough to go with the events that transpire.

Mind you, this is a comedy.  I find it funny in places, and there are funny elements in the film, including several good laughs (one or two spoiled by the trailer).  Jason Statham plays it straight, and is intentionally untentionally comedic. At its heart, though, Spy is an action movie, and it’s not bad.  There are some plot holes that you could probably drive a truck through, but we’ll forgive those, as they’re a part of any film in the spy movie genre.

There is a mid-credits scene that’s worth waiting for.

Recommended, but you can wait until it’s up for rental.

Terminator: Genisys Is the latest movie in the Terminator franchise. Aside from the return of Arnold Schwarzenegger, this film reboots the entire series, and is intended for the fans, but others will like it, too.

I must start with the basic concept. In The Future (future…future…future…), Some computer called Skynet has practically destroyed humanity. The humans were not entirely wiped out, and learned to fight back. The resistance leader, John Connor (Jai Courtney), is almost victorious, but Skynet sent a robot back in time to 1984 to kill Sarah Connor, the mother of John. John was aware of the plan, and manages to send a soldier named Kyle Reese (Jason Clarke) back to protect his mother from the Terminator robot. While Kyle is successful, he sacrificed his life for Sarah, but not before the two fall in love. Kyle is, you see, the father of John Connor. The entire franchise is based on the notion that there were backup plans in place. I’ll leave it to you to revisit the films, but, thankfully, you can skip the last two.

Terminator: Genisys starts with Kyle’s reminiscences of his childhood, and how John Connor saved Kyle’s life. The two were inseparable, and Kyle becomes John’s right hand man. The humans are about to start the attack that will end the war with Skynet, but its done on multiple fronts. Some will attack Skynet directly, but John’s forces are to go after a facility in what used to be San Francisco. The fighting is fierce, but Skynet realizes something is up, and activates a Terminator and sends it back to 1984, this fulfilling that history will remain as it should be. John sends Kyle back, to fulfill his story, but as that plays out, John is attacked in the future, but Kyle makes it back.

It was quite interesting to see the scene played out. The scenes that come after turn the whole story on its edge, and thus have ruined everything that happened in the previous movies. A time travel paradox is created, and everything’s different. Sarah Connor (Emilia Clarke (no relation)) is not what she’s supposed to be, and she has a friend. It would seem that once you muck with a timeline, further mucking is bound to occur. The rest I leave for you to discover.

Those of you who want to talk about time travel and its impact, think of this film along the lines of Bill and Ted’s Excellent Adventure, though not as clever.  For those of you who get easily confused about time travel, I suggest you watch this clip.

The story is a good one, and it’s never clear what will actually happen next, and that’s a good thing. Things have changed, and while things appear to be certain to transpire, they most definitely do not. While Emilia Clarke does well, she does not have the hard edge that Linda Hamilton developed for Terminator 2. While I did like the resolution of the story, there were some liberties taken to ensure that the franchise is not entirely done, yet. There’s a mid-credits sequence, so be sure to stay for that.

I do recommend this film.

Inside Out Is the latest release from Pixar. In the tradition of their legacy, this film is one of their very best. It is difficult to discuss the film

Riley (Kaitlyn Dias) is the only child in a family (Kyle McLaughlin and Diane Lane) that moves from Minnesota to San Francisco when the father takes a new job. The adjustment is rough and it sends Riley into a tailspin of emotions. That’s a pretty straightforward description of the external events that take place in the film, but actually, The main story happens in Riley’s brain. At its core, Riley’s brain is run by 5 emotions that are portrayed as 5 individuals- Joy (Amy Pohler), Sadness (Phyllis Smith), Fear (Bill Heder), Disgust (Mindy Kahling), and Anger (Lewis Black). Joy is the leader of this group, and the others generally let her take charge of what Riley does. This concept has been around for decades, brought to life in the sitcom Herman’s Head, but it diverges in enough ways to set it far apart from it.

The rest of this review does go into some details that spoil the movie, so if you do not want to read beyond this paragraph, you can rest assured that Pixar has another hit movie on their hands, and this is highly recommended. It will definitely make my top 10 films for 2015. I saw it in 3D, and it’s done well, but it’s not necessary to enjoy this film!

–==**Spoiler Space **==–

–==**Spoiler Space **==–

–==**Spoiler Space **==–

–==**Spoiler Space **==–

–==**Spoiler Space **==–

–==**Spoiler Space **==–

–==**Spoiler Space **==–

As time progresses, memories are formed in the control center, and take the shape of a sphere. These are stored nightly in ‘memory’, out of the control center. Life-changing memories are stored in a special place, and make up the core of Riley’s personality.

After the move to S.F., Joy and Sadness are accidentally taken from the control center, and are presumed lost. Fear, Disgust, and Anger try to keep things going, but fail miserably. Joy and Sadness end up with the core memories, and Joy realizes she has to get back to the control center to regain some sense of sanity. Their trip has them wandering through the inner workings of Riley’s mind and they visit many of her memories. They stumble onto an old friend, who helps them on their way back to the control center.

This movie was a lot more complex than I had expected it to be. It tugs on your emotional heartstrings in a way that only Pixar seems to be able to do, these days. The finale of the film is satisfying and implies a growth of maturity. The epilogue was totally unexpected, but hilarious, satisfying, and ultimately enjoyable.

Pixar has done it again.

Oh, and the short at the beginning of the movie was OK, but not their best work. Completely forgettable.

Jurassic World is the latest sequel in a string of Jurassic Park films. Dr John Hammond, the original creator of Jurassic Park, has long since departed this world. He’s left his legacy to his granddaughter Claire (Bryce Dallas Howard), who is now running Jurassic World, a successful replacement for the failed Jurassic Park. The park hosts thousands of guests, and is a success, thanks to an investment by billionaire Simon Masrani (Irrfan Khan). It’s been active for years, but is looking for the new hook to draw in more guests. Claire has a plan, but goes a bit too far, and it all comes crashing down.

What can I say about this film? It’s got action, Dinosaurs, characters to care about, and trouble aplenty. What it really lacks is uniqueness or any sort of real draw. We’ve seen this before. Humans think they can control the dinosaurs. When they break out, the humans think they can contain them. We all know they can’t, otherwise, why bother with the movie? Just add a pinch of corporate greed, and some career vs family life nonsense, and then you have a movie. Or, do you?

Forgive me for going a bit meta here, but Claire says it best early in the film. Dwindling numbers in attendance are driving the park owners to consider how to draw the crowds. People aren’t happy with the same old Dinosaurs they have. The Park people have choosen to create new Dinosaurs that are unique, to re-interest people in coming back. They blend some genetics and come up with an ultrapredator to wow the crowds, which should hold ’em for a few years until they come up with yet another wondrous beast in the future. As I was thinking of this review, I can see the parallels between Jurassic World, and a movie studio, where the Dinosaurs are actually the movies the studio releases. Then, that commentary becomes all clear.

The big new dinosaur obviously breaks free, and mayhem ensues. Claire’s two nephews are at the park, but she’s too busy to show them around, so she assigns her assistant. Naturally, they’re caught up right in the middle of all the chaos. That’s what Claire gets for ignoring a family and living a life. Owen (Chris Pratt) is sort of a Dinosaur whisperer, and has been training a brood of Velociraptors as if they were hunting dogs. He gets “it”. The dinosaurs are living breathing entities instead of commodities, and he has to remind Claire of that, time and time again. Jake Johnson and Lauren Lapkus portray technicians who help “control” the park. Vincent D’Onofrio plays Pratt’s boss, and is the corporate mouthpiece.

There are a lot of cliches in the film, almost too many. There are very few surprises, too, and sadly, that’s what I took away from the film. They can’t have just one failure, it ALL has to come crashing down. It’s the big budget disaster movie, where the lessons supposedly learned from the previous movie were ignored, and that’s the only reason the movie happens. I almost hate it for that.

Human and animal violence run through the film. There are several gruesome deaths, including one person who was supposed to be annoying, but was only doing their job. Either it was gratuitous, or they cut out most of the character’s part from the script.

I almost want to say you should avoid this film. There are some moments that were good, but overall, I’d have to say you don’t need to see it. If you feel you must, you definitely do not have to see it in 3D, like I did.

San Andreas is the latest disaster movie to hit the theaters. It’s available as a 3D experience, as well as the regular 2D. There is some good use of 3D, which is how I saw it. It’s almost enough to recommend seeing it in 3D, but you won’t be missing too much if you don’t see it that way. This film is a traditional disaster film, reminiscent of several others.

Dwayne Johnson plays Ray, a helicopter rescue pilot working out of L.A. The film starts with a TV news crew interviewing him and his team as they rescue someone who’s crashed their car in the hilly L.A. suburbs. He’s going to go camping with his daughter Blake (Alexandra Daddario), before she goes off to college in San Francisco, but is called away, because other matters get out of hand.

In a separate storyline, two seismologists from Caltech, Doctors Hayes and Park (Paul Giamatti and Will Yun Lee) have developed a predictive model of earthquakes, and go to the source of their latest prediction, near Las Vegas. Their calculations are accurate, and all hell breaks loose. They are caught up in a colossal quake along a previously undiscovered fault line near the Hoover Dam. After returning to Caltech, Dr. Hayes’s model shows that the actual San Andreas fault is about to give way, from L.A. up to San Francisco.

We find that Ray is about to get divorced from his wife Emma (Carla Gugino), and she’s moving in with her new boyfriend, a real estate devloper who’s building will be the tallest in San Fran. He offers to take Blake to SF since Ray is no longer able.

Then, the big one hits L.A., and Ray, who was on his way to Vegas in his chopper to help with rescue attempts there, turns around to rescue Emma, who’s downtown. Meanwhile, Blake is trapped up in San Francisco, and Ray decides to fly up to save her. There’re some spectacular bits of destruction going on. There are some scenes reminiscent of 1974’s Earthquake

From there, onward, the situation goes from bad to worse. The disaster porn really kicks into high gear. Ground shakes, buildings tumble, and so on. What we see is more on a personal level, as the movie sticks to following the characters instead of the bigger picture. Perhaps personal isn’t the right word, it’s more intimate. They are involved in the situation, but the focus is clearly on them in the midst of all the chaos.

I have to say that I am a huge fan of these Disaster Porn flicks. All the destruction at the hand of Nature really just amplifies how powerless we are, regardless of what we believe we are in control of. San Andreas is a good film with an OK script. The side story with the seismologists really helps the story, IMO. There are several typical disaster movie tropes in the film, but they’re not too much of a cliche. There are a few graphic deaths, the kind you’d expect in a film like this. I do recommend the film.

There is one issue that bothered me early in the film, but I will explain it below.

Spoilers follow, so you may stop reading if you do not want to be spoiled.

blah

blah

blah

blah

blah

This is spoiler space

blah

blah

blah

blah

blah

Spoilers below, you were warned!

I have one major quibble about the film. Ray’s on his way to Vegas, supposedly with his crew. When he decides to go save his soon to be ex, his crew disappears. What happened to them? I’m trying to remember if they were even in the helicopter when his wife calls for help. There’s no mention of them beyond that point, and they were supposed to all be comrades from Afghanistan who stuck together, no matter what. THEN, he decides to ignore all that’s happening around him in L.A. and fly up to San Francisco. I guess his sense of duty went out the window right with the rest of his crew.

Before you reply, yes, I know it’s a movie and I’m not supposed to expect things like consistency, but still, I had to mention it. It’s a pretty big plot hole that they could’ve explained better. I hope that explanation shows up as a deleted scene when it’s available for rental/purchase/etc.

Mad Max: Fury Road is the latest Mad Max movie from George Miller. You’d think the series is done, having shown enough, but you’d be wrong. 90-95% of this movie is action thriller, and it pays off.

That being said, it helps if you’ve seen the other MM films, but it’s not entirely necessary. Society has totally broken down and degenerated into chaos. There are towns, whose sole focus is the production of some sort of product. Each trades with the others, but it’s a dangerous operation. Raiders loners exist everywhere. Max (Tom Hardy) is one such loner, captured at the beginning of the film, and is brought to the town run by Immortan Joe, whose commodity is water. He leads his people with promises of reincarnation, and glory through battle. While he’s no Ayatolla of Rock and Rolla, he’s definitely got some form of barbaric psychosis, with a ‘uniform’ to match.

Meanwhile, a trade event is happening. Imperator Furiosa (Charlize Theron), leaves with her truck and trailer on the premise of getting gasoline and ammo from nearby towns. She diverts from that plan and goes her own way. The chase is on. Meanwhile, Max has type O Negative blood, and has been imprisoned in the hospital, plugged into Nux, who’s suffering from an indeterminate illness. All warriors are summoned to chase down Furiosa. Nux is a driver, and lashes Max to the front of his vehicle, and they give chase.

Why is Furiosa running away? Where is she going? I’ll leave that for you to find out. This film is one long chase scene, punctuated by periods of exposition. I really couldn’t understand why they made another Mad Max movie, but then again, it’s been 36 years since the original Mad Max film was released (34 since The Road Warrior). This film offers no insight into the world that was, but honestly, it’s not necessary. The action is frenetic, even sped up at times, but it isn’t rehashing stunts you’ve already seen. It’s an exciting film that hooks you and doesn’t let go. Recommended.

Note: This film has extreme violence.

Avengers: Age of Ultron is the latest film from the Marvel Comic Book Universe. It was written and directed by Joss Whedon, who also did the same for the first Avengers movie. The bulk of the review is spoiler-free, but some discussion of the events is necessary. There will be a break in the review before those details are revealed, but notice will be given, first.

After the fall of S.H.I.E.L.D. in Captain America: The Winter Soldier, The Avengers have been on a quest to recover special items that were lost – weapons, devices, and artifacts. Amongst those are the relic called the Chitauri Scepter, which was the device Loki used in the first Avengers movie to summon the Chitauri to Earth. They have traced it to be in the possession of a man known as Baron Wolfgang von Strucker, in the nation of Sokovia. The movie starts with the raid on his castle, with all of the Avengers in on the attack. Some things occur that interfere with their complete success, but they manage to escape with the scepter, mostly unscathed, and angering the nation of Sokovia in the process.

The raid is (mostly) successful, and the intention is to return the scepter to Asgard, Thor’s home, where it can be properly protected from falling into the wrong hands. However, before that happens, Tony Stark and Doctor Bruce Banner (aka the Hulk) examine it, and unintentionally unlock something they shouldn’t have. And with that, the fun begins. They realize they must contain what has been created before it gets out of control.

There’s a lot that happens in this movie. Many subplots are revealed, as is some of the backstory of a character or two. In most movies, this would have been eliminated as unnecessary, but here, time is devoted to a bit of exposition. I suspect that some of the material that was not actually shown may end up as extras on the release to home video. What is shown, however, explains some of the Avengers’ motivations and drives, and is important to the story. There is a lot of humorous banter throughout the movie.

The runtime of the film is 141 minutes, so be prepared. It has been released in 3D and traditional 2D. While I did not see the 3D version, I do not feel it is necessary to pay to see that version. Highly recommended if you are a fan of comic book films, as this one follows along with the first Avengers movie in its quality.
As with other Marvel movies, there is a short clip in the middle of the credits, however, in breaking with tradition, there isn’t one at the end of them.

Regardless, it’s a good action movie, with a touch too much shaky camera action.

Spoilers follow, so you may stop reading if you do not want to be spoiled.

blah

blah

blah

blah

blah

This is spoiler space

blah

blah

blah

blah

blah

Spoilers below, you were warned!

I am left feeling a slight letdown now that I’ve seen it, but perhaps that’s from all the media exposure this film has received in the last few months, but I don’t know. Maybe it fell flat in some ways, mimicing the underlying concept of the need to evolve: The Avengers really don’t seem to have changed all that much nor have they felt the need to. Hard to say, but maybe I’m just overanalyzing it.

Oh yes, and Whedon broke a movie trope – In war films, the guy who shows us a picture of his best girl/wife and family has to die. It’s a rule. That didn’t happen with Hawkeye!

One thing I noticed was that for some characters, the Avengers would use their actual names instead of their superhero names. For example, they’d call Black Widow Nat, Natasha, or Romanov, or Iron Man as Stark, or Tony. Other characters, like Captain America, Hawkeye, and Thor, would be called Cap, Hawk, or Thor. I can almost understand why, but I wonder if this familiarity, or lack thereof, indicates the rift amongst the team, and how they will choose sides in the expected Civil War story, which is rumored to be the topic of the next movie.

James Spader is the voice of Ultron, and his vocal delivery has the deliberately slow cadence of Raymond Reddington from The Blacklist. It took me a while to get past that.

One thing that gets me about computer/A.I. personalities is how they seem to be unique, and there are no such things as backups, so that once something’s gone, it’s gone. I never understood why. In this film, there are two – Jarvis and Ultron. Jarvis is unique, but Ultron seems to be able to transfer to multiple bodies. Why not just duplicate ‘himself’ and remove the need?

Gemma Bovary is a French film that was released in 2014, but coming to the US soon. The French dialogue is subtitled and there is some English. It was one of the latest movies from the Arthouse Film Festival.

This movie follows the life of Martin, a well-read baker in a small town in the Normandy section of France. One day, while tending his garden, new neighbors move in across the lane. They introduce themselves as Charlie and Gemma Bovery [sic]. They have decided to leave England for a while, and start a new life elsewhere. Charlie restores furniture, and Gemma has decided to embrace the country life wholly and completely. She loves all the breads that Martin bakes, and they become acquainted over time.

Martin begins to see parallels between the lives of Gemma and the literary character, Madame Bovary. She has become the lonely wife of an uninvolved husband, much like the Madame in Gustave Flaubert’s novel, which, coincidentally also took place in Normandy. He becomes a voyeur of her comings and goings, hoping that Gemma’s fate is different from the Madame’s.

The film is a bit of a black comedy. I can’t comment on the parallels between the book and the movie, since I never read it. Perhaps that made it more appealing, but even so, I found this movie entertaining in its own right. Recommended to those who enjoy a bit of French Cinema.

The Seven Five was the first of two from last night’s session of the Arthouse Film Festival. It’s a documentary detailing corruption in the NYPD in the 1980s. It follows the case of Michael Dowd and Ken Eurell, officers in the 75th precinct of Brooklyn.

This part of Brooklyn was tough, claiming hundreds of murders in the 80s. There was a lot of decay in the city’s infrastructure, and people were finding ways to survive, many of which included less-than-legal means. Corruption is rampant within the police, all across the city. Dowd, and more than a few officers at the 75th, decide that they can earn more than just their paycheck by ‘other means’, such as skimming off the top of any money and drugs confiscated during all the busts that were occurring.

The documentary starts with Michael Dowd and his partner, Ken Eurell. There’re rumors about Dowd, and Eurell doesn’t want to be paired with him. There’s a mistrust between Michael and Ken, but over time, they build a bond that makes them thick as thieves. Trust between officers, especially partners, is vital to their ability to skim and steal. Their bond builds over time. Eventually, they decide they can make more money by going to the source – the druglords themselves. Initially, they reach out to the owner of a car audio shop that works on the expensive cars owned by the criminal element, and through him, make contact. They offer ‘protection’ services, meaning that they’ll tip off the people who run the storefronts where drug sales are taking place, for a fee. They’ll also work to bring down the competition, thus guaranteeing stability. Information is passed, both ways, and money changes hands.

Michael and Ken get over confident. They live it up on the extra income. Both are married and have children, so they share the wealth. Then involve other officers and former officers in their doings. They get bolder and become careless. The stories they tell were better, in my opinion, than some of the stories you hear in Scorcese movies, but not as lucrative.

Speaking of Scorcese, even though this is a documentary, it was told in Scorcese’s signature style, as much as a documentary could be. Vintage footage is used, and events unfold. Internal Affairs and the DEA are involved in the film, and their stories are told from the participants. It’s a very compelling story, and I do recommend it.

Here’s a link to the official Teaser Trailer for the movie.

Some spoilers of the outcome are discussed below, so you can stop reading if you don’t want to see them.

— keep scrolling —

As a follow-on to the screening, the host, Chuck Rose, brought a special guest – Michael Dowd. He was arrested, and served 10 1/2 years in federal prison, and survived. The interview was quite strange, as I think everyone in the audience was a little taken aback by his presence. He claimed the documentary was mostly true, but left out key components. He felt the story made him more of a mastermind than he actually was, and his partner Ken shared more of the guilt. You got the sense that he felt Ken should have suffered as much as he, but didn’t. He indicated he has realized the error of his ways, but audience members were not inclined to believe him. I’m not sure if I was, either. His life was forever changed by all this, and it’s up to him to demonstrate that he’s on the right path, now. His said his decision to participate in the documentary was so he could indicate how criminals like him could be caught. The documentary was originally going to be about the Mollen Commission, which was formed after Dowd was arrested to investigate corruption in the NYPD. After initially speaking to Dowd, the filmmakers realized they should do the story of the downfall of the 75th precinct instead, so that’s what this became.

Dowd also indicated that he’s in the process of writing a book about his experiences, which should clear up a few things.

Only time will tell.

El Critico was the second film screened at the Arthouse Film Festival this week. It’s an Argentinian movie from 2013 that we finally got to see. It’s in Spanish and French, with English subtitles.

Victor Tellez is a joyless man. He is also a film critic for a newspaper. His life is more or less drudgery. He hates most movies, and hasn’t given any film a 5 star review in years. His editor starts implying that if his behavior continues, he could be out of a job. He commiserates with Ágatha, his niece, who runs a video store that’s really a front for a loanshark. She loves movies, especially romantic comedies. Victor calls them unrealistic, unimaginative and uninspired. He rattles off the essentials of all romcoms and is unmoved and unfazed by the American movies she rattles off, dismissing them all. He is never satisfied.

After one movie screening, Victor is having coffee with the other critics, and is confronted by a director whose film Victor has recently eviscerated. The man will not let him be.

Meanwhile, Victor is being forced out of his apartment. His landlords are remodeling, which will eventually displace him. His real estate agent has shown him place after place, but he finds nothing worth living in. Eventually, he does find a perfect place, but someone else has beaten him to the punch – a mysterious woman named Sofîa, and he tries to convince her to relinquish her claim to the place. During this, his life starts to become surreal, and we, as the audience begin to notice that their relationship is starting to take the shape of those romcoms he finds abhorrent.

This is a lighthearted film, for the most part. There is some unpleasantness, but I rather enjoyed it. There were quite a few bits in the movie that went unstated, but were obvious to the audience. If they had been explained, it would have ruined what turned out to be an enjoyable experience. Recommended.