Hustlers - Movie Review by Ben Cahlamer

Photo Credit: Barbara Nitke / Motion Picture Artwork © 2019 STX Financing, LLC. All Rights Reserved.

Directed by: Lorene Scafaria
Screenplay by: Lorene Scafaria
Based on “The Hustlers at Scores” by: Jessica Pressler
Starring: Constance Wu, Jennifer Lopez, Julia Stiles, Keke Palmer, Lili Reinhart, Lizzo, Mercedes Ruehl, Cardi B

I have to laugh.

“Hustlers,” the latest film from writer-director Lorene Scafaria, earned high praise coming out of its Toronto International Film Festival premiere on September 9th while the online buzz was “meh.” I’m laughing because, as the movie so succinctly points out, we’re all being hustled, some just do it better than others.

Based on the New Yorker article, “The Hustlers at Scores,” Scafaria paints a picture of struggle as a group of strippers concocts a plan to steal money from unsuspecting Joes. Constance Wu plays Dorothy, a wholesome, next-door-neighbor type who is reserved at first when she is forced to get a job as a stripper. Anxious and nervous, she finds a friend in Ramona played by Jennifer Lopez.

Under Ramona’s expert tutelage, Dorothy finds the lifestyle to be very easy; the money, the attitude, the control that come with those situations is addictive. When disaster, in the form of the 2008 financial collapse happens, we realize just how vulnerable everyone is.

Scafaria doesn’t hide behind the effects of the meltdown either. Dorothy, who is already struggling to make herself alluring in the face of stiff competition, also now has a baby to consider. Wu gives a range of emotion during this time as she forced to find other work, forcing Dorothy and Ramona to part ways.

The story flashes forward a few years and we see Dorothy and Ramona catch up unexpectedly, where their friendship resumes as if time was frozen and that’s the point at which the plan is hatched.

The grand heist felt like it could have been patterned from numerous heist films that have come before it, but my mind keeps comping back to Scorsese’s “Goodfellas,” because of the way Scafaria frames the story and develops her characters. It takes a few individuals to scheme the system and it takes several rotten eggs to ruin it.

There’s also an inherent class about the way in which the ladies of the night work their magic; an honesty and an integrity about it; we genuinely believed these women were doing it because they needed to survive and had no other skills to offer the world, something that Scafaria builds out: empathy. We are empathetic to their struggles and the movie is self-aware enough to know that our empathy will go only so far.

Which is why Julia Stile’s Elizabeth character works as well as it does. Dorothy’s interactions with Elizabeth are minimal at first and they are framed in a way to make you think that their conservation is leading you in one direction when the script is flipped.

“Hustlers” isn’t your typical heist story. It has heart and humor. It’s layered with intricacies that will catch you by surprise. Most imperatively, it is empowering and liberating. The story sets out to tell the events of a bad situation going worse, while managing to come out smelling like roses. Ae the end of the day, you won’t mind being hustled out of your $15 for a movie ticket because they earn every dollar in their pocket.

3.75 out of 4

The Goldfinch - Movie Review by Monte Yazzie

Nicole Kidman and Ansel Elgort in 'The Goldfinch.' / Photo Credit: Macall Polay

Dir: John Crowley

Starring: Ansel Elgort, Oakes Fegley, Nicole Kidman, Jeffrey Wright, Finn Wolfhard, Luke Wilson, and Sarah Paulson

The first major art exhibit I attended featured the landscape and floral works of Georgia O’Keeffe. As I strolled through the collection of beautiful artworks listening to experts and enthusiasts discuss aspects of form, space, and contrast, an older couple wandering in front of me asked an interesting question to one of museum curators… “how many people have tried to steal something off the wall?”. The curator responded, “more than you’d think”.

Author Donna Tartt’s Pulitzer Prize winning novel “The Goldfinch” centers on a stolen piece of art, the real Carel Fabritius painting of a chained goldfinch bird on a perch, and a young boy named Theo who grows up keeping a secret about the famed piece of art. It’s a sprawling story featuring numerous plot themes ranging from terrorism, antique collecting, and drug abuse that spans the tragic childhood and tormented adulthood of Theo.

Director John Crowley organizes an exceptional group of talented actors in an earnest attempt to bring this expansive story to life. The result is a confounding adaptation that struggles to fit all the plot pieces and subtle character developments from the book into a nicely packaged cinematic experience.

Theo (Oakes Fegley) is visiting the Metropolitan Museum of Art with his mother when a bomb explodes, killing his mother and destroying the museum in the process. Theo is placed with an upper-class foster family in the Upper East Side, nurtured and helped through the traumatic experience by Mrs. Barbour (Nicole Kidman), and then transfers to Nevada and into the care of his neglecting father (Luke Wilson). Theo (Ansel Elgort), now a young adult, works in the antique community with his mentor Hobie (Jeffrey Wright) selling modified antique furniture. But Theo has been keeping a secret since the day that changed his life, a stolen art piece that he took from the rubble of the museum. 

For a film that centers on a bomb explosion and the theft of a piece of art, you would think the plot would be a fairly straight-forward thriller, possibly a whodunit mystery. “The Goldfinch” never commits to these simplistic ideas, instead it remains somewhat plotless throughout the course of the film while it focuses on Theo and his absolutely terrible journey through life. The theme of love and loss is present throughout, the feeling of loneliness and dependency is felt in numerous places. All of these pieces are present but somehow missing the emotional mark or rushed into and out of scenes for the sake of narrative progression.

The best concept involves the theme of family which permeates every interaction that Theo has with the world. The death of his mother leads Theo to search for that special connection with someone, anyone who will have him or is around him. It’s tragic watching the young character have numerous people ripped from his life, seemingly while he is on verge of making an emotional connection with someone.

Ansel Elgort does a nice job of composing older Theo with a charm just thick enough to hide the broken parts of his character. Nicole Kidman is the highlight in the film however, displaying a refined yet somewhat cold motherly demeanor. In her quiet moments, when she is watching Theo interact with other kids, is when Ms. Kidman shines bright.

“The Goldfinch” feels like the quick highlights from the novel bundled together in a film adaptation with talented actors and beautifully composed photography. It’s the equivalent of the cliff notes for a story, enough information so that you can talk about it without the deeper substance to make it as memorable as it should be.

Monte’s Rating
3.00 out of 5.00

Linda Ronstadt: The Sound of My Voice - Movie Review by Ben Cahlamer

Linda Ronstadt in a scene from “Linda Ronstadt: The Sound of My Voice.” (Greenwich Entertainment)

Directed by: Rob Epstein and Jeffrey Friedman

Starring: Linda Ronstadt, Jackson Browne, Ry Cooder, Sheryl Crow, Cameron Crowe, David Geffen, Don Henley, Dolly Parton, Aaron Neville, Bonnie Raitt, JD Souther

The beauty in our shared human collective is that we are each of us, unique. Our talents are what makes us unique, and ultimately brings us together. Much like the opening frames of “Linda Ronstadt: The Sound of My Voice,” Academy Award-winning co-directors Rob Epstein and Jeffrey Friedman never dwell on the Linda Ronstadt of today. She does give a voice to her own story to be sure.

The co-directors instead focus on her roots, specifically touching on her upbringing in Tucson in the late 40’s and 50’s, her original influences were her parents who both listened to a variety of music. Linda had a voice, but she didn’t have the right back-up, which led her to forming a trio with her siblings, The Stone Poneys. Epstein and Friedman fold in interviews with her siblings to give background, and there was never a moment where you weren’t interested in what they had to say.

Ronstadt’s move to Los Angeles, which is where her big breakout came was full of a lot of musical acts that I was familiar with. What surprised me the most though was how Don Henley’s association with Ronstadt led to the formation of the Eagles, but Epstein and Friedman connected so many dots between acts, it was quite incredible.

Once in L.A., a performance of “Different Drum” by The Stone Poneys at the Troubadour is what caught Capitol Records’ attention. While they recorded the trio, they found that the musical background, which was folksy, didn’t quite work for them, so they re-recorded it with an orchestra, much to Ronstadt’s chagrin. She was initially resistant, but with the power of her voice and the orchestra, the song rose to a completely different plane.

The documentary follows her career growth from that first record, with recordings of her concert footage, which demonstrated her voice, which was fully developed by the time she started touring, which she wasn’t necessarily happy with doing, but she loved to sing. I got the impression from the film that she was unnerved with how powerful her own voice was. As it is repeated in the film, she was confident in her ideas, but not in her abilities.

Thank goodness for solid management and peers to keep her moving forward.

Ronstadt immediately found success, but in the forward progression of her career, she also had to overcome the male dominance, where band members would be used to being a part of a group of guys, Ronstadt found that she had to assert herself more directly. The film uses some of her romantic interests as a way of moving her progress forward, a key relationship being Jerry Brown, the governor of California. The two met at Lucy’s, a famous Hollywood restaurant who catered to many occupations.  and though the relationship was short lived, you could tell that they were a dynamic pair. Epstein and Friedman highlight just how audacious Ronstadt was with her views on the world during her time with Brown, a lighter part of her career.

Ronstadt’s career spanned multiple genres of music, not just rock, but country and pop as well with at least one of her songs making the top of three different charts simultaneously.

The latter half of the film sees Ronstadt branching out into Gilbert & Sullivan’s “Pirates of Penance” with Kevin Kline, who was as surprised that Ronstadt was willing to take on such a piece, and was equally as impressed with her powerful voice; it was a natural fit. As her career began winding down, the documentary segues into taking her Mexican heritage, showing an even greater range within her voice.

We’re reminded of her current condition, having last performed in 2009 and retired in 2012 following her Parkinson’s diagnosis, which the documentary notes runs in her family. The disease robbed her of her talent, but her presence in the documentary shows just how strong of a presence Linda Ronstadt is.

“Linda Ronstadt: The Sound of My Voice” is as much about the singer’s success and the influence she has had on so many of her fellow artists. As each song came up, I felt a chill, full of fond memories of my own, which will truly bring a smile to your face, reminding us of the power of her voice.

3.75 out of 4

TIFF 2019: “Knives Out” World Premiere at The Princess of Wales Theatre

Photo Credit: Claire Folger / Lionsgate

TIFF 2019:  “Knives Out” world premiere and red carpet with Christopher Plummer, Toni Collette, Daniel Craig, Jamie Lee Curtis, and director Rian Johnson

Director Rian Johnson’s “Knives Out” – which arrives in theatres on November 27 - is an extremely clever and fun whodunit with an incredible cast, so it is no mystery that the film drew a big crowd at The Princess of Wales Theatre for its world premiere and red carpet event.  The Phoenix Film Festival teamed up with journalists Mariana Mijares and Barbora Soskova Dudinska, and we had a blast chatting with Johnson and the cast.  

Christopher Plummer at TIFF.

PFF:  Mr. Plummer, you’ve starred in many serious roles in recent years, like “All the Money in the World” (2017), “Remember” (2015) and “The Exception” (2016).  Did you enjoy working on “Knives Out” as a change of pace?

Christopher Plummer:  Oh, I loved it!  It was great fun.  Dear old Ryan is such a wonderful writer.  Interesting, different sort of writing.

Toni Collette at the world premiere of “Knives Out”.

PFF:  How do you compare the Hoover family in “Little Miss Sunshine” with the Thrombey family in “Knives Out”?

Toni Collette:  Equally dysfunctional.  Maybe this family is a little more affluent.  (Toni bursts into laughter.)

BSD: What attracted you to this type of genre, filming mysteries?

Daniel Craig:  It’s a lot of fun, and (this movie) is a piece of entertainment for families.  Everybody (on the film) got into the tone of it.  Everybody got into the feel of it.  I watched it once, and I’m going to watch it with an audience tonight, and (the film) makes me laugh.

PFF:  How did this experience compare to “Logan Lucky” when you played Joe Bang.  It looks like you had fun in both.

Daniel Craig: I try to have fun, when I work. I always do.

Jamie Lee Curtis at the world premiere of “Knives Out”

MM:  What was the most fun about being involved with this movie, and what was the hardest? 

Jamie Lee Curtis:  The fun of it is being part of a group.  The difficulty is learning how to listen in a room full of 15 people (who) are all talking at the same time.  It really strengthened my skills as a listener.   

PFF:  I understand that you’ve had this idea kicking around for about 10 years.  When you were making “The Brothers Bloom” (2008), “Looper” (2012) and “Star Wars: The Last Jedi” (2017), were you itching to get started on this film?

Chris Evans, left, Ana de Armas and director Rian Johnson on the set of “Knives Out.” (Claire Folger /Lionsgate)

Director Rian Johnson:  I’ve always loved whodunits, and I’ve always tried to think of what I would do for (one).  About 10 years ago, I had the basic idea.  I just chewed on it since then, but when I actually sat down to write it, it all happened very quickly.

Jeff – a member of the Phoenix Critics Circle – has penned film reviews since 2008, graduated from ASU’s Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and is a certified Rotten Tomatoes critic. Follow Jeff and the Phoenix Film Festival on Twitter @MitchFilmCritic and @PhoenixFilmFest, respectively.

TIFF 2019: “The Two Popes” red carpet with director Fernando Meirelles and Jonathan Pryce

“The Two Popes” Cast and Crew on the Red Carpet at TIFF 2019

U.S. Presidents come and go every four or eight years, but transitions of power between popes occur less frequently, so these special events absolutely capture our attention.  “The Two Popes” is playing at TIFF 2019, and Fernando Meirelles’ (“City of God” (2002)) captivating film, about the changing of the guard between Pope Benedict XVI (Anthony Hopkins) and Pope Francis (Jonathan Pryce), is one to stop and take notice. 

A special event occurred on Monday, Sept. 9, because Meirelles and Pryce graciously walked the Winter Garden Theatre red carpet and chatted with the Phoenix Film Festival.  Sir Anthony Hopkins was not in attendance, but in a way, the film did have two popes on the red carpet, because Juan Minujin, who plays a young Pope Francis, soaked up the atmosphere as well.

Fernando Meirelles at the 2019 Toronto International Film Festival.

PFF:  Your film features two very different popes who have several one-on-one conversations before their transfer of power.  How is the film constructed?  

FM:  I just loved (Anthony McCarten’s script), and you really get engaged in the conversation.  Of course, you can’t have an hour and a half of conversation.  My challenge was how to make (their discussions) feel organic and keep the audience interested.  So, they move (between locations), and some things interrupt (them), but at the end of the day, the film is about their conversations. 

PFF:  Now, these popes are very different.  Pope Francis is so revered, and Pope Benedict –

FM:  Has no charisma at all.  Completely dull.

Jonathan Pryce at the 2019 Toronto International Film Festival.

PFF:  Is Pope Benedict portrayed that way on-screen?

FM:  In the film, Pope Benedict, played by Tony Hopkins, is quite charming.  (Jonathan Pryce’s) Pope Francis is like the real Pope Francis, and Benedict is much more charming than the real one.  It’s good, because that’s how (the audience can) understand Benedict and (even) like him a bit.  If you have a less charismatic actor, maybe the film wouldn’t work, (but on-screen), you see the chemistry and (become) interested in both of them.

PFF:  You couldn’t ask for two better actors.

FM:  Jonathan was quite an obvious choice.  If you Google the pope and Jonathan - one next to the other - they look alike.  I (also) watched an interview with Jonathan, and I felt (that) he has a warmth and a (great) sense of humor, and I saw the pope!  This guy not only looks like him physically, but he feels like the pope.  He’s tremendous in the film. 

Juan Minujin at the 2019 Toronto International Film Festival.

PFF:  We seem to know a lot about Pope Francis.  Will the film reveal new insight about him?

JP:  When you see Pope Francis in the film, I think you’ll see a fictionalized version of him.   These conversations between Pope Francis and Benedict are conjecture.  They’re imagined, but everything is taken from things that Francis and Benedict have said or written or published, and they’ve been contrived into a conversation between the two men.  I think you’ll see more than a documentary.  As an actor, I could look at YouTube videos of Francis and take his qualities on-board and reimagine and interpret them.  So, you (can) expose a bit more of his personality.

PFF:  Their personalities are significantly different.  Coming out of the film, do you feel that Francis and Benedict have more in common than you thought?

JP:  They still have their differences.  Absolutely, but what especially grew between them in the film is a mutual respect.  They kind of liked each other, and (for) Tony and I, our relationship as actors is reflected in Benedict and Francis’ relationship.

Jeff – a member of the Phoenix Critics Circle – has penned film reviews since 2008, graduated from ASU’s Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and is a certified Rotten Tomatoes critic. Follow Jeff and the Phoenix Film Festival on Twitter @MitchFilmCritic and @PhoenixFilmFest, respectively.

TIFF 2019: A portion of “The Report” Press Conference with Adam Driver, Annette Bening and Jon Hamm

Writer/director Scott Z. Burns’ “The Report” is a highly informative look at U.S. Senate staffer Daniel J. Jones and his eye-opening 6,700 page report about the CIA’s use of torture after the 9/11 attacks.  In the film, Adam Driver plays Jones, and Annette Bening and Jon Hamm star as U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein and former U.S. Deputy National Security Advisor Denis McDonough, respectively. 

Burns, Driver, Bening, Hamm, Jones, and producer Jennifer Fox attended a “The Report” press conference at the 2019 Toronto International Film Festival at The Omni King Edward Hotel, and the Phoenix Film Festival was there.

We will post more of the press conference in November, closer to the film’s November 15 release date, but here’s a sneak peek with the Phoenix Film Festival’s question to Adam Driver, Annette Bening and Jon Hamm. 

PFF:  Dan was asked, in the movie, if he had any nightmares (while working on the report), and I was wondering – and this goes to Adam, Annette and Jon – did you have any sleepless nights preparing for the film and was there anything in the script that surprised you? 

JH:  There was a lot that surprised me.  I did not read the 500-page summary, nor did I read - because I wasn’t allowed - the 6,700-page actual report.  There’s a lot that Dan knows that he’s not legally allowed to tell us, but the stuff that I did learn is horrifying.  The fact that it occurred with the blessing of our government is a real bummer. 

Scott took this 6,700-page behemoth, that was knocked down to 500 pages, (turned it) into a 2-hour movie and told that story.  As Adam was saying, (Dan) became the top guy (who) got that information out and reminds everybody that this is not okay.  I wouldn’t say that I had nightmares, but I definitely was reminded that that’s wrong.  

AB:  One of the important things, I think, to emphasize is that there were many people in the CIA who refused to cooperate with this (torture) program.  They either asked to be transferred out, or they just refused.  So, these people, of course, are nameless, because there’s so much about the entire operation that’s still secret.  So, I think that’s a really important thing to remember.  I hope that (the) message gets through to the public about the film: that this is not, in any way, an attack on the CIA.  It’s an attack on what happened to a group of people, who were under enormous pressure from 9/11 to do something. 

One of the things that I was surprised by was how eloquent Dianne Feinstein was, as was (Sen.) McCain by the way.  They both gave incredible speeches, when (the report) was finally put out, and she basically says, “The strength of our system is measured by how we respond, when we make mistakes.”  So, here we are.  We are acknowledging something that happened.  We are saying to the world that we did a wrong thing, and we are now rectifying it, as they did.  We passed an amendment - as you all know probably, because it’s in the movie - where they said that we are reaffirming that no American can participate in this kind of behavior.  We are going to abide by the Army Field Manual, and from now on, (for) anyone taken prisoner, the International Red Cross has to be invited.  So, just reaffirming what was on the books before.

So, there’s a lot of shocking things for me in the story.  The memo that was drafted within the Administration, justifying torture.  Two contractors, who are not technically federal employees, making 80 million dollars between the two of them, to torture people.  The cases are still going on. 

It’s an ongoing story, but (the movie) was a pleasure to do.  It was a pleasure to be part of it, and I felt really grateful. 

AD:  It’s hard to rank what is more or less surprising.  I mean, if you just read the findings in the conclusion’s section of the actual report, which you can get on Amazon.  I don’t mean it as a plug to Amazon, but in a way, (I’m) just saying that it’s simple to get, which again, is a backway of plugging Amazon. 

I think one of the biggest things that was shocking to me, even just taking emotion out of it, (is) that (the program considered) torture (as) an effective way of getting information.  It’s so well-documented throughout time that (torture) is not useful.  It’s like someone coming along and thinking that we should change cars to square wheels instead, and everyone kind of going along with it, even though we (have) a lot of facts that the opposite is true. 

But, as far as losing sleep, no, I didn’t literally lose sleep.  Although, we shot in 26 days, and that was stressful.  So, in that instance, I lost sleep.  We made (the movie) in a fervor, which I wouldn’t have wanted to change any other way.

AB:  I want to just add one more thing, if I may.  It’s helpful to be reminded that a group of people wrote the report – Dan being the primary writer – and eventually got it out.  Individuals do matter, and the force of character of one person who decides – as Dan did – to not be buried by five zillion pages of documents that the CIA dumped. 

That was part of the (CIA’s) strategy.  They figure, something will happen.  Somebody’s going to get bored.  Many people did quit and had to for very good reasons, (but) Dan’s force of character – and others - did make a difference.  That is an encouraging thing to see, because right now, in so many places, we feel like we need that.  We feel like we need individuals who are willing to step up and say, “I’m sorry, this isn’t acceptable.”

Jeff – a member of the Phoenix Critics Circle – has penned film reviews since 2008, graduated from ASU’s Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and is a certified Rotten Tomatoes critic. Follow Jeff and the Phoenix Film Festival on Twitter @MitchFilmCritic and @PhoenixFilmFest, respectively.

It Chapter Two - Movie Review by Monte Yazzie

Dir: Andy Muschietti

Starring: Jessica Chastain, James McAvoy, Bill Hader, Isaiah Mustafa, Jay Ryan, James Ransone, Andy Bean, and Bill Skarsgård

Memory is a funny thing. Think for a moment about what you remember from the past? Think about a fair or carnival you went to. Do you remember the sound of the carnival? The smell of the cotton candy? The words illuminated in bright florescent lights on the rides? The feeling of seeing that clown make a puppy out of balloons? Is it the one sensation, the one word, or is it all of it? Depending on the experience, specifically, the emotion connected, will determine what and how you remember the event. And as the memory drifts farther from the moment, elements tend to change in exaggerated ways or sometimes fade in how strongly you remember everything.

“It Chapter Two” explores this aspect of memory and also the trauma and fear associated with the past in the continuation of the sinister saga of Pennywise the Clown versus the formerly young, now adult Loser’s Club.

27 years have passed since the showdown between a group of young friends and a monstrous being who utilizes the deepest, darkest fears of its victims against them. The young Loser’s Club defeated the evil creature, who takes the form of a clown named Pennywise (Bill Skarsgård), but only in delaying his feeding schedule. 27 years later and the group of adults must return to their hometown of Derry, Maine to face the fears of their past unleashed upon them by the malevolent Pennywise. 

The Loser’s Club are grown-ups who have found success; Richie (Bill Hader) is a comedian, Ben (Jay Ryan) is an architect, Eddie (James Ransone) is a risk analyst, and Bill (James McAvoy) is a famous writer. Beverly (Jessica Chastain), the lone lady in the group, seems to have a successful life but is married to an abusive husband. While they have worked to separate themselves from their past trauma, a simple phone call from Mike (Isaiah Mustafa), who still lives in Derry, brings the past crashing back to the present.

The past has a way of coming back. This is target sentiment for “It Chapter Two” and a turn of dialog uttered in different ways by every member of the grown-up Loser’s Club. The narrative focuses significantly on this primary story element throughout the proceedings that occupy a journey for a group of adults back to the past. Through flashbacks, scenes featuring the completely delightful young Loser’s Clubs actors from the first film, and terrifying manipulated recreations, ones that evoke the deep-seated fear and trauma from the childhood of these characters, “It Chapter Two” composes a rich and rather interesting analysis of fear.

The past makes and molds different developments of life; the way we think about the past often connects our emotions in the present in different ways. Much is the same here with these characters. No matter how far these characters have moved away from home, how far they have separated their trauma from their consciousness, their past remains intact and intertwined with the experience they had in their hometown, with their friends and family, and with the creature Pennywise. The film narrative uses memory as a catalyst for fear. The past is the foundation for everything that defines these now grown adults, the pieces that have ultimately connected these characters into the world 27 years after they conquered their fear. Pennywise the clown is a metaphor for trauma; childhood, societal, and historical all represented in different ways in the film. It’s an interesting touch to the narrative working with genre frights and scares.

It’s unfortunate that this horror film, amidst its exploration of past trauma as a vessel for horror, somehow fails to execute many of the scary elements throughout the film. Computer-generated effects substantially hinder the effectiveness of the shocks. The sound design is pumped up in places to entice a jump scare but the images associated fail to do much more in making things scarier. The best moments are the simple ones when Bill Skarsgård is allowed to act in clown makeup and modify his voice in truly disturbing ways. The sound of a weeping clown in the shadows of the dark is truly terrifying. The CGI design of some of the other monsters found here come and go without much remembrance.

The film does a great job of matching the young actors in the first film with their older counterparts. And the performances throughout “It Chapter Two” are good, specifically Bill Hader as the wise-cracking Richie and James Ransone as the asthma-induced Eddie. The banter between them adds levity to some of the more serious moments.

“It Chapter Two” is nearly three-hours long, it doesn’t need to be even though fans of the source material might enjoy the deliberateness. There are moments in the film that drag and the tone lingers in places that it doesn’t need to, this is what ultimately makes the running time feel so overlong. Still, the narrative and performances are especially interesting even if the scares are undercut by an overabundance of exaggerated spectacle. “It Chapter Two” doesn’t have the charm of the first film but that doesn’t keep it from being an interesting continuation of the themes of friendship, innocence, and the places that exist between reality and the unknown that Stephen King explored in his beloved novel.

Monte’s Rating
3.25 out of 5.00

Official Secrets - Movie Review by José-Ignacio Castañeda

Directed by: Gavin Hood

Starring: Keira Knightley, Matt Smith, Ralph Fiennes, Indira Varma and Rhys Ifans

“Official Secrets” whispers the true story of the British intelligence officer, Katharine Gun (Keira Knightley), and the fallout of events that occur after she tries to prevent Britain from entering the Iraq war in 2003.

Amid the rising tensions of war, Gun transcribes decoded foreign messages into her computer. Suddenly, a memo from the NSA infects her inbox.

The memo details the United States’ plan to garner the help of the British intelligence community in order to blackmail key members of the United Nations into voting for the war in Iraq. Shocked and nullified, Gun decides to print the memo and sneak it out of her workplace.

Gun then hands the memo off to her old friend and anti-war movement supporter, Jasmine (MyAnna Buring). After failing to publish the memo in other newspapers, the document is finally given to Martin Bright (Matt Smith), a journalist for the Observer. 

Bright vigorously vets the memo before he decided to pitch the story to his hothead editor, Roger Alton (Conleth Hill). Alton decides to print the blackmailing story alongside the memo, but once the story runs, everything falls apart.

The public is shocked by the Observer’s story but no one believes it due to an error in the memo. Certain words in the memo, which was alleged to have been written by an American NSA official, are mistakenly autocorrected to the King’s English. With that error and without a credible “leaked” source, the memo begins to fold under pressure.

Meanwhile, Gun’s workplace begins to conduct internal investigations in order to oust the whistleblower. As the investigation intensifies, Gun decided to confess in order to protect her coworkers and legitimize the memo.  

Gun must then face the consequences of her actions under the constricting hand of the British government and the Official Secrets Act.

With secretive government agencies, underground parking garage meetings and tie-loosening journalists, this film resembles a revamped British version of “All the President’s Men,” but instead of president it’s Prime Minister.

“Official Secrets” executes tension extremely well on a variety of levels. From the most basic human-to-human interaction to an interaction between a government and its people. The stakes of the movie are carefully and wisely placed inside the sympathetic character of Gun, whom Keira Knightly extraordinarily plays.

Keira Knightley delivers a great performance with a specialization in portraying the internal conflict that ravages Gun throughout the movie. Additionally, Matt Smith, Ralph Fiennes and Rhys Ifans give marvelous performances. Most of the main characters in the movie don’t share the screen too often, and they absolutely don’t need to. Their characters are strong and interestingly independent.

This timely film operates well within the powerhouse of a political thriller, while also dividing its storytelling evenly among its well-written characters. 3.75/4 Stars

Satanic Panic - Movie Review by Monte Yazzie

Photo: Eliana Pires/RLJE Films

Dir: Chelsea Stardust

Starring: Rebecca Romijn, Hayley Griffith, Ruby Modine, Jerry O’Connell, Jordan Ladd, and Arden Myrin

Every Friday night during my childhood was pizza night. My parents would call their friends, the kids would rent some scary movies from the video store, and food would be delivered from the local pizza palace. Thirty minutes later the doorbell would ring and the delivery person would be standing there, waiting with fresh pizza and hoping for hefty tip.

In director Chelsea Stardust’s new film, “Satanic Panic”, a pizza delivery girl named Sam (Hayley Griffith) is trying to keep herself financially above water by delivering to a wealthy neighborhood known for their odd practices. After being stiffed for a tip, Sam stumbles into the house and realizes that she’s interrupted a party…a party of Satanist’s looking for a virgin to sacrifice.

“Satanic Panic” is going for that 1980’s straight-to-video vibe, trying to achieve in its less than 90-minute run time that nice balancing act of combining enough humor to keep the tone fun, freewheeling and campy, a few gory scenes to make one “ooh” and “aah” at the viscera, and enough odd and strange twists and turns to make it stand apart from others like it.

And, for the most part, the film is successful in remaining entertaining primarily because of the lead performance of Hayley Griffith who provides Sam with enough self-confidence and honesty to maintain the seriousness of her character’s dilemma. Supporting character Ruby Modine, playing an accompanying sacrificial offering named Judi, has some great one-liners while Arden Myrin, playing one of the more bonkers occultists named Gypsy, gets to chew on the scenery with comedy throughout the film. Rebecca Romijn, one of the big names in this production, gets to hail and hiss with hubris as the head-witch named Danica.

There is a strong 80’s aesthetic being pushed throughout the film; the score specifically has all the digital synth sounds to evoke that feeling and the emphasis on practical grisly effects is a nice touch. The narrative also aims for throwback vibes but wobbles between an interesting final girl scenario that is unconventional in a good way and a worn-out occult tale that struggles to make the impact necessary to turn the devilish troupe into something more sinister. However, it’s still fun to watch the inventive ways the film finds to eliminate the evildoers.

Unfortunately, some of the dialogs come off clumsy, with some characters stumbling over wordy exchanges and others not provided much to work with at all. The pacing crashes from scene to scene with inconsistent results while trying to connect the puzzle of effects gags and story transitions.

Still, there is a fun vibe composed throughout this film, one that shows that the creators of this movie grew up with scary VHS tapes from the video store and greasy pizza from the delivery guy.

Monte’s Rating
3.00 out of 5.00

It Chapter Two - Movie Review by Ben Cahlamer

Directed by: Andy Muschietti

Screenplay by: Gary Dauberman

Based on: “It” by Stephen King

Starring: James McAvoy, Jessica Chastain, Bill Hader, Isaiah Mustafa, Jay Ryan, James Ransom, Andy Bean, Bill Skarsgard

Life finds an interesting way to connect past events to the present. Yes, in a way I am referring to Andy Muschietti’s “It Chapter Two,” which sees grown up versions of the Losers Club returning to Derry as children start mysteriously disappearing. But it also reminds me of my years in middle school, when Stephen King’s novels were popular with my peers; and despite my best efforts, I could not get the librarian to let me check out “It” without my parents’ permission.

Many moons later, I find myself watching films based on King’s novels, and liking them.

There’s more to it than that. One of the things that I respect the most about the various adaptations of King’s novels is the characters and the way they are compelled to face their own inner demons. The returning duo of Andy Muchietti and “It” scribe Gary Dauberman ensures that those characterizations remained richly intact, especially given the fact that the events are set 27 years later.

Most of the Losers Club have moved on and Muschietti spends much of the first act reacquainting us with these characters in their adult states. The adult cast is first rate, with James McAvoy playing Bill Denbrough. I appreciated McAvoy’s tactile approach to the role, the center of a great deal of humor. Jessica Chastain is a natural choice for Beverly Marsh, having to stand up for herself after enduring years’ of abuse. Jay Ryan plays Ben Hanscom who is successful as an adult, and the one character who changed the most between the adult and child versions.

One of the interesting juxtapositions of “It Chapter Two,” are the overly numerous flashbacks to the younger versions of these characters, mostly as a way to carry the adult’s stories forward. None of the characters’ has as strong of a transition as Richie Tozier, played as an adult by Bill Hader. As strong of a comedian as Hader is, a fact that they build upon in the first act, the trauma and the drama the lies underneath a comedian is omnipresent in Hader’s performance.

Rounding out the main ensemble are Isaiah Mustafa plays Mike Hanlon, the one, lone member of the Losers Club who remains behind in Derry, James Ransone as Eddie Kaspbrak and Andy Bean as Stanley Uris.

Dauberman does an exceptional job of bringing the club members back together. There is a lot of nervous humor to keep us on the edge of our seats and when they are together, they are a formidable group against Bill Skarsgard’s Pennywise the Dancing Clown. Skarsgard still terrifies even me, and the scares populate this film rather than punctuate it, though they are effective

What wasn’t necessarily effective was the length of the film, which gives way to several challenges within, namely pacing. While it was interesting to see the flashbacks and for some of the characters, rather effective, they become a distraction to the overall story. Within that distraction though, I still felt more invested in the teenaged characters’ stories.

Where “It” felt like a take on “Stand by Me,” another King staple, “It Chapter Two” feels like a take on “The Shining” with respect to the characters and their narrative arcs. “It Chapter Two’s” length and excessive flashbacks keep it from being a stronger film.

2.75 out of 4

Vita & Virginia - Movie Review by Jeff Mitchell

Arterton and Debicki work very well individually in ‘Vita & Virginia’ but share no chemistry

Directed by:  Chanya Button

Written by:  Eileen Atkins

Starring:  Gemma Arterton, Elizabeth Debicki and Isabella Rossellini

“Vita & Virginia” – “Nothing thicker than a knife’s blade separates happiness from melancholy.” – Virginia Woolf, “Orlando” (1928)

Director Chanya Button’s “Vita & Virginia” depicts the relationship between Vita Sackville-West (Gemma Arterton) and Virginia Woolf (Elizabeth Debicki), and with two commendable actresses and a vastly intriguing historical premise, her film carries two key ingredients that can garner the Academy’s attention. 

Unfortunately, there’s a lot more that separates “Vita & Virginia” from celebrating Oscar gold-happiness and wading in a state of cinematic-melancholy, and this film lands in the latter.

Certainly, Button’s altruistic intentions bear high praise, as noted during the 2018 Toronto International Film Festival.

“If we can be relied to know anything about (Virginia Woolf), it’s how she died.  Whereas, I think this story marks a moment of profound strength,” Button said.

Button accomplishes her goal, but along the way, the movie runs into distracting problems and delivers a flat, lackluster romance that certainly deserves more emotional interest, celebration, scandal, and a sense of danger.  This is especially noticeable, given Vita and Virginia’s relationship crossed taboos in the 1920s, and they willingly and openly committed adultery.

Before Vita’s relationship with Virginia began, her husband Harold (Rupert Penry-Jones) and she enjoyed a happy marriage, and in this case, happy is defined as satisfaction from ordinary companionship.  Their passion, however, is missing, like walking outside with your keys in hand and discovering that your car has been stolen. 

The fire between Vita and Harold has flamed out, and the entire movie feels like this couple’s pedestrian union.  For instance, in the first act, Virginia attends her sister Vanessa’s (Emerald Fennell) party.  During a quiet portion of the evening, Virginia and others casually gaze at their friend Geoffrey (Rory Fleck Byrne) and Vanessa slow dancing, and they – including the said couple – seem to be looking for sleep rather than enjoying each other’s company. 

Cinematographer Carlos De Carvalho paints bright colors, and costume designer Lorna Marie Mugan parades beautiful, vibrant attire that can be found everywhere, but the film’s energy remains low throughout, including the intimate scenes between our two leads. 

Look, Arterton and Debicki share zero chemistry.  They just don’t work as a couple, even though they individually play their parts of pursuer and pursuee in very convincing fashion. 

Ever the socialite and with one eye on human treasures, the lively, gorgeous Vita aggressively chases, or rather hunts down, Virginia, and her intrigue stems from Ms. Woolf’s writing.  Artenton delivers her portrayal with genuine smiles and vitality (pardon the pun) combined with an undeniable aura of mischievousness. 

As one would expect, Button instructs her makeup department to douse Debicki’s skin with gray, English winter-tones, while the actress rightly includes shades of Woolf’s mental illness that barely hold her vulnerable heart strings.

Instead of including an accompanying string orchestra soundtrack, the film sports modern, electronic beats that feel best appropriate for Saturday night clubbing at 2 a.m.  Naturally, the universe carves out places for this music to reside, but these off-putting, pulsating fillers regularly and unsuitably dominate the film’s lulls, and the score includes occasional female gasps for unnecessary reasons.

Speaking of breaths, Button incorporates several extreme closeups of Vita’s and Virginia’s mouths and eyeballs, which begin during the opening scene and continue through the 1-hour 16-minute mark.  There may be many, many more of these camera choices, but this particular critic was probably more concerned with digital flashes on his watch during the picture’s last 34 minutes.

The fact that the screenplay is very conversational doesn’t help, but Vita and Virginia do recite their letters to one another while Ms. Woolf resides in England and Ms. Sackville-West – a diplomat’s wife – whisks off to Persia and Berlin.  These moments have appealing merit, if one can digest the two actresses staring straight into the camera, which becomes tiresome after a while. 

Well, Vita and Virginia’s amorous relationship and platonic friendship lasted quite a while, about 15 years.  Vita also became the inspiration for one of Virginia’s most famous novels, and their on-screen story probably argues that toxic masculinity can be a knife’s blade away from troublesome femininity.

(2/4 stars)

Jeff – a member of the Phoenix Critics Circle – has penned film reviews since 2008, graduated from ASU’s Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and is a certified Rotten Tomatoes critic. Follow Jeff and the Phoenix Film Festival on Twitter @MitchFilmCritic and @PhoenixFilmFest, respectively.

Aquarela - Movie Review by Ben Cahlamer

Director: Viktor Kossakovsky

It is creepily eerie that I’m submitting this review as a massive hurricane barrels down on the Florida panhandle. We talk on social media and in the news about the impacts of global warming, something that has been on my radar in my 43-short years on this planet. And yet, I still have the impression that we have only a small inkling of the power of water and its role in the delicate ecological balance that keeps our small blue ball in the solar system together.

The power behind Viktor Kossakovsky’s enveloping documentary, “Aquarela” is to remind us of water’s awesomeness, its destructiveness and its place in the aforementioned ecological balance.

Water isn’t simply something that covers 71 percent of our surface or 96.5 percent of all the earth’s water is held by oceans. It is in the air as water vapor, in rivers, lakes and as we see in the beginning of the documentary, it is in icecaps and ice floes.

Kossakovsky doesn’t offer a verbal narration of the images that unfold on the screen in front of us. Instead, he relies on the natural sounds, and the happenings on the screen to captivate us. It’s no wonder then that we see people driving across a glacier off in the distance when suddenly the ice gives way and the camera crew goes in to assist.

The purpose of showing this was twofold. First, it demonstrates the fragility of our world and the life on it; second, it begins the narrative flow, literally and figuratively as we move from the frozen world of Russia to a scientific expedition across the Atlantic on a sailboat where we are witness to the rough seas and the constant changing conditions. We see the wear and tear that life on the sea has on us. I noted that as the relentless waves crashed over the hull, the crew became more hardened against what Mother Nature wanted to throw their way.

Kossakovsky takes us from the Northern Hemisphere into the Southern Hemisphere. The shift from the open, rough seas to the wind-blown streets of an unfamiliar town really took me by surprise. The city, which it turns out was Miami during Hurricane Irma was familiar because of the landscape. The power of Irma’s destructive winds was not enough to level the culture and the art deco look of the city, but it reminded me of just how fragile our infrastructure is.

Finally, we float down to Angel Falls in Venezuela where we see the high and mighty water drop into a pool. There is calmness and serenity within the falls, but the images and the sounds that we experience before getting to this point are chaotic. We’ve created the chaos and we can weather it, but water will eventually consume us.

During my screening, and for whatever reason, I chose to sit towards the front of the theater, something I never do. And as the sound of the waves fall over us sonically, Kossakovsky successfully puts us right in the middle of the wave or driving through the hurricane in Florida. I thought to myself, without a voice over narration, this film would sound amazing in Dolby Atmos and to my surprise, they formatted the sound for it. The imagery was also stunning. None of the cameras wavered when you would think they should. It was as if the flow of water running through the Earth’s crust from north to south had a straight path from north to south.

“Aquarela” is the type of film where you have to let the visuals guide you through its story. It is an exceptionally rewarding experience and something that I hope people get to see on as big a screen as possible.

3.75 out of 4

Brittany Runs A Marathon - Movie Review by Ben Cahlamer

Written and Directed by: Paul Downs Colaizzo

Starring: Jillian Bell, Michaela Watkins, Utkarsh Ambudkar, Lil Rel Howery, Micah Stock

Premiering at Sundance, Paul Downs Colaizzo’s “Brittany Runs a Marathon” is an uplifting, inspired comedy-drama, featuring Jillian Bell as Brittany Forgler.

Brittany has all the right qualities for an up and coming young executive in New York City, but she has one problem: she has very little self-respect and she has no motivation whatsoever.

Her roommate, Gretchen (Alice Lee) is full of herself and she projects that on to the world. Brittany also has an aggressive attitude toward Catherine (Michaela Watkins), the fitness guru of the apartment building they live in.

Colaizzo, a playwright from Pennsylvania, imbues his film with solid characters and situations that will feel very familiar to just about anyone who sees this film. The level of humor and self-deprecation with which Bell approaches her character is what drives this story. None of the themes felt forced; the struggling substance abuse/recovery motif, the gay best friend, the inclusivity of it all is something the story cherishes because they are all facets of Brittany’s journey.

The challenge of the story is that is relies so much on the humor that the drama fell short and when it peaks, the direction it goes doesn’t surprise. It actually felt as if every 1980’s soaring underdog film came together at once, that’s how powerful the peak is.

And then the recovery phase of Brittany’s story, while just as compelling really felt awkwardly paced. It’s as if the story knew which direction to go and tried to get there, but then derailed itself at the same time. Bell holds all of this together.

I don’t mind saying that some of the awkwardness I felt was because it summed me up to a ‘T’. And I got the feeling that Brittany was a stand-in for the director’s own story, which if true, kudos for putting yourself out there, Mr. Colaizzo. It’s difficult to share a journey where the character changes so dramatically, not only in physical figure, but also in a mental state, to the point where we realize that we must make our own way in the world, that we must be responsible for our own happiness and well-being.

The supporting cast really helped to cement the push. Michaela Watkins, who was misunderstood at the beginning of the film, really had a strong arc and progression. Utkarsh Ambudkar, who I remembered from “Blindspotting” last year, played “bohemian” really well (you’ll have to see the movie to understand the reference, but trust me, it works). Lil Rel Howery really drove the film’s thesis home and while I liked his character, he came in during that awkward phase of the film I guess because I heard what the character had to say to me and I just didn’t want to hear it, much like Brittany.

“Brittany Runs a Marathon” is an uplifting story with a feel-good ending wrapped up in a familiar ball of energy. Jillian Bell does an amazing job with the performance and the character, but the story falls flat in the third act.

2.75 out of 4

One Child Nation - Movie Review by Jeff Mitchell

‘One Child Nation’ is a brutal, must-see history lesson

Directed by:  Nanfu Wang and Jialing Zhang

“One Child Nation” – “It was like fighting a war.”

A population war.

This eye-opening documentary – from directors Nanfu Wang and Jialing Zhang - dives into a massive conflict that embroiled China for about 35 years, a conflict entirely within its own borders.  Due to China’s constrained resources and rapidly expanding population, the government – in 1979 - enacted a one child policy that limited nearly all families to just one offspring.  Except for some exceptions within designated rural communities, China strictly enforced this edict that finally ended in 2015.  It was the largest family planning project in modern history, and although a macroeconomic graph would logically illustrate the country’s supply versus demand conundrum, this policy unleashed senseless and immeasurable collateral damage – both emotional and physical.

For Nanfu Wang, it’s personal.

Born in China in 1985, Wang grew up under the said policy, and once she became a mother, she decided to explore the topic from behind the camera.  She interviews her family, friends and neighbors, as they all look back at those troubled times. 

Wang effectively narrates the film in broad strokes and intimate details, and she introduces the policy to the viewers and, in the process, unleashes figurative body blows through interviewer/interviewee discourse.  Some of the answers shocked Wang.  They will also stun audiences into absolute silence, and other moments will draw painful gasps.

Well, the Chinese government declaring that families can only have one child is simple enough to say, but infinitely more laborious to enforce.  To an outsider, the policy might seem terribly invasive, but when one’s imagination wonders about the possible implementation methods, expect the worst.  Once the government set the policy in motion, they needed to follow-up with three steps:  delivering the message, investigating behavior and carrying out course correction. 

The film walks through each phase in blunt fashion, and the first - as one would expect - involves propaganda.  When running a communist country, resistance to messaging simply doesn’t exist.  Reminders of the one child policy were found everywhere.  Textbooks, live performances, television, and posters are obvious mediums, but calendars and matchbooks might seem overboard. 

Then again, when an elementary school kid (on television) lectures the populace by rapping, “If you have a second child, you violate the law,” you know that the government is addressing their marketing campaign in vastly creative ways.

China’s people living through constant messaging is one burden, but Wang discoverers much darker forces when the government pursues investigation and course correction, and Zhang and Wang’s camera sears from the interviews’ brutal reveals.  This is especially true during a frank conversation with Wang’s mother (Zaodi’s) midwife, and her role as an enforcer.

Wang’s uncle’s story will probably reduce you to tears, and her brother Zhihao also speaks on camera.  If you’re wondering how Wang has a brother, her family was one of the aforementioned rural exceptions.  Since Nanfu was a girl, the government allowed her parents to try again, in the hopes of having a boy. 

Governmental, institutional and everyday treatment of girls and women as second-class citizens is not a decidedly new concept and just look to thousands of years of human history for countless examples.  In this particular case, Wang explores China’s views and actions.  The doc moves from birth reduction and into another direction, and none of material is easy to digest.

Wars never are.

(3.5/4 stars)

Jeff – a member of the Phoenix Critics Circle – has penned film reviews since 2008, graduated from ASU’s Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and is a certified Rotten Tomatoes critic.  Follow Jeff and the Phoenix Film Festival on Twitter @MitchFilmCritic and @PhoenixFilmFest, respectively.

Ready or Not - Movie Review by Ben Cahlamer

Photo Credit: Eric Zachanowich / © 2019 Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation All Rights Reserved

Directed by: Matt Bettinelli-Olpin and Tyler Gillett

Written by: Gary Busick and R. Christopher Murphy

Starring: Samara Weaving, Adam Brody, Mark O’Brien, Henry Czerny, Andie MacDowell

I’m smiling as I try to figure out how to start this review of “Ready or Not.”

I’m smiling because, for a film that runs a scant 95 minutes, “Ready or Not” packs an unexpected punch to the gut in the most glorious way possible.

I’m smiling because Samara Weaving is a national treasure. And as the beautiful bride-to-be, Grace, she radiates beauty. Her approach and attitude towards her future husband, Daniel (Adam Brody) and his family, who co-incdentally appear to not like her is non-plussed: she is determined to get married.

I’m smiling because the antics that follow their gorgeous wedding are so mind-bendingly hilarious and gruesome that it became cathartic. Co-directors Matt Bettinelli-Olpin and Tyler Gillett used their comedy-horror story, written by Guy Busick and R. Christopher Murphy, to tell a parable of treachery, deceit, and ironically, about the reaches to which the wealthy protect their wealth.

And power.

At the head of the proverbial table is Tony Le Domas (Henry Czerny), a charismatic patriarch who dotes on his son, and looks at his future daughter-in-law cross-eyed. His wife, Becky (Andie MacDowell) is also a gem in this story as someone who can relate to the trials that Grace must face. As Alex, Mark O’Brien struck me as the audience being able to peer into a world that we don’t normally get to associate with and a world that we also look upon with disdain specifically because of the wealth and power the family wields.

As the bride is escorted down the aisle, the camera focuses on Aunt Helene (Nicky Guadagni) and her severe facial expression. I couldn’t help but burst out laughing at seeing the character. The stare, the make-up, the hair color it was perfection. And, as the polar opposite of Alex, we have an inkling of what’s in store for us. The other characters were all like kids in a candy store – “we can’t wait to share our surprise with you” as Grace is told about the game she must play with the family.

The idea of how Bettinelli-Olpin and Gillett go about introducing the game and the rules surrounding it was brilliant because it plays right into the family’s “kid in a candy store” routine while strengthening Grace’s position. The film wears its juxtaposition, from ‘ready or not’ to ‘hide and seek,’ on its sleeve and proudly so.

Within that juxtaposition are hints of stories past, “Clue” and “Murder by Death”; comedies that feature rich characters and the shenanigans to go with them. As with “Ready or Not,” both have a rich air about them, set in a medieval homes with clues to get our lead character through the maze before time runs out. Grace is also the epitome of her namesake as she takes in each event with the grace of someone who is used to having to claw her way through life. She reminded me very much of Uma Thurman’s The Bride – never underestimate the prepared.

There is a twist to “Ready or Not” that builds on what has come before that served the film well. Some might be appalled at the horror. Some might not laugh at the dark humor that permeates the story from the opening frame to the closing. The parallels the film draws to real life are the true treasure trove to be carved out of this story.

3.5 out of 4 stars

The Peanut Butter Falcon - Movie Review by Ben Cahlamer

Written and Directed by: Tyler Nilson and Michael Schwartz

Starring: Shia LaBeouf, Dakota Johnson, John Hawkes, Bruce Dern, Zack Gottsagen, Jon Bernthal, Thomas Hayden Church

To be human is to aspire, to be better than oneself; to learn and to grow. Life throws curveballs at us, some of which we have no control over; some of which are defined by our own choices. It’s the mark we leave on the world that differentiates us from one another and I can think of no better example of this than Tyler Nilson and Michael Schwartz’s “The Peanut Butter Falcon,” which expands this weekend.

To put “The Peanut Butter Falcon” into context is to understand the characters. Tyler, played by Shia LaBeouf is perhaps the strongest performance I’ve seen this year because we see the human side of the actor within the character. Tyler is a drifter, aimless and shapeless. He’s in to shenanigans as he tries to hang on to a job as a deck hand, attracting the ire of Duncan (John Hawkes).

Zak would like nothing more than to meet his idol, The Salt Water Redneck, a pro wrestler. There’s just one challenge: Zak, who has Down syndrome is a ward of a retirement home in North Carolina. He’s under the terrific care of Eleanor (Dakota Johnson) and he has a cunning roommate by the name of Carl (Bruce Dern). The story eventually sees Zak escaping from the confines of his world to follow his passion, leading him to Tyler. Together, they seek out The Salt Water Redneck.

Nilson and Schwartz built the story exclusively around Zack Gottsagen, who aspired to be an actor. They accomplished this by creating a character that mirrors Zack in real life, thus aspiring to be a pro wrestler.

The use of Zach’s, and Zak’s, story as a framing device pivots the focus on the characters. Gottsagen was a breath of fresh air as he finds a way to make his dreams, his reality come true. Within that, there’s an honest earnestness in his actions as he reminds Tyler what it means to be human; to let go of our past transgressions, to be able to move forward.

Tyler’s story and the character’s background is layered in pieces throughout the journey using flashbacks featuring Jon Bernthal as Mark. These flashbacks and Tyler’s actions at the beginning of the film are the impetus for Duncan (Hawkes), a rival fisherman who gives chase. These elements and their arcs work because they define the richer drama and the comedy, but they also hinder some of the film’s flow.

On the other side of the camera, the technical craft is first rate, but there are two areas that I want to call out: the first is the amazing cinematography from Nigel Bluck, who captured the lowlands of the North Carolina coastline, adding a context to the film that moves beyond the characters. The second is the use of music which amps up the emotional impact.

Films like “The Peanut Butter Falcon” offer a new outlook on life and remind us to cherish the time we have.

3.75 out of 4

Angry Birds 2 - Movie Review by Monte Yazzie

Courtesy of Sony Pictures. © 2019 CTMG, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Dir: Thurop Van Orman

Starring: Jason Sudeikis, Josh Gad, Bill Hader, Rachel Bloom, Danny McBride, Leslie Jones, Awkwafina, Sterling K. Brown, Tiffany Haddish, and Peter Dinklage

“This summer, winter is coming.”

Not sure how many young ones are going to correspond this tagline for “The Angry Birds Movie 2” to the adult television show “Game of Thrones”. However, it’s fitting for an animated movie based on one of the biggest mobile games of all time, which was probably played by adults on their cell phones before the little kids discovered it, to aim for some crossover appeal to encourage a weekend family trip to the movies.

“The Angry Birds Movie” found success upon its release in 2016 with a mix of slapstick antics, bathroom humor, and an occasional winking joke tailored for mom and dad. The film had just enough fuel to maintain the enjoyment factor for 97 minutes while only slightly over-staying its welcome.

“The Angry Birds Movie 2” does just about the same, sticking to a similar story formula from the first film while surprisingly applying some much-needed work to the characters leading the charge. The film is working with themes surrounding some typical subjects like friendship, romance, and self-confidence but it also handles topics surrounding masculinity, arrogance, and the fear of failure throughout.

Red (voiced by Jason Sudeikis) is beloved, a hero to the extent of being a folktale in the eyes of the flightless birds who were saved from destruction on Bird Island. Red is tasked as security for the island, protecting the inhabitants from the airborne threats from the king of Piggy Island, Harold (voiced by Bill Hader). Unbeknownst to the two foes is another threat, a group of birds lead by an intelligent yet resentful eagle named Zeta (voiced by Leslie Jones) from the frozen Eagle Island who are looking for new property to inhabit.

Most animated sequels take the route of rehashing a similar, sometimes the same, plot from the original film. “The Angry Birds Movie 2” does exactly this, however it also doubles down on all the qualities that made the original film so much fun; with bathroom humor that will have the kids giggling and music cues with lively songs that will have parents remembering the old school jams, the film is trying to meet as many demographics as it can with its blend of comedy.

The narrative moves surprisingly fast, quickly establishing the primary characters and introducing new ones in effort to make things feel different. It helps in a few places, especially when the whip-smart Silver (Rachel Bloom) is on screen to put Red in his place, but the overall structure of the story doesn’t deviate enough to make it very memorable in the end. Still, the quick pace and emphasis on random humor moments makes the running time fly, which is a pleasant surprise.

“The Angry Birds Movie 2” doesn’t reinvent its story or try for much new direction for its second outing, however its focus seems positioned for simple laughs and entertainment both for parents and kids. In this regard it succeeds in being a fun sequel for a lazy Saturday matinee.

Monte’s Rating
3.00 out of 5.00

After the Wedding - Movie Review by Jeff Mitchell

‘After the Wedding’ keeps most of its vows

Directed by: Bart Freundlich

Written by:  Bart Freundlich; the original screenplay (2006) by Susanne Bier and Anders Thomas Jensen

Starring:  Michelle Williams, Julianne Moore and Billy Crudup

“After the Wedding” – A honeymoon naturally follows a wedding, however, in director Bart Freundlich’s picture, starring Michelle Williams and Julianne Moore, there are no rose-colored glasses for Isabel (Williams) and Theresa (Moore). 

No, they aren’t married or romantic in any way.  Life brings them together.  Theresa - a wildly successful entrepreneur who proudly wears her philanthropist hat - wishes to donate millions to Isabel’s orphanage in India and flies her to New York City to discuss the terms. 

Freundlich, on his terms, successfully establishes both characters and reinforces their striking contrasts.  Living as a selfless pauper and bathing in ideals, Isabel sports a boyish haircut, frequently meditates and seldom smiles, except when she’s speaking to a nine-year-old boy named Jai (Vir Pachisia) living at her orphanage.  She adores him, like a son.  Theresa is a wealthy pragmatist who has it all, including a doting husband and three children.  When we first meet Theresa, she’s driving home, blasting Lady Gaga’s “The Edge of Glory” and singing at the top of her lungs.

While Isabel lays down on a modest mat and speaks to Jai about his future, Theresa reads a story to her young twin boys in an enormous house, which could double as a compound best suited for royalty or the Vanderbilts. 

It’s no surprise that the film squarely focuses on these two characters played by these powerhouse actresses who earned a combined nine Oscar nominations, including Moore’s Best Actress win for “Still Alice” (2014).  Both Williams and Moore are up to the task, as they step into a modern-day mystery, one that feels orchestrated by Theresa and leaves Isabel and the audience guessing.

Based on the 2006 Danish drama starring Mads Mikkelsen, Freundlich swaps genders in this 2019-take on the story, as Williams plays his role.  This critic has not seen the original “After the Wedding”, but those who have can make a rightful comparison.  Here, the camera frequently presents close ups of Williams, as Isabel’s stoic impressions scream discomfort of Theresa and the surrounding, never-ending opulence.  As the movie dives deeper into the narrative, Isabel’s distrust and immediate desire to simply fly back to India grows. 

Conversely, the camera pulls back on Theresa and judges her from distances, as she frequently drinks, takes pills in the quiet comfort of her bedroom, occasionally curses, and releases  sudden outbursts at her office assistant and husband (Billy Crudup).  Looking back, Theresa singing, “I’m on the edge, the edge, the edge…” along with Lady Gaga during her opening scene rings true and further defines her as Isabel’s polar opposite.

“After the Wedding” delivers some devastating turns to the audience and our two leads.  Some moments feel as sharp as a heart attack, and others are ham-handed and forced, especially between Isabel and another female character.  The movie shines whenever Williams and Moore appear together on-screen.  Although, Williams is especially haunting on her own, when Isabel digests her predicament, and Mychael Danna provides some much-needed solace with his gentle, moving score.   These individual pieces are better than the surrounding whole, and this creates a semi-flawed but successful union between the film and its audience.  

(3/4 stars)

Jeff – a member of the Phoenix Critics Circle – has penned film reviews since 2008, graduated from ASU’s Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and is a certified Rotten Tomatoes critic.  Follow Jeff and the Phoenix Film Festival on Twitter @MitchFilmCritic and @PhoenixFilmFest, respectively.

Where’d You Go, Bernadette - Movie Review by Ben Cahlamer

Credit: Wilson Webb / Annapurna Pictures

Directed by: Richard Linklater

Screenplay by: Richard Linklater, Holly Gent and Vincent Palmo, Jr.

Based on “Where’d You Go, Bernadette” by Maria Semple

Starring: Cate Blanchett, Billy Crudup, Kristen Wiig, Emma Nelson, Judy Greer, Zoe Chao, Laurence Fishburne

It occurred to me as I sat down to write this review that I haven’t experienced much of Richard Linklater’s filmography. This is not a slight on my own film watching habits as much as it is a reference point for the review of his latest film, “Where’d You Go, Bernadette”.

However, both points of view are clearly working against me.

His latest film, based on the novel of the same name by Maria Semple, features Cate Blanchette in the titular role. Bernadette is a mother and a wife. She is the neighborhood curmudgeon, who shirks away from anything sociable, attracting the ire of other, more involved parents. She was an up and coming architect who understood life a whole lot better than most would give her credit for, save for her daughter Bee (Emma Nelson), who tells the story from her perspective. Bee struggles to be accepted in school by her peers (and their parents) is loved by, and in fact doted upon by Bernadette that it almost seems as if nothing is amiss.

Billy Crudup plays Elgie, a workaholic who is too busy programming the latest technology craze to see what’s going on with his own family. The script, written by Linklater, Holly Gent and Vincent Palmo, Jr intentionally paints Elgie as the outsider in order to frame Bernadette’s lost ambition and uses Bee to give Bernadette a voice when she couldn’t speak up for herself. It’s actually a rather clever bit of storytelling.

The film, which does play as a bit of a dark comedy is so much more layered than the marketing suggests, which is a good thing. However, when I reflect back on those two points of view I mentioned, “Where’d You Go Bernadette” is an exercise in patience. It is both an experience based on how the story is told and it is a slight on the modern audience because the surface level view of this film is almost as icy as Ms. Blanchett’s character comes across.

Almost.

Laurence Fishburne’s character eases us into some of the deeper depths of Bernadette’s psyche and, I’ve seen enough of Linklater’s work be mindful that more is at work than meets the eye and that’s what drew me towards Bernadette’s story. Sure, I’m a sucker for dark comedies, but the way those elements are folded into the emotional side of the story warranted more of an examination of Bernadette as a character, which I won’t do here; that’s best enjoyed as a part of the experience.

The way Linklater laid out the details of the story, the family dynamic, the neighborhood dysfunction, the way Bee discovers more about her mom and Bernadette’s own insecurities, “Where’d You Go Bernadette” is a very timely look at society today. Suffice it to say, there’s a lot on the surface level, but to truly get mileage out of the story,

3 out of 4

Blinded by the Light - Movie Review by Jeff Mitchell

The coming-of-age story ‘Blinded by the Light’ hits the right notes

Directed by:  Gurinder Chadha

Written by:  Sarfraz Manzoor

Starring:  Viveik Kalra, Kulvinder Ghir, Meera Ganatra, Aaron Phagura, Hayley Atwell, and Nell Williams

“Blinded by the Light” – “Everybody’s got a hungry heart.” – “Hungry Heart” (1980) by Bruce Springsteen

Javed (Viveik Kalra) is starving.  Not literally, but he’s starving for his voice.  Born in Pakistan, he and his family moved to England.  Luton, England, a town with more green than concrete, and it sits about 50 kilometers from London.  So close to the country’s largest metropolis, but so far for a teenager without a car, without a girlfriend and without a social life.  To make matters worse, his father Malik (Kulvinder Ghir) constantly sequesters him at home.  Javed’s not even a dreamer, because he’s too mired in the white noise of teenage confusion to decide on a specific aspiration, other than wonder about life in London. 

“You can’t start a fire without a spark.” – “Dancing in the Dark” (1984) by Bruce Springsteen

On a presumed ordinary day in 1987 - a time when young Brits listened to Depeche Mode, The Smiths, and yes, even Tiffany - a classmate named Roops (Aaron Phagura) hands over his Bruce Springsteen “Born in the U.S.A.” cassette to Javed, and once he plays “Dancing in the Dark”, his life will never be the same.

Written by Sarfraz Manzoor, “Blinded by the Light” is his personal story and the earth-shattering impact that Springsteen had on his teenage beliefs.  This is a story of instant, obsessive influence that gives a young man direction, an outlet and a passion.  Of course, Javed’s new focus is contrary to his father’s wishes and conservative beliefs, let alone his dad’s agitation that his son worships a rebellious, soulful American rock star. 

“Badlands, you gotta live it every day.  Let the broken hearts stand, as the price you’ve gotta pay.” – “Badlands” (1978) by Bruce Springsteen

Director Gurinder Chadha – who wrote and directed “Bend It Like Beckham” (2002) - has captured disparities between child and parent before, and here, she delivers similar beats, although this film is more confrontational.  Javed’s conflict with his dad is universal, but the added element of Malik’s eternally rigid views pile on more contention. 

Throughout the film’s 1-hour 57-minute running time – which, admittedly, feels long – Malik’s downward constraints on Javed’s intrinsic wants never let up.  He’s not an antagonistic, cruel ogre, but Malik’s on-screen appearances promote anxiety and semi-dread, because his strict messages are frequently anticipated and always fulfilled. 

While his dad’s consistent ying drags Javed down, Chadha and Manzoor introduce Ms. Clay (Hayley Atwell) who supplies a never-ending yang of praise and encouragement.  The film does not present Javed with the familiar cinematic pattern of a steady upward trajectory, and instead, it regularly presents starts and stops, peaks and valleys, and joys and heartbreaks, when volleying between the open world of opportunities out there and restrictions at home.  In other words…real-life.  A space that will probably resonate with anyone who clashed (or current clashes) with their parents.

“Come on with me.  Tramps like us, Baby, we were born to run.” – “Born to Run” (1975) by Bruce Springsteen

Music, generally speaking, plays a massive role in teenagers’ lives, and with Javed’s love for Springsteen’s records, much of “Blinded by the Light” is bliss for any Bruce fan, and Chadha delivers thoughtful tributes to The Boss, again and again.  For those unfamiliar with Springsteen’s work, Javed’s fixation might be puzzling, so insert your favorite band while watching this picture, and it all becomes clear.  “Blinded by the Light” sprinkles other 80s tunes into the mix, so there’s a little something for everyone who enjoys the music from this particular era.  More importantly, for those not satisfied with their personal status quo, Javed’s passion hits the right notes. 

(3/4 stars)

Jeff – a member of the Phoenix Critics Circle – has penned film reviews since 2008, graduated from ASU’s Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and is a certified Rotten Tomatoes critic.  Follow Jeff and the Phoenix Film Festival on Twitter @MitchFilmCritic and @PhoenixFilmFest, respectively.