Dark Waters (2019)

There seem to be some hyperspecific genres out there.  Within science fiction, you have movies about people on space stations where the rest of humanity perishes.  This isn’t to say that it’s formulaic.  We’re not talking about The Hallmark Channel, which has no end to movies about some woman who goes to a different town, finds her soul mate and leads a new life she never knew she wanted.  There is some variation beyond which holiday it is.

Take movies based on real life.  Even legal thrillers.  There are a few movies where the little guy takes on big corporations.  There’s usually a little guy.  It might whistleblower or someone who was screwed over by a big corporation.  They find a lawyer who is hesitant to take on the case, usually because it’s almost impossible to win.  In the end, there is victory, although it may or may not mean anything.

This isn’t to say the movie isn’t enjoyable.  Dark Waters is definitely watchable.  But, it does follow that same basic premise.

Wilbur Tennant has lost all but two of his cows.  He knows that it has something to do with DuPont.  The installation of a new dump site is too coincidental.  So, he comes to Rob Bilott, a lawyer who usually defends corporations like DuPont.  No lawyer in West Virginia will take the case.  That’s how embedded DuPont is in his area.

Bilott is hesitant at first.  His firm would like to have DuPont as a client.  Taking on the case would not make a good impression.  When Tennant drops off a box of VHS tapes, Bilott begins to see the light.  What follows is a decade-long legal battle to get DuPont to admit guilt.

And so he does, to an extent.  Tennant’s health deteriorates, but he does get to see some progress.  DuPont is forced to make payments to people.  When push comes to shove, though, they try backing out of an agreement.

You come to realize that life isn’t fair.  Lawyers are there to make things fair.  It’s supposed to be a way of leveling the playing field.  As they say, some people are more equal than others.  In this case, some people can afford more lawyers than others.

The movie does hit all the marks.  We even have a scene where Bilott is afraid to turn the ignition in his car.  (Maybe he’s been watching too many movies, himself.)  Granted, you’ll never look at Teflon the same way.  It’s a story that affects everyone.  I just don’t know that it stands out.

IMDb page

Ocean's 8 (2018)

I suppose there are only so many ways you can do a heist movie.  They tend to be formulaic, almost like Hallmark movies.  The formula usually starts with one person hatching a plan and assembling the right team.  They’ll need someone to crack a safe or someone to infiltrate security.  Maybe they’ll use someone in disguise.  They might have an inside person.  They’ll almost always need someone to fence the merchandise.

The second phase is usually the preparation.  The team has to go over the plan.  They get any supplies they need, like vehicles.  They do any prep work.  There’s usually exactly one major setback when someone discovers something has changed.  It’s usually a critical detail, like the type of vault has changed to the one vault that can’t be cracked.

Once that’s out of the way, the third phase begins, which is the actual heist.  This is where everyone pays attention.  The well-orchestrated plan usually goes off with maybe one or two hitches.  Someone has to improvise, creating tension, but they always pull it off.  (Even when it seems that they don’t, it might mean that it was all part of the plan.)

Part four is the aftermath.  This is where the characters will sell off any items that aren’t cash and split the proceeds.  We’ll also get to see any of those details that we missed.  There may be a few lingering details, like getting rid of the police, but these points are usually minor.

Ocean’s 8 focuses on the sister of Danny Ocean, one Debbie Ocean.  She has been planning a heist during her time in jail.  She’s had five years and eight months to work out the details.  Her plan is to steal diamonds that has been in storage for several decades.  She gets Cartier to put the necklace on the neck of unsuspecting actress Daphne Kluger, who can then be led into a bathroom where the team can steal the goods.

In some respects, this is almost the very definition of a sequel/remake/spin-off that I hate.  There’s a very cookie-cutter feel to it.  The question becomes if the ingredients will be enough of a difference.  There are a few tense moments, but you always get the impression that it’s going to work.  (Well, it worked in the other three movies.  Didn’t it?)

The main characters also seem to work naturally together.  Each one has a reason for wanting to do this.  A few even have to be mildly goaded into doing it.  I never felt like any of the characters were out of place or unnatural.  And yes, it’s an all-female team doing the heist.  I’m glad not to have heard much in that respect.  It really didn’t matter.  I will say it was fun to watch James Corden as the insurance guy.  He played the part perfectly.

My only question is why Danny Ocean couldn’t have been in this movie.  We get a few reprisals of roles from the original trilogy.  (A trilogy based on remake, it’s worth noting.)  The movie has Debbie visiting her brother’s mausoleum early in the film.  He apparently died in 2018, prior to the events of the film but long after the events of the previous one.  Is this to say that there’s no going back?

At least the movie was entertaining.  I never felt bored or as if I was rewatching the other movies.  (This may have to do with the fact that it’s been so long since Ocean‘s 13.)  I think had I not had Moviepass, I may have waited for this to come out on DVD if I saw it at all.  I may not have really taken a chance on it.  As much as I like the actors, there’s always that fear that it’s going to be too much like the previous movies.

IMDb page

Hoodwinked! (2005)

Some things work only if they’re done well.  When someone tries to make it a True Daily Double on Jeopardy!, they’re a genius only if it works.  If not, they’ve got their work cut out for them.  The same goes for something like using fairy-tale characters.  If it’s done well, it’s something can be used to the movie’s advantage.  If not done well, it can turn people away.

Hoodwinked starts with the final scene from Little Red Riding Hood.  Red Puckett is at her grandmother’s house, but it’s not Granny Puckett that Red is dealing with.  It’s the Wolf W. Wolf wearing a Granny mask.   Red is no fool; she’s on to him.  Suddenly, a Kirk the Woodsman comes crashing through the window.  Cue the police, who tape off the area and start interrogating the various suspects.  Fortunately, Nicky Flippers happens to be walking along.  He’s a frog who has a knack for solving crimes.  He starts asking the right questions.

Nicky starts with Red, who works for Granny.  Granny runs a successful snack business.  Red had just found out about the Goodie Bandit, who has been stealing recipes.  Fearing for Granny, Red took the recipe book to Granny’s house, only to have several issues.  This includes meeting Mr. Wolf and Twitchy.  She manages to  lose Wolf and make it to Granny’s, only to find Wolf impersonating Granny.

Nicky then interrogates Wolf, Nick and Granny in that order.  Each interrogation adds more detail to the overall story.  (For instance, Wolf is actually a reporter, with Twitchy being his photographer/assistant.)  After Nicky is done asking questions, some secrets come out, but not the identity of the Goodie Bandit.

The use of the Riding Hood tale was unnecessary.  I get that retelling classic stories has almost become a genre unto itself, but that doesn’t mean you need to do it yourself.  It doesn’t really add anything to the plot.  Sometimes, it’s done with the intent of showing what really happened, either figuratively or literally.  Some characters, like Sherlock Holmes, were based on real people.

Some cases may use the characters to give a sense of back story.  It’s not intended as a direct sequel to the story, but rather to use the story to let us fill in details.  When SyFy did a miniseries based on The Wizard of Oz, we knew the story of Dorothy and The Wizard.  We could see comparisons between the new characters and the old.  The new story is written around the old one.

Here, we’re using the characters in name only.  You could have generated new characters and basically told the same story.  Using fair-tale characters doesn’t add anything new except maybe the chance for a throwaway joke or two.

And then, there’s the animation.  It’s not at all like anything that I’ve seen before.  This might put off anyone that’s new to CGI.  I got used to it pretty quickly, but others might not be so fortunate.  (At least with the animation, you can take a look at a trailer to know what to expect.)

I’d say that it’s low budget, but the movie at least has some recognizable names behind the animated faces.  (Anne Hathaway voices Red while Glenn Close voices Granny.)  Even with this, the actors aren’t necessarily recognizable.  I’ve seen David Ogden Stiers in enough roles that I would recognize such a distinctive voice.  It wasn’t until I started looking up the movie that I realized who it was.  If you skipped this movie, you could be forgiven.

IMDb page