Wind River (2017)

Directed by: Taylor Sheridan

Written by: Taylor Sheridan

Starring: Jeremy Renner & Elizabeth Olsen







When I saw the trailer for this film, I knew I didn't want to see it.  I didn't like that Jeremy Renner and Elizabeth Olsen were the stars in this mystery film that focuses on Native Americans and their reservation.  They couldn't get Native American actors?  But then again someone noted that they would need big star names for the film to actually be successful and made.  But, still...

Nevertheless, the film was great.  The plot was sound and made sense as well as made you think about who the killers of this poor Native American girl could be.  While the main storyline was going on, there was also some consideration about Renner's character's background and how he fit in.

4 popcorns.

Mother! (2017)

Directed by: Darren Aronofsky

Written by: Darren Aronofsky

Starring: Jennifer Lawrence, Javier Bardem, Michelle Pfeiffer, & Ed Harris






The movie without character names.  Thanks Aronofsky.

Lawrence plays a housewife that is remodeling her husband's childhood home.  Bardem, her husband, is a famous author trying to write his next book without any success or inspiration.  After a husband shows up unannounced, it goes down hill from here.  Bardem, being a great host, allows Harris in to stay the night.  Lawrence, deeply upset by this fears the strangers and wonders their intention.  Next thing you know, more guests show up, causing Lawrence deep anxiety.  The film spirals out of control to end up with (SPOILER below)...

...Lawrence dying and Bardem claiming her heart to restart the whole cycle again.  It was confusing for the most part.  Was Bardem God?  Was he the devil?  Was he mother earth?  Was she?  There wasn't a definite answer, which I guess is supposed to make it brilliant, but from what I heard, it made it some people very upset.

For example, if he was God, why would he allow his wife and child to die, especially all the violence that led to that.  But at the same time, religiously speaking God did sacrifice Jesus.

But then there are theories of him being the devil.  That would explain his charisma and the violence. Plus, the claiming of all the souls and pretty much life being destroyed.  But is the devil capable of love and to love all his fans and wife?

Then the theory of mother Earth.  Is each wife mother Earth?  That would explain the title and how her heart can recreate life.  But he's the one that does it.  And if the crystal that broke in the movie representing balance and peace didn't break, would Lawrence still be alive?

I don't know.  And this is why it's 3 popcorns.  It's an artistic film with an unconventional ending as well as confusing and mostly unsatisfactory one.  But I still liked it.

Annabelle: Creation (2017)

Directed by: David F. Sandberg

Written by: Gary Dauberman

Starring: Talitha Bateman, Lulu Wilson, & Stephanie Sigman








I recommend, before watching this film, you to watch the first one first.  Otherwise you might be lost or not see the connection between the films.

A group of orphans move into a new home where weird things begin to happen to Janice (Bateman) and her best friend Linda (Wilson) after discovering a strange doll in the closet.  After a while, the doll becomes more dangerous and needs to take a human soul in order to live on and become stronger.

Now that's where I became confused.  Apparently, the doll is not possessed, it's just attached to an evil spirit.  I thought the doll had the demon inside it, but note to self, it just waits for a host a.k.a. one of the girls.

The film was very tense for the most part and had a complete plot that gave you that "aha" moment at the end.  You can see how the films connect and even get a sense of the true story as well.  (Since if you didn't know, the real doll is a raggedy Ann doll.)

Other than that, there isn't much else to say.  I didn't get scared as much as I was creeped out and tense.  I guess knowing something is coming helps with the fear.  The best part though was the ending because, like I said, it had the connection between the films.  That's what pushed it up to a 4, otherwise it would have been a 3.

4 popcorns.

Atomic Blonde (2017)

Directed by: David Leitch

Written by: Kurt Johnstad

Starring: Charlize Theron, James McAvoy, & John Goodman




In 1989, the Cold War is finally ending, but Lorraine Broughton (Theron) has a mission to find out who is the double agent a.k.a. Satchel in MI6, as well as discover a list with every name of the secret agents.

To be frank, the movie was confusing for about 3/4ths of it.  As an audience member, you knew that she was on hunt for this list as well as Satchel, but the connections to the "bad guys," didn't make sense all that well.  In other words, it was a little difficult to keep up until the end, where you have an "ah ha" moment and just figured everything out.  But in my opinion, that's way too long.

In addition, most of the film was a flash back, which seemed unnecessary.  I think it would have been better and less confusing if they had kept the storyline linear.  Plus, there's a moment in the film where you don't know if it is the past or present.  They should have at least gave some indication as to what it was.

Furthermore, Theron's fighting was iffy.  What I mean is that it seemed so robotic.  Like punch here, kick here, yadda yadda yadda.  There wasn't enough spontaneity until the end where the fighting seemed to have improved.  Not sure what that was about.

Along with the fighting was a lack of music.  Most of the scenes were quiet where you just hear the action grunts and breaking glass, etc.  I wonder if there was action music, like shown in the trailer, if the fighting would have been better and more fast paced rather than slow boring movements.

But despite all these negatives, the actors performed well and the cinematography was great.  Beautiful cool tones filled the screen and the ending gave you a shocker.  The first part of the ending was predictable, but then it took twist that you just don't see coming. (Or at least I didn't.)

4 popcorns.

My Cousin Rachel (2017)

Directed by: Roger Michell

Written by: Daphne Du Maurier (novel) & Roger Michell

Starring: Sam Claflin & Rachel Weisz




After his uncle died, Philip (Claflin) decides to find his uncle's fleeing wife Rachel (Weisz).  After finding her, he discovers her charm and falls in love with her.  But despite Rachel's affections in return, a secret looms from her past.

For the first half of the film, I was falling asleep.  It was all about establishing Philip's feelings for Rachel and vice versa.  It was necessary, but there was too much of it with no subplots to engage the viewer in further.

As for the second half of the film, it was much better.  It started turning into a Hitchcock film interestingly enough and the ending was a satisfying yet not satisfying way to end the film.

Another positive is the camera work brought the film to life.  The shots were so beautiful and moving that it definitely influenced the film to give it an eery feeling.

Nevertheless, 2 popcorns.

The Dinner (2017)

Directed by: Oren Moverman

Written by; Oren Moverman & Herman Koch (novel)

Starring: Richard Gere, Laura Linney, Steve Coogan, & Rebecca Hall




Paul (Coogan) begins the film by narrating his dislike for going to dinner with his brother, mostly due to his dislike of his brother, Stan (Gere), who is running for Governor.  Nevertheless, he decides to go to dinner with his wife.  The dinner seems like an awkward family affair, but really Stan wants to discuss the trouble that their sons have gotten themselves into.

I walked out after an hour.  Here's why:

1) Steve Coogan.  He is just not a relatable main character.  It was hard to like him and on the contrary, I disliked him.  The whole story was from his point of view, which made it difficult to follow.

2) Too many subject areas.  The film kept jumping around trying to find itself.  It would talk about the sons, then racism, then mental illness, and so on.  It's like pick a topic and stick with it.  I can't stand when they have multiple ones because the film then seems so disorganized and makes it difficult to follow and keep me interested.

3) Sound.  Usually in films, the actors' voices are the loudest and then other noises like footsteps or putting down fine china is in the background.  I don't know if it was the theater I was in or it was the sound mixing, but everything sounded loud from the voices to just clanking glasses.  It was so distracting.

4) Dissolves.  Because of all the different topics, whenever a new topic would come up there would be a dissolve.  It was annoying.

5) Pacing.  The film dragged also.  There were parts that could have been eliminated all together that would have saved time and money.

Perhaps the book is better.  Don't go see it.  1 Kernel.

Get Out (2017)

Directed by: Jordan Peele

Written by: Jordan Peele

Starring: Daniel Kaluuya & Allison Williams




At first I didn't think this was 5 popcorns.  I didn't feel anything about it and I wasn't super shocked by the ending, but...then I saw a Buzzfeed article that changed everything.

In the Buzzfeed article, that you can see here, it basically says all the hidden secret things the film had.  I missed most of them and thought it was very creative after that.  I love foreshadowing and puns in films.

So the film had a lot of these, boosting up the popcorn rating.  In addition, the storyline is very creative.  I thought it was going to be about white people enslaving blacks as their slaves using hypnosis as the best friend said, but it's more Sci-Fi than that.

Even though the film is intense, the best friend Rod (played by LilRel Howery) eases the tension throughout the film.  Not sure that I like the tension being eased though.  But maybe Peele put it in in order to not disappoint audience members just in case the tension was too big to fulfill everyone's expectations.

5 popcorns.

Arrival (2016)

Directed by: Denis Villeneuve

Written by: Eric Heisserer & Ted Chiang (story)

Starring: Amy Adams, Jeremy Renner, & Forest Whitaker




I thought this films was great...except the ending.  I really liked how it was thought provoking and had the aliens in a different light (sort of).

Louise Banks (Adams) is the best linguist around.  When aliens arrive on Earth, she is called to figure out how to communicate with them to determine what they want.

Amy Adams played a great linguist and I thought the story line was interesting.  Especially the way she figured out the language.  The story was realistic enough to believe, and there was a twist towards the end, but the twist I figured out at the beginning of the film, so it was not some big surprise.

I was not too thrilled with Renner's character, but he played it well I guess.

That's pretty much all to report.  4 popcorns.

The Girl on the Train (2016)

Directed by: Tate Taylor

Written by: Erin Cressida Wilson & Paula Hawkins (novel)

Starring: Emily Blunt






Have you seen the film Gone Girl?  Well this film is a lot like that film.

Rachel (Blunt) is devastated.  She has been for two years ever since her divorce.  Because of this, Rachel drinks constantly.  On her way to work.  On her way home.  At home.  In the street.  She is always drinking or drunk.  When a woman goes missing, Rachel becomes a suspect for being seen nearby and causing trouble.  Unfortunately for her, she can’t remember a thing. 

The movie dragged until about ¾’s a way in.  There was just a lot of talking and trying to figure out what happened during the time she blacked out. 

I thought the best thing about this film was Emily Blunt’s acting.  She was a great drunk. 

When I said it was a lot like Gone Girl, it is in terms of twists and secrets, etc…, but to be honest, Gone Girl was better. 

This film would be better rented.  3 popcorns.

Nerve (2016)

Directed by: Henry Joost & Ariel Schulman

Written by: Jeanne Ryan (novel) & Jessica Sharzer 

Starring: Emma Roberts & Dave Franco








Nerve could have been amazing…but they casted Emma Roberts in it.

Don’t get me wrong, I like Emma Roberts.  But for some reason, she sucked in this film.  To me, she wasn’t believable when playing the good girl.  She’s better as a rebel/bad girl.

After being rejected, Venus (Emma Roberts) is dared to play Nerve, the new game that’s all the rave.  In the game you can choose to be a watcher or player.  Feeling that she doesn’t take enough risks, she chooses to be a player.  After earning some cash, she becomes hooked and continues to play along with Ian (Franco), another player.  But when the stakes become too high and she wants to bow out, it may be too late.

So besides Roberts being sucky at playing the good girl, I thought everything else was good.  Franco and Roberts had chemistry and worked well together.  The animation worked well too that gave the audience a look into what the players and watchers are seeing in terms of the game.  And the concept it interesting and symbolic.  They always do say that technology is taking over our lives.  3 popcorns.

The Conjuring 2 (2016)

Directed by: James Wan

Written by: Carey Hayes, Chad Hayes, James Wan, & David Leslie Johnson

Starring: Vera Farmiga & Patrick Wilson







Ed (Wilson) and Lorraine (Farmiga) Warren take on their biggest case to date. A young girl in England brings home a Ouija board and, of course with that, the spirit of an old man.  In hopes of casting the spirit out the Warrens come to England, but are unsure if there is a spirit in the house or the girl is just faking it.

I loved this film.  I usually do not like horror films because I end up laughing at them.  I try not to because I don't want to ruin the movie for others, but they just do not seem scary.  But this one did.

The whole time I was watching this film I had goosebumps.  I liked it so much, I saw it twice.  The nun, who is a demon in the film, was the character that really made me shiver.  Mostly because she's a nun, seen as a religious symbol, but also a demon.  Great contrast and decision making of changing the demon to be a nun.  Good job Wan!  Also F.Y.I. the nun is going to have her own movie; same director, writer, and producers.

Another reason I really enjoyed this film is that there are two scenes that are very creative.  There is one where the Warrens want to talk to the spirit, but he will not possess Janet (Madison Wolfe) unless they aren't looking.  So Ed looks away and the camera just has him in focus, while Janet/the spirit are out of focus, but you can still tell when the possession happens.  The other scene is a point of view shot when Ed cannot see and the camera is blurry as it goes around the house with his hands out in front.  I love those type of scenes...when they work!

Besides that I thought the story was cohesive and the acting was great.  5 popcorns.

10 Cloverfield Lane (2016)

Directed by: Dan Trachtenberg

Written by: Josh Campbell, Matthew Stuecken, & Damien Chazelle

Starring: John Goodman, Mary Elizabeth Winstead, & John Gallagher Jr. 






This was a weird movie.  Not experimental weird, just odd plot wise.

Michelle (Winstead) is thrown off the road after breaking up with her boyfriend Ben (Bradley Cooper).  When she wakes up, she finds herself in the bunker, which belongs to Howard (Goodman), who tells her that the world is under attack and that she can't leave.

Initially that is the plot, but towards the end it switches a little and seems to become the prequel for Cloverfield.  Or maybe more of a meanwhile...type film, meaning it's happening at the same time as Cloverfield.

I thought Goodman's performance was great.  He came off as a military creepy perverted man, which just like Michelle, I wasn't sure I could trust.

I didn't feel that there was anything wrong with the technical side of things, not that I noticed.  I was too busy wondering about what was going to happen to Michelle.

I did like the beginning, which is the breakup, but you don't hear it, it is just shown.  For film that is always what you want, show, don't tell, which Trachtenberg does greatly.  He also does this for the rest of the film, but in subtle ways.  For example, at the beginning of the film Michelle has some burgundy nail polish fully on, but as the film goes by you can see it slowly coming off to indicate the amount of time that has passed.  If you see it, you'll probably find other ways that the director achieves the showing not telling, but I don't want to say more because I may give something away.

Initially I was going to give this 3 popcorns, for the plot, but considering all the showing not telling, and Goodman's performance, it comes to be 4 popcorns overall.