VALIANT ONE -- Flat, Thin Military Thriller Reveals Deeply Ingrained Americentric Jingoism1/30/2025 Review by Daniel Lima It can be hard to properly judge art that runs counter to your political convictions. To what extent does an objectionable worldview affect a work’s artistic merit? Can a heinous sociopolitical message truly be separated from aesthetic values? Valiant One slices through this Gordian knot with ease, tying its particular brand of establishment-friendly jingoism directly to its own emotional core to the point that it’s impossible to appreciate the film at all without casting judgment on its simple-minded politics. Also, it’s really bad. A small team of U.S. Army soldiers stationed in South Korea go on a routine mission to repair some surveillance tech. After a terrible storm leads to a helicopter crash, only a handful of grunts and a civilian defense contractor are left. They realize that they have landed on the other side of the Korean DMZ, well into North Korean territory. The team must band together in order to escape this hellish land full of people who would murder and rape them with no hesitation. Writer-director-producer Steve Barnett insists that he set out to make an apolitical film, focusing not on articulating a coherent message, but on telling a story about personal heroism and rising up to meet a great challenge. Like all “apolitical” art, however, the film betrays certain ideological predilections, so deeply entrenched in the minds of Barnett and Americans in general that they are simply accepted. It presumes that: America has a right to maintain a military presence on the Korean peninsula; American interests are altruistic; the North Korean government is cruel and hostile to any sort of diplomacy; the North Korean people would welcome an American intrusion into their home; any form of violence that American military personnel engage in is justified. Suffice it to say, I find all of these presumptions suspect, ranging from disingenuous to ignorant to despicable. Undoubtedly, most Americans would object to at least one of these, in spite of oft-recited truisms about the righteousness of the American military and the evils of North Korea. Yet Valiant One necessitates broad acceptance of these ideas in order to function as a story.
If you don’t believe that the North Korean military would brutalize any American they come across, the premise seems thin. If you don’t think Americans should be installing surveillance equipment on the Korean border, it gets harder to root for these characters. And if you don’t like the idea of armed soldiers bursting into homes of foreign civilians in countries they aren’t supposed to be in the first place — or better still, killing foreign soldiers before even attempting to communicate with them — it becomes impossible not to see these “heroes” as villains. Of course, it’s possible for a film with objectionable politics to still be engaging, stimulating, entertaining. Valiant One is none of those things. The main ensemble is given only the barest amount of definition, mostly relying on archetypes: the dutiful grunt, the reluctant hero, the sniveling civilian. Normally, a narrative like this would see this team fleshed out through the trials that they undergo, pitting them against obstacles that force reveal parts of themselves that might never otherwise see the light of day. Instead, most of the film is just wandering through the woods, pitched and repetitive arguments, and inert gunfights, none of which spurns any interesting character development beyond “they get tougher”. It’s surprising that even at a scant eighty minutes, so much of this movie is just dead air. An interesting note is that the film begins with a title card claiming to be inspired by true events. Of course, this is being generous, as by Barnett’s own admission the genesis of the story was the realization that American soldiers are stationed near the 38th parallel (in the past, downed American servicemen have been released after a period of detention). That little fib is par the course in works like this, however, and unremarkable on its own. If one is willing to engage in this bit of fiction, however, why stop there? Why not engineer a scenario where these soldiers are captured and have to break free before execution? Why not see them run into a North Korean family that is not enamored with them, forcing the squad to make tough choices about what they’re willing to do to hide their incursion? Why not name any of the North Koreans pursuing them, give them characterizations and treat them as something more than a faceless Other? Why not make Valiant One a more interesting movie? Valiant One lands in theaters January 31. Rating: 1.5/5
0 Comments
Review by Daniel Lima Billions of people have grown up familiar with the Ming dynasty novel Investiture of the Gods, the epic tale of history, myth, and fantasy that relays the fall of the Shang dynasty and the rise of the Zhou. All cards on the table, I am not one of those people. As an ignorant Westerner, I can only appreciate Creation of the Gods II: Demon Force — the second part of the latest adaptation of the Chinese classic — as a Lunar New Year blockbuster spectacle. On those terms, it’s certainly not a boring watch, but lacks what made the previous film so compelling. Picking up where the last film left off, the corrupt king of Shang has been saved from the brink death, sending his most trusted generals to bring down the rebellious city of Xiqi and capture the Fengsheng Bang, a powerful artifact that will secure his rule. The lord of Xiqi, joined by an array of immortals and gods, fights against the onslaught as he weighs how to best defend his people. The source material has been adapted countless times in countless forms, and this trilogy of films is perhaps the largest and most expensive. This second entry is heavy on action and special effects, with much of the runtime devoted to large-scale battles with a dizzying number of glowing particles flying across the screen and a cacophony of war cries and explosions. At just under two and a half hours, it’s hard not to feel a bit overwhelmed well before the credits roll (through which there are three post-credits scenes, at that point just don’t end the movie yet). It doesn’t help that it is as dark and drab as any Hollywood tent pole, with much of the action taking place under the cover of night, with a muted color palette, and annoyingly often over a barren plane or against an obvious green screen. Novelty sets this apart from American CG-driven slop: giants commanding steel dragons to attack thunder gods, immortal beings traveling through the elements to rescue people from paralyzing moon beams, mythical steeds felled by evil wizards commanding undead armies. There is a certain looseness to how these elements are brought to life, not as constrained by the paradoxical desire to make things “realistic” that plagues so much Western big-budget fantasy. Perhaps to an audience used to seeing these cultural touchstones adapted to screen, this isn’t anything special, but it was enough to keep me engaged.
That is good, because in devoting so much time to the spectacle, this second film in the planned trilogy sacrifices the character dynamics and political intrigue that drew me into the first. The previous entry was mostly set in the Shang capital, depicting the descent of the king into villainy as his court turn against him and the heavenly interlopers attempt to find a new ruler. With the battle lines not yet drawn, this made for more drama, more time establishing who these people (and gods) are, more reason to actually care about what happens. There are a handful of welcome moments here that attempt to do the same, but not enough of them to make Xiqi feel like a place worth saving. This may well be a consequence of how the novel has been divided up, but coupled with how spread out the characters are, and how many have died or fundamentally changed, it means there is a distinct lack of emotional stakes. Recently, I’ve found myself watching a good amount of wuxia cinema produced by the Shaw Brothers in the 1970s and 1980s. These films were often directly or indirectly inspired by Ming literature about gallant heroes, powerful magicians, and fearsome monsters, and were the crowd pleasers of their day. Though they themselves vary in quality (especially those that attempt to condense particularly long tomes), it can at least be said they are beautiful to look at: ornate and vivid sets, cinematography that glowed, intricate action choreography. It’s hard not to think of these films when watching this modern incarnation, and lament at the lost recipe that made for such gorgeous imagery. Yet as somewhat disappointing as Creation of the Gods II: Demon Force is on the whole, I still have sights like young Nezha shaping his winding sash into a shield and Leizhenzi summoning his green lightning stuck in my head. For whatever it’s worth, this is a film that scratches an itch for big budget fantasy splendor, with a distinct flavor that has me looking into what’s the best translation of a medieval Chinese text. For all the flaws, it still captured me enough that I’m keen to see the grand finale. Creation of the Gods II: Demon Force is now in theaters. Rating: 3/5 Review by Adam Donato Movies like this used to be released in theaters. You’re Cordially Invited is a classic comedy setup. Two weddings, one venue, one weekend, and hilarity ensues. This cliched story is given new life from writer/director Nicholas Stoller, who has been a reliable comedic filmmaker for two decades now. Speaking of reliability, Will Ferrell stars along with Reese Witherspoon as the representatives of the opposing wedding parties who are just trying to make this weekend the most magical it can possibly be. Amazon Prime regularly spits out these studio comedies that would normally be reliable box office bets, but are not given the time of day in theaters. Therefore they get forgotten in the void of streaming content. Does You’re Cordially Invited have the personality to make an impression on streaming audiences this weekend? While You’re Cordially Invited isn’t a technical masterpiece, it does accomplish its job of providing consistent laughs. This is Ferrell’s funniest lead performance in over a decade. Not that this is close to prime Ferrell in the 2000’s though. It’s more that Ferrell has focused his efforts more on producing and supporting roles in the last decade. When he does choose to lead lately, he has fallen flat on his face so this movie is a cute return to form for the comedic legend. Coincidentally, this is also Witherspoon’s best leading role in a decade as she has also focused on producing and television roles. While Ferrell is only nine years older than No Witherspoon, this does feel like a mismatch of a couple here. Not a lot of chemistry between these two, but they’re at worst serviceable with each other and shine on their own. The film has a run time of 109 minutes and could use a shave down. The emotional and romantic beats in the film were underwhelming. Nobody is gonna shed a tear or fall in love because of this narrative. Therefore, the film could shed some of that weight and keep this simple story down to a tight ninety minutes. When the film isn’t trying to make you laugh, it kind of drags It's sweet enough, just nothing to write home about.
There’s a prominent practical effect in the film that’s worth noting. While the scene is over the top ridiculous compared to the comedic tone of the rest of the film, the effect is pulled off quite nicely. It’s clear that the creature is some kind of puppet or animatronic, but has movements and texture that make it look as realistic as it can. This sequence may be where the film peaks comedically for some people, but it definitely feels like an excessive departure. This is much more of a situational comedy rather than a slapstick movie. It’s hard not to be romantic about a film like this. Two major movie stars teaming up together with a notable comedic director should be a lock at the box office. Seeing this Amazon Prime film at a press screening in a theater added to the experience. The audience was having a ball with the film and that won’t translate as well when you’re watching this film on streaming in the background. It’s trying to have heart and it’s genuinely funny throughout. A really good time for a movie and not a bad idea to flip on this Valentine’s Day season. You’re Cordially Invited will be streaming on Amazon Prime on January 30. Rating: 4/5 Review by Jonathan Berk The world of professional wrestling seems like the perfect topic for cinematic exploration. Films like Iron Claw or The Wrestler provide examples where this works to tremendous effect — while other films, like Ready to Rumble or the Hulk Hogan-led No Holds Bars fall short of achieving this feat, or simply don’t quite work for everyone. Even horror has used the squared circle and the costumed contestants for its setting. Well, making its way to the ring is director Lowell Dean’s new film, Dark Match, which blends the world of professional wrestling and horror for 90 minutes of in-ring mayhem…sort of.
The movie begins in the ring with a few matches that culminate with Miss Behave (Ayisha Issa) versus Kate the Great (Sara Canning). After Miss Behave hits Kate for real, she’s punished by the small-time wrestling company’s promotor through a pay cut. Thus, when she and several of the other wrestlers are given an opportunity to earn some extra money by wrestling a ”dark match” by a private party, none of them are really in a position to refuse. It’s not long before the wrestlers take notice to the fact that there is something very wrong with these people and that the stakes are much higher than they expected. The problem with this film which appears to be intently focused on wrestling is that there is a pretty substantial section of the film that is completely devoid of wrestling. Sure, the film starts there, and once it kicks back in it becomes a centerpiece of the finale. However, the moments in between aren’t nearly as exciting or compelling. Fortunately, Issa and Steve Ogg have significant chemistry, and when they’re on screen together, there is enough to keep you on the hook. Unfortunately, there just isn’t enough horror or wrestling for a good thirty minutes — and that feels like a bit of a waste. Fans of wrestling may nitpick some of the sequences. They are edited to death and thus don’t quite emulate the feeling of watching wrestling on TV. What’s probably worse than those edits is the use of jargon and in-ring conversation that feels like someone is only vaguely familiar with the industry. For the casual wrestling fan, these elements may be easy to ignore, or may even spark enough recognition to be meaningful on a basic level. The film is set in the late 80s — which is a prime era of professional wrestling — and kayfabe was the law. One thing that announcers never did was refer to wrestlers as “heels” or “faces”, which this film throws out the window pretty early on. Modern fans will know those terms, as the concept of kayfabe has fundamentally changed, and fans are allowed to peek behind the current more and more. While these details may seem inconsequential, it just makes you wonder why wrestling was chosen for the subject matter. The horror elements that take a minute to truly kick in are solid enough, once developed. The types of matches the wrestlers are put in vary, and only partially utilize their unique premises. The most frustrating was the water match, which ultimately didn’t do anything with its premise. However, the violence that erupts lives up to the genre. Still…for a film that goes very into the genre, it seems like there was quite a bit of room to be more creative with the types of matches presented. Dark Match moderately, at best, lives up to its name. It’s not something everyone should see, but there is enough here for fans of the style to enjoy. One would think that the inclusion of AEW’s Chris Jerico (billed as Chris Irvine) should have added even more credibility to the wrestling…but it kind of doesn’t. Despite some of the film's weaknesses, it’s an easy watch. Dark Match will be on Shudder starting January 31. Rating: 2.5/5 Review by Adam Donato Mel Gibson has had quite the storied career. As a director, he’s known for these big epics that are usually met with awards acclaim. Sitting back down in the director’s chair for the first time since Hacksaw Ridge in 2016, Gibson is back at it again. This time it’s for a small January action film starring his good friend, Mark Wahlberg. The older Caucasian male crowd is on the edge of their seats. Not only does it have to compete with the wake of the Christmas releases, but other January surprise hits as well. In a time where woke seems to be broke, can these two previously cancelled movie stars take flight at the box office? Mark Wahlberg has immense range. Not in terms of the types of roles he can play, but in the quality of those performances. He’s known for The Happening just as much as he is for The Departed or Boogie Nights. In Flight Risk, Wahlberg takes one of the most ambitious swings of his career. Without seeing the trailer, one might look at the poster and think this is another Wahlberg action man movie. In actuality, Wahlberg plays a deranged hit man who sneaks his way onto a private flight to assassinate a key witness. In this performance, Wahlberg sports an exaggerated hick accent and an embarrassingly fake bald cap. Seeing as Wahlberg is the headlining name on the project, it’s surprising how little screen time he has in the movie. The only scenes Wahlberg has that aren’t in the trailers is a string of rapey taunts. These ramblings range from darkly funny to grossly uncomfortable, more often the latter. Wahlberg is an actor who usually just plays himself, so it’s really refreshing to see him take such a big swing. It’s one of those big swings where you spin around and fall on your ass, but boy are those fun to watch. One could argue that his performance is so bad that it’s brilliant, but the lack of screen time and anything to actually do is really holding him back. The story mainly focuses on a U.S. Marshal, played by Michelle Dockery, as she escorts a corrupt accountant, played by Topher Grace, back to see trial. Dockery’s character has to grapple with her shady past, cooperate with her captured witness, fend off the deranged hit man, and solve why this operation has gone so awry. Somehow all of this is going on in this tiny plane, but it feels like nothing is happening. Dockery’s character is not compelling and Grace’s constant nervous quips become draining after a while. The bond they form is weak and their strategy to get out of this scenario is nonsensical. A ninety minute movie shouldn’t feel so long. This is a tight little bottle thriller that isn’t very thrilling.
Flight Risk is a distractingly ugly film. With a budget of $26 million, this film leaves a lot to be desired from a visual standpoint. At the beginning of the film, Grace’s character gets scared by a moose outside his window. This moose looks less real than Wahlberg’s bald cap. Everything that happens with the plane looks fake, which only heightens how unrealistic what’s going on on screen is. The final special effects filled action sequence is completely anticlimactic and leaves the audience wanting more. Watching this movie will make you feel like a flight risk yourself. The desire to be anywhere else is only matched by the thought that it will be over soon. Check this one out if you want to see Wahlberg embarrass himself for fifteen minutes. Other than that, there’s no value to be found here. The performances, story, and special effects are all abysmal. Not much worse than a boring thriller. Flight Risk is in theaters on January 24. Rating: 1/5 INHERITANCE -- iPhone Film is a Deeply Flawed but Engaging Experiment in Guerilla Filmmaking1/22/2025 Review by Camden Ferrell Movies shot with an iPhone are nothing new, being used in previous years by established directors like Steven Soderbergh and Sean Baker. Now, Neil Burger is the newest director to try his hand at the relatively recent art of smartphone filmmaking. His new movie, Inheritance, is a fun exercise with an unconventional camera although it does suffer at times from a thin story that isn’t particularly compelling. After the death of her mother, Maya reconnects with her estranged father. Together, they take a trip to Egypt where she soon realizes her father was once a spy. She is quickly thrown into an international conspiracy where she must travel across the world to figure out who her father truly is. This is an interesting premise for an espionage thriller, especially one shot with an iPhone since the run-and-gun style of shooting could align with the type of story being told. Written by Burger and Olen Steinhauer, the movie is at its best when it focuses on the conversations and interactions of its main characters. While the dialogue isn’t particularly impressive, these slower moments are compelling to watch when compared to the more high-octane sequences throughout the movie. The movie’s biggest flaw is that the moments of tension and chaos feel thin and insignificant. It’s executed well, but the writing leaves a lot to be desired as far as substance is concerned. The acting in this movie is strong even if it’s nothing particularly memorable. Phoebe Dynevor leads this movie as Maya, and she does a great job at adapting to the guerilla style, permitless shooting that Burger carried out. She feels very natural embodying this character and all of her idiosyncrasies, and she’s a reliable force throughout. Rhys Ifans also stars alongside her as her father Sam, and even though his performance is fairly minimal, he is very serviceable in the moments that matter most.
While there are many problems with this film, I can’t help but be in awe of Burger’s ability to use the iPhone to such a gratifying extent. I personally am biased as I always appreciate when filmmakers use “cheap” cameras to make their movies, and this kept me glued to the screen from start to finish. Sure, it doesn’t look as polished as professional film cameras, but I can’t help but fall in love with how scrappy this final product is. Especially after hearing about how Burger shot this entire movie without any kind of permission (this includes genuinely executed retail theft), it’s quite an inspiration to see all this kind of work. Inheritance suffers due to a thin plot that on its own isn’t particularly engaging. However, Neil Burger’s use of an iPhone and guerilla filmmaking still make this a worthwhile experiment. Those who have previous inclinations against smartphone cinematography might not be swayed by this film, but for those who appreciate an imperfect yet passionate use of affordable gear, this will surely satisfy. Inheritance is in theaters January 24. Rating: 3.5/5 Review by Jonathan Berk It’s very likely that you've looked in the mirror at some point in your life and wished you could change something about yourself. Those feelings of self-doubt are often potent, and exponentially worse when you’re young. As a teenager, it can be immensely difficult to find comfort in your skin. If your father’s life work was to develop a scientific marvel that would allow skin grafts to organically grow and help “heal” scars — with the primary motivating force behind this development being not only his scars, but the one on your face…well, it probably makes it even harder to find comfort. Sasha Rainbow’s new film Grafted grapples with this very idea. Wei (Joyena Sun), a Chinese student who is left orphaned after a tragic accident in her father’s lab, moves to New Zealand on a scholarship to live with her aunt and cousin Angela (Jess Hong). Uncomfortable in her skin and awkward to boot, Wei attempts to fit in while working to complete her father’s experiments. She takes a job as a lab assistant with her brilliant professor (Jared Turner), where she will have access to the equipment she’ll need. The mad scientist and body horror elements of this film are the clear highlights. Wei exhibits a strong element of obsession with her work, driven to “fix” the scar that she hides under a scarf for the majority of the film. It feels like a throwback to films like Re-Animator or From Beyond in that way, especially when it gets a little silly. Every time Wei seems to begin getting a grip on her life, something else happens to escalate the drama surrounding her. Despite her brilliance, she’s not always capable of making the best decisions. Sun is nothing short of excellent in this role. Her performance convincingly sells the awkward qualities presented early on but takes on new flourishes later in the film after her character has had to transform. Hong and Eden Hart are asked to do even more with their characters. It would be a spoiler to explain why, but their performances deserve some well-earned recognition. Considering this was the first film for most of the young cast, it is relatively impressive. In some ways, they’re behaving exactly as you may expect high school students to act. Yet, when the film’s story gets going and the crazy starts to unravel, they have to take their performances to another level.
While those elements stand out, something is lacking in the film overall. The story noticeably starts to drag,, and several beats just repeat themselves. Wei finds herself at odds with many of the various people she’s encountered throughout the film. It sometimes feels a little convoluted, and the phrase “less is more” kept creeping into my mind while watching this film. Sometimes, it is very hard to sustain a good idea for 93 minutes…and that seems to be the issue here. Nonetheless, Grafted is a solid horror film to start the new year. The performances, body horror, and nods to similar films that have come before make it enjoyable overall. There is quite a bit of room for improvement, but it should ultimately scratch that itch for horror fans. Rainbow shows potential, and it’ll be interesting to see what her follow-up movie will be. Grafted will be on Shudder on January 24. Rating: 2.5/5 Review by Camden Ferrell The Munich massacre was a terrorist threat that occurred during the 1972 Olympics in Germany, their first time hosting since the fall of the Nazi Party, and it was an event that shocked the world. September 5 is a new movie from director Tim Fehlbaum that aims to relay the events of that day from the perspective of the broadcasting team in charge of reporting on this event. Having its premiere at the 2024 Venice Film Festival, this is a historical drama that is gripping more times than not despite feeling overly conventional in its execution. The crew for ABC Sports went to work that day expecting another day of Olympics activities and festivities. However, nothing could prepare them for the terrorist attack and subsequent hostage situation that occurred in the same city, a situation they had the obligation of reporting on. It’s such a memorable global event, especially from a media perspective, so it’s an interesting prospect to get a glimpse into how these events were handled by this broadcasting team. Despite being written by Fehlbaum, Moritz Binder, and Alex David, a team that has a relatively limited body of work in feature film writing, this script is tightly paced and serves as a great driving force behind the narrative. The dialogue was well-written, the narrative beats were steady and earned, and it gave the actors plenty of material to work with in their own unique ways. It was accessible enough for younger audiences who might not be aware of these events, but it also prevented itself from becoming overly expositional. While the writing is solid throughout, one must also acknowledge the wonderful efforts of the cast who brought it to life. Led by Peter Sarsgaard and John Magaro, they’re able to take the material and make it engaging to watch on screen. They seem to understand the stakes and convey that to the audience in tangible ways. Leonie Benesch was also a delight to see in a supporting role especially after first being exposed to her in last year’s The Teachers’ Lounge.
Even though I have a lot of positive things to say about this movie, I do admit it feels super safe in its execution throughout. It doesn’t take any ballsy narrative swings or any kind of artistic risks. It plays out just as one would expect which makes this feel like an exceptional cable TV movie more than a possible awards contender this year. September 5 will be a gripping watch regardless of the level of knowledge about the Munich massacres. Even knowing how it all ends, audiences will still feel engrossed by the engaging script and extremely talented actors. It gives you exactly what you expect, nothing more, nothing less. Whether or not that’s a good thing is up to you. September 5 is in theaters January 17. Rating: 4/5 Review by Adam Donato One Of Them Days is one of the first releases of the new year and starts us off with a laugh. This is Keke Palmer’s first leading role on screen since her success in Nope. She is coupled with popular artist SZA as two best friends who need to regain their rent money by the end of the day. Helmed by first time director Lawrence Lamont and first time writer Syreeta Singleton, can this comedy survive on the chemistry of these two popular leading ladies? Keke Palmer has more personality in her pinky than most actresses have in their whole body. That includes SZA, who is not bad in the movie, but the writing for the character isn’t doing her any favors. She’s majorly unlikable and annoyingly foolish. For someone who doesn’t regularly act, this was not a failure of a performance though. She has good enough chemistry with Keke Palmer to keep this buddy comedy afloat. Palmer doesn’t need much help. There’s so many laughs gotten from her just messing around. The way she delivers her lines and the energy she brings to every scene is magnetic. It helps that most of the central characters are very attractive and this movie loves to take every opportunity to capitalize on that. This is a horned up comedy to the bone. The narrative of the film gives a clear timeline and is fraught with comedic opportunities. All their attempts to acquire more money and to stay out of trouble are very funny. The film often relies on cheap, over the top slapstick comedy. Character getting hurt in some outlandish and fake looking way. These aren’t as funny as the banter between the characters, but it’s enough to make this day seem like a wild ride. The story threads are wrapped up in similarly unconvincing ways and leaves off feeling too convenient. The film lives and dies on the backs of the bond between these two best friends. The quality of the film does not inspire me to watch more from the first time writer and director, unless they are coupled with inspiring talent.
Turns out the pairing of Palmer and SZA is enough to satisfy audiences. The whole screening was hooting and hollering throughout. One Of Them Days certainly accomplishes its goal of being a fun, crazy and raunchy comedy. Palmer should continue to thrive when it comes to landing more lead roles. Hopefully SZA can garner some more box office attention with her music stans. Check this one out in theaters this January for some lighter laughs. One of Them Days will be in theaters on January 17. Rating: 3/5 Review by Jonathan Berk There are plenty of werewolf movies at this point, and the lore behind the creature has shifted in multiple ways. Universal brought us the monster in the 1941 film The Wolf Man, which has since become a major element of its stable of monsters. After several failed attempts at rebooting the Universal Monsters – which concluded with The Mummy – Blumhouse and writer-director Leigh Whannell's Invisible Man finally found a formula that worked. Thus, the second entry, Wolf Man, had a lot of hype around it. While it is by no means the trash that Blumhouse is known to drop in January, it doesn't live up to the quality of The Invisible Man or many of the werewolf movies that came before it. Blake (Christopher Abbott) finally gets closure when a letter confirms that his estranged father has been declared dead after going missing in the Oregon woods. In an effort to fix his marital problems and tighten his family bonds, Blake suggests that Charlotte (Julia Garner) and their daughter Ginger (Matilda Firth) travel to his childhood farmhouse in rural Oregon. What begins as a potentially relaxing getaway from the big city quickly sours as the family is attacked by an unseen animal, and is forced to barricade themselves in the home for what could be the last night of their lives. The script by Whannell and Corbett Tuck is admirable for attempting to craft a character-centered story. Abbott and Garner give tremendous performances that help carry the emotional weight of the narrative. The problem is that the script is a little weak in terms of logic and dialogue. There is a lot of expository dialogue that almost feels like the characters are simply reading stage directions, as it is so blunt in its messaging. Even the idea that their marriage is on the rocks is simply told to us in an awkward scene before their trip to the farmhouse. It would have been fairly easy to suggest that their relationship was in jeopardy without having an awkward conversation. There is no visible evidence of it other than this kind of generic argument followed by his suggestion that they leave town. Their relationship status also doesn't feel necessary. The payoff of this setup element never quite hits in a way that makes sense of its inclusion in the story. Firth and Abbott also have great chemistry. You believe their father-daughter connection, and that helps make many of the scenes pay off. Unfortunately, the film also features one of the clunkiest line deliveries one could imagine, punching audiences in the face with the theme so it would be impossible to miss. Other than that line feeling so painfully on the nose, it also raises the issue of the choice to have it in a werewolf tale.
The lore of werewolves varies from film to film and story to story. However, the reason the story has existed so long is the visceral nature of our inner beasts breaking out and running amok. The metaphor behind that transformation has taken on a variety of forms — from puberty, as in Teen Wolf and Ginger Snaps, to the emergence of the id, as in An American Werewolf in London or Wolf. In this instance, the transformation component of the tale doesn't feel as focused as many others. There is a reason, but it feels underdeveloped in comparison to other versions. Much of the movie feels like a series of brainstorming concepts that never quite got worked through to their conclusion. Everything that is set up gets some kind of payoff, but it often feels like it takes major leaps to get there. The pacing of the film helps cover up some of these gaps as it rushes you to the next beat — but looking back, it is easy to notice how rushed certain elements feel. Despite those story hiccups, the tension and overall feel of the film manage to help it limp to an overall satisfying experience. The cast and the world they inhabit are compelling. Some innovative POV shifts play on the werewolf mythology in interesting ways which also help set it apart from previous iterations of the story. Rarely do we get to experience the world through the perspective of the werewolf, and it is used to great effect here. It doesn't do a great job of handling the specific rules for this version, but the ones that are established are at least maintained. Wolf Man is a mostly entertaining and watchable film for a January release. Yet, it doesn't deliver the same impressive quality as Invisible Man. Thus, it's hard not to feel a little disappointed. For every original element in this film, there are a few generic horror tropes that ultimately hurt the overall experience. If the actors weren't capable of carrying the weak script with their performances, the film would likely not work at all. Wolf Man is in theaters on January 17. Rating: 3/5 |
Archives
February 2025
Authors
All
|