d_art

This past weekend, I saw the movie "It" (2017), directed by Andy Muschietti ("Mama"), based on the novel of the same name by Stephen King. First off, let me say that I enjoyed this movie quite a bit-- it was a highly entertaining monster flick with jump scares that surprisingly worked (which usually doesn't in many films). The movie stars various (mostly unknown) child actors and Bill Skarsgård as an evil entity called Pennywise the Dancing Clown, which terrorizes the town of Derry every 27 years. The main protagonist of this film is the stuttering Bill (Jaesen Lieberher), who wants to avenge his little brother who was killed by Pennywise. The film focuses mostly on the kids and their relationships, their school bullies, dysfunctional adults, and the sharp-toothed killer clown that moves around in the sewers.

I have the novel in my house, which I never got around to reading. I did, however, see the miniseries on TV, also called "It" (1990), starring Tim Curry as the titular killer clown. There were two parts to the miniseries--first half took place in 1960, and the second part in 1990. The first half mainly starred children, while the second half starred adults (the same children now grown up). The TV show was fairly creepy for TV (particularly the first half), while the second half was on the cheesier side, with monster effects that were not quite on par with theatrical films of that time. Tim Curry ("Clue") was an effectively creepy clown, given that he often just popped out of nowhere to harass the kids. The second half wasn't helped by the fact that it starred mostly comedians such as Harry Anderson ("Night Court"), John Masur ("License to Drive") and John Ritter ("Three's Company)--a baffling decision by the producers. Just imagine seeing a horror film starring Jerry Seinfeld, Adam Sandler, and Larry the Cable Guy, and you get the idea.

So, this 2017 film fixes a lot of the problems that the miniseries had. This film only tells the first half of the story (which still works as a standalone story), with only the children as the protagonists. It also takes place in 1989, taking cues from the nostalgic, retro look and style of Netflix's popular "Stranger Things." (To note, one of the kids from the show is in this movie). Unlike the miniseries, the creature effects in this film is impressively creepy and artistically done. And, this movie is rated R (also quite unusual for horror movies of this ilk), which pretty much tells you that they aren't messing around.

Bill Skarsgård is excellent as Pennywise. He is going full-on creepy-monster-mode here. This is to Tim Curry's Pennywise what Heath Ledger's Joker was to Jack Nicholson's. This Pennywise isn't interested in dishing out any humor or making puns--he is meant to be terrible and scary. With that said, Skarsgård's acting has just enough subtlety and the inflections of his voice to be original and interesting. The kids' acting are pretty top-notch. They feel like real kids, and their situation is often quite terrible. Adults are unlikable here for the most part, and are often one-dimensional. Maybe it's me, but I feel this quite often in Stephen King films (eg. "Carrie") where teens or kids are protagonists--all adults seem like terrible people.

The plot isn't particularly complex--much of the story is about the characters and the horror they face. Where it lacks in story, it has enough details about the characters that you care about their well-being (something many horror films fail at). There is plenty of humor in this film which thankfully offsets some of the gloominess of the situation. Much of this humor comes from the 80's references to films and music, and kids' sarcastic, bad-mouthed dialogue. Having been a child of the 80's myself, I found much to relate here.

As for the horror, as I mentioned, there is, yes, plenty of jump scares. However, this film isn't focused on the "JUMP" part of the "jump scare" but focuses on the "SCARE" part of the jump scare. Allow me to explain. Usually, in horror films, right when a "jump scare" comes, it's very quiet at first, then there's a loud noise (which is usually the part that scares you the most) and something "horrific" (or at least not quite as horrific as the loud noise) happens, then ends (usually quickly). In this movie, the horrific part lingers--you get a good look at what is supposed to scare you. The result feels earned, and not cheap. Remember back in the day when seeing a cool, creepy creature was the big payoff? It was the type of thing that many categorized as a well-done popcorn horror flick. The special effects are also quite good here, many of them practical. As the miniseries failed with its lackluster special effects, this film succeeds. Without giving away details, they did well with the budget. Director Andy Muschietti has made a solid horror film.

If there are any complaints, I kind of feel that it has more to do with Stephen King's original story. The illusory part of how Pennywise operates in the world never seemed quite clear to me. This was also how I felt when I saw the miniseries. Maybe it's better explained in the book--the film is a bit vague on it. And, the adults, as mentioned, are mostly stereotypes--I'm not saying that's not allowed, but such things can make the world feel less real.

This is an entertaining horror film. The female audiences at my theater jumped and screamed in horror more than a few times, while laughing afterwards. If they weren't entertained, at least I was entertained by their reaction. Many also chuckled at the "New Kids on the Block" jokes--yep, we get it, sirs. Well played, dear fellows. Well played.

My Rating: **** 1/2 out of ***** stars

Review at http://ninjasonmotorcycles.blogspot.com/2017/09/my-movie- review-it-2017.html

Wonderful acting, brilliant writing, and great, classical music. One can't help but appreciate classical music that much more after seeing this series. Poetic, sad, dramatic, hilarious, and humane, I loved the high quality involved in this production.

The story involves violinist Doo Roo-mi (Lee Ji-ah)who hires Maestro Kang Gun-woo to lead an orchestra that has recently disbanded due to a former manager running off with all the money. She hires replacements for the orchestra, which consist of mostly amateurs, country bumpkins, and misfits with a dream to perform at a band. Amongst the members is a trumpeter who has the same name as Kang Gun-woo (Jang Geun-seok), who may prove to be a musical genius.

Kim Myung Min's portrayal of the perfectionist and arrogant Maestro Kang Gun-woo is both maddening and hilarious. Maestro Kang's scathing aggressiveness and sharp tongue exudes frank, sometimes admirable, efficiency and cold calculation. Things that come out of his mouth causes people to run off, break down, and cry. Carrying the nickname "Orchestra Killer" (because orchestra members tend not to stick around longer than six months under him), this character has a hard time dealing with regular people as he himself doesn't see himself as regular.

Despite the fact that Maestro Kang treats his orchestra like trash, we find that he is actually a very complex character. Adding to the complexity are the orchestra members' own personal, social, and financial issues, and a love triangle between the two Kang Gun-woo and Doo Roo-mi.

Be sure to check this out on DVD or Hulu.

In this sequel to Cars, race cars Lightning McQueen (Owen Wilson) and his tow truck pal Mater (Larry the Cable Guy) head overseas to compete in the World Grand Prix race. Mater, however, gets sidetracked with international espionage. Helped by British spy cars, Finn McMissile (Michael Caine) and Holley Shiftwell (Emily Mortimer), Mater must stop an unknown villain trying to sabotage the race, with Lightning McQueen as his possible target.

I liked the first Cars, but I admit, amongst the other works of Pixar, it was my least favorite. With that said, I really enjoyed Cars 2. Yes, more so than Cars 1. It's very entertaining with both subtle and not-so-subtle humor that not everyone will quite get nor appreciate. The scenes in Tokyo are colorful and extreme. The scenes in Paris and Italy are breathtaking and beautifully rendered. This is a story about cars. There's only so many ways you can go with this subject. With that said, Pixar has again created a piece of work that remains consistent to their high quality.

Admittedly, Lightning McQueen, the main character in the last film played by Owen Wilson, gets less of a role here compared to Mater, played by Larry the Cable Guy. I would guess some may have a big problem with this. To be frank, Larry the Cable Guy's brand of humor isn't to everyone's taste (nor mine), and perhaps represents what makes one feel embarrassed for being American…especially when in a foreign country. Well, that issue is exactly what comes up in this particular film. Mater is a constant embarrassment for Lightning McQueen whenever he is around—he is ignorant, unsophisticated, and often gets himself into bad situations. What Pixar does here, however, is not to simply leave Mater to just be the butt of every joke. In fact, the characters here actually learn something…or at least we do. The theme in this film is about friendship and seeing value in people we normally would rather not associate ourselves with.

The story is strong and twists are rather mind-boggling enough to keep little kids confused (but as an adult, I thought it was great!). Making Mater the main character, on a practical level, makes sense. Frankly, there are only so many more stories you can really squeeze out about Lightning McQueen at this point—everything already had been told in the last film. It's like a Rocky movie. Rocky sequels were okay, yes, but after a while, Rocky was no longer the underdog—now it's all about him keeping his title (it's like a story about a rich man staying rich)—there are not a whole lot of ways you can go with that plot (I suppose Rocky's next sequel could have him fight in space…I know! Time machine! Brilliant!). One can say Cars 2 is like the further adventures of Rocky's Paulie, Mickey, or Adrian, from their point of view. I thought that was a good move. It's like how Empire Strikes Back was really Han Solo's film (although that is open for discussion).

In the previous film, I didn't care much about Mater. I learned to like him in this film. A simple character has been made a little more complex. Lightning McQueen learns a valuable lesson about friendship, and Mater learns to self-reflect. Owen Wilson and Larry the Cable Guy are fun as always as Mater and McQueen. Michael Caine is excellent as Finn McMissile, a super agent spy car, and Emily Mortimer does fine work as Holley Shiftwell.

The overall feel of this film is more "mature"-flavored without being overtly mature. This is true for much of Pixar's films in general. If you think about many classic Warner Bros. films, for example, they had many underlying mature themes. As for Pixar, they have explored, among others, themes related to mortality (Toy Story series), the family unit (The Incredibles) and fatherhood (Finding Nemo, Up). Cars do come in harm's way in this film. Some do explode. Nothing shocking here. They're cars. I dug the action scenes. This plays like a spy thriller, which admittedly, is more exciting than watching car races. Like much of Pixar's work, there is plenty of humor, a great helping of emotion, beautiful renders, and a clever story. I can't think of anything more to ask for than that. Now, did Cars really need a sequel? Perhaps not, but I enjoyed this one and it makes me even like the previous one. I'm not really into talking cars, talking bugs, or talking fishes, personally, but Pixar still manages to make me like them.

For more of my review updates, you can find me on twitter.com/d_art