Smith's Verdict

Smith’s Verdict: ***1/2

Reviewed by Tanner Smith

It’s the movie that nobody expected to like and yet totally surprised them! (And seeing as how it was the fifth highest-grossing film of 2017, I’m assuming audiences originally went to see it to hate on it?…And then they got so surprised they told their friends to see it too?) “Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle” is a quasi-sequel to the 1995 film “Jumanji,” based on the children’s book by Chris Van Allsburg. In the book and the ’95 movie (starring the late Robin Williams), a mystical board game unleashed an array of ruthless, unearthly jungle animals onto a small town to wreak havoc.

The players of the game had to continue until they finished so that all could return to normal, and in the meantime, they had to run from a stampede of rhinos & elephants and fend off gigantic mosquitoes & spiders, a man-eating flower pod, and even horrific CGI monkeys, among others. The fun of the movie was discovering what could appear next for the characters to defend themselves against (and having a likable Robin Williams guide the audience through the madness added onto the fun).

And now, we have “Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle,” in which the evil game is given an upgrade. Not only does it transform from board to video, but it also sucks players into the game for them to play in the otherworldly jungle. It also might be a little tamer, considering the scarier creatures of the ’95 movie are nowhere to be found here. (But there’s still a ruthless villain and some vicious hippos, rhinos, and other jungle animals to fight off.) That’s because this is more of a lighthearted adventure film whereas the first movie was more like a horror film disguised as a family-adventure. It’s fun, funny, playful, and doesn’t take itself too seriously.

“Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle,” from director Jake Kasdan, has more in common with “Honey, I Shrunk the Kids” than “Jumanji” (funnily enough, both “Honey” and “Jumanji” shared the same director, Joe Johnston), with four kids braving a treacherous jungle in order to find their way back home and learning something about themselves in the process. In this case, our trekking young heroes are nerdy Spencer, gigantic jock Fridge, stuck-up popular girl Bethany, and shy Martha. During a day of detention together, they come across the Jumanji game console and decide to play it. Big mistake…

Suddenly, they’re transported into the game and not played by young actors Alex Wolff, Ser’Darius Blain, Madison Iseman, and Morgan Turner anymore. Instead, they’re switched into the bodies of their video-game avatars—Spencer is now dashing, strong Dwayne Johnson; tall Fridge is now short Kevin Hart; Martha is now tall, striking Lara Croft-like Karen Gillan (complete with tiny top & shorts not fit for a jungle trek); and Bethany is now…Jack Black (uh-oh!). This is where the movie really shines, as these popular actors poke fun at their images. It’s a lot of fun watching Johnson play a scrawny teen trapped in a giant muscular body and taking note of his physical appearance, and it’s especially fun watching Jack Black play a self-absorbed mean-girl trapped in the body of “an overweight middle-aged man” to her absolute horror. The gimmick is they get to play opposite their usual personalities, and it doesn’t wear out its welcome.

Our heroes have to go along the game’s journey through a world they didn’t make, while adjusting to new sets of skills and fending off the monstrous jungle obstacles, in order to finish the game and return home. Another fun element of the film is the video-game logic that they often come across, such as non-player characters that repeat programmed responses, cut-scenes that reveal backstory, and ominous music that lets them know trouble is afoot (in this case, it’s the sinister drumming sounds that Jumanji is famous for).

Something I didn’t quite understand, though, is why we often cut back to the game’s villain, Van Pelt (Bobby Cannavale), in scenes that could have easily been treated like cut-scenes. Wouldn’t it have been more interesting if our heroes didn’t know what to do next and then they found themselves observing another cut-scene in which Van Pelt unintentionally reveals an answer to a clue, and then they realize “Oh yeah we should try that”? Cannavale is wasted in the role anyway, without much juicy material to handle, but it would’ve helped fix what I saw as an annoying plot hole.

Before the film’s release, people were worried that this movie would disrespect the memory of Robin Williams by “rebooting” the film. (Those same people also forget that the original movie was based on another source material, so another adaptation isn’t completely hard to understand.) Thankfully, they were relaxed when they realized it wasn’t so much a “reboot” as a “sequel,” which becomes clear as the main characters come across the old dwelling place of the Robin Williams character. The new inhabitant (played by Nick Jonas) states, “It’s his place; I’m just living in it.” It’s the little things that fix bigger things.

Overall, “Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle” is a lot of fun. And much of the fun comes from watching these four actors play these roles with the greatest of ease. Dwayne Johnson is at his least Dwayne Johnson-est, Kevin Hart has his share of great Kevin Hart freakout moments (such as when he exclaims he doesn’t have the “top two feet of [his] body,” Karen Gillan gets to play kick-ass female action hero perfectly (and also partakes in a very funny scene in which she tries “flirting”), and Jack Black, in a role that easily could’ve terribly wrong, is hilarious and even surprisingly brilliant in a gender-swapping role. The movie is two hours long, but I could easily watch these four for another two hours. Guess that’s all the more reason to see the movie again.

Smith’s Verdict: ***1/2

Reviewed by Tanner Smith

Before I review the latest movie about Spider-Man, I want to talk about a certain side element to it that really surprised and impressed me: Iron Man.

As you know, “Spider-Man: Homecoming” is part of the Marvel Cinematic Universe and a sequel to “Captain America: Civil War.” (Though, that was a sequel to “Captain America: The Winter Soldier”…which was a sequel to—you know what, forget it, most of you know the MCU’s continuity by now; I only meant “Civil War” was the introduction to Spider-Man.) If you recall, in that movie, Tony Stark aka Iron Man (Robert Downey Jr.) recruited a high-school boy, Peter Parker (Tom Holland), to assist in an emergency Avengers situation because the kid is secretly Spider-Man, a masked vigilante that is super-strong and has spider-like reflexes. In “Spider-Man: Homecoming,” Peter is excited for possible new opportunities to prove himself as an up-and-coming Avenger. But being a kid with huge ambitions, which only grow the longer he waits for a call back into action with the Avengers, can lead to him going in over his head on an ego trip. So who has to be his mentor and set him straight?

That’s right—Tony Stark. Why am I impressed by this? Because between “Iron Man” and “Civil War,” Stark has proved himself to be irresponsible, egotistical, unlikable, and even straight-up dumb in his decisions (telling a terrorist where he lives with no back-up plan, creating a device that could doom humanity while thinking it could save it, etc.). In “Civil War,” he felt the weight of what his deeds led to and wanted to assume responsibility for them. And he still makes mistakes and doesn’t always think straight, but you can tell he’s trying to be better—after all, the reason he became Iron Man in the first place was to do good! And now that this kid is reminding him of himself, he has an opportunity to teach him to be better. He even warns Peter at one crucial point, “Don’t do anything I would do.” This is a great development for Iron Man; one I’ve been waiting a long time for.

Oh right, I have a Spider-Man movie to review, don’t I? Don’t misunderstand; the Iron Man element is not the biggest thing to take away from it. It’s just a welcome addition to the MCU, a neat continuation of a sideplot in “Civil War,” and all-around awesome for a would-be Avenger getting advice from Iron Man! (Among Iron Man’s advice to Spider-Man, yet again bringing down Peter’s expectations to be an Avenger: “Couldn’t you just be a friendly, neighborhood Spider-Man?” Ouch.)

Now let’s talk about “Spider-Man: Homecoming.” As I said, in “Civil War,” 16-year-old Peter Parker was discovered by Tony Stark and brought on board as Spider-Man to assist in a fight between squabbling Avengers. (And this is recapped in a wonderful video-diary montage, with footage recorded by Peter, chronicling what we didn’t see leading up to the fight, his point of view of the fight, and what happened after the fight. I’m not gonna lie—if I was in that situation, I would document it too.) Since then, he can’t help but wonder when will be the next time he’ll get a call to fly around with Iron Man and hang out with Captain America and so on. Time goes on, and he’s stuck just performing good deeds around his neighborhood. But how much can he do and how long can he wait before he’s called to leave the city and save the universe? Well, he can try to balance out his ambitions and his classwork for a start, which is even harder than it sounds.

We get as much of Peter Parker’s high-school comedy/drama that we do of Spider-Man’s neighborhood crusades. So while Spidey is thwarting criminal deeds downtown and uncovering a sinister plot to use alien technology (left over from fragments of the infamous battle in “The Avengers”), Peter is preparing for the Academic Decathlon, letting his best friend Ned (Jacob Batalon) in on his secret, and working up the guts to ask his crush Liz (Laura Harrier) out to the Homecoming Dance. It sounds like a lot to juggle for a mainstream superhero film, but director Jon Watts (who also made the terrific “Cop Car”) and his team of screenwriters manage to intertwine the storylines well enough that we can believe Peter’s struggles in trying to maintain both identities as high-schooler Peter Parker and “your friendly neighborhood Spider-Man.”

And it’s also funny too. Peter and Ned have great chemistry and are a goofy duo to laugh at and with. Spider-Man has winning quips due to Peter’s chippy personality. And there’s also humor in how Spider-Man is in over his head—at one point, he catches a guy trying to break into his own car (oops).

“Spider-Man: Homecoming” also deserves credit for giving us a compelling, complicated, NOT-forgettable antagonist (thank God, I thought Loki was the best the MCU could offer). This is The Vulture (Michael Keaton), a criminal mastermind with a bone to pick with the government after his working-class duties were taken over, leading to him wanting to exact revenge. And thanks to leftover bits of alien tech (and some little gizmos from Avengers Headquarters as well), he’s able to create some deadly weapons and even a suit that allows him to fly, hence the name The Vulture. Spider-Man catches wind of some of these strange devices and meets The Vulture face-to-face, leading to him going on a desperate raid that’s more of a job for The Avengers to handle. It’s actually more complicated than what I just described, but to say any more would be spoiling certain details. But Michael Keaton is great in the role, charming and sinister when the occasion calls for either.

Overall, “Spider-Man: Homecoming” is more of a coming-of-age story, as it starts with Spider-Boy wanting to become Spider-Man. He may call himself Spider-Man already, but he’s still a kid with much growing up to do; something Iron Man tries to teach him. He has his abilities, but he also has impatience, doubt, awkwardness, and overwhelming desire, all of which he has to overcome in order to be the man he’s meant to be. This is something that I think is handled better in this version of “Spider-Man” than the other cinematic versions of the superhero. And Tom Holland does an excellent job at portraying the character going through all these changes—I enjoyed his likable performance in “Civil War,” and here, he’s even better.

Sony is back to teaming up with Marvel to gain co-possession of the Spider-Man character, and that makes me very nervous because of how quickly they’ve given up after major blunders such as “Spider-Man 3” and “The Amazing Spider-Man 2.” (I hope they have enough sense not to quit and reboot the film franchise yet again.) But “Spider-Man: Homecoming” is a very enjoyable movie. It works as a continuation of the MCU, it works as a Spider-Man movie, and overall, it works as a coming-of-age film, with just the right man to mentor the boy.

Smith’s Verdict: ***1/2

Reviewed by Tanner Smith

In my review of Noah Baumbach’s “Margot at the Wedding,” I praised the film but I concluded by saying “I’m just glad I’m not Margot’s son.” I can say something similar about the Meyerowitzes in this review of Baumbach’s latest film “The Meyerowitz Stories,” subtitled “New and Selected”—something like, “I’m just glad these guys aren’t my problem.”

But my review of “The Meyerowitz Stories” is still positive. I don’t know how Baumbach is able to find the craft out of creating stories with such shallow, neurotic, sometimes despicable people, such as with “The Squid and the Whale,” “Greenberg,” and of course “Margot at the Wedding,” but I was getting used to his more simple, (mostly) gentler approaches with “Frances Ha,” “While We’re Young,” and “Mistress America.” But here he is back to form with the Netflix comedy-drama “The Meyerowitz Stories,” a film that takes the “fun” out of “dysfunctional family.”

Showing in a chronological series of vignettes featuring the same set of characters (hence, the titular “stories”), we have the Meyerowitzes, a family now in instability (actually, I think they’ve always been in instability). Retired-sculptor-turned-art-professor Harold Meyerowitz (Dustin Hoffman) and his fourth wife Maureen (Emma Thompson) want to sell the old New York apartment and move upstate. This is news to Harold’s oldest son Danny (Adam Sandler), who had hoped to crash at the apartment for a while after his 18-year-old daughter Eliza (Grace Van Patten) goes off to college. He’s recently divorced and his stay-at-home-dad status is changing, and to add more salt in the wound that can only be described as “underachieving dissatisfaction,” he’s a failed musician too. Danny and his clinically-depressed sister Jean (Elizabeth Marvel), who is even more pathetic than Danny in ways that are at the same time explained and unexplained as the film continues, were often in the shadow of their half-brother Matthew (Ben Stiller), Harold’s son from his second marriage. Matthew is the one with all the accomplishments, having gone into finance in LA rather than art in NY. That was probably a good move, because Harold and Danny often complain about their failures in art. Harold particularly, when he’s not boasting about Matthew’s successes, is not afraid to let everyone know about his own self-pity, going on about how he felt his sculptures deserved a wider audience.

Needless to say, these people need some serious help. Harold is an obsessive boor who lets out his arrogance on his family, Danny is pathetically seeking his affection, Matthew seems fine but has his own demons as well, and Jean, well…no comment. We gradually find out more about these people with each passing vignette (all of which are labeled by the character we switch focus to), and it’s mostly done with dialogue. And this is where Baumbach’s skill really shines: as an expert wordsmith who creates biting dialogue out of every uncomfortable situation he can find for his unstable characters. Sometimes it’s sharp and funny, sometimes it’s dark and deep, and mostly, it’s both, showing us there’s more beneath the surface. And he’s also effective in showing the dynamics of this family, particularly in the envy one member feels for another (from another generation) and how the oldest son is slowly but surely becoming like his father, whether he likes it or shouldn’t like it.

By the end of the film, we don’t know where these people are going, but we hope they’re going somewhere far better (and healthier) than they’ve been before.

But “The Meyerowitz Stories” isn’t so serious that you can’t get a laugh, because sometimes, the film is very funny. Dialogue aside, Baumbach finds ways to bitingly satirize both the modern-art and film-school scenes, with Harold’s lackluster art and Eliza’s amateur film projects that are so outrageous that I won’t even explain them in this review; they’re really funny.

Nearly every review is surprised by Adam Sandler’s excellent dramatic turn as Danny in this film, and while they’re not wrong, I never doubted Sandler’s skilled work as an actor…especially since he’s been able to show that in more than a few movies in between his Happy Madison productions. But whatever—Sandler’s great here, doing what he does best as an actor. Dustin Hoffman isn’t afraid to show just how insufferable Harold can be, as well as how feared and respected he can be. Ben Stiller, in his third Baumbach film, is solid as usual. Elizabeth Marvel is impressively messy. And young actress Grace Van Patten brings a new spark and much-needed energy to the proceedings.

I can enjoy “Margot at the Wedding” while thanking God that I don’t have to deal with miserable, excruciating Margot in real life, because the misery and humor made for tender insights and snappy comedy. And I can say the same thing about “The Meyerowitz Stories” and the Meyerowitzes. Baumbach’s material can be a little alienating in some of his films (which is probably why I’ve preferred his Greta Gerwig collaborations a little more), but I can’t deny the power he can deliver when treading through uncomfortable waters. “The Meyerowitz Stories” is effective without having us hate the characters too much.

Smith’s Verdict: ***1/2

Reviewed by Tanner Smith

When I saw “Wonder,” a film featuring a boy with a facial deformity, it was in a theater packed with parents and children. Seated in the row behind me were a mother and her children, who were probably around 7 or 8 years of age. The film had barely started when I overheard the children whisper loudly and repeatedly to their mother, “I don’t want to see what he looks like!” They were referring to the boy with the facial deformity whose face hadn’t been revealed yet. (I’m guessing they didn’t see any promos for the film…?)

Those kids are the exact group of children that need to see “Wonder.”

Stephen Chbosky’s “Wonder,” based on the novel of the same name by R.J. Palacio, does feature a troubled but brave 10-year-old boy with a genetic facial deformity as he attempts to tough it out in public school after being homeschooled for so many years. And some readers have probably stopped right there, because they think they know what kind of film this is—a manipulative, cloying melodrama that uses a physical handicap for exploitation and forced sentiment. But they’d be wrong, because not only is “Wonder” full of familiar elements now done fresh and original, but it also does something else very important that elevates it from the afterschool special that it could’ve been: it shows all that the boy affects around him. That makes the overall lesson we’re supposed to take from the film (that nobody is “ordinary”) all the more stronger. Everyone has their own issues, no matter what their physical differences.

August “Auggie” Pullman (Jacob Tremblay) has undergone 17 operations in his 10 years of life, and his face still alarms everyone around him. His mother (Julia Roberts) decides it’s finally time for him to attend public school, while his father (Owen Wilson) isn’t so sure. They both love their son and want what’s best for him—he’s afraid the other kids will mock or be feared by him; she feels he has to adjust to the outside world more regularly; they’re both understandable in their reasoning. Nonetheless, Auggie begins the fifth grade and is given the looks and the mocking by his fellow classmates, until he slowly but surely starts to adjust and make friends.

Typical, yes. But “Wonder” switches focus from time to time, giving us insight into other characters. We see what goes through the mind of Auggie’s older sister Via (Izabela Vidovic), as she wishes just once that her parents would ask about her day. She loves her brother but silently resents the spotlight that’s always been given to him. And their parents are loving and trying their hardest to be there for both of them; they just don’t always notice when their daughter needs them.

And then we wonder (forgive the pun) about Via’s former best friend Miranda (Danielle Rose Russell), who neglects her after a summer away. We see why there’s this change in her, and suddenly we’re feeling for her.

And then there’s Auggie’s friend at school, Jack Will (Noah Jupe). When something unexpected comes up, we see his point of view and feel for him too.

All of these detours help make “Wonder” even stronger when we realize the full story surrounding Auggie, who at one point has to be reminded that not everything is about him and everyone else is going through hard stuff as well. It’s more than welcome to see the perspectives of those surrounding Auggie as well as Auggie. It’s a very effective way of presenting to the audience that no one person is just “ordinary.”

Appealing characters is only aided by solid acting, and the cast as a whole is terrific. Little Jacob Tremblay continues his string of winning performances, showing that his breakthrough role in 2015’s “Room” was no fluke. And once you see past the odd disfigurement (done with convincing makeup work), you see the genuine sweetness within this character. Julia Roberts delivers her best work in years, playing a genuinely sweet (and thankfully knowing, unlike most naïve parental characters in movies of this sort) mother who tries to be there for both her children. Owen Wilson plays an endearing dad. Other adult actors such as Daveed Diggs as a teacher and Mandy Patinkin as the principal are solid. And all the other young actors, particularly Izabela Vidovic, are very impressive.

My only problems with the film come near the final half. The big final moment is handled well, with of course a big speech and a standing ovation (it earns it), but a couple moments leading up to it feel forced. One involves a meeting between the principal and a bully’s parents (painful), and the other involves a fight followed by a silent moment on a beach (overly whimsical). Also, there are a few lines of dialogue that spell out all the lessons we’re supposed to take from the film, way before the final speech already does it well enough and we get the point by then. “Don’t blend in when you’re made to stand out.” “Between what’s right and what’s kind, do what’s kind.” And a couple more I noticed.

But overall, “Wonder” works “wonders.” (Forgive that pun also—or use it as an article headline.) By the time it ends, you feel that Auggie is going through a positive change in his life and will continue with it through junior high, high school, college, and ultimately adulthood. And you also feel that his friends and his family are going through the same change. Maybe the film will be powerful enough to teach it to the aforementioned children in the audience who saw it along with me.

Smith’s Verdict: ***1/2

Reviewed by Tanner Smith

I remember growing up in the country and hanging out at a friend’s house in the middle of nowhere. When there were no parents around, he would play with some weapons in the house—act like we were soldiers/warriors or something like that. Other friends would often be there and get involved too. Nothing bad ever happened and we felt we were being careful. But when I saw Kevin Phillips’ “Super Dark Times” at this year’s annual Fantastic Cinema & Craft Beer Festival, it made me look back on those memories and consider myself (and my old friends) lucky that we didn’t get hurt doing some really stupid things.

“Super Dark Times” is a coming-of-age psychological drama about the aftermath of a deadly incident between a few high-school teens. It’s a film that reminded me a lot of “Mean Creek,” an independent film from 13 years ago about how actions & consequences can have a lasting impact on young people. Both films are effective in reminding their audiences how dangerous and scary teenage life can be.

Set in the mid-1990s, “Super Dark Times” centers on best friends Zach (Owen Campbell) and Josh (Charlie Tahan); ordinary teens who engage in typical teen conversation, perform gross-out dares, and hang out with others who aren’t exactly their “buddies” but need other people to pass the time with. Two of them are a younger boy, Charlie (Sawyer Barth), and an obnoxious peer, Daryl (Max Talisman). The four find Josh’s older brother’s samurai sword and take it out to the woods to slice some milk cartons. But when Daryl’s harsh attitude leads to a confrontation, an accidental result of panic becomes fatal. Panicked even further, Zach, Josh, and Charlie feel they have no choice but to hide Daryl’s body and cover everything up.

Covering up the accident is easier said than done. While Charlie is relatively quiet about everything, Zach and Josh act differently from then on. Josh is having strange urges, mouthing off in class, and taking more risks such as stealing his brother’s weed and sharing it with peers. Zach gets much of the film’s attention as he attempts to make sure everything is OK, when it becomes clear that nothing about this is quite alright with him, as the guilt is starting to overtake him. Phillips does a very good job showing just how much this plight is affecting Zach, as he becomes more worried and paranoid, and even presenting a couple dream sequences for a more uncomfortable, nightmarish setting.

Things get even darker when it comes to how Josh is handling the aftereffects of what he’s done. And the less I say about that, the better…

The most heartbreaking scene in the film for me was when Zach’s secret crash, a classmate named Alison (Elizabeth Cappucino), is suddenly in Zach’s bedroom and makes a seductive advance towards him. This should be a happy moment, as Zach is realizing his feelings toward her are mutual and she’s IN HIS ROOM, but he can’t help but cry on her shoulder about the tragedy that unfolded. It’s a confusing time for him (a “super dark time,” if you will) and he feels nothing can be normal for him anymore. And he can’t tell anyone about what he’s feeling—not Alison, not his unsuspecting mother (Amy Hargreaves), not Charlie (who’d rather not talk about the incident), not even Josh (who copes with it his own way, alienating Zach). It’s a powerful moment.

“Super Dark Times” is more effective when it explores the theme of “loss of innocence” than when it delves deep into horror in the final act, as Josh’s mental state goes from questionable to dangerous. This is an unfortunate move on the part of writers Ben Collins and Luke Piotrowski, but thankfully, by that point, the central characterizations are strong enough (and the actors are solid too) that it doesn’t really damage the film. It’s a gripping film with a “super dark” viewpoint.