Aquaman Review

Aquaman

Dir: James Wan

Starring: Jason Momoa, Amber Heard, Willem Dafoe, Patrick Wilson, Nicole Kidman, Dolph Lundgren, Yahya Abdul-Mateen II, and Temuera Morrison

The Aquaman had some time to shine in the DC Universe mash-up “Justice League”, but now the comic book character gets an opportunity to swim on his own. Director James Wan, who has helmed some really good films like “Insidious” and “The Conjuring”, takes control of the character but also suggestion from the comic book movie fans who have griped about the seriousness of the DC Universe. What develops is a film filled with flaws, masked under the guidance of something trying to have “fun”. 

Arthur Curry (Jason Momoa) has abandoned a life in an underwater kingdom, one that would call him king if he accepted the call. Arthur was born into two worlds, his father Thomas (Temuera Morrison) is a light keeper in the human world and his mother Atlanna (Nicole Kidman) is a princess from the underwater nation of Atlantis. As the world begins to learn more about The Aquaman, so does the underwater world that has shunned Arthur and his family. King Orm (Patrick Wilson), Arthur’s half-brother, wants to start a war with the human world. It is up to Aquaman to defeat Orm and reclaim the underwater kingdom.

James Wan is one of the more interesting directors working in Hollywood right now; the work he has done in horror has already earned him the accolade of being called a “master” of the genre. And this title is absolutely earned. The director has also displayed his skill for big action vehicles with the competent and over-indulgent fast car franchise “Furious 7” which starred Dwayne Johnson. This makes Mr. Wan’s association with the DC Universe fitting considering the want for a direction change for their superhero movies. 

The director tries for a bit of everything in “Aquaman”. There are big special effects on land and underwater, two villains to occupy every second of Aquaman’s quest, and an easy-going appeal for the narrative that adds levity and zero consequences to a majority of the journey. For the films featuring DC characters, “Aquaman” feels the exact opposite of Christopher Nolan’s fantastic “Batman” films, though it does feel like it could have existed just fine in the Joel Schumacher universe of “Batman Forever” with its larger-than-life characters, bizarre narrative functions, and neon-colored designs. 

“Aquaman” suffers from a poorly written script that stumbles for nearly 60 minutes to establish a simple origin story and then completely falls everywhere but the ocean trying to connect the dots for an adventure that leads from the Sahara to Sicily. The family drama, pushed with sincerity from Nicole Kidman and Temuera Morrison, briefly adds an emotional connection for Arthur but they are placed awkwardly as flashbacks in the story. James Wan’s presence comes through in some parts of the film, specifically when Aquaman and the Disney mermaid princess lookalike Mera (Amber Heard) travel to the Kingdom of the Trench with monstrous mermen in close chase. It’s the one scene that has the scope and excitement fans of Mr. Wan’s movies have come to expect. 

“Aquaman” is trying to change the tone established by previous films in the recent DC Universe, though “Wonder Woman” has done the best job so far. Unfortunately, the need to make something less bad and more fun sinks this film quicker than Aquaman can inflict a bad one-liner. 

Monte’s Rating

1.50 out of 5.00

Lights Out Review

Lights Out

Dir: David F. Sandberg

Starring: Theresa Palmer, Gabriel Bateman, Alexander DiPersia, Maria Bello, and Billy Burke

Who’s afraid of the dark? It’s a fear that still motivates a genre of writers and filmmakers to create all manner of ghost, monster, stalker, demon that are living under the bed, inside the closet, or outside the front door. It motivated director David F. Sandberg to make one of the best short films in some time, a film that functions on the simple premise of lights on and lights off. “Lights Out” was the name of the short film and remains the name of the feature length studio film hitting theaters this weekend. And it’s sure to make a whole group of people think twice before they turn the lights out.

Martin (Gabriel Bateman) is a young boy living with his mother Sophie (Maria Bello), but everything isn’t all right. Whenever Martin turns off the lights a shadowy creature appears, when he turns the lights on it disappears. Every time he does this the creature gets closer and closer. This leads to Martin keeping the lights on and not sleeping while his mother continues to grow more distant and more consumed by her depression. 

After Martin falls asleep in class, and his mother does not respond to calls to pick him up, his older sister Rebecca (Theresa Palmer) gets involved. Rebecca does not have a good relationship with her mother and wants to keep Martin away from her. Unfortunately this does not work out and Martin returns home with his mother and the closing grasp of the shadowy creature that lives in the dark.

If you are a horror movie fan there isn’t much here that you haven’t already seen, but that’s not necessarily a bad thing. This is the kind of horror film that many people will love because it incorporates much of the same material that makes horror fun for general audiences; especially those that love a summer scare. “Lights Out” is a mix of effective jump scares, it offers a story that doesn’t hide the twists and turns that are coming up, and it provides an atmosphere that continuously plays with the expectations of the viewer. Still, while these techniques work very well within this specific film, the 80 minute running time helps immensely, they are also the reasons why the film quickly becomes a monotonous caricature of other films. 

Again, this technique is nothing new in horror. Influence is important in keeping the genre fresh and finding new creative ways to make familiar material unique. The strongest influence for “Lights Out” is the simple scary movie premise of the fear of the dark and director David F. Sandberg, kudos to the production company for letting the creator of the short film direct the feature film, shows some accomplished skill in setting up a scare. A scene with a police officer shooting a gun at the creature is especially amusing and there are more scenes that are equally fun to watch. 

Unfortunately the script is filled with head shaking character clichés and unoriginal setups that grow increasingly dull as the film progresses. As the origin unravels the film progresses into a third act that loses the entire earned atmosphere and effective frights that it incorporated early in the film. While there is nothing wrong with offering an explanation in a horror film sometimes it’s better to keep the monster in the dark, to let the monster retain some of the power that it holds over the story. “Lights Out” doesn’t do this and all the time spent crafting such a good monster is lost, taking with it all the scary strength. It’s unfortunate because there is a tremendous amount of quality material that could have been utilized to deepen the fear imposed by the creature, aspects associated with maternal qualities, the connection to mental illness, and the maturing child in peril are all places the script could have emphasized to provide the film with good structure without having to explain the monster.

“Lights Out” is the kind of horror film that many genre fans love to watch, it’s also the kind of horror film that many genre fans will be indifferent about, if not outright dislike. Still, there is a place for well-honed scares that serve no other purpose than to make someone jump out of their seat. And there is something to be said about a horror film that makes you, even for a small moment, question turning off the lights.

Monte’s Rating

3.00 out of 5.00

The Conjuring 2 Review

The Conjuring 2

Director: James Wan

Starring: Patrick Wilson, Vera Farmiga, Madison Wolfe, Frances O’Conner, Lauren Esposito, and Simon McBurney

While waiting inside a darkened theater a young woman wearing a nun outfit with a painted white face wandered around the theater scaring unsuspecting moviegoers. While watching the playful theatrics help assist in building the optimal atmosphere for watching the newest summer scarefest, I overheard a young man telling his girlfriend “when it gets scary just tell yourself that it’s only a movie”. This comment immediately made me think of the tagline for Wes Craven’s 1972 horror shocker “Last House on the Left” that says “To avoid fainting, keep repeating: It’s only a movie, it’s only a movie, it’s only a movie”. In todays oversaturated horror genre market it’s unlikely that a film will affect audiences as much as Wes Craven’s film did in the 1970’s but it’s nice to see some film directors are still trying.

 

Much of the recent resurgence in the demon/apparition/ghost storytelling in film can be attributed to the creative mind of James Wan and his 2010 film “Insidious”. Utilizing clever effects and playing the genre characteristics for all of its knowing jump scares and anticipatory frights helped bring the scares back into the mainstream market. Though it wasn’t until 2013’s “The Conjuring” that Mr. Wan succeeded in capturing the essence of the traditional ghost story. 

Ed (Patrick Wilson) and Lorraine (Vera Farmiga) Warren return as the famed ghost hunters in “The Conjuring 2”. The two, now very famous personalities, are making appearances on talk shows defending their apparitional findings. However they are not received as respected authorities, in fact they are considered more charlatans than conjurers. This doesn’t stop them from having a connection to the unknown; specifically it doesn’t stop Lorraine from having visions of a terrifyingly ghostly nun offering a warning. A warning the couple ignores when a young girl becomes possessed by a malevolent spirit in England. 

Let’s get this out of the way, “The Conjuring 2” will make you jump, it made me jump a few times. When you can evoke this quality for a horror fan, many followers of the genre can spot a jump scare coming a mile away, you've achieved something special. James Wan has been doing this for years. Mr. Wan is an excellent director who understands the composition of horror films, who understands how genre characteristics work with one another, who understands that in order to trick the intelligent horror fan he needs to do things differently. That was makes Mr. Wan so good at his craft, he pays attention to the little details and puts as much effort into the small elements as he does the big ones. In this regard “The Conjuring 2” does a lot of things really well.

Unfortunately Mr. Wan has also gone bigger and bolder with his visions as his film career has expanded. Perhaps this is what makes him a good choice to direct something like DC Comics upcoming “Aquaman”. However in this horror film, one that states that it is "based on a true story" and grounds itself firmly in the reality of this family from England, there are quite a few moments that don’t seem to fit the construction of the world crafted. The use of a walking CGI scare element, a character similar to one seen in the film "The Babadook", is out of place as are some of the scares that will provoke a jump but quickly begin to replay themselves without much effectiveness. And at over 2 hours in length the film begins to feel more drawn out than dialed in. Still, during this time Mr. Wan gives us sights, specifically a nun character, that is bound to be seen walking the neighborhood at Halloween this fall. 

"The Conjuring 2" is a worthy sequel, that's a hard accomplishment to achieve in this genre. While the film will undoubtedly have some audiences squirming with frightful anticipation, these scares are great in the moment but won't last long after viewing like they did with the first film. While some will appreciate the vagueness of the story elements, some will be asking for more details; regardless the film does a good job of creating drama with the characters and displaying the dynamics of a family and married couple struggling to comprehend the unknown. Director James Wan is doing a lot of familiar things very well in "The Conjuring 2", providing a little bit of everything to cover all tastes returning to the haunted house. 

Monte's Rating 

3.25 out of 5.00

Insidious: Chapter 3 Review

Insidious: Chapter 3

Dir: Leigh Whannell

Starring: Dermot Mulroney, Stefanie Scott, Tate Berney, Angus Sampson, Leigh Whannell, and Lin Shaye

A psychic struggling with the responsibility of her gift tells a teenager that when you call out to the dead, you are calling out to all of them. Recently this sort of setup establishes every camera movement, adjustment in sound, positioned prop, foggy set, and lighting manipulation as a tool to build an uneasy sensation just before a big scare scene. While many horror films fall guilty to familiar and predictable jump scares, including “Insidious: Chapter 3”, this film utilizes the frights in far more subtle and effective way. Director Leigh Whannell directs much like he writes - quick and succinct. This makes “Insidious: Chapter 3” move with a swift and systematic pace. While this doesn’t always help in making the film as terrifying as the first film in the franchise, it does give this third chapter the quality it seems to be aiming for, which is the benefit of a safe scare that lingers just as quickly as it appeared.

This film happens a few years before the haunting of the Lambert family from the first “Insidious”. A young girl named Quinn (Stefanie Scott) has recently lost her mother to cancer and is struggling to find some connection to her. Quinn locates retired psychic Elise Rainier (Lin Shaye), who is a shell of the confident and glowing woman she portrayed in the first two films because she is devastated by the loss of her husband. Elise tells Quinn that she cannot help her and warns her to be careful about reaching out to the dead. Elise begins to experience bizarre occurrences, black tar stained footprints appear, loud knocking noises wake her, and images of a man in a breathing mask stalk her. Elise realizes through a vision that Quinn is in terrible danger, and that she is the only one who can help her.

Employing the prequel scenario is a familiar setup in horror films; especially those that try to maintain the longevity of a franchise. The first “Insidious” was a unique experience because it accomplished what many ghost and haunting stories seemed to have difficulty accomplishing, which was actually being scary. Director James Wan has become a staple of creepy horror films, recently moving on to another franchise with “Furious Seven” and this week being attached to the comic book adaptation of “Aquaman”. Wan’s longtime writing partner Leigh Whannell, who wrote all the “Insidious” films and the first three “Saw” films, has taken over the reins of “Insidious” and has guided it back from the strayed path “Insidious: Chapter 2” took. Instead of continuing the story with the Lambert family, Whannell takes the best parts from the first two films and puts them in focus here. Lin Shaye is given a leading role and she owns every moment on screen. This time we find her broken, afraid, and alone, not at all confident of her abilities. Shaye’s transition into the authoritative force is well accomplished, even giving her character a cheer worthy moment of defiance. The ghost-busting boys, Specs (Leigh Whannell) and Tucker (Angus Sampson), from the Spectral Sightings team are back to offer moments of comedic relief between scares, a nice blindsiding effect. And an old friend from the past films makes a jolting appearance as well.

While it’s no fault of this third chapter, the “Insidious” films have established a blueprint for how they like to scare you, which unfortunately makes the frightening qualities here have a lessoned effect. The film again focuses on a family and how the wounds of the past make them susceptible to dark forces. While “Insidious: Chapter 2” felt like a hurried effort from the beginning, continuing the story with the Lamberts into clichéd and particularly un-scary places, “Insidious: Chapter 3” takes the best characters and scare designs from the previous films and makes a film that stands on its own.

Monte’s Rating

3.00 out of 5.00