Dunkirk

Year: 2017

Director: Christopher Nolan

Starring: Fionn Whitehead, Aneurin Barnard, Tom Hardy, Mark Rylance, and Kenneth Branagh
Tagline: When 400,000 men couldn't get home, home came for them.
Synopsis: This is the story of the Dunkirk evacuation during WWII, as told from three interwoven perspectives: the land, the sea, and the air.

Review

Wow.  Seriously.  Wow.  Director Christopher Nolan has crafted an incredible film in a way that only he can.  Dunkirk is beautiful, gripping, mesmerizing, and an all around well-made movie.

Every component works together to create a film that will stick with you long after the credits roll.  The cinematography is amazing.  They actually strapped cameras onto old British Spitfire's in order to get some of the aerial shots.  The film feels real because so much of it is real.  CGI can do a lot these days and is more realistic looking than ever, but it still cannot compare to real planes, real ships, and the real world.  Dunkirk has all of that.  In fact, some of the actual little ships (private boats and yachts) used in the Dunkirk evacuation were used in the film.  If you ever splurge and see movies in IMAX, this is one to see large format (which I did).

Working right along with the visuals is Hans Zimmer's incredible soundtrack.  The music is so fully integrated into the film, it feels impossible to say where the noises of the film end and the music begins.  They feel one and the same.  Throughout the score is the sound of a ticking clock, highlighting the fact that time is as much the enemy as the Germans in this rescue/evacuation.  (Interesting note: the ticking noise was recorded from Nolan's own pocket watch.  He's that cool.)  What really got to me -- as a bit of an Anglophile -- was how Zimmer incorporated "Nimrod" from Edward Elgar's Enigma Variations during some of the most climactic moments.  You might not recognize the name, but you may well recognize the very British melody (so well loved it was used during the closing ceremony of the London Olympics).  That particular musical cue adds a dramatic punch like no other music could.

As amazing as the visuals and soundtrack are, they are both tools in Nolan's arsenal to tell a gripping story.  And Dunkirk is gripping.  The subject matter itself is larger than life: the evacuation of 400,000 men.  But how do you tell that story in a coherent manner?  Nolan seems to be the king of the non-linear narrative and he brought his A game here.  The film involves three interwoven stories, each of which occurs for a different duration of time.  The film seamlessly moves back and forth between the three stories (and thus different time frames) in a way that was never confusing.  As the film continues, we realize just how interconnected the three stories are.  And it is brilliant.

One interesting decision Nolan made with Dunkirk is that it is more the story of the evacuation than of individuals.  We follow various individuals throughout the film and see the events through their perspectives, but it isn't a character driven film.  Nor is there really any character development.  And in this film, it works.  Even though the characters don't have arcs, they all feel real.  We may not know many of their backstories, but their actions are all believable.  They are each, to some degree an Everyman.  There are moments of heroics.  And there are moments of selfishness.  None of them feel forced.

One of the more fleshed out characters is Mr. Dawson, the owner of a boat that accepts the call to sail to Dunkirk and bring back men.  We are given some of his history, which helps us understand some of his words and actions.  But what I love about Mr. Dawson is that he is the embodiment of the British attitude of keep calm and carry on.  And it's not a front.  It truly is his character.

In preparing for this film, Nolan apparently watched a number of silent films.  Dunkirk is not a talkative movie.  Body language accounts for much of the emotional story telling.  For instance, there is a moment when Farrier (an RAF pilot) must make a decision.  There's no one for him to talk to.  He doesn't say a word.  But you can see it in his eyes and in his subtle movements as he makes his choice.  The moment is a brilliant example of visual storytelling.

One of the most striking things about Dunkirk is the lack of Germans.  Except for a couple of shadowy, out-of-focus soldiers at the end, we don't see a single German soldier.  They are represented only through gunfire and planes.  It really contributes to the idea that in the evacuation, the overarching antagonist was time.

Unlike most war movies, Dunkirk is rated PG-13.  There is violence, but it is not gruesome or bloody.  But there are bodies.  The film, however, is intense.  Really intense.  It hits you in the opening minutes and never lets up until the credits roll.  Be prepared to be on the edge of your seat.  The film also has some swearing, though I only remember them in one particularly stressful scene.

If you can't tell, I loved Dunkirk.  It is one of the best, most well-crafted movies I have seen in years.  I saw it again this weekend.  It's just as epic and incredible the second time.  And it fully deserves to be seen in IMAX.

*** Spoiler Section ***
For much of the movie, I wondered how exactly it would end, or rather, how it would all wrap up.  Nolan did not let us down.  Having Tommy -- weary but relieved to be home -- read aloud Winston Churchill's rousing "We shall fight on the beaches" speech works well.

The end is all the more bittersweet as we realize how much Farrier (the pilot) has sacrificed.  He has landed his plane in enemy territory and is now a prisoner of war.  While over 300,000 men made it home, he didn't.

Quotable Quotes

• "He's on me."  "I'm on him." -- Collins and Farrier
• "Is he a coward?"  "No, George.  He's shell-shocked.  He's not himself.  He may never be himself again." -- George and Mr. Dawson
• "You should be at home!" "There won't be a home if we allow a slaughter across the Channel." -- The shell-shocked soldier and Mr. Dawson
• "You can practically see it from here."  "What?"  "Home." -- Commander Bolton and Captain Winnant

Spider-Man: Homecoming

Year: 2017

Director: Jon Watts

Starring: Tom Holland, Michael Keaton, Robert Downey, Jr., Jon Favreau, Marisa Tomei, Zendaya, Jacob Batalon, and Laura Harrier
Tagline: Homework can wait.  The city can't.
Synopsis: Teenage Peter Parker deals with the struggles of high school while trying to prove his worth as Spider-Man.

Review

I'll get straight to it: I was disappointed.  I wanted so much to completely love this new iteration of the neighborhood web-slinger.  And there is much to love in Spider-Man: Homecoming.  And because it got so many things right, I'm all the more saddened by where it dropped the ball.

The trouble is, I can't really explain why I'm disappointed without spoiling important plot points.  So if you want to see the movie, by all means, go see it.  And maybe the things that are stuck in my craw won't bother you.  I seem to be in the minority on this one.

But let's get into what I can discuss without spoilers.

Tom Holland is the best Peter Parker.  Hands down.  He was terrific in Captain America: Civil War and proves himself capable of carrying his own film.  He brings a nerdy, teenage charm to the role.  Although Holland is in his 20s, he believably passes for an awkward teenager who doesn't even know how to drive a car, even though he can pick one up with his bare hands.  It's also refreshing to see a superhero who has little to no idea what he's doing.  He's making stuff up as he goes along.  He goofs and blunders.  A lot.  Yet his heart is always in the right place.  I look forward to more adventures with this iteration of Spidey.

I'll admit, Ned -- Peter's best friend -- started getting on my nerves not too long into the story.  But he is a believable addition to the story, as are all Peter's classmates.  The film is as much a high school story as it is a superhero story, which helps ground it.  It's also a nice change from the world-saving of other Marvel movies.  This is our friendly neighborhood Spider-Man.

As with other Marvel movies -- yes, I acknowledge that this is technically Sony -- there is a good deal of humor in Homecoming.  Much of it flows naturally from the characters, especially Peter and Ned.  I also quite enjoyed Spidey's interactions with "suit lady."  Spidey's suit is a bit over-equipped.  And it's quite humorous.

Going into the film, I was worried about Tony Stark's role in it.  But I liked how they used him.  He sort of serves as a mentor, but not necessarily a very good one.

Which leads me to Uncle Ben.  I get that the filmmakers didn't want to do yet another origin story for Spider-Man.  But to not even mention Uncle Ben even once?  That seemed strange and left the film lacking.  Uncle Ben is a key character in Peter's life and in his learning to be a man/hero.  Without Uncle Ben, it felt more like Peter was only ever trying to prove himself, and not necessarily trying to do the right thing for the sake of the right thing.  Yes, I wanted some version of the "with great power comes great responsibility" line.  It's a lot more emotionally powerful and resonating than Peter being told he doesn't deserve his suit, which is what Tony tells him.

After Tom Holland, the best part of the film is Michael Keaton as Adrian Toomes (aka the Vulture).  He isn't after world-domination.  He's not out for revenge.  He's a businessman and a self-proclaimed scavenger (more properly a thief).  As such, Adrian is a welcome change from the villains we've been encountering in all these superhero movies.  He's is also smart, pragmatic, and ruthless.  He's also doggedly loyal to his family and friends, which keeps him realistic and even makes him a little sympathetic.

I wanted so much to love Spider-Man: Homecoming.  And there is much in the film that I thoroughly enjoyed.  But the plot holes (detailed below) really dampened my appreciation of the film.  There were also a few things I could have done without, such has the half-uttered F-bomb or Ned using "watching porn" as an excuse (he's not, but that's the explanation he gives for why he's alone in a computer classroom).  Despite its flaws, there is much to be hopeful about with this new iteration of the friendly neighborhood Spider-Man.  And I do look forward to his future adventures.

*** Spoiler Section ***

Homecoming makes a big point about establishing that it takes place shortly after the events of Civil War.  And yet the theme of Civil War seems to be completely forgotten in this movie.  At no point is Spider-Man ever held accountable for all the messes he makes.  And he makes a lot of messes during the film.  He's a kid with superpowers after all.  The worst that happens is Tony takes his suit.  That's it.  The government (and Tony) spent an entire movie trying to hold Captain America and the others responsible for their actions in saving the world, yet now there are no repercussions at all.

For instance, an alien bomb goes off in a teenager's backpack inside a national monument.  And there are no repercussions for that?  No inquiry as to where an alien bomb came from or how it got there or why?  If nothing else, where's J. Jonas Jameson shouting about how Spider-Man is a menace?  Because in this film, Spider-Man is a bit of a well-intentioned menace.

Also, how is it that a highly classified, incredibly secure Damage Control storage facility doesn't have a single security camera?  Not one.  Spider-Man is allowed to just hang out in the facility with nobody the wiser.  And then he sneaks out on a truck.  His blue and red outfit aren't exactly camouflage.  Nobody noticed?  Nobody cared?  Or is Tony Stark now paying off everybody to leave his protege alone?

If those were the only plot holes, I could forgive them and move on.  But the one that irked me the most was what happened with the Vulture.

Nope, I didn't see the Vulture as Liz's dad coming.  Not at all.  And that made it perfect and made that scene genuinely tense.  It was terrific.  I was on the edge of my seat watching Peter fidget while Adrian puts all the pieces together.

And then there's the confrontation between Spidey and the Vulture.  It's a brilliant scene.  The Vulture actually uses monologing against our hero before bringing down a building on top of him.  Clearly the Vulture is smart, clever, and ruthless.  Which is why what happens a few scenes later irks me to no end.

Spider-Man has, yet again, thwarted Vulture's best-laid plans (albeit making a big mess in the process).  Spidey knows that Adrian is the Vulture.  The Vulture has already shown on multiple occasions that he has no qualms with killing Spider-Man.  And yet, when he finally has a dazed and disoriented Spider-Man in his clutches, he drops him and turns his attention to a box of arc reactors.  He just leaves Spider-Man to regain his senses and come after him again.  It makes no sense and is completely out of character.

And then Spidey is the one shouting that the Vulture armor is about to explode.  Adrian has worked with alien technology for over eight years.  He should be smart enough to recognize his wings are on fire and that he is in danger of a serious malfunction.  But he doesn't.  Again, it makes no sense and doesn't fit with the character.

It's as if the script writers got to the end of the movie and suddenly realized they'd created a villain that 15-year-old Spider-Man had no chance of defeating.  So they simply dumbed down the villain in that final scene in order to give Spidey a chance.  The movie deserved a better resolution than that.  Spider-Man and the Vulture deserved a better resolution than that.

Lastly, I truly hope that Michelle isn't going to be the MCU's "MJ."  She is not MJ and I simply cannot fathom her and Peter becoming a couple.  I truly hope Kevin Feige was serious when he said calling her MJ was a joke.

Quotable Quotes

• "I'm nothing without this suit!"  "If you're nothing without the suit then you shouldn't have it." -- Peter and Tony
• "Can you summon an army of spiders?"  "No, man!" -- Ned and Peter
• "You gotta get better at this part." -- Aaron Davis, regarding Spidey's interrogation tactics
• "So how long have we been in here?"  "37 minutes."  "What?!"  -- Peter and Karen (aka suit lady)

Cars 3

Year: 2017

Director: Brian Fee

Starring: Owen Wilson, Cristela Alonzo, Armie Hammer, Nathan Fillion, Chris Cooper, Tony Shalhoub, and Bonnie Hunt
Tagline: It's not over until lightning strikes.
Synopsis: Even anthropomorphic race cars get old.

Review

First off, can I say how much I love Pixar shorts?  They are terrific and "Lou" is no exception.  It's cute, clever, funny, and tugs at the heartstrings.  I loved it.

As for the feature film itself ... well, I didn't dislike it.  It's way, way, way better than Cars 2 (which it didn't even acknowledge).  Did we need Cars 3?  Not really.  And I have nothing against well-thought-out sequels.  [I love Finding Dory and can hardly wait for The Incredibles 2.]  But this film seems to be mostly a retread of the original film.  Sometimes that tactic works.  Sometimes it doesn't.  I suppose if nothing else, the merchandising from the Cars franchise helps pay for original stories like Coco, which comes out in the fall.

One thing is undeniable, the visuals in Cars 3 are amazing.  There was one scene where it was such beautiful scenery, I had to remind myself that this is an animated film made on computers.  It looks so good.  Pixar continues to excel.

I was, however, disappointed with the music.  The soundtrack is mediocre, as is the score.  Yes, I have high expectations for Pixar scores thanks to Finding Nemo, The Incredibles, WALL-E, Up, and Inside Out.  If Cars has a main theme, I can't think of it.  The music is just there, like an obscure background character: noticeable, but not memorable.

As for the story, it is serviceable, albeit predictable.  Kudos though for a kids movie being about the difficulties of getting older and losing your edge.  When the story was about Lightning and his relationship with Doc Hudson (aka the Hudson Hornet), that was when it really pulled me in.  When it was about the races themselves, not as much.  I was also disappointed that the major plot point in the first teaser trailer -- Lightning crashing -- was far less dramatic and pivotal to the story/character development than promised.

If you're a fan of the first Cars film (or have kids who are fans of it), there's much to enjoy about this one.  If you are looking for a way to beat the heat on a hot summer day, Cars 3 is an admirable way to spend 90 or so minutes.  It's rated G and is clean throughout.

*** Spoiler Section ***

The climax didn't surprise me.  It is clear from the scene on the beach that Lightning is unwittingly training Cruz, not the other way around.  Thus it is inevitable that it is Cruz, not Lightning, who wins the race against Jackson Storm.  It is a strange rule, though, that allows for the climax.  I guess it does have basis in the real world of racing, but it seems intrinsically unfair to switch cars, allowing a fresh car to go against tired ones.

What did surprise me was Sterling's turnabout regarding Cruz.  Granted, he seems a bit untrustworthy from the start.  But there is nothing in his previous behavior that naturally leads up to him telling Cruz to leave.  Of course he wouldn't want her to race, but he has no compelling reason to send her away so that she can't at least watch.  The confrontation feels forced.

Quotable Quotes

• "I decide when I'm done." -- Lightning
• "The beach ate me." -- Cruz
• "Don't fear failure.  Be afraid of not having the chance.  You have the chance!" -- Sally
• "Tell her all the crabs have gone night-night."  "I -- I can't say that.  You tell her!" -- Lightning and Smokey

Wonder Woman

Year: 2017

Director: Patty Jenkins

Starring: Gal Gadot, Chris Pine, Connie Nielsen, Robin Wright, Danny Huston, and David Thewlis
Tagline: Power. Grace. Wisdom. Wonder.
Synopsis: Diana, Princess of the Amazons, ventures to the outside world to help stop World War I.

Review

Wonder Woman had the unenviable task of having almost the entire weight of the DC extended universe on her shoulders.  She more than proved herself up to the challenge.  Wonder Woman is now one of my favorite superhero movies, DC or Marvel.  This is what a superhero movie should be, primarily because Diana is what a superhero should be.

Diana/Wonder Woman was (easily) the best part of Batman v. Superman.  She was intelligent, enigmatic, and fierce.  Her solo outing and origin story are worthy of the character teased at in that first glimpse.

Gal Gadot is Diana.  Her charisma mixed with an intelligent naivete carry the story.  This is her hero's journey, from a sheltered island paradise to the unimaginable horrors of WWI trenches.  It is also her journey of self-discovery, as she learns just what she is capable of.  And it's a joy to watch.

But what is best about Diana is her inherent goodness.  She has a firm belief that it is her duty to fight for those who cannot fight for themselves.  She and Steve Rogers (aka Captain America) could have some swell conversations about ideals.

Her own Steve -- Steve Trevor -- is also a good man, albeit one who has become jaded by years of brutal war.  He provides a good balance to Diana.  Chris Pine holds his own next to Gadot, which is no small feat.  His character, rather than relegated to sidekick or comic foil, is in many ways shown to be Diana's equal.  Their onscreen chemistry keeps the film rolling along smoothly and humorously.

Wonder Woman is very much a superhero movie and has plenty of action, explosions, and -- of course -- villains to be thwarted.  The climactic battle does become a bit cliched, but nonetheless works within the story.  The best scene may well be when Diana crosses No Man's Land.  I'll leave it at that so as not to spoil anything.  But it is epic.

Also epic is Wonder Woman's theme music.  It was the best part of the Batman v. Superman soundtrack and it is even better here.

I thoroughly enjoyed Wonder Woman.  Was it perfect?  Not entirely.  And there were a few things that kept it in the PG-13 realm that I could have done without.  But it is one of my favorite superhero films, right up there with Captain America: Winter Soldier and The Dark Knight.  Wonder Woman has action and adventure.  But it also has humor and heart.  If you are wondering if you should see it, wonder no more.

*** Spoiler Section ***

There are two main spoilers in the film's climax.  Admittedly, neither came as a surprise to me.  It isn't that they are poorly set up.  The film does a good job handling both.  But the one felt somewhat inevitable and the other I was suspicious about from the moment I looked at the cast list.

That Steve dies is sad.  He's a good guy, which is precisely the point.  He is willing to sacrifice himself for the good of others.  Diana is not the only hero in the film.  And his death is, in some sense, needed to help complete Diana's journey to being a hero among mankind.  She has been disillusioned.  She has seen the worst in men and women, the darkness in their hearts and deeds.  Steve is able to balance that out by showing the best.  He is flawed, but still good and striving for the light.

I was pleased and intrigued that Ares turned out to be Sir Patrick.  It makes him a much more interesting nemesis with much more subtle ambitions and plans.  It was his "peace at any cost" mentality that struck me as being off.

Quotable Quotes

• "I will fight, for those who cannot fight for themselves." -- Diana
• "Have you never met a man before?  What about your father?"  "I had no father.  My mother sculpted me from clay and I was brought to life by Zeus."  "Well that's neat." -- Steve and Diana
• "You lied to them?"  "I'm a spy; it's what I do." -- Diana and Steve
• "It's about what you believe.  And I believe in love.  Only love will truly save the world." -- Diana

Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales

Year: 2017

Director: Joachim Ronning and Espen Sandberg

Starring: Johnny Depp, Geoffrey Rush, Javier Bardem, Brenton Thwaites, Kaya Scodelario, Kevin McNally, and zombie sharks
Synopsis: Captain Jack Sparrow searches for the Trident of Poseidon.

Review

I'm quite fond of the Rotten Tomatoes website, and it is rare that I see a movie given a rotten green splotch.  Yet my curiosity won over and I opted to venture forth once more with Captain Jack Sparrow.

Well, it's better than the last one.

That's not saying much though.  On Stranger Tides had plot holes so big you could sail the Spanish Armada through them.  Dead Men Tell No Tales isn't all bad.  It has aspects I appreciated.  But let's start with the struggles.

One of the chief problems with Dead Men is that it tries to tell too many stories.  Whose story is it?  We are first introduced to Henry Turner, son of Will and Elizabeth.  And though we spend much of the story with him, his narrative line isn't all that interesting.  Jack of course is central to the story, but his antics are -- yet again -- focused solely on staying alive as yet another cursed villain wants him dead.  We are also introduced to Carina, who serendipitously wants to also pursue the film's MacGuffin in order to resolve her daddy issues.

But wait, there's more.  Hector Barbossa is also back with his own personal agenda.  The villain has his own storyline -- including an excellent flashback when Barbossa gets him monologing.  And then there's a British officer who ... um ... is somehow necessary because somebody else needs to be chasing all the other characters.

Henry's and Carina's stories are the most compelling.  But Henry's is largely sidelined and Carina's is frankly far-fetched.  She claims to be a woman of science (for which she is branded a witch [Seriously?]) and yet she is pursuing a mythical object.  She also seems far too accepting of some of the plot twists.  The whole film, Henry and Carina feel like bland imitations of Will and Elizabeth (characters who were exceedingly more likable, interesting, and charismatic).

Going in to Dead Men, or any of the Pirates films, I didn't expect great, logical cinema.  But this one has moments that are simply ludicrous (I'm looking at you, St. Martin bank).  And there is much that is simply pointless, adding nothing to the story and offering only cheap "laughs."  Did we need Sir Paul McCartney as a pirate?  No.  Did we need that bizarre wedding?  No.  Where did that even come from?

Despite the action, the first two thirds of the film drag.  But then, unexpectedly, things pick up for the climax.  Once we have all our protagonists on the same (familiar) ship, the story holds together better and kept my attention.  Finding the Trident of Poseidon and fighting the ensuing final battle -- while not without problems -- were entertaining enough and well-paced enough to temporarily make me forget all the slog we went through to get there.  And I'll admit, the finale provides some nice closure to the franchise.

Other than the climax, Dead Men does a few other things right.

Captain Salazar (played by Javier Bardem) is a worthy addition to the franchise's villains.  He is intelligent and intimidating.  And his crew are interesting as well, visually that is.  But the most impressive thing is the Silent Mary, their ship.  Watching the ship rise up and strike down opposing ships ... yup ... that's cool.

I was, however, disappointed that Captain Salazar didn't seem to live up to the code he supposedly espoused, at least while alive.  He makes a point to tell Barbossa that he didn't kill men, he killed pirates.  Yet he and his crew have no qualm killing the officers and crew of two British ships.  Granted, the Spanish and the British weren't exactly on historic good terms, but it does undermine Salazar's supposed sense of duty and honor without explanation.

And although ridiculous, I'll admit that the zombie sharks are also pretty cool.  Why they have rotting shark carcasses on the ghost ship I have no idea.  But just add water and boom!  Zombie sharks to chase down Jack and Henry.

The music is also still good.

So, is Dead Men worth the voyage?  That depends on how much you enjoy the franchise.  If you still think Jack Sparrow is the greatest pirate ever, by all means go enjoy his rum-induced antics.  Stay through the credits.  There is a bonus scene which opens the door for yet more adventures.

*** Spoiler Section ***

OK, how many of these films has Hector Barbossa been in?  This makes four out of five if memory serves.  And at no point has there been an inkling that he has any interest in stars, the Trident of Poseidon, or the daughter he left at an orphanage.  All of that I can accept.  Pirate.  But then he meets Carina and suddenly she is both his heart's desire (per the compass) and his "treasure"?  And Carina accepts it, just like that?  That's a bit harder to swallow.

I've never been all that fond of Jack Sparrow.  In the original film, I liked Will Turner the best.  So the ending of At World's End irked me, to say the least.  It didn't help that when I saw the movie the person I was with wanted to leave immediately, so I missed the semi-redemptive post-credits scene.  Flash forward ten years and I did finally get the closure I wanted for Will and Elizabeth.

The film ends and everything is all neatly tied up.  Will is free from the curse and with his beloved Elizabeth.  Henry has Carina.  Jack has the Black Pearl.  Jack and the franchise can sail off into the horizon.  Roll credits ... and cue post-credits scene that brings yet another character back from the dead and opens the door for another sequel.  <face palms> 

Quotable Quotes

• "Find Jack Sparrow for me and relay a message, from Captain Salazar.  Tell him: 'Death will come straight for him.'  Will you say that to him, please?  I'd tell him myself, but dead men tell no tales." -- Captain Salazar to Henry
• "Guillotine?  Sounds French.  I love the French." -- Jack Sparrow
• "I once knew a Spaniard named ... something in Spanish." -- Jack Sparrow

ISFS

Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2

Year: 2017

Director: James Gunn

Starring: Chris Pratt, Zoe Saldana, Dave Bautista, Bradley Cooper, Michael Rooker, Vin Diesel, Kurt Russell, and Karen Gillan
Tagline: You only get one chance to save the galaxy twice.
Synopsis: The further adventures of the misfit Guardians of the Galaxy.

Review

When the first Guardians of the Galaxy came out in 2014, it was unexpectedly different from everything else in the Marvel Cinematic Universe.  It was weird and zany and a lot of fun.  How does Vol. 2 fare?  It's still weird, still zany, and mostly fun.  But it can't quite recapture the freshness of the original.  Considering how much I enjoyed the first one, this one left me disappointed.

The film's opening sequence is, however, stellar.  As the Guardians do battle with a multi-tentacled space monster in the background, Baby Groot obliviously dances to ELO's "Mr. Blue Sky" in the foreground.  And it is terrific.  The whole sequence reintroduces us to the characters and why we want to root for them.  The opening set me up for a better movie than I got.

As with its predecessor, Vol. 2 uses a popular mix of songs from the 70s and 80s.  And the music is part of the story, part of who Peter Quill is.  So even though I don't necessarily like all the songs they include, I appreciate how they work within, and add to, the story.  I will likely never be able to hear "Brandy" by the Looking Glass without thinking of this film.

Another thing I appreciate in the film is the theme of family.  We see deeper into each of the Guardians and also into Yondu and Nebula.  Every character is broken in some way or another.  That's why they come together so well.  And there is a lot of bonding in this film and discussion of what it means to be a family.  Maybe too much, as certain characters seem to shift uncharacteristically far based on how they were portrayed previously.

While the film does a good job with characterization, the plot feels a bit weak.  It wasn't as compelling as the previous story.  It didn't help that the villains/antagonists all seem petty and weak in terms of their motivations.  The main villain started out interesting but ended up feeling bland.

My biggest qualm with the film was its adult content.  The first film certainly pushed the envelope for what is acceptable in a Marvel Studios film.  This one nudges it even more.  There was more crude humor.  And while nothing is explicitly stated or shown, it's very apparent that the Ravagers visit a robot brothel.  The film is definitely not for kids, so it is irksome that it is has toy lines very much marketed toward kids.

While I don't think it lives up to the first film, Vol. 2 is still, overall, a fun trip to the movies.  But be advised before you bring the kids.  And if you didn't like the craziness of the first one, Vol. 2 isn't going to win you over either.  Oh, and there are a whopping five mid-credits and post-credit scenes.

*** Spoiler Section ***

Why do Ravagers have such cool funerals?  They are basically space pirates, yet they have all these neat traditions for a funeral.  It was fun to watch, but felt incongruous with their portrayal.

Quotable Quotes

• "You look like Mary Poppins."  "Is he cool?" [pauses] "Yeah, he's cool." -- Peter and Yondu
• "Does anybody have any tape out there?  I wanna put some tape over the 'death' button." "Nobody has any tape!" -- Rocket and Peter
• "All you do is yell at each other.  You're not friends."  "No ... we are family." -- Nebula and Drax
• "No raccoon or tree creatures were harmed during the making of this movie.  However the same cannot be said for the handlers of the raccoon and tree creatures." -- End credits

ISFS

Born in China

Year: 2017

Director: Chuan Lu

Starring: John Krasinski (narrator) and a lot of fuzzy animals
Synopsis: Follow the stories of pandas, snow leopards, snub-nosed monkeys, and chiru (Tibetan antelope).

Review

I've reviewed quite a few movies on this blog, but this is my first documentary here.  Born in China is a Disneynature film that came out on Earth Day.  It stars giant pandas and snow leopards and showcases the beauty of China.  What's not to love about that?

The film follows four different animal families over the course of a year.  To see the magnificent snow leopards in their natural habitat is, for me, worth the cost of admission alone.  And the panda mommy and baby are cute and cuddly too.  There are also a few shots of a red panda, which might be one of my favorite animals.  And the monkeys are cute enough as well.  Antelope/chiru aren't really my thing, but their story was interesting nonetheless.

If you're expecting a documentary like Planet Earth, don't.  Visually I'd say it is of the same caliber.  But the narration -- provided by John Krasinski -- is definitely geared toward kids.  It's informative, but got a bit twee at times.  And there was quite a bit of animal personification going on.  Overall though, the narration does a good job balancing information with humor.

The film has an overarching theme of families and the importance of them.  I did appreciate that aspect.  And while the similarities with human families were certainly stressed, the filmmakers also acknowledge that animal families are quite different.  Even the four different animal families in the film are different.  You've got the chiru herd, a clan of monkeys, and single mothers with the snow leopards and pandas.

Although this is a G-rated Disney film, I was impressed that it didn't shy away from the realities of the animal kingdom and the circle of life.  It did so in a tasteful manner that's as kid-friendly as you can probably get.  But the fact remains, one animal's survival depends on another animal's demise.  And not every animal survives the film.

If you love animals and gorgeous scenery, I'd say Born in China is worth a gander.  Or it's something to take the kids to if you need to get out of the house.  Did I mention cute pandas and gorgeous snow leopards?

Quotable Quotes

• "She considers this marmot ... no she doesn't." -- Narrator about the snow leopard's dinner plans
• "The herd is many, but the herd is one." -- Narrator

ISFS