Pitch Perfect 3 (2017)

Calamity (Leader of Evermoist): I’m Calamity. This is Serenity, Veracity and Charity

My expectation meter was set to "Mole People" when I strapped in for PP#3 and to my delight it outperformed my prediction. #1 is cute an fun. #2 was execrable. #3 pulled the plane up and brought the franchise over the shark into the far green pastures of "maybe again in 20 years."

Is DJ Khalid really that big a deal? I mean I have heard of him, but in no way did I place him as a headliner for a USO tour.

In short, the Bellas fulfilled all sequel obligations, sang, had pretty good quips, and made a happy exit. Here's to decent producers (film and music).

Big points for me: John Lithgow's Aussie accent is either fantastic or Dick Van Dyke level buffoonish.  Either way...I'll watch basically anything with John Lithgow.  I always forget that he played the preacher against dancing in Footloose.  (He was only 37 then -I don't think I will be cast as a preacher with HS teenager daughters in 4 year.)

If you have agreed that "The Shark" is one's friend and you want to punch it in the nose in poor taste as you write over it, more power to you.

2.4 out 5 star. 

Battle of the Sexes (2017)

Billie Jean King: Hello?
Bobby Riggs: Eureka, Billie Jean! It’s Bobby. Bobby Riggs.
Billie Jean King: Bobby? How did you get my number?
Bobby Riggs: I called every hotel in the city. Listen, I have a great idea.

Gladys Heldman: You do the Tennis. I'll do the smoking.

I'm sorta glad that I watched this on a plane. The Battle of Sexes just left me kinda wanting to stop watching but not enough so that I did, so it was good that the design of the situation kept me from changing things.

In a truly strange confluence, The Battle of the Sexes manages to take a good script, with a good cast, and an inspiring level of 1973 set/costume detail and turn it into something less than memorable. In this case 1+1=1.

I think the answer to this debacle is that while the original "Battle of the Sexes" was an interesting social point in history and worthy of a movie.  The event more easily lends itself to pure comedy than the elements of drama that were written to make a script. The drama somehow took away from the spectacle. And spectacle was the purpose of the the 1973 battle.

if you are a Steve Carrell or Sarah Silverman fan, both are fantastic in their roles.

2.4 out of 5 stars. 

The Wizard of Lies (2017)

Ruth Madoff: Can't we just have quiet?

Bernie Madoff: I can't fall asleep unless I watch something.

Ruth Madoff: You just took a whole fucking bottle of Ambien, Bernie. Sleep's not gonna be your problem.

Bernie Madoff: My mind races.

Ruth Madoff: Fine. Our last night on Earth will be you, me and Judy Garland. How romantic.

Bernie Madoff: Let's not get started, Ruth.

[Bernie takes Ruth's hand]

Bernie Madoff: We had a good life, didn't we?

Ruth Madoff: Hmm. Yeah. Until you ruined it.

It's often fun to see two different team's projects and work on basically the same topic.  Your Deep Impact vs. Armageddon or Dante's Peak vs. Volcano.  Good ideas just seem to happen in twos and sometimes they arrive into the culture at the same time. So having watched The Richard Dreyfuss "Madoff" from 2016, I jumped at the chance to see "The Wizard of Lies" also about Bernie Madoff but starring Robert DeNiro.   *Madoff" was a TV mini-series so I didn't/don't feel obliged to review it on this blog.

Similarities
The two seem to be working off of the same source materials (the events aren't that long ago..like 10 years) and both were filmed in 2015 so only like 6 years after the events. They even both go into details about Bernie's back problems and how he was forced to lay on the floor. They both spend time showing the Madoff family's love for seafood/lobster. -I think this was chosen for some accuracy but also to give the family the proper fancy tropes so as to make them broad strokes understandable/dislikeable.

My own focus were I writing The Bernie Madoff story would have been to focus on Bernie, the regulators, the process, the machinations of how the pyramid was held up, and how it came down with some time for wife/brother and less time for his children.  But, I can understand that I am not a mainstream audience and that for a narrative that works for more people, there needed to be more focus on the sons etc.  A final similarity I noted is that both of these films made a point of signaling out the wealth/prosperity and even celebrity of those effected. This was much emphasis on the victims and not a lot on the system/foundations that allowed this.

Differences
Richard Dreyfus was a better Bernie than De Niro -I know I was surprised- and Blythe Danner was better than Michelle Pfeiffer -again surprising.  Unfortunately, the chemistry between Blythe and Dreyfus was negligible, while Robert and Michelle were good together. It was interesting to me that Dreyfus's Bernie was an interestingly pitiable figure in that his arc included that he knew exactly what he was doing to support everyone -"I'm the magic man." and just not getting caught, while De Niro's was not asking for understanding as he seemed to be of the opinion that he got away with it for so long that it was the fault of everyone else. -His portrayal also seemed to intentionally lack empathy, which I found uncomfortable.

3.7 out 5 stars. 

Spotlight (2015)

Mitchell Garabedian: If it takes a village to raise a child, it takes a village to abuse one.

Fiction is really preferable to reality. Yet, sobering truths, without question, are substantively important. Fantasy is a sugar. The truth is more like durian.

I bring this up because, I think everyone should see Spotlight. It is very very important, in the way that vegetables, vitamins, and sunlight are good for us. Spotlight speaks with an authenticity seldom approached in "non-fiction" and was written/performed in such a way as to be more true tale of journalism than hero journey concocted from a true story.  My hats off to everyone involved for handling a tale of Church child sex abuse with dexterity, openness, and dare I say truth.

4.12 out of 5 stars.

Post viewing, my thoughts went in a design direction. Spotlight took in about $90M overall and $50M of that was after it won best picture like 90% of it domestic USA. I do not believe awards or financial returns are our best measures of quality as it comes to art, but I can say that a middling grade marvel movie, let's say Ant-Man, did $520M in returns. Assuming ticket prices are the same, 6 people saw Ant-Man, an admittedly charming movie, for every 1 person that saw Spotlight. (If adjust for just domestic USA I get more of a 1:1.8 ratio) Why the edge to Ant-Man? There is no question that Spotlight was a more important film in terms of learning, empathy, knowledge of the world, history, legal process, journalism, integrity, etc. So why are so many people opting for fantasy?

In my own fantasy world, there would be equal audiences for butterfly documentaries and Ken Burns mini-series as Infinity Wars, but I know that is not the case. People just don't choose to spend their dollars and time to eat their vegetables as they do on sugar. Movies are an escape.

What can be done to increase the audience for socially important but not sugary movies?  Comment with your thoughts. I've bulleted out some of my early ideas for a solution.  (You can also comment if you disagree that the disparity in market size for documentaries, histories, journalism films, is a problem.)

• Lie in the trailers ( and just trick some people into thinking there will be explosions)
• Bundle go to 4 films for the price of 3 in certain categories. 
• Latch on to success -What if every Blockbuster had to be a double feature? Like when Totoro came out with Grave of the Fireflies....only in this case it would Dr. Strange 2 and a documentary on the Ainu. 
• We could design subsidies to make certain film prices cheaper for the consumer. You can see 1 fiction film or 2 histories at the same price. (same revenue to the theaters or movie houses)
• Take a cue from Bollywood and include dance numbers in everything whether they need it or not. -this might compromise integrity....but...spitballin.