"Wonder Woman" (2017)

Well, I've finally seen it.  Finally watched this movie.  And it took me a while because I was quite conscious of all the hype that was made about this movie when it originally came out.  As such, I think this response needs two parts.

First, the movie itself--just as it is:  a movie.  Plot was fine--nothing elaborate.  Characters weren't flat, but basic.  The action/fight sequences were fun to watch.  And all the other aspects--set, costume, music, etc.--quite adequate.  Good even.  High points of quality:  the action sequences, and the way Gal Gadot carried Diana--her poise, her bearing, her charisma.  As a movie, I'd give it an 8 out 10, maybe even 8.5.  But as far a movie goes, I don't know that there's too much more to say.  The movie seems to hang it's hat on the action sequences--and if it was merely aiming at a good action movie that carried out DC's conception of Wonder Woman for a modern audience, then it was successful.  Quite successful.  Well done.

But I can't help noticing that the second part of this response colors the my thoughts on the first, and in that respects, I was quite disappointed.

The second part of this response is all the things that surrounded this movie when it came out.  There was a great deal of hoopla at the time.  The movie was being touted as a celebration of women.  There was even a little bit of controversy as some movie theaters held the first showing of the movie for women only (and some of the men didn't like being excluded).  And a few of those who saw it came out of the theater vindicated and ecstatic that the movie was a celebration of women. 

So, maybe all of this set the movie up for higher expectations within me--higher than it should have, higher than what may be was realistic. 

I can see that if a person wanted to see women as equal to men--as better than men--then, I suppose the movie accomplished that.  But what does that mean?  Within this movie, it means they gave a woman the bigger weapon, the better skills, and the higher success rate than the male characters. 

Is that a celebration of women?  That sounds more like trying to make a woman become a man, not celebrate being a woman. 

Oh, I know.  There are those who would say, "I am tired of seeing men get all the laud, and women being lowered..." [or whatever adjective would be chosen to be put there].  "...and it was time to show that women could be a hero/heroine just as much as men."  I still can't help feeling like something's been lost.  It's kind of like the old story of a woman climbing the business ladder only to find that what it took to climb ladder (male tactics) made her lose all the qualities that made her uniquely a woman.

If I'm looking at this movie as a story, as a movie, then it was a good movie--8 or 8.5 out of 10.  If I'm looking at this movie as a "celebration of women," then I think it is a failure.  I think that there needs to be a better movie that can celebrate those things a woman can do that a man can't, and that would be a "celebration of women."  I can think of several movies plus a few characters that do a better job on that front.  Ocean's Eight pulls off fashion, smarts, the ability to blend in, and most importantly collectivity--almost a sisterhood--between the characters.  That's something you'll find in the female aspects of our society  Even The Single Moms Club does a much better job celebrating what makes women unique and wonderful. 

It's also one thing to be brave when you're invincible.  It's another thing to be brave when you're not.  Think of the character Narcissa Malfoy who for the love of her son has the nerve to ask someone trying to look dead if her son is alive and then turn and lie to Voldemort about it.  Talk about a gutsy woman.  As for action scenes, we have that too:  Turn to Lara Croft to find a way to take an action sequence and make it over into a woman's style, and not just give the girl a bigger "gun."

So if you're looking for a page out of the comics brought to life, if you just want to see a woman "kick some butt," then this movie is great for that.  I'll completely support that.  But if you're wanting a movie to "celebrate women," then I think you need to keep looking.

"Ocean's Eight" (2018)

Having seen the other three Ocean's movies (still haven't seen the original, though), this one had me intrigued and it did not disappoint. 

I came across it on a Mother's Day display, and it caught my attention.  It amuses me that the girls could do their heist in less numbers than the guys and do it with their own flair.

It's a light movie, but that's what it was meant to be.  Would love to have seen a few more personality moments, though, from each of the eight.  I mean, we have come a ways from the original TV show Charlie's Angels where the girls are just active figures with no distinguishing personality traits, right?  Right?

I did enjoy the runway exit for ladies displaying the re-cut jewelry and their fancy garb, but I'm afraid my "I want to re-watch that moment" might be limited to Awkwafina's stall sprawl and a few other of her smooth moves such as her pocketing this and depositing that.  Maybe Rose Weil's Met Gala outfit.

That said, I do recommend this movie as a good watch, worth the time.

"Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald" (2018)

Too dark to feel satisfying.  Yet, too well written to not appreciate it.  Complete, yet unresolved.  Yeah, it's a second movie.  I once asked if there was a book that was the second in its series that was as satisfying as the first in its own right.  I gathered from the response that such examples are far and few between.  I think these movies have become the Charles Dickens serials of our day.  I don't think that's a good or bad thing.  Maybe mostly something to resolve myself to.  In any case, I almost enjoyed watching the author interview in the extras (and it's inside analysis of the movie) more than the movie itself.

This movie had it's enjoyed moments--Newt charming the zouwu being one of the top.  It's frustrating aspects are minimal, mostly limited to the tendency of so many characters to mumble.  I can understand it as a character characteristic and a style choice, but if the audience (me) can't understand it without multiple rewinds and/or subtitles, then how much is it actually communicating?  If anything, having to resort to such actions pulls me out of the movie's story.  Aside from often wondering "what did he say?" Newt's character's personality is still endearing.  Guess I can't have it both ways.

I did enjoy all the "name-dropping" of people and elements to tie in to the later-set-period of Harry Potter.  That made watching the movie somewhat of an "Easter Egg" hunt, which was enjoyable.

What I still hope for in future movies:  more "sneaky peaks" (okay, ANY peak) into the world of Ilvermorny Houses and culture, both with students and alumni; that the wonder of the magical wizarding world shows up more thoroughly in the next movie (more than just fancy entrances into places); and that all the loose ends in the Fantastic Beasts series gets satisfactorily tied up.

That said, would I recommend this movie?  Sure.  But, unless you're a "die-hard" Harry Potter fan, you might wait until you can watch all three movies in close succession.

"The Hunger Games" (2012)

I don't think I've gotten hooked into full fledged dystopian literature.  I just dont't think it's my thing.  Nevertheless, this novel and movie I've found do-able, and I was quite pleased with this adaptation.

A few years I tried watching this movie without having read the book first--something I don't normally do--but I didn't get very far in the movie before giving up on it.  I'm not sure if that's because it was dystopian or if it's because I hadn't read the book first.  Maybe I am a "book first" kind of gal. 

This adaptation was done very well--the costuming, the special effects, the art direction for the different social classes in this society--and I thought the end credits music the right style to play.

I just think I'm not into dystopian stories, or perhaps just not found the right flavor of one?

I was pleased with how they balanced indicating the violence without being too graphic in it's telling.  I'm actually pleased they didn't try to re-create the fallen tributes into the animal faces.

I liked the bird calls.

"Beautifully Broken" (2018)

The flyer came around.  "War (blah, blah, blah)...beautiful story (blah, blah, blah)...Go see it."  I had my reservations that I'd love it as much as the flyer said I would, but it was high on the local culture's radar, so I tagged along, unsure of how much I would enjoy it, but thought it would be good to at least be a part of this piece of local activity.  At very least I'd be able to say, "Yeah, I've seen it."

I was wrong.  I very much enjoyed this movie.  It is very well done.  Part of the local excitement is that the movie's director has local roots.  They have done well to be excited.

The story is very well done:  not so much gore shoved in the audience's faces that we needed to put defenses up to get through the movie, but enough hints and skirted images that we both knew what was going on and couldn't ignore it.  The weaving of the different story threads was well balanced and cut/edited well. 

I don't know that I'd call the story "faith-centered" because I think that term is part misleading for what this movie is and part mixed with preconceptions about what such a movie with that label would be.  I think "faith-laced" is better.  It's how my life works--not just "Jesus on Sunday morning," but Jesus and God and faith interlaced throughout all my week, through all parts of my life--or at least I'd like to think it is.  I'm a sinner along with the best of hypocrites, just never far from God's forgiveness either.  And that's where this movie does the faith-lacing well.  It successfully departs from the faith-genre-acting style that comes across canned to me.  This is acting in the style of real-life, and brings faith into its life situations as faith should in real-life.

And it's point?  It's not the salvation pounded out in same-new ways.  It's the message of how God likes to take the broken pieces and do beautiful things with them because He can.  Because He does.  Because broken He can work with because it shows His beauty and strength.  Which, oddly enough, is the title of the movie.

Go figure.

Final tidbits:  the ending scenery of Rwanda is beautiful.  I'm not sure, but it looked like the theme song was performed by at least three different singers (neat!).  The story is based on a true story.  How much of the movie is a true and how much adjusted for movie telling purposes?  I can't say, but I can say that I recommend this movie.

I don't know how widespread this movie's distribution is, but if you're looking for a beautiful, "decent" (it goes beyond decent--good is the word here) movie that supports a beautiful idea (that God uses broken things in beautiful ways), then consider going to your local movie theaters and requesting this movie come.  Then spread the word to everyone you know to go see it.  I think it is worth supporting this movie.

"Ready Player One" (2018)

I know, I know. "But in the book, ________ was my favorite part, and it wasn't in the movie."  Admittedly, even I will have to watch the movie a second time to enjoy it on it's own terms.  But the author of the book co-wrote the film, and co-produced the film.

That's not exactly ammo from the book against the film.  That's ammo for taking the book's ideas and looking at them fresh.  A film adaptation for it's own merits.  And in looking at those merits, the film stayed true, generally speaking, to the spirit of the book.

Now, the film.  On it's own merits.  (Because I haven't taken yet to posting book reviews online--at least, nothing regular.)

Story/plot--condensed well enough to keep a good hook to see what would happen next.  Successfully including surprises (even for those who read the book).  Seemed like there were one or two holes, though.  At the time, wondering how Wade's hideout was discovered was one "wait a minute" moment.  But the answer was there, subtly placed, earlier in the film.  How the high 5 hacked into Sorrento's rig was explained, but I'm not sure I was sold on that answer.  Maybe a second just-enjoying-it-now-that-I -know-what's-coming will sell me on the first time's hesitation.

Looking back at the "leave the stacks while you still can" after seeing the events unfold wasn't a line that made sense to me, nor fifty people standing there with one guy with a gun.  Nobody came from behind him?  Maybe I missed some thinking/thought processes somewhere.

With all the possible 80s references to pull from, I don't know that I was thrilled with the grab bag of horror as opposed to other options.  That might just be me.  Maybe those who enjoy the horror genre felt the movie was more balanced in it's 80s references???  I dunno.  Someone will have to tell me.

I'm thinking the music choices generally worked, with a few that were definitely "nice touches."  "Stayin' Alive" comes to mind.

Do I recommend the movie?  Yeah, I do.  But if you read the book first, go in with a blank slate and open mind.  In fact, what you know from the book might even trip you up.

If you have neither read the book or watched the movie, which would I recommend enjoying first?  Actually, I can see it going either way.  So, I'm not sure it matters.  If you read the book first, then watch the movie, the movie will hold a few surprises even though you'll generally know how it goes.  Sorta.  If you watch the movie first, then read the book, the book will hold a few surprises for you even though you'll generally know how it goes. Sorta.  Either way, remembering that the movie is an adaption--not a reproduction--will mean that you'll get two fresh stories for the "price" of one story arch.  And that's not a bad deal.

"Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them" (2016)

Newt Scamander's mannerisms are refreshing because they're not done absolutely everywhere.  "Neat and Tidy" plot, with a melancholy ending--but maybe it sets things up for the next movie while leaving the present story mostly satisfied.

Set in New York City.  Filmed in Liverpool, England.

"But I made them cocoa."

Was trying to remember which Hogwarts house was blue and yellow.  [Answer blue and bronze are the colors of Ravenclaw.]

Overall, enjoyed the movie