Tuesday, December 18, 2018

Sorry To Bother You (2018) SPOILERS!

Sorry To Bother You is one of those movies that really caught me by surprise. I had first learned about it because someone had given me a sticker of it at SXSW that I put on my water bottle. I decided to check out the trailer because I might as well. The trailer didn't seem out of the ordinary. It mainly looked like a comedy about being a telemarketer. I could relate because at one point in my life I did work at a call center and I know how much it sucks. But, when I sat down to watch it I received a completely different film.

The plot is about Cassius Green (Lakeith Stanfield) in an alternate present day Oakland trying to make a difference in the world. But what is really making a difference in the world? His girlfriend Detroit (Tessa Thompson), who wears really ornate earrings, just tells him to get a job. After his friend Salvador convinces him to take a job at a telemarketing company, he starts to climb the corporate ladder. His trade secret is by putting on his "white" voice (David Cross) when selling. But, the company that he works for has more up its sleeve than he was led to believe.

Now the movie started off really funny. The obvious jabs at corporate America and the financial crisis are very apparent throughout the whole film. The selling your soul and turning on your friends for success is a huge theme. Everyone who has ever worked a job before knows of the possibility of this. Cassius gives up his values to achieve success because that is what he most strives for. He wants to make a difference in the world, even if it is for the negative. This includes selling weaponry, slaves etcetera etcetera. But the money he also receives is too good to pass up as well.


I AM GOING TO SPOIL THE FILM RIGHT NOW SO STOP READING THIS IF YOU WANT TO WATCH THE FILM AND BE SURPRISED.

But the last thirty minutes are where it goes completely off the rails. One of the companies that is shown throughout the film has secret plans to take all of it's workers and turn them into half horse/ half human to create a more efficient workforce. After creating so many of them the owner of the company Steve Lift (Armie Hammer) needs someone to keep and eye on them to make sure there isn't a uprising against the company. As he says he wants Cassius to become there "Martin Luther King Jr." to stop the uprising because he knows that eventually a social collapse will occur. Weird right? Also you get to see a lot of horse penis.

The rest of the film is Cassius and his friends trying to take down the corporation that are creating half-horse/ half people. Now the ending of the film did come quite quickly and I was really at a loss at the end. The film went from 15 miles per hour to 200 in 12 seconds. Now I understand what the film was trying to say and the dry humor behind the whole thing but the ending just was too out there for me. Don't get me wrong, it's a cool idea, it just belongs in a much different movie.

Rating: C+

Genre: Comedy, Fantasy, Sci-fi

Cast: Lakeith Stanfield, Tessa Thompson, Jermaine Fowler

Rated: R for pervasive language, some strong sexual content, graphic nudity, and drug use.

Director: Boots Riley

Saturday, December 8, 2018

Dr Seuss' Cat In The Hat (2003)

Sometimes it's nice to sit down, shut off your brain and watch a movie. But sometimes that is not always the case. There are seldom times that I have to turn off a movie because it's so bad. Dr. Seuss' Cat In the Hat (2003) hurts your brain to watch. This took me three separate times to try and get through. This movie was the final nail in the coffin for Audrey Geisel (Dr. Seuss's wife) to not allow any more Dr. Seuss material to be made in live action. Ron Howard's How The Grinch Stole Christmas (2000) helped with that decision. But what really made this movie so horrific to watch?

The film does contain some of the same elements of the book but is very difficult to turn a 50 page book into a 88 minute film. The viewer follows siblings Sally (Dakota Fanning) and Conrad (Spencer Breslin) and the day they encountered a certain Cat in a Hat. The Cat is played by Mike Myers (Austin Powers, So I Married an Axe Murderer) who is really hamming it up in this film. But where the film took a few liberties is all of the subplots. The kids are supposed to keep the house clean while their Mom (Kelly Preston) gets called in for work. Yes, her characters name is just Mom. She is also having a work party and since her boss Mr. Humberfloob (Sean Hayes) is a germaphobe the kids have to keep the house clean. Just to add in even more story there is also Quinn (Alec Baldwin) who is courting  Mom. He wants to send Conrad to military school so he then can finally marry Mom or something...I don't know. So take all of that and combine in with a cat making a huge mess of the place and you get the convoluted story of The Cat in the Hat.

The biggest problem that I have with this movie is that none of the jokes land. All the characters throughout the film are annoying and there is no direction. I like Mike Myers. I think he is a really funny comedian and his characters he creates are amazing. Wayne's World (1992) is a hilarious movie. But, you can just tell that he does not want to be in this movie. The breaking of the fourth wall and the "Oh Yeahs!" just get old after awhile. Also, the adult jokes in this movie are just plain gross. You can only roll your eyes at how any of these made its way into a PG movie and didn't qualify it for a PG-13. The other biggest problem that I have with this film is the costumes. Thing 1 and Thing 2 are terrifying. It is difficult to look at them because they are literally something you have seen in your nightmares. The Cat also is weird to look at especially when you know that the suit was made with human hair.

The film ends with everyone realizing that they were terrible and now, through the torture that the Cat made them endure, they are better people. Alec Baldwin also spits up purple goop. What a cathartic ending.

But I know it is a film for children. Maybe the kids might take something from that but my money is that they won't. They won't think it's funny, they won't learn anything and they won't know what's going on.

I keep trying to find some sort of redeeming factor in this film but I just can't. All I can think about is the disgusting imagery and the Cat threatening to beat a child with a baseball bat after he was hit in the balls. I'm serious. That is actually in this film. Feel free to skip this movie. You aren't missing anything here.

Rating: F

Genre: Adventure, Comedy, Family

Cast: Mike Myers, Dakota Fanning, Spencer Breslin

Rated: PG for mild crude humor and some double entendres

Director: Bo Welch


Sunday, December 2, 2018

The House That Jack Built (2018)

Lars Von Trier's latest film The House That Jack Built has been creating quite the stir amongst critics and audiences. Audiences at Cannes had left the theater after some of the more brutal scenes. Now the MPAA is upset over the unrated directors cut of the film that was shown. It has been five years since his latest film Nymphomaniac Volume 1 and 2 (2013) was released and The House That Jack Built was supposed to be his true retrospective on his life as a person and a director. Luckily I was able to see the unrated version in theaters and it is unlike any film I have ever seen. Both in creative style and sheer brutality.

The House That Jack Built is about a serial killer named Jack (Matt Dillon) and five different incidents that he has gone through in his twelve years of killing. As he goes through the different incidents, he is talking to a man named Verge (Bruno Ganz). Jack is telling him his personal thoughts on these different incidents and why he did these things. They bring up subjects of art in violence, wine making, the holocaust, and hunting, just to name a few. Each of the five incidents focus on a different crime that he has done and then builds on his personal thoughts of how that incident happened. In other words it is a two hour and thirty two minute dive into the mind of a killer and the senseless acts of violence he has committed against society. But where this movie stands out is that the whole movie is a metaphor for Von Trier.

The cinematography and art style are amazing. It is told in the same format as Nymphomaniac where there are voiceovers as Jack and Verge discuss what is going on in the scene. It feels as if someone was actually telling this story to a stranger which Von Trier does really well in his films. I find that the use of quick cuts to show examples of what they are talking about make the film very interesting to watch. It always keeps it new and helps you understand the characters and their thinking. I guess it is almost like a "dumbing down" for the viewer but it never feels that way. There is always a point to the images shown on the screen to help move the story along.

I can't speak for how violent the rated version is but the unrated version that I saw is really violent. I can understand why many wouldn't want to see this film. Just explaining some of the scenes make people cringe. The worst scene that got to me was the murder of a woman and her two children. It only makes it worse that when he is trying to kill them, he is having a conversation with Verge, comparing killing them to a hunter hunting deer. Basically you want to save the mother for last and should kill the young first. The way that Dillon's voice is when talking about this is very monotone, because he has no empathy which also makes the actions that much worse. Let's not forget that all the violence is shown and even after the killing, it gets a lot worse. I don't want to explain too much but be prepared to cover your eyes.

This is where is starts to get tricky. Von Trier is comparing himself to Jack throughout the film and is using the killings throughout the film as a metaphor for his films. Jack believes that murder is a version of art and although violent, destructive and sick should be viewed under a respectful manner. Von Trier has been under fire multiple times for his violence in movies especially against women. By comparing Jack to himself with this metaphor he is explaining that his films should still be considered art even if they are depraved.  Now this probably makes the film more interesting for someone who is familiar with Von Trier's works. For a newcomer, this would be lost on them unless they have done some research. Also within the film he makes notions towards one of his biggest fiascos that almost destroyed his entire reputation so that was intriguing to see his feelings towards that.

What it comes down to though is was it any good? I thought the movie was very well done. Is it for everyone? Absolutely not. Does it give an insight into Von Trier's mind? Absolutely. Do we really need that? No. I will mostly likely watch it again because there were certain parts of their talks that I couldn't quite make out over the packed theater. Also, I walked out of the theater curious and confused as to what I had just watched. The ending also needs a rewatch because it really comes from left field. So if you are okay with extreme violence in the name of art then you will enjoy this. If violence is not your thing then stay as far away as you can. Some scenes in this will give you nightmares.

Grade: A-

Genre: Drama, Horror

Cast: Matt Dillon, Bruno Ganz, Uma Thurman

Rated: Unrated

Director: Lars Von Trier