HERETIC Review

I remember reading an interview with David Fincher when he was doing press for Gone Girl where, in talking about adapting the book, he stated, "You have to choose which aspect you want to make a movie from." The idea that adapting didn't simply mean to alter the material so that it fit a new medium but adjusting, modifying even - so that said material was not only suited to this new medium but complimentary of it, stuck with me. Heretic was not adapted from a book and doesn't *really* take Fincher's advice when it comes to picking a single aspect from the topic it's covering to focus on. In fact, Heretic operates more in the "go big or go home" line of thought as it attempts to be a mind game, a mind fuck, as well as a critical reading of organized religions that ring “as hollow and as capitalistic” as board games like Monopoly with all its "zany spinoffs".

I bring up this Fincher quote because it helped me narrow my thoughts in response to Heretic for, despite the sprawling breadth of the subject matter and epic monologue deliveries via a charming-as-ever Hugh Grant, what I really zeroed in on was this idea of "iterations" and how the film presents this idea that these amalgamations of fantastical stories meant to serve as moral channels have ultimately presented us diluted and obscured worldviews. Views that people have died in the name of, views that have created rifts between entire civilizations and have fostered countless forms of violence throughout history despite being perceived as a major contributor to a peaceful society. That isn't to say this is any single religion's fault - people will find anything to argue about - but that it has become the basis for such negative repercussions says a lot about how organized religions have imported their ideas to their followers and how that shapes how those followers then choose to experience the world.

JOKER: FOLIE À DEUX Review

They say the art of originality is knowing how to hide your sources but if you saw the first Joker film you know writer/director Todd Phillips has no qualms about sharing his sources. Interestingly enough, it would seem the basis of Phillips' foray into the world of his titular character was not only to make something in the vein of some of his own inspirations but also to tell a story of inspiration itself while somehow crafting a film that doesn't feel the least bit inspiring. "They" AKA Shakespeare also stated that “all the world's a stage” and it is this divide within the psyche of our main character who so badly desires to be the center of attention - the main character of his own story if not others as well - yet is unable to necessarily stand out without doing something drastic that hangs over Phillips' follow-up. It is this coming to terms with his actual mediocrity that pains Joaquin Phoenix’s Arthur Fleck to the extent he doesn't know which side of himself to turn to in the aftermath of killing five people (actually six) - one of which was live on national television. As lost as Fleck seems to be it would appear the same could be said for Joker: Folie à Deux, the sequel to the billion-dollar-earning and Oscar-winning 2019 film, at least over the course of its first hour. 

On the one hand, Phillips is keen on making a film that so subverts expectations that it doesn't allow itself to fall into any trappings audiences might expect from a typical sequel. The desire to subvert going so far as to cause the filmmaker to claim this is a musical, but this is true only in so far as the characters sometimes burst into sing-songs that further highlight their emotions in ways intended to deepen our understanding of these aforementioned psyches yet these moments never transcend the reality or develop into full-on musical numbers. The splitting of hairs between avoiding the obvious path of a Joker sequel and committing to being something else entirely give the result an unbalanced feeling; as if the ambition and desire are present but the passion to execute is not. Somehow, this identity crisis becomes the main text of the film which is an interesting idea yet in addition to feeling unbalanced the film also becomes something of a tedious experience where the overarching intent is never quite clear. The film even going so far as to acknowledge how much the Arthur character wanted to do what the audience expected him to do, for him to give them the Joker they're begging for, but instead simply admits he could no longer carry on the facade, essentially coming clean about his state of mind during the murders and how desperate he is to begin anew - conveying to the audience and more specifically, the fanbase, that they may want to do the same. Admirable, bold even, but not always entertaining.

TRAP Review

I once had a literature professor who'd also served as the mayor of the small town I was attending community college in. Besides the lessons on William Blake, I don't remember much from the class, but of the many anecdotes the professor told the one I am reminded of most was about how, when he was mayor, a detective met him at city hall and commented on how he knew he was neither a corrupt politician nor serial killer because his office was so unorganized. Please understand this was in 2006, so before Dexter premiered, and before my Friday nights consisted of consuming episodes of 48 Hours as a way to decompress. That is to say, this felt like such an insight at the time. The professor would go on to note how the detective told him a favorable statistic showing that more often than not these people in positions of great risk were obsessive about the state of the world they crafted not only so they had the right boxes checked should said world ever be questioned but because psychologically their impulses wouldn't let them operate in any other way. And so, while the overly obsessive, neat-freak of a serial killer is a somewhat tired trope in 2024 M. Night Shyamalan's Trap utilizes it to great effect in the most Shyamalan of ways by clearly telegraphing the film's themes and intentions almost immediately while at the same time possessing something of an unidentifiable spirit that both suggests and reassures to inquiring viewers that there's more going on than meets the eye. 

What's great about Trap is its seeming disregard for harboring any kind of notion that it needs to sport a signature Shyamalan twist. Given the trailers there was something of an expectation that there might be more to the set-up and there is, to a certain extent, but it puts all of its cards on the table early with the appeal of the film largely resting on this brilliant, four-quadrant set-up. Sure, the movie is also something of a soft launch for Shyamalan's daughter's music career, but this is largely "The Josh Hartnett Show" and with the pre-release narratives established around not only Hartnett's comeback but the buzzy premise and the hope the director might deliver a late-summer surprise all indicators pointed to Trap being a major touchpoint in pop culture this year even if it ended up as one of M. Night's more minor works. Fortunately, Trap is more interesting because of how it unfolds rather than only because of what happens in the final moments which, while likely disappointing for some, will seemingly ensure the enduring qualities of the movie as a whole for much longer than if Shyamalan were solely banking on a build-up and reveal. As stated in the marketing, this is an experience through and through, an experience that represents the writer/director crafting what is almost the antithesis of what we've come to expect from him in that as far as instead of looking for clues to piece together a puzzle we're simply looking for the next logical step that might allow both us and Hartnett's killer to escape for a little longer.

DEADPOOL & WOLVERINE Review

A movie made so specifically for certain people of a certain age that there are bound to be as many who can’t contain their smiles as there are those who won’t be able to do the same with their confusion. That said, give or take Endgame and No Way Home this might be the greatest trick Kevin Feige has ever pulled as Deadpool & Wolverine has been marketed as the shot in the ass the MCU desperately needs, the disruptive force this once unstoppable franchise was seeking and while I’m genuinely surprised Ryan Reynolds was able to convince Feige to let him get off a few of the zingers he does here, in reality, as soon as the credits roll it’s more than apparent which universe this chapter in particular has the most impact on and maybe more telling…which one it does not.

Listen, as a boy who became a teenager in the year 2000 and a kid who watched the animated X-Men series every Saturday morning I was as excited for Bryan Singer’s movie as I imagine he probably would have been to meet me at that time. I essentially matured alongside the superhero genre - going from the infantile experiments that were those first X-Men and Spider-Man films to entering my twenties with the likes of The Dark Knight and of course, the birth of the Marvel Cinematic Universe proper. This makes the natural evolution of where we currently sit with franchise entertainment disappointing if not completely unexpected. There had to be a fall in order for there to be a reclamation. What’s odd is that Feige and co. would position this film as such when it feels very evident Feige and Marvel Studios have no real intention of allowing Deadpool to screw around with their sacred timeline. Sure, Deadpool can now be used to save some face and comically course correct certain methods of storytelling going forward while abandoning others without going through the trouble of actually eating crow, but Wade Wilson should be offended…not because he minds being used, but because he and his trademark fourth wall breaking are more or less being abused.

LONGLEGS Review

A completely surreal style a la the isolation of characters and staging of settings that writer/director Oz Perkins manages to merge with the expectations of a procedural; allowing the story to boil in the tedium of its case gone cold before the unexpected convictions of its characters come to light - revealing the true intent of the piece. Key to this intent is the understanding that the world we're being presented is largely dictated by the perspective through which we're seeing it. Longlegs doesn't always sustain itself on the intrigue of its mystery yet continuously gets under the skin with the disturbing if not sometimes heightened ideas it has around real-world difficulties. That isn't to say the central conceit of the film as a crime thriller doesn't work but more if that's all one takes away from it then they are missing the point. In essence, Perkins has put together a cautionary tale of sorts, regarding the trappings of mythologizing both regular human beings who choose to do terrible things as well as deities, demons and whichever side you affiliate with in terms of worshipping them. 

Perkins, who is presently the father of two teenagers, is also if not more interested in the ideas of the extent and severity to which parents go to not only protect their children but ensure the purity of their life experiences for as long as possible than he is said procedural aspects. Alicia Witt turning in a genuinely chilling performance in support of such. Yes, Longlegs features the titular character played as extravagantly as one would expect Nicolas Cage to play a creepy serial killer who looks like Tiny Tim and Powder's lovechild but for as effectively (and memorably) as Cage portrays this doll-making witch doctor what echoes for days after seeing the film is not the actions of the character of Longlegs, but more the credibility he lends his beliefs based off nothing more than intuition and furthermore, how far he was willing to follow them.