The Fundamentals of Caring (2016)

Dot: I told you I only date assholes.

So, if someone asked me if the idea of Paul Rudd taking a boy with muscular dystrophy to see The World's Biggest Pit was a reasonable premise for a movie, I would have said no.  Don't make it. 

But, they did and I saw the result.  

It is genuinely  nice to be proven wrong. 

The Fundamentals of Caring was not a great movie, but I have positive feelings about it. 

I kinda hate when movie dialogue and shy away from positive asshole-ry.  I think that for a lot of people the closer a relationship the less formal and more raw one can be. This leads to expletives and dark dark jokes that in any other circumstance would be considered abhorrent, but are often delightful. The difference between "I will kill you." and "I will murder you by putting your face in den of fire ants and hungry rats." My own tendency for showing affection through the dark and disturbing puts me at an advantage to empathizing with the main characters of The Fundamentals of Caring. I appreciate the tricky high-wire act that they display. 

If you find this kind of humor and affection unsettling, you might not enjoy The Fundamentals of Caring. 

On a scale of gallows humor to The Pun-itentiary, I give The Fundamentals of Caring 2.5 out of 5 stars. 

Star Trek Beyond (2016)

Spock: Lt. Uhura wears a Vokaya amulet which I presented to her as a token of my affection and respect.

Bones: You gave your girlfriend a radioactive jewelry?

Spock: The emissions is harmless, Doctor. But its unique signature makes it very easy to identify.

Bones: You gave your girlfriend a tracking device?

Spock: [realizing] That was not my intention.

I consider Star Trek Beyond the manifestation of a disturbing trend for commercial film, but also for the Star Trek Franchise. 

I am a Star Trek fan.  My favorite series is DS9. My Captain ranking is Sisko, Picard, Kirk, Archer, Janeway. My favorite species are the Cardassians.  So, I speak from a place of some fan authority when I say:

Star Trek Beyond is not a Star Trek Movie. It is a reasonable science action film; perfectly acceptable; but not a Star Trek movie. 

There have been good Star Trek movies (II, IV, VI, First Contact), marginal ones (V, Generations), bad ones (III, Nemesis), and execrable ones (looking at you "The motion picture", and Insurrection). But it is my contention that since the JJ Abrams reboot, Star Trek has lost its core and descended into indistinguishable sci-fi. 

For me, the core of a "Star Trek" movie is that ultimately it has a higher purpose. They exist to teach us something valuable. A "Star Trek" movie draws parallels to the real world; has opinions about ethical, societal, or emotional problems.  "Star Trek" in my mind means exploring, learning, and discovery for the audience and the crew. Star Trek IV is synonymous with saving whales. V is a journey to find god. VI is an allegory about the end of the Cold War.  These films and episodes have meant something. 

I do love JJ Abrams, but his versions of Star Trek lack the soul of their predecessors. We learn nothing.  The films state no opinions.  They exist to entertain.

I understand how focusing on visual effects, explosions, and character wit, can create a movie that appeals to everyone.  But, it makes me sad that the venerable Star Trek has succumbed to forces of commercialism at the expense of meaning.

 On a scale of Warp 1 to Warp 9.9 sling-shot around a sun, I give Star Trek Beyond 2.0 out of 5 stars. 

oh and here is a video of Karl Urban doing Dancing Queen. LINK

The Shallows (2016)

"I'm not dying here." - Nancy

Blake Lively vs. A Shark:  That's basically it.  I think we've all seen this before.  And it does not disappoint. Blake Lively fights a shark. Yup.   To not disappoint is actually a remarkable achievement. In my mind, The Shallows has put itself in contention for  Top 5 shark movies of all time.  Most are just pure trash. Take a look at this list: 1  In this company, The Shallows is head and shoulders above.  I say well done.   -though can't say that I wouldn't enjoy watching Jersey Shore Shark Attack.

Kudos to the writers of The Shallows for placing our damsel in distress on the back of a rotting whale.  Just wonderful.

On a scale of Mega-Shark to Mecha-Shark, I give The Shallows 3.3 out of 4 stars. 

Me Before You (2016)

"I just…want to be a man who has been to a concert with a girl in a red dress. Just for a few minutes more." -Will Traynor

What a legitimately sad movie. Sad in the best way. Sadness can encompass joy, solace, and relief.  This makes Me Before You a unique and wonderfully strange date movie.  Seriously, this could only be the worst or the best first date movie ever. Nothing in between. At it's best, everyone cries. And everyone emerges from the darkness better for the journey.  At it's worst, the date descends into soul crushing despair and never recovers. 

So in short, most films would stop at nothing to achieve one tenth of the emotional depth of Me Before You. But the rest of the film from acting to writing to editing and music is slightly below average.  So yeah...a really emotionally moving meh. 

Emotional connection is really the hardest thing to engender in a film. Really well done, Director Thea Sharrock.

On a scale of The Marianas Trench to Sea Level, I give Me Before You 3.1 out of 5 stars. 

Finding Dory (2016)

"For a guy with 3 hearts, you're not very nice." -Dory

Hats off to Pixar. They know how to make me feel; happy, sad, solace; you name it. I think that John Lasseter is a true and often unheralded master of cinema today. His cheer and leadership permeates everything Pixar touches. Other studios can copy the look, the sound, even to some degree the feel, but they can never recreate John Lassester.

It's unfortunate that Finding Dory, just wasn't actually a great movie. It was fine. Fun. Cute, and made me sniffle to hold back tears, but the story was difficult to follow, made harder by retrograde amnesia, and just felt like a really great direct to video adventure, not a cinema feature.

On a scale of 1 fish,  2 fish to 1 potato, 2 potato, I give Finding Dory 2.2 out of 5 stars.

A Hologram for the King (2015)

"It was a difficult decision." -Allen Clay in reference to the Schwinn bicycle case

Hologram for the King was a well conceived, well-executed,  and timely movie. It is worth seeing. I expect college classes in 20 years might include it in a syllabus, and that's exactly why it is a financial flop. The entire premise lacked anything that the average audience member could latch onto. I like to think of myself as average, and I do my best to empathize with everyone, but the movies I see and even want to see are a product of years of schooling, training, and my attempts to seem/act/behave smrt. If I lacked the privileges of my circumstance, my guess is that I would have found Hologram for the King, slow, unfunny, boring, and confusing.

But, I want to use HftK as a springboard for something we all want to talk about when it comes to movies: NUDITY!!!!!

Yes, HftK has nudity.

For myself, I think our culture, sensors, and artists, should prioritize violence as a "problem" on screen far far above nudity. I'm even in favor a strict 50/50 policy when it comes to female vs. male nudity.  And no, Tom Hanks does not get naked for this role. HftK only has female nudity.

But what made the nudity of HftK notable is that it wasn't outrageously young pretty people wearing make-up, but rather an attractive woman in her early 50s in the ocean, where light is irregular and no make-up stays put. No pretenses, no camera tricks, no voyeur camera positions, just a character getting naked for the right reasons, in a delightfully understated and tasteful snorkeling sequence. Equality in attractiveness, age, body-type, and gender in cinematic nudity please.

I also found myself comparing the unbuilt tech city and Saudia Arabia itself to Japan in the 1980's into 90s. Wealthy and prosperous in vision for the future; unable to see the emptiness of their affluence in the present.

On a scale of emulated flattery to inimitability, I give Hologram for the King 3.43 out of 5 stars.

Captain America: Civil War (2016)

What defines a movie versus a mini-series versus a serial season?

I honestly don't know. I've commented before that I have thought certain films would have been better served in a different format -Batman: The Dark Knight Rises comes to mind.

And in terms of Captain America: Civil War (CA:CW)C, here is where I am confused.

• CA:CW was crafted with deference to the needs a story arch contained within
• It has a clear 1st, 2nd, 3rd act and a denouement.
• The main theme CA:CW seems to be "things torn apart". The resolution is a torturous break with no catharsis.
• This is not unique to CA:CW, other films choose to end on chaotic notes -The Empire Strikes Back-, but this is a defined commitment from start to finish to dissolution. It isn't its choice as much as its purpose.
• I know that this is part of an extended Universe of which this movie serves a distinct purpose for future films
• CA:CW is a resounding success in its goals: emotional tension, continuity, suspension of disbelief, etc. 

So, here I am wondering if it is even right to rate and judge CA:CW and other franchise universe films under the same criteria as one-off competitors. I'm not sure I want to have to think about Alfred Hitchcock's The Birds and CA:CW as being in the same class of art. 

I realize now that TV, mini-series, seasons, and films/movies are melding together in a way that I enjoy and find upsetting at the same time. I shouldn't be surprised. I consume electronic visual media in an almost uniform fashion. Others are doing the same. I watch movies, episodes, and series generally from home in longer sessions -binges.  If I do go to the cinema, the experience is only occasionally better than my couch. 

Content is coming together as never before.  The only differences are production time, episode time, and length of audience attention during and between engagements. 

It's a brave new world. 

On a scale of One-Time event to On-Demand, I give Captain America: Civil War 3.657 out of 5 stars.