Movie Reviews
Titles Covered: Klaus, Xmen: Dark Phoenix, Dark Crystal: Age of Resistance, Castlevania, IT: Chapter 2, The Addams Family 2019, Hustlers, Good Boys, The Mule.
Klaus (****)
Where did THIS come from?
Like many, I saw the ads on Netflix and thought, “OK, another Netflix special. Don’t they release a new one every 10 minutes?” Then, word on the street came that Klaus was actually good. Then it started getting nominated for awards. OK, I’d better check it out…
I’ll just say it: Klaus should have won the Academy Award for Best Animated Picture.
Klaus is a fresh take on the Santa Claus legend, set in an alternate history 19th century in which Christmas exists (with the traditional carols about Jesus), but traditions of Santa do not. Main character “Jesper” is sent to a remote frozen island by his father as punishment for his laziness. Jesper can only return to enjoy the family fortune if he proves his work ethic by delivering 6,000 letters from an economically depressed town caught in the middle of a never-ending clan war. Believe it or not, this set-up segues into a plausible origin story for Santa Claus… and makes total sense both logically and dramatically.
The result is a film that combines the frantic silliness of a Bugs Bunny cartoon with the sentimentality of a modern Disney movie. The cartoon violence and slapstick is crazy and out of this world… and yet the emotional beats are also very strong. Klaus is also clever in developing a grounded origin story. The reindeer don’t really fly and the “elves” were actually nomadic tribespeople with funny hats, but you see how the children would misinterpret what they see into a magical legend. And why does Santa have so many presents to give away? Because he’s just a nice guy? Nope! Because he’s a lonely widower with OCD who constantly made toys for the children that his infertile wife was never able to give him. Damn…
There’s maybe a few small flaws to groan at in this movie: the contemporary soundtrack is distracting and a few modern references take away from the period setting. But overall, Klaus is a great-looking and creative movie with pitch-perfect voice-casting and a very unique style. Check it out!
X-Men: Dark Phoenix (**)
The now-concluded (?) Xmen series can actually be divided into 3 subseries. First came the original trilogy: 3 films released in quick succession which told a mostly coherent story. Then there’s the Wolverine anthology of 3 unrelated self-standing stories. And then there’s the First Class tetralogy, an incoherent mess with only one particularly good movie (Days of Future Past). Unsurprisingly, hardly anyone showed up for the final installment.
To be fair, none of the Xmen movies are that bad, and even Dark Phoenix isn’t horrible (It’s meh-mediocre). But as a whole, I feel like this reboot series didn’t add up to much. The timeline doesn’t work at all (everyone from First Class should be at least 50 by now), cliffhangers are left unresolved, major plot details are ignored, Magneto’s role makes less sense with each installment, and Mystique’s role never made sense. In addition, adapting the Dark Phoenix saga is problematic, since that story takes place in the “Guardians of the Galaxy” cosmos currently occupied by the MCU. Also, I feel that comic-book fans have over-hyped the Dark Phoenix story. Any adaptation that’s less than brilliant is going to make the rest of us wonder why “good girl goes bad” was supposed to blow our minds.
But… as its own movie, is Dark Phoenix any good? Eh… it’s OK, I guess. I liked the music, the final action scene, and some of the ideas about how mutants and humans could interact more positively. As a whole, the movie is a pretty easy watch. However, it rarely excels. James McAvoy does alright, but Jennifer Lawrence doesn’t seem to care and Sophie Turner is totally out of her depth. The plot isn't very involving, events come and go without much importance, and the villains are irrelevant until the big battle at the end.
I guess if you’ve stuck with the Xmen franchise for this long, you might as well see Dark Phoenix. When the time comes, I’ll probably just show my kids the original trilogy and call it a day.
Dark Crystal: Age of Resistance (**** and a half)
I honestly didn’t know what to expect from this.
The Dark Crystal is a 93-minute movie with a pretty simple plot. There’s also been a few books and comics, but Jim Henson’s oddball fantasy doesn’t have the expansive lore or pop culture presence of something like Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings, or Star Wars. Where exactly does one go with the story? Reviewers compared the series to Game of Thrones (which I’ve never gotten into). Could “Game of Thrones… with Muppets!” actually be good?
The first episode starts a bit slow, but I was eventually won over by the surprisingly coherent and interesting mythology, not to mention the philosophical and political subtext. How exactly would 18 Skeskis keep control over thousands of Gelflings? Well, the same way that kings rule in the real world. Oh, and remember the scene in the movie in which Skektech used the crystal to suck life essence from living creatures? The series shows the first time he successfully did so, and it’s a shocking and emotional scene. My jaw nearly hit the floor. These are film-makers who understand how scary The Dark Crystal was to kids, and were prepared to scare the now-adults who grew up watching the movie.
The set design, creature design, and world creation is fantastic. I’m really amazed by how much mileage the writers and designers got out lore. The series is completely true to the original movie, but also expands on it in ways that feel both logical and very satisfying. They succeeded marvelously at taking the small glimpse of Thra that we saw in 1982 and expanding it into a living world that could rival Middle Earth. Frankly, this achievement should embarrass the jokers in charge of Lucasfilm right now.
However, as with virtually every TV series ever, Age of Resistance doesn’t need to be as long as it is. In particular, they went way overboard with scenes of the Skeksis. The Skeksis are scary villains, but they’re also very unpleasant to watch, and too many scenes involve them screeching at each other. Meanwhile, more development could have been given to the Gelfling Queen (All-Madra) and her 3 daughters.
Age of Resistance has a lot of pacing issues and the occasional awkward scene, but it’s a must-see. It’s simultaneously extremely faithful to the source material and wildly original. It’s really unlike anything else I’ve seen recently, and produces one of the most epic, emotional, and shockingly weird projects that Netflix has ever hosted.
Castlevania (*)
We’re still trying to adapt videogames into other narrative mediums?
Castlevania launched on Netflix as a very short series, consisting of only four 20-minute episodes. Honestly, I would have liked it better if it were even shorter.
Castlevania is an R-rated series, and demonstrates this fact by including tons of sophomoric and disgusting material. The gore is way overdone and made me feel physically ill. Ick! The writing isn’t much better, aside from an occasional funny one-liner. It’s obvious that Season One was planned as a movie and then awkwardly split into episodes; none of the episodes have any sense of structure or pacing. Even taken as a whole, the story feels simultaneously padded (either with redundant dialogue or extra scenes of gore) and incomplete. The first episode actually casts Dracula as the main character, but then he suddenly becomes an offscreen badguy. We’re also supposed to be really sad about Dracula’s wife, but the series never bothered to show us that they were a married couple. Show! Don’t tell!
And hold on… this is supposed to be an adaptation of Castlevania III on the NES?! This isn’t the Castlevania I remember! It should have been a fun story about a hero with a magical whip who fights monsters. Instead of being fun, most of Season One focuses portraying “the Church” as a ridiculous cartoon-evil stereotype. Portraying the medieval church as antagonistic is nothing new, but Castlevania sets a new low, using the most clichéd characterizations ever.
I suppose the strong production values technically put Castlevania above the worst videogame adaptations, but I’ve rarely encountered a series that’s so nasty and mean-spirited.
It: Chapter 2 (***)
2 years ago we got a new film adaptation of “IT,” a popular Steven King novel about a killer clown from outer space. This 2017 adaptation was pretty good and became the highest-grossing horror movie (not accounting for inflation). However, the film only covered about half of the book, so a sequel was expected and logical. The result is a decent horror flick, albeit one that doesn’t live up to its predecessor.
Why is this one not as good? For starters, the adult “losers club” comes off like the cast of a prime-time sitcom: handsome beings with no kids, all with high-powered jobs despite demonstrating only average intelligence and ability. The actors do the best they can, but the characters just aren’t that interesting.
Also, the movie is WAY too long. The second act is mostly superfluous. The characters do nothing but confront demons from their past… which they do again in the third act so it’s totally redundant.
Other than that, It: Chapter 2 is solid. The scary visuals are imaginative and well-executed, and set the movie apart from the usual boring zombies and slasher killers of the horror genre. The jump scares are definitely effective, and Bill Skarsgard excels as Pennywise the Clown, even making him sympathetic at times.
Probably the most effective story-telling tool, however, is the use of original child cast. As mentioned previously, the adults aren’t that great, but I loved the way the film combined their adventures with the past child versions. It was a cool effect, and also made sense in the context of a story about defeating an enemy from your past.
It: Chapter 2 is a decent horror movie, and ends up being more than the sum of its parts. It’s satisfying, and worth seeing if you liked the previous installment.
The Addams Family (** and a half)
Although I’ve seen bits of the TV sitcom and the original comic strip, I’m most familiar with “The Addams Family” through the 1990’s live action movies starring Raul Julia and Angelica Huston. These were popular comedies that had just enough macabre to be edgy, without being unsuitable for families. Revisiting them as an adult, I found the first movie somewhat weak, though the sequel mostly holds up. Anyway, 2019's Addams Family is supposed to harken back to the original comic strip, including elements like a pet lion.
For the film’s credit, the character design is pretty good (especially the extended Addams Family members), and I really liked Wednesday and Lurch. Other characters don’t work as well. Uncle Fester is annoying and pointless, and Cousin Itt’s garbled vocal effects ruin the stunt-casting joke of having him voiced by Snoop Dog. On the other hand, Cousin Itt’s introductory scene is pretty dang funny, as are many other scenes. Some favorite moments include Morticia conducting a séance to talk to her parents, and Thing looking at pictures of feet.
Unfortunately, the plot is pretty lame and thematically toothless. The antagonist is a reality TV host who dislikes the Addams because they’re supposedly making it hard to sell houses in the neighborhood. Wow, what an exciting conflict that kids will totally relate to! Gotta love those real estate markets! Boo…
On the whole, I guess The Addams Family 2019 is OK. It’s worth a watch if you’re curious, but certainly not one of 2019’s better films.
Hustlers (*** and a half)
Hustlers is based on a true story about a gang of criminal strippers who drugged and robbed their clients. Though they eventually served light jail sentences, it seemed that these cons got away with it because their victims were too embarrassed to admit what happened to them.
Hustlers is told from the point of view of a young stripper taken under the wing of an older veteran, learning the tricks of the trade. The industry doesn’t seem like a nice place to be (the girls admit that they struggle in relationships and rarely actually have sex), but provides a nice income… until the 2007-2008 economic crisis forces their wealthy NYC clients to stop wasting money on drinks and lap dances. Thus, we see how aggressive sales tactics eventually morph into outright fraud, as the strippers fight for the few interested men left.
The movie has a lot of strengths, from its engaging actresses, well-illustrated plot, and occasional emotional moments. The scene where the hammer finally comes down on the main characters is especially well-executed. And yes, Jennifer Lopez gives a very memorable pole-dance performance, regardless of how you feel about the sex industry.
However, I can’t say I agree with the film (or at least the film’s proponents and author-insert character) in saying that the actions of the main characters are justified or “empowering.” Are we really at a point where fraud, drugging, and robbery is OK as long as women do it, and we don’t like the victims? In fact, we’re to believe that this is not only OK, but empowering? That’s a disturbing thought.
Hustlers is very entertaining, engaging, and definitely worth a view. It’s also disturbingly sympathetic towards criminals who probably don’t deserve our sympathy.
Good Boys (****)
2019 yielded 2 movies that were immediately pegged as imitations of the 2007 comedy Superbad. Booksmart was “Superbad with girls,” and Good Boys is “Superbad with a younger cast.” Booksmart is funny, but didn’t quite click with me. Good Boys, on the other hand, is much a smarter movie that’s genuinely great.
Once again, we’ve got a group of kids who need to get to a party. And once again, they need to find a MacGuffin before doing so. In Superbad it was alcohol, in Booksmart it was the address of the party, and in Good Boys it’s a missing drone that must be replaced so that the main character won’t be grounded. As expected, there will be lots of physical comedy, excessive swearing, and run-ins with various antagonistic groups.
What’s unexpected, however, is how Good Boys uses the innocence of the main characters to drive the comedy. The boys don’t quite understand the world around themselves, and are young enough to believe everything they’ve been taught in school is the Gospel Truth. The young age of the protagonists makes their incompetence believable, and works to produce heavy amounts of dramatic irony. In particular, I loved the character of “Lucas,” the most virtuous of the boys who also proves to be the funniest.
Good Boys is a gem. It’s a good mix of raunchy comedy, creative situations, nostalgic messages, and a smart script that uses wordplay to maximum effect.
The Mule (***)
Say what you will about the man’s politics, Clint Eastwood is a screen legend who’s brought many great stories to the screen. One of his most recent starring roles is The Mule, a true story about an elderly man who became a pawn for powerful drug cartels.
Clint’s character is a talented horticulturist with exceptionally bad judgement. Now in his 80’s, he’s lost his farm and his family, with nothing to show for his life’s work. A random encounter with a stranger gives him a lead on some easy money: drive a large duffel bag from Texas to Chicago. It’s obvious from the beginning that this is a criminal enterprise, but Eastwood doesn’t seem to put much thought into it.
The result is a story about finding meaning late in life, as well as a parable on police profiling. Despite limited ability, Eastwood runs drugs easily, because law enforcement officers never suspect an elderly white man of such a crime. Even when they know exactly where he is, they’ll end up (comically) detaining or arresting somebody else.
The heart of the story focuses more on Eastwood’s family. He runs drugs because he hopes that money will earn him respect from his community and family. This sort of works, but he’ll ultimately have to take a much bigger risk in order to win back their trust.
The Mule is a good story with good acting. It also manages the idea of a criminal protagonist much better than Hustlers. However, the dramatic stakes never get high enough. There isn’t any big moral dilemma about Eastwood’s decisions, and the climax is relatively low-key. So… it’s not Breaking Bad, but the Mule is decent watch nonetheless.
Klaus (****)
Where did THIS come from?
Like many, I saw the ads on Netflix and thought, “OK, another Netflix special. Don’t they release a new one every 10 minutes?” Then, word on the street came that Klaus was actually good. Then it started getting nominated for awards. OK, I’d better check it out…
I’ll just say it: Klaus should have won the Academy Award for Best Animated Picture.
Klaus is a fresh take on the Santa Claus legend, set in an alternate history 19th century in which Christmas exists (with the traditional carols about Jesus), but traditions of Santa do not. Main character “Jesper” is sent to a remote frozen island by his father as punishment for his laziness. Jesper can only return to enjoy the family fortune if he proves his work ethic by delivering 6,000 letters from an economically depressed town caught in the middle of a never-ending clan war. Believe it or not, this set-up segues into a plausible origin story for Santa Claus… and makes total sense both logically and dramatically.
The result is a film that combines the frantic silliness of a Bugs Bunny cartoon with the sentimentality of a modern Disney movie. The cartoon violence and slapstick is crazy and out of this world… and yet the emotional beats are also very strong. Klaus is also clever in developing a grounded origin story. The reindeer don’t really fly and the “elves” were actually nomadic tribespeople with funny hats, but you see how the children would misinterpret what they see into a magical legend. And why does Santa have so many presents to give away? Because he’s just a nice guy? Nope! Because he’s a lonely widower with OCD who constantly made toys for the children that his infertile wife was never able to give him. Damn…
There’s maybe a few small flaws to groan at in this movie: the contemporary soundtrack is distracting and a few modern references take away from the period setting. But overall, Klaus is a great-looking and creative movie with pitch-perfect voice-casting and a very unique style. Check it out!
X-Men: Dark Phoenix (**)
The now-concluded (?) Xmen series can actually be divided into 3 subseries. First came the original trilogy: 3 films released in quick succession which told a mostly coherent story. Then there’s the Wolverine anthology of 3 unrelated self-standing stories. And then there’s the First Class tetralogy, an incoherent mess with only one particularly good movie (Days of Future Past). Unsurprisingly, hardly anyone showed up for the final installment.
To be fair, none of the Xmen movies are that bad, and even Dark Phoenix isn’t horrible (It’s meh-mediocre). But as a whole, I feel like this reboot series didn’t add up to much. The timeline doesn’t work at all (everyone from First Class should be at least 50 by now), cliffhangers are left unresolved, major plot details are ignored, Magneto’s role makes less sense with each installment, and Mystique’s role never made sense. In addition, adapting the Dark Phoenix saga is problematic, since that story takes place in the “Guardians of the Galaxy” cosmos currently occupied by the MCU. Also, I feel that comic-book fans have over-hyped the Dark Phoenix story. Any adaptation that’s less than brilliant is going to make the rest of us wonder why “good girl goes bad” was supposed to blow our minds.
But… as its own movie, is Dark Phoenix any good? Eh… it’s OK, I guess. I liked the music, the final action scene, and some of the ideas about how mutants and humans could interact more positively. As a whole, the movie is a pretty easy watch. However, it rarely excels. James McAvoy does alright, but Jennifer Lawrence doesn’t seem to care and Sophie Turner is totally out of her depth. The plot isn't very involving, events come and go without much importance, and the villains are irrelevant until the big battle at the end.
I guess if you’ve stuck with the Xmen franchise for this long, you might as well see Dark Phoenix. When the time comes, I’ll probably just show my kids the original trilogy and call it a day.
Dark Crystal: Age of Resistance (**** and a half)
I honestly didn’t know what to expect from this.
The Dark Crystal is a 93-minute movie with a pretty simple plot. There’s also been a few books and comics, but Jim Henson’s oddball fantasy doesn’t have the expansive lore or pop culture presence of something like Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings, or Star Wars. Where exactly does one go with the story? Reviewers compared the series to Game of Thrones (which I’ve never gotten into). Could “Game of Thrones… with Muppets!” actually be good?
The first episode starts a bit slow, but I was eventually won over by the surprisingly coherent and interesting mythology, not to mention the philosophical and political subtext. How exactly would 18 Skeskis keep control over thousands of Gelflings? Well, the same way that kings rule in the real world. Oh, and remember the scene in the movie in which Skektech used the crystal to suck life essence from living creatures? The series shows the first time he successfully did so, and it’s a shocking and emotional scene. My jaw nearly hit the floor. These are film-makers who understand how scary The Dark Crystal was to kids, and were prepared to scare the now-adults who grew up watching the movie.
The set design, creature design, and world creation is fantastic. I’m really amazed by how much mileage the writers and designers got out lore. The series is completely true to the original movie, but also expands on it in ways that feel both logical and very satisfying. They succeeded marvelously at taking the small glimpse of Thra that we saw in 1982 and expanding it into a living world that could rival Middle Earth. Frankly, this achievement should embarrass the jokers in charge of Lucasfilm right now.
However, as with virtually every TV series ever, Age of Resistance doesn’t need to be as long as it is. In particular, they went way overboard with scenes of the Skeksis. The Skeksis are scary villains, but they’re also very unpleasant to watch, and too many scenes involve them screeching at each other. Meanwhile, more development could have been given to the Gelfling Queen (All-Madra) and her 3 daughters.
Age of Resistance has a lot of pacing issues and the occasional awkward scene, but it’s a must-see. It’s simultaneously extremely faithful to the source material and wildly original. It’s really unlike anything else I’ve seen recently, and produces one of the most epic, emotional, and shockingly weird projects that Netflix has ever hosted.
Castlevania (*)
We’re still trying to adapt videogames into other narrative mediums?
Castlevania launched on Netflix as a very short series, consisting of only four 20-minute episodes. Honestly, I would have liked it better if it were even shorter.
Castlevania is an R-rated series, and demonstrates this fact by including tons of sophomoric and disgusting material. The gore is way overdone and made me feel physically ill. Ick! The writing isn’t much better, aside from an occasional funny one-liner. It’s obvious that Season One was planned as a movie and then awkwardly split into episodes; none of the episodes have any sense of structure or pacing. Even taken as a whole, the story feels simultaneously padded (either with redundant dialogue or extra scenes of gore) and incomplete. The first episode actually casts Dracula as the main character, but then he suddenly becomes an offscreen badguy. We’re also supposed to be really sad about Dracula’s wife, but the series never bothered to show us that they were a married couple. Show! Don’t tell!
And hold on… this is supposed to be an adaptation of Castlevania III on the NES?! This isn’t the Castlevania I remember! It should have been a fun story about a hero with a magical whip who fights monsters. Instead of being fun, most of Season One focuses portraying “the Church” as a ridiculous cartoon-evil stereotype. Portraying the medieval church as antagonistic is nothing new, but Castlevania sets a new low, using the most clichéd characterizations ever.
I suppose the strong production values technically put Castlevania above the worst videogame adaptations, but I’ve rarely encountered a series that’s so nasty and mean-spirited.
It: Chapter 2 (***)
2 years ago we got a new film adaptation of “IT,” a popular Steven King novel about a killer clown from outer space. This 2017 adaptation was pretty good and became the highest-grossing horror movie (not accounting for inflation). However, the film only covered about half of the book, so a sequel was expected and logical. The result is a decent horror flick, albeit one that doesn’t live up to its predecessor.
Why is this one not as good? For starters, the adult “losers club” comes off like the cast of a prime-time sitcom: handsome beings with no kids, all with high-powered jobs despite demonstrating only average intelligence and ability. The actors do the best they can, but the characters just aren’t that interesting.
Also, the movie is WAY too long. The second act is mostly superfluous. The characters do nothing but confront demons from their past… which they do again in the third act so it’s totally redundant.
Other than that, It: Chapter 2 is solid. The scary visuals are imaginative and well-executed, and set the movie apart from the usual boring zombies and slasher killers of the horror genre. The jump scares are definitely effective, and Bill Skarsgard excels as Pennywise the Clown, even making him sympathetic at times.
Probably the most effective story-telling tool, however, is the use of original child cast. As mentioned previously, the adults aren’t that great, but I loved the way the film combined their adventures with the past child versions. It was a cool effect, and also made sense in the context of a story about defeating an enemy from your past.
It: Chapter 2 is a decent horror movie, and ends up being more than the sum of its parts. It’s satisfying, and worth seeing if you liked the previous installment.
The Addams Family (** and a half)
Although I’ve seen bits of the TV sitcom and the original comic strip, I’m most familiar with “The Addams Family” through the 1990’s live action movies starring Raul Julia and Angelica Huston. These were popular comedies that had just enough macabre to be edgy, without being unsuitable for families. Revisiting them as an adult, I found the first movie somewhat weak, though the sequel mostly holds up. Anyway, 2019's Addams Family is supposed to harken back to the original comic strip, including elements like a pet lion.
For the film’s credit, the character design is pretty good (especially the extended Addams Family members), and I really liked Wednesday and Lurch. Other characters don’t work as well. Uncle Fester is annoying and pointless, and Cousin Itt’s garbled vocal effects ruin the stunt-casting joke of having him voiced by Snoop Dog. On the other hand, Cousin Itt’s introductory scene is pretty dang funny, as are many other scenes. Some favorite moments include Morticia conducting a séance to talk to her parents, and Thing looking at pictures of feet.
Unfortunately, the plot is pretty lame and thematically toothless. The antagonist is a reality TV host who dislikes the Addams because they’re supposedly making it hard to sell houses in the neighborhood. Wow, what an exciting conflict that kids will totally relate to! Gotta love those real estate markets! Boo…
On the whole, I guess The Addams Family 2019 is OK. It’s worth a watch if you’re curious, but certainly not one of 2019’s better films.
Hustlers (*** and a half)
Hustlers is based on a true story about a gang of criminal strippers who drugged and robbed their clients. Though they eventually served light jail sentences, it seemed that these cons got away with it because their victims were too embarrassed to admit what happened to them.
Hustlers is told from the point of view of a young stripper taken under the wing of an older veteran, learning the tricks of the trade. The industry doesn’t seem like a nice place to be (the girls admit that they struggle in relationships and rarely actually have sex), but provides a nice income… until the 2007-2008 economic crisis forces their wealthy NYC clients to stop wasting money on drinks and lap dances. Thus, we see how aggressive sales tactics eventually morph into outright fraud, as the strippers fight for the few interested men left.
The movie has a lot of strengths, from its engaging actresses, well-illustrated plot, and occasional emotional moments. The scene where the hammer finally comes down on the main characters is especially well-executed. And yes, Jennifer Lopez gives a very memorable pole-dance performance, regardless of how you feel about the sex industry.
However, I can’t say I agree with the film (or at least the film’s proponents and author-insert character) in saying that the actions of the main characters are justified or “empowering.” Are we really at a point where fraud, drugging, and robbery is OK as long as women do it, and we don’t like the victims? In fact, we’re to believe that this is not only OK, but empowering? That’s a disturbing thought.
Hustlers is very entertaining, engaging, and definitely worth a view. It’s also disturbingly sympathetic towards criminals who probably don’t deserve our sympathy.
Good Boys (****)
2019 yielded 2 movies that were immediately pegged as imitations of the 2007 comedy Superbad. Booksmart was “Superbad with girls,” and Good Boys is “Superbad with a younger cast.” Booksmart is funny, but didn’t quite click with me. Good Boys, on the other hand, is much a smarter movie that’s genuinely great.
Once again, we’ve got a group of kids who need to get to a party. And once again, they need to find a MacGuffin before doing so. In Superbad it was alcohol, in Booksmart it was the address of the party, and in Good Boys it’s a missing drone that must be replaced so that the main character won’t be grounded. As expected, there will be lots of physical comedy, excessive swearing, and run-ins with various antagonistic groups.
What’s unexpected, however, is how Good Boys uses the innocence of the main characters to drive the comedy. The boys don’t quite understand the world around themselves, and are young enough to believe everything they’ve been taught in school is the Gospel Truth. The young age of the protagonists makes their incompetence believable, and works to produce heavy amounts of dramatic irony. In particular, I loved the character of “Lucas,” the most virtuous of the boys who also proves to be the funniest.
Good Boys is a gem. It’s a good mix of raunchy comedy, creative situations, nostalgic messages, and a smart script that uses wordplay to maximum effect.
The Mule (***)
Say what you will about the man’s politics, Clint Eastwood is a screen legend who’s brought many great stories to the screen. One of his most recent starring roles is The Mule, a true story about an elderly man who became a pawn for powerful drug cartels.
Clint’s character is a talented horticulturist with exceptionally bad judgement. Now in his 80’s, he’s lost his farm and his family, with nothing to show for his life’s work. A random encounter with a stranger gives him a lead on some easy money: drive a large duffel bag from Texas to Chicago. It’s obvious from the beginning that this is a criminal enterprise, but Eastwood doesn’t seem to put much thought into it.
The result is a story about finding meaning late in life, as well as a parable on police profiling. Despite limited ability, Eastwood runs drugs easily, because law enforcement officers never suspect an elderly white man of such a crime. Even when they know exactly where he is, they’ll end up (comically) detaining or arresting somebody else.
The heart of the story focuses more on Eastwood’s family. He runs drugs because he hopes that money will earn him respect from his community and family. This sort of works, but he’ll ultimately have to take a much bigger risk in order to win back their trust.
The Mule is a good story with good acting. It also manages the idea of a criminal protagonist much better than Hustlers. However, the dramatic stakes never get high enough. There isn’t any big moral dilemma about Eastwood’s decisions, and the climax is relatively low-key. So… it’s not Breaking Bad, but the Mule is decent watch nonetheless.