I Feel Pretty [2018]

MPAA (PG-13)  CNS/USCCB (A-III)  RogerEbert.com (2 1/2 Stars)  AVClub (C-)  Fr. Dennis (3 1/4 Stars)

IMDb listing
CNS/USCCB (K. Jensen) review
Los Angeles Times (J. Chang) review
RogerEbert.com (C. Lemire) review
AVClub (I. Vishnevetsky) review


I Feel Pretty [2018] (cowritten and codirected by Abby Kohn and Marc Silverstein) is a fun / positive comedy of the Melissa McCarthy, yes, Amy Schumer vein (the latter starring in this film as its "we've all been there" average yet again "that's what we all are" heroine).  And judging audience, composed mostly of smiling and at times _beaming_ 20-30-something women, where I saw the film, it succeeds, often in spades ;-).

Amy Schumer plays Renee a 20 something Queens / Brooklyn New Yorker who eats, speaks, and dreams like a 20-something Queens / Brooklyn New Yorker -- she could _easily_ (!) be a parishioner at any place where I've ever served -- and yet, of course, dreams of being (and feels somewhat cheated that she isn't) the feather-light, yet still somehow curvy, supermodel who she sees displayed on the packaging of the cosmetics that she buys and the "fashion" / "women's magazines" that she reads.

Her wannabe dreaming has her working for "Lily LeClair" (a fictionalized Coco Chanel) cosmetics / mostly women's fashion company.  But since she doesn't necessarily fit the corporate image, instead of working at the company's 5th Avenue HQ, she along with another quite frumpy looking guy (played by Adrian Martinez) works "IT" for the company out of a random second story apartment somewhere in nearby Chinatown ;-). 

Running some papers over to HQ "because the servers were down," she discovers that the company is looking for a new receptionist -- arguably "the face" of the company.  And though as an IT person she probably gets 2-3-4x the salary that a receptionist would, it just gets in her head that _this_ is the job that she'd really want, 'cept ... she looks ... like a regular person, as opposed to a supermodel.

Well ... inspired through watching the rerun of the delightful Tom Hanks comedy, Big [1988], she runs out, in the midst of "a dark and stormy night" and throws a coin into a nearby fountain asking to become "pretty" and ... after getting a knock on the head in the midst of a simultaneously goofy / horrific, cornball-ish accident (that could only happen to "a regular person" like you / me) she wakes up and ...the rest of the story follows ... ;-)

It's not much of a spoiler to tell the audience that, of course, Renee doesn't _become_ "pretty" SHE JUST THINKS SHE HAS ... ;-) -- this is already shown in the film's trailers.  But the film then challenges Viewers to ask themselves  what "beauty" actually is, and how much of it really is just a state of mind.  And the story to its credit also shows a bit of the "ugliness" of "beauty" ... Renee begins to feel entitled to treat some of her past friends (played by Aidy Bryant and Busy Philipps) with disdain. 

Anyway, the film reminds us that "beauty" in large part, and on _a surprising number of levels_, truly comes "from within."  Great / fun story!

A final note to parents, I do believe that the PG-13 rating is ENTIRELY APPROPRIATE to the film.  There is no bad language and though much of its thematics is about being "body beautiful" the film is remarkably discrete in what it shows: while much is implied, often with humor, _nothing_ is actually shown.  It's a film that a 13 year old could see, not be tempted and ... understand.  Again, excellent job!

<< NOTE - Do you like what you've been reading here?  If you do then consider giving a small donation to this Blog (sugg. $6 _non-recurring_) _every so often_ to continue/further its operation.  To donate just CLICK HERE.  Thank you! :-) >>

A Quiet Place [2018]

MPAA (PG-13)  CNS/USCCB (A-III)  RogerEbert.com (3 1/2 Stars)  AVClub (B+)  Fr. Dennis (0 Stars)

IMDb listing
CNS/USCCB (K. Jensen) review
Los Angeles Times (J.Chung) review
RogerEbert.com (B. Tallerico) review
AVClub (A.A. Dowd) review


A Quiet Place [2018] (directed by John Krasinski, story by Bryan Woods and Scott Beck, screenplay by Bryan Woods, Scott Beck and John Krasinski) is supposedly some sort of a triumph and does certainly keep one's attention ... so long as one does not think about it too much ;-/

The story takes place in the near future, a number of years after an alien invasion and long after said aliens have effectively "won" -- what's left of humanity is scattered and deathly terrified of said aliens.  This is even though the aliens look simply like GIANT unarmed ('cept for their claws / teeth) ANTS ... as "technologically fearsome" as say ... a grizzly bear with an exoskeleton and six legs. :-)

Further, these ant-like aliens, who incidentally are REALLY, REALLY UGLY, are also apparently BLIND, though they can HEAR really really well, an evolutionary trait that would be almost certainly _useless_ to them IN THE VAST _EMPTINESS_ OF INTERSTELLAR SPACE (hearing requires decoding signals in _pressure waves_) or for that matter ON ANY PLANET OTHER THAN THEIR OWN (almost every foreign planet's atmosphere would be toxic to them, as it would be toxic to us).

So one's left wondering how the heck these BLIND giant ant-like creatures, who incidentally appear to be incapable of (or uninterested in) communicating with anyone else 'cept (perhaps) between themselves, could nevertheless master _interstellar space travel_ and defeat our ... doors ;-), to say nothing of electrified fences, to say even less of machine guns, to say even less than that of "insecticides" (chemical weapons) or finally almost nothing at all of nuclear weapons.

So what the heck is going on here?  We in the audience are invited to FEAR GIANT, UGLY, UTTERLY UNREASONABLE "ALIENS" who simply come to OUR WORLD to DESTROY IT for no apparent reason other than that they can.

Soo ... Build the Wall, build the Wall!

-- zero stars.

<< NOTE - Do you like what you've been reading here?  If you do then consider giving a small donation to this Blog (sugg. $6 _non-recurring_) _every so often_ to continue/further its operation.  To donate just CLICK HERE.  Thank you! :-) >>

Isle of Dogs [2018]

MPAA (PG-13)  CNS/USCCB ()  RogerEbert.com (1 1/2 Stars)  AVClub (A-)  Fr. Dennis (1 Star)

IMDb listing
CNS/USCCB () review
Los Angeles Times (W. Anderson) review
RogerEbert.com (Odie Henderson) review
AVClub (A.A. Dowd) review


Isle of Dogs [2018] (directed and screenplay and story cowritten by Wes Anderson along with Roman Coppola, Jason Schwartzman and Kunichi Nomura) is a film that's not going to be for everybody.  If one's already seen (and liked) some of Wes Anderson's films from The Royal Tanenbaums [2001] through to the Grand Budapest Hotel [2014], then one will probably enjoy this movie.

However, the story's approach to prejudice / bigotry, the parable (or fable)'s theme, will disconcert a fair amount of Wes Anderson's otherwise fans: The story presumably condemns said random (and cruel) prejudice / bigotry (here against "dogs") BUT ... if I were part of a persecuted or otherwise historically looked-down-upon group in society, I'm _pretty sure_ I wouldn't be comfortable with being cast as "a dog" in the story no matter what PETA may insist or say.

So there it is: The story, set in contemporary Japan, is about a random corner of the island nation, in Megasaki Prefecture (Japan is divided up politically into several dozen such Prefectures), in which two shogun families have been battling for dominance for centuries.  One of these, the Kobayashi family, has harbored an again centuries-long irrational hatred of dogs (and an amusing, equally irrational fawning love of ... cats ;-).

By ancient tradition, recalled even to this day in haikus and traditional operas and plays, Megasaki Province's dogs were saved as a result of a "Boy Samurai" who rose-up to champion the dogs' "Here's a good dog, you're such a good dog" cause and put the evil Kobayashi clan in its place.

BUT ... after _centuries_ of plotting quietly -- behind cute, fuzzy cat draped heraldic banners -- the Kobayashi clan has returned, with the election of one of its own as Mayor (voiced by Konichi Nomura).  Near the beginning of the film, the Mayor gives a rousing Fascist-like speech vowing to rid the Prefecture of its "bad dog" menace, noting that city's dogs were known to be carriers of a random if menacingly sounding illness called "Dog flu" an illness that NEVER (yet?) jumped the species barrier to humans BUT ... if it did, well, it COULD BE ... bad.

At the end of his speech, Mayor Kobayashi, eyes rolling, notes that "thanks to the democratic imposed-upon-us Constitution" he has to give "the other side" a chance to speak, and so he calls a quiet/introverted, out-of-his-element "scientist" to the podium, one who's been working on "a cure" for the as yet never to have actually infected anybody "dog flu" to speak on the dogs' defense.  The poor scientist, Prof. Watanabe (voiced by Akria Ito) in a quivering voice simply notes that: "Not all dogs are BAD dogs, some are GOOD DOGs" and ... is pelted with eggs, tomatoes and ... rocks, by the mayor's assembled crowd.  Hmmm... what does that seem like?

So ... "The People" "by popular acclaim" give the Mayor power to deport / dump all of the Prefecture's dogs to a distant island, where its trash was taken, and the Mayor ... a picture or banner of _a cute fuzzy cat_ present as a backdrop at much every location where he appears ... has _his scientists_ secretly work on a means of simply _killing_ (exterminating) the city's remaining dogs exiled to that distant trash heap.  Hmmm ... again, what does that seem like?

Much ensues ... and quite obviously (not much of a spoiler alert) the dogs do "get their day."

Okay, I get what the story's trying to say (I think) BUT ... if I were either Jewish, Mexican or even Muslim (is Trash Island, basically a version of Guantanamo in addition to being the Warsaw Ghetto / Auschwitz?) I'm not sure I'd exactly want to applaud a movie that would compare me to a dog, perhaps "a cute, yes, what a good dog" but a dog NEEDING A MASTER nonetheless...

Sigh ...

<< NOTE - Do you like what you've been reading here?  If you do then consider giving a small donation to this Blog (sugg. $6 _non-recurring_) _every so often_ to continue/further its operation.  To donate just CLICK HERE.  Thank you! :-) >>

Acrimony [2018]

MPAA (R)  CNS/USCCB (L)  RogerEbert.com (1 1/2 Stars)  AVClub (C-)  Fr. Dennis (3 1/2 Stars)

IMDb listing
CNS/USCCB (J. Mulderig) review
Los Angeles Times (K. Walsh) review
RogerEbert.com (M. Castillo) review
AVClub (K. Rife) review


Acrimony [2018] (written and directed by Tyler Perry) is a well spun marital drama, if _somewhat_ exaggerated at times, that is worthy of married couples in their 20s, 30s, 40s, 50s to view.  It is definitely not for kids, but for those old enough to become involved in a serious relationship (and thus old enough to begin appreciating the consequences of getting involved in a serious relationship) this would not be bad viewing.

The film begins in court with Melinda (played wonderfully by Taraji P. Hensen) being ordered by the court to respect the restraining order filed by her former husband Robert (played also quite well / realistically by Lyriq Bent) against her and is ordered to attend some anger management classes.  From her expression, it's obvious that Melinda did not feel that the judge was being right with her.

Okay, she, eyes rolling, expression dripping with resentment comes to her first appointment for her anger management counseling, and expresses her feeling that none of this is just, and ... begins telling her story ... and ...

... well, and this is what's so good about Tyler Perry's story here, one starts to understand her, ONE SEES HER POINT.

... BUT ... ;-) ... and this then is what _really makes_ Perry's story here so interesting to me, as the story progresses, after she's had her say at her counselor's office, and the rest of the story develops, it becomes clear that she's only _partly_ right.  Yes, she has her story.  And yes, one understands her.  But in the second half of the story, one starts to see that the people that she's angry at, have THEIR TRUTHS / STORIES too.

So I found this to be a well written, well acted "marriage gone awry" story in which EVERYBODY in the story is at least PARTLY RIGHT (and hence, also, PARTLY WRONG).

Excellent job! 


<< NOTE - Do you like what you've been reading here?  If you do then consider giving a small donation to this Blog (sugg. $6 _non-recurring_) _every so often_ to continue/further its operation.  To donate just CLICK HERE.  Thank you! :-) >>