Beirut

Probably the only thing this movie and the new Ghostbusters movie have in common are that people saw the trailer, got pissed, and I get the feeling that it hurt the exposure the movie got. Yes, the only reason I really know about this movie was because I read an article a while back about how people were complaining about how the trailer to this movie gave a seemingly inaccurate representation of the Middle East and the Lebanese Civil War... before they saw the movie... Now I don't know if that really hurt the box office of the movie because it never really seemed like this was positioned to be a huge hit, but people jumping on social media to boycott a film seems pretty silly in the first place, especially if the movie isn't half bad.

Beirut follows the story of a diplomat by the name of Mason Skiles (played by Jon Hamm). Skiles is living in Beirut in 1972 right before the Lebanese civil war in 1975 that changed the landscape of the country forever. He lives with his wife, Nadia (played by Leila Bekhti) and a young boy named Karim (played as a child by Yoav Sadian and later as an adult by Idir Chender) who the couple have started to sponsor and are helping him with education and a future life. But a tragedy hits and Skiles wife is murdered by terrorists.

Ten years later, Mason is back in the states and an alcoholic. However, he is brought back to Lebanon by the CIA who say that a terrorist group claims to have an old friend of his and they will only talk to him.

What follows is a relatively entertaining spy/historical drama/ action(ish) movie.

The first thing to mention is Jon Hamm because he really drives this movie and the only reason anybody really went off to see this movie. On one hand, I really like Jon Hamm. I didn't watch all of Mad Men, but I watched about 4 seasons before there wasn't anything more on Netflix and by the time there was I lost track of where I was.

On the other hand though, his character set up is pretty cookie cutter and predictable. He's a guy who seems to have it all, but then tragedy brings him down to his lowest point and he needs to go back into the arena one last time. And again, it's not bad, but the way that it's shown is pretty stereotypical and unoriginal. He's putting alcohol in his coffee so he's obviously having a rough time, but his drinking problem, while mentioned to be a potential issue, never really affects the overall mission.

The other issue with Jon Hamm's character and performance is that he's basically playing Don Draper. And that's not really a bad thing per se, but the same way American Made could be a spiritual sequel where Maverick smuggles drugs for the cartel, Beirut could be a spiritual sequel to Mad Men where Don Draper becomes a diplomat. It's not bad, especially if it's worked in the past, I just wish I could see some more out of Hamm.

The rest of the cast is actually pretty good but I can't say they're written very well. Dean Norris plays a shady CIA officer and I barely noticed him with hair. And as much as I love Rosamund Pike (check out Gone Girl you'll see what I mean), but like a lot of movies she's in, she's underwritten and not very developed. In this movie, she is just essentially a female character that plays second fiddle to Jon Hamm. I watched some of the bonus features and they had a 50 second clip trying to build up who this character was and I realized, she doesn't really have a character at all. Pike gives and okay performance because I think she's a good actress, but she doesn't add much to the movie at all besides adding an active female character.

Probably the biggest issue I have with the movie is that there is the inklings of a really good movie. There's a lot of real potential drama builders in this movie like Don Draper's alcohol problem, his relationship with the young boy who he was a pseudo father to, the fact he basically loses his groove because of tragedy. But as it stands, the movie is just too predictable and lacking in real action or drama to make it memorable. The way the story progresses is pretty predictable because it's set up so predictably but it didn't have to be that way. There were a lot of potential and great actors who still gave pretty good performances but in the end we get an okay spy thriller (kinda) and I was left wondering what the whole point of it all was.

Again, this movie's trailer drew criticism for being another stereotypical white man in a foreign land saving the day film but in reality this movie wasn't good because it didn't back the story up with anything meaningful. It's not even a historically true story. It's just set in the time period of the Lebanese Civil War right before the invasion of Israel in 1982. I have to admit that that's an interesting setting, especially for a spy film as the CIA was present in Beirut dealing with the PLO and international tensions at the time. The issues people should have with this movie shouldn't be based in any racial tensions based on a trailer, it should be with the quality of the film as a whole and personally, I thought it was fine. Not great, but fine.

In many ways, this movie reminds me a lot of Bridge of Spies. I still really enjoy Bridge of Spies and both that movie and this movie had elements about it that I really enjoyed and made the watching experience entertaining. But I really haven't thought about Bridge of Spies since I saw it and I get the feeling that upon a second viewing, I would find more issues with the film that I originally thought. The difference is that I was able to notice the flaws while watching and I doubt I'll really remember this movie in a week or so. If you're like me and you like stories about spies, the 1970s and 80s, are intrigued by Middle Eastern history and international affairs, or just like Jon Hamm, you might find some enjoyment in this film like I did, but this is probably going to be barely a blip in the conversations of movies I watched in 2018 and deserves just kind of a "meh".

But did you see Beirut? Were you one of the people who complained about the trailer and watched it still? If you did I'd be interested to get your take on the film but I doubt too many people, regardless of their thoughts on the trailer saw this movie. Comment and Discuss below! You can also send me your thoughts on Twitter @MovieSymposium as well as send me your requests for films I should review in the future. If you follow me on Twitter, you can get updates on future movie news and reviews coming out of this blog.

I'll see you next time!

American Made

It's actually been a fascinating time for movies over the past 5ish years because there's a period of history that has started to become declassified and more information has come out about it and that is centered on the rise of drug cartels, the war on drugs, and the CIA, DEA, and the government involved in the whole thing. You see it in shows like Narcos, and movies like The Infiltrator, and now American Made.

And it makes sense, this is a period of time that was full of intrigue and a lot of stories that can't all be told to their fullest extent, even in a show like Narcos. The one issue is, when you watch more than one of these shows, you start remembering names and you know what happens in the end of one movie because of something you saw in another. Unfortunately, that was the case with me and this movie. Barry Seal (played by Tom Cruise) was a real person and he's a piece of the bigger puzzle that is the war on drugs and the cocaine trafficking business in Central America. But even though I knew the ending, I still can say that this movie expanded on a story that is worth telling and had a lot of fun with it along the way.

American Made is a "biopic" on the life story of Barry Seal, an airline pilot bored with his life that is recruited by the CIA to perform intelligence operations in Nicaragua during the Cold War. While he's doing work for the CIA, he is recruited by Pablo Escobar and the Medellin Cartel to smuggle drugs into the United States.

I use quotes because in interviews, the director Doug Liman, has stated pretty clearly that this is not meant to be the most accurate of telling. There are events in the overall manner that for sure happened but the truth is that Tom Cruise didn't match the build or characteristics of Barry Seal. There is a lot of embellishment in this movie and it wasn't made for the purposes of a movie like The Darkest Hour that same year. It was made to be an entertaining crime thriller set in a historical setting with historical characters. Don't take this movie as historical truth is all I'm saying.

What is important to do is to enjoy the crazy stories about this character of history because I get the feeling that a lot of the stories are more true than it would seem and there are probably stories that didn't make it into this movie.

Another aspect of this film that was done really well was the casting.

Again, historical accuracy not considered, everyone gives a pretty good performance in this film. Domnhall Gleason, who I'm seeing in almost everything these days and really enjoying as well, does a great job as a CIA officer who recruits and oversees Seals jobs. Seal's wife Lucy isn't that well written of a character but Sarah Wright gives a pretty decent performance. Jesse Plemons (or as I call him budget Matt Damon) does a good job and Caleb Landry Jones plays Lucy's younger brother JB and does a really good job at playing a twerp kid who you really don't like from the get go but provides some conflict at the peak of Seal's rags to riches story.

But as per usual, the main focus is Tom Cruise.

Honestly, I know the timeline doesn't work out, but I don't really know why they're making a sequel to Top Gun when this movie really could serve as a the spiritual sequel we all need. The way they build the character and the way Tom Cruise plays him, he might as well be Maverick. And at the end of the day, would anybody be really surprised if Maverick ended up burning out of Top Gun, getting hired by the CIA, and smuggling drugs for the cartel? Sounds like the best Top Gun sequel ever!

And despite the light black comedy tone of the movie, Cruise really does give a pretty good performance. Despite all the jokes about him and how much of an eccentric person he is in real life, with very few exceptions, he doesn't really ever give a bad performance. Seeing him on screen and the way he performs at the very least keeps you entertained.

Like I said, there are exceptions (the Mummy), but Tom Cruise and Doug Liman have a two for two record of good movies in my book.

Are there problems with the movie? Yeah and I think it's a few missteps with the tone. This movie isn't totally sure if it wants to be a comedy, an action movie, a historical drama and it kind of goes for all three without really championing one or the other. Don't get me wrong, it does it right at certain times. The ending where the movie explained the historical basis for the story felt more like the ending of Animal House than it did a biopic and I felt like that really worked. But at the same time I feel like the movie could have benefited from a little more development of the relationship between Seals and his wife. There's a point near the end where the two are talking about the future and it doesn't really have the impact it was meant to have because the relationship isn't as strong as it could be. They have one funny line that connects the two of them and the rest you really have to just deduce from assumptions.

I don't like comparing movies but I would put American Made in a very similar category as The Infiltrator. It's a film with a lot of good actors doing good performances, but the story just doesn't have that oompf to really push it towards something you'll really remember. Now if I ever see this on TV, I'll probably stop and watch it and I do think it is worth checking out, I just think it's a very fine entertaining movie, but not a whole lot more.

But those are my thoughts on American Made. What did you think? What do you think is the best Tom Cruise performance? Comment and Discuss below! You can also send me your thoughts on Twitter @MovieSymposium as well as send me your requests for films I should review in the future. If you follow me on Twitter, you can get updates on future movie news and reviews coming out of this blog.

Thanks, I'll see you next time.

The Incredibles 2

So I'm going to put a disclaimer on this review from the get go. I went into this movie after a long weekend of not getting a lot of sleep due to spending time with family and friends. I knew from the get go that it was very possible that I was going to fall asleep to this movie, no matter how good it was. And there were a couple of moments that I did fall asleep very briefly and even if I wasn't, I was just down right tired. I'm going to try and take a lot of those external factors out of my analysis of this movie because I was very, very excited for this movie.

The Incredible came out in 2006, just about the time that I was starting to get into more adult movies and I was trying to move away from the Disney animated films. However, that didn't really seem to matter because at every step of the way, Pixar has managed to create quality films that appeal to both adults and kids so going into The Incredibles never felt like I was watching a kids movie, it just felt like I was watching another movie. So while I don't think I hold The Incredible up in such a heartfelt nostalgia manner the way I know a lot of people do, I was still excited because this seemed to be a continuation of one of the films that solidified Pixar's already stellar record of creating just quality movies, not just kids movies.

The Incredibles 2 follows the story of the Parr family right where the previous movie left off. Bob Parr or Mr. Incredible (voiced by Craig T Nelson), his wife Helen or Elastigirl (voiced by Holly Hunter) and their two kids Dash and Violet (voiced by Huck Hilner (a change from the first film) and Sarah Vowell) are struggling with the fact that super heroes are still illegal. Bob wants to give his kids the chance to make the choice on whether or not they want to crime fight, but he also really just wants to get back to crime fighting, very similarly to the way he was in the first movie. After a botched hero intervention with the Underminer (voiced by John Ratzenberger), the Incredibles are approached by a brother sister duo who work at a tech company who are interested in promoting the image of superheroes to get them legalized again.

Winston and Evelyn Deavor (voiced by Bob Odenkirk and Catherine Keener) want to build up the image of supers but they believe that the best way to do that is to have Elastigirl spearhead the campaign. This leave Bob alone with the kids as Violet is having trouble with boys at school, Dash is

having difficulty with math, and the baby Jack-Jack is developing his first powers. Overall it makes for a great adventure that I actually was almost preferring the parts where Mr. Incredible is at home with the kids over the action. Maybe I was tired and not able to appreciate the action as much as I wanted to, but it was fun seeing the tables turned. The previous movie was Bob going off and adventuring on his own while Helen was home with the kids but this movie was the opposite. I would love to re-watch the first movie and watch the second movie right after it because it does feel like the continuation of the first film as it does happen right after. Maybe I'll do another review down the road where I do that and can give a better impression of how it fits as a larger story.

That's not to say that Helen's part of the movie wasn't good. They even expanded a little bit in a fun way.

At a certain point, Helen is introduced to a group of new superheroes that are inspired by what she does and they have a really fun set of powers. Later in the film they have representatives from other countries and their superheroes. I think they managed to do a really good job at expanding the lore of the universe while not feeling too gimick-y or in the trends of today. That was something that they recognized in the production of this movie and they instead wanted to center on the family and their growing journey.

And that's another really interesting thing about this movie, the production story. The first movie came out 14 years ago. I think people were a little nervous about that. So much that they even added a little disclaimer at the beginning with Craig T Nelson, Holly Hunter, Samuel L Jackson, and Brad Bird about how much work goes into these movies and why it took so long. If you have time, go over to the production notes on the Wikipedia page and read a little bit into how long it took this movie to get green lit and some of the stories behind it because it is interesting.

I do feel like the movie was able to keep the same tone from the first movie and expand the story a bit, however I wonder if it's just the way sequels are that it never can really capture the magic of the first film. The villain of the movie never felt as sinister and personal as Synestro. The family dynamic at times felt like it was retreading on old territory that had already been covered in the first movie at times. There are a couple things in the movie that I could nit pick but I don't really want to. Maybe that's not being objective, but the truth is this movie was just fun.

The one big complaint I might have is that there wasn't enough Edna Mode (voiced by Brad Bird) in my opinion. In the parts she is in she almost steals the show, but I do think there wasn't enough of her in this film.

Whether it's just seeing these superheroes trying to live a normal life, Frozone (voiced by Samuel L Jackson) and the rest of them doing more action, or Jack-Jack developing his powers while tormenting a raccoon, this movie is just down right entertaining. Especially if you were a fan of the first one, go check it out, you will not be disappointed.

I probably have missed some criticisms and some praised of this movie due to being tired, so I want to hear your thoughts. What did you think of The Incredible 2? How did it match up to the first one? Comment and Discuss below! You can also send me your thoughts on Twitter @MovieSymposium as well as send me your requests for films I should review in the future. If you follow me on Twitter, you can get updates on future movie news and reviews coming out of this blog.

Thanks, I'll see you next time.

Con Air

There are movies out there that will never win Oscars or be remembered as the classics, but they still go down as legendary. And that is exactly what Con Air is. This movie is all together terrible and at the same time all together brilliant. There are other great 90's action films, other 90's action movies have as great of cast, and have similar insane and overboard action. But for some reason, I think this movie flies under the radar from time to time and should be recognized as one of the greats, even if John Cusack doesn't think so and only did it for the money.

Con Air follows the story of Cameron Poe (played by Nicholas Cage). Poe is a former Army ranger coming home from military service to his pregnant wife Tricia (played by Monica Potter). Unfortunately, the reunion is cut short when Poe is arrested for killing one of the men who tries to attack him and his wife outside of the bar where they had their reunion. He is sentenced to 7 years for ridiculous and movie plot exaggerated charges. When his sentence is done and he's put on parole, he is on his way home, hitching a ride on a plane full of deadly prisoners.

Now there are a couple of strings on this story. You've got Poe just wanting to get home, but then you've got a slew of introductions of the most vicious criminals a 90's movie can make up. You've got Cyrus "the virus" (played by John Malkovich) who is this self taught genius. You've got Diamond Dog (played by Ving Rhames) who is a black nationalist, you've got Steve Buscemi playing a Hannibal Lector style mass murderer.

But then you've got other side stories like Poe's cell mate Mike (played by Mykelti Williamson) who needs his insulin shot. You've got an undercover DEA agent with a very vague agenda. Even Dave Chapelle is thrown in there for good measure. All so serving as tinder for the explosion that is when Cyrus and his gang of prisoners orchestrate a plan to hijack the plane. But I can tell you that's only the beginning of this wild ride.

I won't go too in depth with Cyrus's plot because I highly recommend people check out this movie, but basically it's your typical 80's or 90's villain plot. The villain and his gang are irredeemably evil but undeniably entertaining. And then you've got a few good guys who are trying their best to stop him from getting away with his plot. One of them is Poe who begrudgingly takes on the role of amazing action hero when all he wants to do is get home to the daughter that he hasn't gotten a chance to meet yet. The other heroes are the ones on the ground and for a movie called Con Air, a lot of great action happens both in the air, and on the ground throughout the entire movie.

The side of the good guys is complete with John Cusack playing US Marshall Vince Larkin. He's the one in charge of tranportation of these prisoners and the entire movie, he's trying to find a way to bring the plane down and bring these criminals to justice.

Now it's pretty well documented that John Cusack hated this movie and only took the job for the money, but I don't think I've seen a better performance from him since. Maybe he didn't care so much that he just ended up having too much fun with the film but I loved every minute of him on screen and I thought that he and Nic Cage, along with everyone in the cast, just brought this movie legitimacy by taking a premise so ridiculous to life and doing it in a way that doesn't take itself too seriously, but never feels like a joke. Everyone is playing this movie just serious enough that the audience buys it and has a fun time, at least I did.

Con Air is the epitome of a 90's movie because it could never be made today. Like I've mentioned, you have just a wacky cast of characters from the stereotypical gay characters from the 90's which is frankly just offensive now, the typical Dave Chapelle role, and everything in between from Steve Buscemi playing Steve Buscemi if he was in the Silence of the Lambs, and John Malkovich being probably the best action villain since Hans Gruber in Die Hard in my opinion.

But the crowning jewel of course is Nicolas Cage.

Saying Nic Cage is hard to pin down is the understatement of the century. One minute he'll be playing a super boring character, more in his most recent films, then he'll do something like Leaving Las Vegas and win an Oscar. But I think where he's at his best is when he plays the very unique characters that if it was any other actor, you'd maybe see this kind of entertainment in a side character. But Cage is able to use his Cageisms to both create a really weird character and yet make him very likable and throw in some awesome 90's action poses in there as well. He did it in The Rock, National Treasure, (and other films) and he does it perfectly as Cameron Poe. Poe is a hillbilly from Alabama who is undoubtedly good. The whole premise is that he has multiple chances to get off the plane to go see his daughter, but he doesn't, not necessarily to stop Cyrus and his gang, but to save his friend and a female guard that Danny Trejo in no uncertain terms says he's going to rape if Poe isn't there (again, it was the 90's, there's no way this movie could be made now, and some of it really doesn't age well).

At the end of it all, you get a wild ride of action set piece after action set piece. Is it well acted? No. Is it uneven in it's execution? Yes. Is it still really awesome? Hell yeah! It's a Nicolas Cage movie, what did you expect?

It's kind of hard to point out the issues with this movie for two reasons. The first is, there are almost too many to count. The reality of it is, this is not that great of a movie if you're thinking about it critically. The characters are paper thin and really only based on stereotypes and cliches.

But at the same time, it's really kind of an amazing premise, an amazing cast that we'll never really get to see in this capacity ever again. John Cusack or John Malkovich will never be this cool again because they're more established actors and they are going off to do their art house films. We'll probably never see this Nic Cage again because he's really mellowed out in his older age. And yeah, there are parts of this movie that we'll never see again for good reasons, but it just feels like a really surreal ride that is constant action and just a mountain of fun.

I recommend checking out Con Air because it really is a time capsule of bizarness. It's very easy to pick up and enjoy the ride while it lasts. Just don't think too hard about it.

But those are my thoughts on Con Air. What do you think of this film? How does it rank up against the other action movies of the 90's? Comment and Discuss below! You can also send me your thoughts on Twitter @MovieSymposium as well as send me your requests for films I should review in the future. If you follow me on Twitter, you can get updates on future movie news and reviews coming out of this blog.

Thanks, I'll see you again soon!

Future Man Season 1

Hulu Original shows have been a difficult subject for me. I haven't always consistently had the streaming service and the times that I did (through roommates or family), there weren't the quality of original programming that we have today. I saw descriptions and trailers for Future Man and was interested, but not enough to really binge the show. And then I got a personal recommendation from a friend of mine and he happened to mention that the episodes are half hour long episodes and suddenly I was totally sold. After watching the show, I'm actually really bummed I didn't check this out earlier.

Future Man follows the story of 20 something year old janitor, Josh Futturman (played by Josh Hutcherson). Josh lives at home with his parents and works as a janitor at a big science lab called Kronish Labs. His boss, Dr. Kronish (played by Keith David) is researching the cure for herpes. He is a bit of a mentor to Josh who finds himself in a bit of a rut, unable to figure out what he wants to do with his life. So he plays video games for a form of escapism. He is obsessed with a game called Biotic Wars. Biotic Wars is an almost impossible game in which Josh has been working so hard to get to the end of. Finally one night he does it. He beats Biotic Wars and he is named The Savior at the end of the game.

I will note that the representation of gaming is not at all accurate. Not only is Biotic Wars a really low res game in comparison with the other games that are out there today, but it's also a linear game that is considered impossible? There are a couple of articles out there that have made this point already but although the gaming aspect of the show is inaccurate, the gaming culture isn't that far off, especially in the form of Josh's friends, portrayed by Awkwafina and Paul Scheer. I'll try and attach a link to article that talked about this at the end but the point is, this is the first nod towards fandom that Future Man gets right, even if it gets the specifics wrong.

When Josh beats the game, the two characters from the game, Tiger (played by Eliza Coupe) and Wolf (played by Derek Wilson), come to him and assume he is the savior who will help them prevent their dystopian future, a future Josh thought only existed in the game.

What follows is a really hilarious romp where this trio is traveling back and forth through time, fighting evil agents from the future, and trying to put the timeline on the right course in what is self described as a plot similar to The Last Starfighter and Quantum Leap with a lot of Back to the Future and Terminator all squeezed in there.

This show is produced by Seth Rogen and Evan Goldberg so a lot of the humor feels like something you'd see out of Pineapple Express or Sausage Party but it all works really well. The three main characters are really hilarious and their dynamic really works out. At the start, you think that it's going to be a fish out of water story with Josh being the fish out of water. But it works in the opposite direction as Josh is actually more in tune with the "rules of time travel" and just rules of human decency then the two time travelers are so it often is put on Josh to teach the other two how to behave and not murder everyone they come across.

The show is riddled with references to all the classic 80's movies from Back to the Future, to Top Gun, to a lot of other pop culture. If you're a fan of gaming, movies, or pop culture in general like I am, you are going to absolutely love this show. If you're not, I think you'll still enjoy the comedy because this had me laughing quite a bit.

Tiger and Wolf are two characters that I wasn't sure I was going to like at the beginning. I don't think they are the best characters in the world but somehow they manage to create characters that are cold blooded killers that really have no regard for human life as long as they get to their goal, and yet manage to make you care about them and the really funny moments they create. A lot of it comes from the up ended premise that the time travelers in every movie with time travel are always the all knowing person. In this show, Tiger and Wolf are really out of their element and it really becomes hilarious, especially when they start time traveling to the sixties, to a future where James Cameron is the founding father of a new world order, and to the birth of Keith David's character back in the 40's.

Among Keith David are a bunch of supporting characters that really color in the background for the main trio. Josh's parent's (played by Ed Begley Jr and Glenne Headly) are hilarious and Robert Craighead plays a really, REALLY funny role as a police officer who is continuously haunted by these three as they travel through time.

I think the thing that really made me love Future Man was how simple it was. The episodes are only a half hour long and that's really good. If they had been an hour long I feel like I would have gotten bored with the premise or I would have gotten sick of the humor, that let's be honest, is very typical Seth Rogen dick joke humor. But the episodes go by very quickly and they keep you engaged in a self aware time travel story that you kind of forget how silly a lot of it is or how weak the narrative can be at times. The story has a pretty good grasp on the use of time travel as a story device and even when it meets some pitfalls, it is very quick to point out how that is a pitfall just in general in the way other people have used those story elements.

I gave myself a little bit of time to marinate over Future Man. While I was watching it I was having a really fun time. I blasted through it very quickly and all of that I can give it a lot of credit. But it's not a show I'm really going to remember. Compare this to Ready Player One and I would take this as a more true to form homage to 80s movies and pop culture, but overall, I wouldn't subscribe to Hulu to solely watch this show. It's good, but not mind blowingly good. Entertaining, but not a show I will put down as my favorite of the year.

But have you seen Future Man? Comment and Discuss below! You can also send me your thoughts on Twitter @MovieSymposium as well as send me your requests for films I should review in the future. If you follow me on Twitter, you can get updates on future movie news and reviews I post from this blog.

Thanks, see you next time.


Footnotes:
Article about Gaming in Future Man: https://www.polygon.com/tv/2017/11/17/16666552/hulu-future-man-pilot