Tuesday, April 25, 2017

A Year of Free Hype and Ballyhoo


The Marvel Studio president Kevin Feige is one smooth fellow that knows how to play a marketing game that won't cost him a penny. In two recent interviews, he has casually dropped two little info nuggets that have and will continue to inspire extensive thinkpieces from various movie news sites and keep social media blazing with rampant speculation. In an interview with Collider, Feige's elicited the buzzing and salivating by mention that he did not think there would be a Phase 4 but rather something entirely new instead. The phases are what the studio calls the stages of Marvel movies usually with a big event movie in May capping it off (the first phase climaxed with The Avengers). It really is just semantics over what you call the movie groupings, it can be called Phase 4 or Potato Salad, but Feige is implying that significant change is on the horizon. Does this mean that much like the comic books that a major event will occur that causes a reboot, which then ushers in new versions of the current major characters? Or does it mean all these characters stories will be done and a new slew of heroes will be given movies?

The buzz then electrified when he was asked why Marvel still hasn't given a catchy title to Avengers 4 (because you can't just do numbers anymore). The heads of every Marvel fan almost did a Scanner's head explosion when Feige said the reason for the delay was that the title for that movie will be a big giant spoiler for next summer's Avengers: Infinity War. Now, Feige was being very strategic by mentioning this and knows that saying such things has made the next Avengers into the biggest motion picture event yet. The plan is for it to be Marvel's highest grossing movie and become a massive smash hit, and it had a chance without Feige's revelation, but now we have a year's worth of salivating anticipation.

Feige and Marvel have been masters of the hype machine, because they know how to get people revved up but they also realize the suspense needs a worthwhile payoff. I don't see them pulling a No Good Deed where the studio said critics screening were cancelled because they didn't want them to spoil the major twist. Of course, the big twist was the movie found a way to make Idris Elba and Taraji Henson uninteresting. I don't see the title ending up being Avengers: Thanos' Revenge, with the big spoiler being the Avengers stopped him from destroying the world and now he wants to get payback. The bad guy losing in the end isn't much of a spoiler and even Avengers taking a hit to set up a sequel isn't, so I don't expect it to be Avengeance: Avengers Strike Back.

After the hype that has now being stirred up, something huge needs to go down next summer. Last year's Captain America: Civil War felt like it ended with real consequences and changes to the universe. The Avengers were now torn apart and scattered with relationships that had serious damage. It now looks like Marvel is going for changes with even more far-reaching implications, and something so big that no title or maybe even a trailer can spoil.

I believed it before Civil War and stand by it now, either a main character or one of the major supporting characters needs to die. If the death is title worthy, then my thinking is it is a character being played by someone whose contract is coming to an end like a Captain America or Iron Man. It would shake up the cinematic universe and force the series to have some heavy dramatic moments as the heroes need to deal with such a massive blow. I also think killing off a character allows for some real stakes and make the audience realize anyone could be in trouble and make the wars have a strong emotional impact as it could be the end of a beloved hero.

It also could be a betrayal or a major change in character such as Steve Rogers revealing he has been working with Hydra all along, which would coincide with a comic book storyline but make no sense based off things that happened in Captain America: Winter Soldier. It would shake up the universe and help freshen up some stories.

The other little nugget Feige revealed in the most recent interview was that there was a chance Thanos would not be in Avengers 4. Now, he didn't outright say that, but it was implied by answering "It is a whole new movie" when questioned if Thanos was in both. It would make next summer's movie a pretty major event if they blow off the biggest of big bads that they have been building up since the first Avengers. This also means they need to come up with an even bigger threat for the follow-up, which again could mean some kind of betrayal or unearthing of an unholy entity that is unlocked by the Infinity Gauntlet. Or this is the time for the massive crossover with 1980s iconic characters, the Snorks.



Feige has been successful in sparking the excitement and ensuring we talk about next summer's movie for the next year, and I'm sure there will be plenty to keep stoking those flames. The key now is for the pay off to be something gigantic and force some major changes. Otherwise, there probably will be a feeling of letdown or being mislead.

The other reality is that while Marvel Studios still produces some of the very best tentpoles of the past decade, the cracks and rust is beginning to show. Avengers: Age of Ultron was a step below the previous movie. Civil War wasn't quite at the caliber of Winter Soldier, despite it being sold as a major event movie. Ant-Man had a feeling of being different but it was a movie that was easier to forget than previous Marvel productions. Plus at this point the formula is beginning to show and while they're all very good movies, you can predict most of the beats and turns. With plans for three movies a year for several more years (or eternity if they can keep it going), the franchise needs to get back to high speed and feel like major events again. This year may do a lot to help a bit of the fatigue with Guardian of the Galaxy Vol. 2, Spider-Man: Homecoming, and Thor: Ragnarok attempting to add some twists to the formula and having some distinct style and personality. Next summer's Avenger: Infinity War will likely set the tone and lay out the stories for several years.

I'm just hoping it then isn't revealed to be Avengers: Mac is Back.

Monday, April 24, 2017

The Breakdown of 'Sand Castle', 'Tramps' and the Summer Box Office Challenge Draft


It is finally here. This week is the annual Summer Breakdown Box Office Challenge, and Christopher and Scott each pick the 10 movies they think will give them victory. The winner this year gets to pick three movies that the loser will have to watch and review, I don't suspect the choice to be the original Star Wars trilogy. As well, we review two Netflix originals this week in the Nicholas Hoult starring war drama, Sand Castle and the down-on-their-luck romantic drama, Tramps. As well we analyze the massive success of Disney's live-action remakes, and we introduce a new segment where we both reveal our Top 5 Favourite Fictional Cities. As always, if you enjoy the show then please spread the word to other movie lovers.

Remember you can now subscribe either to The Movie Breakdown feed (a subscription link is at the top right hand of this site) or on iTunes.



Breakdown Outline:

4:04 Sand Castle review
15:47 Tramps review
28:07 What has made Disney live-action remakes big critical and financial hits?
44:18 Top 5 Ficitonal Cities
1:06:08 Box Office Challenge Draft
1:25:39 Trailer Reviews: The Beguiled, American Assassin, Wakefield, The Little Hours
1:35:43 Box Office Analysis
1:44:23 Review Rundown

Rating Rundown:

Sand Castle ** (CS) & **½ (SM)
Tramps *** (CS) & **½ (SM)

Summer Box Office Challenge:

Christopher's Picks:

1. Guardian of the Galaxy Vol. 2
2. Spider-Man: Homecoming
3. Wonder Woman
4. Transformers: The First Knight
5. War of the Planet of the Apes  
6. Baywatch
7. The Mummy
8. The House
9. Atomic Blonde
10. Captain Underpants

Scott's Picks:

1. The Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales
2. Despicable Me 3
3. Alien: Covenant
4. Cars 3
5. Dunkirk
6. Annabelle: Creation
7. Snatched
8. All Eyez on Me
9. The Emoji Movie
10. The Hitman's Bodyguard




Saturday, April 22, 2017

Actually, Katherine Heigl, the Box Office this Weekend is Pretty Unmemorable


It is a slow weekend at the movie theatres, with four rather small new releases in soapy thriller Unforgettable, the feature length shoot-out Free Fire, the Armenian Genocide drama The Promise, the latest Disneynature documentary Born in China, and the found footage teenagers-get-lost horror (hi 1999!) Phoenix Forgotten. And all of them will get squashed by The Fate of the Furious in the box office, and will likely not even beat out Beauty and the Beast and The Boss Baby. In other words, a typical two weekends before the big Summer Blockbuster Season with the studios saving their big tentpoles for the next three months. Despite it not being much to write about, Scott has an entire prediction piece for you to enjoy where he highlights two of the news release, Unforgettable and The Promise.

Friday, April 21, 2017

The Movie Being Delayed Rule Doesn't Always Apply


A movie being pushed out of its release date is almost never a good sign. At first glance, a horror picture being shoved out of October, one of the months where movie-goers have a hunger for the macabre and frightening seems to be even worse. Then it isn't as straight-forward as appearances when that horror movie is slotted in January, which is the one other month that horror movies tend to thrive. January comes along right after the studios stuffed the cinemas with high-end prestige fare, so the tastes start leaning towards something a bit more salty.

Insidious Chapter Four moving away from Halloween may not spell doom for the franchise. It actually may have a chance for more success being a recognizable film series to kick-off the new year. It now holds the January 5th slot, and if it turns out like most years, it will likely be the lone 2018 release that weekend. A horror picture is usually the movie that starts off the years, and it is a tradition that turns out to be pretty successful for the studio that slots it. Now, the rule has typically been that horror movie also sucks, but after the really solid Insidious Chapter 3, I have higher hopes for this one.

I also think that one of the other reasons for the move is that they haven't even started production on it. No one has stated that it is true, but there hasn't been any news on things like casting or shooting. Or maybe I just missed it. A horror movie like Insidious is probably something they can get shot and produced within a few months.

The shift is actually a really solid strategy as it means the October 20 slot is now inhabited by the small and unknown Blumhouse horror, Half to Death. It has one of those premises that is both smart but also feels well-worn, with a woman reliving the day she is murdered until she discovers the identity of her killer (the slashers of Groundhog Day). A movie like that can benefit from being slotted in the month that that synonymous with horror, with people being more willing to take chance on it due to the fact it is horror.

Thursday, April 20, 2017

The James Bond Sweepstakes


In a time where several studios salivate over the prospect of a Robin Hood shared universe because they are so obsessed with franchises, a legitimate proven box office juggernaut in the James Bond series is up for sale. EON and MGM own the rights to 007, but they aren't distributors so they have to enter a relationship with another studio to ensure their movie gets released. Since 2006. Sony Pictures owned the rights to distribute until now, and they are one of five studios in the heat of a bidding war. The other studios are Universal, Warner Brothers, 20th Century Fox, and newcomer Annapurna.

Right off the bat, the interesting things is the studios that are not competing for the rights. Paramount is out of the game due to being in a tough financial spot and still regrouping after a hiring a new chairman. Despite being out of the hunt, it isn't like Paramount is devoid of any franchises as they have Flashy Bang Boom Robots  and Mission Impossible. Lionsgate is in desperate need of a franchise after the end of Hunger Games and Twilight while Divergent failed to take its place and movies like Gods of Egypt were massive flops. It is those massive flops that have probably kept then from going after what will be an expensive franchise. The most obvious studio absent is Disney, who is so deep and rich in big money garnering franchise like Avengers, Star Wars, Live-Action remakes, animate features, and Pirates that they probably just chuckled at the prospect while throwing cash into the air.

As for the players in the game. Sony Picture is the one that needs it the most, There is no evidence that anyone wants to see a cinematic universe full of Spider-Man leftovers or that there is any life left in 21 Jump Street (especially considering the second did all it could in killing the notion of endless sequels). Sony needs something secure, and while James Bond isn't the powerhouse that it once would have been, it is still a major recognizable global brand. Though the kicker is that MGM and EON are only offering a single movie deal, but since they have already played ball with Sony, they may be more willing to extend things (unless they aren't happy with Sony).

Universal is the studio that a few years back everyone said was in trouble because it lacked big franchises, but then in 2015 had one of the biggest box office years ever thanks to Furious 7 and Jurassic World. Fast and Furious has proven to still be a powerhouse, but I'm not sure how much legs the Jurassic Park franchise has after the next movie. The monster universe will probably prove to be a non-starter after The Mummy is released this summer. On the positive side, they also have the very successful Despicable Me franchise, and two franchises that are very strong with females in Fifty Shades and Pitch Perfect. I think, this studio is much healthier than pundits believed a few years ago, and outside of Disney, may have one of the stronger franchise slates. I could see them making a big play for James Bond to cement themselves as a strong number two box office getter (no one is catching Disney any time soon).

Warner Brothers' biggest guns are DC Comics and LEGO. The DC Comics franchise may have been a critical disappointment and didn't make as much as they hoped, but it still had two of the top grossers last year. I don't see LEGO being the type of franchise that endures, but right now, it is safe because their first two movies were of top notch quality. There is also their big monster universe they want to launch with King Kong and Godzilla, but I see audiences wearing thin on this before they can get several movies deep. They have several other potential franchises in the making with Blade Runner, Mad Max, Tomb Raider, and Ocean's. My feeling would be Warner Brothers has enough big players and universes to focus on that they can let James Bond go.

Much like Sony, 20th Century Fox is another that looks pretty thin on massive mountain of money earning tentpoles. They have Deadpool and the X-Men, which are both solid, Then it gets a little shakier, with Alien potentially going either way in its ability to draw (Prometheus had a poor audience reception, but Alien: Covenant seems to be trending well). Planet of the Apes may be coming to an end, and Kingsman's original was a hit, but who knows how long its style can keep going. My guess is Fox really would like to have another reliable franchise.

Annapurna is a pretty new distributor and for the most part has been releasing smaller prestige movies and doesn't have any big franchises. My guess is they like having a high quality independent cinema reputation where they focus on releasing award contenders like Detroit, Downsizing and Paul Thomas Anderson's upcoming project. They are probably going to stay small but that doesn't mean they wouldn't at least like one really big establishing franchise. It would make them look like a player to land James Bond, and they could still round out the rest of the year with the prestige fare. But the big question is does MGM and EON trust such a new and unproven distributor? This is where the one movie deal could benefit them, as Annapurna has a chance to prove they are good partners and if it works, it will be extended.

I don't see James Bond being any kind of game changer for a studio, but it is a nice fairly consistent draw. It will mean more if they can get Daniel Craig for a final movie to wrap up current storylines. I also believe MGM and EON will want someone that has a solid track record and proven to market hits. On the other side, I believe it will go to the studio that believes it really needs another franchise. Sony is probably that studio, but if MGM and EON was interested in them, I think they wouldn't have put this one movie deal in place. So, my prediction is in the next few days we will be reading the news that Fox will be distributing the next James Bond picture.

Some Slow Moving Ketchup for the Blog

Things have been rocking and rolling on here in regards to getting things posted, but I still feel there are pop culture issues or interesting ideas for articles that fly past me. As much as this site is really vital to my career, it still can only take up so much time in between preventing children flying off roofs and providing writing for clients who pay. Depending how things roll over the next few weeks, I may either end up more active on here or have to resort to it being just a house for links to my other work. But over the last few months and even years, there have been some significant events and talking points that I'd still like to DeLorean my way back. The big thing is writing up some tributes to significant celebrity figures that have sadly passed away. Over the next little bit, I hope to try to write something that still have some relevance and value even if the person being written about has been gone for years.  I'm also sticking the antenna up and hoping to write a bit more on major news issues that don't pertain to movie. Two nights ago, I read an article that got me motivated to write something on Bill O'Reilly and as it was formulating in my head, I started having visions of far right slobbering trolls coming at me with their clubs. Lately, I've been on the downside of my emotional life coaster and realize I just didn't have the energy to defend myself, so potential controversy was delayed for another day. I really do want this site to end up being more than just my thoughts on the latest Marvel trailer.

Would Passengers Be Better With a Creepier Chris Pratt?


Warning this piece contains major spoilers to the movie Passengers.

I was a much bigger fan of 2016's Passengers than most. Director Morten Tyldum demonstrates a great sense of visuals in crafting a fantastic and stunning spaceship with a bunch of fun rooms and technologies; it also pays homage to many classic set pieces, scenes and shots of classic movies. Chris Pratt and Jennifer Lawrence have a hot chemistry and you buy they'd go from strangers to lovers (though they have the advantage of each other being the only option for the rest of their lives). It also has the benefit of being one of the few sweeping romances and original sci-fi movies that have got wide released with a big budget in recent years. But it is hard to shake that there are some major plot structure flaws, plus some major ethical issues over trying to make Pratt sympathetic and as well, it does follow a very predictable path including a contrived big action finale.

Youtuber Nerd Writer's latest weekly video explores if Passengers would be a much better movie if the story was told from the perspective of Lawrence's character and begins with her waking up (you can check the video out at the bottom of this article). This would mean that the audience would be rocked along with Lawrence when it is revealed that Pratt woke her up instead of what she believed was a pod malfunction . As the video details, it allows for there to be some added tension and mystery as we try to solve what has happened to several sections of the ship and as well, try to figure out why Pratt's character is behaving in an odd fashion at times. Maybe screenwriter Jon Spaihts feared the mystery would be too easy to solve and this is why he went with the route of Pratt as the lead, but it also means the ending is largely predictable along with the troubelsome issue that the movie needs to keep Pratt sympathetic and relatable as the protagonist. With Lawrence as the one the audience sees the events through, it is less clear if Pratt is ever one we should trust and it makes it less certain if they end up together. This would allow for large swaths of the film where Pratt could play an antagonist role after his selfish misdeed is revealed.

If the tension relies more on Lawrence being trapped and isolated on a ship with a guy she can't trust then there is less need to rely on some other contrivances to keep the narrative churning into the final act. The malfunctioning ship is by far the weakest element of the story as it plunges the narrative into the pit of derivative storytelling. The more interesting stuff is focusing on the forced relationship that now is hampered by one man's selfish act and big lie.  Of course, this could also fall into cliché stalker thriller territory, but I'm not saying change the Pratt character but rather how the audience perceives him for a large portion of the story. This new perspective could also still work even with the doomed ship storyline.

It is interesting how a story can be made much better with a small tweak or change of perspective. There were several issues with Transcendence but it would have been far stronger and had more tension if it didn't open with a desolated world. Michael Bay needed to realize he didn't have the chops to pull off a Fargo-like crime caper and leave out the 'humour' that bogged down Pain & Gain. Last year's Blair Witch would have been way stronger if they avoided it being found footage, and I stand by the same with Chronicle (though I like that movie). Black Mass needed to wipe out the interrogation scenes that put focus on henchmen who didn't really drive the narrative, Actually, Black Mass would have been a much stronger picture if it did something daring like show it from the perspective of Whitey Bulger's (Johnny Depp) wife, Lindsey Cyr (Dakota Johnson). It would have made it feel less like a low-grade Goodfellas or countless other gangster flicks. Of course, that would also not be a small tweak but make it a completely different movie.

What movies do you think would have been much stronger with a few tweaks or even a major alteration?

Please Sir, Promote Another (Podcast)

By now, you have probably run through the entirety of Scott's Mind Matters and Our Ignorance is Bliss podcast. So, you need another podcast series to quench that thirst, and I've got the perfect one for you, Today's Tea with Kenny P. It is a podcast hosted by a man named Kenny P, who just happens to have a different tea that he drinks each episode. But oh, it is so much more. It is the more that is a bit harder to describe, except there really isn't anything else like this show. It is probably best described as Stuart McLean is blended with the cast of The Kids in the Hall by a radar gun shot from Flash Gordon as played by Sam J. Jones. Yes, I'm sorry many of those references just flew over the head of a younger reader or really even readers not so young, but Kenny P would know. The point is that the show is bizarre yet sweet with a wit and sense of humour, I would say it isn't for everyone but is there really anything that is literally for everyone? I know, people who don't eat pizza or never watched an episode Modern Family. It is a wacky world we live in, but just the type that deserves Today's Tea with Kenny P, so give it a listen.

Tuesday, April 18, 2017

Do You Need More of Scott's Dulcet Tones?

I think we can all agree that my Breakdown co-host Scott Martin is awesome. I'm sure you eagerly look forward to his calm and soothing voice giving you his movie thoughts every week. The thrilling and exciting news is you don't need to wait every Monday to get your Scott podcasting desire fulfilled. Get ready for it, Scott actually hosts two other podcasts. I've promoted his other shows on the Breakdown before, but I don't think that I've written about them here,

One of the shows that he does is co-hosted with his friend Deane Proctor and is about dealing with mental illness in the church, which is called Mind Matters. You can check out that bi-weekly show at their Facebook page here (or search for it rather easily on iTunes). The third show he does can also be found on iTunes and is called Our Ignorance is Bliss. He hosts it with our good friend and former roommate Cameron "The Puppy" Mitchell, who is also the man responsible for an amazing deck on a home that my family used to live in but now someone else enjoys.

OIB, as the cool kids call it, is exactly like The Breakdown except they don't talk about or review movies, they don't follow an outline, and has a preamble that typically runs for 60% of the show. Or maybe a better description would be to call it Morning Talk Radio that is typically recorded at night mixed with just two buddies having a lot of fun.

No matter how you want to describe those shows, you should give them a chance. Because the world always needs to hear more Scott Martin.

If Only 'Sandy Wexler' was as Good as its Songs


Sandy Wexler, as expected, was not a very good movie. It did turn out to be many times better than almost anything Adam Sandler has starred in the past decade. A huge part of that was a great presence and performance by the talented and gorgeous Jennifer Hudson. You believed she would capture the imagination of America and become an instant hot star, though it was a bit harder to take that she had any kind of feelings for Wexler. There seemed to be real work taken to make Hudson's Courtney Clark into a believable pop star. This included making songs that felt like they would have been hits in the 1990s but also were really catchy songs that could endure. As much as I never want to watch Sandy Wexler again, I do find myself already humming to "Mr. DJ", which I think has a chance to far outlast the actual movie that it was created to be in.

An Article About the Social Importance of Movies


Collider is a mainstream movie and film news site that like most of its type is crammed with trailers and casting rumours and essentially, free publicity for the big studios. But unlike many similar sites, it often houses some really powerful and well-written articles that probe deeper than just revealing who will be the villain in Justice League (apparently, it is Steppenwolf because he is born to be wild). Today, Chris Cabin wrote a piece about the importance of watching movies depicting the immigrant experience. He mentions and details several really significant movies like James Gray's The Immigrant, Gregory Nava's El Norte, and Ramin Bahrani's Chop Shop. The article is a great read because it will likely open your eyes to movies you have never heard about but really should watch due to their artistry and importance. His piece also really highlights how important art is at exploring the social climate and giving a voice to major issues. Movies definitely have a unique way of crafting and shaping that message that makes it accessible to more people. Plus he mentions how Roger Ebert helped so many of those movies to get seen, and any time Ebert is praised is a good thing to me. Please check out the article, because I think it is really worthwhile.

'American Assassin' Trailer: Just in Case Jason Bourne, Ethan Hunt, Jack Ryan, and Jack Reacher Weren't Enough


Lionsgate is hoping that your globe-trotting, kick-ass spy franchise hunger hasn't been satiated yet, as the already crammed genre that sort of exists to appease those who want a bit more adult geared action has a new entry in American Assassin. The movie is an adaptation of a popular Vincent Flynn novel that just happens to be part of 15 and going novel series about CIA black-ops recruit, Mitch Rapp (Flynn passed away in 2013 but author Kyle Mills is continuing the series). Obviously, the studio is hoping an already established fanbase will help launch this into a powerhouse franchise, but it is pretty clear by now that a popular book series isn't enough for a box office gold churning franchise. You need to have a movie that stands out and appeals to those that have never heard about the book while also keeping the loyal reader happy enough to shell out for a ticket too.

The first trailer doesn't really have anything that makes it stand out from your routine agent with an agenda off to make the bad guys pay type. I do like Dylan O'Brien getting another chance at a lead role, and he was perfectly fine in the uneven Maze Runner franchise (that one day will have a third movie that I can happily ignore). Michael Keaton is taking on the Kevin Costner type role of the wise and tough ass division head. Sanaa Lathan is always someone who I thought was far better than the material that she is in. Taylor Kitsch never became the star he was destined but stuff like The Grand Seduction and Lone Survivor proves he deserve better. Despite me rooting for the cast, there isn't anything here that looks like it is attempting to shake up a genre. Instead it leans heavy on tropes like the hero losing a loved one to terrorists, a father figure that he has to prove his worth, and lots of typical action sequences like jumping on the moving boat and kicking down that door.

Worst of all, this looks to be an origin story, which I really think studios just need to jettison off to space. But maybe the whole training and finding his way can be solved in 20 minutes, and there is a fresh story that is being hidden from this trailer. I expect Rapp to succeed in his mission and then stand on top of a tall building while narration tells us he is here to keep our world safe, then a stinger where Mads Mikkelsen kicks the President's puppy.

Even 'Fast' Die Hards are Furious on 'Fate" Finale


Spoiler warning for those who are actually left that want to see The Fate of the Furious.

The congregation of Fast and Furious is even grumbling over some of the plot issues in The Fate of the Furious. Haliegh Foutch, writer of Collider and clearly a bigger Fast and Furious fan than me, writes a solid piece exploring some of the major plot problems and analyzing how they can be fixed in the two upcoming movies (along with other hypothesizing about the future of the franchise). One of my big issues that got addressed in this article is how Jason Statham's Deckard is paling around with Hobbs (Dwayne Johnson) and Dom (Vin Diesel) with no problems after he had murdered "family member" Han (Sung Kang). The movie was trying to soften up Deckard so he could be Superhero Statham after he was a murderous and heartless supervillain in the previous movie. Foutch believes we may be in store for more redemption of Deckard as it could possibly be revealed that Han isn't dead and potentially pulling a Brian by enjoying Coronas on the beach with the other presumed dead "family member", Gisele Yashar (Gal Gadot). That would help make Deckard more believable on the side of good, though it doesn't really explain why he is accepted now without that revelation.

Han and Yashar returning isn't far-fetched when you consider resurrection seems to be a Furious and Chris Morgan writing staple. Probably even more likely if Wonder Woman is a huge hit, which means the franchise will be more open to using some of Gadot's new star power. The series has already seen Letty (Michelle Rogriguez) miraculously come back from the dead, and I'm glad that a fan like Foutch even recognized it was odd that the once presumed dead then upgraded to vegetable Owen Shaw (Luke Evans) was bouncing around with life now. This habit of going full of soap opera and just bringing people back at the film's convenience is part of the reason this franchise just feels to be lacking any stakes or gravitas. The Han death does really need to be addressed considering the scene of his demise has gone down in three movies now (thanks to Furious' scattered timeline where Han's death initially happened all the way back in Tokyo Drift). If he does return, it is hard to escape yet another eyeball-rolling moment in a series full of contrived plot turns.

Also I like Foutch's observation that Charlize Theron's Cipher is this series' Thanos where it has been revealed she has had a hand in all the villainy that has been going down since at least Fast Five (maybe sooner? My attentiveness in this series is not strong). Cipher was a huge bright spot in the cartoon cavalcade that was the movie, but I think she is better served if she isn't the key villain in the two follow-ups in order to avoid going full on Cobra Commander retreat every time. This could be where the revival of Owen pays off, as it can be revealed he is still in cahoots with her or gets persuaded back to the dark side. This would allow for the family theme to continue with a brother vs. brother storyline and also gives a reason for more Helen Mirren screen time than the one scene cameo. It could also give Deckard some depth as he has to battle with either going against his brother or betraying his brand new "family."

The other final interesting thing about this franchise going forward is where Dwayne Johnson is going to sit. His Hobb's character turned down getting back his badge in exchange for staying at home with his daughter, which felt a bit like a quiet send off for his character. The biggest news surrounding this franchise has been that Diesel and Johnson do not like each other, and Diesel seems to be the one that has some creative power for the series. Though at this point, I'd say Johnson is far more valuable to the movies than Diesel, but it is also clear that Johnson needs it far less than Diesel. If this was the farewell to Hobbs, it gives me even less reason to continue on with this franchise.

I admit over and over that I've just never connected with The Fast and the Furious movies, so my opinion probably matters very little in regarding what they should do. I also recognize it is a pretty big deal in our film culture, which is why I just spent several hundred words analyzing it.

Monday, April 17, 2017

Breakdown of 'The Fate of the Furious', 'Sandy Wexler', 'Slam' and 'Before I Wake'


One of the biggest movies of the year has finally arrived, and The Breakdown has you covered. We review the eighth installment in the Fast and Furious franchise in The Fate of the Furious. I'll admit that I haven't been a fan of this series, so find out if the cartoony actioner has finally won me over. Speaking of movies that have to fight for a recommendation, we're reviewing the latest Adam Sandler movie in the 90s set Sandy Wexler. We are also bringing back the Breakdown Trivia Showdown, with the prize this week being first pick in next week's Breakdown Summer Box Office Challenge draft. As well, the trailer for the most anticipated movie of the year was dropped this weekend, so we also talk Star Wars: The Last Jedi. As always, if you enjoy the show then please spread the word to other movie fans.

Remember you can now subscribe either to The Movie Breakdown feed (a subscription link is at the top right hand of this site) or on iTunes.



Breakdown Outline:

1:14 The Fate of the Furious review
19:11 Sandy Wexler review
38:59 Slam review
51:18 Before I Wake review
1:05:24 The Breakdown Trivia Showdown
1:21:30 Box Office Analysis
1:28:04 Trailer Reviews: Star Wars: The Last Jedi, Thor: Ragnarok, Detroit, Baby Driver, Atomic Blonde, The Hitman's Bodyguard
1:41:58 Review Rundown

Rating Rundown:
The Fate of the Furious ** (CS)
Sandy Wexler ** (CS) & ½* (SM)
Slam **½ (CS) & *** (SM)
Before I Wake **½ (CS & SM)