William Shatner Live! – Captain Kirk Beams Down to Concord, New Hampshire.

2
18020 Fidelity Clearing & Custody Solutions Portriats

The photo op with Willam Shatner. That’s me on the left (yours truly, Michael Arruda), my son Jonny, William Shatner, and my son Lucas.

KHAAAAAHNNNNN!!!!!!!!!!

Yup, one of William Shatner’s iconic moments from the movie STAR TREK II: THE WRATH OF KHAN (1982), and we got to hear it twice, once in the movie and once live, roared by the man himself, William Shatner, in person, as part of William Shatner Live on Stage! an event which my two sons and I were fortunate to attend the other night at the Capitol Center for the Arts in Concord, NH.

The event was comprised of two parts, the screening of STAR TREK II, and then Shatner’s appearance on stage.

It was fun to see STAR TREK II back on the big screen again.  The last time that happened for me was probably in 1985 or so, when waaay back when I was in college, it was part of a film series at my dorm at Boston University. It was probably a 16 mm print. And while back in the day we college students were certainly Star Trek fans, the audience at the Capitol Center was jam-packed with enthusiastic and very vocal Star Trek fans which made watching the film even more rewarding.

Cheers erupted at each star’s name in the opening credits and on their initial appearances, as well as during their most memorable lines. The aforementioned cry of “Khan!!!” had the theater rocking.

Still, this Star Trek enthusiasm at the movies was hardly a first for me. I’m old enough to have seen the first film, STAR TREK THE MOTION PICTURE (1979) on the big screen and remember the audience cheering out loud at the actors’ names during the opening credits and during their initial appearances, since this was the first time we had seen these characters since the original 1960s TV show. I also remember waiting in a long line for tickets in Boston to see STAR TREK IV: THE VOYAGE HOME (1986) which probably received the most hype, all of it deserved, of any Star Trek film other than the first one.

It was fun to watch STAR TREK II: THE WRATH OF KHAN to be sure, but the reason the auditorium was filled was not for the movie, but for the man, William Shatner who came out on stage after the film to be interviewed and answer pre-selected questions from the audience.

If you’ve seen Shatner speak when he’s not in character, you know he’s full of energy and is a gifted storyteller.  Making this even more amazing is his age.  He’s 87. You wouldn’t know it by the vigor he displayed on stage.  He seemed considerably younger.

As I said, Shatner is a gifted storyteller, and he spoke for just under an hour after the movie, and it was a lively, humorous, and highly entertaining event.  For me, the best part were his recollections and anecdotes from his time as Captain Kirk, and even though I had heard some of the stories before, as I’ve read the books he’s written on his Star Trek memories, they were still laugh out loud funny, like when he told the story of how he used to prank De Forest Kelley.

He also spoke of his friendship with Leonard Nimoy, and shared interesting tidbits on Star Trek, like how after every movie the studio would destroy the sets because they believed it would be the last movie in the series, but the films kept making money.

Shatner also spoke on his love of horses, motorcycle riding, race car driving, and his work on other shows, including BOSTON LEGAL (2004-2008), T.J. HOOKER (1982-1986), and THE TWILIGHT ZONE (1959-1964).  He spoke of his friendship with James Spader, and used it as an example of how most showbiz friendships work, in that actors intend to stay in touch but usually don’t because they are so busy. As such, Shatner said as much as he enjoyed his friendship with Spader, he hasn’t seen him since the show ended.  Shatner said this would have happened between him and Leonard Nimoy, but the films kept bringing them back together, enabling the two to establish a much longer friendship.

Shatner also spoke of his famous TWILIGHT ZONE episode, with the humorous anecdote of how his children used to ask him to show them “the look,” which was his frightened expression from that TWILIGHT ZONE episode, an expression he delighted the audience with by springing it on us at just the right time.

And, as I said, he bellowed out to us, “Khaaaann!!!” in person, which once more produced thunderous applause.

My sons and I had purchased the special VIP ticket, which enabled us to go back stage afterwards for a special photo-op with Mr. Shatner (see photo above.) By the size of the line, I would say that at least half of the audience had also purchased these tickets.

It was a special moment to be sure. Yeah, it lasted only a couple of seconds, but to be able to stand next to William Shatner, say hello and thank him, and have him respond, that’s special.  I was so caught up in the moment I can’t honestly remember what he said in response, but it was gracious and warm, and it was a gratifying moment.

I was fortunate enough to have met James Doohan who played Scotty on STAR TREK back in 1986 when he visited Boston University, and so I’m happy to have met two members of the original Starship Enterprise.

I know, it’s just a TV show, and William Shatner is just an actor, a celebrity.

But STAR TREK is more than just a show, for so many reasons, and the biggest is its positive view of the future, and William Shatner with his iconic portrayal of Captain James T. Kirk had a lot to do with shaping that view.

For so many of us, STAR TREK is a major part of our lives, not only as a form of entertainment, but as way of thinking and seeing the future, an open-mindedness and acceptance that sadly does not always exist in the real world today.

But let’s not get too deep here.

The bottom line is seeing William Shatner live on stage was a good time, and honestly I’m amazed at how good Shatner looked and how much energy he had throughout the interview.

It was certainly a night I won’t forget any time soon.

Live long and prosper!

Thanks for reading!

—Michael

 

 

 

 

 

Advertisements

DEADPOOL 2 (2018) – Raunchy Jokes Aren’t Enough the Second Time Around

0

deadpool-2

The jokes work.

The story doesn’t.

That’s pretty much my take on DEADPOOL 2 (2018), the sequel to Marvel’s R-rated superhero romp DEADPOOL (2016) which starred Ryan Reynolds as the hilariously foul-mouthed Deadpool. Reynolds is back again in the sequel, as vulgar and comical as ever, breaking the fourth wall more often than he breaks bad guys’ heads.

Yep, there’s plenty of Deadpool and his trademark humor in DEADPOOL 2, but the story he finds himself in this time around is a complete snooze. But judging by the large audience which laughed out loud throughout, I doubt people are going to mind.

Deadpool (Ryan Reynolds) is living the dream with his girlfriend Vanessa (Morena Baccarin) and they are even planning to have a baby together, but a visit to their apartment by murderous thugs seeking revenge against Deadpool leaves Vanessa dead and alters Deadpool’s course for the rest of the movie.

And for Deadpool that means seeking redemption by protecting a young mutant boy named Russell (Julian Dennison) who has become the target of Cable (Josh Brolin), who’s come back from the future a la the Terminator to kill the young boy in order to stop him from committing a crime that hasn’t happened yet.

And that’s pretty much it for storyline in this one. Sure, there are plenty more characters involved, some interesting and fun, others less so, but the bottom line is that’s about it for plot here, folks. The rest is jokes, jokes, and more jokes. And frankly for me, that just wasn’t enough.

Once more, Ryan Reynolds has a field day playing Deadpool, and the script gives him enough gags to get him through the whole movie and then some. If you’re simply into watching Deadpool make funnies, and don’t care about plot, you’ll enjoy this one. Reynolds is a hoot.  He doesn’t disappoint.

Josh Brolin is okay as Cable, but his performance is not on the same level as what we just saw him do in AVENGERS: INFINITY WAR (2018) as Thanos. Brolin delivered a powerful performance as the CGI enhanced Thanos, but here  he’s playing a character that is far less impressive.

DEADPOOL 2 also introduces the X-Force, a band of mutants who Deadpool recruits to be his superhero team.  This team was actually kind of a disappointment as they don’t do a whole lot nor are they in this one very much. The one notable X-Force member is Domino (Zazie Beetz). Her superpower is good luck, and thanks to Beetz’ performance, luck is something she doesn’t need.  She’s very good on her own.

There’s some star power here as actors like Brad Pitt, Matt Damon, Terry Crews, and Bill Skarsgard have cameos and small roles, which is all part of the fun.

T. J. Miller, an actor who I always enjoy, sadly has his screen time as bartender Weasel reduced in this one.

The script by Rhett Reese and Paul Wernick, who both wrote the first DEADPOOL, and Ryan Reynolds, scores high with the jokes but low with the story. The end credit scenes to this one alone are worth the price of admission. They’re hilarious.

DEADPOOL 2 was directed by David Leitch, who also directed ATOMIC BLONDE (2017). Leitch’s stuntman background enabled him to shoot one of the best fight sequences I’d seen in a while in ATOMIC BLONDE. I thought the fight sequences here in DEADPOOL 2 were less impressive and much more standard.

For me, and maybe it’s because it was released on the heels of AVENGERS: INFINITY WAR and BLACK PANTHER (2018), two Marvel superhero films that instantly rank as two of the best in the franchise, DEADPOOL 2 simply didn’t work.

And the reason, as I said, is its plot, which is not only mediocre, but flat-out boring. I wasn’t interested in any of it. Did I care about young Russell? No. And hence I didn’t care about Deadpool’s mission to save him. Did I care about Deadpool’s relationship with the X-Men? Not really, because this movie didn’t really make me care, as the relationship was simply a set-up for jokes. Did I care about Cable? No. The film didn’t really develop this character, and so his words and plight rang hollow.

Did I care about X-Force? Yes. They were an interesting lot. Unfortunately, they’re in the film for all of ten minutes.

So, while I laughed at the jokes, and had fun with Ryan Reynolds constantly breaking the fourth wall as Deadpool, I didn’t really care about any of it.

The first DEADPOOL got both of these items right. It was nonstop hilarious, and it had a compelling storyline.  I was into the film from the very first scene. In DEADPOOL 2, in spite of the humor, my mind was wandering throughout because no one on-screen other than Deadpool himself held my interest.

Bottom line? If you love the Deadpool character and Ryan Reynolds’ take on him, you’ll probably enjoy this movie. But be prepared for a plot that is as lifeless as it is dull.

And that’s a problem because if the story puts you to sleep, well, it’s hard to laugh at all those jokes if you’re not awake to enjoy them.

—END—

 

LIFE OF THE PARTY (2018) – Melissa McCarthy Comedy Surprisingly Lively and Funny

0

LIfe of the Party

LIFE OF THE PARTY (2018), the latest comedy starring Melissa McCarthy, possesses a positive vibe that makes it livelier and funnier than most critics are giving it credit for.

Then again, maybe I was simply influenced by the audience. I saw it in a very crowded theater, where the majority of people in the seats were women, and the loud and frequent laughter was nothing short of contagious. The folks in the theater definitely enjoyed this one.

LIFE OF THE PARTY tells a simple, albeit far-fetched, story. Right after housewife Deanna (Melissa McCarthy) drops off her daughter for her senior year of college, she learns that her husband wants a divorce. Devastated, Deanna decides to go back to college to earn the degree she gave up on when she decided to start a family.

She enrolls at the same school as her daughter, and before you can say “Toga!” she and her daughter and her daughter’s friends are all best buds and living the college dream together.

As I said, this one is definitely far-fetched. But it’s also definitely funny, as most of the jokes work, and for a comedy, you can’t really ask for more than that.

I saw this one because I’m a fan of Melissa McCarthy, and I generally enjoy her work. I have to say, she’s more than up to the task of carrying what otherwise would have been a mediocre and very silly movie.  She imbues Deanna with likable characteristics that make you root for the character, but more importantly, she’s simply very funny.

When she goes to a college party and tries to fit in, the scene has all the makings of a terrible cliché, but yet McCarthy pulls it off and the audience is laughing. When she finds herself in a sexual relationship with a young college hunk, it’s ridiculous, but because of McCarthy, it’s also hilarious.

That’s one place where this film could have been much better, if it had simply been more believable. This lighthearted comedy is so unbelievable it’s nearly a fantasy, but it’s heart is in the right place, as is it’s funny bone.

And the comedy has to work on a good-natured level because the film is rated PG-13, not R, and so this isn’t a raunchy gross-out college comedy. It plays like a throwback to some of the classic comedies of yesteryear, the silly comedies of the 1960s which used to feature Doris Day. Think “Doris Day Goes Back to College” and you’ll have the right idea for how this one plays out.

McCarthy wrote the screenplay with her husband Ben Falcone, who also directed. This is their third film together, following TAMMY (2014) and THE BOSS (2016).

In spite of this one not being believable, it does get some things right.  It nails the relationship between Deanna and her daughter Maddie (Molly Gordon). Maddie is not too keen at first about her mother being on the same campus and hanging out with her friends, but it doesn’t take her long to change her mind and really go along with things. Their relationship is not cliché. They really do like each other, which is something you don’t see every day in a movie. And Molly Gordon is excellent as Maddie.

As is the rest of the cast. Maya Rudolph has a field day as Deanna’s best friend Christine, and she has some of the best laugh-out-loud moments in the movie. The mediation sequence is a keeper, as is the scene with Deanna and Christine on the racket ball court.

The actresses who play Maddie’s friends all stand out, especially Gillian Jacobs as Helen, known as “Coma Girl,” as she had awoken one day after spending several years in a coma.  Character actors Stephen Root and Jacki Weaver are hilarious as Deanna’s parents. And Chris Parnell is on hand as Deanna’s former classmate and now professor, who obviously has a thing for her.

The film also captures Deanna’s delight at being back in college again. It’s as if she has turned back the clock for herself.

LIFE OF THE PARTY certainly doesn’t rank with my favorite Melissa McCarthy movies. For example, THE HEAT (2013) with McCarthy and Sandra Bullock was a much funnier movie. But I’d heard this one was awful, and it really isn’t.

The best part of LIFE OF THE PARTY is it is indeed funny.  I laughed a lot. The audience of women I saw it with laughed even more.

I didn’t believe any of it for a second, but since the film avoided the pitfall of associating stupidity with humor, in that it retained a sincere mood throughout, even if its situations were often far-fetched and suited more for fantasy than for a comedy, it worked, making it that rare example of a movie that I can’t say I believed but I can say that I liked.

LIFE OF THE PARTY is lively, energetic, and fun. It truly is the life of the party.

—END—

 

BAD SAMARITAN (2018) – Routine Thriller Not That Thrilling

1

 

bad-samaritan-david-tennant

David Tennant in BAD SAMARITAN (2018).

BAD SAMARITAN (2018) is one of those movies where the idea behind its plot is better than the actual movie.

Supposedly influenced by the films of Alfred Hitchcock, the movie barely resembles the work of the master director.

In BAD SAMARITAN, two buddies, Sean Falco (Robert Sheehan) and Derek Sandoval (Carlito Olivero) struggling to make it in the world— Sean’s a photographer who wants to create art— have taken to robbing people’s homes. They park cars for an upscale Italian restaurant, and when they spot someone they feel has stuff worth stealing at their home, one of them drives the car back to the customer’s house and robs it while the other keeps an eye on the victim dining inside the restaurant.

When a rather rude and obviously very rich man Cale Erendreich (David Tennant) shows up at the restaurant, Sean and Derek agree he’s the perfect candidate for them to rob. Sean breaks into the man’s home and all is going well until he discovers a woman, Katie (Kerry Condon) chained in his bedroom like an animal. Sean tries to rescue her, but when Cale abruptly leaves the restaurant, Sean has to race back to get the man’s car back in time, but he promises to return to rescue the woman.

Knowing that he had broken into the man’s house, and fearing arrest, Sean makes an anonymous call to the police, but when they arrive at Cale’s house, Cale is there with another woman, and everything seems so normal the police do not even go inside. Sean vows to do whatever it takes to rescue the woman, but that’s easier said than done, because it doesn’t take Cale long to figure out what Sean is up to, and he in turn decides to stop Sean by making his life a living hell.

As I said, the idea behind the plot is a good one. I liked the notion of a thief breaking into the home of a serial killer and discovering the chained body of his next victim. But that’s about all I liked, really, because unfortunately, there’s nothing in this film to lift it above the level of a straightforward and very predictable by-the-numbers thriller.

Obviously, the biggest draw here is that David Tennant plays the villain, Cale. Now, Tennant is a very talented actor, but this isn’t the kind of movie you buy a ticket to hoping to see a tremendous performance by your favorite actor. Besides, you’ve already seen Tennant play this type of role if you watched Season 1 of the Netflix Marvel TV show JESSICA JONES (2015-18), where Tennant played the villain Kilgrave. His performance here is nearly identical, and about the only difference is Cale doesn’t have Kilgrave’s mind-controlling abilities.

The script by Brandon Boyce doesn’t help matters. Cale is a straightforward villain with very little depth. We know hardly anything about him, and while Tennant tries to make the character a three-dimensional one, the truth is he just doesn’t have enough material to work with. At the end of the day, in terms of villainous characters, Cale is rather boring.

One part of the screenplay I did like was the angle that both Sean and Derek not only feared getting arrested, but they also were afraid of getting deported, since neither one of them were born in the U.S. This was a timely plot point. Unfortunately, it’s mentioned all too briefly and not really developed.

I also liked the performances by Robert Sheehan as Sean and Carlito Olivero as his buddy Derek. Both actors are very good, and Sheehan makes Sean sympathetic in spite of the poor decisions he makes in his life, like robbing people’s homes. Derek tries to convince Sean just to forget about the woman, but Sean refuses, making it almost his mission to find her and rescue her. Sheehan is in most of the movie and is easily watchable.

Olivero is in the film much less than Sheehan, but he also makes an impression, and his character Derek, although he initially tries to dissuade Sean from finding the woman, does not shy away from helping his friend in the quest to locate the victim.

But the rest of the characters are all way underdeveloped and don’t leave much of a mark, including Jacqueline Byers as Sean’s girlfriend Riley. They’re in the first scene of the movie together, and they generate such wonderful chemistry I thought much of the movie would involve them, but Riley simply fades into the background, as do all the other characters, like Sean’s mother and step-father, the police, and the FBI agents.

The movie spends a lot of time on the relationship between Cale and his victim, Katie, played by Kerry Condon, but these scenes shed very little insight into either character.  We learn little about Katie, other than she’s a victim, and the strangest thing about this movie is how little sympathy it builds for Katie.

BAD SAMARITAN also does a poor job wrapping things up for its characters. It introduces a lot of characters but doesn’t show what happens to most of them.

Director Dean Devlin’s thriller is devoid of any originality and plays like most other thrillers you’ve already seen. There are a couple of very good performances here, but none of them are strong enough to carry the movie or make it better than what it is.

There are also plenty of missed opportunities. Sean is a photographer, for instance, but his photography skills hardly play a factor in the plot. I also expected more from the relationship between Kale and Katie. Strangely, she never seems all that scared. She should have been terrified.

And for a thriller, it’s not very thrilling. I don’t think I jumped once, nor was I on the edge of my seat. The suspense was minimal.

I would imagine this one’s not doing all that well at the box office. There were just three of us in the theater.

BAD SAMARITAN is not a bad movie. It’s just not a very good one.

—END—

 

 

Memorable Movie Quotes: LIVE AND LET DIE (1973)

0

 

Live and Let Die - Seymour and Moore

Jane Seymour and Roger Moore in LIVE AND LET DIE (1973)

Welcome back to Memorable Movie Quotes, that column where we look at cool quotes from some really cool movies.

Up today, it’s LIVE AND LET DIE (1973), the first Roger Moore James Bond movie, and also the first Bond flick I saw at the movies, as I was fortunate enough to see this one when I was just nine years old.  I loved it and instantly declared Roger Moore the best James Bond. Of course, a few years and several Bond movies later, I changed my tune and went with Sean Connery.

Here’s a look at some quotes from the James Bond movie LIVE AND LET DIE, screenplay by Tom Mankiewicz.

Like most James Bond movies, especially the Roger Moore ones, the script is full of humorous double entendres. In fact, when playing Bond, Moore seemed most at home keeping things light.

Like in this early scene in the film, as Bond unzips his date’s dress with a magnet in his watch:

WOMAN: Such a delicate touch.

JAMES BOND: Sheer magnetism, darling.

In one of the film’s funnier scenes, Bond eludes the folks chasing him by hopping into a small plane only to find a woman at the controls waiting for her flying lesson.  They then speed through the airport with the villains in high pursuit. When the wild chase is over, and Bond and the woman safely bring the plane to a comfortable stop, Bond turns to her and says:

JAMES BOND:  Same time tomorrow, Mrs. Bell?

And after the villainous Kananga is killed when Bond shoves an explosive gas pellet into his mouth, causing him to blow up like a balloon and then explode, there’s this exchange with the beautiful Solitaire (Jane Seymour):

SOLITAIRE: Where’s Kananga?

JAMES BOND: He always did have an inflated opinion of himself.

 

One of my favorite lines comes right at the beginning of the movie, when one of Bond’s fellow agents is on a mission in New Orleans. He’s watching a funeral, when a man approaches him.

AGENT: Whose funeral is this?

MAN: Yours.

The man pulls out a knife and stabs the agent.

 

A lot of the humor in the film comes from Clifton James’ over-the-top portrayal of Southern sheriff J.W. Pepper. The role proved so popular that James reprised the role in Moore’s next outing as Bond, THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN GUN (1974) which also starred Christopher Lee as the villainous Scaramanga.

In LIVE AND LET DIE, Sheriff Pepper spends most of his time chasing Bond all over the roads and waterways of Louisiana. When one of the cars whizzes past him, Pepper radios in:

SHERIFF PEPPER: Toby. Toby! I got me a regular Ben-Hur down here. Doing 95… minimum.

STATE TROOPER: Need any help, J.W.?

SHERIFF PEPPER: Hell, no!

When Bond proves too elusive, the sheriff decides to call for his brother-in-law, Billy-Bob, who owns the fastest boat in the area.

SHERIFF PEPPER: I got it. You call my brother-in-law, Billy Bob. He’s got the fastest boat in the whole damn river. Billy Bob sure enough will fix their ass! Call Billy Bob!

And later, when the chase ends badly for the police, and a boat lies smashed into the sheriff’s car, his deputies react:

DEPUTY: That look like a boat stuck in the Sheriff’s car there, Eddie?

EDDIE: Boy, where you been all your life? That there’s one of them new car-boats.

 

And we finish with one last double entendre from Mr. Bond. After defeating a one-armed assassin, and having removed the dead man’s prosthetic arm from the train window, he’s asked by Solitaire:

SOLITAIRE: Now what are you doing?

JAMES BOND: Just being disarming, darling.

 

And that’s it for now. I hope you enjoyed this edition of MEMORABLE MOVIE QUOTES featuring quotes from LIVE AND LET DIE.

Join me again next time when we look at more cool quotes from other cool movies.

Thanks for reading!

—Michael

Books by Michael Arruda:

TIME FRAME,  science fiction novel by Michael Arruda.  

Ebook version:  $2.99. Available at http://www.crossroadpress.com. Print version:  $18.00. Includes postage! Email your order request to mjarruda33@gmail.com. Also available at Amazon.com.

IN THE SPOOKLIGHT, movie review collection by Michael Arruda.

InTheSpooklight_NewText

 Ebook version:  $4.99.  Available at http://www.crossroadpress.com.  Print version:  $18.00.  Includes postage. Email your order request to mjarruda33@gmail.com. Also available at Amazon.com.

FOR THE LOVE OF HORROR, short story collection by Michael Arruda.  

For The Love Of Horror cover

Print version:  $18.00.  Includes postage. Email your order request to mjarruda33@gmail.com. Also available at Amazon.com.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TULLY (2018) – Odd Telling of Motherhood Tale A Showcase for Charlize Theron

1
tully-mackenzie-davis-charlize-theron-

Mackenzie Davis and Charlize Theron in TULLY (2018).

TULLY (2018) is an odd movie.

Sometimes I like the odd ones. Other times I don’t.  This one teetered right on the fulcrum for the most part, leaning ever so slightly towards the side of it-didn’t-really-work-for-me.

TULLY is a tale of motherhood, but that’s not what makes this one peculiar. The stress and toils of what it’s like to raise a newborn with two very active older children already in the house, and with an inattentive husband, that part the film gets right.  It’s the extension of that part, which leads to the arrival of the titular character, where the film struggles.

Marlo (Charlize Theron) is about to have a baby, and as one of the characters points out, she looks like she’s going to pop. She and her husband Drew (Ron Livingston) already have two children, an eight year-old girl Sarah (Lia Frankland) and a five year-old son Jonah (Asher Miles Fallica). Jonah has emotional issues, and while Marlo has taken him to see doctors, they haven’t received a proper diagnosis of his condition. Jonah is prone to fits of panic, crying, and he fixates on routine, which all certainly sounds like a branch of autism, but the disorder is never mentioned in the movie. Instead, Jonah is referred to as “quirky.”

Marlo is already under tremendous stress, mostly because all the parent duties fall on her. Drew works long hours, and when he comes home, they have dinner, and then he retreats to the bedroom where he plays video games. She has no idea how she is going to handle the additional burden of caring for a newborn.

Marlo’s brother Craig (Mark Duplass) suggests she hire a night nanny, someone who comes in at night and takes care of the baby so the mother can enjoy a full night’s sleep, or at least a better night’s sleep. The night nanny still wakes the mother up to breast feed, but that’s it. The mother is free to go right back to sleep afterwards. Craig even goes so far as to offer to pay for the night nanny as a birthday gift for Marlo, but she hesitates, not feeling comfortable inviting a stranger into her home to care for her baby while she’s sleeping.

But after a few rough weeks, Marlo changes her mind. Soon after, showing up at the front door one night like a magical Mary Poppins, is Tully (Mackenzie Davis), their new night nanny.  Tully explains that she’s also there to take care of Marlo as well as the baby. In fact, she says she can help out with everything around the house.

If this sounds like the set-up for a bad horror movie, you’re right. It does, but TULLY is not a horror movie. It’s a comedy-drama, with the emphasis on drama. At one point, Marlo and Drew even joke that the situation does sound like a horror movie, but they laugh it off.

Tully is a quirky character herself, always positive, almost seeming like an angel to Marlo. She is certainly there to help, and the way she helps and her relationship with Marlo is pretty much the story TULLY has to tell.

First off, the most amazing thing about TULLY is that Charlize Theron gained 50 pounds for this role! Talk about dedication! Marlo’s body is supposed to be in rough shape after the pregnancy, as she struggles to lose the additional weight, and Theron with the extra pounds she put on looks the part.

The extra weight also represents the heavy emotional burden Marlo faces each day, as you can just see her struggling to stay afloat in her life. It’s a very good performance by Theron, certainly more satisfying than her traditional turn as the killer agent in ATOMIC BLONDE (2017). That being said, I enjoyed her performance in MAD MAX: FURY ROAD (2015) better than her work here.

So, if you’re a fan of Charlize Theron, you definitely want to see this movie. It’s a chance to see her really act.

But the story I had some issues with.  TULLY is by the same team that made JUNO (2007), with Jason Reitman directing and Diablo Cody writing the screenplay. Tully is definitely an odd character, one who at times seems too good to be true, a la Mary Poppins, and since this isn’t a fantasy tale, obviously something has to give, and what that something is to be honest I saw coming very early on.

For starters, the film offers some clues. For example, Marlo has a recurring dream about a mermaid swimming in the water, and since mermaids are not real, the imagery is there for the audience to see clearly a character— the mermaid— who is not real.

Also, if you’ve seen a certain famous movie by M. Night Shyamalan, you won’t be fooled here. It’s obvious early on by the way certain scenes are set up that something isn’t quite right.

The other issue I had with the screenplay by Diablo Cody is the way it handles the young Jonah character.  The boy is certainly on the spectrum for autism or asperger syndrome, and yet no one in the movie acknowledges this. Even the administration and teachers at the school seem to be oblivious, only referring to Jonah as “quirky.” In this day and age, that didn’t seem realistic to me, nor was it credible that Marlo and Drew would have taken their son to multiple doctors without receiving a proper diagnosis.

It also didn’t help that Tully was supposed to be this savior character, but yet I found her persona grating and annoying.

Mackenzie Davis is fine as Tully, although admittedly I never warmed to the character. We recently saw Davis in BLADE RUNNER 2049 (2017), and I liked her better in that science fiction movie.

This isn’t the first time Ron Livingston has played an ineffective dad.  He got to perform the same honors in the scary horror flick THE CONJURING (2013) a few years back.  Here, as Drew, the video game playing father, Livingston is very good.  What he does best is make Drew more clueless than careless.  He does love his family and his wife, but it simply takes him an entire movie to realize he needs to get off his butt more to help out.

Which also brings me to another issue I had with this one, the ending.  It ends on a happy note, which one would expect from a movie marketed as a comedy/drama, but I’m not sure I bought all of it.  For instance, Drew supposedly sees the light at the end of the movie and realizes, “You know, I should be helping out more, shouldn’t I?” Duh! Through Livingston’s performance, I understood that Drew was a decent guy, but the script never sold me on the moment when he awakes from his self-absorbed stupor.

And as I said, the big twist in this one, I didn’t think was much of a twist because I saw it coming very early in the proceedings.

The movie wasn’t hyped all that much, and it showed, as I saw it with a small audience. There were only about ten of us in the theater.

TULLY is an odd one. It works best when it shows the incredible stress Marlo feels raising three children, including a developmentally challenged five year-old boy, and a newborn baby. It stumbles when it enters its metaphorical realm, with the entrance of the titular character Tully, the night nanny with all the answers.

There is certainly more to Tully than meets the eye, but sharp observers can figure out what that something is before it’s revealed. And once it is revealed, it begs the question, what’s the point? Is it all just one big wake-up call for Marlo and Drew? That seems to be the case.

I wish they had experienced this enlightenment earlier in the movie. The two of them working together trying to handle their challenging family situation sounds like a story I might like to see.

—END—

 

 

IN THE SPOOKLIGHT: THE NIGHT STALKER (1972)

0

Night_Stalker_poster

“This nut thinks he’s a vampire!”

So says reporter Carl Kolchak to his editor Tony Vincenzo, as he tries to convince him to publish his story.

THE NIGHT STALKER (1972) is not only one of the best horror movies from the 1970s, it’s also one of the best horror movies period.

Even more impressive, it was a made-for-TV movie, which isn’t surprising for the early 1970s, as that part of the decade was a great time for made-for-TV horror movies. Films like THE NORLISS TAPES (1973), GARGOYLES (1972), and TRILOGY OF TERROR (1975) were all made-for-TV shockers.

The best of the lot was THE NIGHT STALKER.

THE NIGHT STALKER starred Darren McGavin in the role that most of us consider to be his signature role, the inexorable reporter Carl Kolchak.

This movie earned such high ratings when it premiered on television on January 11, 1972 that in a largely unprecedented move, it was released theatrically after it played on TV because the film was that popular. Amazing.

And it really is a superior horror movie, which is no surprise since it was produced by Dan Curtis, the man behind the Dark Shadows phenomenon. It’s also an incredibly lean production, as it clocks in at just 74 minutes. There isn’t an ounce of fat on this baby.

THE NIGHT STALKER boasts a fantastic script, and you would expect no less since it was written by Richard Matheson, based on an unpublished novel by Jeff Rice. The legendary Matheson wrote a ton of movies and so it would be difficult to call THE NIGHT STALKER his best screenplay, but I will say that for me, it’s probably my favorite Matheson screenplay.

In 1972 Las Vegas, young women are being murdered, their bodies drained of blood. The authorities want this information kept out of the news to avoid a panic, but reporter Carl Kolchak (Darren McGavin) sees this story as his ticket back to the big time, as he’s been fired from one major newspaper after another, due to his in-your-face abrasive style.

Kolchak’s efforts come much to the chagrin of his hard-nosed irritable editor, Tony Vincenzo (Simon Oakland) who has a love/hate relationship with his reporter.  Kolchak describes his boss in a voice-over, “Rumor has it that the day Anthony Albert Vincenzo was born, his father left town. The story may be apocryphal, but I believe it. The only point I wonder about is why his mother didn’t leave too.”

Vincenzo recognizes that Kolchak is a top-notch reporter but grows increasingly frustrated that he can’t control him. Their verbal exchanges are some of the liveliest parts of the movie.

The vampire, Janos Skorzeny (Barry Atwater) possesses superhuman strength and performs such feats as hurling doctors through windows, tossing police officers about like twigs and outrunning police cars. He’s a type of vampire seldom seen in the movies, and to 1972 audiences he made for a violent shocking killer.  He’s quite scary.

The film does a nice job building to the inevitable climax where Kolchak finally tracks down Skorzeny.

Carl Kolchak was a perfect role for Darren McGavin and it’s no surprise he’s most known for the part. What I’ve always liked about Kolchak in THE NIGHT STALKER is unlike other heroes in vampire movies, Kolchak knew absolutely nothing about vampires.  For him, it was just a story, and at first, he didn’t even think it was a real vampire until he saw with his own eyes the vampire in action. He then researches the supernatural, and before you know it, he’s the one who’s telling the police about crosses and wooden stakes through the heart.

The vampire scenes in THE NIGHT STALKER are second to none.  Barry Atwater makes for a chilling vampire, hissing and dashing in and out of the shadows a la Christopher Lee, and like Lee in some of his Dracula portrayals, Atwater has no dialogue. In fact, Atwater’s performance as Skorzeny is even more visceral and violent than Lee’s Dracula. The success of THE NIGHT STALKER also influenced Hammer Films to make their next Dracula movie, DRACULA A.D. 1972 (1972) as a modern-day vampire tale set in 1970s London rather than the usual 1890s period piece. THE NIGHT STALKER is the superior film, by far.

The film enjoys a fine supporting cast, led by Carol Lynley as Kolchak’s girlfriend Gail Foster. There’s Claude Akins as the aptly named Sheriff Butcher, who also butchers the English language. During one press conference, he yells at Kolchak saying the reporter is there by the “mutual suffrage of us all,” to which Kolchak quickly corrects him, “it’s sufferance, sheriff.””

The cast also features Kent Smith as D.A. Paine, Ralph Meeker as Kolchak’s friend and FBI contact Bernie Jenks, and Elisha Cook, Jr. as another of Kolchak’s sources, Mickey Crawford.

The best supporting performance though belongs to Simon Oakland as Tony Vincenzo. Oakland would reprise the role in both the sequel THE NIGHT STRANGLER (1973) and the subsequent NIGHT STALKER TV series.

Directed by John Llewellyn Moxey, THE NIGHT STALKER is a quick efficient thriller with enough chills and thrills for a movie twice its length. The early scenes chronicling the violent attacks on women in Las Vegas are scary and unsettling, and thanks to Richard Matheson’s superior script, the story moves forward with nearly every scene as the suspense continues to grow..

Moxey worked mostly in television, and he directed other genre TV movies as well.  He also directed the little seen Christopher Lee horror movie CIRCUS OF FEAR (1966), also known as PSYCHO-CIRCUS, a West German/UK co-production, and Moxey directed the English language version.

But the biggest reason, of course, to see THE NIGHT STALKER is Darren McGavin’s performance as reporter Carl Kolchak. Kolchak is a man who isn’t afraid to ruffle feathers or get into the faces of the authorities in order to tell the truth.  That’s part of the attraction of the character.  That he’s fighting through the lies of the establishment.  As he says in another voice-over, “Sherman Duffy of the New York Herald once said, ‘A newspaperman is the loneliest guy on earth. Socially he ranks somewhere between a hooker and a bartender. Spiritually he stands with Galileo, because he knows the world is round.'”

McGavin would play Kolchak again in the sequel THE NIGHT STRANGLER and in the NIGHT STALKER TV series (1974-75), which sadly lasted only one season.

He also gets the last lines in the movie, as he speaks into his tape recorder and concludes, “So think about it and try to tell yourself wherever you may be in the quiet of your home, in the safety of your bed, try to tell yourself, it couldn’t happen here.”

—END—