The Last Starfighter - review

Warp Speed to Nostalgia!

The eighties were the decade of my awkward transition from teenager to adulthood.  Video games, sci-fi movies, girls, acne and weird feelings, what a time to be alive!  I lived a good portion of that time in arcades because my raging hormones could be momentarily drowned out by the roar of 8-bit music and the rush of playing my personal favorite coin-op, Bally’s Wizard of Wor.

I loved video games, still do, and “The Last Starfighter” is one of the few movies that manages to successfully use video games as a jumping off point for a delightful story.

While not a Steven Spielberg film, “The Last Starfighter” certainly reflects his influence in its glorification of homespun nostalgia.  The story is absurdly simple and simply absurd, but it succeeds largely because of the earnest performances of the actors, who make the drama ring true and the comedy sparkle with a heaping helping of old-fashioned, aw-shucks enthusiasm.  This sentimentality is difficult to resist because “The Last Starfighter” is just so happy to be a movie!

Lanky but charming Lance Guest plays Alex Rogan, a young man who feels trapped in the trailer park where he lives with his mom and little brother, doing handyman chores for the aging residents.  Alex has a steady girlfriend, but he wants more from life than necking by the lake in a sleeping bag.  He dreams of escaping to college, but when Alex's school loan is denied, he is crushed by the thought of being consigned to replace fuses and erect TV antennas but never see the big wide world outside his little desert valley.

To distract himself, Alex plays a newly arrived video game at the trailer park’s general store.  The machine turns out to be a recruitment tool sent by an intergalactic huckster named Centauri, played by the delightfully hammy Robert Preston.  When Alex beats the game, Centauri appears and offers Alex the chance to actually escape the trailer park, but that choice involves risking his life as a real star pilot in an actual war!  At first Alex balks at this responsibility, but danger at home compels him to make the leap into the great beyond.

CGI was still in its nascent stage, but the visual effects in “The Last Starfighter” hold up quite well, due in large part to the brilliant production design by Ron Cobb.  Despite the modest computing power of this era’s processors, the Gunstar spaceship that Alex commands is a unique and nicely detailed design.  The dogfight action is very well-composed and edited, and Craig Safan’s rousing score soars through it all, keeping our spirits flying along with Alex as he battles seemingly impossible odds.

The supporting cast is wonderful across the board.  Catherine Mary Stuart plays Maggie, Alex’s sweetheart, and her girl-next-door looks, luminous eyes and sweet yet sexy demeanor make her instantly adorable.  Alex’s little brother Louis, played by Chris Hebert, adds a lot of humor without feeling one-dimensional, and all the denizens of the trailer park are distinct even though they don’t have much screen time.  These background characters may feel a bit stereotypical, but this kind of cinematic shorthand is still done with genuine affection.

“The Last Starfighter” is a mighty cornball of clichés.  An unabashed celebration of can-do attitude, romance and adventure which might seem mawkish to those with hardened hearts, but I find its schmaltz to be utterly appealing and infectious.  It’s a love letter to youth in all its optimism, aspirations and starry-eyed wonder.  If you have ever looked up at the night sky and dreamed of cosmic adventure, then “The Last Starfighter” is your ticket to a trip back in time for a vision of the future, eighties-style!

"The Last Jedi" review

The Last Straw

That's it.  I'm done.  "The Force Awakens" was a stumbling but earnest effort to recreate a Star Wars movie that felt right.  The look and the mood and the music in the first act perfectly captured the serious but fun atmosphere of the original Star Wars trilogy, and yet the new characters were fresh and different and interesting.  Then the old familiar faces began to appear and the snappy pacing stalled under the increasing weight of the reverence for Episode IV before the story finally sunk into a bog of nostalgia.

Both of you were lovely here. WTH happened?

While I could understand the desire to return to familiar territory, I didn't want a straight up remake of the first Star Wars film, and this is why I was looking forward to "Rogue One", as it seemed poised to offer director Gareth Edwards the chance to really break free from a lot of burdensome lore and expand the Star Wars universe.  He did, but the needlessly complex plot resulted in a confusing and boring heist movie with no emotional stakes due to the cardboard-thin characterizations.

No one really cares if ALL of you die.  Isn't that a problem?

I'd only seen Rian Johnson's first film "Brick", and I recall it fondly even though the contradictory combo of a neo-noir story set in a contemporary high school felt too disjointed to really gel despite the excellent mood and cinematography.  Still, I was hoping that his approach to "The Last Jedi" would answer some burning questions posed by "The Force Awakens", and that these answers, while satisfying, would not only help us to better understand the new characters, but deepen the mythology of this new story, and get us excited for its conclusion in Episode IX.

Emo is the new villainy?  I can almost buy that.  So scary!  So. . .so.

Rian Johnson failed.  Now, whether this is due to Disney demanding certain story or character elements or whether Rian understands Star Wars as well as George Lucas is beyond my ken.  All I can say is that "The Last Jedi" is the last Star Wars film that I will see in the theater.  Star Wars is no longer a franchise about myth, adventure and great heroes.  It's solely a product, and a recycled one at that.  A means to a merchandising end.  That galaxy far, far away is now just an Amazon one-click away.

Luke upon realizing that they were going to make him milk a land seal with massive breasticles.

I cannot go into all the details of why this film is a failure on nearly every level that is possible for a film of its kind, but its most prominent transgression is that it doesn't respect its origins.  It doesn't matter if the plot or the character's motivations make sense anymore.  I now understand why the trailers hammered the line from Kylo Ren about destroying your past because it's the only way to become who you truly are, as that's what Rian is trying to do with this latest film.  He's trying to "reset" audience expectations.

I'm Mary Poppins, y'all!

But you know what?  Those who forget the past are doomed to relive it, and so this has now become the doom of every Star Wars fan from this point forward.  Forget all that great storytelling and character development.  Forget all the intense emotional moments that were built up across multiple films culminating in a final battle between two characters which was resolved in the most heart-breakingly bittersweet way.  Forget all that.  Coherent narrative is no longer necessary.

FEED ME, FANBOY!

We've got Porgs and the giant racing rabbit horses and sea cows with massive lactating teats. Don't forget the gag shot of the close-up on the steam irons pressing on First Order uniforms that looked like a spaceship landing!  That was funny, right? We can make meta jokes and mock this franchise now, right?  No.  Not if you want your audience to take your film seriously.  Yet under the Disney yoke, Star Wars has now become a punch line.  Kyle Smith at the National Review nailed the fallacy in this wanna-be Edgelord thinking: "Get a cheap laugh poking fun at the mythology and its power won’t be there when you need it."

Mourning the imminent demise of the franchise.  Luke really could see the future!

Star Wars is dead.  Long live Star Wars.

"Logan" review

The Old Man finally gets his due.

It has been seventeen years since Hugh Jackman first suited up as the Wolverine, but in all the X-Men films that followed, one crucial element was always missing from his character: the guilt.  Logan has long been haunted by remorse for all the carnage that he has inflicted not only on his enemies, but also on his friends.  At his lowest point in this latest entry, Logan tearfully pleads with another character to not follow his path because bad things always happen to the people that he cares about.  While Logan’s mutant healing ability has greatly extended his lifespan and made him nigh-invincible, it has also utterly isolated him.  All Logan’s friends are now either dead or missing in action, so he has severed the emotional ties that time inevitably wears down and destroys.  Logan can no longer tolerate the wounds that never fully heal.

The weight and depth of Logan’s outcast existence suffuses every scene of this film with pain and regret.  The world seems to have largely forgotten about mutants, and Logan would appear to be just fine with that.  Yet he drinks relentlessly, and the decades of mental anguish and alcoholism have etched deep creases into his now craggy face.  This is because Logan's healing ability is failing, and he is barely able to care for Charles Xavier, who is also tormented by his own advancing age as his telepathic powers are spiking wildly out of control.  The perpetually setting sun and the lengthening shadows surrounding Logan’s decrepit desert hideout signal more slaughter, for some humans have not forgotten mutants, and seek to weaponize their powers regardless of the obliteration of the innocent.

Though Logan claims to be past caring about the lives of others, he gets pulled back into the final fray when he learns of a diabolical new plan to make literal super-soldiers by harvesting mutant DNA and then injecting it into children.  Logan also discovers that he has a crucial connection to this killer-from-a-crib program in the form of a young, seemingly mute girl named Laura who has powers much like his own.  Their lives become inextricably linked as Logan repeatedly leaps to Laura's defense against the ruthless mercenaries now pursuing them both.  Logan desperately desires to also rescue Laura from the misbegotten life that he has endured, while she finds in him the only positive paternal influence that she has ever known.  Thrown together in turmoil, they both rise to meet their fate with a familiar ferocity.

The R rating of this film has been much ballyhooed, and while there is certainly more blood and violence than in all previous X-men entries, it is not overindulgent.  To the contrary, the spurting jugulars and shattered bones are actually eclipsed by the lean, kinetic storytelling, the stunning cinematography and the superlative ensemble cast.  The vast majority of the film’s running time is instead devoted to investing the audience in the lives of these characters, which makes the brutal action scenes convulse with the kind of galvanic excitement that had me whooping and clapping at the intensity of the psychological catharsis rather than the physical butchery.   It must also be stressed that amidst all this chaos, there are a few terrific belly laughs to be had.  While much of the story is indeed harrowingly grim, it is not without a few precious moments of joy.

“Logan” is one of the best X-men films and also one of the best superhero films ever made.  This character’s sojourn across the silver screen mirrors his course through the comics: a long and lonely road fraught with continual peril, with only the solace of a few friendships and cold brewskis to set against the unrelenting assault of a mean and mistrustful world.  The final scene packs a serious gut punch, because it is not only a heartbreaking farewell, but also a stark and beautifully visual tribute to the duality of the Wolverine.  Logan is a tremendously tragic character, and yet the resolution of his story is so damn well done that I told my wife as we walked through our front door that we had just come home from a really good wake.

"Captain America: Civil War" review

Civil Spat

 “Captain America: The Winter Soldier”, directed by the Russo brothers, is one of the best films in the Marvel Cinematic Universe.  It developed all the characters introduced previously while adding new ones who were interesting and had integral parts to play.  The story became darker and more complex, but still felt lean, moved quickly and was SO much darn fun to watch!  “Captain America: Civil War” was also to be helmed by the Russo brothers and I was truly excited for it.  The Avengers battle the Avengers?  Black Panther?  Spider-Man? What could possibly go wrong?  Unfortunately, a LOT.

“Captain America: Civil War” finds the Avengers (most of them anyway) threatened with political sanctions due to the continuing civilian collateral damage from all their preceding battles.  The film does a much better job of presenting the severity of this subject than “Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice”, but there is still something missing.  This fight should feel like an intimate and ideological world-shaking clash between our conflicted crusaders, but it comes off more like a neighborhood kerfuffle over parking in somebody’s driveway without their permission.  Sides are chosen arbitrarily, often in direct contrast to the particular character's worldview.  Most problematic as that critical decisions feel wholly plot driven instead of coming from the heart, and this significant lack of tangible stakes saps the strength from the story.

Marvel’s grand plan leading up to the end of Phase III is an incredibly courageous construct that has many merits.  All the individual films are intricately tied around a central storyline that will eventually culminate in the two part climax of the Infinity War.  However, the major drawback is that all this setup and foreshadowing does not leave the individual films with much room to maneuver as far as their own stories.  The original content that is present is often forced in between exposition that won’t be paid off for several years.  Furthermore, because certain characters must be present for the grand finale, nothing truly terrible can happen to them now.  If it does, it is not to be trusted as permanent.  Without real risk and lasting consequences, little emotional drama is possible regardless how much plot is present.

The result is that even with a two and a half hour running time, "Captain America: Civil War" is more overstuffed than a Thanksgiving turkey.  Despite the visual feast, satisfaction remains elusive because there is an aura of sameness hanging over every scene.  There are no peaks and valleys to the ride.  I like these actors and I love some of these characters, and clearly a LOT of genuine, earnest effort was put into this film.  The problem is that you can feel it.  The cinematic pry bar is being pushed to the breaking point under the weight of so many expectations.  While the film is enjoyable overall, it is so densely packed with information that it’s almost overwhelming.   The viewing experience is not unlike eating an entire chocolate cake without the accompanying glass of milk.  It can be done, and it is tasty, but by the time you’ve choked down the last bite you’re just glad that it’s all over.

I believe a man can fly. . .again

What is the Soul of a Superman?

First of all, I am not an expert on Superman.  I’ve read very few of the thousands of comic books, and have seen only a smattering of episodes of the numerous TV shows in which he has appeared.  I’ve not even screened the third and fourth theatrical films (by choice, mind you) so my familiarity with all the iterations of Superman which have come and gone over the decades is minimal.  Still, I believe that I understand the character well enough to proceed with a passionate plea for his cinematic reclamation.

As a child my first exposure to Superman was reruns of the black and white television serial “Adventures of Superman” starring George Reeves.  Even though I didn't watch the entire series, I enjoyed what I saw immensely.  Yet my interest did not lead me towards other familiar sources such as comic books.  With certain pop culture franchises I have remained a purely visual consumer.  I am the same way with Star Wars.  While I am aware of the vast range of stories set in the Star Wars universe that are available in novels and other print media, I’ve only ever been interested in the movies and the all-encompassing sensory experience that they alone provide.

When “Superman” first came to theaters in the summer of 1978, I was a boy whose imagination was easily carried away, and not just by the colossal charm of Christopher Reeve.  The rose-colored vision of this character was equally reflected in the “modern” city of Metropolis.  I knew that this was not a realistic depiction of urban life, for I had watched the nightly news and knew what happened in big cities.  I didn’t question the omission of certain savageries because I understood that they didn’t fit into the universe which Superman inhabits, for he is not the only idealized element in this cinematic world.

The real world has changed very little in the four decades since, but attitudes towards heroes have become more complex and hyper-critical.  Even at the apex of his popularity in the fifties, Superman was viewed by many as a deluded Boy Scout, unable or unwilling to acknowledge the seemingly inexpiable failings of so much of humankind.  Today the response to Superman’s unfaltering altruism has metastasized from a bemused intellectual superiority to downright dismissive scorn.  How could he be so stupid?  Why does he even care?  What good can he possibly do?

This breaks my heart.  The knee-jerk judgments heaped upon Superman are such an ugly expression of the cynicism which has so virulently infected much popular culture and online social media.  I understand this up to a point.  There’s a lot to be upset about.  Greed, hatred and tyranny still hold much of our world in a poisonous, debilitating grasp.  Pessimism is so rampant and so accepted that even wishing for things to get better is often seen as a futile exercise.  Furthermore, even when something good does happen, often the first reactions are smug and nihilistic assumptions that it was either a fake stunt or merely a momentary anomaly from the norm of misery.

Shouldn’t that make Superman and what he stands for even more relevant and appealing?  In a world where the righteous moral path is shrouded in ever deepening shades of gray, wouldn’t you want a hero who is the most incorruptible?  Wouldn’t you want someone whom you could implicitly trust to tell you the truth and always be there to help?  What’s so wrong with actually giving a shit about the world and the people in it?  Has hope now become something to be viewed as a mental illness?  When did trying to be a good guy suddenly become a bad thing? 

I present below a superlative example of how Superman can beatifically merge with our harsher realities when he is in the hands of a writer who understands his character.

Yeah, I needed a tissue too.

Unfortunately, the three most recent films featuring Superman only serve as cautionary tales about the failure to successfully integrate his character into our contemporary global culture.  After the titanic two-part saga that unfurls through “Superman” and “Superman II”, the franchise faltered with the silly “Superman III” and then augured in with the atrocious “Superman IV: The Quest for Peace.”  Rather than try to launch a phoenix from such ignoble ashes, director Bryan Singer’s solution was to start an alternate timeline picking up after “Superman II.”  It sounded like a fantastic idea, and when the first teaser trailer was released, “Superman Returns” seemed perfectly poised to get the franchise flying high again.

Much to the dismay of many, “Superman Returns” turned out be more like “Superman Mopes.”  Other than the superb sequence involving the rescue of the airplane, Superman’s actions are decidedly un-super, mostly revolving around pedestrian, soap-opera-styled relationship squabbles.  Our hero does almost nothing truly heroic, and despite the welcome attempt to evoke an earlier era in the Art Deco-styled production design, the lighting is somber and the atmosphere moody.  The whole world looks depressed, and Superman doesn’t bring any light or joy to the darkness.

While “Superman Returns” was dreary and misguided, I believe it was an earnest attempt to revitalize the character for modern audiences. However I could not have guessed at the illogical oblivion to which the franchise would be consigned under the guise of further “updating.”  Zack Snyder’s “Man of Steel” was an attempt to reboot Superman’s origin story, but the film is a headache-inducing barrage of blurry, hyper-kinetic CGI mayhem from start to finish.  Again, Superman has only one moment of true heroism, and that single positive spark is soon extinguished by the eye-numbing assault of the interminable final battle.

There’s SO much wrong with "Man of Steel", but the crowning critical error was the whole-scale destruction of Metropolis that occurs as Superman battles Zod.  Thousands of innocent lives are destroyed in the toppling skyscrapers and yet Superman never once pauses to help.  This total lack of concern for the people whom he is sworn to protect is a direct contradiction of the core of the character.  Superman would NEVER do this.  Zack Snyder’s belated claims that this deviation would be “explained” in future films clearly demonstrates that this director does not understand the character.

Those die-hard fans of Superman who were able to forgive Snyder’s ill-conceived initial approach must have been gobsmacked by “Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice.”  This ponderous, chaotic monstrosity laid bare the myopic scope of Snyder’s glum and murky vision.  Batman and Superman duking it out seems like a natural match-up as Batman is a creature of the shadows while Superman is a harbinger of light.  Even though they strive for similar goals, these two heroes are polar opposites in their world views and their actions, so it's easy to see them coming blows over their divergent methods.

Yet Snyder’s psychological sketch for both characters is nearly identical.  They brood and glower with furrowed brows, looking in dire need of some Metamucil.  Speaking of coming clean, I have to confess that I haven’t seen the movie, and I never will.  “Man of Steel” was more than enough to convince me to avoid any future Snyder films because I don’t have enough ibuprofen and bourbon at home with which to self-medicate afterwards!  I have heard enough to know that my decision was correct.  But it still makes me sad.

The one consolation that I can take from this is that “Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice” did not do as well as was hoped.  The opening was a financial bonanza, but the film experienced a second weekend plummet of ticket sales by almost 70 percent!  This is due not just to the failure to properly present the main characters, but also because Zack Snyder is such a poor director with no sense of character development, coherency or pacing.  Despite this precipitous drop in attendance, I doubt it will be enough to convince Snyder to reconsider his approach to Superman or film-making in general.

What’s worse is that Superman is still in Snyder’s hands, as it has been confirmed that he will direct at least the first of a two-movie Justice League saga.  I have no hope that Superman will finally be able to show his true colors again in this next installment.  However, I still believe that this character has a place in our lives and could be presented in a modern film in a way that is not corny or anachronistic.  It can be done, they just have to find that one director who knows who Superman is, where he comes from and why he does what he does.

Superman is an immigrant, and his story is a celebration of the ideal of this country being a place for anyone who wants to remake their lives or just start over.  Superman is also an orphan, yet he found a new home with his foster parents who taught him to value everyone and everything in equal measure.  Superman knows that the world is usually not fair, but nevertheless he tirelessly struggles to makes things better because he believes that we have the capability to overcome our flaws and learn to live together peacefully.

Kindled by hope, guided by the love of his new family and powered by the yellow sun in the bright blue sky of his new home, Superman carries forward upon his mighty shoulders our fondest dreams for a better future, and the source of the inspiration for this virtuous goal is eloquently evoked by his father, Jor-El, in perhaps the single greatest summation of what Superman represents to us:

“They can be a great people, Kal-El, they wish to be.  They only lack the light to show the way.  For this reason above all, their capacity for good, I have sent them you. . .my only son.”