Passengers (2016)

3.5 Stars (out of four)

This movie, from the trailers, seems to be a simple story. Two people wake up from suspended animation on a long journey, fall in love and need to help each other with a disaster at the end. And while that is the general gist, it is actually a little more complicated and deeper than that, thankfully.

After a freak in-flight accident, engineer/mechanic Jim Preston (Chris Pratt) is awaken from suspended animation on a space flight from Earth to a new world Homestead II. The spaceship is a gargantuan vessel carrying over 5000 passengers. The accident caused a system malfunction and he finds he has been awakened 90 years too early on his journey. What he doesn't know is that the accident set into motion a cascading series of events that will come into play later. He awakes to find himself all alone on the ship, his only company an android bartender named Arthur (Michael Sheen). Jim spends over a year trying to fix his problem and filling his time until he comes to the brink of loneliness and despair and almost commits suicide. He then sees writer Aurora Lane (Jennifer Lawrence) in another pod. He falls into an instant longing for her and learns everything about her. He wrestles with the idea of waking her up to allay his selfish, but ultimately necessary desire for human contact. He deliberately wakes her up, despite knowing he is dooming her to his fate, to die on the ship. When she wakes, he lets her believe she, like him, was awoken by accident. Gradually, they fall in love with each other until it is revealed his deliberate act. From then on, it gets interesting...

What impressed me so much was the dynamics of how their relationship changes throughout the story. We have all seen stories like this before, but Pratt and Lawrence are such riveting actors that they totally sell the premise. This movie is essentially an acting exercise around the question of horrible betrayal and can forgiveness happen. I heard one reviewer say that it's hard to buy into it since the movie has two of Hollywood's most beautiful stars in it. One should have been a lot less attractive and that would have made the story much more interesting. While that may be the case, this is a business and you have to get butts in the seat. But in the end, I found it to be a wonderful and satisfying story that most people will like. This is definitely a good date movie, so check it out.

Rogue One: A Star Wars Story

4 Stars (out of four)

As good as The Force Awakens was, Rogue One is really the Star Wars we have all been waiting for. Despite the bad press regarding major reshoots because Disney executives thought the tone of the film was too dark, to everybody's irrational fear that Disney would ruin Star Wars, to just the plain old naysayers who said that Rogue One was a redundant and unnecessary film because, as we all know, we already know the end. Boy, were all those people wrong and their fears totally groundless. This was a make or break film for Disney with their new franchise, and unlike The Force Awakens, Rogue One does something extraordinary. It takes us in new directions and unlocks the vast potential this franchise of franchises possese to tell amazing stories.

"It is a period of civil war. Rebel spaceships, striking from a hidden base, have won their first victory against the evil Galactic Empire. During the battle, Rebel spies managed to steal secret plans to the Empire's ultimate weapon, the DEATH STAR, an armored space station with enough power to destroy an entire planet."

With those 55 words, myself and countless other excited moviegoers were glued to our theater seats in 1977 for the film that would ultimately change most of our lives, and definitely the summer blockbuster, forever. These are the first words in the opening crawl of Star Wars, and yes, at that time it was simply Star Wars, not this Episode IV: A New Hope nonsense. It also describes exactly what we will see in this new movie. But to get a little more specific without spoilers, Rogue One is a movie about Jyn Erso (Felicity Jones), the now-outlaw daughter of Galen Erso (Mads Mikkelsen), the man who ultimately designed the power system for the Death Star. Jyn is freed from prison by a rebel, Cassian Andor (Diego Luna) and his reprogrammed imperial robot K-2SO (Alan Tudyk, who, like his character Wash in Firefly/Serenity, provides some much-needed, but not out-of-place sarcastic humor). They are given a mission by the fledgling and divided Rebellion to reach out to Saw Gerrera (Forrest Whittaker), a dangerous extremist who received an urgent message from Jyn's father regarding a new weapon being built by the Galactic Empire. This sets into motion the events that are described in the opening crawl quoted above.

So, why is this movie so great and not just a redundant and cynical cash-grab from Disney? Despite the fact we know the story, we don't know the context behind that first battle. To be fair, this is NOT required viewing for a new Star Wars fan, but it is a rewarding and satisfying chapter that explores the context behind what is to come in Episode IV. This is truly the first Star Wars movie with adults in mind first and foremost. It is long on action AND story, a key failure of the prequels, and is not simply a retread of Episode IV, a key weakness of The Force Awakens. Rather, it is a new story entirely based on an outcome we already know. This does not detract from the plot, but rather enriches what comes after the events of the movie. It establishes the stakes even more by giving crucial context to the events of A New Hope.

Chief among those elements of context are the natures of both the Rebellion and the Empire. For those of you who do not read the books, the Rebellion is far from a united organization based on a common goal and the Empire is not a monolithic entity all steering in the same direction, either. We see the Rebellion, far from being united or totally good for that matter, is fractured and divided. The events of Rogue One are a key component that forces the Rebellion to come together and act for the first time in a unified manner to defeat an existential threat to them and the universe. The Empire as well is not a hive-mind of evil devoted to one goal, but rather a collection of competing interests and ambitions which the Emperor uses to keep everyone in check under him. This makes the universe immediately more complex, diverse, and yes, "real" than the simplistic archetypes of the rest of the Star Wars series. Star Wars, at its core, is made for children. Rogue One, for the first time, dares to try to move that bar into more mature territory. It works just fine on a simple level for kids with its great action pieces. But it also works on a much deeper level, as a more nuanced, larger story, with complex characters who actually feel.

In the final analysis, this complexity is what makes Rogue One superior to every other movie in the series. It is why The Empire Strikes Back is the only other movie that actually matters. There is complex emotion and evolution in the characters and story. We see Jyn evolve from a loner criminal to determined rebel. We see Cassian change from rebel drone to free-thinking individual. Each character in this cast (and there are many), all have their evolutionary journeys that are completely realized, a not-easy feat to do in our jump-cut, action-oriented thought processes of today. This movie actually has some real meat to it in the characters and organizations that may cause you to look at each a little different when you leave. Rogue One adds real nuance to everything in the Star Wars universe, and thus changes our perception of it. For me, this was a game-changer and restored my faith in the power of moviemaking. The movie is just familiar enough to ground us in the reality, but different enough to change our perception about it in a positive and meaningful way. Screenwriters Chris Weitz and Tony Gilroy may not win an Oscar for this, but they should.

Finally, I can't leave this review without a little criticism. As much as I love it, it's not perfect. It's as close as you can get, but still falls a little short of the mark. We are given just enough information to put us in the action, but there is a lot of unmined territory that could maybe be produced in books. The territory is primarily the backstories of all the characters. Each one of them is interesting. Part of Jyn's backstory is in Catalyst, but each of the supporting characters are fascinating in their own right, particularly Saw Gerrera. There is enough to tantalize, but I would like to know more. Other than that, this movie is superb in both story and acting, and deserves a place as one of, if not the best Star Wars movie of them all.

The Seven Samurai (1954) vs The Magnificent Seven (1960) vs The Magnificent Seven (2016)

This The Seven Samurai 3 Stars (out of four)

The Magnificent Seven (1960) 3 Stars (out of four)

The Magnificent Seven (2016) 3 Stars (out of four)

So the remakes continue. The Magnificent Seven, itself a remake of Akira Kurosawa's Seven Samurai is now being remade again in 2016, this time with a politically correct racially diverse cast. However, I like the idea of this new cast as all actually would have had a reason to be in the Old West. With today's tendency toward historical revisionism, this new version promised to be a fun and interesting remake.

The story is pretty much the same. All take off from the same general outline of The Seven Samurai, only the details change. A small, rural farming village is being robbed by a large group of approximately 40 bandits. The village elder tells some of the men to go into town to hire men experienced in fighting and weapons to train and help the villagers defend themselves. The villagers cannot afford to pay the Samurai what they would get for such services, but they promise their defenders all the food they can eat and a pittance. We have a montage of the older warrior who recruits six other men, all with different strengths. One is an old brother-in-arms, another is a killer of the greatest skill, and another is a young man who dreams of becoming a warrior. We find out this young man was a farmer as well and personally identifies with their struggles and hardships. Once the group reaches the village, all the women are missing as the villagers think the warriors will rape them. When those fears are allayed, we get more montages of training and getting ready for the big battle. In the middle of all this, the young warrior falls in love with one of the local girls, much to the dismay of her conservative father. The movie ends with the warriors fighting alongside the villagers in a battle to kill the bandits.

THE SEVEN SAMURAI (1954)

Before American audiences were watching foreign films regularly, Akira Kurosawa was one of Hollywood's go-to directors to rip off. Some of his movies that have been appropriated include this one, of course, Star Wars uses elements from both The Hidden Fortress and Throne of Blood. His film Yojimbo has been remade at least twice (Last Man Standing and A Fistful of Dollars). All three films are based on Dashiell Hammett's noir novel Red Dust. Even Kurosawa himself was not above stealing as his movie Ran is a remake of Shakespeare's King Lear, only set in feudal Japan. I guess it goes to show that if you're going to steal from somebody, steal from the best.

That said, The Seven Samurai is a wonderful movie, if just a tad overlong. I'm not one with a short attention span, but at close to 3.5 hours, this movie becomes a butt-buster. Even so, it takes its time so that we can get to know and appreciate each character. We know backstories on each Samurai and the villagers who hire them. Different motivations come into play, particularly with longtime Kurosawa-collaborator Toshiro Mifune's character. In this movie, we are introduced to him playing a character that is almost buffoonish in his broad comedic performance. He careens wildly from annoying comic relief to sullen, worldly cynic that is abrasive to all around him except the old Samurai. As we and the other characters get to know him, we see a damaged character underneath that uses bluster to hide his very deep pain at the world. He keeps people at arm's length so they will not hurt him anymore than he has been already. His arc from cynical buffoon to real hero is very satisfying because of this deliberate evolution.

The movie's (very long) climax when the samurai and the townspeople is quite exciting and entertaining. The denouement where four of the Samurai die is quite poignant as we have come to know and like each one of them. The Seven Samurai is one of those movies that just seems right to serve as the archetype of things to come. It is a work of stunning originality on the part of Kurosawa and all his collaborators behind and in front of the camera. Kurosawa is one of those legendary directors because he made great movies time and time again. This is only one of at least six of his movies that are considered classics of the film genre and he is one of the most revered and copied filmmakers of all time. Like Chaplin, Welles, Scorsese, Spielberg, Ford or Hitchcock, he is one of the templates that all aspiring filmmakers should study.

THE MAGNIFICENT SEVEN (1960)

After Kurosawa saw The Magnificent Seven for the first time, he said, "It's a wonderful movie, but it's my movie," and shortly after began legal proceedings because no one had secured the rights for remaking his picture. Once it was released, The Magnificent Seven became a classic of western action. If there was ever a movie that benefited from trimming the run time, this is definitely it. At just over two hours, this movie steams along at a great pace and never really slows down. Even at the slower points, and there are a couple, the movie is brisk with very little filler. The movie is similar in its plot, except this time it takes place in Mexico and a local ground of bandidos is terrorizing and robbing a small farming village.

My two biggest complaints of the movie are fairly minor. The biggest one was the casting of Yul Brynner. Although he is great in just about everything he ever did, the choice to cast him in the lead role is a bit off for this film. When I was younger, I hated it, but as I got to appreciate Brynner's presence, I warmed up to it. But it still rings wrong in this cast and I can't quite put my finger on it. Maybe I don't buy him as the lone outlaw with the Clint Eastwood attitude. My second complaint is a pet peeve of mine. The western genre at this time tended to be the springboard for a lot of young actors to make their mark, and producers wanted to showcase them, sometimes at the expense of the real talent we were coming to see. The most egregious example is Rio Bravo. As good as the movie is, we came to see John Wayne. Dean Martin is badly miscast and bringing in Ricky Nelson was a disaster. They even shoehorn in a song so Martin and Nelson can sing together. The offending character in The Magnificent Seven is Horst Buchholtz who plays Chico, the young man with the background of being from a similar village, a combination of two characters from The Seven Samurai. This is the critical part of the movie, but again, it feels as if they wanted to make Buchholtz the star (instead of the other soon-to-be-superstars in the stellar cast including Steve McQueen, Charles Bronson, Eli Wallach, Robert Vaughn and James Coburn). I am not saying this is Buchholtz's fault, his performance is fine. It's just a little too pronounced in an otherwise stellar, soon to be immortal cast of Hollywood action heroes for the next two decades.

In the end, The Magnificent Seven is a fine movie with a great ending, but in my opinion, falls just short of greatness. But a movie I would heartily recommend to anyone for a wild ride of rip roaring fun.

THE MAGNIFICENT SEVEN (2016)

I have held that movies are definitely a reflection of the times they are made. A movie like this one or King Arthur, Robin Hood, or Ben Hur, a story told over and over again in different generations gives a fascinating glance into how people perceive reality and their biases toward each other and their environments. Movies, being a product of popular culture, have to conform to these cultural norms in order to be embraced. For instance, D.W. Griffith's Birth of a Nation is roundly and rightly considered a cinematic classic in that it set up the modern method of cinematic storytelling structure, but it is also incredibly racist in its attitudes toward black people in general with its favorable portrayal of the KKK as the saviors of the post-Civil War Reconstruction South. The movie was embraced as a blockbuster, but is roundly reviled today in its attitudes. Westerns from the 30s through the early 60s portrayed a boyhood fantasy of what the Old West was like with bloodless gunfights and virtuous whores. Clint Eastwood's Man-With-No-Name spaghetti Westerns with Sergio Leone signified the end of the innocent Western of John Wayne and a more nihilistic Old West as a cruel, dehumanizing landscape that culminated in Eastwood's visionary anti-Western, Unforgiven. A movie that in one brilliant turn shreded every cherished trope and legend of the Old West. It could only have been done by Eastwood or Wayne, the two men most directly responsible for establishing these legends to begin with.

So why am I bringing all of this up? First to show that stories are continually adapted to meet cultural sensitivities. Also to illustrate that in a post-Unforgiven cultural landscape, we are left with a more jaundiced eye toward the portrayal of our past. In the case of the upcoming Guy Pierce's version of the King Arthur story, you have a man not born into nobility as Arthur was, but rather a street kid who ascends to the throne, a very modern type of hero. In the case of Westerns, there is a dual track of striving for historical authenticity combined with modern inclusion of as many new characters as possible, not matter how shoehorned they appear to be. Movies like Posse and The Quick and the Dead are the most egregious examples. This new version of The Magnificent Seven strikes a good compromise between the two. In a modern all-racial-inclusive cast, this movie works on all levels. No one out of place here. All the cast members have compelling reasons to be in the story, but the overall themes of justice and redemption are still in place.

In this case, the action takes place in the Wyoming territory, where an unscrupulous land baron is now trying to take the land from settlers to make way for a railroad line to his mines. He is the thoroughly modern Occupy Wall Street/Mr. Robot villain, a totally amoral rich guy that will take everything from poor people unless there is a revolution of the proletariat of sorts. No matter, the movie is great and all performances are fun to watch. I particularly like Chris Pratt, who is fast becoming the next superstar movie actor. He is very affable and comes across as a very sympathetic character, and one actor I am excited to see what he will do next. The finale is very kinetic and fun, and propels this film into a better than average action flick. A fun recommendation when you just want to turn your brain off and go with the flow.