 |
| Courtesy of Disney |
(Rated PG for some action and rude humor.)
The cast: The voices of John C. Reilly, Sarah Silverman, Gal Gadot and others.
What it’s about: Set a few years after Wreck-It Ralph, this charming sequel finds Ralph (Reilly) and Vanellope (Silverman) adjusting to their routine lives in the arcade. However, when the steering wheel controller on Vanellope’s game breaks, the friends must journey through the internet to find a replacement before the owner unplugs her world forever.
The good: Ralph Breaks the Internet joins the exclusive club of sequels that are just as good – if not better – than their predecessors. That’s because, instead of being stuffed with easy gags and Disney princess cameos, the film actually has something important to say about the web: how it can bring people together or just as easily tear them apart. Most importantly, the creative, funny and heartwarming screenplay (credited to Phil Johnston and Pamela Ribon) focuses on character first and allows the jokes to spring from there.
It’s a much better approach than reverse engineering a story around popular memes that will be out of date by the time the flick hits Blu-ray in a few months. (That being said, hang around after the credits for an internet joke that made me cry with laughter.)
Reilly and Silverman are outstanding as Ralph and Vanellope, quickly reestablishing the rapport that made Wreck-It Ralph such a joy to watch. Gadot is also terrific as a beautiful, dangerous driver from a Grand Theft Auto-style game who sees something special in Vanellope and encourages her to foster her talent. A more clichéd movie would make her a villain that comes between our two heroes, but Ralph Breaks the Internet has more interesting ideas in mind.
The not-so-good: The movie’s commitment to character development is laudable, but it requires a significant amount of setup and payoff that results in a two-hour running time. I didn’t mind (although it could’ve dropped a couple of subplots), but kids with short attention spans might. Also, the third act gets intense, which younger viewers might find a little scary.
Grade: B+
Creed II
 |
| Courtesy of Warner Bros. |
(Rated PG-13 for sports action violence, language, and a scene of sensuality.)
The cast: Michael B. Jordan, Sylvester Stallone, Tessa Thompson, Dolph Lundgren, Florian Munteanu and Phylicia Rashad.
What it’s about: Life is good for new heavyweight champion Adonis Creed (Jordan). He just proposed to his girlfriend Bianca (Thompson), they’re expecting a baby and his “Unc” Rocky Balboa (Stallone) is bouncing back from the cancer that almost killed him. But when Viktor Drago (Munteanu) challenges Creed for the title, accompanied by his father and trainer Ivan (Lundgren) – aka the Russian who killed his father back in the 1980s – the champ must decide whether to risk throwing everything away to settle an old score.
The good: Considering Creed II was made under less-than-ideal circumstances (brilliant director and co-writer Ryan Coogler is only an executive producer this time), I’m genuinely surprised it’s so good. If you treat the film as a sequel to Creed, it falls far short of its predecessor. But if you think of it as Rocky IV, Part II, you’ll be in for a rousing, albeit clichéd, crowd-pleaser.
Jordan, Thompson, Stallone and Rashad (getting a bit more to do this time) all deliver strong performances. I especially liked the small, intimate moments when the plot stops so we can see Donnie and Bianca just living their lives. But I was not expecting Lundgren to be the film’s stealth MVP.
With some help from the screenplay (co-written by Stallone and Juel Taylor), the actor transforms Drago from a one-dimensional cartoon villain into an actual person. His scenes with Munteanu are so good that I was surprised to find myself enjoying them as much as the main story. That made the climactic fight – featuring some cool, innovative direction from Steven Caple Jr. – even more emotionally involving than I expected.
The not-so-good: I don’t think anyone would make the argument that Creed II was a necessary addition to these franchises. Still, if Stallone (with an assist from Coogler) was going to make the movie anyway, viewers got lucky that it’s this strong. Honestly, considering the final scenes, it’s the perfect place to end both characters’ stories. But the guy who’s getting ready to make Rambo 5 and Escape Plan 3 isn’t exactly known for gracefully bowing out.
Grade: B
Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald
 |
| Courtesy of Warner Bros. |
(Rated PG-13 for some sequences of fantasy action.)
The cast: Eddie Redmayne, Katherine Waterston, Dan Fogler, Alison Sudol, Ezra Miller, Zoe Kravitz, Jude Law and Johnny Depp.
What it’s about: The second installment of J.K. Rowling’s convoluted prequel series to her beloved Harry Potter saga kicks off with evil wizard Gellert Grindelwald (Depp) escaping custody and preparing to wage war against non-magical people. To stop him, Albus Dumbledore (Law) enlists former student Newt Scamander (Redmayne) and his friends (Waterston, Fogler, Sudol and Kravitz), although dangers, betrayals and surprising revelations await them.
The good: Redmayne continues to demonstrate that he’s finally found the perfect role for his unique traits and acting style. I’m not always a fan of his performances, but I really like what he does in these films.
Law, playing a much younger and charismatic version of Dumbledore, is a welcome addition to the cast, although I hope he gets more to do in future installments. Similarly, Miller and Sudol do terrific work in a film that doesn’t understand what makes their characters so compelling. Viewers who love stellar visual effects and cute CGI creatures will find plenty to enjoy in The Crimes of Grindelwald.
The not-so-good: Almost everything else. I mostly enjoyed Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them (the first installment), but I had a creeping suspicion this series could easily become Rowling’s version of Peter Jackson’s The Hobbit – two hours of story stretched across five unnecessarily long movies. Turns out I was right.
In 135 minutes, we learn almost nothing about these characters or why we should care about them. Instead, we get painfully long expositional monologues that literally involve people staring at family trees. Characters that showed promise in the first film now make monumentally stupid decisions for the sake of plot twists that betray what made them compelling to begin with.
Speaking of bad revelations, the film concludes with one meant to stoke viewers’ anticipation for the next installment (due in 2020) but it ends up making both this series and – even worse – the original books feel smaller in hindsight. If this “Wizarding World” is as vast as Rowling claims, why does she turn into Oprah handing out new relatives to her characters?
“You get a surprise sibling! You get a surprise sibling! Everybody gets a surprise sibling!” It’s a hackneyed, soap opera-style conceit that cheapens everything.
Grade: D+
Comments
Post a Comment