Capsule Review, Minimal Spoilers:

Midway is the dramatic retelling of what was the most decisive battle of the Pacific War portion of World War II. This is the second major motion picture to do so – the 1976 movie Midway had also tackled the subject, using stock footage, and footage from several other films. This Midway uses CGI to accomplish that goal, and it’s mostly effective.

This movie is good, but has its issues. It has a runtime of 2 Hours, 18 Minutes, and tries to cover too man of the events leading up to the battle. There is a large cast, and, to me, was sometimes difficult to differentiate between a few actors, in terms of their roles. I suspect (and hope) that there’s a more complete film, where portions of it ended up on the cutting room floor, but will now reside on the DVD/BR of Extras associated with the film. There are other criticisms that I will discuss in the second part of this review.

I recommend this film for War Film buffs, but with some reluctance. Perhaps I am being too harsh, but I felt it was trying to document the entire Pacific War for the US forces leading up to the battle, and that was too much for this one film.

Main Review, Some Spoilers:

Oh, where to begin. I guess I can discuss the focus of the film. It primarily involves several groups – The Bomber flight crews of the USS Enterprise, one of the most versatile aircraft carriers in the US Fleet, participating in more combat actions than any other ship in Pacific War. It also focuses on the secret code breaking team and its leader, Edwin Layton (Patrick Wilson), as well as the commanders, Admiral Chester Nimitz (Woody Harrelson(!)), Admiral William ‘Bull’ Halsey (Dennis Quaid), and Admiral Raymond Spruance (Jake Weber). On top of them, it also provides a Japanese perspective on the war, via Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto (Etsushu Toyokawa), and Admiral Chuichi Nogumo (Jun Kunimura), leader of the invasion and carrier forces respectively. The film jumps around between these groups, and at times, struggles to make them whole characters, not just “an actor in a role”. One can easily appreciate that they are trying to round out the story, but with some of them, the Japanese Admirals aren’t given enough time to properly give them life. It’s not enough time to handle this many people properly. FYI, there are a few women in the cast, most notably Mando Moore, as Ann Best, wife of pilot Dick Best (Ed Skrein). She gives a good performance with her material, but it’s practically lost in the scheme of things.

The film starts off in 1937, where the young Naval attache Layton has a conversation with Yamamoto in an exchange of information, suggesting that Yamamoto’s life is in jeopardy, because he’s not the warhawk that the Army wants controlling the Navy. They’re trying to set the stage for what is to come. Next up is the attack on Pearl Harbor, which is handled far better than that overly dramatic and borderline campy Michael Bay Film. Next, you’re dropped aboard the USS Enterprise, and several pilots are talking about how they’ll spend their shore leave in Honolulu. Then, they jump to Admiral Nimitz being appointed supreme commander of the Pacific Naval Fleet, who talks to Layton to try to bring the movie’s focus back to the subject. Intermingled with this is the Battle of the Coral Sea, with the Enterprise participating, and further events leading up to the fight at Midway. This is now starting sound more like a history lesson than a movie review, so I’ll stop there.

Intermingled with this was Dolittle’s raid on Tokyo. The USS Enterprise was involved in this, only as a support ship, to defend the fleet, in case of attack. Dolittle (Aaron Eckhart)’s tale is told, through his eventual rescue in war-torn China. I do not understand why this was included, other than the involvement of the Enterprise and its air crews, who do nothing on the mission. I suspect the writers were basing their script on a memoir of someone on the Enterprise. I felt it unnecessary to this movie.

Let’s talk about the CGI. It was reasonable, but far from excellent. For more close shots, it’s reasonable, and sharp, but for objects further away, it resorts to fuzzier detailing. Perhaps it was a budgetary issue, but given the nature of graphical detail in video games these days (the game World of Warships, in particular), it could have been rendered better.

My biggest issue with what we see on screen is the Japanese counterattack against the US fleet, or the lack thereof. It’s shown in the preparation of the Japanese carriers, but the next thing you know, the USS Yorktown is damaged by an attack that happened off camera. It’s jarring, and extremely disappointing that they couldn’t show this, in favor of showing Dolittle’s raid and aftermath instead. Will it be included in the Extras? Who knows? Who knows if they even shot/rendered it?

At the start of the film, a title card comes up to indicate that this is based on the facts. It is, but there are some truths that seem glossed over, and others ignored, and that was a bit of a letdown. It IS visually engaging, but, as I mentioned, I wasn’t pleased completely. I also noticed what were apparent flaws in the attack patterns of the planes, but this is just speculation on my part.

I have to reluctantly recommend this movie. It’s a visual spectacular that’s a bit lacking, and the cast is good, albeit overfull.

Summary Review, Minimal Spoilers:

Marriage Story is a good movie with an unremarkable title. It’s definitely a story about a marriage, but marriages can end up being so many things, some wonderful, some terrible. This is somewhere in between.

Charlie (Adam Driver) and Nicole (Scarlett Johannson) have what a great life in New York City. He’s a director of Off-Broadway plays, and she is his muse, and star. They have a son, Henry (Azhy Robertson), and they’re all really engaged with each other. However, the situation changes, as a job opportunity starts a rift in their idyllic life.

It’s the sort of story you’ve seen before, but it’s very engaging and draws you in as it continues. This film has an excellent cast, populated with well known stars, and each of them have good moments on screen.

As a movie, I was pleased with what the movie did. I’m not a huge fan of the story, but I can forgive it because it feels like it’s the “right” outcome. I’m not a huge fan of interpersonal conflicts. There were some slow moments, with a lot of close-ups, and I do admit that I spent some time trying to count the number of moles in both Adam’s and Scarlett’s faces. I sat really close to the screen, OK? I’ll just say that I was not bored, but I did feel some scenes plodded along.

I’ll go ahead and recommend this. It’s not the best sort of story like this that I’ve seen, but it felt like a sincere effort to portray these people’s lives. They really felt like people, not just characters on a screen, and that goes a long way with me. The runtime is 2 hours, 16 minutes, so plan accordingly. It’s currently playing in theaters, but will go to Netflix soon enough, since they backed the film.

Extended Review, with Minor Spoilers:

If you hadn’t guessed, this story dances around with the dissolution of a marriage. It’s about someone repressing their dreams for the sake of keeping the relationship happy and free of conflict. Sometimes, it just takes a separation for someone to realize they’re missing out, and that’s the push they needed to make things happen.

The supporting cast’s parts were well written. So often, they are just sounding boards for the lead cast members to talk to, and they usually come off as wooden and/or two-dimensional. Not here. They are properly fleshed out, and have their own drives, desires, and agendas. The ones that stand out the most are Julie Hagerty as Nicole’s mom, followed by Laura Dern and Alan Alda as lawyers. Their characters really help give Nicole and Charlie some perspective, because it appears that neither have that close friend/confidant, because they were that, for each other. They were both navigating new territory, and and you could see they were both awkwardly accepting that. It was not a simple process, by any stretch of imagination.

Summary Review, Minimal Spoilers:

The Current War: Director’s Cut is a story about the electrification of the USA. There were two types of power for people’s homes. One is Direct Current (DC) and the other is Alternating Current (AC). On the one hand, Thomas A. Edison (played by Benedict Cumberbatch) was the proponent of DC, while George Westinghouse (Michael Shannon) had AC, which was more cost effective. This film documents their struggles to gain acceptance, and the conflicts that arose. Interesting stuff.

It’s a rather good bit of history that’s not well known. Also involved in this story was one Nikola Tesla (Nicholas Hoult), who had an important role to play in the success of both people.

The story itself doesn’t hold back much. It portrays Edison for the person he was known to be, not the myth that most people remember. I suspect that the delay in having this movie released related mostly to criticism about this portion of the movie, but apparently, Alfonso Gomez-Rejon, the director, won out, and we’re seeing the movie he made. It is said that the release was delayed also because it was one of Harvey Weinstein’s last movies as the head of a studio when the scandal broke, but his alleged criminal have nothing to do with the nature of this movie.

This film was well researched and properly done. You definitely get the sense of being there, in the 1880s. It feels very authentic. Cumberbatch and Hoult give good performances, true to their characters’ actual natures, but this movie rests on the shoulders of Michael Shannon. As Westinghouse, he gives a stern and driven performance that one would hope is a fair representation of the man. You see this film from all of there perspectives, at times.

If you know the history,they do cover the involvement of animals. It is re-enacted, briefly, and fortunately not for thrills, as it were. I’m glad it is dealt with, that way, as anything more would’ve cheapened the film.

I really liked this film, and I do recommend it.

Semi-Spoiler Free Review

When Lambs Become Lions is a documentary by Jon Kasbe, who lived in Kenya before making this. This is the story of Ivory poachers and the park rangers who protect the elephants of Kenya. It focuses on their home life, mostly, and contains some footage of when the soldiers are patrolling, as well as when the hunters are hunting.

It’s a fascinating tale that does not glorify either side of the situation. One lead poacher, dubbed “X” in the documentary, struggles to keep his business going, while the rangers close in, making his thievery more and more difficult to accomplish. Meanwhile, the park rangers suffer through their circumstance, often unpaid, and always under-equipped. Kenya is a poor country, and the citizens struggle to survive on a daily basis.

There were several things that I found amazing about this documentary, aside from what happens in it. First is that the director spent over a year with X before he got him to agree to be filmed for the documentary. The same was true for the rangers that were involved. He had to build up trust that this was not some sort of undercover work for the government. The second, and more astonishing thing is a matter of Kenyan law, and I’m paraphrasing what I remember – If someone is filmed for a documentary, the documentary footage cannot be used against them in any legal matters. That’s completely different from US Law. The third, and more shocking thing is revealed late in the film, and I will not spoil it here. The finale pretty much blew my mind.

If ivory poaching is something of interest to you, I wholeheartedly recommend this documentary. There is very little violence depicted in the film (towards both people and the elephants), but a small fraction of it is implied by events on screen. I was grateful we were spared that.

When Lambs Become Lions opens in LA on Nov. 27th, and NY on Dec. 6th.

Semi-Spoiler-Free Review:

The Kill Team is dramatization of the events that took place during the documentary of the same name. It chronicles the story of a soldier Andrew Briggman (Net Wolff) in Afghanistan, who’s new platoon sergeant (Alexander Skarsgård) is a rule breaker on several fronts. Their task is to visit the villages in their area of operation, to root out any ISIS collaborators. They seem to find them wherever they go. While this is expected, these people are labelled enemy combatants and are killed.

Problem is that Briggman has doubts that everything’s being done by the book. This causes the dilemma for Briggman, and is the focus of the movie. Briggman doesn’t know where to turn for help. Given that it’s based on a documentary, it’s relatively true. It’s also a war film, so it’s difficult to see, at times, and may not be for everyone.

It’s a powerful film that would be waived off as fantasy, if not for the fact that it’s based on real events. It’s a sad tale, and we must acknowledge it as similar to what’s happened in previous wars. It is worth seeing.

There’s not much else to say, other than it’s going to be on a limited release, starting on October 25th.

Spoiler-Free Review:

Ad Astra is an epic space movie, taking place in the near future. An astronaut, Roy McBride (Brad Pitt) is pulled out of his regular duties, for a special mission. Years ago, his father was on a mission, and his ship disappeared. Things are happening on Earth, and it’s unclear if it’s related to the disappearance. It’s never simple, is it?

This is a great story about the hard science of space travel in the near future hammers home some of the more specific details that get glossed over in other space epics, and it appears to remind us not everything is warp speeds and force fields. While it may seem to follow the gist of the film, the pacing of the film is it’s downfall. If you enjoy the nitty gritty of the science fiction genre (aka Hard Science), you will enjoy the film, however, if you’re more a fan of plot and exposition, there’s a good chance you won’t.

Standard Review (with minor plot spoilers):

Roy is a cool-as-a-cucumber kind of guy. Go out, get the job done, or work at it until you can’t. Nothing fazes him. That’s good, because all astronauts are constantly evaluated for their mental state by computer – are you ok, how is your stress level, etc. Roy is focused on his job, so much so that his wife (Liv Tyler) has divorced him and it barely registers. He plays videos of her, and it’s like he isn’t even participating in his own life. He is extremely detached from it.

Something happens to the space platform/elevator he’s working on. It’s destroyed, but he survives, after falling into the atmosphere from space. He shrugs it off and wants to get back to work, but is pulled into a special secret project that he is to discuss with no one. Funny thing is that he has no one to discuss it with.

He’s sent on a mission to Mars. The space platform that was destroyed is shown to be the victim of some cosmic energy discharge, and that somehow, is coming from the vicinity of where his father’s ship was lost. He is expected to send a message to his father and get him to respond, because their efforts have failed. His handler for this, Pruitt (Donald Sutherland) implies that there’s more to this than he’s been told, and that he should figure it out.

All of the space sequences are incredibly done and shot. As I mentioned, there’s a lot of hard science in this movie, and they make every effort to make it all seem plausible. Zero G activities look right. It was all quite convincing. The problem is with Pitt’s character. He’s pretty cold and unfeeling. It’s really difficult to relate to, or sympathize with someone like that. I also mentioned that the plot drags. Some of it was definitely related to the slowness and isolation of space travel in the foreseeable future, but there were times where I wondered when they would just get on with the story as it was laid out before us, and go go go. That moment never really happened.

There are two scenes in the film that just don’t seem to fit, yet they are there, perhaps at some producer’s insistence. One just seems out of place, and the other is not resolved to anyone’s satisfaction that I know.

After viewing the film, there are two words that came to mind, which would definitely “spoil” the whole thing, but I will not mention them here. After you see it, I suspect you’ll know them, too.

As a fan of the hard science aspects of the story, I rather enjoyed it from that standpoint. The main story could probably be told in a fraction of the time, but then, how would we get to see all the cool space stuff? I recommend it with a caveat that it’s not for people expecting a great story. If you’re one of those people, stay away. Otherwise, Enjoy!

Spoiler-Free Review:

The Death of Dick Long is a bit of a mystery. Three guys are partying one night, and one of them ends up dead. The other two are somehow involved, and they try to cover up their role in whatever happened. The truth eventually gets there, though.

This film is not for the faint of heart. While it’s not very gory, it covers some topics that some filmgoers will find unpleasant. You will likely not believe the outcome, but it does make sense. Its not everyone’s cup of tea, but I’ll admit, I liked it. I’m on the fence about recommending it or not.

Standard Review (with minor plot spoilers):

The movie starts out with a bunch of guys practicing with their band, and then they start drinking and smokin. Then, they leave the house. It’s the next day, and Zeke and Earl (Michael Abbott Jr. and Andre Hyland) are hoping no one links them to the death. Problem is, they dumped him outside the hospital, where he died. These guys are dumb. Really dumb. Box of Rocks dumb. Oh yeah, and it’s a good friend of theirs that’s dead. They make plans to hide their participation, but miss major flaws in their thinking. Earl is fired again for leaving his job to take care of things. Zeke is trying to hide everything from his wife Lydia (Virginia Newcomb) and daughter Cynthia (Poppy Cunningham), but reality and logic just aren’t part of their plan, if you could call it one.

The police are called in by the hospital, after the body is discovered, but with no ID. Officer Dudley (Sarah Baker) tries to get the cause of death of the man, and her process leads down a rathole filled with clues. Things start falling into place. The Doctor performing the autopsy is Roy Wood Jr, and he’s trying to get to the bottom of it all, butt it’s quite puzzling, to him.

People have likened it to Fargo, but it’s not as involving. I will say, I was entertained by it. It plays out with some flashbacks, and you can deduce what actually happened as the movie moves forward. In a way, it reminded me of the plot for The Hangover, but it’s reasonably compelling. As a side note, I feel that Virginia Newcomb should be mentioned for her work here. Her acting is the glue that kept me engaged in the film. You do expect all the pieces to fall together, and they eventually do, just in a rather weird way.

There are good and bad bits to the film. These guys are trying to cover up their activities, by doing things they’ve seen on TV and in the movies. Problem is that in their situation, they don’t manage to think about what would’ve happened before, and can’t tie it all together. It bugged me a little that they could get creative with coming up with plans, but kept failing to get their stories straight. They kept making things worse by heaping lies onto their lies. It was like they were smart dumb guys, if that’s a thing.

Minimal Spoiler Review:

Britt-Marie Was Here is the story of a wife, who lived in her husband’s shadow for 40 years, until something changes and she has to come into her own. It’s the sort of heartwarming story that Hollywood really doesn’t make any more. That’s good, since it comes from Sweden, and is subtitled.

Britt-Marie (Pernilla August) is the kind of housewife that fades into the background. Unremarkable, she cooks, cleans, and washes up for her unappreciative husband, who barely acknowledges her when he’s home. That all changes when something happens to him. She has to go it alone, and lands a job as a youth counselor in a small suburban town in the middle of nowhere. No one accepts her, not even the kids, but she is resolved to make it work.

Pernilla is a good actor. As a minor footnote, you’ve probably seen her before in her role as Shmi Skywalker in the Star Wars Prequel movies.

This is a fun and decent movie. It has its moments and it’s a nice story that works itself out. Without spoiling any more, I’ll say I rather liked it. However, if you want more spoilers, you can check out the trailer on imdb.com

Spoiler-Free Review:

Downton Abbey is a movie continuation of the series that aired on PBS in recent years. All the cast has returned for the film, but even with a runtime of 2 hours, 2 minutes, not everyone has a chance to shine. It’s a very large cast of characters. Thanks to a good script, the story flows as you’d want it to, with one or two predictable moments.

This one is for the fans of the show. While it is essentially a movie that must stand on its own (and it does), many of the nuances and relationships play out well, and can be appreciated by longtime fans.

If you are a fan of the show, or know someone who is, it’s worth the trip. Not many people saw it at the screening (I comprised half of the audience), but fans will find it quite satisfying, and it leaves the story open to more such films in the future, if they choose to make them.

Standard Review (with minor plot spoilers):

While touring Yorkshire, King George V (Simon Jones), and Queen Mary (Geraldine Jones) have announced they will visit Downton for one day on their trip. This sends the Earl of Grantham (Hugh Bonneville) and Lady Mary Talbot (Michelle Dochery) into a tizzy. So much to do, so little time to prepare. Lady Mary approaches Carson (Jim Carter), who has retired as Head Butler, to return as the preparations are not going well.

As the big day approaches, various members of the Royal Staff arrive, to lay out a list of how the day will go, effectively replacing the entire Downton staff. This angers the existing staff…well, perhaps that’s not the most British way to say it say. Instead, perhaps they found the orders a tad irksome, since the staff will not be able to perform any noticeable duties while the Royals are there. Fortunately, Mr. Bates and his wife Anna (Brendan Coyle and Joanne Froggat) have devised a cunning plan to deal with that…

Several new characters are introduced along the way, including cousin Maud Bagshaw (Imelda Staunton), who is traveling with the Queen, becomes a formidable foil for Violet Crawley (Maggie Smith). There’s money involved, and…I’ll stop there. Suffices to say that the new characters add intrigue to the adventure.

As is the case with many movie adaptations of TV series, studio heads get the bright idea to introduce new writers to the mix. Fortunately, this is not one of them. Julian Fellowes returns, and is up to the task. The movie flows with a flair akin to any of Robert Altman’s films, jumping from story to story without too much in the way of setup. It’s a large cast of characters. This is where the fans will be satisfied, and the uninitiated might become a little confused. Established relationships are a vital part of the movie, and this movie only enhances the tale.

Downton Abbey has been a successful show. It’s a bit melodramatic at times, but not overly so. The same is true for the movie. Once some story elements are revealed, the film has a tendency to become a tad predictable, but it is by the strength of the script and the actors that this movie makes its way through those supposed difficulties.

If you are a fan of the TV series, I’d say this is a must see. If not, but you will be attending with someone who is, you should go, as well. Afterwards, you can grill that someone for hours to get all of the backstory you would want. Glad to say that I recommend this movie for that audience.

If you haven’t seen the show before now, you can always stream it, and by the time you’re finished, this movie will be available for streaming, as well.

.

Minimal Spoiler Review:

The Art of Racing In The Rain is an adaptation of Garth Stein’s novel of the same name. It follows the story of racer Denny Swift (Milo Vetimiglia), who is an up and coming driver, always looking for the next challenge. The twist is that the story is almost entirely told from the perspective of his dog, Enzo (voiced by Kevin Costner).

The whole story is well-told from Enzo’s perspective, as he navigates his life to find his role and purpose, as Denny goes through life. Enzo is rather focused on racing, and discovers there is much more to life than that. This is the meat of the story, and it is very engaging.

It’s a very touching tale, and pulls at your heartstrings. It’s the kind of story where all the characters are properly fleshed out and don’t do anything for the sake of the plot. It’s hard to properly described, but all the actors were convincing in their roles, and I got sucked into the story without being taken out of it by anything on that front.

I wholeheartedly recommend this film, and it will definitely be on my top ten of 2019 list. I’ll admit that I did not read the book, so I can’t comment on how closely it follows the story, but I hope that’s the case, here. Go and enjoy.

Standard Review (with minor plot spoilers):

I’ll admit that I’m not a dog person (I’m pretty much a cat person), and even though the author anthropomorphized Enzo, I can get why people love them so much. Enzo’s role is as a commentator on what’s happening around him, but he’s also part of the situation. It gives him, and us, a unique perspective.

As for the story, it’s rather good. There are one or two standard story cliches that are involved, but they play out in better ways than I’ve come to expect. Without going into too much detail, it suffices to say that they are infused with a healthy dose of three dimensional characters and behaviors, which can be difficult to portray on screen. Kudos out to Amanda Seyfried, who plays Eve, and Kathy Baker, who plays her mother, Trish. Even the supporting characters behave like human beings with their own lives, and that’s hard to do, especially given their onscreen time. Very refreshing to see it done right.

It’s a well-done story without relying too heavy on the racing or the drama. I wish there had been more of the racing angle, they put enough that it wasn’t frustratingly absent. While they ascribe a lot of human behavior to Enzo, it’s necessary for the story, and keeps things moving. At times, Enzo is the most human character of them all, acting as our proxy in the film, for us. Doing that well is a challenge, but it pays off.