Pacific Rim: Uprising Lacks The Unique Directorial Style Of Its Predecessor But Compensates With Enough Action And Mayhem

    

      When a sequel is greenlighted, it's generally because the original film ended up being not just a financial success but managed to catch the audiences attention in terms of the overall experience with them being overall satisfied with the end result and left wanting more. In the case of the original Pacific Rim directed by Academy Award Winner Guillermo del Toro, the film underperformed stateside despite blowing up globally with a massive $400 million worldwide haul along with favorable opinions from audiences. Given the highly unusual mixture of the first being both a box office success globally, as well as being somewhat of a financial misfire stateside
(It still managed to cross $100 million stateside though the budget was much higher), the studio saw enough international appeal with the film to proceed with a sequel. Released a total of five years after the events of the first film without the involvement of del Toro as writer/director this round, Pacific Rim: Uprising aims to continue the world building of the previous film while introducing newer characters combined with returning ones. The end result is an entertaining and generally satisfying sequel to the first Pacific Rim, even if it doesn't quite match the standard of its predecessor, nor the stamp that del Toro left on the first Pacific Rim. Pacific Rim: Uprising feels like a better sequel to Independence Day than Resurgence as both films carry similar character arcs and plot points (The son of one of the originals main stars wanting to follow in their fathers footsteps, society rebuilding after the events of the previous film with a younger generation being the armed force against the invaders). The film delivers enough explosions and machine vs creature battles to excite the audience along with an appealing young cast of talented actors pushing the sequels story forward. The film is not original in regards to any aspect of its story, but it combines all the key elements of a typical monster and disaster flick to make it both an undeniably entertaining as well as a solid sequel to the first film.

      The plot for Pacific Rim: Uprising takes place a decade after the previous film with a dead war hero's son (Played by Force Awaken's John Boyega with Idris Elba playing his father in the original) reluctantly following in his fathers footsteps by taking up his duties along with being tasked to train both young men and women to fight an army of large reptilian monsters called the Kaiju. It's throughout his battles that he finds more determination and courage in them than he has imagined as the new generation of warriors both train and prepare to defend humanity. The plot for Pacific Rim: Uprising manages to create enough distance from the first film to tell it's own story while remaining loosely connected to it. The story for Uprising does attempt to build upon the events of that film with a new generation of young cadets going toe to toe with Kaiju's, which often feels like a crossover between the Power Rangers mixed with teaspoons of both Transformers and Top Gun. The sequel manages to give audiences much of what they enjoyed about the first film such as its edge of your seat action, that's combined with young and hip characters who are designed for the audience to care about. The films story structure is well-balanced with the main characters receiving enough buildup, as well as strong enough chemistry to hold over audiences in between the films main action set pieces. Like its previous predecessor Uprising manages to be pure entertainment and spectacle though it lacks a distinct visual stamp that Del Toro leaves with all his films despite the film carrying a strong visual flare of it's own. It's a film that knows exactly what it is and what it wants to be, while living up to its promise to entertain audiences in a style similar to Michael Bay's Transformers with the difference being the Pacific Rim series carries with it a similar style but carries more substance with it.

      Outside of the films fantastic visual set pieces, one of its key elements that makes it work is the likable and charming performances from it's main cast, John Boyega in particular who continues to demonstrate his ability to provide a strong leading man performance in both this film as well as Disney's​ Star Wars sequel trilogy. Whereas the new film loses key figures from the first such as Charlie Hunnam and Idris Elba, Uprising brings in Boyega with The Fate Of The Furious star Scott Eastwood, and Cailee Spaeny with returning faces from the first Pacific Rim such as Burn Gorman and Charlie Day. In the films main role, John Boyega proves to be both charismatic and compelling as Jake Pentecost, the son of Stacker Pentecost who was played in the previous film by Idris Elba. Boyegas acting is solid and carries the film during the films quieter and character driven moments, while keeping the audience engaged with its insane action sequences. Scott Eastwood impresses audiences in the role of Nathan Lambert, Jake's estranged co-pilot and partner. Their characters dynamic help gives the film a Top Gun feel with audiences getting instant flashbacks to Maverick and Iceman's conflict before they became allies. Cailee Spaeny surprises in the role of street orphan and creator of a civilian Jaeger Amara Namani, along with being Jake's partner also when Nate becomes injured. Like Eastwood, she shares strong chemistry with Boyegas character, making their friendship dynamic believable to audiences as well as likable. Jing Tian gives a likable performance as Shao Liwen, a smart businesswoman and technologist who joined the allies against the precursor Emissary. As for the films supporting roles, Burn Gorman and Charlie Day both serve as being welcoming returns of familiar faces from the previous films with Day stealing the show once again as Dr. Newton Geiszler, a brainwashed former scientist and officer in the PPDC, who ends up becoming the emissary of the Precursors after they seize control of his mind. His role in the second film is expanded upon with his character having an interesting twist that occurs within the films third act. The overall performances from the main cast was always going to be a major factor in selling the believability of both the characters and story for Uprising. Thankfully, the main cast rises to the occasion and brings much energy and life to their performances. The strength of the newer actors proves to be even more impressive given the sequel consists of mostly newer faces.

      The films directing by Steven S. DeKnight proves to be both serviceable and effective with DeKnight giving his best effort to fit into the shoes of Guillermo del Toro with his whacky and distinct visual flare, that he leaves with each film he does. With Uprising, DeKnight gives audiences his best Michael Bay impersonation in regards to directing the films action-set pieces in a style similar to Bay's Transformers films. When it comes to the action sequences, DeKnight delivers a similar style to Bays films in regards to the films flashy cinematography such as the slow-motion turning around in front of explosions, overlong and drawn out battle scenes, and characters being appealing though lacking true depth. Where DeKnight's action sequences might lack some of the excitement of the ones from the first film, he makes an effort to compensate by delivering newer Jaeger designs with additional combat moves, particularly when they join forces. Whereas the first Pacific Rim film was directed to not only be a fun rollercoaster ride for audiences but also carry a serious tone to it, that made audiences think of films with similar arcs such as Independence Day with Idris Elba giving his dramatic speech in a vein similar to Bill Pullman, Uprising is more straight-forward and confident in its ambitions to deliver enormous amounts of popcorn entertainment to it's audience with the combination of Power Rangers meets Transformers with the films epic battle sequences. The films pacing never lags and keeps both the action and story moving with the score by Lorne Balfe adding to the films excitement, as well as its emotional core. As for the films visual and sound effects, the latter proves to be top notch with the action sequences being both loud and thunderous with strong CGI to back it up. Given that del Toro films carry a unique visual stamp on them, that make it extremely hard for anyone to surpass or imitate, DeKnight does a solid job of not only building on the universe that Guillermo introduced to audiences in 2013, but distancing the sequels story far enough to where it can reference the past while standing as its own film along with being a continuation of the story.

      The films writing also by Steven S. DeKnight, Emily Carmichael, Kira Snyder and T.S Nowlin is reasonably decent given the type of film audiences expect Pacific Rim Uprising to be. While the films battle sequences serve as being the main attraction for audiences, the script is fairly well-balanced in giving audiences enough global destruction, while focusing on the arcs involving the films main characters. To audiences, most if not all of the films main subplots are rather generic and reused from other films with similar plots. The subplot involving Boyega's character carrying on his fathers legacy can be compared to films such as Creed and A New Hope with the conflict between his character and Eastwood's over whose right in regards to fighting the monsters giving audiences the Top Gun vibe. Another familiar element of the story is the whole concept of a black sheep coming back into the picture to lead a group of new trainees to save the world essentially. If audiences approach Uprising looking for originality with the films script, they'll be largely disappointed as both creativity and originality in regards to the films story is shown to be largely absent here with heavy reliance on old and tired cliches. Despite the familiarity of things, the film is appealing enough for the audience to forgive the scripts lack of creativity and accept its basic plot with one dimensional character development, that's cleverly disguised by the strong performances of it's main actors.

      Is Pacific Rim: Uprising the overblown CGI trainwreck that many critics made the film out to be upon its release? No, while the film suffers from some sizable faults of its own (The lack of strong scriptwriting, Guillermo del Toro's detailed and focused visionary approach to the films look is missed here), it still carries enough appeal to make it worthwhile for fans of the first Pacific Rim that's largely thanks to the performances of the main cast, as well as the insane action the film delivers. Given the sequel is one that audiences weren't exactly clamoring for as the first film closed its story up fairly well, Uprising does a surprisingly decent job of not only justifying its existence to those who enjoyed the previous film, but managing to honor it's past while delivering a somewhat worthy follow-up/soft reboot. One hopes that del Toro returns to direct the third Pacific Rim film to connect all three films together while giving the story he began a proper sound off. Pacific Rim: Uprising despite feeling like a consistent sequel to the first film makes no efforts to hide the fact that it's main agenda is to entertain its audience with popcorn style thrills mixed with explosive action and rising young stars. Its intentions are to be nothing else beyond that and never tries to go deep with its plot development or themes. Whereas that would normally result in films turning out to be lackluster as well as both shallow and disappointing, there's enough presented on the surface to give it a thumbs up rather than flat out disregarding the film. Uprising sets out to rock the audiences world and it does so with no apologies for being what it ultimately is. For that reason, it deserves ones time and effort.

Final Verdict: For those who enjoyed Pacific Rim, Uprising proves to be a solid sequel on its own merits despite not being quite as good or carrying del Toros unique visual touch.

The Shape Of Water Is A Dark And Mesmerizing Fantasy Tale That's Beautifully Told And Masterfully Shot

       Very few directors can be considered true visionary filmmakers. A visionary filmmaker is someone, who carries a specific style behind their filmmaking that essentially feels like a stamp on all the films they do. Directors who fit the profile of being visionary directors are Steven Spielberg, James Cameron, Peter Jackson, Christopher Nolan, and Tim Burton. With The Shape Of Water, Guillermo Del Toro officially cements his status as being one himself with a visual flare that's unique, and proves to be solid yet emotional storytelling. With his newest effort, Del Toro manages to create a bizarre Sci-Fi romance disguised as an art house film, that possesses his trademark visual flare while making the story appealing enough for mainstream audiences, particularly Oscar voters who awarded the film with wins for Best Picture and a long-awaited Best Director win for Del Toro. Not only is The Shape Of Water beautifully made, it stands as being Del Toro's best film next to 2006's Pans Labyrinth. The film has an impressive combination of strong acting performances, stellar cinematography, art-set decoration, costume design, an effective score, and a fantastical element to the story that makes it feel both real and captivating. The end result is an emotionally absorbing story that puts Guillermo Del Toro at his best visually, while matching his visual wonder with strong storytelling and a fantastic performance from Sally Hawkins.

      The story for The Shape Of Water takes place in the 1960's era with a female cleaner named Elisa (Played by Sally Hawkins) discovering a secret containment area where an amphibious humanoid creature is being held captive. Whereas the officials holding the creature have sinister intentions for it, the female cleaner becomes drawn to it. The best way to describe The Shape Of Water is that it's both wild, brave, and imaginative. The films bizarre yet striking love story is presented in a way that makes it come across as feeling intelligent, emotionally charged, and extremely well-acted with great performances from its talented cast. On a visual level, the film essentially allows Del Toro the opportunity to continue pushing the boundaries of him being visually distinctive from other filmmakers with him letting his creative vision run free. One cannot argue that it's an extraordinary vision as he manages to bring something fresh to the story, making it visually breathtaking while engrossing the audience with the films main theme regarding loneliness. The film at times feels like a tribute to the old classical style of Hollywood filmmaking with the way Del Toro helms the film with its stunning cinematography right down to its brilliant score by Alexandre Desplat. For some, The Shape Of Water may come across as being too out there for them to enjoy nor feel comfortable with the concept of a woman falling in love with a fish (They seem to have no problem embracing love stories with similar plots, such as Edward Scissorshand's or Beauty And The Beast Animated Or Live-Action), but for others the film is not only entertaining but shows the free reign that a director with a firm grip on his craft, is allowed to have over the story. The film essentially supplies audiences with the answer of whether the director of Blade ll, Hellboy 1,2, Pans Labyrinth, and Pacific Rim could evolve into creating a more serious type of drama with his insane visual appeal, with the final answer ultimately being yes. Not only can Del Toro provide the story with imagination, but he can also supply it with tons of heart and emotion.

      What elevates the film outside of its strong visual look, is the incredible acting performances from its talented cast with Sally Hawkins performance being both the heart and soul of the film. Hawkins performance as a mute Elisa is significant because of the fact that she played the character without any word of dialogue, using complete sign language as well as her emotions to make the audience connect with her character. She's terrific here and creates a character that's likable and sympathetic. The same goes for Octavia Spencer in a strong supporting role as Elisa's co-worker and friend Zelda, who serves as her interpreter. Richard Jenkins also shines as Elisa's closeted neighbor and close friend Giles, whose a struggling advertising illustrator. With the strong performances of the actors and actresses playing Elisa's supportive and close friends, Michael Shannon does great with playing the films main antagonist Richard Strickland, a United States Colonel in charge of the project to study the creature referred to as the "asset." Whereas all the human actors churn out strong to incredible performances, the real impressive work outside of Hawkins stunning portrayal of Elisa is Doug Jones work as the creature referred to as the "asset." With the help of Del Toro providing uncredited vocal effects combined with Jones mannerisms and character movements, the two succeed in bringing the amphibious creature to life making him both mesmerizing to look at and believable. The films cast and performances go hand in hand with its visual style to bring it's story to life in a way that makes it feel real, believable, and engrossing as the actors all make you feel something for the characters as well as becoming concerned about the well-being of the creature.

      In terms of the films directing, Guillermo Del Toro does an excellent job of meshing fantasy/horror together with romance that makes the audience emotionally invested in both the story as well as the characters. Given that the main characters never speak a word to each other, Del Toro through sheer brilliance and creativity manages to make it work in a way that's hard-hitting. With the creature, he manages to give it a mysterious yet majestical feel that makes it hard for the audience to take their eyes off the screen. Guillermo also succeeds with setting up the mood of the story, giving the film an authentic 1960's feel to it that's stunning both in terms of set and costume design, while allowing his actors the freedom to bring their characters to life. The films editing is skillful and works in regards to keeping the story functional and moving with the story structure remaining coherent with not one moment feeling unnecessarily added to the story. In regards to the creatures design, Del Toro puts a great amount of detail into the look of the creature as he makes it appear both realistic and inventive (Though it shares a similar resemblance to the creature from Hellboy). As a filmmaker, Guillermo is one that knows his craft and puts it on full display with his passion as well as excitement for telling this story. While a love story between a woman and a beast is in no way an original concept, Del Toro takes the familiar and makes it feel fresh and new again with his stylistic approach to filmmaking.

      The films screenplay also by Guillermo Del Toro and Vanessa Taylor succeeds in taking the whole Frankenstein concept, as well as Beauty And The Beast's and presenting a different form of unconventional romance that often feels like it's paying homage to those stories. While it can be argued that Del Toro isn't really going anywhere new with the story as all the best elements of it are borrowed from past classics, he presents those ideas in a way that's flashy and heartfelt with the selecting of the films 1960's time period to be an ideal setting for the story due to the concept of society at the time being constantly afraid of something that's different. Toro and Taylor present their themes of loneliness, love, inability to speak to each other, racism, the fearing of things we don't understand in a way that makes them feel poetic and told in a fairy tale like fashion. The inner-species romantic aspect of the plot, is appropriately handled without it coming across as feeling forced with an ultimate message that says love can transcend differences between extant humanoid species. The screenplay allows a fair amount of time for developing all the main characters, giving the story a novel like feel as everyone has scenes and moments that define their characters and allows the audience to get inside their head. What the writers do with the story that makes it noble is that through the characters of Elisa and the creature, they provide a voice to the voiceless by creating a striking romance between the main characters, that feels suttle rather than generic. One of the films best moments is when Elisa and the amphibian creature share a dance together with Elisa singing a black and white song through the use of sign language. It is through moments like these and others such as them floating together in an apartment that's flooded, and Elisa explaining to Giles in Sign language why she cares so much for the amphibian man, where the sheer power of the story takes full effect, as well as Del Toro's desire to create a unique fairy tale being put on full display.

      In the end, The Shape Of Water is not a film for everyone as the unusual nature of its romance will be too weird for some audiences to invest in. For those who appreciate a directors artistic vision, they will find much to appreciate and become fascinated with Del Toro's work here. It doesn't top his work on Pans Labyrinth but it's the film that demanded he finally nab a well-deserved Best Director Oscar win. He doesn't create a conventional monster film here, but rather a complexed and personal character story regarding two lonely individuals, who form a special bond that can't be explained. The film is bold, creative, and carries with it a distinctive visual touch that makes it stand out from the majority of films released today. As the film demonstrates, Del Toro is expanding his grasp over his craft in terms of becoming one of the greatest visionary filmmakers to ever grace the big screen. Here he gives audiences an emotionally absorbing spectacle, that's all heart and charm with a genuine feeling of imagination thrown into the mix. It's beautifully acted, masterfully shot, and told with pure devotion to its concept which showcases brilliance and imagination. It may not be a film for everyone but its intentions to entertain, as well as captivate its audience cannot be denied. The Shape Of Water is one of the more unusual Best Picture Winners in recent memory, but it also happens to be one of the most daring.

Final Verdict: For Guillermo Del Toro fans as well as those who enjoy films made with the sole intention of being striking pieces of art, The Shape Of Water is a must see.

Vice Is A Bold And Clever Satirical Piece With Fantastic Acting By Christian Bale

      

      Making a biography to a person's life is a challenging task as the filmmakers have both an obligation to be as accurate to the facts surrounding that person's life as much as possible, while making the story both entertaining and appealing for its specific target audience. In the case of Vice, the filmmakers take a bold initiative by covering the political career of Dick Cheney while incorporating both humor as well as satire to the proceedings. It can be argued that the film aims to point an unflattering picture of the controversial ex-Vice President, as well as taking a shot at their administration, but the film aims for the most part to remain as well-balanced in regards to showing the rise of Dick Cheney as being a political insider in Washington to becoming Vice-president as much as possible. What could've easily ended up being a boring and rather bland autobiography that glorifies it's counterpart turns out to be an entertaining, often funny, well-acted, and provocative film that shows Cheney's surprising rise in stature with the film posing some hard-hitting questions along with the reflection of reality. Vice is certainly not everyone's cup of tea in terms of being a widely appealing film, but it's a well-handled one that works due to the pure craftsmanship of both it's actors and filmmakers. With the role of Dick Cheney, Christian Bale proves once again why he's one of the greatest actors of his generation as the idea of him playing Dick Cheney may comes across as sounding unbelievable at first until the audience witnesses the transformation from actor to character as he totally nails it. Vice is unquestionably one of the best performances to come out in 2018 with the film being one of the strongest for those willing to give it a chance.

      The story for Vice gives both a complexed and satirical examination into how Dick Cheney (Played by Christian Bale), a consummate Washington insider and career politician, managed to turn whats essentially viewed as being a mostly ineffective position of being Vice President into an incredibly powerful position of command during the administration of President George W. Bush (Played surprisingly well by Sam Rockwell), as well as showing his response to the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Vice makes its intentions known early on that its portrayal of Cheney is one that leans towards being one that's unflattering and even condemning at times with it's attempt to educate the audience on Cheney's rise through the political establishment of the Republican Party, while showing the character himself to be a rather complexed figure. While the filmmakers fire direct shots at Cheney as well as reminding the audience of the damage both him and his administration did to both the country and the world during their run in the White House, they also present moments where Cheney acted less like a Emperor Palpatine from Star Wars style figure behind the curtain and more of a human being who carried common flaws such as gambling and excessive drinking, yet also cared about the well-being of his family. The film manages to develop other members of the Bush administration with showing the business relationship between Donald Rumsfield (Played well by Steve Carrell) and Dick Cheney, while also showing Cheney meeting and observing how inexperienced W. Bush is as a candidate while seizing the opportunity to become his Vice President as a form of power grab. The filmmakers make it a point to take scattershots at numerous people throughout the film while showing Cheney's rise in stature. The satirical aspect of the film goes a long way in regards to maintaining the audiences interest with the story along with the stellar performances from it's main talented cast with Bale stealing the show with his commanding yet transformative performance. As a film, Vice manages to find a perfect balance of both history and satire that makes it engrossing for the audience to watch, while serving as both a refresher and eye-opener in regards to educating people on the decision making that triggered some of the most significant events in the 21st century, which forever changed the political spectrum along with the world.

      As far as the films acting performances go, the cast as a whole does a fantastic job of bringing their real life counterparts to life with Christian Bale knocking it out of the park as Dick Cheney. Not only does he manage to completely own the part but gets his mannerisms, patterns of speaking, and coldness down to perfection. His emotional acting is as equally impressive as his physical transformation, showing audiences that he represents the kind of dedication and commitment upon playing his roles that's barely seen nowadays. He chews up each scene that he's in while leaving an undeniable impact on the screen. Amy Adams manages to rise to the level that Bale set with his performance and meets him head on with her strong performance as Dick's wife Lynne Cheney. She does very well playing a cold and square Lady Macbeth type character whose less likable than her husband, pushing him to extend his position to gain more power and stature. The two showcase great on screen chemistry together with their characters driving the story. When looking at the real life Dick and Lynne, one would be hard-pressed to picture these two as being the ideal choices to portray them on screen but both actors manage to successfully pull it off in a sweeping fashion making their separate Oscar nominations well-deserved. In addition to the strong performances delivered by Bale and Adams, Sam Rockwell manages to rise to the occasion with his spot-on performance of George W. Bush, not only acting similar to the ex-president in terms of voice but sharing a similar physical presence. The rest of the supporting cast delivers solid performances with Steve Carrell being surprisingly good as crazy Secretary Of Defense Donald Rumsfield, Tyler Perry delivering a small yet effective performance as Colin Powell, LisaGay Hamilton as Condoleezza Rice, Allison Pill as Mary Cheney, and Lily Rabe as Lib Cheney. Overall, the cast is terrific and bring a great deal of believability to the story with each actor/actress feeling like the appropriate casting choice for their roles. Outside of the films direction and writing, the performances of the actors were always going to be the key to making the story work, which thankfully is the case here.

      Another element which the film owes its success to is the satirical style of the story laid out by director Adam McKay. Here he puts his craftsmanship as a filmmaker on full display, making a biography that's both entertaining and fun to watch while churning out a stronger film than his previous collaboration with Christian Bale on 2015's The Big Short. McKay manages to incorporate humor into the story while making it flashy and appealing. He allows his actors enough room to breathe life into their roles with the films technical elements such as the art-set decoration and costume design complimenting the story. The editing and score by Nicholas Britell are both effective and keep the story moving and afloat with giving it an extra shot of energy, Particularly the films soundtrack selections. The films editing keeps the story structure
well-balanced and flowing with the film playing as a biography disguised in the form of a dark comedy. One only has to look at Britell's filmography to determine that he's a filmmaker who incorporates abstracts and non-stick humor into his projects. McKay's choice of using a narrative character within the story feels awkward, though helps to deliver information to the audience regarding the plot while keeping both the continuity and story structure of the film intact. While this may appear to be a clever gimmick that keeps his stories fresh and engaging with most audiences, it can also make certain moments of the film come across as being fragmented for others with the humor feeling a bit out of place. For the most part, McKays approach to directing Vice works as he was able to find the right balance of satire and humor to go with the films historic elements, while building up the main characters.

      Another level of genius behind the films directing lies within the writing also by McKay. The film spends the core of it's time showing Cheney's rise in stature as a political insider in Washington whether it's through his business dealings with a loose cannon Donald Rumsfield, or through the persistence of his wife to become a more powerful force in the government. The film presents Cheney as being an opportunist who helped change and reshape the political landscape throughout the last several decades, while pushing the boundaries of what a Vice Presidental position entails. Although the film clearly aims to condemn both Cheney and the Bush administration for their illegal actions in regards to the War with Iraq, the film makes an attempt to humanize their character and make them understandable in the eyes of the audience. The film not just points the finger at Cheney for helping to create today's political landscape, but also condemns the audiences complacence for allowing it to happen and continue (The films opening narration explaining who Cheney was with the publics passiveness and lack of awareness about his position being a perfect example). The film also never truly leans fully into being a conventional biopic as the films darkly comical moments emerge to remind audiences that the film is a mixture of a biography meshed together with satire. Whereas that might make the film appear to be fragmented at certain points, both elements find a way to work well together that ultimately makes it a stronger film to Oliver Stones 2008 biopic on Bush Jr. titled W. The films final sequence involving a post-presidency interview with Cheney plays off the whole breaking the fourth wall aspect of the story which Deadpool popularized while perfectly summing up Cheney's character. While this approach to the story might put off some viewers as well as the film itself leaning towards a more liberal perspective on the actions of Cheney and W, the film manages to find the perfect blend of seriousness and humor to make it work ultimately.

      While Vice is by no means a perfect film (It's satirical and biographical mixture despite working well together, can also come across as feeling a bit messy at times with the film also having scenes involving quick cuts that feel awkward), it proves to be highly effective in what it sets out to do while effectively demonstrating that the actions of both Vice President Dick Cheney as well as those in his circle did a great deal of damage to both security and political freedom with the end result continuing to occur today. Vice is a stylish and brilliant film, that finds a way to tell it's story in a form that's both entertaining and eye-opening for it's audience much in a fashion similar to the end of Spike Lee's BlacKkKlansman. Given that it's story spans the course of almost four decades, it does an impressive job of working all the main events of Cheney's career into it's story with a running time of just over two hours. What could've easily ended up being a total condemnation of Cheney both as a politician and person, turns out to be surprisingly well-balanced as McKay portrays him as being both power hungry as well as being a husband and father whose purely devoted to his family. With Vice, McKay impressively creates an atmosphere that feels real to the audience with the story carrying a mixture of being funny, insightful, and ultimately disturbing. He makes no efforts in hiding his contempt for the events depicted in the film as he shows them to be over-the-top and ridiculous, but makes the story appealing enough to where any form of audience can understand and get drawn into it. Vice will not be a film for everyone and come across as feeling heavily divisive with the conclusions it draws (It's political nature and direction it leans towards will automatically turn some viewers off), but it's deserving of it's praise largely thanks to McKay's stylish directing as well as the fantastic performances from Christian Bale and Amy Adams. If one wants a better understand of how today's political climate was molded along with the events leading up to it, then they should most definitely check out this film. The film can be fun to watch but often disturbing and sad with the film explaining in the stats during the credits the consequences of Cheney and his administrations actions resulting in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people both American and Islamic as well as contributing to the rise of the Islamic State of Iraq. It's a film that sets out to do exactly what it was intended for which is to entertain its audience, while giving insight into one of the most controversial political forces in history as well as making people think, reflect, and question why America and the rest of the world ended up with certain problems they're currently still trying to resolve.

Final Verdict: For those who enjoy good old- fashioned satirical films, or wish to get a better understanding of today's climate of American politics, Vice is the film to see.

Green Book Is A Heartwarming And Well-Acted Story About Friendship And Acceptance

     

       Whereas all films are made with the sole intention of entertaining audiences along with churning out a profit, there are a selective amount of films that aim to do both along with delivering an important message which carries relevance in today's society. In an era where studios are becoming less risky with greenlighting projects that make the audience think and reflect on society as well as choosing to play it safe with numerous superhero and franchise-driven films, it's especially admirable to see a film like Green Book find its way to the big screen and achieving the highest standard a film can reach in terms of critical acclaim with it winning the Oscar for Best Picture. While the film has received some flak since then with some saying it was good but not Best Picture worthy (BlacKkKlansman would've been a much more fitting choice for Best Picture), along with it getting comparisons to Driving Miss Daisy in terms of it's story structure with the main difference being the characters are both male, Green Book remains an impressively made and moving drama that's both heartwarming and powerful in telling it's story about two people with virtually nothing in common forming a unique type of friendship on a road trip that puts both their beliefs as well as their friendship to the test.

       Based on a true story, Green Book centers around a working class Italian-American bouncer (Played by Viggo Mortensen), who becomes the driver of a prominent African-American classically trained pianist (Played by Mahershala Ali) while both tour through musical venues that lead to both men encountering racism in the 1960's southern states. Green Book may not have the most original storyline as it's type of formula has already been done before, but its one that has it's heart in the right place and aims to make it's audience feel something for the characters upon walking out of the theater after the credits roll. The heart of the film lies within the relationship between the two main characters with both Viggo Mortensen and Mahershala Ali giving terrific performances with strong chemistry, that makes their characters evolution from strangers to friends by the end of the film both believable and effective. The film carries with it themes that not only properly convey the atmosphere of the South during the 1960's, but also share strong relevance with today's world. The film is about two people with different backgrounds and virtually nothing in common being put together on a road trip, which opens up both of their eyes to a portion of the United States that was less tolerant at the time outside of the beautiful scenery the two got to experience during their trip. Green Book is a story that's well-paced and beautifully told with a realistic depiction of racism occurring in the 1960's South, as well as themes incorporated into its story that today's audiences can find relatable such as friendship, loneliness, not being able to fit in due to being different (Ali's character is both African-American and homosexual, both were looked down upon heavily during the stories era), respect, dignity, and courage. What could've easily been a brutal and disturbing reflection of the stories time period ends up being one that's handled with a large dose of sentimentality and compassion for the characters. The soul of the film lies within the growth of the two main characters as their prejudices and pre-notions towards each other lessens and their friendship deepens. Green Book is a story about how barriers are broken and unities are formed in the most unusual circumstances with the most unlikely people.

      Outside of the films strong writing and directing, it's the performances of the main actors that make the film as moving as it turns out to be. Both Mortensen and Ali bring huge doses of humanity to their roles, while showing both passion and dedication to the story. Viggo Mortensen does very well playing Italian bouncer Tony Lip with Mortensen making his characters transformation throughout the course of the film to be both a convincing and pivotal part of the story. Watching his character observe his counterpart, particularly the moments where he maintains grace when being discriminated against, as well as Tony showing clear frustration and anger at such acts are among some of the films most powerful and memorable moments. Out of the two main actors, Mahershala Ali gives the strongest performances of the two as world-class African American pianist Dr. Don Shirley. Ali conveys the right emotions for the character with him being portrayed as being demanding and confident, yet someone whose also lonely and alienated from society deep down. Some of the most powerful moments in the film are when his character experiences mistreatment first hand, which brings his character back to reality given how he comes across as being rockstar-like with his concert tour through the deep South. His characters struggle with being alienated from everyone, is evident in the scene where he argues with Tony about how he's not black enough to fit in with the rest of the African American community as his character is wealthy, nor white enough to fit in with the rest of society, whose shown to have his character stay in closets at concert gigs or use outdoor bathrooms that are segregated. It's the moments where his character loses his shield behind being a wealthy and well-executed musician to being treated like every other person of color with Tony witnessing those moments of injustice, that make the core of the story one that's powerful and hard-hitting in the most subtle ways. Ali plays his part with a sense of both charm and calmness that allows his presence in the film to add weight to the story. As far as the supporting cast goes, Linda Cardellini shines in a minimal yet effective role as Tony's wife Dolores, with her character appearing to be supportive of Tony's business venture with Don. Sebastian Maniscalco also doing a good job with the role he has as Dolores brother Johnny Venere. Whereas the latter two actors have lesser parts in the story compared to Mortensen and Ali, they still manage to make the most with the roles they have while adding something to the story their in. The main focus of the film is placed on the characters of Tony and Don with their journey shown to be one that's transformative for both men as well as eye-opening and moving. The film was always going to rely on the strong dynamic and chemistry of it's main actors to make it work with both actors proving to be no exception while giving Oscar caliber performances.

      Besides the films strong acting performances, it's the handling of the films story with it's subtle yet steady direction, that makes it a memorable piece. Director Peter Farrelly approaches the story as being one that's transformative not just for both the main characters, but potentially for the audience watching it as well. He takes the time with the films steady pace to develop the friendship between both Tony and Don, with Tony's character being the eyes of the audience essentially with the witnessing of the mistreatment and disrespect that Don's character received the further South they went. Farrelly gives the film a feel good yet tender atmosphere, that says even though the experience that the main characters as well as the audience endure on their trip is a hard one, there is something special and significant that's happening between the main characters as walls are being torn down and bonds are growing stronger. The films beautiful cinematography with it's breathtaking scenery of fields and landscapes, convey the sense that the main characters journey is both a transformative and personal one. The costume and set designs all go hand in hand in regards to accurately portraying the time period that the story takes place with a low-key yet powerful score by Kris Bowers, that's solid and properly utilized at the right moments in the film though never overshadows the performances of the main actors. In terms of the films directing, Peter Farrelly does well with setting up the atmosphere of the film that gives it a vibe that's uplifting and heartwarming while letting Viggo Mortensen and Mahershala Ali command the screen with their performances.

      The films screenplay by Nick Ballerina, Brian Hayes Currie, and Peter Farrelly does a solid job of making the story feel like a natural progression in terms of the growth of the characters. The heart of the story is about relationships with the writers showing how the one between the main actors started out as being non-existent, then evolves into something that feels genuine and moving with both men learning from each other. The story drives home the notion to the audience that if more people were willing to set aside prejudgements with others and get to know them, then the world would be a much different place. The writers make the story not just about the friendship between Tony and Don, but about the landscape of American society within the deep South in the 1960's. What the script does well that differentiates it from being generic and bland, is giving audiences a deep character examination of both main characters and how they respond to the social climate of the time and vice versa. The film shows that there are different forms of discrimination besides it being just black and white with Don's character getting chastised for being homosexual when caught with another person of the same gender, or treated differently from other blacks because of his wealth with the type of outfits he wears. The writers take the character of Tony and add a deeper layer to him with his character being not just the typical tough guy whose a bouncer, but someone who carries a great heart underneath and isn't sure how to fully express himself to others. One of the films true standout moments is when the character of Don teaches Tony how to improve his writing in his letters to his wife. The audience sees the growth in Tony's character through Don with him becoming more expressive and understanding of others while Tony shows Don how to be more social and less demanding of others. He also gives him a reality check on being sheltered from the rest of society in scenes where he critiques Don on his lack of knowledge of musicians from his own culture. It's moments such as these that brings power to the story with the film carrying an overall message, that says it takes courage to change people's hearts as explained by one character to Tony in the film upon witnessing Don's maintaining of his dignity upon being discriminated against. The film also shows that through the relationship between Mortensen and Ali's characters, friendships can emerge from the most unexpected circumstances if people are willing to let go of their prejudices. In a time where America is becoming more socially divided as well as progress in race relations slowly going backwards, the films themes and message are as relevant now as they are in the time period of the story.

      While it is clear that Green Book might not have been everyone's choice for Best Picture (It's become the most divisive Best Picture winner since 2005's Crash with the Academy being accused of playing it safe with awarding this Best Pic over films like BlacKkKlansman), there's no doubting that the story of Green Book is one that's entertaining, well-told, and has an empowering message behind it regarding friendship. Some have accused the film of possessing the convenient white savior narrative, that usually is inserted into stories like this (Mississippi Burning, 42, Race, and Hidden Figures are prime examples of having this narrative which involves the main African-American character receiving assistance or support from a powerful Caucasian figure, who essentially ends up being the reason they become as successful as they get in their professions or society), but in all honesty the film is less about trying to appease one single demographic and more about showing how people with differences can come together and share a friendship or bond, that can change both persons outlooks on life. The story is richly told with a sincerity to it that's rare in movies nowadays. Green Book may bear similarities to Driving Miss Daisy, but 
it's both a powerful and effecting drama that has it's heart in the right place while contributing to the conversation regarding race in America. The film deserves commending not just for it's strong performances and expertly handled directing, but for it's noble intentions to touch the hearts of it's audience. Audiences watching it for the first time will be hard pressed not to feel some kind of emotion with the films heartwarming final sequence involving Christmas dinner with Tony's family and Don. While such a moment may feel cliched and manipulative to some audiences, it gives both the characters and the audience the emotional payoff and closure to the story that they deserve. As Green Book suggests, the key to overcoming racism and loneliness is opening up to others who are different and understand their situations as barriers can be broken and new friendships formed.

Final Verdict: For those looking for a moving and feel good story about relationships and acceptance, Green Book is the film to watch.