DISRUPT THE DISRUPTORS: a review of "Glass Onion"

 

'"GLASS ONION"
Written and Directed by Rian Johnson
***1/2 (three and a half stars)
RATED PG 13

Why does Rian Johnson make this so difficult when it always appears to be so easy?

How often do we have the opportunity to see a movie and not wish to ruin the surprise(s) for any potential viewers? How many times recently have you seen a movie before a friend and you struggle to not reveal too much so as not to spoil and yet, you are just anxious for that friend to see it for themselves...and then, you can speak freely about it? 

In our age of sequels, prequels, reboots, remakes and re-imaginings, plus the threat of spoiler alerts mere hours after the first screenings nationwide, those times truly are fewer based upon which movies are now even being released to theaters in addition to our streaming services. But there are still they occasional anomalies...

With Rian Johnson's "Glass Onion," I do have the sequel to his terrific "Knives Out" (2019) at my hands to share my reaction with you. Yet, unlike the nature of our serialized storytelling these days, there is no connective tissue between the two films other than Johnson himself as Writer and Director, the sly, loquaciously witty presence of Daniel Craig as Johnson's "World's Greatest Detective" Benoit Blanc and of course, the central twisty, turny mystery for Blanc to solve. 

At this time, I am more than delighted to announce that I found Rian Johnson's latest entry in his young series has delivered the goods as it is a most delicious cinematic meal and one that feels so effortlessly prepared and enthusiastically executed yet not remotely frivolous or forgettable. Johnson clearly has something to say within his latest mystery but he is unquestionably determined for us to have a great time!

Rian Johnson's "Glass Onion" finds our great detective Benoit Blanc (again richly played by Daniel Craig) fretting in his abode, struggling with lockdown during May 2020, a few months into our global isolation due to the Covid-19 pandemic. Suddenly, a mysterious box arrives at his door, containing a series of puzzles leading to an invitation to the vast Glass Onion mansion, located upon a private Greece island owned by Miles Bron (the perfectly unctuous Edward Norton), New York billionaire and co-founder of the technological company Alpha.

Blanc is soon joined in invitation by five of Miles Bron's friends to partake in a weekend murder mystery party at the mansion. The collective includes the following participants:

Lionel Toussaint (Leslie Odom Jr.), the head scientist at Alpha
Claire Debella (Kathryn Hahn), the Governor of Connecticut, now running for the United States Senate
Birdie Jay (Kate Hudson), a vapid and aging supermodel turned fashion designer plus her assistant Peg (Jessica Henwick)
Duke Cody (Dave Bautista), misogynistic video game and men's rights streamer plus his assistant/girlfriend Whiskey (Madelyn Cline)  

and finally, surprisingly...Alpha co-founder Cassandra "Andi" Brand (a terrific Janelle Monae), forced out of the company by Miles. 

When a member of the group ended up dead for real, it is up to Benoit Blanc to solve the real life murder mystery!

While I have to admit to enjoying the first installment a hair more than this new chapter, Rian Johnson's "Glass Onion" is a first rate comic thriller, that is again sharply written, briskly directed, and acted wonderfully by the entire cast, who are all clearly having a whale of a time while ensuring the story is served to its absolute best. The film is proudly frisky without becoming remotely frivolous or forgettable and definitely rewards subsequent viewings due t the excellent cinematic sleight of hand at work, both in front of and behind the camera. 

As a murder mystery, Rian Johnson has already established himself as a clever storyteller as evidenced by not only the original film but in his previous works such as the science fiction time travel thriller "Looper" (2012) and his high school set film noir ode in his debut feature "Brick" (2005). While he certainly displayed skill, energy and unquestionable talent with both of those films, they did leave me wanting and each felt to be ore of exercises in style rather than complete experiences. With "Glass Onion,": just as he displayed with "Knives Out" and spectacularly with "Star Wars Episode VIII: The Last Jedi" (2017), his stylistic tendencies remained powerfully with is storytelling growing in leaps, making the narrative both visually and motivationally worked in lockstep.

Truthfully, it would be very easy to overlook just how meticulous Rian Johnson's writing and directing actually is within "Glass Onion" because he makes it all look so easy! So breezy is his material and its execution that before you know it, you have completely missed details he has so clearly laid out directly in front of you--just as Benoit  Blanc announces to the party guests over and again. I repeat, it is all right in front of our eyes the entire time and still, ian Johnson trans us upon where to look and when in order to keep his mystery going..

And frankly, with streaming at our fingertips, we now have the opportunity to immediately review scenes and sequences to see if all of the pieces line up just as they are eventually revealed. I will admit to you to doing just that and just laughing to myself that Johnson was indeed this slick and had so perfectly distracted me from the action by keeping me riveted to watching the principals interact and luxuriating in the peppery dialogue that provides one zinger after another throughout. In accomplishing this feat, Rian Johnson's "Glass Onion" deftly set up residence in the cinematic vicinity of Steven Soderberg's outstanding "Ocean's Eleven" (2001).

As fun as "Glass Onion" is, it was also great to see that Rian Johnson has more on his mind than a murder mystery party, as he injected some food for though into the proceedings, which I am gathering is perhaps why he decided to place his narrative just after the start of the pandemic. 

Similarly, with Writer/Director Mike White's sensational HBO series "The White Lotus" (2021/2022), and Director Mark Mylod's stylish yet flawed "The Menu" (2022), Johnson has served up an "eat the rich" satire merged with opulent travel. But, looking a tad deeper, I am wondering if the tone is closer towards Writers/Directors Joel and Ethan Coen's "Burn After Reading" (2008), their absurdist comedy of fatal errors in which their collective of characters are all victims of their own narcissistic delusions at best and utter stupidity at worst.

"It's a dangerous thing to mistake speaking without thought for speaking the truth," sermons Benoit Blanc to one of the film's characters and in essence, it feels that is the core pf the film as well as some sincere cultural commentary from the film's central character plus its creator. We are now existing within a "post-truth" society where basic facts are debated if not outright denied, and pre fabricated realities are valued over (again) what is directly in front of our eyes, taking the tenor of "history is written by the winners" to a new extreme. 

Much has already been made of Edward Norton's character supposedly being a stand in for Elon Musk, to which Rian Johnson denies. But, stay on that conceptual track, if you will. "Glass Onion" is populated with characters, who due to their immense wealth, privilege, and celebrity are in positions where they feel entitled and justified to invent their own realities regardless of what actually occurred. With that, and of course due to it's own title, we are meant to peel back the layers of the mysteries as well as the characters themselves to reveal all of the hidden truths, and within one, a more than righteous and rightful sense of palpable rage in need of justice.  

And really, should I say more? I really shouldn't as I won't assume that anyone who chooses to read this has already seen the film. But, that is where the absolute fun is! The not knowing ahead of time. Rian Johnson's "Glass Onion" is a delight from start to finish. Just go in as cold as possible, before movie advertisers gave us two minute versions of the entire film before we could see the entire vision, and allow yourself to be deeply entertained and rewarded.

THE LORD HIGH EMPEROR OF SUSTENANCE: a review of "The Menu"

 

"THE MENU"
Screenplay Written by Seth Reiss & Will Tracy
Directed by Mark Mylod
**1/2 (two and a half stars)
RATED R

Some meals just end up not coming into their full fruition, regardless of the ingredients involved and the depth of care to the preparation. 

With the nature of food, fine dining and culinary artistry, I would imagine that it is not terribly far fetched to find comparisons with the nature of literature, music, and any other art form, which includes the movies. The potential for greatness or failure always exists and even within the finest of artistic hands and hearts, sometimes the stars are aligned and sometimes they are not. 

With the movies, I have often expressed that the act of getting a movie completed and released at all must be akin to a minor miracle let alone the movie in question ending up as the full representation of the artist's vision...or even just being watchable. With food, I can gather that there are similarities in this particular vein, especially in the world of fine dining and elevated courses, in which recipes are and techniques are studied meticulously only to be re-invented over and again in the pursuit of creating that very meal that is completely unique, inventive, showcases the individualistic style of the chef as well as being delicious. It feels like an impossible feat and yet, when it happens, culinary art exists. But, one false move, no matter how miniscule, the art pursued is eluded.

I had this feeling as I viewed Director Mark Mylod's satirical, psychological thriller "The Menu." It is a mostly well constructed piece, a clever idea that is filled with the ingredients, so to speak, and is well executed but one that did leave me wanting. It is not a bad film by any means. It was one that lacked in satisfaction as it did not stick to the cinematic ribs (ahem). 

So as not to produce spoilers, I will try to keep the plot description brief. "The Menu" stars Ralph Finnes as celebrity chef Julian Slowik, operator of the exclusive restaurant Hawthorne, which is located upon a private island. 

This evening's guests include falling movie star (John Leguizamo) and his personal assistant (Aimee Carrero), a trio of young business partners (played by Rob Yang, Arturo Castro and Mark St. Cyr), a food critic (Janet McTeer) and her editor (Paul Adelstein), a wealthy elderly couple (played by Judith Light and Reed Birney) and finally, young Tyler Ledford (Nicholas Hoult) and his date Margot Mills (Anya Taylor-Joy).

Over the course of the night, the dinner guests will be served an elaborate and increasingly sinister menu leading to a final course that could prove deadly. 

Mark Mylod's "The Menu" is elegantly staged, akin to a malevolent play. With its concept of the uber wealthy in a state of glorious travel threatened with a dark underbelly of sociopathic dysfunctions, it feels perfectly timed with the likes of Writer/Director Mike White's "The White Lotus" (2021/2022) series for HBO plus Writer/Director Rian Johnson's "Glass Onion" (2022), yet the end result feels considerably lacking when compared to the aforementioned works.

Where it succeeds best for me, it as a social commentary over our collective cultural identification as "foodies" combined with or due to our exposure to food via a host of television cooking competition reality programming. At its best, and much like how the late, great Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert's long standing presence in movie criticism for television educated and engaged the general public in how to watch, engage with and therefore discuss the movies, our current television food programming has given us similar gifts. We are now armed with a greater knowledge of food, where it comes from, how it is prepared and therefore, we have been given the language of how to discuss food. 

It has been quite the populist transition in demystifying the art of cooking while simultaneously upholding it, keeping the exclusivity of fine dining while bringing it it to the masses via our television screens. By learning more about food, we are given the opportunity to understanding how food works with our bodies and how to possibly eat better because of our new found knowledge of how the Science and art of food congeals. All of that being said, and as the old adage expresses, everybody's a critic, and regardless of how much new knowledge we may have when talking about food, everyone is not an expert. For if anyone could prepare food to such an elevated level, then anyone would...and we don't because we can't.

Mark Mylod's "The Menu" plays with that very unctuous, pretentious, pseudo intellectual fashion of preparing and experiencing food within the motivations of Chef Julian Slowick and his doomed patrons, where one false move could present dire consequences regardless of status and cache. Mylod creates a tale of class warfare and and upending societal and economic privileges, something that is actually very reminiscent of Director David Fincher's "The Game" (1993).

Yet, where that film's surrealist aesthetics truly weaved a deeply unsettling spell as a psychological thriller, it is also an exceedingly sharper and ore pointed satire, where "The Menu" overall succeeds in fits and starts. It is indeed fueled by an "eat the rich" narrative while also functioning just this side of horror but it never feels to go as far as it absolutely could.  

I did appreciate a certain multi-layered level to the existential horror of the film, especially as it is a parable about a collective of individuals who have amassed everything in their power but have sacrificed all manner of joy from their existence. A joy of inspiration and creation, a snuffing out of the spark that may have first inspired them, yet their main pursuits have become not of any sense of inner ascension but of socio-economic domination which leaves them all as gradually hollow shells rather than full human beings now all facing a certain judgement on this fateful night. 

As a thriller, all of the pieces are in place, the performances are strong, the visual sheen and design is effective and truthfully, the first half of the film builds strongly into two or even three shocking crescendos. But, the film overall in terms of its sense of character, as well as an exercise in terror, never really finds its footing in its second half as characters remain underwritten, character motivations are unclear and even questioned within the film by other characters and the participants feel shuffled from one sequence to another without any real consequences other than a plot driven inevitability which ends up undercutting any sense of that under the skin intensity this film needs. 

Mark Mylod's "The Menu" is well plated but feels decidedly undercooked and truthfully, in need of a re-fire. For it is one that is indeed lacking in heat! 

HAPPY 13TH BIRTHDAY TO SAVAGE CINEMA!!!

This time, the day snuck up on me.

Dear readers, this evening, I had logged into this blogsite to try and write a brand new review for myself and for you when my Facebook memories greeted me with a revelation. It was a memory of two years ago and featured an image starring the number 11 front and center. Having no idea whatsoever of what this particular memory pertained to, I clicked and was then struck with full remembrance tinged with some melancholy.

The number 11 referred to the 11th anniversary of Savage Cinema, and since that was two years ago, this means that today is the 13th anniversary of the very day when I sat within my parents' basement in South suburban Illinois and very trepidaciously hatched this blogsite on which I would merge my love of writing and the movies into a deeply personalized space and a place for me to share those specific loves with anyone who chose to enter.  

As previously stated, I said this realization came tinged with melancholy. Well...frankly, how could I forget this very day, especially as there was a time, for much of this site's existence, when I would never have forgotten and would therefore have commemorated this experience and thanked all of you for supporting me throughout the years?  

Yet, somehow, I did. And truthfully, that omission makes me feel very sad indeed. 

All of this time, I have often expressed that I am Savage Cinema and Savage Cinema is me and in the forgetting, have I forgotten myself? Over these past three years definitely, and exacerbated by the pandemic, Savage Cinema has taken a drastic back seat within my life as the shut down of movie theaters combined with all of the real world anxieties and stresses when then folded into my mental health issues made the process of watching movies, let alone writing about them feel like a mountain too difficult to climb. 

In these past few years, I have to express to you hat there have been several film reviews that I began  and yet, never finished, due to a profound lack of mental energy due to work and internal stressors. How I would have loved to have written about Wes Anderson's "The French Dispatch" (2021),  Edgar Wright's "Last Night In Soho" (2021) or Peter Jackson's "The Beatles: Get Back" (2021), all of which I began (and for those keep score, I LOVED them all), yet sadly never finished due to lack of time, and lack of energy...

...but believe me, NEVER for a lack of caring.    

Admittedly, there have been times over these 13 years when I would take up a new review posting as a challenge, a means of honoring the promises I made to myself when I began this site. Yet, I always told myself that if at any point if writing a review began to feel like a job, then I should hit pause and re-think my purpose. That being said, I pressed onwards and write, wrote and wrote, and I look back and I feel such pride at this body of work I have amassed over these years. Even now, with Savage Cinema showing dramatically less output, that sense of accomplishment should not be undersold to myself by myself. 

Especially as I remember that very first post, the very one where tapping the "PUBLISH" button felt to be so terrifying. And after I hit "PUBLISH" upon this post, I will have reached a whopping 854 postings!!!! It happened. You helped me reach this milestone. That cannot be taken from me and perhaps, on this day where I have forgotten myself, this memory is helping me to remember myself. To remember that what was so frightening that very first time, did produce what exists today...and truthfully, what still can exist in the future.

I am Savage Cinema and Savage Cinema is me and I am still here...so...

There is yet another enormous aspect to this lack of activity on my part and that is due to the movies themselves.

For as much as I have changed over these years, so has the movie industry. I am not proclaiming the death of cinema or anything like that for I do believe that we are in a wave that has yet to completely turn and become something anew. But, these times do feel quite dire for the movies.

For years upon this site, I have expressed my long seated fatigue with superhero movies, as well as with all manner of sequels, prequels, reboots, remakes, and re-imaginings...even as I, just like all of you, continue to see such movies. In many ways, I do side with the likes of Martin Scorsese as he has decried the sheer abundance of say Marvel movies as being "theme park rides" and not "cinema." Now before we get ourselves lost in that particular debate, which in and of itself is yet another thread of the "high art" vs. "low art" battle (and one in which I will never engage as it is one I have never subscribed to), I will say that...to a degree...Scorsese is not wrong in his assessment.

Basically, it is a variation of what I have been feeling for at least 10 years: I have no problem whatsoever with the Marvel movies being made. I just don't need to see them every single week and definitely not at the expense of every other movie that could be made. 

The motion picture industry has been inching towards this moment for several years now and the pandemic exacerbated the inevitability. With the rise of the franchises in prevalence, creation and status as being EVENT MOVIES, films that are seen as "smaller" would find themselves pushed away--which in and of itself, creates the fallacy that EVENT movies are the only things that audiences wish to see (because, it could easily be argued, just look at the box office receipts and records constantly being made by the likes of Marvel and now, the latest "Avatar"--but of course, it could be argued as rebuttal, those movies would be setting box office records when nearly every screen in your local multiplex is showing that one particular movie thus severely limiting actual choices for audiences to make).

Besides, why can't great acting, great storytelling, great dialogue and great directing BE THE EVENT regardless of the film style or genre?!

Where are the adult drams? Where are the teen comedies? The romantic comedies, indie dramas, psychological thrillers, and any and all other cinematic offerings that do not fit into the sequel, prequel, remake, reboot, reimagined boxes? All to streaming services--and that includes new movies from filmmaking giants like The Coen Brothers, Spike Lee and the aforementioned Martin Scorsese! There are few  directors remaining that could potentially open a film just due to their  name--Quentin Tarantino, Christopher Nolan and Jordan Peele to name three. To that end, perhaps aside from Tom Cruise, do we have any movie stars anymore--that is if they appear in something where they are not required to adorn a cape and possess super powers? 

Yes, we have streaming, but I do not think that it would be unfair to suggest that many viewers are like myself who do feel overwhelmed by the sheer amount of streaming content and services that it is difficult to know where to begin...and so, little to nothing is watched at all. 

Even worse, there is  the decrease in actual movie theaters. I do not know about where you happen to live but in my home base of Madison, WI, where I have called home since 1987, we are now in a movie theater desert. As a college student at UW-Madison, right in the heart of the city and downtown area, during the 1980's and 1990's, 

There once existed University Square 4, a small 4 screen multiplex--where I saw nothing less then Spike Lee's "Jungle Fever" (1991), Ridley Scott's "Thelma and Louise" (1991), crossed a picket line to see Martin Scorsese's "The Last Temptation Of Christ" (1988), witnessed my one and only NC 17 film in Philip Kaufman's "Henry & June" (1990), copious midnight screenings of Alan Parker's "Pink Floyd: The Wall" (1982) and an ocean of great times at terrible flicks like Rod Daniel's "K-9" (1989). 

Down State Street and around the state Capitol building, there sat the Orpheum, the Majestic, the Strand and the Esquire. All of these were within walking distance and combined with all of the student film societies, the sheer presence of so many locations to engage within my passion for the movies, and on a student budget no less, made it a gift for people like me who were looking for alternatives to the Madison party scene or the sports fan community. In addition to all of those screens, there did exist the multiplexes by shopping malls, the Hilldale theater, the Westgate Art Cinema--where I saw Rob Reiner's "The Princess Bride" (1987) on opening weekend--and in 1989, the second run Market Square Theater multiplexes, specializing in second run features, was born. 

By now in 2022, our movie theater landscape has changed entirely and irrevocably. The Orpheum and Majestic are now concert venues. The Strand, Esquire, Westgate Art Cinema and that 4 screen campus multiplex are all lost to time itself. Hilldale was demolished to make way for the very first Sundance theater in the nation...a theater that Robert Redford himself arrived in Madison to announce its creation only to sell it years later. This November, that theater shut its doors...one full month earlier than expected and in the very same year that the Market Square Theaters shut its doors forever...even after apparently surviving the pandemic. 

Madison, WI now has essentially no movie theaters in the city as 2022 draws to a close, forcing theater goers like myself to venture to impersonal, corporate multiplexes in outlying communities in nearby Sun Prairie and Fitchburg (if that one can get past its own health code violations). Less choices, less theaters...certainly that does indeed make things difficult for a film enthusiast like myself. But a gain, movies are not dead and neither am I. There is a way and I do have these 854 posts and 13 years reconfirming that fact. 

I just need to make my way...just as I did 13 years ago.

Moving forward...what does it mean for  Savage Cinema? I am not prepared to roll those ending credits at all. In fact, I have a couple of ideas in my brain just waiting to be written. I just need to remind myself to be gentle with myself and take ANYTHING written and posted as a victory, for every new feature extends the life of this blogsite and my creative life. 

I wish to thank you for your patience, your understanding, your continued encouragement and support. Again, without you as my fuel, I never would have reached 13 years of Savage Cinema at all. 

And yes, I did reach 13 years of this experience.    

Thanks for the reminder.

WHOSE WORLD IS THIS?: a review of "Don't Worry Darling"

"DON'T WORRY DARLING"
Story by Carey Van Dyke & Shane Van Dyke and Katie Silberman
Screenplay Written by Katie Silberman
Directed by Olivia Wilde
***1/2 (three and a half stars)
RATED R

Friday, June 24, 2022... 

That date will forever be seared into my mind as it was on that very morning that the United States Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, therefore undoing what had been the law of the land for nearly 50 years. It was the proverbial line in the sand, that invisible barrier marked with "BEFORE" and "AFTER." The date where access to an abortion instantly became perilous for those who choose to seek or need one. Furthermore, and regardless of whatever one's view on abortion happen to be, the action on this date effectively announced that women in totality were not human beings deserving of the right to have autonomy over their own bodies. Decisions would have to be made for them by the men in power. 

On that very morning when the news was announced, I was taking my charges in the school aged Summer Camp for our adventure of the day, part of which was spent racing around the lawn of our State Capitol building here in Madison, WI, a location we essentially pass every single day. As the children played, I found myself pausing to regard all of the girls in my class, ranging in ages from 5-9, and all of whom are vibrant, eccentric, challenging, ingratiating, exuberant, gloriously zany and endlessly inventive human begins. I could not help to look at them and suddenly feel a tremendous amount of fear of the world they would potentially grow up into, their natural and completely individualist lights forcibly snuffed out by a world now armed against them for no other reason than their gender. 

For all of the talk about personal rights and freedom, especially during this time of Covid-19 and just the act of wearing a piece of cloth over one's mouth and nose caused conniptions by detractors, what does it mean when one does not possess the autonomy of the bodies in which they were born? If you don't own yourself, freedom is non-existent.

Watching Director Olivia Wilde's second film "Don't Worry Darling," an abrupt stylistic shift from the verbose teen comedy of her debut directorial feature "Booksmart" (2019) to this psychological thriller, I found myself undergoing the same feelings of dread and doom as I felt on that day in June. In many ways, much of what is presented within the film is familiar. Yet, for me, I do not mention this as a criticism for I think what Wilde has achieved is a unnerving fever dream of an experience that meets the moment of the precarious space where women stand within this country when held at the mercy of overly confident men who make the laws certainly, and wish to retain absolute power undeniably. 

I have now seen this film twice and still, I am honestly surprised at the vitriolic tenor of the largely negative reviews the film has received. Yes, we can debate about its sense of originality or lack thereof (which feels to be a moot point in this age of unending sequels, prequels, remakes, reboots, and re-imaginings) but for me, Wilde's film was less about being necessarily original but taking notes from the past to make a statement about the present.   

Set sometime in the 1950's, Olivia Wilde's "Don't Worry Darling" stars Florence Pugh and Harry Styles as young, married couple Alice and Jack Chambers, residents of the idyllic and experimental company town of Victory, California, where the sun always shines, everyone is a snappy dresser, the men work each day while the women tend to their homes and each night is filled with splendid home cooked meals, ever flowing drinks, and wall to wall music and merriment. 

Each day, the men venture to work on the top secret "development of progressive materials" in the outlying desert location of Victory Headquarters, for the mysterious Victory Project, as overseen by Frank (Chris Pine), its enigmatic founder, while the women are instructed to never ask questions and just enjoy and relax into their existence as homemakers in their elegant lifestyles.

But, of course, all is not as it seems...not by a long shot.

After experiencing the odd behaviors of one of her neighbors, which are soon followed by increasing hallucinations and nightmares, Alice suspects a sinister secret is being kept from the residents of Victory by its founder thus rendering this supposed utopia as a certain kind of Hell.

Now, dear readers, if one were to automatically think of Director Bryan Forbes' "The Stepford Wives" (1975)--or Director Frank Oz's 2004 remake--while even regarding the trailers for Olivia Wilde's "Don't Worry Darling," you would not be mistaken or criticized for making the comparison. In fact, for all of the criticism launched against Wilde's film for its lack of originality, I actually counter that perception because I feel that she not only is more than aware of the clear comparisons between the two films, she has in effect leaned into these comparisons heavily to make her own commentary about the place of women in society with similarities and contrasts between the 1970's and the 21st century.  

Yes (and without intentionally producing spoilers), Wilde's "Don't Worry Darling" owes quite a lot of its structure to "The Stepford Wives" with even a dash of Writer/Director Cameron Crowe's "Vanilla Sky" (2001) sprinkled in for good measure and for me, this was not a hindrance. As the late, great Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert used to express, "A film is not always about what it is about. It is about how it is about what it is about." I think that this is the engine at which Olivia Wilde is operating for her film and she is utilizing the familiarity, for herself and the audience, as a means to take us upon an extremely dark ride. 

I really loved how Wilde eschewed with any opening credits and thrust us immediately into a drunken dinner party, already suggesting that this is something of nightly regularity and that also something is decidedly wrong. That sense of unease is ever present. I loved how Wilde essentially did away with exposition and purposefully left holes and breadcrumbs throughout all of which will point towards the ultimate realization of what Victory is while also consistently commenting upon the action as we regard it and the effect was disturbing to stay the least. 

Through out the outstanding work from Wilde's team, which includes Cinematographer Matthew Libatique, Editor Affonso Goncalves, Composer John Powell, and Production Designer Katie Byron, the sheer perfection of Victory is disturbing, the comparative symmetry of watching the husband's cars flow out of their neighborhood cul-de-sac and Alice's creepy Busby Berkeley styled hallucinations are always unsettling and really, listen to the sheer parade of vintage pop songs being pumped into Victory (excellent breadcrumbs) and what of Frank's daily Victory broadcasts, which are either motivational or a form of brainwashing.

Weather never seems to exist as the sun always shines. A constantly pregnant neighbor who seemingly never has any other children. A lifestyle where ever present food, comfort, wine and sexual gratification feels forces you to question if anything is out of love or pacification leading to subjugation. Alice's odyssey throughout "Don't Worry Darling" is its own nightmarish wonderland where power, control and bodily autonomy itself are all in the balance. Through the familiar aesthetics and jet fueled by Florence Pugh's terrific leading performance, Olivia Wilde has fashioned a film that works within its own dream logic to address real world nightmares, especially as any victories of the feminist movement during the 1970's has given to our current regressive politics and right wing attitudes towards women in 2022.

There is a joke meme that I have seen as of late which is essentially, "If I only had the confidence of a mediocre White man." Think of that as you regard Wilde's film. Take note of the emasculation fear mongering the likes of Tucker Carlson performs every night upon his television show and think of that as we regard Frank and the men of Victory. Regard the sequence during which Jack receives a major Victory promotion during a swanky banquet and is then asked (or forced?) to perform a "celebratory" dance on stage all the while looking like a madhouse marionette (truly Harry Styles' best scene in the film) and just think of how something like fascism happens, how it recruits, and how it keeps subjects tethered. 

I think, whether obvious or not, there is more going on in this film that it has been given credit for and all of the muckraking in the press over all of the behind the scenes turmoil during and post production benefits no one and frankly, stifles and undercuts Olivia Wilde's storytelling vision as well as her position as a filmmaker...and considering what transpires within the film, this feels a little more than uncomfortably fitting. 

Olivia Wilde's "Don't Worry Darling" got under my skin. And after everything that transpires within the film, I think it is the final sound that we hear before the end credits that perhaps rattled me the most. For never do I wish for any woman, and definitely not the girls I care for presently, to ever feel that the lives they are leading reach the point where that sound has to be made. 

TESTAMENT FOR THE KING: a review of "Black Panther: Wakanda Forever"

 

"BLACK PANTHER: WAKANDA FOREVER"
Based upon the Marvel Comics series created by Stan Lee and Jack Kirby
Story by Ryan Coogler
Screenplay Written by Ryan Coogler and Joe Robert Cole
Directed by Ryan Coogler
**** (four stars)
RATED PG 13

Bless you, Ryan Coogler. For your passion and determination, certainly. For the veritable ocean of love poured into this experience, unquestionably. 

It truly feels like the impossible has been made possible as Writer/Director Ryan Coogler, the architect behind "Black Panther" (2018), the greatest film in the entire Marvel Cinematic Universe canon, in my opinion, has astonishingly crafted and delivered an even more soul stirring experience and while faced when conceivably insurmountable odds. The utter shock of the death of Chadwick Boseman. King T'Challa himself, after a private battle with colon cancer in August 2020, felt to derail any possibilities of a second chapter and if there were none to be made, then so be it. Yet, Coogler remained intrepid, regrouped, carried onward and ultimately created a work that felt to be birthed from the communion of his spirit and Boseman's, with whom he had developed a close friendship. 

Ryan Coogler's "Black Panther: Wakanda Forever," is the rare sequel, especially in our time of constant sequels, prequels, remakes, reboots and re-imaginings, that truly feels as if it was birthed through a purpose that exceeds itself far beyond anything solely commercial and cynical. In my original review of Coogler's "Black Panther," (housed in the February 2018 section of this blogsite) I remarked that the film felt to be the first Marvel film that was actually about something, ascending itself far above heroes and villains with subject matter pertaining towards, but not limited to, Black excellence. Black nationalism, and Afro-futurism as presented as a dream world of an uncolonized, technologically advanced African landscape and how that contrasts with the plight and displacement of colonized African-Americans. 

With "Black Panther: Wakanda Forever," Ryan Coogler has taken everything we loved about the original film and has extended and deepened his palate into something so specific to the Black experience plus experiences of the marginalized communities of color to the universal and primal emotions the human community experience when grieving and mourning. In essence, through immense tragedy, Ryan Coogler dug deeper than ever before and emerged with a testament of towering strength and emotion, propelling itself far from its MCU brethren and into an artistic statement, a kinetic, operatic, and shatteringly poetic installment that exists within its own triumphant lane. 

I will keep plot details to a minimum so as to to produce spoilers. Our story of "Black Panther: Wakanda Forever" begins with grave solemnity as we and the characters are greeted with the death of King T'Challa. As T'Challa family and friends plus all of Wakanda reels from tragedy and attempts to continue onwards in the face of personal and national grief, a new threat arises in the form of the ankle winged Sub-Mariner himself, King Namor (played by Tenoch Huerta Mejia), ruler of the underwater civilization of Talocan, housed directly beneath Wakanda.

Even moreso than its predecessor, "Black Panther: Wakanda Forever" is majestic and mountainous, visually, artistically, sonically, philosophically, spiritually, and most importantly, humanely. While there are conceptual and story threads that link and further extend the MCU as a whole, Ryan Coogler, working so beautifully with his superlative cast and crew are firmly rooted within their collective communion of grief and tribute to Chadwick Boseman, that the film truly operates at a completely higher level. If the first film represented itself at a peak of quality, then this new film showcases Coogler's vision ascending to an even greater peak ensuring that "Black Panther: Wakanda Forever" never exists as "just another Marvel movie" or "the next Marvel movie" but defiantly as a full, enriching, enveloping artistic statement upon its own considerable merits.  

The presentation is astounding, and just as with the first film, Coogler's world building is so resplendent and complete that it would be impossible to digest every detail within one sitting. The fictional world of Wakanda has grown even more lush and labyrinthine, so effectively that the lines of fantasy and reality are considerably blurred further...or perhaps, my wishes for Wakanda to being a real place have grown stronger. 

To that end, the film allows Coogler to envision and deliver a tremendous effort at world building, especially when adding in the underwater realm of Talocan. Just as Wakanda immerses itself in the colors, iconography, clothing, dialects and history to depict the uncolonized Africa, Coogler and his team perform the same feat when imagining Talocan, which is a hybrid mixture of Mesoamerican and Mayan cultures. Tremendous praise must be showered upon Costume Designer Ruth Carter plus Cinematographer Autumn Durald Arkapaw and good Lord, Composer Ludwig Goransson (might this be his finest score?) for truly showing the efforts of their talents and they extended of themselves to reach for greatness. 

In addition to the building of two distinct worlds, Ryan Coogler has also grown much ore comfortable with the handling of visual effects and larger scaled and unquestionably more complicated action sequences and large scaled set pieces, conjuring one image after another that never exists as CGI bombast or bludgeoning incoherence. He has amassed a vision that exudes an operatic heft which always resonates powerfully and emotionally, while shaking the confines of the movie theater walls. 

It is that specific quality that allows "Black Panther: Wakanda Forever" to transcend the MCU and its own genre for it is an experience bathed in mourning and tribute to the character of T'Challa and his real world conduit, Chadwick Bosemean. It is evident that Ryan Coogler, his cast and crew KNEW that if they were to proceed with a new installment, it would have to be an experience worthy of the one who is no longer present in the flesh. It could not be an experience that was simply OK or a placeholder for the next Marvel movie. It HAD to be of value and of worth to the man, again as a character and as a human being in reality, fur the film is about his presence in its absence. How his life and the threads he weaved through the connections he made in life, affect everyone and everything now that he is gone. 

Throughout Wakanda and its inhabitants, from the characters of Wakandian Queen and T'halla's Mother, Ramonda (the ever regal Angela Bassett), T'Challa's sister and scientific genius Shuri (Letitia Wright), his lover and Wakandian spy Nakia (Lupito Nyong'o), Dora Milaje General and trusted ally Okoye (Danai Gurira) and leader of the Jabari mountain tribe, M'Baku (Winston Duke), "Black Panther: Wakanda Forever" is a film, about grief and the grieving process. All of the characters are given space to explore how they process and attempt to reconfigure their place in the world without T'Challa and it is uncanny with how there is an intimacy along with sequences and monologues that touch upon the Shakespearean. 

The moments when the film grows quiet, where it feels like we are gaining insight into the actor's otherwise private feelings regarding Chadwick Boseman's passing, we in the audience are also allow to process our own feelings whether regarding what Boseman meant to us or even our mourning for those we have lost in or real lives. It is a daring balancing act that Ryan Coogler honors beautifully and never allows the super heroics and pyrotechnics to overshadow, especially within its opening and closing scenes that so elegant in their poetic humanity.     

Further still, and through means of the very representation which always matters (especially in our current era of extremely loud and open racism and social/political violence against communities of color), his sense of metaphor and allegory remains strongly intact and again gives the film a greater purpose than just being about heroes and villains. 

Just as with the first film, we explore the relationship between the culture uncolonized Africans and colonized African-Americans who have been disconnected from our own sense of culture, history and legacy. Through Namor and his kingdom, Coogler explores a community of color that has been fully displaced and then forced to reinvent elsewhere, in this case, underneath Wakanda, this creating the metaphorical hierarchy, which itself created the conflict between the two nations and even further, extends from the consequences of T'Challa's nobility by ceasing Wakanda's existence as an isolationist society and an active part of the global community overall. 

Coogler then further explores that very Dr. Martin Luther King Jr./Malcom X dichotomy while acknowledging that both men and the philosophies they lived by were exceedingly more complex and nuanced than ever given credit for. Now that T'Challa is gone, how should Wakanda proceed as a nation? What is Black nationalism and therefore, Black militarism? Should two marginalized communities merge and formulate an alliance, in what purpose should such an alliance exist? In one of collaboration and solidarity, aiding in each other's self preservation and ascension? Or in contention and vengeance, always at the ready for revenge filled retribution towards each other (knowing such a conflict only benefits the dominant society) as well as against the dominant society? 

Even further still, so richly, and without calling obvious attention to itself, Ryan Cogler's "Black Panther: Wakanda Forever" is a celebration and tribute to Black women, the pillars of our communities and even society itself as Black women have been pivotal to the preservation of our American democracy time and time and time again. Coogler gives us a tapestry of Black women in royalty, Black Women of Science, Black women as warriors, Black woman as teachers, and all of them function as Black women as LEADERS who are the collective heart and soul of Wakanda (and the film itself) for it does not exist without any of them. 

It feels fitting that in a film that stars Wakanda, a mythical world  once isolated from the rest of the world, plus the even more mythical landscape of Talocan hidden underneath, Ryan Coogler's "Black Panther: Wakanda Forever" should stand above and apart from its Marvel companions. Coogler has gifted us with a film that stands by itself so proudly and in such tremendous reverence to Chadwick Boseman and as it should. It would have been so easy to recast the role and be done with it, and hw mercenary an act that would have been. Thankfully, Coogler, his cast and crew dug as deeply as and properly, especially in a film that surrounds itself with concepts of family, legacy, traditions, and how we honor all those who came before. These artists stood upon the shoulders of the memory of and love for Boseman to give of themselves to make a film that stands in tribute to what he meant to them as well as to us. We grieve alongside our cast and their characters, and in doing so, our tears are shared as we are also thrust into a story that resonates with representation, revolution and spiritual resolution. 

There are good movies. There are bad movies. There are good to great Marvel movies and there are...um...not so good Marvel movies. Ryan Coogler's "Black Panther: Wakanda Forever is a GREAT MOVIE, a towering achievement and one of 2022's very best films. 

DON'T LOOK UP: a review of "Nope"

 

"NOPE"
Written, Produced and Directed by Jordan Peele
**** (four stars)
RATED R

Clouds certainly do not look the same after seeing this one.

One of my most favorite sequences in Steven Spielberg's "Close Encounters Of The Third Kind" (1977) is the alien abduction of 3 year old Barry from his rural home in the middle of the night directly from the safety of his Mother (Melinda Dillion). Even after 45 years, the power of this sequence is untouchable. A swirling array of lights, color, awesome sound, electromagnetic pulses, inanimate objects racing around and operating by themselves while an enraptured Barry persistently approaches the aliens as his Mother furiously strains to keep him...to no avail. 

It is a sequence of great terror and astonishment and concluding with these night sky clouds containing the spaceship and hovering away in ethereal foreboding. Those very same "Spielberg-ian" clouds re-appear in his "E.T.: The Extra Terrestrial" (1982) as well as his own Production (or ghost direction, such as it is ) of Tobe Hooper's "Poltergeist" (1982), all three films showcasing the natural mystery, menace and magic of these atmospheric aerosols and whatever elements they contain that can upend the mundane lives in suburbia. 

With "Nope," his third directorial feature film, Jordan Peele has extended from the psychological chamber pieces of the outstanding, game changing debut  "Get Out" (2017) and the mesmerizing, disturbing "Us" (2019) and has widened his cinematic palate to deliver an experience that feels like a direct descendant of what Steven Spielberg created in the modern summer blockbuster film in "Jaws" (1975) while also firmly expanding his own distinct cinematic universe. 

"Nope" is a grander, often sprawling affair yet one that is decidedly artful in its occasional non-linear storytelling, conceptual metaphors, combined with the representational hallmarks that have made Peele's oeuvre as provocatively challenging as they are entertaining. Jordan Peele's "Nope" makes him three for three as his original films have truly become a treasured oasis in our ever widening sea of sequels, prequels, reboots, re-imaginings. 

As with his previous films, the less you know about Jordan Peele's "Nope," the better. Daniel Kaluuya and Keke Palmer star as siblings Otis "O.J." Haywood Jr. and Emerald "Em" Haywood, horse wranglers for television and motion pictures, owners of their financially troubled ranch and possibly descendants of the the unnamed African American jockey depicted in Eadweard Muybridge's "The Horse In Motion" (1878), the first assembly of photographs to create a motion picture. 

As O.J. has sold many of his horses to Rocky "Jupe" Park (Steven Yeun), owner of the nearby tiny Western theme park, "Jupiter's Claim," the financial straits of the Haywood ranch and business grow dire.

And then...

At the ranch, O.J. and Em soon experience strange electromagnetic pulses, odd inorganic objects falling from the skies, their remaining horses reacting violently and vanishing without a trace and finally, something, hiding and hovering overhead inside the clouds over the ranch.

With a storytelling canvas that incudes, but is not limited to, a late '90s sitcom, a field of tube man skydancer props, outdoor carnivals, analog cameras, music eerily slowed down to half speed, and multiple self-referential nods to film history, Jordan Peele's "Nope" is far and away his broadest, most expansive, widest reaching film. It is also an elusive experience, one where all of the cinematic bread crumbs seem to be leading to differing destinations until they all congregate at the same terrifyingly visceral point.

As previously stated, "Nope" owes much of its DNA to the earlier films of Steven Spielberg--especially with clear and clever open nods to both "E.T.: The Extra Terrestrial" (in a particularly great visual moment) and especially, "Jaws." Firstly in keeping the mystery within the clouds hidden from view for much of the film, thus increasing the tension and terror, but secondly and notably in a short sequence during which grizzled Cinematographer Antlers Holst (a great, growling Michael Wincott) delivers a grave recitation of a novelty song to both O.J. and Em, clearly echoing the shark hunter Quint's iconic U.S.S. Indianapolis monologue in Spielberg's classic. 

"Nope" also finds Jordan Peele expanding his already impressive and immersive visual storytelling as his collaboration alongside Cinematographer Hoyte van Hoytema, Editor Nicholas Monsour and his visual effects team have devised new ways to distill information, provide clues, offer legitimate scares and the cinematic slight of hand by tricking you eyes making you wonder if you saw what you thought you saw...often to gripping your theater seats frightening heights.

But if there is a behind the scenes MVP, it would have to extend firmly to Peele's work with Sound Designer Johnnie Burn, which is so immersive, so primal, so much of a character in and of itself, that it often took me to the same horrific  cinematic neighborhoods as M. Night Shyamalan's "Signs" (2002), Steven Spielberg's ferociously nightmarish "War Of The Worlds" (2005), and Denis Villeneuve's "Arrival" (2016). For all of its volume and its silence, the sound of "Nope" is exceedingly crucial to its towering success. 

For a filmmaker as multi-layered as Jordan Peele has already proven himself to being with just two films prior, "Nope" continues his probing, provocative leanings which quite possibly are linking his filmography together thematically. Again and as always, representation means everything! 

With Jordan Peele's "Nope," which is indeed a hybrid of horror, the Western and science fiction, we are seeing Black faces in cinematic arenas in which we are either not seen and definitely not as the leading characters driving the narratives forwards. "Nope" leans into African American cowboy history and culture while also delivering elements of a Western which happens to have Black people at the forefront. Peele also gives places Black people at the beginnings of the history of film itself and the presence of Black owned Haywood ranch feels as essential as anything witnessed in Quentin Tarantino's heartfelt revisionist history as contained in "Once Upon A Time In Hollywood" (2019).

Reuniting Peele with Daniel Kaluuya firmly showcases a cinematic pairing that is meant to be. As O.J., so taciturn, so still waters runs deep, Kaluuya's beautifully haunted, expressive eyes (honestly, Kaluuya's eyes alongside Brian Tyree Henry's eyes--of television's "Atlanta"-- are some of the deepest, most expressive I have seen in years) speak more powerfully than any monologues he could have been given. This skill not only allows him to become that classic Western figure, the type seen in John Ford or Howard Hawkes films but one that inexplicably links the concept of Peele's Sunken Place of all three films together in my mind. 

For in "Get Out," the Sunken Place partially represented psychological trauma and imprisonment, ad it is seemingly more physical in the subterranean dwellings of "Us," with "Nope" it somehow is woven into our collective need for the spectacle, to own it, to harness it, to obtain the unobtainable and to our own destruction be damned. 

And so, what is "Nope" all about? For that, you'd have to see for yourselves and explore it for yourselves and to that end, I deeply appreciate Jordan Peele for giving audiences a film experience that has become exceedingly rare as ready made material with our prefabricated responses are ruling the theaters at the expense of regarding a filmmaker's personal vision. 

Clearly, Jordan Peele is asking us to ponder the nature of a spectacle for what else is "Nope" but a spectacle about spectacles and our relationships with them combined with our own sense of voyeurisms, containment and even exploitation as we co-exist in our instant gratification, cellphone camera driven culture where living the experience has taken that backseat to capturing the experience, which ultimately be contributing to our societal spiritual decay for not everything can be owned, and definitely not controlled to meet our expectations. 

For all of its surprise, awe, and wonder, Peele never allows us to be firmly lifted or let off of the hook. That underbelly of doom is ever present, serving as warning signs to us all as it simultaneously exists as a superb work of cinematic art.

Jordan Peele's "Nope" is one of the best films of 2022. 

WELCOME TO MY NIGHTMARE: a review of "Doctor Strange In The Multiverse Of Madness"

"DOCTOR STRANGE IN THE MULTIVERSE OF MADNESS"
Based upon the Marvel Comics series created by Steve Ditko and Stan Lee
Screenplay Written by Michael Waldron
Directed by Sam Raimi
**1/2 (two and a half stars)
RATED PG 13

It was bound to happen and frankly, I am not surprised that it has not happened even more often. 

My superhero movie fatigue has been long documented upon this site and so, there's no need to rehash everything now. But with regards to the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU), I have comes to terms and have grown to largely accept the serialized storytelling approach they have achieved to a miraculous degree overall. The middle to end period of the "Phase Three' sequence of films and stories, which included nothing less than Ryan Coogler's "Black Panther" (2018) as well as Joe and Anthony Russo's extraordinary "Avengers: Infinity War" (2018) and "Avengers: Endgame" (2019) represented a towering culmination of all that had come before. 

With the arrival of "Phase Four," we have already been gifted with Destin Daniel Cretton's wonderful "Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings" (2021) and Jon Watts' absolutely tremendous "Spider-Man: No Way Home" (2021), both of which worked independently and in conjunction with all of the new forays into the extended storylines depicted in the Marvel television series. With Matt Shakman's "WandaVision" (2021), Kari Skogland's "The Falcon and the Winter Soldier" (2021), Kate Herron's "Loki" (2021) and Rhys Thomas and Bert & Bertie's "Hawkeye" (2021), I was thoroughly engaged with the elongated storytelling that expanded all that we had previously experienced as well as explored a post Thanos existence with creativity, pathos, sorrow, and the rightful sense of global PTSD. 

With few exceptions, the MCU has become especially thrilling to me and with the gradual arrival of the multiverse and the full emergence of next great threat Kang The Conqueror on the horizon, the reservations that I harbored have largely dissipated...

...sort of.

As good to great Marvel has been as of late, there is still the factor of assembly line moviemaking to contend with and how having so many projects in the proverbial pipeline, and all working together to create a larger narrative, something at some point is bound to stumble. And unfortunately, that stumble has now arrived.

Sam Raimi's "Doctor Strange In The Multiverse Of Madness" has long been billed as being Marvel first horror film, so to speak. Yes indeed, we do receive the pre-requisite jump scares and sequences of surprising, sudden shocks of graphic violence (PG 13 comic book styled, of course) but that being said, the film is nowhere near as inventive, dazzling, frightening or as maddening as it could have been. That being said, it is not for Raimi's lack of trying as he is indeed working like the devil to keep all of the conceptual plates spinning in the air.  But, honestly, there is only so much even the very best filmmakers can do when racing to complete a film before the pre-announced release date. And truthfully, and especially with this high caliber work Marvel has been producing recently, all parties involved, deserve better. 

Opening a short time after the events of "Spider-Man: No Way Home," we reunite with Doctor Stephen Strange (again played by Benedict Cumberbatch) trapped in the throes of an adrenalized nightmare in which he and a plucky teenager named America Chavez (played by Xochitl Gomez) are being relentlessly pursued by a demon intent upon stealing America's powers to travel through and manipulate the multiverse. But, was it a nightmare...

In the so-called waking world, Doctor Strange soon meets, or is reunited, with America during a battle with another demon intent upon capturing the teen. Upon noticing witch craft runes, Strange decides to consult the grieving Wanda Maximoff (Elizabeth Olsen), living in isolation after the devastating events depicted within "WandaVision." Strange soon discovers that Wanda has not only been overtaken by the influence of The Book Of The Damned, known as The Darkhold, the book has also fully transformed Wanda into The Scarlet Witch and she is the one behind the attacks against America Chavez, leading to a relentless pursuit throughout the multiverse.

Sam Raimi's "Doctor Strange In The Multiverse Of Madness" functions like a technicolor fever dream. Vibrantly psychedelic and kaleidoscopic, certainly but also noisy, fussy, frantic, chaotic, and messy, definitely. Granted, the odds were stacked against this film considerably as Directors were swapped and therefore, Raimi's production time was truncated due to the switch as well as the Covid-19 shut down, plus all of the reportedly extensive re-shoots. All of that being said, it is amazing when a movie gets itself made under normal circumstances but for one as fraught with difficulties as this one, it is admirable that Raimi delivered a final result in time for the film's release...even though the entire film looks and feels as if he was building the plane while flying it.  

Of course, there is much to admire. The pre-requisite MCU spit and polish is firmly in place. Performances are strong throughout, with Elizabeth Olsen as the clear MVP and I will speak to that shortly. Conceptually, I loved the idea that dreams and nightmares are in fact passages to multiverse existences and not fantasy at all. The Scarlet Witch's ability to Dreamwalk through and control multiverse existences was another aspect that really intrigued me greatly, I loved the concept of the Incursion-when multiverse realities collide and disintegrate. There was more than enough conceptually to work with and utilize to surprisingly and, in sticking with the film's title, to really work us over psychologically as well as function as a superb horror film, much like the source material which did give me nightmares as a child, strong enough where I gave the comic series a wide berth. And still, by film's end, it all felt to be a series of missed opportunities.  

I think back to "Spider-Man: No Way Home" and how the concept of theme multiverse was handled, presented and executed as it was indeed a magical merging of storytelling, emotional heft, dire issues of fate and consequences plus fan service that was supremely earned. I look to both "WandaVision" and "Loki," where the dizzying concepts of alternate, multiverse realities and variant personalities, The Time Variance Authority (TVA) and the overall destruction of the Sacred Timeline thus unleashing the soon to be revealed dangers of Kang The Conqueror made for mesmerizing, captivating, cathartic  viewing. 

With regards to Sam Raimi's "Doctor Strange In The Multiverse Of Madness, we are given elements of pathos, some better than others. For Stephen Strange, I suppose the take away is that he is a figure confronted with the limits of his own arrogances as every multiverse incarnation Strange confronts is one who has been defeated in one way or an other. It is as if in this film, Strange is serving as Marvel's George Bailey in essence, exploring existence and his place within it or without him. Compelling in theory but it never sticks to the cinematic ribs, so to speak. Benedict Cumberbatch is perfectly suited for the titular role as Doctor Strange but even so, I had wished the screenplay did not let an actor of his skills down so much and so often as he really has not terribly much to do...and due to that, I know that I was nowhere near as invested as I should have been in a story such as this one.

Now Elizabeth Olsen on the other hand, as previously stated, walks away with the entire film, flaws and all. It seems that despite all of the storytelling potholes and poor tonal sifts, Olsen as Wanda and furthermore, as The Scarlet Witch continued to create a powerful swan dive into the ocean of grief and loss, which for her possesses no bottom  Granted, if you have not seen "WandaVision,"  you will be missing a massive amount of intensely crucial set up for the events of this film--in addition to one of the very best performances seen within the MCU in the service of one of the series most tragic characters.  

With Raimi's film, Wanda's trauma has been transformed into a righteous rage that does brilliantly set her up to become a formidable "villain" but an adversary that is rooted in grave pain congealed with a fury that does indeed strike at the heart of the unfairness and even implied sexism Wanda has faced throughout her adventures with the Avengers. 

"You break the rules and become a hero," Wanda states sharply to Strange early in the film. "I do it and I become the enemy. That doesn't seem fair." At its very best, and for so often during the entire MCU saga, the humanity of the characters has far outweighed any of the pyrotechnics. It is within those three lines that we understand nearly everything that we need to know about this stage of Wanda's trajectory as well as how it has informed and re-contextualized everything that we knew about her previously. I really think that Raimi comes dangerously close to merely demonizing her yet Elizabeth Olsen's performance is what makes Wanda/The Scarlet Witch roar.  

Yet, with Sam Raimi's film overall...sigh...Where was the sense of awe? Or confusion? Or psychological terror? Or...well...honestly, that sense of madness that is presented in the film's own title? Yes, there is one terrific sequence of Doctor Strange and America Chavez hurtling through one universe after another, but all told, Raimi seems to have no thoughts about these universes other than visual...and briefly at that. Yes, indeed this is a PG 13 movie and Raimi can only go so far (and I believe that he certainly did within one particularly gruesome sequence of superhero carnage) but everything feels so glib and unsurprising. 

Absolutely no one seems to be remotely phased by the existence of the multiverse or when characters from one universe meet similar characters who exist in a parallel universe. Everything is so matter of fact, so everyday and without any sense of real danger, excitement, or intensity, It often just feels like the actors are only walking from set to set or just standing upon one set with CGI backgrounds ever changing without any real consequences and in a story where things just happen. 

The typically strong Marvel storytelling was considerably messier this time around to the point where I am wondering if it was a glaring plot hole if the events at the conclusion of "Spider-Man: No Way Home" were understood correctly.

Sam Raimi's "Doctor Strange In The Multiverse Of Madness," while not a bad film by any stretch, it one that doesn't sink inwards, doesn't really disturb, and it is a film that often felt like it was being written each day in order to meet the pre-ordained release date. In fact, this film's shortcoming only showcase how strong the Marvel television series actually are as they have worked wonders for the Marvel characters by having the time to stretch and add layers and textures, making for more satisfying experiences. 

Doctor Strange deserves so much more than a rush job and unfortunately, that is precisely what this film is.