I like my Film Critic pants, but they're on briefly this week because there are only three films to review, and none are worth seeing. So buckle up! It's time for some capsule (short) movie reviews for the week of Friday, November 22, 2024.
1) GLADIATOR II
If you know me at all, then you know that I think Ridley Scott is, without question, the most overrated filmmaker in cinema history. I admit that it is extremely admirable that at almost 87 years of age, Scott has continued to work steadily since the 1970s. It is also pretty amazing that his latest, "Gladiator II," is his 29th feature film.
The main problem is that in all those years of steady work, the majority of his movies have been crap. He has spent almost 50 years making terrible movies and getting praised for them.
In my opinion, Scott has only directed two great films ("Alien" and "Blade Runner") and a few deeply flawed but passable movies: "Thelma and Louise," "GI Jane," "Matchstick Men," and "The Martian." The rest are either not worth seeing or are among the worst movies I have ever seen.
Ridley Scott is a hack of biblical proportions, and Gladiator II is a prime example of the half-assed, lazy, uninspired, and inept filmmaking he dumps into theaters every year. Of course, it will be nominated for multiple awards and praised by most critics.
Yeah, I have passed on the Ridley Scott Kool-Aid for decades, and I'm not gonna start with this dreck.
Briefly, this sequel that nobody wanted takes place in Imperial-era Rome, a generation after the events of the original (and awful) first film. The main character is Lucius (an uncomfortable Paul Mescal), a distant relative of the first film's hero, Maximus (maybe??), who survives a battle with the Romans that has left his wife dead and him an enslaved person.
Lucius is purchased by former slave, now slave trader, Macrinus (a shamelessly hammy Denzel Washington) to be used as a gladiator in battles that will help Macrinus climb up the ladder of Roman hierarchy and seize power from the two bratty, brother co-emperors (Joseph Quinn and Fred Hechinger, both awful).
Lucius just wants revenge and is focused on punishing and killing the Roman General who killed his wife (a wasted Pedro Pascal), bringing down the emperors, and settling his mother's issues with Lucilla (a bored Connie Nielsen).
So, it's pretty much a carbon copy of the original film, with the terrible screenplay by longtime Scott collaborator David Scarpa, going through the superficial, boring dramatic motions while Scott loads the thing with lots of blood, clanging armor, helmet smashing, decapitations, elaborate battle sequences, and Colosseum fights filled with mayhem.
That all sounds cool, right? Wrong.
While this terrible sequel gives us Scott's expected inept execution and staging of the action scenes (they are truly awful), we are also gifted with some of the most poorly designed and laughable CGI in the history of big-budget filmmaking.
The gladiators battle against giant fake-looking CGI Rhinos, a bunch of poorly animated rabid, deformed baboons, and video-game-resembling sharks—yes, sharks. They flood the Colosseum with water and let them loose. I am not kidding. These ridiculous creatures look like they came straight from a particularly strong LSD-fueled night of programming over at Adult Swim.
When the screen isn't filled with the absurdly bloody antics of the arena, it's dominated by boring, half-assed, and recycled drama from the first film (which in turn was boring, half-assed, and recycled drama from dozens of other, better films).
The cast is stacked with incredibly gifted actors who are either terribly miscast (Pascal), completely wasted (Mescal), or just plain awful, which is the case with Washington, who, in this movie, gives what is easily the worst performance of his career, and I'm including "Carbon Copy."
Denzel's performance consists of purposely wacky line readings, generously complex sleeve-work and robe pulling, and character-breaking laughter that he throws in hoping that you'll remember how great he was in "Training Day." Clearly, he read the shitty script, realized what he had gotten himself into, and went directly to fun-town... and I bet he gets a fucking Oscar nomination for this nonsense.
Like so many other Scott projects, this is a sad, desperate attempt to bring grand, epic filmmaking to the screen, made by a man who has no idea how to do it using either new or old technology.
Ridley Scott is a terrible filmmaker, and "Gladiator II" is a terrible film. - ⭐️
2) NICKEL BOYS
Based on Colson Whitehead's Pulitzer Prize-winning novel, this film chronicles the strong friendship between two young African American men who navigate the harrowing trials of reform school together in Florida.
The events in the movie are based on things that happened at a historic reform school in Florida called the Dozier School for Boys, which was notorious for the abusive treatment of students.
Despite solid performances by Ethan Herrise and Brandon Wilson in the lead roles and a passionate message, I was surprisingly underwhelmed by the film.
I found the subjective point-of-view camera and storytelling style distracting, inconsistent, and pompous.
This gimmicky trope completely took away from my being emotionally invested in the characters and events of the film, which are clearly important and powerful. I was detached and didn't care, and it had everything to do with the confused way the film was made. - ⭐️⭐️
3) WICKED
Hey! Did you guys know that a film version of the Broadway musical Wicked is coming out?!?!? I hadn't heard anything about it—what a surprise!
OK, here's the deal right up front: I hate "The Wizard of Oz."
Always have, always will.
It's an annoying, stiff, poorly made example of the type of conveyor belt product that MGM was regularly churning out in the 30s. It's only considered beloved because it was annually jammed down our collective throats throughout our childhoods, and it was something we felt we HAD to watch and love.
Now, Walter Murch's brilliant "Return to Oz," starring Fairuza Balk as Dorothy, well, that's a different story....I LOVE that movie.
Unfortunately, this film is not at all connected to that 1985 much-maligned masterpiece. It is a direct prequel to the 1939 film version of L. Frank Baum's "The Wonderful World of Oz."
Now that I've got that out of the way, I also actively dislike the stage version of the musical "Wicked." I didn't care about the story, wasn't really impressed with the staging, and found the songs and score unremarkable and profoundly dull. So, yeah... this movie was clearly not made for me.
I will not waste space going into the plot, describing the characters, or recounting the complications of the myths. You've already seen the show, know all about it, and are ready to see the movie. Whatever I say here is pretty meaningless.
At its core, this new film is as bland and uninteresting as the stage version (I mean, the songs are still the same - bad), only worse because it is roughly twice as long as the Broadway musical. This is just PART ONE (?!?) of what will ultimately be a 6-hour film of a story that could be told effectively in about 90 minutes.
It's bloated and so loaded with special effects-laden filler, unnecessary characters, and subplots that even the biggest fans might wonder why it had to be stretched out this way.
The visuals are sumptuous, and the production design, costumes, and art direction are all top-notch because... they better be. But the wildly inconsistent director Jon M. Chu proves here that he will forever be the director of "Step Up 3D" and "G.I. Joe: Retaliation," which are both more competently made than "Wicked."
The cast is easily the best part of this whole thing, with terrific performances from the co-leads Cynthia Erivo and Ariana Grande and outstanding supporting work from Jonathan Bailey, Kristin Chenoweth, and Michelle Yeoh. Fun appearances by Bowen Yang, Ethan Slater, and Marissa Bode add some life, but it is a fantastic Jeff Goldblum as The Wizard who steals the show and single-handedly keeps things interesting.
I'm pretty sure that nothing I wrote here will change anyone's mind about this movie, and I'm pretty sure that I will be in the minority with my thoughts about it, but so be it. I didn't like it, sorry, I don't care.
Now, if you'll excuse me, I will watch an institutionalized Dorothy Gale (played by the magnificent Fairuza Balk) receive some much-needed shock treatment in the first ten minutes of the finest film trip to the land of Oz ever. "Return to Oz" will happily take my mind off of "Wicked," which, despite the impressive technical achievements, just ain't for me, and I am fine with that. - ⭐️⭐️
Thanks for reading, and please SUBSCRIBE to my weekly NEWSLETTER!
And consider joining me on Patreon as a paid subscriber to help keep this thing going.
Thanks again!