2016 Films: #20. Amanda Knox

Netflix viewing on October 1st in Chicago, IL. Over the last couple of years Netflix has come up with really good original content. This is just another source of new features. So it counts.

The film tells the story of the murder of Meredith Kercher, a British exchange student from the University of Leeds attending school in Perugia, Italy, and the subsequent investigation, trials and media coverage of the murder. To say that this was a sensationalist trial is quite the understatement. From the get go, this was a media circus and things broke down from there. Admittedly, I don't remember much from this except the basics (I was driving a truck for a mobile marketing firm so my television watching was relegated to Simpsons and Seinfeld reruns as they were always easy to find no matter where you were), Ms. Knox was an American exchange student living with Kercher and she was on trial for her murder.

This case took 8 years to conclude. Knox (and her then boyfriend Raffaele Sollecito) were found guilty of the murder in 2009. The conviction was overturned on appeal in 2011 and Knox returned home to Seattle. In 2013, Italy's Supreme Court of Cassation set aside the appeals decision and would find Knox and Sollecito guilty in 2014. In 2015, the same Supreme Court of Cassation that found her guilty a year earlier, ruled that the case had no foundation and both were finally acquitted. Quite a ride.

 The film centers on the media coverage of the case and the rush to judgement by law enforcement. Law Enforcement appears to have ignored certain facts and then just tried to get the murder to fit their narrative (a global police phenomenon) of the crime. The owner of the pub where Knox worked was implicated early by a vague text that he sent to Knox and his life was probably ruined (the film didn't really follow up too much on the poor guy) by the investigation. It was clear to me that neither Knox nor her boyfriend had any real motive (cui bono? "Those who benefit" in Latin. I think its a phrase Alec Baldwin uses in The Departed when discussing a murder with Matt Damon, to which Damon replies, "cui who gives a f*ck!"). Police then made up the lovers triangle that had no foundation. The evidence pointed in a few directions but law enforcement settled on Knox and Sollecito and eventually a 3rd person, Rudy Geude (who admitted to being at the scene, changed his story about Knox being at the scene and was convicted of the murder prior to the Knox trial).

The real villains here were the media. They painted a picture that was hard t turn away from, printing whatever the felt would sell the most of get the most ratings and of course not taking any responsibility. One of the journalists who covered the murder said something along the lines of "everyone was doing it." Nothing like a little journalistic integrity. It seemed that everyone wanted Knox to be guilty. Why? It was the better story. I felt bad for Kercher's family. They were being told that Knox was guilty by law enforcement and the media. How are they supposed to feel? Their 8 year journey had to just as gut wrenching as Knox's.

If you're into true crime documentaries, then this is a good watch. It's not as in depth as Making a Murder but it's no less satisfying.

2016 Films: #19. The Magnificent Seven

September 27th in St. Charles MO. For those not aware, this film, directed by Antoine Fuqua, is a remake of John Sturges' 1960 classic of the same name, But the film that started it all was Akira Kurosawa's 1954 all-time uber-classic Seven Samurai.

The year is 1879 and the venue is the western mining town of Rose Creek (it could be Arizona, Utah or even Northern California but it was filmed in New Mexico if any of that matters). The populace of ROse Creek are under the thumb of wealthy but evil industrialist Bartholomew Bogue ( Peter Sarsgaard) who burns down the church and kills a few townspeople to make sure the get the fact that he runs the show. One of the townsfolk gunned down was the good looking guy from White Collar and his wife Ellen (Haley Bennett) wants vengeance.

Ellen goes out to recruit some hired guns. The first person she runs into is warrant officer, Sam Chisolm. Chisolm isn't really turned on by the gig but perks up when he hears that Bogue is the lead villain. Here's the crew that makes up the title of the film:

• Sam Chisolm (Denzel Washington): The leader and the replica of Yul Brynner from the original.
• Joshua Farraday (Chris Pratt): The goofy, boozing gambler who has impure thoughts for Miss Ellen. He's the Steve McQueen of this version.
• Goodnight Robicheaux (Ethan Hawke): Confederate veteran, good friend of Chisolm (a black guy by the way) and sharpshooter. Hawke is this version's Robert Vaughn.
• Billy Rocks (Byung-hun Lee): Robiceaux's confidant, martial arts and knife expert. Lee is the Jame Coburn character.
• Jack Horne (Detective Bobby Goren): Mountain man.He represents Jeremiah Johnson. Who was not a character in the original. His closest match is Brad Dexter. Not really but they're both heavy set big dudes. 
• Vasquez (Manuel Garcia-Rulfo): A Mexican outlaw that Chisolm just sort of runs into whole trying to recruit another guy. He closest match would be Charles Bronson but Bronson has no equals. 
• Red Harvest (Martin Sensmeier): A Comanche who stumbles upon the group when they're camping out. Chisolm tells him that they're going to right some wrongs and kill some white people. Red Harvest is like, "yeah man! I'm in." The closest match here is Horst Buchholz. Much like Horne and Vasquez, its not a match.

The group arrives back at Rose Creek and  dispatch Bogue's henchman with relative ease while Bogue is in Sacramento. Since Bogue is in Sacramento, they have a week to prepare for his assault and they start making preparations. Robicheaux, who's seen too much killing, leaves because he feels this is a no win situation and he just can't kill anymore. When Bogue's forces arrive and attack, they're ambushed and in the ensuing shootout Robicheaux returns only die a gruesome death alongside Billy Rocks when Bogue unveils his gatling gun and sprays the town with bullets. Farraday sacrifices himself in order to take out the gatling gun. Eventually, Chisolm and Bogue square off against each other. It's here where Chisolm reveals that Bogue was responsible for the rape and killing of his sisters and mother back in Nebraska. Chisolm survived the lynching and it's payback time.

The film has had mixed reviews, much like Antoine Fuqua's other films. This was entertaining but not that great. Seven Samurai, was the first film that gave film viewers the plot element of recruiting heroes into a team to complete a mission. Sturges did a much better job in 1960 than Fuqua did here. Maybe it's because we're only supposed to care about Pratt and Robicheaux. To be fair, Fuqua did a nice job of recreating the scene that introduces us to Billy Rocks. It was a nice homage to the Coburn scene. In the 1960 version, there was an emotional attachment to all of the crew. Here it's pretty much just Denzel, Pratt, Hawke and to a lesser degree Lee. The others really just rounded the group out. Red Harvest's only purpose was to battle and kill Bogue's Comanche assassin (I knew there was a Native American in the group and I knew immediately when I saw Bogue's Native American that two we're going to fight. Too obvious). As for Vasquez, the group needed more diversity I guess. In fairness though, the original group was pretty iconic. It's difficult to match that kind of talent from the the 1960 film. 

Ellen Cullen seemed a bit too much like Mattie Ross from True Grit and since she was a ginger, she would have gotten a 3rd degree sunburn. Denzel was his usual brilliant self. Pratt had a difficult job of taking the McQueen role. It was a fine performance and he did the best he could but there isn't anyone who can match McQueen. Hawke's performance is right up there with Denzel. He played the Robert Vaughn character very well. I also liked Lee in the Coburn role. But I had no emotional connection to the rest of the group. None what so ever. That's probably the way the filmmakers wanted it? Take a close look at the poster, see how far in the background Jack Horne and Red Harvest are? You can barely make out Vasquez's face. That is intentional.

There were also a lot of elements from Pale Rider in here as well. Especially the Chisolm/Bogue showdown. Chisolm having survived a lynching is from Hang 'Em High. Speaking of lynching survival, it seemed really convenient that the first person that Ellen runs into is Chisolm. He turns the gig down until she mentions Bogue. If Chisolm was so into revenge, he probably could've tracked Bogue down. It's not like Bogue was keeping a low profile. He was a wealthy industrialist for crying out loud. Since Bogue is a wealthy industrialist, people are going to miss him when he's dead. Now Chisolm has a mark on his head. I know it's 1879 and vigilante justice wasn't as frowned upon as it is now but you can't just kill a mining tycoon and not expect repercussions (especially when the murderer is a black man, in 1879 there are people that will be all too happy to make sure the lynching does the job the 2nd time around). There are a lot of  flaws in this picture (I won't bother about the accuracy of the gatling gun or that no horse suffered so much as a scratch from all the bullets flying around) and it's those flaws that keep this film from being good. It was entertaining for sure but that's it. It just wasn't very good. It was meh. It's worth seeing if you're a fan of the original just for comparison's sake.

2016 Films: #18. Hell or High Water

September 24th in Chicago. This is a film that got some excellent buzz and more than a few people told me to see it. The film received an 98% Rotten Tomatoes rating and has grossed over $25 million against a budget of $12 million. The film went into a limited US release on August 12th and a wider release on August 26th.

Set in the bleak desolation of West Texas, Toby (pretty boy Chris Pine) and ex-con brother Tanner (the criminally underrated Ben Foster) pull off an early morning heist of a Texas Midlands Bank. The robbery is assigned to Texas Rangers Marcus Hamilton (The Dude) and Alberto Parker (Gil Birmingham). Hamilton, the old coot Ranger, is retiring (sounds a little like a certain sheriff in No Country For Old Men right?) ad this is his last case and he wants to see it through. While at a diner at another small town, Tanner knocks over another bank while Toby is flirting with the waitress.

The brothers so far have only stolen a relatively small amount from the banks. The reason is they're raising money (Hamilton deduced as much from the investigation) to pay off (they launder it at an Oklahoma Native American casino) the reverse mortgage on the farm since oil was discovered on the property. The boys' mother had died and the bank is itching to foreclose and sell it off to get that sweet oil money.

There is a historical reference you know.

There's one more Texas Midlands Bank to knock over. Hamilton and Parker are staking one out (which leads to the funniest exchange between Parker/Hamilton and an old waitress when trying to order lunch). Hamilton realizes they're at the wrong bank. Toby and Tanner hit the bank but it's payday. This being West Texas, everyone in the bank is packing and violence erupts. The brothers split up and Tanner leads the authorities in the desert for his last stand. The film ends with Toby paying of the bank and turning into a trust for his estranged sons. He's confronted by a now retired Hamilton about his involvement.

This picture is directed by David Mackenzie, an Englishman who's not exactly well known on this side of the pond. The film is very reminiscent of No Country For Old Men but it more than holds its own. The characters are gritty (there were more than a few times when I muttered to myself, "isn't he going to take a shower?") and the characters are very real and layered. My problems with the film were minimal. One being that Chris Pine is too much of a pretty boy to dirty up. He did a fine job, it's not his fault he's such a good looking guy. Another is that Bridges is pretty much reprising his Rooster Cogburn role but that's just being nitpicky. Ben Foster gives a great performance as the somewhat unhinged brother who's going to go down in flames. In a fair world, Ben Foster would have a few Oscars on his mantle for supporting roles.

There are also few messages here as well. First and foremost is the plight of the Howard farm. There's a scene where Toby and Tanner are getting the proper instructions on how the save the farm and keep a large steady flow of income coming in for Toby's boys. The banker explains that Midlands loaned their mother just enough to keep her poor. There is probably happens in real life and I am sure something along these lines happened during the Great Depression. There was a feeling that the Howard Brothers were sort of heroes sticking it to "the man." The staff and patrons from the diner were not that cooperative when asked to describe the brothers and at the end even the bank didn't seem to give a crap about identifying Toby as the second robber. Then there's the gun angle. Violence erupts and innocent people are killed when some guy decides to be the "good guy with a gun" inside the bank. Technically the bank guard tarted shooting first (he was a lousy shot considering he got the drop on the Howard Brothers) but we see a bank patron pull his gun out prior to the bank guard making his entrance. The "good guys" give chase but turn tail and run (as they should) when Tanner pulls out a machine gun and sprays bullets into their cars. I just got the feeling that the film was trying to say that police work should be left to the professionals,

This is a must see film. An all around well made film. Hell or High Water is the best film I've seen this year.

2016 Films: #17. Don't Breathe

September 10th in Chicago, IL. So I was hanging out in downtown Chicago on a rainy day and needed to kill some time while my wife was at work. I had heard about this film, it had an 88% Rotten Tomatoes rating, I had heard some good buzz and nothing else looked appealing. The film had a $10 million budget and has grossed over $82 million domestically.

There's a gang of essentially delinquents that are pulling off low to medium level burglaries in the Detroit area.

L to R: Money, Rocky and Alex

The team consists of Money (Daniel Zovatto), the standard drop out with dreams of being a big time gangster and who looks like James Franco from Spring Breakers. Rocky (Jane Levy), the tough but pretty Detroit chick who's only avenue to escape the bleakness of Detroit is crime (her home life is stereotypically awful, she wants to escape to sunny California with her little sister). She's also dating Money. Rounding out the gang is Alex (Dylan Minnette), the brains of the group. His dad owns a security company and it's his clients that they knock over and makes sure that the robberies stay under the felony limits. Alex has been in love with Rocky since grade school and is basically taking down scores to impress her (it's not working). Alex is a smart kid who doesn't need to be a criminal but love has a tendency to make people do silly things.

Let's be fair, a lot of geeky young males would take up crime to get close to her. 

After the opening heist, Money meets the fence and feels they didn't get enough money ( the economics of robbery are not a dollar for dollar trade. A $10k watch doesn't mean you'll get $10k in return. This should be taught in Robbery/Burglary 101). The fence tips Money to a score that could net them 0ver $300,000. The mark is a Gulf War veteran who came into a settlement after his daughter was killed in a car accident. After the three "case the joint," they learn that the mark (Stephen Lang) is a blind man (with a large dog) who's the sole person living in an abandon neighborhood. He also happens to be a customer of Alex's dad so it works out.

Suffice to say that the heist does not go as planned. Money brings a gun upping the ante to armed robbery and a minimum prison sentence. It also turns out that the blind man is really adept at moving about the house. Things go from bad to worse and there are some creepy twists along the way. I would go into more detail but this was a good film that is worth watching and I don't want to give any spoiler alerts. Go see the film.

Fede Alvarez, wrote and directed the picture and does a really nice job of giving the audience the sense of isolation and ratcheting up the tension. There are more than a few "trapped in a house" tropes involved but he's not looking to reinvent the wheel. I started to feel bad for the gang when they clearly get more than they bargained for. There is also a disturbing twist when Rocky and Alex try to escape through the basement (does that ever work out in film?). That leads to a really disturbing scene involving a turkey baster (very cringeworthy). Heck, the opening shot of the film is of a woman being dragged down the street (ensuring the viewer that they are in store for something interesting to say the least).

Alvarez keep the film short (88 minutes) and never goes off the rails with ridiculousness found in other films like this. Don't Breathe is very similar to the likes of It Follows (both take place in Detroit and Blue Ruin; minimalistic, gritty and intense. Alvarez is a director worth keeping an eye on (his 2013 remake of Evil Dead of nice debut). This is a film worth watching. Check it out.

2016 Films: #16. Suicide Squad

August 13th in Chicago. In only 3 weeks since it's release on August 5th, Suicide Squad has grossed over $270 million domestically. The film has more than made back its production and marketing budget ($325 million combined) with a worldwide gross of $587 million. The funny thing is that the critics don't like the film but fans love it. Fans loved it so much, they wanted to shutdown Rotten Tomatoes because they felt so strongly that the site's critics reviews were wrong (they weren't).

I can see why critics hate this picture. It's bad. There is nothing original in this film. If you want to see a good film involving Task Force X, go see Batman: Assault on Arkham Asylum.

Don't worry. Suicide Squad steals a lot from this feature.

My good friends at  Cracked.com had this to say about the film but I think the redundant plot can be properly summed up here in a way that makes me wish I was this clever...

To be fair, there were strong performances. Viola Davis really nailed Amanda Waller and I liked Jared Leto's take on The Joker (a bit more subtle than Heath Ledger's portrayal). Will Smith is good as Deadshot but Margot Robbie's portrayal of Harley Quinn is something that's up in the air. Sometimes she's good and sometimes I'm left scratching my head. Which maybe is the reaction I should be having. There are some good scenes in this film, mostly flashbacks involving Batman. Overall the film seemed rushed, a recurring theme in the DCU. They used the same sets at Batman v. Superman and had a plot piece that seemed all to familiar...

I give you the swirling portal from Suicide Squad (2016).

Ghostbusters (1984).

Avengers (2012).

Thor: Dark World (2014). Sensing a screenwriting theme yet?

X-Men: Apacalypse (2016). To be fair it's really just swirling debris. But you get the idea.

As I've said earlier, I didn't like the film. It wasn't as awful as critic made it out to be but it did not warrant fan backlash against Rotten Tomatoes either. Others have voiced better opinions that mine but here's another for good measure. With the financial success of this picture, there will be others and there's still time to make this better. 

2016 Films: #15. Star Trek Beyond

July 28th in Fairfield, CA. I will just come out and say it. I did not care much for this film. The film received great scores on Rotten Tomatoes and I understand that this is now an action franchise (as noted by the choice of director, Justin Lin). We are not going to see the science fiction film with some action from the past. That's fine. The powers that be want to milk the franchise for all its worth. It's the Hollywood way. Put in as much action as possible for younger viewers then throw in some nostalgia to suck in the older fans of series past. This is the 3rd film since the 2009 reboot and each film has gotten steadily worse.

The thing is, I never got a feeling that Kirk and pals were ever in any danger of not getting the job done. Kirk and Spock do not have the same rapport in the reboot either. Their friendship was forced upon them and us. The convoluted plot deals with both Kirk and Spock contemplating leaving the Enterprise until a distress signal calls the Enterprise back into action with the standard, it's "the only ship in the quadrant" cliche. The distress signal turns out to be a trap, the Enterprise is destroyed and the crew marooned on an unknown planet. Despite being split up, they manage to come up with a plan that involves a motorcycle (because why wouldn't it), Scottie fixing stuff with no explanation, repairing a two hundred year old starship to escape the planet and a hot female alien.

When they first meet, Kirk looks her over and totally thinks about having sex with her Given.

Then of course there are the evil aliens led by Krall. They seem to have access to great technology that allows them to monitor Starfleet transmissions and supply exposition. Oh, the two hundred year old starship that the Enterprise crew escapes in, turns out it's the ship that brought Krall and the evil aliens to the planet. See, it's the USS Franklin that went missing somehow the crew survived and has been luring ships there in hopes of finding the missing piece to an ancient weapon that happens to be in Kirk's possession in the comedic opening scene. Spoiler, the evil aliens turned out to the the crew of the Franklin and they've been turned into lizards (no explanation) but stay youthful due to a device (never shown) that can suck the life out of people (never shown, no explanation). It turns out they're really pissed at the Federation for not rescuing them. This all leads to the final battle on board the new Starfleet space mall that Kirk manages to save from the biological weapon at the very last second. Given.

The film is fast paced but the story and plot definitely take a back seat to the action. Lin abandons the sci-fi aspect of the film to go straight into hand to hand combat (thankfully the universe has a universal knowledge of kung-fu) and motorcycle stunts. Simon Pegg and five other people are credited with writing this picture. That usually means that the studio put in a lot of input and there were potentially a few other uncredited writers. It's very possible that the film had a good script to being with but it kept getting changed. The film was released on July 22nd and has grossed over $146 million domestically and $86 million world wide against a $185 million budget through August 19th. Not bad numbers but certainly good enough for a sequel. Perhaps the next installment can improve.

2016 Films: #14. Race

July 27th on flight from Chicago to San Francisco. The real life of Jesse Owens is one of hard work, resilience, perseverance, fortitude, triumph and tragedy. Yet somehow this film seems to overlook a lot of that stuff. Look, I understand that to make a comprehensive film about Mr. Owens, it would have a runtime of 180 minutes (2013's 42 had a similar problem but focused on Jackie Robinson's first year in the major leagues). The picture is directed by Stephen Hopkins (who has a lot decent to mediocre films to his credit) and centers around Owens' time at Ohio State and the 1936 Berlin Olympics. Stephan James does a very nice job in his portrayal of Owens. But I never really bought into Jason Sudeikis as Owens' gruff track coach at OSU. To me he was the guy from Horrible Bosses. 

Then there's the fact that the film also puts focus on Avery Brundage (Jeremy Irons) and how he was able to negotiate the with the Nazis to include Black and Jewish athletes in the games. The film makes a valiant effort to give the viewer an account of what lead up to one of the greatest Olympic achievements of the 1st half of the 20th Century (Jim Thorpe being the other) but it falls short. Is it about Owens or about the Berlin games themselves? By trying to hit on all facets of the of the period (the hideous racism faced by Owens; Owens having to deal with whether or not to compete in the games; Owens getting a new pair of track shoes prior to competition; Owens having to pay his own way through college because scholarships weren't offered to blacks; the USOC debating about whether to boycott and the whole Brundage thing), the entire film was shortchanged.

Even the film's postscripts in the end fail to do Owens justice. It tells you that after decades of being unable to find work, Ohio State gave Owens a job as a janitor. A janitor. Actually it was much worse than that. Read about it. I did. This is the one thing I give the film credit for; it forced me to find out what really happened to Owens after the Olympics. It was terrible. The film received a 61% rating on Rotten Tomatoes which is mediocre. Not bad but not that good either. The film just doesn't do justice to the life of Jesse Owens. It should have been better.