HAPPY/SAD/BEAUTIFUL: a review of "Sing Street"

"SING STREET"
Story by John Carney & Simon Carmody
Screenplay Written by John Carney
Directed by John Carney
**** (four stars)
RATED PG 13

Yes, I know that all of you are most likely out seeing the latest Captain America adventure but please do allow me to point you in the direction of something that is not only far off of the beaten path, it is also one that has sailed directly onto my personal list of one of the best films of 2016. Times are indeed becoming increasingly tougher for the smaller film to survive among the big budget behemoths and I seriously wish for this wonderful film to not slip through the cracks.

In a movie year that has already delivered Richard Linklater's raucous, astutely perceptive and deeply heartfelt "Everybody Wants Some!!" and Don Cheadle's audacious, poetic, rule breaking "Miles Ahead," we now arrive with something truly beautiful. Writer/Director John Carney, who previously delivered the lovely, Oscar winning "Once" (2007) and the criminally under-appreciated "Begin Again" (2014), now presents "Sing Street," not only his third ode to music and romance but unquestionably his finest film to date. It is a film of harsh realism combined with delirious optimism and musical fantasy, merged so effortlessly that by the film's end, you will find your heart and spirit soaring with inspiration and possibility.

I honestly do not know how Carney achieves such a feat over and again but I am now beginning to see him and his talents existing as a full blessing to cinema as movies have only continued to grow darker, more cynical and crass and driven solely by the bottom line. With "Sing Street," you can feel the adoration John Carney has for his subject matter flowing rapturously from the screen. It is obvious that he believes in every single moment he has placed on camera and every single word that he has written. And in doing so, our own levels of cynicism completely fade and we become believers right along with him. Please do yourselves a favor and head straight out to see this film for it is a glowingly special experience that just may have yo finding yourselves singing all the way out of the theater.

Set within inner-city Dublin circa 1985, "Sing Street" tells the story of teenager Conor Lalor (a thoroughly winning Ferdia Walsh-Peelo), who finds himself transferred from his private school to a rough public Catholic school named Synge Street CBS, after his family faces new financial and personal woes. Conor's Father Robert (Aiden Gillen) finds business for his architecture practice waning as well as his marriage to Penny (Maria Doyle Kennedy) failing as fights grow more frequent and he falls deeper into alcohol. While Conor's older sister Ann (Kelly Thornton) remains studios, his older brother Brendan (a terrific Jack Raynor) is a wayward, music obsessed college dropout.

At his new school, life becomes even more turbulent as Conor is the subject of torment from not only the school bully Barry (Ian Kenny) but also the unrepentant and violent school principal, Brother Baxter (Don Wycherley). After finding himself befriended by the diminutive yet clever, fast talking Darren (Ben Carolan), the twosome spot the stunning sight of an older girl standing petulantly across the street. For Conor it is love at first sight.

In a moment of pure boldness, Conor introduces himself to the girl named Raphina (a wonderful Lucy Boynton), who presents an affect of worldliness and claims to be an aspiring model. Following suit and in an even bolder move, Conor invites Raphina to play a role in the upcoming music video for his band. Except, and unbeknownst to Raphina, there is no music video because there is no band.

Not yet...

Soon, Darren introduces Conor to multi-instrumentalist Eamon (an excellent Mark McKenna), and the band, soon to be named Sing Street is formed alongside keyboardist Ngig (Percy Chamburuka), bassist Larry (Conor Hamilton) and drummer (Karl Rice), with Darren serving as producer, manager and music video director. After being creatively pushed his brother to not just play in a cover band but to actually generate his own material, Conor, with great aid from Eamon, becomes a promising songwriter. Now armed with his band, self made music and videos and emerging self confidence, Conor strikes out to win Raphina's heart and quite possibly, mend his family as well.

As with both "Once" and "Begin Again," John Carney's "Sing Street" is a rapturously affectionate film that revolves around the joy of inspiration and the supreme connection that is formulated between disparate individuals when creating music and playing together. The sequences of songwriting, performance and video making instantly took me back to my own teenage years when I served as drummer for a band and also made a short movie for Arts Week one year. For me, those times were not only confidence building but experiences where the only expectations were ones my friends and I placed upon ourselves. We were building our own worlds together and the energy that sparked between one person's talents and ideas and everyone else's was infectious. We never had any claims to what the future may have held for any of us as musicians, writers and filmmakers but we thrived just on the fact that we were being creative and inventive, surprising ourselves all along the way. Now that those years are far behind me, I can easily look back to those times and realize that those periods fully paved the way for my adult creative life as a writer and as a radio DJ. And I still carry my drumsticks inside of my daily, and increasingly ragged satchel because...you never know...

Despite those specific personal moments and emotions, "Sing Street" expertly tapped into that wider and almost inexplicable drive that the young (and I would gather any creative individuals) happen to possess when thrust into the world of creating art just at the point where they are discovering (to continuing to discover) themselves and their specific places in the world at large. In some respects, that particular spirit is fearless because there are no wrong answers, the rules and boundaries are of their own making, therefore absolutely anything is possible.

Also, and as with Carney's previous musical film entries, "Sing Street" is loaded with a collection of original songs (many co-written by Carney) that are superbly pitch perfect and fit lusciously alongside their mid 1980's counterparts by the likes of Spandau Ballet, The Cure, Hall & Oates, Joe Jackson and others. This particular tactic also served the film greatly not just through being instantly accessible and crowd pleasing songs but in the perceptive quality that showcases how budding songwriters and musicians need to crib from their sources of inspiration to find themselves as well as displaying Conor's inner life, hopes, fears, frustrations and ever growing dreams.

"Sing Street," like its predecessors is also a deceptively simple film. Yes, it is primarily the story of a boy who wishes to impress a girl by forming a band. But, the details within and underneath give the film a tangible dramatic weight, eve when the film is often flying sky high due to the music and its boisterous comedy. Yes, Conor's life as songwriter/singer/musician may have explicitly begun to impress an older girl, but what it becomes is a source of self-expression leading to growing independence, an exploration of sexual identity and rebelliousness, courage, strength and even salvation.

Carney is extremely sharp and wise to utilize the realities of 1985 Dublin as the hardened backdrop to a story this romantic. The scent of violence looms subtly in the air as does a societal sense of hopelessness as economic disparity grows larger. Carney will have these quick matter-of-fact moments where Conor and Eamon are writing songs together in an idyllic setting yet Eamon's bicycle is stolen right behind them. Another moment presents Conor and Raphna hand in hand with songs in their heart racing through the nighttime streets as a drunk citizen vomits profusely in an graffiti drenched alleyway. The songs serve as rainbows to life's clouds to be certain, but they also illuminate and inform Conor about the role he possesses in determining the course of his future.

Once Conor gets it into his head to begin a band, yet has no idea whatsoever as to what music they would even perform, he fumbles into the idea of his band existing as one that is "futurist." With "Sing Street," Conor's eventual clash with the possibilities of his own future arrive rapidly and turbulently as he is forced to face conflicts with his dreams and realities with the state of his family, his school, his homeland and even with Raphina. It is here where we realize that the core of the film is not necessarily Conor's romance with Raphina but his endearing relationship with his brother Brendan, who guides him in music and ultimately. in life via witnessing his brother's own disappointments and failings. For what sort of future does Conor wish to have for himself, and how would those dreams conform to the extremely limited environment in which he currently lives?

While the pain of Dublin realities arrive, vanish and return over and again throughout the film, Carney maintains his optimism, which is as urgent as it is clear eyed. Because honestly, what could be more daring in a world where despair is on the rise, giving into that despair or fighting against it to create a better future for yourself? The film's final moments are definitely Carney's most dramatically extreme to date, providing us with visual and emotional metaphors for the storms we all shoulder within life and how we can either face or fear them. For Carney, optimism is a defiant choice, not a defeat. A virtue, not an unrealistic hindrance. And his sense of hope and community, especially in our extremely divisive and vitriolic times is a much needed necessity.

As our hero Conor, Ferdia Walsh-Peelo is first rate in a performance that is rich, warm, vulnerable, completely involving and engaging and it also must be noted that he performs all of his own singing within the film and wonderfully so. Lucy Boynton is his terrific equal as she conveys many levels of strength and jadedness alongside innocence and a deep sadness that supplies Raphina with a palpable and realistic pathos. These young lovers conjure an angst and adolescent and romantic urgency that feeds into the music and vice versa so beautifully. You will indeed root for these kids and their friends to remain true to themselves and their spirits and to not find themselves beaten down by life. If these were real human beings that one could converse with, I believe that you would instantly wish to take each of them aside and provide them with the right amount of encouragement and support to keep them moving forwards regardless of life's obstacles.  

John Carney's "Sing Street" is a triumph, a number one hit with a bullet and fully deserving of your embrace at the box office. Captain  America will be just fine. He doesn't need our help. But for these talented, creative, heartfelt, love-struck kids from Dublin, just imagine where they could go with some devoted love from all of us.    

IN THE KEY OF MILES: a review of "Miles Ahead"

"MILES AHEAD"
Story by Steven Baigleman & Don Cheadle and Steven J. Rivele & Christopher Wilkinson
Screenplay by Steven Baigleman & Don Cheadle
Directed by Don Cheadle
**** (four stars)
RATED R

I have met Miles Davis.

Yes, it is true, dear readers. Long ago, I did indeed meet Miles Davis. I shook his hand as well, while hearing that unmistakable quiet yet firm rasp in his voice. I was 17 years old and the meeting occurred backstage a short while after a performance at the Chicago theater. And even so, the whole exchange was quite lost upon me at the time, as in my mind, Miles Davis represented my Father's music and for my Father, this meeting was a lifetime in the making.

For me, as I have grown older and have incorporated Miles Davis' unprecedented music and artistry into my life, I am stunned that I actually met the man himself. Considering his legendary mercurial and often impenetrable persona, I am further surprised to realize that my memory of the backstage visit was certainly brief but warm and for that matter, I can say that I have never seen my Father so excitedly nervous in my life, before or since, as he was at long last having a moment with a lifelong hero. There was no sense of disappointment or uncomfortableness about the visit and as I look back, now armed with a greater knowledge concerning what I understand about the man as well as the urgent and restless creativity and inventiveness within the music itself, I have often wondered how his mind actually functioned, not only regarding his art, but his relationship with those who admired and revered him, placing him upon the pedestal of icon as well as those who existed and persisted as vultures.

Don Cheadle's "Miles Ahead," which he co-wrote, directs and gives a performance of sensational grit and pathos in the title role, IS NOT a biopic. Defiantly, audaciously and without any sense of concern to any potential detractors or polarization, the film is a wildly entertaining plus deeply impressionistic and passionate exploration of Miles Davis and for my sense and sensibilities, it is as courageous as they come. In fact, I felt it to be a film that often feels to exist a few minutes ahead of most films being released these days due to its overall poetic nature merged with its vibrancy. As impressed as I often was, the film is indeed quite the head-scratcher as well, a quality that certainly stopped me from sailing over the top with my impression of it. But, that is a minor quibble for a film that is demonstrably breaking the rules and charting its own creative path...much like the music of Miles Davis itself.

"Miles Ahead" proudly eschews all biopic cliches and trappings as well as the "cradle to grave" narrative structure by utilizing a completely non-linear narrative all set within a period near the end of Miles Davis' (played by Don Cheadle) five year, self-imposed sabbatical and exile from public life, studio recording and live performances. While extending a toe back into creating new music, Davis is at first pursued and then joined by Rolling Stone reporter Dave Brill (Ewan McGregor), initially for an interview and soon, on a car chase and bullet ridden hunt for a set of Davis' stolen master tapes of new material. And through the feverish pursuit, Miles ventures back and forth from the intense solitude of his isolation and out into the larger world as well as between the present day and his memories, all the while attempting how to move forwards in his art and life unequivocally upon his own terms.

For those of you who are looking for a film that will provide you with a new insight into the world and therefore, the motivations and inner life of Miles Davis, Don Cheadle's "Miles Ahead" is demonstrably not that film. Well...not in any traditional sense. What Cheadle has created is worlds away from something like Director Taylor Hackford's "Ray" (2004) and don't worry, it is not as all out bonkers as Director Ken Russell's Franz Liszt fantasia "Lisztomania" (1975). "Miles Ahead" is much more in the similar vein as the likes of Director Bill Pohlad's outstanding "Love And Mercy" (2015), based upon the life of Brian Wilson or better yet, Writer/Director Todd Haynes' truly forward thinking "I'm Not There" (2008), his nearly impenetrable, non-linear exploration of the music and various personas of Bob Dylan, and perhaps even more fittingly, Director Michael Mann's "Ali" (2001), his more overtly abstract exploration of Muhammad Ali.

For a figure as inscrutable as Miles Davis, it is more than fitting to me that he deserves an equally inscrutable film. "Miles Ahead" is precisely one film that throws the rule book out of the window and flies confidently by its own creative whims and excursions, defying all expectations and forcing the audience to catch up to it and conform to its will in order to fully enjoy and comprehend. In that regard, Cheadle's film is a triumph. Often electrifying in its energy and swaggering style, Cheadle utilizes the figure of Miles Davis to somehow bridge the gap between the esoteric art film and ruthless Blaxploitation. It is not only as if we are seeing a film that the real Miles Davis may have enjoyed viewing, it is the type of film that Miles Davis could possibly have made himself about himself.

For the matter of discovering any insight into the personality and persona of Miles Davis, I felt that it was deeply intriguing that Cheadle chose to focus his portrait within a period during which this artist was not being creative, therefore adding to the impressionistic style of the film itself, and making the experience, which sees more than its share of action, a decidedly cerebral journey. In many ways, the entire film works as a metaphor, or a series of metaphors, in which the iconography of Davis' life and persona congeal to create an amalgamation of symbols and signposts which then build up the film's drama and character portrait, which we are then invited and challenged to work out for ourselves. Even Miles Davis' music, which is featured wall-to-wall upon the film's soundtrack alongside a score by Composer Robert Glasper, also provides signals as to Miles Davis' state of mind throughout this unorthodox motion picture.

To me, it felt that Don Cheadle used "Miles Ahead" to extend beyond his primary subject in order to explore the idea of the artist's perception of himself, his successes and failures versus the perception the fans and critics have of him and his work. In one terrific sequence early in the film, Miles Davis, ensconced within his chaotically arranged abode--a presentation that houses shades of Howard Hughes combined with Orson Welles' "Citizen Kane" (1941)--hears a radio program on which the host professes his adoration over Davis's seminal "Kind Of Blue" (released August 17, 1959). Miles, fitfully irritated, then calls the radio station and admonishes the host, exclaiming that the album never met his own standards. As the film continues, it could be inferred, that perhaps "Sketches Of Spain" (released July 18, 1960) was the album on which Davis felt he had possibly hit his creative zenith, due to sequences where Cheadle lovingly depicts the recording sessions and Davis' collaboration with Gil Evans (played by Jeffrey Grover). With this aspect about the film in place, I wondered if all of the running around after the stolen master tapes was essentially a metaphor for the music itself that Miles Davis may have been chasing inside of his artistic spirit during his five years away from the public eye. The music. Just think about it for a moment. Present yet elusive. Simultaneously within and just this far out of his grasp.

Furthermore, Cheadle spends a large portion of "Miles Ahead" regarding Davis' turbulent eight year relationship with his first wife, dancer Frances Taylor (played by Emayatzy Corinealdi), the figure who adorns the cover of Davis' "Someday My Prince Will Come" (released December 11, 1961). Certainly, we witness a relationship of tenderness, sexuality, and romance but also one that was fraught with tension, obsession, infidelity and abuse. Even as we are presented with a domestic drama, to me, the marriage also functioned as a possible metaphor as it felt that Cheadle is presenting Frances as the love of Miles Davis' life both literally and figuratively.

If Frances functions as Davis' muse, it would seem that in the world of "Miles Ahead," we are again witness to the tension that exists within the artistic process as Miles Davis attempts to bend that ever elusive sense of inspiration itself to his will...something all creative individuals will know and understand is often filled with frustration. Inspiration arrives when it wishes. As much as we attempt to force it into existence, the harder it is for inspiration to make its presence known, And even when it does arrive, it is nearly impossible to tame. In doing so, "Miles Ahead" builds and becomes an astute story of power and control, which of course, leads me and the film into the concept of artistic autonomy.

It felt more than fitting to me that I have now seen this film after the tragic death of Prince, even though the film was made long before his passing. Not only was Prince once friends and recorded and performed with Miles Davis, Prince is now heralded as a figure who spent a large portion of his career being an advocate for artists' rights and the control of one's own master tapes, publishing rights, and intellectual property, all of which he attained near the end of his life yet Davis did not. The pursuit of the master tapes within "Miles Ahead" speaks directly to this battle as Davis is often depicted in heated and even violent contact with record label executives as well as with the film's primary antagonist, Harper Hamilton (played by Michael Stuhlbarg), a sleazy agent/producer unctuously guiding the career of young trumpeter Junior (played by Keith Stanfield), who may also serve as a representative of Davis himself in his early days as a younger, greener musician on the rise.

As previously stated, and in all areas of the film as I have described for you, Don Cheadle utilizes the music of Miles Davis to underscore and serve as signals to Davis' deteriorating mental state. Throughout the film, just watch Davis' mood alter when the music within the film grows more lush compared to other sequences featuring the agitated urgency of Davis's drug fueled, fever dream fury during his post "Bitches Brew" (released March 30, 1970) period of the early '70's. Also, I do not think it to be unintentional of the frequent boxing metaphors within the film, most certainly referring to Davis' penchant for boxing matches plus his own rock music driven yet devotional album "Jack Johnson" (released February 24, 1971).

Returning to Prince for a moment, he once described himself as feeling like Jack Johnson during his lengthy battles with the record industry and Warner Brothers in particular. With that comparison in mind, I can only imagine that Miles Davis quite possibly felt exactly the same with regards to the music he wished to create, in addition to how much music he wished to create, as well as when he would and even would not choose to record and/or perform. Miles Davis was the sole architect of his art, life and destiny, a figure who refused to be pigeon-holed or hemmed in by any constraints other than whatever he placed upon himself. He could not be contained and whenever one tried, beware his wrath. And still, even creative geniuses house their own specialized brand of insecurities, fears and demons.

Quite possibly the most audacious move Don Cheadle could have exhibited with "Miles Ahead" was to load his film with a series of of fictionalized characters and events in what many would expect to serve as a dramatic musical biopic. From what I understand, Ewan McGregor's Rolling Stone reporter character never existed in real life. I cannot find any mention of a real world Harper Hamilton anywhere. And I am more than certain that the real Miles Davis was never involved in car chases nor did he fire a gun in the offices of his record label and further shake down record executives. In essence, the character of Miles Davis that Cheadle envisions is one of combined artistic genius and streetwise gangster. So, for all of this fantasy, it would be more than understandable for you to ask of me just what the overall point of "Miles Ahead" happens to be and how I could have enjoyed it to the degree that I did when much of the content was indeed fabricated.

To that, all I can offer you is what I have previously stated: the film is an impression of Miles Davis, not a biography, a technique which gives Don Cheadle a healthy artistic license to just allow his creativity to fly freely and with a strong sense of command over such a difficult subject and a dizzingly complex execution that is as dynamic as it is often surreal. In a way, it is possible that the entirety of "Miles Ahead" takes place deep within the confines of Davis' own mind, with the fictionalized characters all serving as metaphorical stand-ins for the real figures he was in contact with.

In fact, what is Miles Davis' cluttered, wholly disorganized home in the film other than a representation of his mind, crippled by drugs and a body fraught with injuries from chronic hip pain? Perhaps his isolation houses not only his memories, regrets and ghosts but an even more frightening and mounting sense of insecurity and doubt, something the world at large would never see but nonetheless a private pain which threatens to consume him. Truthfully, who would possibly be more insecure than Miles  Davis  himself for no one else would be more acutely aware of his own talents, artistry and overall legacy than himself. Therefore, the five years away and out of sight, would certainly present itself to posses considerable soul searching threatened by those demons that woud plague any artist: Is my talent still with me or has it evaporated? Am I able to do it all over again? Am I able to create anything new? Do I have anything else left to say?

The always wonderful Don Cheadle superbly emerges i as a formidable triple threat as actor, co-writer and director. Cheadle is nothing less than fearless behind and in front of the camera, demonstrating that no one else could have made this specific material about this idiosyncratic artist within this fashion. As an actor, Cheadle delivers what just may be his finest and most immersive performance with his unquestionable bravado--which feels like an extension of his excellent work in Director Kasi Lemmons "Talk To Me" (2007)-- combined with his lithe, athletic frame (as that of a boxer ready to strike). Eerily, Cheadle has indeed nailed the iconic rasp of Miles Davis' voice, which often left me questioning if I was hearing archived Davis interview footage instead of the actor. But, the performance is truly set deeply within Cheadle's eyes which always convey the drive, determination, rage, sorrow and of course, a haunted quality that is riveting to behold. By encapsulating the outer physicality with an intense interior dimension, Don Cheadle's performance transcends mere imitation and becomes a work of fury and grace, much like the music of Miles Davis.

In 1991, I was 22 years old. I had graduated from college and had then decided to live in my adopted city of Madison, WI as I began taking my first steps into making my way in the world. For a time, I worked part-time at a record store for several months and on the early morning of Sunday, September 28th, I ventured into the Walgreen's' near the store before we opened to peruse the morning papers. Picking up the Chicago Tribune, and discovering tucked into a lower portion of the front page was the news that Miles Davis had passed away at the age of 65 from the combined effects of a stroke,pneumonia and respiratory failure. While the magnitude of the news was lost upon me at the tie, my thoughts immediately turned to my Father who treasured Miles Davis above all others of his musical heroes. And yet, because of what Davis had meant to my Father, I was aware that music had lost someone of towering significance so much so that I did feel it to be more than odd that the news was relegated to a less prominent place on the front section of the Sunday papers.

What has been proven to me is that the legacy of Miles Davis since his passing has only increased with a slew of lovingly presented posthumous releases that treat the man and his music with the reverence it deserves. Over the same years, I have found myself becoming more and more immersed within the man's musical legacy, all the while learning and slowly beginning to understand precisely what had touched my Father so powerfully. I have seen music articles discussing Miles Davis' legacy only increase in frequency and his name has not evaporated into the recesses of the past as artists still invoke his name to this day. In the film's stunning final sequence, which I will not reveal, Cheadle fully addresses this reality by suggesting that the presence of Miles Davis is everlasting through all those who choose to listen and most especially within the artists themselves: those who were his contemporaries who remain creative and exploratory and to the younger musicians who currently defy classification. In doing so, it is as if Miles Davis is still  here with us, never relegated to past but one who remains so powerfully present.

As Davis states to Brill near the opening of the film, "If you're gonna tell a story, then come with some attitude." Don Cheadle's "Miles Ahead" has attitude to burn but also substance and high flying, improvisational artistry that flows through the triumphs and turbulence, the memories and madness of Miles Davis with dynamic aplomb. With the summer movie season behemoths just itching to burst out of the gate and head straight into the theaters and the top of the box office charts, a film like "Miles Ahead" is doomed to become lost in the shuffle. In fact, in my home city, it is already nearly on its way out of town. But, again, and as I have implored of you repeatedly upon this site, we cannot allow films of such high quality to become forever lost in the shuffle and therefore ignored, especiall when you have one that is as inventive and artful as what  Don Cheadle has so passionately achieved.

Miles Davis famously dismissed the term "jazz" in favor of describing his art as "social music." And what could be more social than to take in this film and find ourselves lost in discussion, interpretation and the music of the eternal Miles Davis.

SAVAGE CINEMA'S COMING ATTRACTIONS FOR MAY 2016

To my beloved Savage Cinema, I extend to you a heartfelt apology.

Dear readers, the extended hiatus of this blogsite was first somewhat intentional but has now transformed into being completely unintentional. I had planned on trying to see three movies during the month of April and yet, I saw only one. Now a part of this had to do with life getting itself in the way of my personal plans. But, in another way, my lack of movie going may be a result of a larger issue within the film industry.

I won't bent your ears anymore about my distaste with all of the reboots, sequels, re-imaginings and superhero movies all over again but I am feeling that the glut of those types of films at the expense of every other kind of film has now led to the issue of what just may or may not be finding its way into our local theaters. Writer/Director Jeff Nichols' science fiction thriller "Midnight Special" arrived and left my city before I truly noticed that it had eve arrived...and at only one theater at that. Don Cheadle's "Miles Ahead," only in town for one week (and which I will get myself to screening today) is also already almost on its way out.

Granted, the pickings for film-going lately has been slim, and the bigger studios and more high profile releases are always going to receive ore attention. But even so, for films that are riskier or smaller, I am fearing that the chances for those types of films to have even a window of a chance at the box office is growing slimmer, something that is detrimental to all manner of filmmakers as well to us as an audience.

Seeing the long lines around my city during the Wisconsin Film Festival was proof positive that audiences are hungry for so much more than movies that go "BOOM!" Again, there is nothing inherently wrong with big budget movies designed for the masses, but if that's all that we had to choose from...you get the picture.

With all of that being said and with "Miles Ahead" waiting in the wings, the one movie that I already know that I am gearing up for (and which has already received a healthy share of glowing reviews) is of course...

1. Yes, I am not immune to the superhero movie, especially if it is a good one and the Marvel Comics Film Universe, while not always successful, has been more than consistent over the last 8 years and now, I actually feel ready to see the next installment "Captain America: Civil War" as directed by Joe and Anthony Russo, who previously helmed the superior "Captain America: The Winter Soldier" (2014).

2. Beyond those two, I am hoping that "Sing Street," Writer/Director John Carney's latest ode to music and romance arrives in my city for a healthy theatrical run.

The massive and the decidedly smaller. I love them all and wish to see as many as life will allow. I'm feeling hungry for the movies again after quite the lengthy break. So, as always I ask for your well wishes...

...and I'll see you when the house lights go down!!!!

BOYS CLUB: a review of "Everybody Wants Some!!"

"EVERYBODY WANTS SOME!!"
Written and Directed by Richard Linklater
**** (four stars)
RATED R

I am unable to fully express to you the undeniable magic that existed during the 1979/1980 school year when I was in the 5th grade in an upstairs clubhouse of a classroom with some of my most cherished childhood friends and one of the finest teachers I have ever been graced to have had in my life, Mr. John Wilson. Furthermore, I am unable to fully express to you the undeniable magic that existed when I arrived at college in 1987 and the four years that ensued. For both of those specific periods, with all of their respective beginnings and endings and experiences both good and bad, these years were deeply instrumental in my growth and development into the person I exist as today in 2016. I would not trade those years for anything and if I had the possession of a time machine, I think I would seriously ponder travelling backwards just to revisit days, night and even mere moments just to experience them again (albeit from a different perspective).

In some ways, I am almost beginning to wonder if Writer/Director Richard Linklater is not solely a filmmaker but inexplicably some sort of time traveler. Now certainly not in the sense of a fictional character like Dr. Who or a figure out of an H.G. Wells tale. But, Linklater, throughout his career, has carried this uncanny ability to chart specific time periods and the emotional, psychological and philosophical landscapes specific to each and all periods--and to such a highly entertaining degree--that he is truly an artist of an extremely rare quality.

In recent years, Richard Linklater has truly found himself into an especially fruitful artistic groove. After delivering "Bernie" (2011), the terrific true crime/dark comedy which features the career best performance to date from Jack Black, as well as the outstanding "Before Midnight" (2013), and his masterpiece, the beautiful, brilliant "Boyhood" (2014), Linklater moves backwards and forwards in time once again with his latest entry, "Everybody Wants Some!!," his self described "spiritual sequel" to his classic "Dazed And Confused" (1993). As you would certainly expect, the film is indeed a wild, raucous ride filled wall-to-wall with sex, drugs, and rock and roll yet its deep perceptiveness into the male ego and the poignancy surrounding the beginnings of collegiate life will certainly sneak up on you and warmly surprise as Linklater ensures that the film is not just a wild party but a film that provides the proceedings with a palpable urgency and even fragility to match its rambunctious energy.

Where "Dazed And Confused" focused upon one long day, night and the following early morning beginning with the last day of high school for a collective of students in 1976, "Everybody Wants Some!!" flashes forwards to August 28,1980 as we follow Jake (Blake Jenner), Texas college Freshman and new pitcher to the university's baseball team, as he arrives at his new school and living quarters, a dilapidated house designated for members of the baseball team.

Jake is immediately ingratiated with, and also runs afoul of, several of his new team and housemates including the loquacious would be charmer Finnegan (Glen Powell), the perpetually stoned Carl Sagan/Pink Floyd devotee and would be guru Willoughby (Wyatt Russell), testy and jealous would be B.M.O.C. McReynolds (Tyler Hoechlin), would be playboy Roeper (Ryan Guzman) among others during a full weekend of male bonding, competition and rampant debauchery for one last summertime blast before the school year begins.

Richard Linklater's "Everybody Wants Some!!" is a rambling, raunchy, and raw joyride of a film that deserves and fully earns its self-description as being the spiritual sequel to "Dazed And Confused." It's shaggy structure, which follows Jake and his team/housemates for the entire weekend all the way to moments into their first day in the lecture halls, showcases the Linklater aesthetic as this is indeed a film that does not function via a plotline or really even a story. "Everybody Wants Some!!," like most of the films within Linklater's filmography, is a "slice of life" film so authentic to its sense of time, place and most importantly, behavior, that the film could also be seen as somewhat of a quasi-sequel to "Boyhood" and therefore, a quasi-prequel to "Before Sunrise" (1995) as we witness characters of a certain age navigating their post high school lives.

This is where I feel that Richard Linklater functions as somewhat of a time traveler, because he is so truthful to the time period as well as to the specific time of life, that he has blissfully captured late adolescence that is specific to it own time period while also functioning as lyrical odes that are indeed timeless. These characters are stepping into the shoes of all who have come before them and setting the stage for all who will arrive after them, while having experiences and self-discoveries that are as universal as they are individualistic.

In fact, and also like "Boyhood," I believe that you will also find yourselves travelling through your memories and discovering key moments that fully mirror the antics on-screen. An early sequence, which finds Jake and his crew driving around and all enthusiastically rapping along to The Sugarhill Gang's now iconic "Rapper's Delight" instantly brought me back to my 5th grade mornings on the school bus and how the Earth shifted every single time "Rapper's Delight" played over the bus driver's radio. Additionally, I often traveled back to 1987 when I arrived at college and moved into the third floor of the all male dormitory in which I would call "home" for four years. During my Freshman year, I was a daily witness to various mammoth members of the Wisconsin Badgers football team having lunch together in the common room fully engrossed in episodes of "Days Of Our Lives," a memory that was mirrored in the film by the baseball team players ensconced in their viewings of "All My Children." Memories long dormant were triggered over and again as I watched "Everybody Wants Some!!," again making the full experience of viewing a Richard Linklater film as something completely immersive and never at any point mindlessly passive.

With "Everybody Wants Some!!," Linklater again provides us with a cinematic 1980 landscape so meticulously designed and executed that could also exist as a documentary! From the clothes, locations, vehicles, hairstyles (man, were those "porn-staches" that prevalent?)  and of course, the sparkling opening to end credit soundtrack (which fully sat inside of my personal wheelhouse), the film nearly feels as if it was unearthed from some sort of time capsule rather than a film production lensed and brought to vivid life in the 21st century.

Aside from the aesthetics, what is truly notable about the film is that I feel that this just may be Linklater's most testosterone heavy film to date as the cast dominates in male characters and therefore, male behavior in all of its aggressive, comical, vulgar, overbearing penis envy from the seemingly endless carousing for girls, locker room banter that feels to exist anywhere and everywhere from sunrise to alcoholic pass-outs, and the eternal jockeying of athletic and sexual prowess.

The male bravado is indeed overwhelming at times (it's almost like viewing a squadron of the Matthew McConaughey character from "Dazed And Confused"), I have to admit.that I often remarked to myself that what I was witnessing was precisely why I habitually steered away from certain types of aggressive male friendships throughout my life. Yet, Linklater completely ensures that his film never exists as or descends into becoming what could have been a new and wholly unnecessary version of the odious "Porky's" (1982), due to his insight and perceptiveness into this specific brand of male behavior and therefore, male insecurity.

Linklater provides us with a front row seat into what is essentially a Darwinian survival of the fittest regarding all of the male characters within "Everybody Wants Some!!." While the hazing rituals as depicted in "Dazed And Confused" make their return in this new film, and aside from one wild sequence upon the baseball field, the taunts and humiliations exist as more of a psychological and social degree than physical but the fear, scars, bruises and wounds are rampant regardless of  how deeply these young men try to conceal them. With so much male bravado on constant display, any sense of perceived softness or sensitivity is viewed as weakness. One of the more soft spoken characters is teased relentlessly about his lack of a mustache while another gentler character is endlessly razed over his long distance relationship and repeatedly has his given name changed by his teammates regardless of all of his protests no matter how vehemently they are expressed.

Yet, Linklater is quite sly with his affectionate, observational, non-judgmental style, especially when regarding just how fragile these young men truly are as well as the obvious homo-erotic tension/fear that exists as well. Take their nightly carousing of the local dance clubs, for instance. First, we have all of the primping and preening these men undertake upon themselves, one of whom laboriously stares at the reflection of his own posterior in the mirror, ensuring that he has what he refers to as "the best cheese on campus." Then, we have various sequences of the nights themselves as they go from disco clubs then to country and western bars and finally, ending up at a punk rock show, all the while attempting to change and adapt to any new locale or any potential hookups...and never being content to ever just be themselves, whomever each of these characters happen to be underneath the overwhelming machismo. Save for Jake, to an extent.

"Everybody Wants Some!!," for all of its riotous energy, is a film that surprisingly grows quieter and more contemplative over the course of its running time. Jake eventually begins a relationship late in the film with the film's sole primary female character, a theater and performing arts major named Beverly (Zoey Deutch--incidentally the daughter of actress Lea Thompson and Director Howard Deutch). Their first major scenes together, one of which is a telephone call and another set in her dorm room, are both witty and revealing of each character's misconceptions and prejudices about the other as well as their mutual attraction and publicly concealed hopes for their respective futures. But returning to the cast of male characters, we do also have the opportunity to have several touching moments where competition phases into camaraderie and adversaries phase into mutual admiration. Yes, building friendships could all vanish in a flash and return to hefty rivalry--and it does tend to--but the possibles are present and relevant.

Mostly, we see these men though all of their public masks and social facades, which all exist to obscure their individual levels of fear and inadequacy, whether with women or even greater, their respective places on the baseball team and their potential futures as professional athletes. In their individual high schools, they were all the star players but now, in a sea of star players, nobody is a star player and the anxiety that ensues is deeply perceptive. We see how the Freshmen players are indeed hazed more frequently and the heightened state in which they exist in comparison to the pseudo relaxed state the upperclassmen players exude. But uncertainty for all of them are ever present.

One character named Niles (Juston Street), who is notable for possessing a pitch that clocks in at a speed of 95 m.p.h. and a veritable lock for a professional career in baseball, is the most unhinged character in the film by a mile. And then, there is the team's sole African-American player named Dale (Quinton Johnson), an upperclassman and as much of an Alpha dog as any of his teammates but even so, I could only imagine his transition to to this small Texas college and the baseball team when he was a Freshman (certainly that could be a film all by itself).

For Jake and the baseball team players, the pecking order is ever shifting and tenuous. The reality of athletic injuries certainly could rest in the back of all of their minds as well. So, why not anesthetize the anxiety with as much drink, drugs and women as possible? This is the existential core of "Everybody Wants Some!!"--if being an athlete and sexually desirable defines me as a man, then if I fail, am I still a man? Inevitably, failure will become evident for some, if not most of these characters, but for now, for college, let the good time roll.

Richard Linklater's "Everybody Wants Some!!" is a breezy, free flowing, often very funny, richly insightful and beautifully realized film filled with fully naturalistic performances from his entire cast, who collectively grow to become enormously endearing by the film's end, and even then, I still wanted to see more--from the remainder of that first class lecture to the first week and throughout the first year.

"Everybody Wants Some!!" is a virtual time machine, in cinematic presentation and soulful philosophy, again signifying how Richard Linklater is not only one of our most idiosyncratic filmmakers but also one of our most humane.

SAVAGE CINEMA'S COMING ATTRACTIONS FOR APRIL 2016

New month and at long last, new movies!!!!

Last month, I expressed that I did feel a bit of a need to take a short hiatus, as I needed to step away from movies and writing about movies after the huge output from the late 2015 releases and the Oscar season and telecast. Now, I am more than feeling the itch to get back to my local cinema and take in whatever 2016 has to offer me and this month, I am more than excited about three offerings in particular.

1. Writer/Director Jeff Nichols who has previously delivered the excellent psychological, apocalyptic thriller "Take Shelter" (2011) as well as the coming of age, summertime Gothic drama "Mud" (2012) returns with "Midnight Special," a science fiction themed film, his first in four years. Nichols has truly proven himself to be a filmmaker worth watching and I am very curious with his latest offering.

2. Richard Linklater's long awaited return after the glory of "Boyhood" (2014) finally arrives with "Everybody Wants Some!!" his self-described "spiritual sequel" to both "Dazed And Confused" (1993) and "Boyhood," as he delivers a weekend college romp in the year 1980. Just get me the ticket already!!!!

3. I have been waiting for this film for quite some time, so much so, that I even contributed a little taste to the film's crowd sourcing fund in order to get the film made! "Miles Ahead," an impressionistic exploration of the iconic Miles Davis as co-written, directed by and starring the brilliant Don Cheadle is finally being released this month and I am hoping that my local Sundance theater will be screening it.

Just to be able to stretch my movie muscles again will be great and hopefully, these three offerings will have more than enough to not only entertain but to also stimulate my writing muscles. So, as always, I ask that you send to me the very best of your well wishes...

...and I will see you when the house lights go down!!!!

BLACK AND BLUE: a review of "Batman v. Superman: Dawn Of Justice"

"BATMAN v. SUPERMAN: DAWN OF JUSTICE"
Based upon characters and situations from DC Comics
Screenplay Written by Chris Terrio and David S. Goyer
Directed by Zack Snyder
** (two stars)
RATED PG 13

I have to say that I am feeling more than sorry for Ben Affleck who has taken more than his deserved share of lumps over some areas of his filmography, most notably his eternally maligned previous entry within the comic book film genre with Writer/Director Mark Steven Johnson's "Daredevil (2003)--a film I actually liked quite a bit.

While he has more than re-invented and resurrected his career as a filmmaker of impressive skill and grit with "The Town" (2010), the Oscar Best Picture winning "Argo" (2012) and what I feel is his strongest directorial effort, "Gone Baby Gone" (2007), it amazes me that there is still a public contingent of viewers wishing and hoping for him to fail and crash land horrifically in a career ending ball of flames. I don't get it. I don't understand it. But it is there.

After having returned home from a screening of Director Zack Snyder's "Batman v. Superman: Dawn Of Justice," in which Ben Affleck dons the cape and cowl of Batman for the first time, those sentiments are all over the internet as mean spirited memes, viral videos and articles depicting "Sad Affleck" reacting to the glut of middling to harshly negative reviews the film has been receiving over the last few days. Overall, it just feels like a pathetic attempt to see who is able to humiliate the man the most and with the actual reviews, some of them feel to carry the tone of writers who are writing for other writers and not truly writing an honest review for readers. Well, now having seen the film for myself, I can quickly send these words of solace to Mr. Ben Affleck should this posting ever reach its way to him: You did good. But the film however...it's not your fault.

Zack Snyder's "Batman v. Superman: Dawn Of Justice," the direct sequel to Snyder's ambitious and deeply problematic "Man Of Steel" (2012) and true opening shot at building a DC Comics film universe, is as ambitious and as deeply problematic as its predecessor. Aside from being saddled with an awfully awkward title, Snyder has delivered yet another often visually dazzling, intermittently involving yet wholly bombastic effort that just left me cold...as well as bludgeoned. Yes, I do appreciate the sheer ambition Snyder has obviously placed within the film and he indeed is a filmmaker unafraid to take some real risks with these iconic characters. But even so, was all of the cataclysm worth the trouble, especially when it is so self-consciously dark, humorless, and so shamelessly disingenuous to its own themes and concepts?

"Batman v. Superman: Dawn Of Justice" opens with yet another cinematic re-telling of Batman's origins from young Bruce Wayne's first hand witnessing of his parents' murder at the hands of a gun totting criminal after a night at the theater. From these most familiar moments, we plunge into a clever re-staging of the protracted ultra violent climax from "Man Of Steel" where Superman (again played by Henry Cavill) engaged in a life and death battle with General Zod (Michael Shannon), while skyscraper buildings and innocent civilians all fell to their deaths (clearly a ham fisted, overly obvious, emotionally hollow and just this close to tasteless echo of 9/11).Yet, this time, we view the action from the eyes of Bruce Wayne (Ben Affleck), whose employees were maimed and killed during the destruction, thus fueling his bottomless rage, a fury which has grown more paramount over his two decades serving as the increasingly ruthless Gotham City vigilante we all know as Batman, a figure who has now taken to brutally branding his victims, including one sex trafficker. Viewing Superman as completely responsible for the Metropolis carnage, Wayne vows revenge.

18 months after the events of "Man Of Steel," Kal-El, yet known to world alternately as either Clark Kent or Superman, has only grown into becoming a more controversial figure as he continues to attempt to adjust and assimilate in a world that feels it has just as much to fear as to worship from his presence, abilities and powers. His romance with Daily Planet ace reporter Lois Lane (Amy Adams) escalates, and he also further seeks counsel from his adoptive Mother Martha (Diane Lane) as well as the spirit of his adoptive Father Jonathan (Kevin Costner), and has now found himself consumed with exposing Batman as an unregulated thug who causes more damage than good.

Enter Alexander "Lex" Luthor (a manic Jesse Eisenberg), hereditary CEO of LexCorp, himself consumed with destroying Superman via a hunk of Kryptonite unearthed from the bottom of the Indian Ocean merged with the DNA of the deceased General Zod and equipment from Zod's downed spacecraft into an ultimate biological weapon. Yet, to fully enact his nefarious plan, he must first play the role of puppet master...pitting Batman and Superman against each other in a fight to the death.

And then, there is the arrival of the elegant and mysterious Diana Prince (Gal Gadot)...

When the cacophony was all said and done and I was exiting the theater, I felt that my reaction to Zack Snyder's "Batman v. Superman: Dawn Of Justice" was essentially identical to my reaction with "Man Of Steel." What I liked, I enjoyed and what I didn't like I really did not like. For all intents and purposes, the film works pretty well in specific visual and tonal areas as well as in narrative fits and starts.

First of all, Snyder does remain a striking visual stylist, emerging with many startling, haunting dream-like images to do leave an unsettling impression and work well in creating the dark universe he wishes develop and deliver. Since he continues to present the character of Superman as precisely what he is, a literal alien, moments where he is seen hovering in the sky, his face obscured by the light of the sun and shadows falling over his iconic costume, the qualities of whether he is savior or a malevolent force are poetically brought into question and effectively so. Unfortunately, this time around, it felt as if Snyder and his writers really were a bit unsure as to how to develop the character of Superman, how to really make him progress. But granted, Superman has never really been that interesting of a character. He is indeed a bit one note and is more defined by the characters that surround him. With that, Henry Cavill again does an effective job with making the character his own by not necessarily portraying Superman or even Clark Kent but the Kryptonian Kal-El, the ultimate outsider, unsure of his place in the world as well as his destiny.

More conceptually, I think the film succeeds best in illustrating the world of Batman, a real surprise as this film is arriving just a mere four years after Writer/Director Christopher Nolan completed his sensational and truly game changing "Dark Knight Trilogy" (2005/2008/2012), a series I adored so much that I truly had no interest in viewing another re-telling and especially so soon. But even so, I felt this was the most effective thread of the film as we are given a vision of an older, angrier, embittered Batman consumed by loss, recrimination, grief and guilt, not only over the deaths of his parents but apparently the death of his sidekick Robin at the hands of the Joker (as visualized by an encased and graffiti littered costume that hangs in the Batcave). With solely Alfred (nicely played by Jeremy Irons) as his confidant as well as tech and weapons expert, Bruce Wayne utilizes the guise of Batman to further unleash his inner demons upon the world around him and now to a degree that has become unrepentant in its violence.

Visually, I really liked some early sequences in the film where Snyder depicts Batman in action, with its grim shadows and dark corners, somehow taking a few steps a bit further from Nolan and even Tim Burton's incarnations. Snyder also handles a couple of Bruce Wayne's nightmares with appropriate menace and torment, although Wayne's post-apocalyptic horrorshow sequence over-stretches. And to a certain extent, Snyder's exploration of Batman from psychologically damaged hero to anti-hero and the elements of morality he now confronts with his dogged pursuit of Superman gave the film a much needed element of gravitas,  however fleeting it actually was.

Here is where I feel that Ben Affleck deserves his praise. Again, I really had no interest in seeing a new incarnation of Batman so soon after Nolan's films in which Christian Bale gave me the finest interpretation of the character that I've seen. But like Cavill achieved in relation to cinema's finest Superman with the late Christopher Reeve, Affleck somehow devised a way to make Batman his own through a bitter command and buffed up physicality. I have no complaints with Affleck's interpretation and performance and it was good enough where I would at least consider seeing him perform the role again in a future film.

Regardless of what I liked about the film, "Batman v. Superman: Dawn Of Justice" is cloaked in serious problems that refuse to allow Snyder's vision to really take flight. Granted, Snyder really does whip himself up into a frenzy with this film as he is not only essentially trying to lead us up to a gladiator battle but also set up the DC superhero collective of the Justice League Of America, featuring characters that could potentially make up the proposed next 10 films! Aside from the overkill of that prospect, there is already considerable overkill within this one movie which truly feels as if Zack Snyder is trying to single handedly create what several filmmakers from Jon Favreau, Kenneth Branagh, Joss Whedon, Peyton Reed, Joe and Anthony Russo among others have created with the Marvel Comics film universe over the previous eight years. In doing so, the storytelling within "Batman v. Superman: Dawn Of Justice" is often sloppy, occasionally excessive and filled with dialogue and motivation that are arbitrary at best and downright stupid at worst.

For instance, in a film that runs 2 1/2 hours, Snyder really needed some assistance in the editing department in a variety of areas. Yet, when he utilizes his film to not only introduce us to Wonder Woman (more on her in a little bit) but also The Flash, Aquaman, and Cyborg, what could have been a nice goosebump Easter Egg just becomes one of the film's several protracted sequences that really achieves nothing but to extend the running time.

One of the film's greatest offenses is Lois Lane herself. Again, this is of no fault to Amy Adams who does what she can with this completely regressive role that perpetually rivets her into an existence as a forever damsel in distress and only based upon one stupid decision after another. It truly makes you question how she could possibly be the Daily Planet's ace reporter when she's so busy stumbling herself into being tossed from rooftops, nearly drowning and so on.

Even worse is Wonder Woman. While her arrival in full gave me my one goosebump moment in the entire film, once she began speaking, all of the air was let out of the balloon. While she is seen here and there within the film, it did indeed dawn upon me that Gal Gadot really did not have much dialogue at all and when she was required to deliver a few more substantive lines during the film's conclusion, it struck me that Godot is simply not very good. While she was just fine in fighting alongside Batman and Superman in the film's climax, overall Gal Godot was like Greg Brady in the classic "Johnny Bravo" episode of "The Brady Bunch" as I have a feeling that she was hired because she fit the costume.

Beyond the two women in the film, there is also the issue of Jesse Eisenberg as Lex Luthor, who was uncommonly irritating and not at all villainous enough. It was as if Snyder's direction to Eisenberg was to essentially take his performance as Mark Zuckerberg in David Fincher's "The Social Network" (2010) and just dial it up to 25! Sorry, but that is just not good enough for me.

Then, there is the fight itself, the raison d'etre of the film and it's all in the title and frankly, it's flat out boring. Now I did express earlier that I appreciated Snyder's sense of ambition and his willingness to take some serious risks with the characters of the DC universe. That said, it doesn't necessarily mean that I liked the risks that he chose to take. With "Man Of Steel" and its interminable climax which ran for a full and numbing 45 minutes, the endless stream of violence and carnage concluded with Superman committing an act that fully goes against the aesthetic of the character. With the new film, Snyder not only kills off Robin and Daily Planet photographer Jimmy Olsen, he also essentially makes Batman exist as another man of extreme violence, making the movie a tremendously joyless affair. Honestly, even as intense as "The Dark Knight" (2008) was, it was completely involving, complex and exhilarating as Christopher Nolan is a first rate storyteller, something Zack Snyder just does not happen to be.

With Snyder's "Batman v. Superman: Dawn Of Justice," it is operatic without any real soul, callously brutal to the point of being sadistic and so emotionally simplistic and inane that it basically exists as the consummate right wing fantasy film; two men who feel that the most extreme forms of violence will solve absolutely, positively any problem...and they both really love they mamas! Spare me and no amount of Christian allegory and symbolism can justify the excessive ultra violence on display. At times, it was like sitting through Clint Eastwood's dumb, offensive and jingoistic "American Sniper" (2014) all over again.

"Batman v. Superman: Dawn Of Justice" is all so disingenuous as it tries to answer for the criticisms against "Man Of Steel" while it ultimate doubles down upon those very criticisms, Yes, I did think the opening sequences depicting the "Man Of Steel" climax from Bruce Wayne's perspective and his reactions to all of the destruction was a slyly effective way to justify the violence of that film, while also creating the new film's theme of the consequences that exist behind the actions of both Batman and Superman no matter the purity of their intent. Yet, when it is time for the two men to battle, it just boils down to a facile misunderstanding that could have been worked through in mere moments but then, we wouldn't have that comic book Ali/Frazier fight to watch, now would we?

And even when that portion of the movie is all over, it's not all over as Snyder makes the exact same mistake he made with "Man Of Steel" by hurling us through another extended, overlong, CGI maelstrom which really served no purpose but for Snyder to take another truly bold yet completely unnecessary risk, which even then led itself to what felt like 10 different endings, all designed to set up the next batch of DC films. It was akin to being beaten into submission where all I could say to myself was, "Well...that was loud."

Look, "Batman v. Superman: Dawn Of Justice" is not the disaster some are making it out to be. It did have its moments and good points and believe me, for all of Zack Snyder's faults, he is at least capable of not producing something that is as cinema killing as anything helmed by the likes of Michael Bay. But, the relentless and purposeless darkness was indeed tiring and ultimately, the film made me arrive at two important realizations: The excellence of Zack Snyder's adaptation of "Watchmen" (2009) was a fluke and the Marvel Comics films confidently have the edge.

And again, to Ben Affleck, it's not your fault.

SAVAGE POSTSCRIPT:
While our MPAA film rating system is more than problematic, for parents it does work as a perfect guide for what you are willing to take your children to see. This film is rated PG 13 and for me, I felt that it really danced to the edge of the rating, so much so that Zack Snyder has already announced plans to release an extended R rated version for home video.

I deeply urge those of you who happen to be parents of small children aged 8 and younger (and with that, I am being more than generous) to not take your little ones to this film which is excessively violent, intense and grim. Think of it this way: this is not a comic book movie that happens to be violent.

This is a violent movie that happens to have comic book characters. You have been advised....  

SAVAGE CINEMA'S COMING ATTRACTIONS FOR MARCH 2016

I think that I needed to take a break.

After writing a series of year end reviews plus the four part Savage Scorecard series and then, my combined lack of enthusiasm for and anger with the Oscars concerning the whitewashed nominations, I found myself feeling not terribly interested in seeing any movies at all. The latest films from both The Coen Brothers and Michael Moore each arrived in my city and I saw neither of them. Additionally, I found myself particularly uninterested in screening "Deadpool," despite the great word of mouth that I have been receiving from friends as well as the massive box office earnings it has already gathered.

This is not to suggest that my life long passion had finally dissipated. On the contrary, absolutely not and never will this particular flame extinguish itself. No, it was nothing to that effect. I really believe that it was indeed nothing more than what I said at the outset of this month's intro: I just needed to step away for a spell, therefore, rebuilding my anticipation to return to the movies, which I fully plan on doing this month. Perhaps I will see "Deadpool," regardless of my skepticism but I will definitely be seeing the following feature:

"Batman V. Superman: Dawn Of Justice" from Director Zack Snyder as the follow up feature to his own "Man Of Steel" (2013) and the second building block in the newly emerging DC Comics film universe, is the one that I am simultaneously curious and extremely skeptical about. "Man Of Steel" definitely was a film that had much that I admired yet when it went off of the rails, it did so tremendously and to an ugly degree of bombastic mega-excess. I fear that the bombastic tone will only resurface but I'll only know for certain once I see the finished film at the end of this month.

Beyond that film, I am honestly not certain but I do have some ideas percolating.

So, with that, I shall return in earnest. Wish me luck please and as always, I'll see you when the house lights go down!!