The Addams Family - Film Series Retrospective

There are a lot of ways that one could describe the characters who are the focus of today’s retrospective. Some might call them “creepy” and “kooky”. Others might say they’re “mysterious” and “spooky”. And yet, most would agree that “they’re altogether ooky”. Yes, folks, today we’re celebrating the classic franchise that is The Addams Family. It all began in 1938 when cartoonist Charles Addams first published a series of cartoons for The New Yorker which introduced audiences to the titular family of Morticia, Gomez, Wednesday, Pugsley, Uncle Fester, Grandmama, Thing, Lurch the butler, and Cousin Itt. The cartoons served as a satire of the all-American family by having the Addams Family fully embrace their macabre lifestyle without any regard for those who find their antics disturbing. Suffice it to say, they were a huge hit, resulting in the characters transitioning into other forms of media. Arguably their most famous spin-off is the classic TV series starring Carolyn Jones and John Astin as Morticia and Gomez that ran from 1964 to 1966. Aside from that, there were also a few animated series made by Hanna-Barbera (with one of them notably featuring a then 11-year-old Jodie Foster as Pugsley) and more recent works such as a Broadway musical in 2010. But for the purpose of today’s retrospective, we’ll be focusing on the characters’ appearances in feature films which, since the ’90s, have primarily consisted of two major cinematic incarnations. First, there’s the 1991 live-action adaptation that was followed by a sequel in 1993, resulting in a pair of films that have very much become staples of the Halloween programming blocks for networks like Freeform. Then, there’s the franchise’s recent animated outing that came out last year and is set to get a sequel sometime next year (you know, unless COVID-19 subjects it to the same issues that have plagued countless other upcoming releases). And so, without further ado, prepare to snap your fingers to Vic Mizzy’s iconic theme song as we look at the Addams Family films.

THE ADDAMS FAMILY (1991)

We begin with the first live-action film adaptation of The Addams Family, which was released in 1991 and was directed by Barry Sonnenfeld. Before he went on to direct films like the original Men in Black trilogy, this film served as his directorial debut after starting out in the industry as a cinematographer on many of the Coen brothers’ early films like Blood Simple and Raising Arizona and other classics such as Big and Misery. Unfortunately for him, though, the film’s production was consistently plagued with problems such as health issues for multiple members of the cast and crew, a change in cinematographers that even forced Sonnenfeld to step in and do it himself for a stretch of time and, most infamously, a change in the distributor. Originally handled by Orion Pictures, the studio ended up selling the film to Paramount out of fear that it would be another commercial flop for them at a time when they were struggling financially (sure enough, they would ultimately end up filing for bankruptcy that year). But upon its release, the film did quite well at the box-office as it grossed over $191 million worldwide on its relatively modest $30 million budget, and while its overall critical reception was mixed at best, it’s clear that it managed to be a hit with audiences and it’s easy to see why. Overall, the film does a great job of capturing the madcap atmosphere of the original show and the delightfully dark and twisted visual style of Charles Addams’ original cartoons right down to some spot-on recreations of key moments from the latter. Plus, it’s all bolstered by an excellent ensemble headlined by Raul Julia, who is delightfully theatrical as Gomez, and Angelica Huston, who’s a practically pitch-perfect fit for the role of Morticia. This makes up for what is easily the film’s biggest shortcoming in that anything that doesn’t directly involve the Addams family (namely, everything regarding the main antagonist, a loan shark who tries to disguise her adopted son as  the long-lost Uncle Fester to steal the Addams’ fortune) is a lot weaker by comparison. Ultimately, though, the film still manages to be a solidly entertaining (albeit far from perfect) romp that, at the end of the day, ends up being one of the better adaptations of an old television sitcom from the ’60s, a subgenre that notably trended in the ’90s as evident from other TV-to-film adaptations such as The Flintstones, The Beverly Hillbillies, and Dennis the Menace.

Rating: 3.5/5

ADDAMS FAMILY VALUES (1993)

Fueled by the first film’s success at the box-office, Paramount quickly developed a sequel, Addams Family Values, which hit theaters in 1993 and saw the return of both director Barry Sonnenfeld and most of the main cast from the previous film (save for Judith Malina, who was replaced in the role of Grandmama by Carol Kane). The film also took on a much different tone compared to its predecessor as it was more reliant on its macabre humor rather than its efforts to replicate the zany antics of the TV series, which is ultimately the catalyst behind it being one of the rare cases of a genuinely superior sequel. Yes, thanks to this pivotal change in direction, Family Values is a lot more consistent with its humor and, really, is just a better-made film, for the most part. Much of this has to do with it having a far superior villain than its predecessor thanks to Joan Cusack’s delightfully campy turn as Debbie, a gold-digging femme fatale who marries Uncle Fester with the intent of killing him to collect the inheritance. The only real downside, though, is that, because the film is largely focused on Fester and Debbie’s relationship, it results in Raul Julia and Angelica Huston not getting as much to do this time around as Gomez and Morticia. But at the very least, the film makes up for this by simultaneously giving Christina Ricci a larger role as the precociously cynical Wednesday. Ricci had already made a great impression in the role back in the first film, but thanks to this film’s subplot in which Wednesday and Pugsley are sent away to an overly chipper summer camp and, naturally, cause a whole bunch of chaos there, she’s far and away its biggest standout. With all this in mind, I can safely say that if you were among those who found to be the first live-action Addams Family film to be a bit underwhelming, I believe that you’ll probably get a lot more out of this one. It truly is a great example of a sequel that managed to improve upon its predecessor in almost every possible way and I wouldn’t be surprised if this was the film that was largely responsible for the positive reputation that this duology has maintained over the years.

Rating: 4.5/5

THE ADDAMS FAMILY (2019)

And finally, we cut to nearly three decades later when the Addams Family made their return to the big screen in a new animated feature, which served as the second outing for the directing duo of Conrad Vernon and Greg Tiernan after the smash hit that was 2016’s Sausage Party. Obviously, these two films are quite different from each other when it comes to both their target audiences and their overall sense of humor, but in this case, Vernon and Tiernan do manage to maintain much of the consistent humor that we saw from Sausage Party. Yes, there are quite a lot of modern references (as is admittedly the case with a lot of modern adaptations of older bits of source material), but for the most part, they don’t completely overtake the film to the point where they overshadow anything that made this franchise so popular in the first place. In other words, this new film does just as great of a job as the live-action films did when it comes to capturing the zany and macabre nature of the titular family, especially when it comes to its overall visual style. While there was some… to be perfectly blunt, rather hyperbolic backlash towards the Addams family’s character designs (which seemingly only stemmed from most folks’ fondness for the live-action films), these designs brilliantly match the look of Charles Addams’ original cartoons. And just like the live-action films, they’re brought to life by a terrific ensemble, from Oscar Isaac and Charlize Theron as Gomez and Morticia to Chloe Grace Moretz and Finn Wolfhard as Wednesday and Pugsley. Really, the only ‘negative’ thing that I can say about this film is that the main plot is your standard ‘fish out of water’ story with some blatantly obvious payoffs. Despite this, though, this new take on The Addams Family does manage to be a solidly entertaining family flick, and while I didn’t end up seeing this when it first came out exactly one year ago, I’m certainly interested in seeing what will come from next year’s sequel.

Rating: 4/5

*Snap Snap*

Atomic Blonde (2017) review

Atomic Blonde is an action film that’s headlined by two of the genre’s biggest rising stars. The first is its leading lady, Charlize Theron. Of course, prior to this, Theron’s already had a long career in the film industry. She’s starred in several critical hits over the years and she also won an Oscar for Best Actress for her role in 2003’s Monster. However, she’s recently begun to make a name for herself as an action star, thanks in part to her iconic turn as Imperator Furiosa in Mad Max: Fury Road. The other big name on this project is its director, David Leitch. Like Theron, Leitch has been in the film industry for a long time; for most of that time, though, he’s mainly been known for his work as a stuntman/stunt coordinator. Since 1995, he’s worked in the stunt department on several big-name films, including Fight Club, Serenity, and The Bourne Ultimatum just to name a few. Only recently has he moved into the field of directing. He made his official directorial debut in 2014 as the uncredited co-director alongside fellow stuntman Chad Stahelski on the modern action classic, John Wick. And while he didn’t return to direct this year’s sequel, John Wick: Chapter Two, he’s already been lined up to direct some major projects, including the highly anticipated sequel to 2016’s smash hit, Deadpool. But first, we have his official ‘solo’ debut, Atomic Blonde. The film is based on the 2012 graphic novel The Coldest City by Antony Johnston and Sam Hart. And thanks to the combined efforts of Theron and Leitch, Atomic Blonde is an edgy/badass action thriller that features the same kind of incredible action sequences that made Leitch’s other directorial claim to fame, John Wick, such a success.

In the year 1989, Lorraine Broughton (Charlize Theron) is a top-level agent working for MI6. Around the same time that the Berlin Wall is set to come down, she is approached by her superiors, Eric Gray (Toby Jones) and ‘Chief C’ (James Faulkner), with her latest mission. One of her fellow MI6 agents, James Gasciogne (Sam Hargrave), who Lorraine happens to have had a close relationship with, was just murdered in Berlin. Stolen from his body was ‘The List’, a bit of microfilm containing the identities of all undercover operatives who are currently stationed in the Soviet Union. To protect the identities of her fellow agents, Lorraine is dispatched to Berlin to not only retrieve the list but to also take out the double agent who betrayed Gasciogne in the first place known only as ‘Satchel’. Once there, she is joined by her main contact, agent David Percival (James McAvoy), while also engaging in a relationship with undercover French agent Delphine Lasalle (Sofia Boutella). But in her efforts to obtain the list and take out ‘Satchel’, Lorraine finds herself embroiled in an increasingly complicated game of cat and mouse as she’s forced to act fast before ‘Satchel’ puts a target on her back as well. And as she soon finds out, some of her closest allies may not be as trustworthy as they seem.

As implied in the intro, Atomic Blonde does share some similarities with John Wick… at least, more than just the fact that they share one of the same directors. Both films center around a badass main protagonist who fights their way through a non-stop barrage of thugs to achieve their mission. They also share admittedly simple plots that still manage to be effective enough leverage for the events that transpire in them. And in the case of Atomic Blonde, this is primarily through its retro setting of Berlin near the end of the Cold War, which does provide a neat backdrop for this film’s main plot. With that said, though, Atomic Blonde does take a little while to get going, partially because it spends a considerable amount of its first half just setting up the plot. And really, the plot in this is mainly just a simple ‘cat and mouse’ plot with some predictable twists and turns along the way, which unfortunately makes it the weakest aspect of the film. But once Atomic Blonde’s second half rolls around, that’s when it truly steps into high gear as a highly entertaining action thriller. Leitch’s experience working in both the stunt industry and on John Wick translates perfectly to this film’s action sequences. Just like in John Wick, they are fantastically shot and brilliantly choreographed. Thus, Atomic Blonde easily features some of the best action sequences of the year, including an epic long-take fight sequence (about nine minutes (!), to be precise) that’s set in an old apartment building. This, for the most part, does make up for some of the film’s narrative shortcomings.

As for the film’s cast, Charlize Theron is truly the star of the show here. She’s more than proven herself to be a badass action star in the past, and that very much shows in this film’s incredible action sequences. And even though the film’s main plot is a simple one, Lorraine Broughton is still a fascinating main character. Her standoffish, no-nonsense attitude provides us with some interesting glimpses into her overall characterization as well as some entertainingly blunt arguments with her main associate, James McAvoy’s David Percival. McAvoy ends up getting a lot of the film’s best humorous moments due in part to the character’s roguish playboy personality. Another standout of the cast is Sofia Boutella as the seductive French operative Delphine. She has terrific chemistry with Theron and their characters share a solid relationship that’s more than just sexual, as Broughton basically takes Delphine under her wing when it’s established that the latter hasn’t had much experience out in the field. As for the rest of the cast, their roles in the film are minor by comparison but they are all solid in their respective roles and they work well with Theron in the scenes that they share with her. This includes, among others, Eddie Marsan as a defecting Soviet officer codenamed ‘Spyglass’, Til Schweiger as an enigmatic MI6 ally known only as ‘the Watchmaker’, and John Goodman as CIA agent Emmett Kurzfeld.

Under the direction of one-half of the duo behind John Wick, Atomic Blonde is just as badass as that film in terms of its impressive action sequences. My friend/colleague Michael Kaye of Geeks+Gamers said it best; Leitch’s experience in the stunt industry makes him a perfect candidate for directing action films. Like John Wick, this film features incredible action sequences, especially in the second half of the film. With that said, though, there are a few instances where the first half of the film drags a bit, namely to delve into exposition regarding set-ups for some admittedly clear-cut plot twists. Granted, also like John Wick, the plot isn’t meant to be the focus of the film; thus, it’s okay that this film’s plot is just a simple spy story and not much more than that. Still, it’s because of the simplistic nature of the plot that I admittedly don’t consider Atomic Blonde to be ‘as good’ as John Wick. However, I can’t deny that this is a solidly entertaining action thriller. It’s got a nice edge to it and, of course, it’s all highlighted by Charlize Theron’s excellent performance in the lead role. Now, for the record, I haven’t read the graphic novel that this is based on, The Coldest City, so I can’t really comment on how effective this was at adapting the source material. Though, from what I’ve heard, the graphic novel was a bit more focused on the espionage aspect of the story than its action sequences. Still, on a weekend where the internet is getting a bit too obsessed with a film that has gotten universally negative reviews (you know EXACTLY what film I’m talking about), thankfully this film is around to give audiences a good time.

Rating: 4/5

The Fate of the Furious (2017) review

I think it’s safe to say that when the original Fast and the Furious came out in 2001, not many people figured that it would eventually lead into one of the biggest film franchises in recent years. And yet, here we are now at the eighth installment of the Fast and the Furious franchise. Seriously, it’s crazy to see how far this series has come since its early days. Who would’ve thought that by the time that its fifth installment came about in 2011, the franchise that had always attracted a mixed-to-negative response from critics would manage to turn things around and start to do just as well with critics as it’s always done with audiences? Whether it’s due to the shift from street racing to action heist plots or the addition of Dwayne ‘The Rock’ Johnson as fan-favorite Luke Hobbs, the series has seen a major increase in both critical and commercial success thanks to its most recent outings. Case in point, the most recent entry, 2015’s Furious 7, became the first film in the series to gross over $1 billion worldwide. Of course, part of the reason for this was that the film was impacted by the death of franchise star Paul Walker halfway through shooting. Thus, the film ended up becoming a poignant send-off to one of the series’ original stars, while still being another enjoyably over-the-top entry in the series. But the story isn’t over yet for Dominic Toretto and his crew. Now under the direction of F. Gary Gray, fresh off 2015’s smash hit Straight Outta Compton, the crew finds themselves up against their most intimidating adversary yet, one of their own, in The Fate of the Furious. Yes, you may snicker at that title, but if you’re a fan of Fast and the Furious, you’ll be pleased to know that this film features more of the same great over-the-top action that this series is known for.

Things have been going quite well for Dominic Toretto (Vin Diesel) and his crew ever since the events of Furious 7. No longer having to worry about dealing with anyone that’s trying to hunt them down, they’ve been spending most of their time living in peace, with Dom enjoying his honeymoon with his wife, Letty Ortiz (Michelle Rodriguez), in Cuba after she regained her memories of their marriage in the previous film. However, when the team is called in to steal an EMP device from a military complex in Berlin, they are surprised when Dom shockingly betrays them by taking the device and getting their ally, Diplomatic Security Service agent Luke Hobbs (Dwayne Johnson), arrested by the local government. As they soon come to find out, Dom is in cahoots with the most elusive cyberterrorist on the planet, Cipher (Charlize Theron), who unbeknownst to them has managed to coerce Dom into working for her thanks to a crucial ace in the hole. Thus, Letty, Hobbs, and the rest of the crew; fast-talker Roman Pearce (Tyrese Gibson), tech expert Tej Parker (Ludacris), and hacker Ramsey (Nathalie Emmanuel), find themselves in a difficult situation as they’re now forced to combat their longtime friend. With the aid of their old ally, government agent ‘Mr. Nobody’ (Kurt Russell), the team embarks on their latest mission; to take down Cipher before she instigates nuclear war and to, hopefully, get Dom back on their side. They even gain an unexpected ally in their old nemesis, Deckard Shaw (Jason Statham), who they had imprisoned at the end of Furious 7.

Well, seeing how this is the eighth entry in the franchise, I’m well-aware that I’m just repeating myself at this point when it comes to talking about these films. Let’s be honest, folks, eight films in, you know exactly what to expect from this series. You’re not going to get anything Oscar-worthy out of this film’s straightforward ‘stop the bad guy from doing something terrible’ plot. But, of course, that’s not what you’re here for. You’re here for the ridiculous and yet still all-around awesome action sequences that defy all logic and physics with characters who are basically superheroes at this point. And, of course, this film has plenty of that to go around, including an epic chase through New York City involving an army of cars remotely controlled by Cipher. Seriously, though, if you’re one of those who scoffs at the sight of Dwayne Johnson pushing away a torpedo (that has been fired by a submarine) with his bare hands or Vin Diesel managing to finish a street race all while his car is almost entirely on fire, then this film isn’t for you. But, for those who are fans of the series, this doesn’t disappoint when it comes to delivering exactly what this franchise is known for. But, at the same time, it’s all handled with solid execution from a directing standpoint. F. Gary Gray, who’s no stranger to action films having directed the 2003 remake of The Italian Job (which, fittingly enough, starred Charlize Theron and Jason Statham), handles the action well and the film’s overall tone is probably the most consistent that it’s ever been at with this series since Fast Five. In other words, it’s a well-balanced mix of fun, over-the-top action and light-hearted banter with just enough dramatic heft in there that never overshadows the previous two aspects. Because at this point, the franchise is very much self-aware when it comes to not trying to be something that it isn’t.

And, of course, it wouldn’t be a Fast and Furious film without arguably the most definitive aspect of the franchise (yes, even more so than the action), family. Yes, despite the scandalous feud between stars Vin Diesel and Dwayne Johnson that clearly isn’t ‘just a publicity stunt’ and this film’s big plot-line of Dom going against his family, the camaraderie amongst the cast is as strong as it’s ever been. And the big reveal surrounding Dom’s actions, without giving anything away, are, surprisingly, well-handled. It isn’t anything too outlandish like I know some were assuming when the first trailer came out. Instead, it manages to tie in with the whole ‘family’ aspect quite well. Of course, the rest of Dom’s crew is just as solid as they’ve ever been, from Tyrese getting a lot of the best humorous moments as Roman to Dwayne Johnson being his usual badass self as Hobbs. Hobbs also gets quite a lot of memorable scenes with Deckard Shaw, as Jason Statham thankfully gets a much more substantial role this time around. Sure, the idea of him becoming an ally to Dom’s crew may seem like a major stretch considering that, in the last film, he killed their crewmate Han but I’ll admit that I’m interested in seeing how they handle this going forward. Plus, it does lead to one super entertaining action sequence that he’s directly involved in. And then, there’s the main villain Cipher, who most certainly ends up being one of the series’ best villains. Charlize Theron plays the part excellently and while she does spend most of the film monitoring the action instead of being out in the field (which may come as a disappointment to some given Theron’s clear skill in terms of fight sequences as evident from Mad Max: Fury Road and the upcoming action thriller Atomic Blonde), her ability to coerce Dom into working for her makes her an entertainingly cold villainess.  

I won’t lie, folks… this may have just become my new favorite entry in the Fast and Furious franchise. I’m kind of reeling at the surreal nature of that statement; I just said that about the eighth (eighth!) installment of the franchise. The only other instance in film history where that was even remotely possible was Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2 back in 2011… and that’s not even my favorite entry in that series, so this is a first for me. But, as a fan of this franchise (at least since the fourth film), this delivered on everything that you’ve come to expect in a Fast and Furious film. Yes, it’s just as simply plotted as its predecessors. And yes, the action is insane… and yet it’s still so damn awesome. Somehow, someway, the filmmakers are continuing to raise the bar in terms of the crazy stunts that this series is known for. And despite what I just said about the film being just as silly and over-the-top as its predecessors, its handling of the whole ‘Dom going rogue’ storyline is surprisingly well-handled. Yeah, it easily could’ve gone a lot worse but the way that they handle it does make sense once you realize the specific reason why Dom is forced to go against his team. Pair all that with the same great over-the-top action and the strong camaraderie of its cast and you have another super entertaining action thrill ride. And with a record-breaking weekend at the global box-office in the books (over $532 million to be precise), this series clearly isn’t slowing down. And you can bet that I’ll be looking forward to the next two installments of this apparent new ‘trilogy’ that the filmmakers are implicating is being set up by this film.

Rating: 4.5/5

(P.S. As it turns out, my next post on here will be the 500^th post that I’ve published on Rhode Island Movie Corner. With that in mind, stay tuned for an extra special post to celebrate this momentous occasion.)

Mad Max (1979-2015) Series Retrospective

So as I’ve made it clear quite a few times already in the past year, I wasn’t really a ‘big’ fan of Mad Max: Fury Road when I first saw it in theaters. As I’ve also stated numerous times before, that doesn’t mean that I ‘hated’ the film. I just felt that the internet had severely overhyped the film for me prior to its release; that can happen sometimes and it’s also happened to me for films like Edge of Tomorrow and Deadpool. Obviously, though, not being a ‘huge’ fan of the film basically meant that I was in the minority as the internet went nuts over this film… though maybe a bit too much. You see, the internet has become much more critical in recent years towards film over certain practices like heavy CGI use and a deluge of sequels, reboots, and remakes. So whenever it comes across a film that a lot of film fans really, really love, it’s endorsed like it’s the only film worth watching that year. That’s exactly what happened when the new Mad Max was released and that actually kind of pissed me off because as soon as Fury Road came out, all I heard for weeks were people saying that it was the best film of the summer and that nothing else compared to it. And to put all of this into perspective, this was in May; the summer season had barely started and yet already a lot of people were acting like it was already done just because of one single film. As a result, I started to get rather mad (pun not intended) at the film for stealing the thunder of some of the other great summer films of 2015, including my favorite from not only that stretch but the whole year in general, Tomorrowland, which was released a week later and yet was completely overshadowed by the Mad Max hype train. Really the only advantage that Tomorrowland had over it was the fact that it did beat Mad Max at the box office that weekend… and then proceeded to gross more than $100 million less worldwide. How ironic that a film that promoted a more optimistic outlook on the future and challenged the craze of the post-apocalyptic genre got overrun by a film from the exact same genre it was addressing.

Well anyway, it’s been more than a year since the release of Fury Road and I’ll admit that I’ve calmed down in regards to me being angry at it for overshadowing its competition. While I may not have been a big fan of it like the rest of the internet, I did acknowledge some of its biggest strengths that made up for the issues that I had with the film, for the most part. But ultimately I vowed that I would give the film a second chance to see if I would warm up to it after a second viewing. This time, however, I decided to approach this situation differently compared to when I first watched it. When I first saw it, I hadn’t seen any of the previous Mad Max films beforehand. And while some did claim that watching the previous films first wasn’t necessary in order to enjoy Fury Road, I do feel that not doing so put me at a disadvantage going in because at that time I had never seen any of them and was generally unfamiliar with the franchise. So this time around, I’m doing this in a much more proper manner and watching all three of the original Mad Max films, starring Mel Gibson in the title role that was later taken on by Tom Hardy in Fury Road, before I do my second run-through of the newest film. So with that said, grab your flame-throwing guitars, your silver spray paint that makes you all shiny and chrome, and proclaim “Oh what a day! What a Lovely Day!” and join me as I look back upon the Mad Max film franchise, from the original 1979 classic that started it all to its even more beloved sequel to its not as beloved sequel and finally culminating with Fury Road.

MAD MAX (1979)

We begin in 1979 with the original film that started it all, Mad Max. It was the feature film debut of director George Miller, who prior to working on this film was a medical doctor in Sydney. This experience in the hospital would actually play a major part in the development of Mad Max as the injuries sustained by characters in the film were directly influenced by what Miller witnessed while on the job. As for the film itself, it’s a highly engrossing tale of revenge in which police officer Max Rockatansky (Mel Gibson) goes up against a vicious biker gang when they threaten both him and his friends and family. For a film that was shot on a low budget of under half a million dollars (and for the record, this is in terms of 1970’s Australian currency), it is very well-shot as it is full of great action sequences and also boasts an excellent production design based around its dystopian setting, something which of course would become a staple for the franchise. The landscapes of Australia also help serve as a perfect backdrop for all of this film’s chaotic action. Mel Gibson, in what was easily his break-out role, shines in the role of Max while Hugh Keays-Byrne, who of course would return to the franchise years later in another famous villain role, gives the film an excellent main villain in the form of the biker gang’s leader Toecutter. All in all, even though this film would eventually become fairly overshadowed in terms of scale by its follow-ups, it’s still an excellently directed, well-acted, and well-shot action thriller that fully immerses you into this world of madness.

Rating: 4.5/5

MAD MAX 2: THE ROAD WARRIOR (1981)

Although the original Mad Max proved to be a worldwide critical/commercial success, it actually wasn’t that big of a hit here in the U.S., at least from a commercial standpoint, due to its distributor, American International Pictures, going through ownership changes at the time. It may have also had something to do with a disastrous ‘American dub’ that was instigated because the distributor supposedly feared that audiences wouldn’t understand the cast’s Australian accents. So as a result, when the sequel was released two years later, it was renamed to The Road Warrior and its connections to the previous film were underplayed in the marketing. Regardless, the film did perform much better domestically this time around, which is deservedly so because like its predecessor it is another excellent post-apocalyptic action flick. In a way, this is the same great visceral and sharply constructed storytelling of the original but now with the added benefit of a larger budget. Like before, the action is terrific, especially the big chase at the end. I can definitely see how much of an influence this had on Fury Road, not just through the similarities of their ‘chases’ but also because the film relies a lot more on visual storytelling than dialogue. Mel Gibson is once again excellent as Max and the film has its fair share of memorable side characters, from Max’s ally the Gyro Captain (Bruce Spence) to the imposing gang leader Lord Humungus (Kjell Nilsson) to Humungus’ highly intimidating and vicious lieutenant Wez (Vernon Wells). It could be said that The Road Warrior was the film that really catapulted the Mad Max franchise into its prime spot in pop culture history and I can definitely see why. This is one of those rare sequels that is not only as good as its predecessor but may arguably be better.

Rating: 4.5/5

MAD MAX: BEYOND THUNDERDOME (1985)

To put it bluntly, Mad Max: Beyond Thunderdome is generally considered to be the weakest installment of the franchise. Part of it may have something to do with the fact that this wasn’t fully directed by George Miller, who instead shared co-directing duties with George Ogilvie, who had starred in the 1983 miniseries The Dismisssal that he produced, following the death of Miller’s producing partner Byron Kennedy in a plane crash in 1983. Miller ultimately ended up only directing the film’s action sequences. But the major reason why this film is generally not as well-received as the previous two films (as well as its subsequent sequel) is due to its second half. For the record, the film starts out pretty much exactly like what you would expect from a Mad Max film with its excellent production design and visceral proceedings, as Max finds himself in the sordid community of Bartertown. But then things change when Max ends up getting exiled from the town by its ruler, Aunty Entity (Tina Turner). He ends up coming across a group of children who believe that he was their ‘flight captain’ who was meant to take them to ‘civilization’. As many have pointed out, these kids are sort of like the ‘Lost Boys’ from Peter Pan and as a result of this, the film ends up taking on a much more kid-friendly tone. Now I’m not saying that I ‘hated’ this part of the film but the shift from the franchise’s traditional hardcore action to a more light-hearted and goofier adventure is still rather jarring. I should probably also mention that this is the only entry in the series to be rated PG-13.

But that doesn’t mean that there aren’t any ‘good things’ in this film. Gibson is of course excellent once again as Max and Tina Turner is actually pretty darn good in the ‘main villain’ role of Aunty Entity, even though the character is absent for a good chunk of the second half due to the change in plot. Of course there’s also a few noteworthy side characters as well, most notably the duo that is ‘Master Blaster’. Heck, even the kids do a pretty fine job acting-wise. The action is still pretty darn good as is the production design, with this film in particular having some pretty nice cinematography. As Doug Walker (AKA the ‘Nostalgia Critic’) pointed out in his review of Fury Road, this film may arguably even be the most quotable of the entire series, from Aunty Entity repeatedly calling Max a ‘raggedy man’ to the iconic ‘Two Men Enter, One Man Leaves’ rule of Bartertown’s Thunderdome arena. However, at the end of the day I do have to agree with the general consensus in that this is definitely the ‘weakest’ installment of the series. Don’t get me wrong I still think it’s a pretty darn good film on its own merits but as a Mad Max film it’s a bit underwhelming as a result of its jarring shift halfway through that introduces a plotline that doesn’t really mix with the whole storyline of Bartertown. Ultimately Beyond Thunderdome would end up being the final Mad Max film to feature Mel Gibson and it would be quite a while, three decades to be precise, before the series finally made its return to the big screen.

Rating: 3.5/5

And on that note, here’s the big one…

MAD MAX: FURY ROAD (2015) - SECOND OPINION

And finally here we are at the latest installment of the Mad Max series, Fury Road. This was the first time that I had watched it since seeing it in theaters last May. And of course, as I’ve already mentioned, the first time I saw the film… I wasn’t ‘too big’ on it. I did like it and gave it a 4/5 rating in my original review but in some ways I felt that the internet had severely overhyped it. So for months I was left wondering why this film was being treated like it was the second coming of Christ. It got to the point where I admittedly was this close to using that scary word that I hate to use… ‘overrated’. But after waiting until last year’s awards circuit was over, I finally made sure to give it another chance. And fear not, internet folk… I warmed up to it the second time around. Granted, I still have some issues with it but I cannot deny the great things about this film. The action, predominantly done with practical effects in the modern age of CGI, is incredible and the production design is just as great as you would expect from a Mad Max film. This film also sports one hell of an amazing color palette as everything is bright and vibrant, very much different compared to most films in the post-apocalyptic genre. Charlize Theron is ‘Sigourney Weaver in Aliens’ level fantastic in the role of Furiosa, the ‘true’ main character of the film. But actually my favorite character in the film ended up being Nux, played by Nicholas Hoult. I thought Nux had the most interesting arc of them all; at first he’s a loyal War Boy of the Immortan who aspires to die historically on the Fury Road knowing that he’ll be ‘awaited in Valhalla’. But by the end, he ends up helping Max, Furiosa, and the Wives escape from Immortan Joe and I won’t lie… his death at the end of the film is a pretty damn emotional one.

But like I said, there are still a few minor issues that I have with the film and, like I said in my previous reviews of the film, they mainly stem from the writing. Now let me be clear, I’m not saying that this film needed a very complex plot. Not every film needs that and this film more than works without it because that’s obviously not the main intent of the film; instead it’s a visceral and kinetic action extravaganza and it very much succeeds in that regard. However, at the end of the day, this really is just ‘get from Point A to Point B… and then back to Point A again’ and Furiosa and Nux are the only major characters in the film that get any sort of major character development. While it’s really cool that Miller doesn’t make the Wives characters ‘damsels in distress’, to the point where even Splendid (Rosie Huntington-Whiteley), the pregnant Wife, gets in on the action and is even killed off halfway through (got to give the filmmakers credit for having the guts to pull off a ballsy move like that), only a few of them get much to work with, namely Splendid and Capable (Riley Keough), the latter of whom ends up having a sweet little ‘romance’ with Nux. And as for Immortan Joe, while he may be quite the badass-looking villain, I wouldn’t really say that he’s a badass ‘villain’. Sure he’s got a great intimidation factor, primarily emphasized by both his menacing look and his ability to lead his army of devoted War Boys, but at the end of the day he really doesn’t do much in the film other than drive around, make some speeches, and have what is admittedly a pretty awesome and gnarly death scene. As far as the villains that Hugh Keays-Byrne has played in the Mad Max series are concerned, I think the better of the two is still Toecutter from the original Mad Max.

And then there’s Tom Hardy as Max and… I still think he’s quite underused in this. Now like The Road Warrior, Max is more of an ‘outsider’ in the plot. Furiosa really is the main character of the film and that’s a great thing. While there have unfortunately been some fanboys who have been rather critical of this, the film deserves a whole lot of kudos for its strong feminist themes. However, the film really should’ve just been called Furiosa: Fury Road because Max really doesn’t factor at all into much of this. And while I am a fan of Tom Hardy and I do think that he does a good job with what he had to work with, ultimately I prefer Mel Gibson’s Max as I feel that there was more to his version of the character, particularly in the first film. Hardy’s Max is more of a blank, and arguably even a bit emotionless, slate. But despite the issues that I just laid out, I’ll fully admit it… I did warm up to Mad Max: Fury Road upon re-watch. It really is one of those films that gets better with repeat viewings. George Miller was in his late 60’s when he made this; one of the most insanely awesome action films of all-time. That’s amazing. And even though I do have some minor issues with the writing, this film truly delivers when it comes to the action and production design. Simply put, it is a finely-tuned and gorgeous looking action thrill ride.

Rating: …Yeah, I’ll bump my original rating up to a 4.5/5

So to finish this post, here are my rankings of the four films.

4. MAD MAX: BEYOND THUNDERDOME

3. MAD MAX 2: THE ROAD WARRIOR

2. MAD MAX: FURY ROAD

1. MAD MAX

Be sure to sound off in the comments below with your own rankings of this iconic post-apocalyptic action franchise.

Mad Max: Fury Road (2015) review

2015 is shaping up to be a year full of iconic franchises returning to the big screen after a considerable amount of time. And while of course you have your ‘Star Wars’ and your ‘Jurassic Parks’, there’s another franchise that’s making a big return this year; ‘Mad Max’. What started out in 1979 as a low-budget Australian film from director George Miller soon turned into a film franchise with some of the most acclaimed action films of all-time. This includes the original ‘Mad Max’, which also became one of the most profitable films of all-time, and its sequel ‘The Road Warrior’, which was even more well-received than its predecessor in regards to critical reception. The third film, ‘Beyond Thunderdome’, wasn’t as well-received as the first two films but still did solid enough with critics, though fans were a little more critical. Now, 30 years since the release of ‘Beyond Thunderdome’, director George Miller returns to his post-apocalyptic franchise with ‘Mad Max: Fury Road’, though it’s the first entry in the series to not star Mel Gibson in the title role of ‘Mad’ Max Rockatansky. Instead, Tom Hardy takes over the role, joined by Charlize Theron in an equally important role as far as this film’s story is concerned. And like its predecessors, it’s been getting rave reviews from critics. Hell, to be perfectly frank, it’s probably the most critically-acclaimed summer blockbuster in a long time. But in the end, while, let me be clear, I did like the film, ultimately I can’t say that it’s an absolute ‘masterpiece’ compared to what, well, everyone else is saying.

In a post-apocalyptic world that is dominated by desert, drifter Max Rockatansky (Tom Hardy) is taken captive by ‘the War Boys’, a cult army led by the tyrant Immortan Joe (Hugh Keays-Byrne, who had previously played the villain Toecutter in the original ‘Mad Max’). Soon after this, one of Joe’s lieutenants, Imperator Furiosa (Charlize Theron), starts to head off-course while on a job to collect gasoline. Joe quickly discovers that she is actually escaping with his Five Wives; Splendid, Capable, Toast, Dag, and Cheedo (Rosie Huntington-Whiteley, Riley Keough, Zoe Kravitz, Abbey Lee, and Courtney Eaton, respectively), five young women who were chosen specifically for breeding in the hopes of him being blessed with a new heir. Joe immediately sends out his army after her, with Max being dragged along due to the fact that he’s currently serving as a blood donor for one of the War Boys, Nux (Nicholas Hoult). Max soon catches up with Furiosa and agrees to help her bring the Wives to safety. So, with a whole army on their tail in this post-apocalyptic wasteland, Max and Furiosa try to get the Wives to ‘the Green Place’, a location that Furiosa states that she originally came from where they can be free from Immortan Joe’s clutches.

This film is worth seeing just for its action sequences and visuals. According to Miller, 90% of the stunts in the film were practically done, which is a very impressive feat in this modern age of visuals effects/CGI. Because of this, all of the stunts in this film are awesome as are the visuals. There’s literally one guy in Joe’s army who’s on a truck that has a bunch of drummers on the back of it playing a flame-spewing guitar. That alone should give you an idea of how crazy the production design is for this movie. And really, the film definitely lives up to the ‘Mad’ part of its title, showcasing a chaotic post-apocalyptic world that is almost entirely devoid of sanity. But while the film definitely delivers on a technical level, the same can’t really be said for its writing. Now with that said, because this film is primarily one big chase scene, I do recognize that the filmmakers were probably more focused on the action/visuals than they were with the story and characters. I’m not saying that’s a bad thing as the action and visuals are incredible. It’s just that the film is focused so much on the chase that there are only a few scenes where the action slows down and we get some bits of character development. I wish that the film spent just a little more time developing its characters because aside from like two of them, most of the characters are fairly underdeveloped. This includes the main villain Immortan Joe, who’s more intimidating in presence than he is in actually doing anything in this film, and, I hate to say it, even Max himself.

The film may be called ‘Mad Max: Fury Road’, but Mad Max isn’t the main character of the film… and because of it, Tom Hardy is quite frankly underused. He’s a fine choice for the role and does a good job based on what he has to work with. But as far as the story is concerned, he really doesn’t play that integral of a part in the overall story. It’s just a case where he was dragged into a situation that he didn’t initially cause in the first place. In reality, Furiosa is the main character of the film whereas Max, dare I say it, is rather forgettable. But on the bright side, Furiosa is the main character of the film. Charlize Theron absolutely owns it in the role of what is easily the best female character in an action film since Ellen Ripley in ‘Aliens’. Furiosa is just a total badass who’s able to hold her own in combat alongside Max and Theron’s so good in this that I’d be perfectly fine with her getting nominated for an Oscar for Best Actress. That’s how great she is in this. All of the Five Wives are pretty good as well, especially due to the fact that they’re not just ‘objects’ for the heroes and villains to fight over. They get down and dirty in the chase just as much as Max and Furiosa. Finally, the other big standout is Nicholas Hoult as Nux. Like Theron, Hoult really owns his role of the insane but also rather innocent War Boy, a description perfectly summed up by the scene in which he, while driving through a raging sandstorm that’s already taken out a few of his allies, shouts “Oh what a day! What a Lovely Day!”

I went into this film with a completely fresh point of view as I have not actually seen any of the previous ‘Mad Max’ movies. With that in mind, if anyone is worried about not seeing any of the other films before this one, you don’t need to worry about that too much because this is ‘technically’ a series reboot that doesn’t really tie back too much to the previous films. But ultimately, I was not as big a fan of ‘Fury Road’ compared to, basically, the rest of the internet. And let me be clear; I didn’t hate the film. The action sequences, which of course were pre-dominantly done with practical effects/stunt-work, are impressive and the film has some amazing visuals, primarily thanks to the film’s eye-popping production design. Not only that, but Charlize Theron really shines as Furiosa, one of the best female action film leads of all time. But at the end of the day, I wish that the filmmakers had spent a little more time developing the story and characters. I recognize that this probably wasn’t what they were going for but it would’ve been nice to have a little more story/character development for any character that is not named Furiosa or Nux. And while this film may have been called ‘Mad Max’, Max is arguably the most forgettable main character in the film. So yes, I only ‘liked’ the film; I didn’t ‘love’ it. I recognize that I’m pretty much in the minority on that one. But if you loved this film more than I did, then the more power to you. It’s just that, not having seen any of the other ‘Mad Max’ films, this wasn’t really one of my most anticipated films of the year. And while I made sure not to let that influence my opinion on the film, ultimately I just wasn’t as blown away by it as everyone else.

Rating: 4/5

A Million Ways to Die in the West (2014) review

After establishing his own animation empire with ‘Family Guy’, which continues to run after surviving not one but two cancellations, ‘American Dad!’, and ‘The Cleveland Show’, Seth MacFarlane transitioned into film with his directorial debut, ‘Ted’, and the film was a pretty big hit when it released in June 2012. Not only did it receive generally solid reviews from critics, but it also ended up becoming the highest grossing original comedy of all time with nearly $550 million worldwide at the box office. A few months later, MacFarlane was selected to host the 85^th Academy Awards and while he, as usual, attracted a lot of controversy due to his trademark style of humor, I was one of those who thought that he did a really good job and felt that his turn as host was a breath of fresh air for the annual awards ceremony. But now he’s back with his next directorial effort, ‘A Million Ways to Die in the West’, and this time instead of just portraying a motion capture character as he did in ‘Ted’, he makes his live-action debut in the lead role. So how does this film hold up? Well, ultimately I can’t say that it was as good as ‘Ted’ for a few glaring reasons but overall it still provided a decent amount of laughs though how it will fare with audiences could ultimately depend on whether or not you’re a fan of MacFarlane’s work.

The film centers on Albert Stark (Seth MacFarlane), a cowardly sheep farmer in Arizona who constantly complains about how awful the Wild West in 1882 is, and that’s mostly because there are multiple ways (‘a million’ to be specific) to die there; disease, outlaws, animals, the doctor, etc. His lack of courage ends up resulting in him losing his girlfriend Louise (Amanda Seyfried) to the town’s moustache shop owner Foy (Neil Patrick Harris) after he withdraws from a duel. Albert then decides to leave for San Francisco, but ends up staying when a mysterious woman named Anna (Charlize Theron) moves into town. As she and Albert start to become friends, he starts to gain a bit more confidence as he attempts to win back the heart of Louise. But soon he finds himself having to stand his ground not against Foy, but against Anna’s husband, the notorious outlaw Clinch Leatherwood (Liam Neeson), when he arrives in town seeking revenge on Stark after he started to develop a relationship with Anna. In order to deal with this, Anna helps Albert by teaching him how to shoot better so that Albert can stand a chance against the most vicious gunslinger in the territory.

This film’s humor is exactly what you would expect from MacFarlane given his line of work; fairly crass and juvenile. If you’re someone who likes that kind of humor, you’ll probably enjoy this movie and overall there are a solid amount of funny moments in this film. I’ve heard some people say that the best stuff is in the trailer and for the most part they’re fairly right but there were still a few good funny moments peppered in here and there that weren’t featured in the trailers. However, the big problem here is that there are a few instances where there’s no humor at all. And you know some comedies do have moments where the humor doesn’t fly well but that’s not the case here because there are a few instances where nothing funny is happening for a good 10 to 15 minutes. A lot of critics have said that this film is ‘overlong’, and I have to say that I do agree with that. This film may only be about 10 minutes longer than ‘Ted’, but that film’s humor was much more consistent and ultimately had enough material to justify its runtime. This film, sadly, doesn’t have enough material to be nearly two hours long. In fact, the whole plot involving Liam Neeson’s character… is actually more or less just the subplot for the third act. Seriously, most of the movie’s buildup revolves around a duel between Albert and Foy, not with Albert and Clinch as the trailers are indicating.

But still, this film does benefit from a pretty solid cast even if they don’t always have enough good material to work with. In his first major live-action leading role, MacFarlane does a pretty good job and his chemistry with Theron, who’s really good here as well, is also really good. It always helps in a movie like this when the chemistry between the two leads is really good though remember what I said about those instances that had a severe lack of humor? That’s because those scenes are mainly focused on developing the relationship between the two and though it really is a nice little romance that these two develop, this film sort of focuses on that relationship a bit too much. All of the other major members of the cast, including Seyfried, Harris, Giovanni Ribisi, who plays Albert’s best friend Edward, and Sarah Silverman, who plays Edward’s fiancé Ruth, have their own moments to shine here as well. Unfortunately though, Liam Neeson doesn’t get much to do here; his character is pretty one-note, which is a shame after his hilarious turn as Bad Cop/Good Cop in ‘The LEGO Movie’. As for the multiple cameos in this movie (another thing you can expect from a MacFarlane production), there a few really noteworthy cameos here that produce some quality laughs though one cameo unfortunately had to be involved in probably the weakest post-credits scene ever. It’s a fairly brief scene and the cameo itself was pretty cool but quite frankly it just isn’t worth it after waiting through the entire credits.

I don’t think ‘A Million Ways to Die in the West’ is that bad; I feel that it’s better than a lot of comedies that are coming out these days and at the end of the day there are a good decent amount of laughs to be had here. However, as far as MacFarlane’s directorial efforts go, ‘Ted’ was the funnier film. This film just doesn’t have enough material to justify a near two-hour runtime. There are at least two or three instances where no humor is occurring for at least 10-15 minutes and while those scenes are setting up a nice little romance between MacFarlane and Theron’s characters, that romance is focused on just a bit too much. Still, the cast is pretty game for the material, there are a few really fun cameos here, and overall if you’re a fan of MacFarlane’s work you’ll probably like this. If you’re not a fan, well, obviously you’re probably not going to like this film. But really, if you haven’t seen ‘Neighbors’ yet, I’d recommend that film over this one because at the end of the day that is still the best comedy of this year so far. Again, I don’t think this film was that bad, but it’s a rather disappointing follow-up to ‘Ted’ and it could have been a lot funnier.

Rating: 3/5