Smith's Verdict

By Tanner Smith

In 2011, we had a surprise hit with “Rise of the Planet of the Apes,” a sort-of prequel (kind of a reboot) to how the “Planet of the Apes” of its popular film series came to be. I certainly didn’t need this “sort-of prequel” but I was very surprised at how interesting and fresh it turned out to be. In 2014, we got a sequel: “Dawn of the Planet of the Apes,” a darker, more compelling man-versus-ape story than I ever would have anticipated. Then, in 2017, we got a concluding chapter for this “Planet of the Apes prequel trilogy.” “War for the Planet of the Apes.” It seemed to be building up to something, which should be obvious to us all that it doesn’t end well for mankind. From “rise” to “dawn” to “war”…let’s see what “War for the Planet of the Apes” has for us…

“War for the Planet of the Apes” is, in my opinion, the best “Planet of the Apes” movie ever made, maybe even better than the 1968 classic that started it all.

Talk about saving the best for last. (I don’t think there’s anywhere else for this franchise to go after this, so that’s a high compliment.)

This is a hell of a film. It’s powerful. It’s gripping. It’s complex. It’s brutal. it’s heartbreaking. It’s everything I didn’t know a “Planet of the Apes” movie could be. It even made me forget about how great “Dawn of the Planet of the Apes” was, because this one topped that!

The story, told from the apes’ perspective, involves Caesar (Andy Serkis) and his army of apes still having to fend for themselves against human soldiers who want to hunt and kill them. Caesar has tried time and time again to have peaceful coexistence between humans and apes, but the Colonel (Woody Harrelson) wants nothing more than to wipe every single last one of them out. Seeing no other alternative, Caesar embarks on a suicide mission to track down and kill the Colonel.

As the title suggests, “War for the Planet of the Apes” is building up to the end-all of one final battle between man and ape. But director Matt Reeves (who also directed “Dawn of the Planet of the Apes”) has something more on his mind, such as what it all means for both man and ape. The evils and casualties of war. The question as to whom is the true animal. Racism allegories. What it means to exact revenge. The sacrifices that are made. And so on. This doesn’t feel like a mere “Planet of the Apes” movie; it feels like a genuine war movie!

And it’s all done RIGHT. When the action kicks in, it’s exciting. When the drama settles in, it’s very moving. When characters are allowed to sit and discuss a few things, it means something. Even its comic relief, a scared, abused ape named Bad Ape (Steve Zahn) whom Caesar and his crew come across, is done exactly right. In any other movie, this would have been akin to Jar Jar Binks.

The film can also take some time out to warm your heart. One of Caesar’s partners is Maurice (Karin Konoval), a wise orangutan who always has the right answers for Caesar. Along the way, Caesar and co. encounter a young mute girl (one of the wild humans they come across), and Maurice is the one to take care of her during the journey. I loved Maurice in the previous “Planet of the Apes” film, and seeing him care for this little girl melted my heart.

Notice how so far, I’ve talked so much about every other aspect that makes this film successful except for the effects factor? Well, how do the apes look? How do you make it credible? Well…if I thought they were put to great use in “Dawn of the Planet of the Apes,” then they’re put to SPECTACULAR use in “War for the Planet of the Apes.” Caesar, Maurice, Bad Ape, every one of the “apes” look amazingly REAL. It’s the best motion-capture work I’ve ever seen in a film. And it was so wonderfully done that I wanted Andy Serkis to get an Oscar nomination just for bringing Caesar to life with much expression and dignity. How often do you see a bunch of CG creations and NOT notice that it’s computers at the source of them? It’s outstanding for all the right reasons.

I prayed for this one to win Best Visual Effects at the Oscars. (I didn’t take into account the first-rate effects of “Blade Runner 2049.”)

Where CAN the “Planet of the Apes” franchise go from here? It’s hard to tell. Maybe…remake 1968’s “Planet of the Apes,” with the updated technology? I don’t know. But I guess I’d be curious to find out if there IS something planned.

By Tanner Smith

Well, before director Josh Trank’s name became a punchline thanks to the messy blockbuster “Fantastic Four” (or “Fant4stic,” as people like to call it), he had a sleeper hit with the 2012 found-footage superhero teen film “Chronicle.”

Honestly, I feel bad for the guy for what happened with “Fant4stic.” He probably could’ve had something special if not for the studio interference. (Again, the studio system strikes.) Let’s see if he’s doing anything else.

*quick Google search*

Oh OK, he’s doing an Al Capone film with Tom Hardy, called “Fonzo.” Sounds good. Wonder when that’s coming out.

But back to “Chronicle.” “Chronicle” is a film about three high-school students–Andrew (Dane DeHaan), Matt (Alex Russell), and Steve (Michael B. Jordan)–who come across some sort of otherworldly portal that leads them to a force that gives them superpowers. They have telekinesis, they can fly, and they’re stronger the more they use their abilities (“like a muscle”). Because it’s a found-footage movie (though from the perspective of different cameras to tell the whole story), they document it all–the kid holding the camera for the most part (Andrew) even operates it without touching it (meaning there’s very little shaky cam here!). But Andrew, who comes from a broken home and is constantly bullied in school, starts to feel dangerous urges with his new strength and uses them to get back at people who do him wrong.

The first half of “Chronicle” is lots of fun to watch over and over. The kids are played as real kids, they work off each other brilliantly, and they behave the way I think real kids would behave if they suddenly gained superpowers. (Although, wouldn’t it be more interesting if they showed it to their classmates? I digress.) The effects are nicely done, especially for the low budget. (The flying sequences are a little dated, but they’re not terribly done.) And I love seeing them experiment with their abilities–pranking people, flying around, catching a baseball mid-air through mind powers, and even the damage they can cause if they’re not careful…which brings me to the second act, which is very dark and grisly. Much of it has to do with Andrew’s loss of control, which if you go back and watch the film again is inevitable rather than sudden. It bothered me when I first saw “Chronicle”–it doesn’t anymore.

What I like best about “Chronicle” overall is that it tells the full story. It doesn’t set up for a sequel. There’s an obvious beginning, middle, and end, with all the right buildups and just about every right payoff, and it’s told very satisfyingly.

With that said, I do wonder what Matt found when he set off on his quest to find out what happened to him and his friends–what was that thing down there in the tunnel? Where did it come from? But on the other hand, maybe it’s best to keep wondering. I like “Chronicle” just the way it is.

By Tanner Smith

I’m going to get to writing about “Frozen” soon enough, because it’s Disney’s biggest hit (to say the absolute least!!). I already talked about “Tangled,” a very enjoyable romp. Other terrific Disney animated films from the 2010s include “Zootopia,” “Moana,” and “Wreck-It Ralph”–but today, I want to talk about what I think is their most “pure fun” animated film from this decade: “Big Hero 6.”

Remember when the Oscars didn’t nominate “The Lego Movie” for Best Animated Feature? Well, I feel a little better about that since they gave Disney’s “Big Hero 6” the honor.

“Big Hero 6” is conventional, cliched, and kind of predictable…but damn it if it also isn’t a ton of fun!

It’s an origin story for a team of superheroes, as a lovable collection of techno-savvy geeks band together and decide to suit up as a super-team to go up against a techno-savvy baddie. To their aid is a robotic companion, now programmed to kick some serious butt. Along the way, there’s tragedy, comedy, and of course, a life lesson that our main hero has to learn as well as the main villain.

Would it surprise you that this is based on a Marvel comic? Didn’t really surprise me, either.

Oh, and it also takes place in a future city known as San Fransokyo, a hybrid of San Francisco and Tokyo–there’s not any explanation for this joining, but it makes for a pretty visual sight when we go to some different spots of this world here and there.

It begins as Hiro Hamada (voiced by Ryan Potter) is convinced by his older brother Tadashi (Daniel Henney) to join his science college to better his creative mind. Hiro comes up with a unique robotic invention and unveils it at a science fair, but it seems someone is out to get it for himself and starts a fire in the building that claims the life of Tadashi. (It wouldn’t be a Disney movie without some sort of tragic death, right?) Hiro is left with Tadashi’s own robotic invention–a portly Pillsbury Doughboy lookalike designed as a health care robot, named Baymax (Scott Adsit). At first, Hiro doesn’t want to admit he needs help in any way, even though he’s clearly suffering from loss of his brother. But when it becomes clear to him why his brother died (that it was no accident), he decides to get to the bottom of it. He rallies Tadashi’s genius classmates–cowardly laser specialist Wasabi (Damon Wayans Jr.), quirky chemist Honey Lemon (Genesis Rodriguez), bitter engineer Go Go (Jamie Chung), and comic-book loving slacker Fred (T.J. Miller)–to help him out, and he also reprograms Baymax to become a lean (er…OK, not lean), mean (actually, he maintains his calm manner) fighting machine (thanks to karate styles in movies) to back him up.

Baymax is adorable. He speaks in a soothing voice, has many resources (including hugs) to help those in need of medical attention, and is the perfect toy for Disney to sell to children.

They go through all the motions of the origin story. They encounter a masked supervillain that they think is someone in particular but really turns out to be someone else for another reason. And of course, the villain’s motivation mirrors the hero’s selfish desire, which leads to a moral that both need to learn before the credits roll. Yes, admittedly, “Big Hero 6” doesn’t have much that’s “new,” per se, but when it works, it’s not only one of the most entertaining animated movies of the decade–it’s also one of the most touching. By the end, I wanted to tell Hiro that everything’s going to be OK and we all suffer and get through loss at some point of our lives.

Hiro is the most well-developed of the kids, which mostly comprise of generic types–the stoner, the goth, the wuss, the loony. But I like them all for the same reasons I like the kids in “Honey, I Shrunk the Kids,” who were also generic types. They’re more than likable enough to follow and they add to the fun. They each get their time to shine.

The action is fun and wonderfully animated (like I would expect anything less from Disney animation). The themes of loss and redemption are well-done. And when it’s all said and done, it doesn’t matter what we have or have not seen before in other movies before–what matters is how well it’s all handled. “Big Hero 6” is a ton of fun.

Also, stick around after the end credits (this is a Marvel movie, after all). It’s a pretty golden moment that follows.

By Tanner Smith

One of the best, most surprising animated treasures of the 2000s was DreamWorks’ “Kung Fu Panda,” starring Jack Black as a panda who learns kung fu…thinking about what I just wrote baffles me for how stupid it seems and yet delighted that it actually worked.

And it definitely worked. Released in 2008, “Kung Fu Panda” was not only beautifully CG-animated and very funny AND wonderfully choreographed (for animation, providing as many kung fu styles as possible takes incredible skill)…but it was also rather moving and beautiful when it needed to be, and it taught a valuable lesson that speaks to both kids and adults: we all have unique skills that help make us who we are.

Three years later, in 2011, we got “Kung Fu Panda 2,” which was even better. More atmosphere, more action, more visual treasures, and most surprising of all, more emotions–you will believe Jack Black as Po the Kung Fu Panda will make you feel things!

I could make a Looking Back on 2010s Films post about “Kung Fu Panda 2,” but honestly, I think I’d rather write about “Kung Fu Panda 3,” my favorite of the trilogy.

Yes, it’s a trilogy with a conclusion…unless DreamWorks decides to go the PIXAR/”Toy Story 4″ route and meet back up with familiar characters years later. (I’d be fine with that, if it’s done well, like with “Toy Story 4.”)

With each passing film, we see a neat progression in Po’s character. In the first movie, Po was a mere kung fu enthusiast (and flabby panda) who was chosen to become the Dragon Warrior to combat a dangerous villain and bring peace to the valley. No one believed in him until he was able to find the skills within himself to get the job done.

But with “Kung Fu Panda 2,” we’re reminded that it’s not as simple as that to become what you desire to be. Po had to search within himself to find out who he truly is and not just who he wants to be. (Oh, and he also had to find out about his origins, as his father’s a duck who obviously adopted him.) Through it all, he finds inner peace. A satisfying resolution for an even more satisfying sequel. Where can we go from there?

Well now we have “Kung Fu Panda 3.” What are we going to tackle with this one? Well, this time, Po has to be a teacher. Already, I’m intrigued. Po is still excitable and energetic. He has mastered many of the ways of kung fu, but we see he still has a lot more to learn. Now, Master Shifu (voiced by Dustin Hoffman) is stepping down as master of the Furious Five and appointing Po as the new guy in charge. But even Po knows he’s not ready for this responsibility–and thankfully, we get a scene early on in which Master Shifu states the reason he wants Po to teach is so Po himself can learn something new, because he shouldn’t get used to what he already knows. Pretty good point there.

Anyway, Po is visited by another panda in the valley, named Li (Bryan Cranston), who it turns out (GASP!) is Po’s birth father! It’s a happy reunion that turns into more than that when it turns out Li may be able to help in defeating a new all-powerful villain, the chi-stealing warrior Kai (J.K. Simmons). You see, pandas possess the hidden secrets of the power of “chi,” which translates to “life force” or “energy flow.” The more Kai can possess from those he comes across, the more powerful he becomes. Thus, Po has to travel with Li to the secret panda village to learn chi. But it’s going to be harder than it seems, as Po is interacting with his own species and finally learning how to be…a “panda,” for the first time in his life.

Oh, and Po’s adoptive father–you know, the goose (James Hong)–is understandably jealous of Po’s new attachment to the father he never knew. Thankfully, this subplot isn’t as annoying or even as distracting as it could have been. And its resolution is actually kind of touching…but not as effective as…

You know, it’s baffling and kind of disconcerting that “Kung Fu Panda 3” didn’t get the attention it deserves. Critics recommended it mildly at best. It was released in January, when it could/should have been a fitting summer release. And of the three “Kung Fu Panda” movies, this was the only one not to be nominated for the Best Animated Feature Oscar.

People just see it as just another “Kung Fu Panda” movie, which is a shame, because…I love this movie.

Why do I favor this one over the previous two? Because it’s a definite proper conclusion in this sense: it’s the only one in the trilogy that came through with its original promise. You ever notice that what usually defeats the previous villains is some kind of magic that was never fully explained, defeating the purpose of the message the films try to get across, that it’s best to find your own inner strengths? Well, this time, even though the mystic Wuxi finger hold (which I still don’t get) plays a role in the climax, the focus is still on what Po is able to teach his fellow pandas in the ways of kung fu. He teaches them to use their abilities to their advantage, and in a fresh, inventive way, it truly works. There’s an ancient Chinese saying that kung fu lives in everything we do–this is a Kung Fu Panda showing us how! As strange as that may sound, it’s truly effective.

Now, I can just predict some troll commenting, “Haha I’m writing an angry comment on your blog–is THAT kung fu? XP” To that, I say, “It just might be.”

And as Po learns who he himself really is, it’s actually very emotionally satisfying. I can’t help it–the “Kung Fu Panda” trilogy is better than it had any right to be. With the right skills and writing and technical wizardry, you can make even the silliest ideas work wonders.

By Tanner Smith

Hayao Miyazaki’s swansong, this was said to be. Well, a few more years will change anyone’s mind, as he seemingly has another film in the works. But it wasn’t the first time he announced retirement anyway. Who am I to complain? If he wants to keep making films, let him.

“The Wind Rises” is one of Miyazaki’s best. It shows his strengths as a visionary animation director. It’s visually stunning, has a beautifully told story, and is just an overall fantastic film. It’s also the first time Miyazaki tackled a “true story,” so that’s just as impressive. It’s a story loosely based on aviation engineer Jiro Horikoshi, who came up with the design of the Japanese Zero fighters, which were used in WWII.

Thankfully, neither the character nor the film have a political agenda to get across. We know what damage and tragedies came from this creation, with many lives lost at the hands of the fighter pilots. But the character of Jiro didn’t know that would happen–he just felt happy to create something unique and special…it just turned out that “something” was a weapon.

The film doesn’t focus on the controversies that spawned from what this creation led to, but it doesn’t ignore them either. It instead focuses on the wonder and majesty of bring something new and innovative to life. That is what the film is about–it’s a fable about dreams, creativity, and passion.

And the way the film explores the creative process is imaginative. We see Jiro’s dreams and fantasies (in which he converses with his hero, a late Italian aviator voiced by Stanley Tucci), and we also see little things that inspire him, even something as small as a curvy fish bone that inspires his ultimate design.

But the film is also very downplayed. Characters talk about what should be done and what needs to be in order to make it work, in realistically effective fashion. The visually amazing sequences that Miyazaki does best are saved for dream/fantasy sequences, which was a wise decision for a film like this.

Oh, and here’s an interesting tidbit: human voices are largely used as sound effects, such as engine roars. I don’t know exactly why, but I think that’s ingenious.

So maybe Miyazaki hasn’t called it quits yet. Whatever his next film turns out to be, I’ll be interested in seeing it.

By Tanner Smith

One of the bonus features on my Criterion DVD/Blu-Ray collection for Richard Linklater’s “Before” trilogy is a wonderful video essay called “On Cinema and Time.” It looks at many of Linklater’s films (including the “Before” trilogy, of course) and Francois Truffaut’s “Antoine Doinel” film series (spawned by “The 400 Blows”) to look into the styles of distinctive filmmakers who can be labeled as “auteurs.” And it was done brilliantly. (Side-note: please watch it here.)

Who made the video? A filmmaker best known for his video essays, simply known as Kogonada (or, : : kogonada). He’s all about content, form, and structure of film, and his video essays are about trademarks and aesthetics used by filmmakers. Other sources for his essays include Wes Anderson, Quentin Tarantino, Stanley Kubrick, among others.

I remember thinking, this is a fascinating “movie buff” (for lack of a better word) and he should write/direct a feature film some day. Well, he did–a wonderful conversation-driven comedy-drama called “Columbus.”

The film takes place in Columbus, Indiana. One of our two main characters is Casey (Haley Lu Richardson), a young architecture enthusiast who graduated high school, works at the local library, likes to walk around local architecture and pretend she’s a tour guide providing important information to people, and also cares for her mother, who is a recovering drug addict. The other is Jin (John Cho), an American who works in South Korea translating literature to English and comes to Indiana to care for his estranged father, who is now in a coma after he was supposed to give a lecture about architecture.

Jin and Casey meet by chance, strike up conversation, and find they share a rapport. Jin hates architecture, leading Casey to tell him about her favorite buildings, which then leads Jin to ask WHY they’re her favorite structures. In talking about this stuff, they also open up about themselves, such as how Jin feels resentful towards his father since he buried himself into his work and how Casey would love to pursue her dreams of working in architecture but feels pressured to look after her mother. The two help each other out, even when they both stubbornly state they don’t need help.

I mentioned the “Before” trilogy and how Kogonada’s video essay was used to illustrate Linklater’s style of presenting philosophy and time through cinema. Watching “Columbus,” I can’t help but feel like this is the style Kogonada took inspiration from. Most of it is not so much “dialogue” driven as it is “conversation” driven, as the “Before” trilogy was. That’s not to say he steals Linklater’s style; he just puts his own spin on it, with his own writing, characters, and style. He’s telling his own story through words, and he’s also doing it through architecture–many of the film’s static shots are framed in such a way that we can appreciate the design of the setting just as Casey appreciates the structures of her favorite buildings. He’s practically forcing you to look at what he has to show you.

Jin and Casey are two interesting people communicating both through conflict and despite conflict. They need each other to talk with/to, and as a result, we learn more about each one of them and what they have to go through. That makes the scenes in which they’re with other people, such as Jin with his father’s assistant (Parker Posey) and Casey with her coworker Gabriel (Rory Culkin), all the more interesting when you note the contrast between they want to talk about and what they’re afraid to talk about. Thus, each time Jin and Casey revisit each other to talk some more, I’m all the more invested in what they have to say next.

John Cho is very good as Jin–it’s great to see the guy who was known as the “MILF guy” in the “American Pie” movies and the first half of “Harold & Kumar” get opportunities to shine as a dramatic actor. (He was even better in “Searching” in 2018.) But the real star of the film for me is Haley Lu Richardson as Casey. I’ve liked her in movies like “The Edge of Seventeen,” “Split,” and “Support the Girls,” among others–“Columbus” gives her the role she was born for. She’s brilliantly natural, she has great screen presence, I feel for her character from beginning to end, and she delivers a true heart to the film that I can’t praise enough. I want to hug her when she’s upset, I want her to follow her dream, I feel bad for her when something goes unexpectedly, and I smile for her when she does something she even remotely likes. She’s nothing short of wonderful here.

There’s a lot of sadness in “Columbus,” which is why Jin and Casey need their outlets to let out their emotions. But there’s also a lot of possibilities for them to move past it all and embrace what they have and what they could get. Much of it has to do with love–the sacrifices for it as well as the avails…kind of like what goes into architecture as well.

Kogonada has another feature in the works: a science-fiction drama called “After Yang,” starring Colin Farrell. With this guy at the helm, I look forward to seeing that film as well.