Cowboy Pete’s Movie Round Up

So I’ve been doing some movie going and I figured I’d bring you up to speed on my film thoughts. These are pretty much spoiler free:

ANT-MAN: Ant-Man conclusively proves that Marvel can do a variety of films. After movies in which the stakes range from millions of lives to planetary destruction, Ant-Man is basically–at its core–a family film. Two dads, Scott Lang and Henry Pym, have other concerns certainly that stem from Pym’s work as a miniaturizing scientist, but ultimately it’s about two fathers trying to connect or reconnect with their daughters. Considering that the only other Marvel film with serious daddy issues features a dad who rules Asgard, Ant-Man is unique. I should also mention that it is unquestionably the first Marvel movie that truly benefits from 3-D. I don’t say that lightly and I have actively complained about previous 3-D efforts from Marvel, but this one knocks it out of the park.

TRAINWRECK: Amy Schumer writes a screenplay in which she plays a magazine writer named Amy (clever) who spends her romantic life aggressively pinballing from guy to guy while she remains determined never to form a connection with them. Her plan derails when her boss, who is apparently the boss from “The Devil Wears Prada,” assigns her to do an article about a sports physician played by Bill Hader. Boy meets girl, boy loses girl, boy gets girl. It’s honestly all rather formulaic, although Hader is a delight to watch as he tries to understand what is going through her mind at any given moment. I dunno, people are raving about this film like it’s the second coming of Tracy and Hepburn, and I thought it was okay but not great.

MR. HOLMES: An aged Sherlock Holmes, having retired to bee keeping, strives to remember the details of his last case while forming a fatherly relationship with the young son of his housekeeper. It’s not exactly a thrill ride, and there is a largely pointless side trip to Japan that could easily have been cut entirely and the film wouldn’t have lost a step. But the pace builds and developments in the last half hour will gut punch you. Plus fans with long memories will adore a sequence where Holmes goes to a movie based on the Watson-written version of his last case, and the film Holmes is portrayed by none other than Nicholas Rowe, the star of “Young Sherlock Holmes,” who has grown up into an exact version of the Sidney Paget illustrations.

INSIDE OUT: The best movie of the summer. Possibly the year. If you haven’t seen it, what the hëll is wrong with you?

PIXELS: Why is everyone trashing this movie? I mean, the same people who complain when Adam Sandler overacts condemn him for underplaying his role this time. Is it the greatest movie ever made? God, no. It’s basically Ghostbusters light as Sandler and his team battle aliens who are, by any reasonable measure, monumentally stupid. I’m told that it’s a rip-off of an episode of Futurama. Then again, I’m also told that Inside Out is a rip-off of Herman’s Head, so I have no idea how much validity there is to that. All I know is this: It’s a harmless way to kill two hours, there are some funny jokes in there, and there is a dazzling array of 1980s cameos including Max Headroom (voiced by Matt Frewer) to make it worth your while. And it’s better than Ghostbusters 2.

PAD

37 comments on “Cowboy Pete’s Movie Round Up

  1. Ant-Man was freaking fantastic. I’m disappointed that there seems to be such desire in some quarters to see Marvel have a bomb that there was a concerted effort to talk the movie down to the casual movie goers before it even hit theaters.

    I was unaware of the Nicholas Rowe casting in Mr. Holmes. I’ll have to look for that when we go see it.

  2. I can see it on the Pixels DVD packing:

    PETER DAVID RAVES: “IT’S BETTER THAN GHOSTBUSTERS…”

    🙂

    1. They actually might have to use that because it’s likely the kindest quote about Pixels available on the Internet.

  3. I always considered IRON MAN 2 to be, more or less, about daddy issues; granted, a lot of Tony Stark’s problems in that one stemmed from being at Death’s door, but certainly his relationship to his father factored into things. Certainly not at the level of THOR or ANT-MAN, but it was there.

  4. I saw “Pixels” last Thursday and thought it was okay. I think a lot of people still have trouble simply admitting to willingly going to see an Adam Sandler movie. And I do think there’s a legitimate question about the approximate age that the film is targeting. The people familiar with the games that are being used in the movies are going to be in their 40s and 50s now.

    I also have to mention that one of the previews before “Pixels” is a movie I’m definitely looking forward to, “The Secret Lives of Pets.” The scene of the cat struggling with its conscience (do cats have such things?) when it discovers the contents of the refrigerator had the audience in my theater giggling out loud.

    One last thing — I can’t really judge anyone for liking Adam Sandler any more. Because my grand-niece, who I have instilled interest in comic books (she sleeps with an Iron Man figure, and has a Turtles Monopoly set) has, in turn, made me into a brony. Google it if you don’t know what it is. I haven’t gotten this many sideways looks from friends since the 80s when I happily watched The Smurfs every Saturday morning.

  5. I didn’t find Pixels offensively bad, but I sure didn’t find it funny. The jokes had an odd pacing to them…It felt like the actors had space to tap their mics and ask “is this thing on?” Peter Dinklage was funny, though (“I made your game my bi-utch!”) and the kid playing the female lead’s son was kind of charming. The bit with Lady Lana didn’t make an ounce of sense, though.

    Continuing with the “nothing new under the sun” theme, I thought the description of Mr.Holmes sounded a whole lot like Michael Chabon’s “The Final Solution.” The Nicholas Rowe bit was nice, though; I dearly loved “Young Sherlock Holmes” (never knew there was a post-credits scene until I saw it on tv recently…I’d always turn the VCR off when the credits started to roll).

    1. Mr. Holmes is nothing like “The Final Solution.” It is an adaptation of the novel “A Slight Trick of the Mind,” which granted came out the year after “Final Solution.” But with typical eighteen month publishing schedules what they are, there is no way the Chabon novel could have influenced it. It had to have been finished by the time the Chabon novel was published.

      PAD

      1. Oh, of course. I wasn’t trying to imply that one influenced the other; I just thought it was one of those odd synergistic coincidences, like how there were two other Robin Hood films in development when Prince of Thieves came out (which in this case were summarily cancelled).

  6. Loved Ant-Man, too. Very deftly done, and I hope that Michael Douglas can be persuaded to appear more widely in MCU fair. Absent Reed Richards, Hank Pym would make a great “resident super-genius” for Marvel characters to draw upon. Scott Lang’s “3 Musketeers” could also make a fun addition to the Avengers support team alongside the likes of Dr. Selvig. Oh, and why am I not surprised that PAD appreciates a movie with strong daddy-daughter themes?

    I concur on “Inside Out” and “Mr. Holmes” as well, though I think I enjoyed “Trainwreck” more than you did.

  7. I’m a Futurama fan, but I somehow doubt that someone saw “Raiders of the Lost Arcade” (which was only part of an anthology episode) and decided to make a movie out of it. I am betting it is more of a case of similar ideas leading to similar tropes. Once you decide your premise is that old school arcade games are attacking the Earth, it is natural to have a protagonist who was really good at these games back in the day recruited for his (normally useless) knowledge.

  8. Thanks for putting the hat back on, Peter. I hope you’ll want to give expanded versions of these reviews sometime. Including one for Avengers: Age of Ultron.

  9. Just because Futurama used the concept first doesn’t mean that any other story to use is a “ripoff”.

    I recently read a piece by someone who was talking about stories with similar concepts, tropes or motifs. I forget the exact wording, and I’m not sure if I’m right about the examples he used, but it went something like this (I’ll substitute my own examples): “People say that EdTV was just a ripoff of The Truman Show. But why? Just because they had similar concepts or ideas doesn’t mean that watching the second film wasn’t a distinctly enjoyable moviegoing experience from the first one.”

    I think that’s what nails it: It’s the experience of watching it. It’s been said that there are only three story types: Man vs. Man, Man vs. Nature and Man vs. Himself. Everything other way to measure quality is derived from what the storyteller does with the concept. As Roger Ebert said (again, I’m going off memory), movies are not about what happens, but about how it happens.

    I still haven’t seen ANY of these films, except for Inside Out, dammit.

  10. I finally got to see “Inside Out” on July 29; I’ve been moving to a new city and adjusting to a 10 p.m.-6 a.m. work schedule, so movies have been on the back burner. I took my 65-year-old mother, and I warned her beforehand that it was kind of a tearjerker.

    As we were walking out after the movie, my mom said, “So what was supposed to be the tearjerking part?”

    …anyway, I’m kind of worried about my mom now.

      1. The spoiler-free answer is “the part between the Pixar logos” but maybe that’s just me.

      2. Eh, I guess that was mildly emotional, but no more so than any decent Hollywood movie. I couldn’t really muster much sympathy for a girl who experiences a complete mental collapse just because she misses Minnesota.

  11. Minions. It’s a hoot. Friends and I saw it twice and caught gags the second time around we’d missed the first time. Too much going on for only one viewing. And, yes, the funniest rendition of HEY, HEY, WE’RE THE MONKEYS I’ve ever seen.

  12. so i bumped into a friend that works for pixar and i just broke down telling him how great “Inside/Out” was and how it will open the door for people to understand not just emotions but also lead to helping people explain or understand mental illness/drug addictions/etc.

    i think i took him off guard b/c he only responded with ‘thank you’.

    i was very drunk too.
    but i hope they understand how great a movie it was.

  13. Inside Out was, of course, pure genius. I’m particularly excited about Ant-Man, however; partly because I’ve always loved heist films, and especially because of (spoiler alert) the introduction of another female superhero into the Marvel Cinematic Universe. I’ve always loved the Wasp, and although I’m not familiar with Hope van Dyne, I’m excited to see more of her in upcoming films. I know Kevin Feige has said she won’t be showing up in Civil War, but I hope she’ll at least pop up in the next Avengers movie. I’d hate to have to wait 4 years or whatever for an Ant-Man sequel (if there even is one) to see Wasp kicking butt.

    1. Getting your wisdom teeth removed without painkillers or anesthetic is better than Ghostbusters 2…

  14. ANT-MAN – Objectively, mostly very well done. I just couldn’t buy the way they got Scott out of the jam he was in at the end (unless telepathy was involved, it made no sense), but the rest was well put together and executed.

    Subjectively, on the other paw … I’m one of those annoying purists who can’t understand why they didn’t go with Hank & Janet instead of Scott. I liked the character, but much preferred the originals. As for Janet’s permanent fate, Scott puts a hole in that theory, and we know that, in the comics, she made a ‘back from the dead’ thing a couple of years ago. The movies may wind up following that route as well. One can hope. Because leaving her dead because it had set up tension between Hank and Hope would be beyond annoying.

  15. Mr. David,

    I’d be interested in hearing your thoughts on Fantastic Four is you’re inclined to set them down. I find that your opinions on movies are often a good indicator of whether I’ll enjoy it or not.

  16. Originally, I had less than no interest in seeing “Ant-Man,” but I got dragged to it this week and to my surprise I had a good time. The film did a good job utilizing the powers of the suit to create a fun visual spectacle. Even during the third act, which is where I usually get bored and tune out during action movies, there were many great moments playing with scale and the absurdity of the situation.

    I actually enjoyed Hank Pym’s role as mentor, which allowed them to skip over the slower parts of an origin story and give us an Ant-Man with all his capabilities. Sure, his story is the first Iron Man over again with a younger business partner and a pinch hitter to fight the bad guy at the end, but Michael Douglas gives a great performance. There’s even one scene where he gives a hint of how this version of the character could plausibly be the abusive Hank Pym who would have been impossible to market.

  17. Hey, Peter, I have a question!

    How much does Ashley Judd impact your writing for Robin Lefler? Do you watch Ashley Judd movies or anything to see how she’d handle your material? Were there challenges to converting this live action guest-star into a fully defined character? Or is your approach something else entirely?

  18. It’s clobbering time… for the new FF film. Estimated at only $26 mil this weekend, when the projections were $45 mil.

    Maybe you’ll enjoy it, PAD, but the trailers just looked god awful. I think io9’s review summed it up nicely:

    “And I can’t vent too much about this film’s treatment of Sue Storm, without veering into spoiler territory. Luckily, Fox released a clip, for promotional purposes, that contains my number one complaint about how this movie handles Sue:”

    (Minor spoiler: the clip is where the boys, including Doom, go into the alternate dimension. Sue does not. Yeah.)

    So far, I’ve been pleasantly surprised by everything so far for Deadpool. Otherwise, I’m well past ready for Fox to lose the rights to anything Marvel-related.

      1. Yeah, everybody complained about the two previous FF films, but I personally thought they were ok. FF isn’t dark & dour, and those films didn’t try to be that at all. Were they great? No, but I don’t need great every time.

        Fox (and WB for that matter) seem to think EVERYTHING needs to be just like Nolan’s Batman trilogy, utterly failing to recognize WHY that works for Batman but very few other characters.

        I remember that after Captain America came out, webcartoonist Scott Kurtz (of PVP) called it a great Superman movie. Ouch.

        Clueless effing suits. 😛

  19. “Better than ‘Ghostbusters 2’ ” is the textbook definition of dámņìņg with faint praise. “Pixels” is not as bad as has been made out, but it’s still not good. It’s lazy, Sandler isn’t funny in it (others are, especially Josh Gad and Peter Dinklage), and it goes out of its way to set 1982 as its touchstone year, the year from which everything the aliens base their attacks on, and then throws that out the window by having the aliens represent a bunch of things that were not part of the consciousness in ’82, including Max Headroom (although Matt Frewer as Max is always a welcome sight), Madonna (whose first album didn’t come out until ’83 — and the aliens don’t just screw this up, so do the kids in the beginning of the movie, lusting for a woman they would not yet have heard of) and even several of the video games referenced. But even worse than all of that…

    SPOILER WARNING

    … the movie sets up as a moral that cheating is bad and that all of the games must be strictly played by the rules. Putting aside that cheat codes on early ’80s arcade games were NOT a thing — which destroys the entire premise of Dinklage’s character — the climax of the movie has Sandler defeating Donkey Kong by throwing the hammer at him, something that is not possible to do in the game. There was an easy enough way to defeat him just like in the game — have the game progress to level 2, where Mario actually topples Donkey Kong — but instead they do something that invalidates the entire theme. Sigh.

  20. (On the other hand, agree with your assessments of “Ant-Man” and “Inside Out,” but I liked “Trainwreck” a lot more than you. I need to see “Mr. Holmes.”)

Comments are closed.