6 UNDERGROUND

Ryan Reynolds     Melanie Laurent     Manuel Garcia-Rulfo     Adria Arjona     Corey Hawkins

Dave Franco     Ben Hardy

     Six characters so closeted, when someone says, “Who are you?” the answer is, “No one.” They like to see themselves as “ghosts.”  Number One (Reynolds) (they use numbers, rather than names) who essentially functions as the leader (and founder, perhaps) has strict principles to live by, which precludes forming attachments, having cell phones, or leaving any digital trace of their footprints.  (This code is bandied about from time to time, with some squirming against it, and some openly questioning it; but One always defends it.)  They’re a “Delta” force doing risky, undercover work; but unlike the Navy Seals, for instance, they are not attached to a government.  It’s part of their creed that they take orders from no one and make their decisions to take action all on their own (vigilantes).  This also means that things like “due process” and written laws of justice are not a part of their value system.  They do believe that if they see broad social injustice—such as a despotic leader exploiting his people—they have a right/duty to intervene through whatever means it takes.

     This system presents a wondrous opportunity for filmmakers (Michael Bay, director) to devise a point-by-point account of the group’s derring-do against a backdrop of luxurious settings (e.g., Florence Italy and Hong Kong), on gigantic yachts, in elegant hotels, and so on.  It’s like a James Bond film, but here you have six/seven heroes/heroines to gaze upon.  Likewise, it’s an opportunity for a macho extravaganza of destruction.  (Thank goodness, they spared Michaelangelo’s David sculpture in Florence!)  It’s the cinematographer’s (Bojan Bazelli) job to show off the visual elegance of these scenes, accompanied by Lorne Balfe’s reverberating score.

     6 Underground is a libertarian’s wet dream about heroic acts being achieved outside the strictures of authority and government.  It’s likewise a video-game-like lavish display of machismo—executed by women (thank you very much!) as well as men.  I do appreciate females being portrayed with as much authority as the males. And it even shows their superiority at times when two males can’t keep from fighting like little boys.

     As in many action films, 6 Underground is heavy on the car chases and heroics at the expense of story and character development. Maybe this was meant to be more tongue-in-cheek than I got, but, to me, Ryan Reynolds did not fit with the hard-edged character he was meant to be.  Just to look at him physically, is to see a nice and gentle guy who could pull off Deadpool beautifully.  I think a more sharp-edged—going toward the cynical—look in the actor would be more apropos in this case.

     I can say that on the one hand, 6 Underground is entertaining in places and has unexpected elements, and I always like to see the evil man get his due.  On the other hand, envisioning a vigilante force outside of law exerting its judgment (including killing) without benefit of a lawful trial makes me uneasy.  I’m also against the wanton destruction shown during much of the film, especially when cars are careening every which way and bashing into other cars, buildings, and historical sites along the streets in Florence and elsewhere. These scenes become tediously repetitious.

     Aside from Reynolds—who I think was miscast, although he is a good actor—Melanie Laurent, Manuel Garcia-Rulfo, Ben Hardy, Corey Hawkins, Adria Arjona and Dave Franco enrich the plot and inhabit their characters well, especially Laurent, Hardy, Hawkins, and Garcia-Rulfo.  

If you’re up to a video-game kind of movie, this will please you.  But if you have a problem with vigilantism and absurd car chases, find another film to watch.

Grade:  D+                                    By Donna R. Copeland

IF BEALE STREET COULD TALK

Kiki Lane     Stephen James     Regina King     Diego Luna     Brian Tyree Henry     Dave Franco

     Ah, yes, if Beale Street could talk, what a tale it would tell—I mean tales.  Based on a novel by the highly respected James Baldwin, novelist and social activist (Notes of a Native Son), and directed by Barry Jenkins (who also wrote the screenplay), who won the Best Picture Oscar last year for Moonlight, this film is expected to be above the norm.  And in my estimation it is.

     The story is about an appealing, warm-hearted family forced by others’ mistakes to face the grim reality many African-American people face—that of being wrongly convicted of a crime.  The main character is young, bright, unassuming Tish (Lane); the story is about the troubles she faces when her just as innocent boyfriend Fonny (James) is identified as the rapist of a Puerto Rican woman.  Never mind that he has a verified alibi and lives far away from the scene of the crime, which occurred in the dark—he is identified as the perpetrator in a line-up.  (Although research has long shown the unreliability of eyewitness identifications, many police departments continue to use it.  

     Early in the story, we see the fundamental bond that has developed between two kids from childhood, and see it blossom into a passionate romance that has more gentleness ingrained in it than in any other I’ve seen in a film.  Prospects look great; Fonny will try to make it as an artist in woodworking, and Tish will work in a department store, and they will find an apartment (after some frustrations) to their liking. Then, out of the blue, we are dealing with the accusation tainted with much of the corruption in law enforcement and judicial processes that we’re all familiar with by this time.

     Barry Jenkins has proven himself as a significant American filmmaker, who works with a core team [Nicholas Britell, music; James Laxton, cinematography; Joi McMillon and Nat Sanders, editing; and Cindy Tolan, costumes) to produce films that are engaging to watch and carry potent social messages.  They’re framed in a way as to elicit as much empathy and understanding of the issues as possible, without alienating (if possible) skeptics.

     The movie is fast-paced except when it’s properly lingering over emotional scenes, presents a clear history of the characters—including their families—and maintains an air of mystery and suspense.  My one question while viewing it was why a mother, rather than a lawyer, went to Puerto Rico to find a woman.  The final scene in that encounter shows a need for professional interrogation, but finances were likely a factor.

A very successful film in eliciting your interest and outrage.

Grade:  A                                    By Donna R. Copeland

THE DISASTER ARTIST

James Franco     Seth Rogen     Dave Franco     Josh Hutcherson     Alison Brie     Zac Efron

      What a quintessential James Franco production!  Is there anyone else who could take a cult film like The Room, duplicate parts of it, and then make it his own?  Beyond that, it rings so many bells as you watch it, beginning with its star, Tommy Wiseau (J. Franco), an oddball character who makes you smile and turn away at the same time.  A clown-like figure, he lives in his own world, and has enough resources that he can pull everyone around him into his reality, and is genuinely hurt when they start backing off.  It’s a bit sad, too, that everyone stays with him so long as they’re getting a paycheck.  But he retains one loyal friend.

     The story is about the making of a film called “The Room”, which is written, directed, produced, and acted in by Tommy.  (Keep in mind, The Room is an actual film that tanked, but later became a cult classic.)  This story is based on a memoir written by one of the film’s protagonists, Greg Sistero.  So The Disaster Artist is a bit about Gregg (D. Franco), who is an aspiring actor who lives with his mother.  He manages to strike up a conversation with a classmate he admires in his acting class, hoping to get his advice.  Tommy surprises him by instantly taking a liking to him and inviting him to room together in Los Angeles where he has an apartment.  Neither has much luck in scoring roles, so Tommy decides he’ll write his own script, casting the two of them as characters.

     The rest of the story is about the freewheeling production of the movie, with Tommy being the most unpredictable factor.  It remains a mystery as to how he has the money to finance the film, or even where he is from or how old he is.  In addition to James and his brother Dave, the cast includes Seth Rogen, Josh Hutcherson, Alison Brie, Zac Efron, Kristen Bell, Megan Mulally, and others, with cameos by Brian Cranston, Adam Scott, and Judd Apatow. 

     Despite James Franco’s talented acting here, this is something of a “nothing” movie that will leave many viewers cold; although, granted, many find it a hoot and have thoroughly enjoyed it.  I’m in the former camp; although I enjoyed the performances, it seems pretty senseless to me.

The remake of a cult movie that is intended to be funny, but isn’t very.

Grade:  C+                                    By Donna R. Copeland

NERVE

Emma Roberts     Dave Franco     Miles Heizer     Juliette Lewis

          Reality games on television have spawned online gaming in the real world, where, as predictable, things can get out of control.  Vee’s (Roberts) best friend Sydney (Meade) nags and shames her into participating in the current craze, Nerve, a game in which “watchers” (i.e., voyeurs) devise dares for specific people.  Exasperated, Vee decides to give it a try, and it starts out mildly, where she is to kiss a stranger for five seconds.  With the support of her friend and fellow photographer Tommy (Heizer), she timidly approaches someone reading a book in a diner.  It’s Ian (Franco), who is so thrilled, he does a music-dance routine right in the diner, to warm applause. 

      But the way the game works, one “completion” brings on another dare—which the person can refuse, but when the chance to win big bucks is at stake, most gamers are sorely tempted, as is Vee, especially when Ian pleads with her.  The watchers have paired them up, so now all the dares are theirs to do together.  This leads on and on with higher and higher stakes and more and more dangerous dares. 

        To increase the complexity and heighten our interest (and nail biting), there are several behind-the-scenes intrigues involving Ian, a threatening figure named Ty (Machine Gun Kelly), and computer guru Tommy who is familiar with Darknet, so it becomes hard to know whom to trust.  It turns out that unseen forces are pulling the strings, making the marionettes dance to their tune.  This ends up in an ugly scene toward the end, with mob rule voting for the kill. 

        In the meantime, it seems a catfight is called for after Vee’s phone conversation with Ian about Sydney is overheard not only by Sydney, but also by everyone playing the game.  They have it out, and everyone wonders if their friendship will survive.  I could have done without this theme; it’s an unnecessary stereotype.

         Emma Roberts is developing into a fine actress, but still lacks the charisma she needs to be a major star.  Her performance just needs a little more spark to show more depth.  The same could be said about Dave Franco—although his song and dance routine was most impressive.  Again, he needs to have more roles that plumb his depth to make him a leading figure.  Supporting actors Miles Heizer and Emily Meade show talent that will serve them well.  Juliette Lewis’ cameo role as Vee’s mother is very well done.

        The book (Nerve by Jeanne Ryan) on which the movie is based makes a point about how online communication, being anonymous to some extent, is changing us.  Screenwriter Jessica Sharzer and directors Henry Joost and Ariel Schulman have taken the book and adapted it to make a suspenseful thriller that is likely to appeal to young people.  And for older people, it can be interesting and thought provoking in that it plays into current fears about the internet and how much data is collected about us.  It’s chilling to learn that whoever is behind the game of Nerve has access to all internet records about the players—their Facebook, their medical records legal records, everything.  In short, this film is scarier because it’s plausible.

A film illustrating some of the realities of reality games.

Grade:  C+                        By Donna R. Copeland

NOW YOU SEE ME 2

Mark Ruffalo   Lizzie Caplan   Daniel Radcliffe   Jesse Eisenberg   Dave Franco  

Morgan Freeman   Woody Harrelson   Michael Caine   Sanaa Lathan

          Dazzling sleights of hand, cat and mouse chases, vengeance, and power struggles continue the essence of the Now You See Me films (#3 is already planned).  Revelations about mysteries left unresolved in the first picture are cleverly revealed, specifically with regard to Thaddeus Bradley (Freeman).

        The Four Horsemen of Now You See Me have been in hiding for a year after they robbed their sponsor’s Parisian bank account during their performance in New York to give the spoils to their audience, many of who were victims of Hurricane Katrina.  They have been in training for the next big caper, the details of which have not been revealed.  They’re restless and resentful that the secret society from whom they receive their instructions, the Eye, has not provided them with more challenges.  The sponsor of their original show, Arthur Tressler (Caine) of Tressler Insurance, had not been generous to the victims, so the Horsemen considered themselves Robinhood figures who give to the poor what the rich have withheld.  Now, finally, the magic troupe has plans to reappear by usurping a major advertising promotion by the company Octa in London, 

         But the FBI is after them for their previous heist, along with Thaddeus, in jail for his role in the previous story, and Tressler, who lost millions in one of their heists.  Along for the venomous ride this time is Tressler’s son Walter (Radcliffe) who has a big investment in pleasing and redeeming his father.

         Sanguine truths are sprinkled about through this story to at least give it some depth.  Walter, who has learned from his father the value of secrecy, says, “True freedom is not being seen”, an astute observation of one who wants his actions and behavior to remain anonymous.  Another character emphatically refers to the “power of an empty fist”, so useful in magic tricks.  And finally, in the last few moments, Thaddeus observes that “Seeing is believing…” but he thinks it’s important to ask whether what’s seen is truth or lie.  (It’s noted that belief has ‘lie’ in the middle of the word.) 

        When the film begins, we learn that one of the Horsemen (played by Isla Fisher) is missing, and the team needs to recruit another.  After some disagreement, cheeky Lula (Caplan) is accepted and wins their respect for her skills.  Magic tricks are very similar to those in the first film, and all the actors are captivating in their renditions.  Radcliffe does a fine, convincing job in being evil with daddy issues.

          The last scenes are clearly set-ups for Now You See Me 3.

If you liked the first one, you’ll probably enjoy Now You See Me 2.  If not, skip it.

           

Grade:  C+                        By Donna R. Copeland

NEIGHBORS 2: SORORITY RISING

Seth Rogen     Rose Byrne     Chloe Grace Moretz     Dave Franco     Selena Gomez

       Neighbors 2 is essentially the same as Neighbors (2014), except that gender stereotypes are even more pronounced, although the filmmakers try to promote women and gays in a more positive light toward the end, as if to make up for earlier scenes.  In earlier scenes women are shown as giggly, squeaking, sobbing uncontrollably at a sad show on television, and on and on.  They’re depicted as dumb (e.g., not knowing what ‘escrow’ is, not recognizing the implication of water breaking in a pregnancy, and immediately accepting of a man who appears authoritative to them and promises rescue).  Note that all the writers are male, so expect this to be a male fantasy with a few curbs just to be politically correct.

         Granted, men are portrayed as dumb and bumbling too (clueless about parenting, unable to pull off a heist) and prejudiced against gay men, but they’re also the ones with ideas and computational abilities.  Actually, the film for the most part is accepting of gays by portraying them more or less realistically.  I wish they had been as open-minded toward women.

        The first Neighbors chronicled the trauma of a young couple with a baby who is unlucky enough to have a fraternity move in next door (loud partying, mainly).  Things got partially resolved, and now that the couple is expecting another child, they want to sell their house and move somewhere else.  The problem is that just when they are getting close to finalizing the sale, a sorority moves in next door, which makes matters worse (Dontcha know—women are always worse than men!). 

          What follows is the same kind of one-upmanship that we saw in the first Neighbors, with ridiculous ideas turning slapstick bad.  The only time I really laughed was when a young person not knowing about landlines pulled the “old people’s” phone off the wall, not realizing it was attached. 

         Neighbors 2 is an excellent example of a film not needing a sequel, but filmmakers see the $$$ and do it anyway.  They recycle the same plot and jokes trying to refit it to be more politically correct (although they still don’t seem to be aware that the word “frat” is not really accepted in Greek communities at universities).  I didn’t hear too many laughs in the screening I attended with around 200 people.  Maybe it’s not so funny after all?

The not-funny-again sequel to the 2014 Neighbors.

Grade:  D                        By Donna R. Copeland