Gemini Man (2019)

I love watching the coming attractions when I go to see the movies.  Some get me excited.  (I’m stoked about seeing the new Terminator movie.)  When I saw the preview for Gemini Man, it looked interesting.  A man is hunted by his own clone.  Little did I know that I had basically seen the entire movie.  I hate to spoil it for everyone, but it’s basically true.

Henry Brogan (The older Will Smith character) is a sniper who realizes that it’s time to quit.  He’s starting to grow a conscience.  His boss hates to seem him go, as Henry is the best.  Shortly after retiring, he realizes something is up.  There’s someone new working at the marina.  A friend gives him information that his last target wasn’t a terrorist.  Suddenly, a guy on a motorcycle starts hunting him.  Who could it be?  Oh, that’s right.  I saw the coming attraction.  It’s Junior, the Will Smith clone.

The two have several engagements and eventually hunt down the people doing this to them.  I was kind of hoping that this might mean some nice action scenes.  It didn’t.  There was some nice scenery.  This made the use of a high frame rate and 3-D worth it.  Being able to see it in Dolby didn’t hurt, either.  But this is basically the only good thing I can say about the movie.  When all a movie has going for it is the visual spectacle, it’s not a particularly good movie.

I kind of felt like the movie put all it’s money into getting a few big names and some good visuals.  There’s very little about the morality of what happened.  Instead, it focuses on the revenge aspect.  Yes, I know it’s difficult to come up with great movies all the time.  I’ve been seeing a few mediocre ones lately.  But this one is like the writer wasn’t even trying.  You know how people complain that cable has 400 channels and most of them are crap?  This isn’t one of the good channels.

There’s nothing really new or exciting about this movie.  Clones aren’t new.  Being replaced isn’t new.  I don’t recall that many witty one-liners.  You’d be better off just watching the coming attractions a few times.  Save yourself the ticket price.

IMDb page

Aladdin (2019)

Remakes are a tricky bunch.  There are some movies, like Back to the Future and The Princess Bride, that should never be redone.  Both movies are perfect as is.  I don’t think anyone could improve on either one.  In other cases, I can understand.  Time passes and the older version seems dated.  (It’s rare, but there are remakes that are better than the original.)  There are also characters, such as Godzilla, that audiences just can’t get enough of.

Then, there’s Aladdin.  I’ll admit that I never watched the 1992 version all the way through.  However, it would seem that this version stays pretty close to the original.  At least a few of the songs are similar.  So, that makes me wonder why a remake was deemed necessary.

I’m not going to go too much into plot here.  Most people should be aware of the basic story by now.  An orphan named Aladdin meets a princess named Jasmine.  Despite the class difference, he manages to court her with the help of a genie named Genie.  He also takes on an evil Grand Vizier who’s out for power.

This movie still seemed to be operating in cartoon mode.  For instance, the scenery seemed realistic, but there were come parts that still came off as well-rendered CGI.  The characters also seem to be one-dimensional.  (Jasmine is defined by her inability to serve as sultan.  The Genie is defined by his need to serve a master.)

Will Smith seems to have an energy similar to Robin Williams without seeming like he’s channeling Williams’s version, so there’s that.  However, I could see a lot of long-time Disney fans seeing this movie as unnecessary.  (Childhood nostalgia is a dangerous area to wander into.  One wrong move could generate a lot of backlash.)

Fortunately, the movie is pretty safe for children.  They didn‘t add anything scary.  (The PG rating comes from a few dangerous situations and action sequences.)  I’m not sure how similar the movie is.  It’s a perfectly fine movie to take the children to see this summer.  I’m just glad I was able to see it before school let out.

IMDb page

Bright (2017)

I’m old enough to remember a time before the Internet became popular.  People were making a big deal over a fourth broadcast network and cable, if you had it in your house, probably got 30 or 40 channels.  If you made a TV show and wanted to get it on a TV set, there was some degree of competition.  This isn’t to say that all shows were popular, but there was a good chance that your show might not make it.

Now, with 200+ cable channels, five broadcast networks, Hulu, Netflix and all other manner of options, it’s a little easier for TV shows and, by extension, movies to get made.  Netflix has had a few hits with Stranger Things and Okja.  There were bound to be a few bad movies.

Enter Bright.

Bright is set on Earth, but it’s an Earth where humans live alongside the fantasy races that everyone knows and loves.  Daryl Ward, is a human police officer working with an orc partner named Nick Jakoby.  The movie starts with Ward returning to work after recovering from a gunshot wound.  He blames Jakoby, who was busy getting a burrito.  Jakoby chased the suspect, but ultimately lost him.  Jakoby’s side of the story is suspect, but he’s still on the force.

The name of the movie comes from a group of people that can handle magic wands.  Those that aren’t Brights will die if they touch a wand.  The action begins when Ward and Jakoby find a wand and an elf to go with it.  When backup arrives, it becomes clear to Ward that the other officers don’t want Jakoby walking away from this.  Internal affairs is looking for an excuse to fire him, but a bullet would be quicker and easier.  It’s up to the two officers to find a way out of this.

My problem is that I wasn’t sure where the movie was going, and I mean this in a figurative and literal way.  Jakoby and Ward are being chased while carrying an item that acts as a beacon for its owner.  They can’t give it back and they just can’t leave it, so how are they going to get out of their predicament?

Then, there’s the underdeveloped story.  Science fiction and fantasy are often used as a way to deal with topics that you can’t deal with directly.  The movie tries to deal with racism by having orcs and elves.  This isn’t to say that there aren’t Hispanic gangs in this movie, too.  It’s just that they operate alongside an orc gang, as well.   Oh, and none of the police officers like Jakoby specifically because he’s orc.  Ward defends him, to an extent, but Ward doesn’t want him as a partner.

It kind of comes off as the pilot to a TV series.  I don’t know if Netflix is using this as a backdoor pilot for a series or if they’re looking to make other movies.  Either way, the movie could have used some more depth.  If a show is well-written, you can get the message without it being preachy.  You might not even realize what the message was until later.  If you look at Zootopia, it is somewhat obvious, but the movie tended to focus more on the story and developing the characters.

We learn very little about the various races.  We know that the races don’t get along.  Elves are seen as having money and power and a strong fashion sense.  Orcs are seen as being more athletic, although they tend to be football linebackers rather than basketball players.  (Only humans, orcs and elves are featured, although dwarves are namedropped.)  This isn’t a complex movie that hides is message under a parable.  This is a “Oh, this happened to a friend” stories.  Nobody’s kidding anyone.

This was the real travesty of the movie.  A little more time writing it and maybe filling in some details would have been nice.  I get that exposition might slow down the story, but lack of exposition weakens it.  I also don’t think that it helps the LAPD that all of the human officers are portrayed as racist to varying degrees.  (Early in the movie, Ward states that fairy lives don’t matter.)  All of the groups come off as being one-dimensional.  Some of the characters are more complex, but that’s not saying much.  Both Jakoby and Ward seem to respect each other a little more towards the end, but not by much.

I can’t say that I hate the movie, but I can’t say that I love it, either.  The makeup and effects were good at making the world seem real with maybe one or two exceptions.  However, I don’t think that the fantasy element really added much.  Sometimes, I’ll look at an element and wonder how necessary it was to the plot.  You could have removed the fantasy element without much effect on the overall plot.  I don’t even think there are many lines that would have to be rewritten, other than swapping out group names.

I may have to reserve final judgment.  I will be waiting to see if anything comes along in terms of a sequel.  If the sequel does well, Bright may have been worth it.  As it stands, I’m inclined to file it under miss rather than hit.

IMDb page

Wild Wild West (1999)

When I was in middle school, we got a new principal.  I think the first interaction I had with her was her coming up and hugging me.  It was is if she were treating us like third graders.  It didn’t make much sense until we found out that she had been teaching at an elementary school the year before.  It took her some time to overcome force of habit.

I thought of that when I saw Wild Wild West.  It’s as if the writers were used to writing movies for small children and this was their first attempt at writing for adults.  Many of the scenarios seem intended for more for adult audiences, but the overall sense of the movie seems to be geared towards a less-sophisticated audience.  (I wouldn’t say it’s geared towards teenagers, but it’s close.)

The movie starts out with James West and Artemus Gordon both looking for one General McGrath.  He’s wanted for murder.  Gordon is inside a brothel dressed as a woman.  West arrives later, having chased a carriage filled with nitroglycerin.  (West, of course, stops the nitroglycerin from going over a cliff at the last moment.)  Arresting McGrath doesn’t go so well.  He escapes and the nitroglycerin is pushed into the building, starting a fire with both West and Gordon still in the building.

The next scene has Gordon and West meeting with President Ulysses S. Grant, both apparently unscathed.  Apparently, McGrath is part of a larger plot.  All anyone knows at the moment is that several top scientists have been kidnapped.  They pursue a lead to New Orleans; Dr. Arliss Loveless is hosting a party there.  In the mansion where the party is being held, West and Gordon find Rita Escobar.  She claims her father is one of the kidnapped scientists.

It turns out that Loveless is the one behind everything.  His plan is to get President Grant to hand over all of America’s land.  He’ll give back certain territories various parties, such as giving back the former colonies to Britain.  He’ll keep the northwest area of the United States for himself to rule over.  The only catch is that Grant won’t surrender.  What follows is a sort of cat-and-mouse game, eventually resulting in Loveless‘s defeat.

I’m not sure exactly where the movie fails.  Will Smith and Kevin Kline play West and Gordon, respectively.  I can’t put it on the acting, though.  The same goes for the directing.  Barry Sonnenfeld also directed the Men in Black movies, which I liked.

I think it has more to do with the writing.   Salma Hayek is given very little to do Rita Escobar other than stand there and look pretty.  She’s not even a McGuffin.  Her character probably could have been written out with very minor changes to the plot.  There are also a few scenes where West and Loveless talk to each other.  Instead of anything useful, the two just insult each other.  West makes jokes about Loveless not having legs and Loveless makes crude remarks about West’s race.  It’s not entirely out of character, but it’s also not entirely necessary or funny.  (On that note, there’s also an Asian character, who’s last name is East, which sets up an obligatory East-meets-West joke.)

I don’t really feel guilty about giving away some of the jokes, as I’m going to have to recommend skipping this movie.  Rather than worry what would happen if you saw it anyway, I’d rather explain why it’s something you’d want to miss out on.  I kind of wish I had been given that warning, myself.  The movie is billed as a comedy, but wasn’t really funny about it.  It felt like a lot of the jokes tried too hard or missed the mark.  I kept watching the movie thinking Salma Hayek could have done better.  Then it occurred to me that this applied to everything about the movie.  There are so many better movies out there.  You shouldn’t have a problem finding one.

IMDb page

I Am Legend (2007)

Note:  This review was originally posted to my Epinions account.

WARNING: This review gives major details about this and other movies that may influence your decision as to whether or not to watch this one. As the movie is based on a book that has been made into two other movies, this decision may have already been made. Continue watching at your own risk.




First came a book by Richard Matheson called I Am Legend. It was about a man immune to a plague that was trying to find a cure. From that book came several (credited) movies and possible an entire genre.

The first movie was called The Last Man on Earth and featured Vincent Price as Dr. Robert Morgan, a man who was bitten by a bat and thinks it’s given him an immunity to a worldwide plague that’s killed his family. He spends his days seeking supplies and his nights hiding from humans that have become vampires. He manages to find a few other survivors and eventually saves humanity, but dies trying.

The second movie was called The Omega Man. It starred Charlton Heston as Colonel Robert Neville, a man who has a vaccine, giving him immunity against a worldwide plague that’s killed almost everyone. Neville finds a few survivors, manages to save them, but ends up dying in the process. Notice a pattern here? I was a bit reluctant to see the movie called I Am Legend because I kind of figured it had to follow the same basic premise.

This time, it’s a cure for cancer that’s the cause of a worldwide plague in 2009, which wipes out much of humanity. Lt. Col. Robert Neville is the last uninfected man in Manhattan. He’s also a doctor that’s lost his family. He didn’t create the virus, but he has…drum roll please…an immunity and wants to use that to help those infected, who have become vampire-like mutants. He has some success on rats, but not on humans.

For the three years between the outbreak and the start of the movie, Neville spends all of his time with his dog, Samantha. Together, they go out together during the day looking for food and ‘renting’ movies. Neville has placed mannequins throughout the city so he can have conversations with them. At night, he has to hide in his house from said mutants. He has entire house on lockdown to protect himself. I’m not going to go through the rest, as you have to assume that the movie either follows the first two or it doesn’t.

Will Smith has come a long way since Fresh Price of Bel-Air. For most of the movie, we get to see Neville alone. This has to be hard for Will Smith, as his only costars are a dog and several inanimate objects. This couldn’t have been easy, as a good deal of acting involves playing off of other people. According to IMDB, there are two dogs credited as playing Samantha. (I’m assuming one was the adult Sam and the other was Sam as a puppy featured in a series of flashbacks.) I remember reading that Smith wouldn’t let many other people around the dog playing the adult Sam so that they would have a stronger bond.

As for the mutants, it was a little obvious to the untrained eye that they were CGI. They were supposed to be actors, but the actors just couldn’t get rid of all emotion. It didn’t really detract from the movie, as they weren’t shown that much. Otherwise, the special effects were great. I heard that most of the emptiness of New York City was done with computers and I didn’t even notice it.

Of the three movies, I’m torn between liking this one and The Omega Man the best. This one looked more modern, but it also looked more Hollywood. It had all sorts of fight scenes and explosions. The Omega Man seemed to be more about the plot and the characters. Heston was able to interact with the infected. Here, it was man against beasts.

I would definitely recommend seeing The Omega Man, especially if you’re going to see this one. It’s up to you which you see first. As for the rating, Last Man on Earth gets four stars.

IMDb page

Hancock (2008)

Note:  This review was originally posted to my Epinions account.

There are certain things that most superheroes have in common.  For starters, there's almost always a secret identity involved.  Superman has Clark Kent.  Spiderman goes about his non-hero business as Peter Parker.  Not so with Hancock.  Everyone knows him as such and he always uses the same identity.  He dresses in everyday clothing and has no alter ego.  He even goes through most of the movie without even thinking of a special costume.

His full name is John Hancock, an allusion to the most famous of signatures.  (The reference is explained in the movie.)  John is the most basic of heroes.  He doesn't seem to have use for social skills or manners.  When he arrives to help someone, he does what he has to do to save their lives, but doesn't seem to care what the consequences are.  This bothers many elected officials, public servants and common people.

To give you a good example, Ray Embry, played by Jason Bateman, enters the movie when Hancock saves him from an oncoming train.  Ray made the mistake of stopping on the track and not noticing said oncoming train because he was talking on the phone.  Instead of picking up the car and flying off, Hancock chooses to stop the train, thus derailing it.  Yes, Ray gets to live another day, but the railroad company is left to clean up a huge mess.

Everyone at the scene is upset with Hancock because this is just the latest in a string of messes he's made.  Ray, recognizing that Hancock saved his life, decides to repay him by trying to change his image.  Turns out, he's an advertising executive, so he knows a little about changing image.  Apparently, Ray likes a challenge.

Ray's wife doesn't think that the makeover will work.  Hancock is not only impolite, but he's a drunk and a rather mean one at that.  He lives in a trailer far removed from anyone else.  He seems to hate everyone for calling him what he is.  I don't know that he's necessarily a bad person.  It's just that, as I said earlier, he doesn't realize why it's important to be polite.  He knows that stopping a carjacking or a murder is the right thing to do.  He doesn't realize that form is at least as important as function.

Hancock seemed a bit over the top at times.  In one scene, he throws a kid so far up in the air that he has to wait a minute or two to catch him.  (Another scene is not fit for describing in mixed company, but you won't be able to listen to the theme to Sanford and Son the same way.)  The bad guys, on the other hand, seemed a bit flat.  I felt like they were just there to give Hancock something to do.

I don't know if there was any source material, like we have with other superheroes, who seem to be based mostly on comics.  This was a good thing for me because it all seemed new.  Even though comic-based books do deviate a little from the source material, you generally know the basic information like where they came from and who the main bad guys are.  (Despite never having read a comic book in my life, I can usually point out the minor changes to the story.)

I felt like Hancock's back story could have been spread out a little.  We spend a good portion of the movie learning about the basics of Hancock, like what a jerk he is.  We also learn that he woke up with amnesia, not knowing who he was.  Then, we have a good portion of his history dumped on us all at once.  I could have seen the information being spread out over several movies.  A hero with amnesia does seem interesting.

Despite the flaws, I do recommend the movie to people.  This is not a movie for children, as there's quite a bit of name calling and vulgarity, not to mention images that small children may not be able to deal with.  Interestingly enough, it does look like there will be a sequel, at least according to IMDb.  I'd definitely be interested in seeing it. 

IMDb page

Men in Black II (2002)

Note:  This review was originally posted to my Epinions account.

Sequels are difficult.  If a movie is successful, there’s pressure to do another one in hopes of making more money.  When the first Men in Black did well, a second MIB was released.  In this installment, we have Agents J (Will Smith) and K (Tommy Lee Jones) returning.  For those that didn’t see the first, K had ‘retired’ by having J erase his memories.  K is now Kevin Brown, a Postal worker.  J has gone through a few partners since the end of the last movie.

J has been successful in helping the MIB to defend Earth against aliens and the like.  One day, though, Serleena shows up.  She’s looking for The Light of Zartha.  She finds someone that may know something.  When information isn’t forthcoming, she kills him in front of a hidden witness, Laura Vasquez.  Serleena eventually takes over MIB headquarters looking for answers.  The problem is that only K knows exactly what and where The Light is.  J has to restore K’s memories and fast.

Once done, K reveals that The Light isn’t even supposed to be on Earth.  The Zarthaians came to Earth hoping that the MIB would protect The Light, but it was too dangerous and they refused.  Serleena isn’t willing to accept this.  She’s intent on getting The Light.  If you’ve seen the coming attractions for Men in Black 3, you can assume that J and K save the day.

I’ll admit that Men in Black II does fall into some of the traps common to sequels.  It did seem to rely heavily on characters from the previous movies.  Frank the Pug has an expanded role in this movie, delivering a few funny lines.  Instead of K being the senior officer bringing J into the organization, J is the one telling K what’s what and hoping that he accepts it.

There are new characters, but there is a sense of familiarity.  It was a big action movie with comedic elements.  You have an alien demanding something that the MIB are at a loss to find.  I didn’t mind.  There was enough original material that it seemed new, overall.  Also, you have Rosario Dawson as Laura.  I can’t say I can complain about that.

Men in Black and Men in Black 2 should be watched in order.  You could probably watch this movie first, but you may miss a few things.  It will also ruin certain elements of the first movie that will be ruined if you watch this one first.  They were meant to be watched in order.  (Men in Black 3 doesn’t seem to rely as heavily on these two movies, although I would still recommend watching in order.)  If you liked the first movie, I’d recommend watching this one.

IMDb page

Men in Black (1997)

Note:  This is a review I originally posted on Epinions.  With the closing of Epinions, I’ve decided to repost many, if not all of my reviews here, on my blog.  I’ve made some minor modifications to reflect any changes that have occurred since first reviewing the movie.  With any luck, I will be doing this at least once per week.

One way of writing an alien movie is the alien-in-disguise, humanity-doesn't-know-the-truth way.  Aliens live among us, but we don't know about it because aliens either look human or can fit into an inconspicuous disguise.  In Men In Black, the title organization protects us from alien threats because, well, no one else is authorized to know that aliens even exist.

The movie starts with agents K and D on a mission.  D decides that it's time to quit.  He misses looking up at the sky and not knowing the truth.  That leaves K to find a new partner.  People are recruited from all manner of organizations, mainly military.  It's James Edward, a New York City police officer, that K seems interested in.  When James becomes Agent J, we get to find out all about the various things that let the MIB stay in the shadows.

To become J, James can  no longer exist.  His fingerprints are removed.  All files are erased.  Anyone that knew James has their memories of him erased with a device called a neuralyzer.  (This device also comes in useful for covering up major incidents.)

Meanwhile, a big bug crashes on Earth and kills Edgar to take his appearance.  You'd think something like this would get out.  Yes, the ship crashes in farmland, but someone has to have seen something.  It has to have made it into a newspaper.  That's where tabloids come in.  We all think they're full of crazy half-baked hoaxes, but they're really the best investigative journalism around.  J and K go to Edgar's house and talk to his wife, Beatrice.  After the interview, she's neuralized and the agents are on their way.  Around the same time, different aliens show up demanding The Galaxy.  The MIB have a galactic standard week (one hour) to find and deliver it.

The movie was based on a series of comic books.  From what I've read, though, there were more than a few changes.  The comic version hat the MIB investigating all sorts of things and could protect their identity however they saw fit.  I don't know how well that version would have done, mostly since I've never read the comics.

It's still a very dark movie.  There are a few scenes that aren't going to be appropriate for children.  For instance, when The Bug takes Edgar's skin as a disguise, you don't see The Bug actually killing Edgar, but you know what's going on.  Also, as the movie progresses, the skin deteriorates.

I remember liking this movie when it first came out.  For some reason, this is one of two movies that I can recall where the sequel seems to get more TV airplay than the original.  (Ghostbusters is the other.)  I'd like to watch it again, but I don't know that I want to rent it.  Two sequels have been made, both of which I‘ve subsequently seen.  I'd still love to get my hands on a neuralyzer.

IMDb page