Showing posts with label Rian Johnson. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Rian Johnson. Show all posts

Saturday, January 6, 2018

Well, here we are: Star Wars Episode Eight, The Divergence of the Force by The Mouse.

Movie Reviewed: Star Wars Episode Eight: The Last Jedi

Director: Rian Johnson

Date: 6 January 2018

jamesintexas rating: **



Failure is always an option, and I think The Last Jedi represents a failure of ideas at times despite its many wonders.  "The greatest teacher, failure is" says you know who in an appearance applauded for its puppetry and lack of CGI but another example of pillaging the past.  (Side note: Hasn't this character been through enough when I think of the Sonic-the-Hedgehog type stunts in Episode 2?)  I am also not sure if the creative forces behind this film and the aggressive release schedule which drives forward stories so quickly would align with the master's idea of learning from a failure.  A failure that makes one billion dollars in box office in only a few weeks.  I think that as a long-time fan, I am coming to terms with the world being a place where a new Star Wars film happens yearly and is just less special.  That is what it is.

The Last Jedi.  Even the title to this film lacks conviction and clarity because I do not know who it is supposed to refer to and what it means.  Rian Johnson's bloated, overstuffed take on the Star Wars universe stumbles in its own mythology, seems to mishandle the great Carrie Fisher's last onscreen performance as General Leia (unless maybe there is footage for Episode Nine?), juggles multiple story lines poorly, gives short shrift to characters like Rey and Finn as well as substance in order to fit in multiple CGI cute creatures and quasi-political and social commentary about arms dealing and weapon-building, and ultimately the film embodies the worst tendencies of Peter Jackson's finale in The Lord of The Rings: The Return of The King, with an overlong, extended, indulgent denouement.  Here, Johnson flirts with making bold, radical choices with this storytelling and always blinks, never being courageous enough to shock or stir the audience.  In contrast, he is much more comfortable blowing up the tenets of the Jedi world, including the laws that govern them and the Force-ghosts in ways that provide quick storytelling shortcuts but up-end the universe itself without making sense.  And don't get me started on the jump to Hyperspace.

This film is a curiosity: a storyteller's decision to play in the world and muck it up, which I guess is his right, as this new trilogy is significantly farther away from George Lucas's vision than The Force Awakens would have made us believe.  In that film, J. J. Abrams offered a mishmash of old recycled into new, charmingly playing in the destruction of the world of the original trilogy with exciting, fresh characters like Rey and Finn and even Kylo Ren.  My favorite moments included Rey scavenging in the wrecked carcass of a Star Destroyer, now smashed up on the floor of her planet.  Now, the world constructed in The Last Jedi seems constrained by its script, in a rush to go here and there, while being a bit of a tale of sound and fury, as it were.  Many ridiculed George Lucas's focus on trade federations in Episode One; now, we have an entire movie devoted to running out of fuel?

After an exciting, WW2-esque opening battle, there are too many storylines to follow: Kylo Ren's (Adam Driver) dark journey and then rage; General Hux's (Domhnall Gleeson) grandstanding; the unconvincing bad guy Snoke (Andy Serkis); Finn (John Boyega) and Rose's (Kelly Marie Tran) journey to another planet and back to gather secrets to help their failing ship; sidelined flyboy Poe (Oscar Isaac) clashing with autocratic Vice Admiral Holdo (Laura Dern); Rey (Daisy Ridley) following Luke Skywalker (Mark Hamill) around until he agrees to teach her; and I think that's it?  There is an early fake-out death which goes far beyond the logic of this established universe and feels like a take from a Superman film.  I think that moment took me out of the film, and I struggled to get back on board.  It was distracting and still does not make sense to me.

To say this film signifies nothing is not true.  But whatever Johnson's vision is for this world, I am not sure I want in after this because there is some really strange altering of the world as we know it which offers some great visuals but sacrifices something in the process.  Johnson displays clumsiness and an unsteady hand throughout, which is evidenced by the film's inability to end.  The overlong quality of this movie betrays its own insecurities: Johnson wants to give us everything and nothing at the same time.  Rey engages in an Empire Strikes Back-ish quest to learn from Luke as teased in the closing moments of the previous film.  Luke's reluctance to join The Resistance and become her teacher are the most compelling moments of the film.  When the film is at its best, Skywalker storms around a rainy Ireland island in a cloak with Rey following and trying to engage him while also undergoing her own self-discovery.  Rey begins to psychically connect with Kylo Ren through Force telepathy, and her thoughts are never far away from her origin story.  Who are her parents?  What is her destiny?  How does she negotiate The Force and her newfound power?  Those are my favorite moments, and the more Rey, the better.  Rey and Finn are kept strategically apart this film, and I think that's a mistake because of the chemistry between the two characters, and dramatically, I think I just wanted more of Rey, though she does have a wonderful action sequence mid-film that repairs a missed opportunity in The Return of The Jedi.

As the latest two Star Wars films have proven, you show me an AT-AT, I'm probably on board because of nostalgia and the Hoth Battle being maybe my favorite moments in the series, close second being the forty minutes in Jabba's palace.  And there is a nice apocalyptic quality of some of the final sequence with its stark imagery, snow-like salt on top of red, blazing with light shimmering everywhere, but the final machinations of the film left me nonplussed, about which the less said, the better.  I was emotional in the final scenes, but I also think that part of that emotion was because the film seems to have sidelined its most interesting characters in plot lines that do not allow them to shine.  Ridley and Boyega are so fun to watch; they deserve to do more than just wait around.  Hamill does what he can with a Luke Skywalker that has been given this story line.  The performances generally are strong; I think I just was troubled by the arrangement of the film and storytelling, and some of dialogue is very clunky, even by Lucasian standards.

"We are what they grow beyond" says the green sage.  Growth, I guess, is debatable.

Star Wars: The Last Jedi, 2017, 4K



Sunday, February 10, 2013

Looper: Time Travel Hurts My Brain

Movie Review: Looper

Director: Rian Johnson

Reviewed: 10 February 2013

jamesintexas rating-- ***

Rian Johnson's "Looper" is a confounding, innovative, and dazzling work featuring Bruce Willis as Old Joe and Joseph Gordon-Levitt as Joe, caught in a time travel plot initiated by the crime syndicate of the future.  A looper is an assassin who wipes out people sent back from the future, since in the future, disposing of a body is nearly impossible.  Loopers are paid well, expected to be at the rendezvous point, gun in hand, prepared to shoot anyone who comes back in time.  When the bad guys want to close the loop, they send the older version of their looper back to be killed by his younger self.



Part of "Looper's" fun is seeing the plot unfold and Johnson's narrative time-splitting, so the less said, the better.  The make-up uniting Gordon-Levitt and Willis is at times distracting, though the movements, growl of the voice, and the overall look unites them.  Johnson's strength in this film is in painting a wide canvas with many details around the edges.  Jeff Daniels shows up as Abe, a world-weary crime boss; Paul Dano is a looper named Seth, forced to confront himself with torturous results (and perhaps my favorite special effects shots of the whole film).  Emily Blunt carries the second half of the film which involves a small Kansas farm house, and that plot line is certainly fresh and innovative.  I had no idea where it was going.  The imagery is strong: Joe, standing in an empty cornfield, with a tarp next to some corn stalks, waiting patiently with his gun.

At one point, Old Joe acknowledges that he doesn't "want to talk about time travel...we'll be diagramming shit on napkins for hours," and that kind of confidence in the story-telling propels "Looper" though I still don't know what to make of the ending and I'm not sure I followed every twist and turn.  Yet, it captured my imagination, and nearly a month afterwards, I still wonder and come back to the film, which means another viewing is soon in my future.  That is a good sign, when a movie won't leave you.  Can you fight yourself when the older version of you essentially knows everything that the younger version will do?  Some of the special effects shots do not work, and I felt very disoriented and confused most of the film.  In fact, I still do.  "Looper" is a film that I admired more than loved, yet I'm willing to return to it and see if the story moves me more on a second viewing.  Johnson's "Brick" was a wonderfully inventive transplanting of the detective noir style to a Southern California high school, and this film wrestles with time travel and family in a way that I haven't seen before.



A film that's likable and worth your time.