2019 Year in Review

With 2019 in the books, it's time for some reviews and predictions. Let me start with my top 10 movies of the year. Disclaimer, there are a few I wasn't able to see... yet (1917, Honey Boy, The Lighthouse, Just Mercy being most notable). That said, here are my top 10 films of 2019 in alphabetical order:

Ford v Ferrari
Jojo Rabbit
Little Women
Marriage Story
Midsommar
Once Upon a Time in Hollywood
Paddleton
Peanut Butter Falcon
The Two Popes
Uncut Gems

I'm expecting 1917 to skyrocket to the top of the list, as it's one of my most anticipated awards-season films, but as of right now, Ford v Ferrari is my Best Picture. However, since it wasn't nominated, I'm expecting Marriage Story and Once Upon a Time in Hollywood to clean up at the Golden Globes this year. These will set the precedent for the Oscars, but here is who deserves to win in the Golden Globes categories:

Best Drama - Marriage Story
Best Comedy - Once Upon a Time in Hollywood
Best Actor - Drama - Joaquin Phoenix (although I wouldn't be made at a Jonathan Pryce or Christian Bale win either but Joaquin carried his film)
Best Actor - Comedy - Leonardo DiCaprio
Best Actress - Drama - Rene Zellweger
Best Actress - Comedy - Awkwafina
Best Director - Quentin Tarantino (although Sam Mendes might win if 1917 is as great as I am hearing)
Best Supporting Actor - Brad Pitt
Best Supporting Actress - Laura Dern
Best Screenplay - Quentin Tarantino (although BongJoon Ho might be deserving if Parasite is as good as advertised)
Best Foreign Language - Parasite

We'll see how it pans out tonight...

Star Wars: Episode IX - The Rise of Skywalker

Imagine for a moment, if you will, Peter Jackson being given the momentous task of not only directing "Return of the King," but also writing it so that the Lord of the Rings faithful would all be satisfied. Such was the task placed squarely on the shoulders of action franchise wunderkind JJ Abrams. Stepping in for Colin Trevorrow (one of six writers), Abrams anchors the ninth and presumably final installment of the iconic, 42 year old universe that has endeared literally generations of movie-going fans. On a combined budget of $1.3 billion, and a collective gross of $9.3 billion and counting (12 films total), the universe has revolutionized how Hollywood looks at extended universes (Marvel - I'm looking at you).

The film begins with Kylo Ren, the new Supreme Leader of the First Order, using a mysterious Sith wayfinder to discover that the Emperor isn't dead at all. In fact, he lives on the hidden planet of Exicle, and he's building an unstoppable army. He offers Kylo the throne with one small quid pro quo; Kill the girl. Of course he means our newly anointed heroine, Rey. The gang gets into shenanigans, they search for a wayfinder of their own that they can use to attack the Sith Lord, and Rey discovers the truth about her origin story. Along the way we make some new friends, get glimpses of creatures and characters from over the years, and get one last stand with some twists and turns.

The ending was somewhat unexpected, and despite loud objections by members of the audience who took to shouting at the screen (they must have been disappointed), the last chapter has now been written and the Skywalker saga has been closed. Is this the last we'll see of our friends? Probably not. $10,000,000,000 says there is more story to be told. In fact, Disney+ is seeing success with "The Mandalorian" and Ewan McGregor just announced that he is reprising his Obi-Wan Kenobi role in a new series coming in 2021. Rian Johnson is rumored to be working on a separate trilogy of his own, and George Lucas still has his fingers in the pie even after exiting with the $4 billion he received for the rights to his baby. Half of it was Disney stock, valued at $46 a share. Today, the stock is worth $130 a share, so his $2 billion is worth approximately $5.7 billion now. Not a bad haul for a crazy idea about an ancient space magic and the battle of good versus evil.

Abrams, who successfully revived the franchise with 2015's "The Force Awakens" introduced us to the new generation of heroes and villains to mixed reviews. The complaints numerous, it was unavoidable and predestined to be criticized endlessly due to the fanaticism of the core followers. I personally liked it after the prequels were special effects overkill.

Fast forward to Christmas of 2019. Forty-two years of story-telling has built to one epic finale. Imagine the pressure on the team of writers. Deliver a satisfying conclusion to a cherished childhood experience for millions, or forever face the scorn of audiences. It's a true Kobayashi Maru (Star Trek reference).

The reason I mention this is that as a film critic, there are sometimes that emotions cloud judgment when watching a movie. Often it enhances the experience and ends in a positive review, but sometimes I find myself walking into the theatre with expectations so unrealistic that no matter how strong the story, direction, acting, special effects, or execution are, there is something missing. I admit, I have grown apart from my love of Star Wars. As a seven year old, watching Return of the Jedi, I wanted to be Han Solo (most of my friends wanted to be Luke). But now, I am more of an observer, and try as I might, I have simply outgrown the unabashed love of the franchise.

That said, Episode IX (that's 9 for the young ones who don't know Roman numerals or cursive or spelling), upon some reflection, was better than I was expecting. It was a truly satisfying conclusion with callbacks to elements of all eight previous films. The somber, existential tone of "The Last Jedi" gives way to a much more popcorn-friendly, explosion and special-effects driven vehicle that doesn't slow down too much to lose the audience interest. Most questions are answered and aside from an eye-rolling "Avengers: Endgame" ploy, it followed the spirit of the franchise from start to finish.

Take it with a grain of cheese and don't overthink your expectations. Enjoy the ride, remember why you loved Star Wars in the first place, and know that this isn't truly the end of the line, because as we know about Jedi, nobody is really ever gone. 8/10.

Ford v Ferrari

The first Oscar-worthy picture of the year has landed, and in all my years and tens of thousands of films viewed (possibly an exaggeration, but who knows?), I have never experienced a racing film quite this complete and masterfully done. At a robust two and a half hours, it's a bit long-winded (it seems like we experience the full twenty-four hour of LeMans near the end), but for some reason, it maintains focus and paces itself with the brilliant acting of two of Hollywood's best.

Based on the true story of Carroll Shelby's collaboration with Lee Iacoca and Henry Ford to create a car capable of competing with the Italian racing stalwart, Ferrari, in the mid-1960's. Blending elements of nostalgic Americana, the character-driven vehicle relies heavily on props, which in this particular case, is the drool-worthy supercar icon, the Ford GT40. Kudos to the authenticity and attention to detail by director James Mangold (more on him in a bit) and the production team. You feel like you are part of American history, the coming of age story of domestic automobiles.

Carroll Shelby (Matt Damon) is a former racer-turned custom sports car maker who has an endearing relationship with the socially brusque, but genius mechanic/driver Ken Miles (Christian Bale). They tinker and test the limits of their new car (and their relationship) on and off the track. It's a magical relationship of mutual respect, and constantly pushing back against the iconic car manufacturer and the legacy of its founder. Josh Lucas plays Leo Beebe, the executive tasked with putting Ford up against Ferrari on the biggest stage of all, LeMans. His antagonistic approach strengthens the resolve of the unlikely duo, and makes this underdog story one for the ages.

Christian Bale will receive a Best Actor nomination for his work. He's absolutely phenomenal as a journeyman racer who keeps burning professional bridges with his hot temper, but whose comfort and precision behind the wheel is undeniably brilliant. Adding depth to the character is a quirky but loving relationship with his supportive wife, Mollie (Caitriona Balfa) and his constant shadow and biggest fan, his son Pete (Noah Jupe). The father/son relationship was subtle, but incredibly powerful from start to finish, and I'm looking forward to many years of Noah Jupe's work. He has the child "it" factor that many lack. He's going to be around in the industry for a long time.

Damon's portrayal of Shelby is fantastic as he's given most of the film's best lines in comic relief. His admiration and respect for Miles elevates the legendary status of the racing intrigue for the times when the camera is in, above, behind, or next to the beautiful GT40. Although the story is clearly centered around Ken Miles, Carroll Shelby is the star-power from the historical perspective.

The racing puts you on the edge of your seat with a low, throaty, rumbling idle that accelerates to nearly two-hundred and twenty miles an hour. What blew me away was that although there were several races, and the racing screen-time probably approached ninety minutes or more, it never got old or stagnant. The actors and director (and screenwriters) found a way to keep it fresh, interesting, and emotional.

Director James Mangold ("Logan," "Walk the Line," the underrated "Cop Land") delivers a stellar opus that will stand the test of time in the auto racing genre as one of, if not the greatest film to grace the screen. No offense to "Rush," "Days of Thunder," or even the "Fast and Furious" films, but "Ford v Ferrari" just takes exceptional racing, and mixes it with incredible acting, masterful direction, and a story worthy of a gold statuette.

I expected "Ford v Ferrari" to be good, but my expectations were overwhelmed. The only way to adequately describe the film is that it is complete. So many different elements are done exquisitely well, so I can confidently say that this is the current front-runner for Best Picture. Likely there will be something else that comes along in the next six weeks, but until then, the bar has been set. If you enjoy car racing in the slightest, this film is a must-see. If you like Bale or Damon, their performances make it a must-see as well. "Ford v Ferrari" belongs in the pantheon of great sports films, but also as a character study of resolve, ingenuity, and competition. 10/10.

Joker

Writer/Director Todd Phillips ("The Hangover") had a picture of Joaquin Phoenix on his computer while he wrote the script for this film, and he stated there was no "plan B" if he didn't take the role. Personally, I can't imagine another actor playing the role so naturally, albeit disturbing and awkward. "Joker" is a one-man show to be certain, and it is every bit worth the price of admission to experience his story.

"Joker" is an origin story, and has ties to the Batman universe, but it is more subtle and introspective and hopefully will stand alone as a cinematic gem instead of a gateway into another futile attempt by DC to replicate Marvel's universe. Gotham City is painted as a gritty 1970's New York City with garbage piling up, senseless subway crime, and a deafening cry for society to take notice of the madness that is human nature. It's a bleak environment to be surviving in, and we see mostly the have nots as opposed to the haves. Enter Arthur Fleck (Phoenix). He's a grown man living with his mother, working humiliating gigs as a clown to make ends meet. He lives in squalor, but doesn't seem to care, and he has fantasies about romantic relationships and is being ignored by his social worker. Society is slowly letting him down with every tragic turn of events. His dream is to be a stand-up comedian, and appear on the Murray Franklin show (played magnificently by Robert De Niro), which is an inflated caricature of the delusional nature of his imagination. He is ignored by the system, a poster boy of someone with nothing going for them. Yet, there is something tremendously endearing about him. He is a true victim of his circumstances. Desperate for a break, only wanting a fair shake, he doesn't seem to be malicious by nature, and that's what makes for a great villain. He doesn't fit the villain archetype at all, just a strange dude with a lot of issues. Over the course of the film though, he's literally and proverbially kicked while he's down, and what gets back up is a creature that society is responsible for creating, and now they must live with the consequences.

The thing that makes this film work brilliantly is that Arthur Fleck is a humorless man. He's depressed, disturbed, and by all outside perspectives, he's strange. He even has a medical condition where he awkwardly laughs at inappropriate times out of sheer nervousness, but he desperately is looking for joy and humor in his life. In fact, it's really all he is looking for. Ironically, he only finds joy and attention through malicious and senseless acts of extreme violence and it's only when he gets a taste that he realizes what real happiness is. The optics of this idea is disturbing to be sure, but captured in a two-hour film, it is emotional dynamite. Coupled with one of the greatest living actors (that's right, I said it), this is a rich serving of anti-hero exploration, and although the plot moves slowly, it is forgivable because of the sheer amount of magnetism that Phoenix brings to his role.

Phoenix delivers an acting opus as the centerpiece of this anti-hero character study. An iconic villain that is the envy of practically every actor alive, and after 2008's "Dark Knight" performance by Heath Ledger, one that has a very large pair of shoes to fill. Let's forget about Jared Leto's "Suicide Squad" for a minute as it was pure garbage and a completely wasted opportunity. Phoenix resists the temptation to overindulge in the character to a chilling effect. Viewing his performance takes you into the mean streets of 1970's New York, but spins it with what can only be described as authentic method acting. The current front-runner for Best Actor in my mind, it will take a tour de force to wrestle the statue away from him when the Oscars come around.

Where does DC go from here? Well, there is another incarnation of "Batman" in the works with Robert Pattinson as the caped crusader. Aside from that, I could see the exploration of more villains in stand-alone origin stories. I just hope they avoid the temptation to explore a sequel, and maintain the gritty and dark tone that makes Gotham so attractive in the first place. With recent successes of R-rated superhero films ("Deadpool," "Logan," "Venom"), it's clear that audiences are ready and eager to get more personal with some of our notorious villains.

Already on pace to break October records, "Joker" has hit pay dirt with audiences, critics, and couldn't have dropped at a more appropriate time. Whether life imitates art, or art imitates life, the people feel neglected and want attention from those in power. "Joker" absolutely commands attention. 9/10.

Once Upon a Time... In Hollywood

Not everyone admits they like Tarantino movies, but everyone respects the quirky, sometimes gratuitous nature of the film maker's style. He's inserted himself into the industry and stands in a class of his own. There is an expectation among audiences when one of Tarantino's films comes out, particularly as awards buzz grows. Critics lead the way, and audiences listen, and what I'm hearing is that it's a strong entry in his diverse (is it though?) catalog of films. "Once Upon a Time... In Hollywood" is certainly filled with likely awards nominees moving forward, but beyond that, it's a satisfying and entertaining two and a half hours.

His latest pairs Leonardo DiCaprio as Rick Dalton, a fading star in beautiful 1969 Hollywood. Brad Pitt, in one of his best performances in years, is Cliff Booth, Rick's best friend, consigliere, and stunt double. The sets take you back in time in a light and fluffy love letter to the awkward post-classical age of American cinema with Coupe DeVilles driving around town, neon marquee signs along the strip, and cigarettes galore. Tarantino loves his cigarettes in film. The two buddies see the sun setting on their careers while hippies take over the Hollywood Hills, and a Roman Polanski and Charles Manson back story sets up the incredible (but predictable) ending that departs from the "Pulp Fiction" style and goes straight into "Inglorious Basterds" territory.

Leonardo has emerged as the best current actor in Hollywood. This film gives him the chance to show a little more range than in the past as he acts within the headspace of an actor on a film about an actor. It's really incredible to see his work demonstrated seemingly authentically, particularly in a pair of fantastic scenes with Timothy Olyphant, and the late Luke Perry. Equally commanding on the screen is Pitt, who is carefree and upbeat. It's a refreshing character, and harkens back to "Moneyball" as he brings the casual coolness of the actual Brad Pitt to the screen.

As with all Tarantino films, there is a laundry list of actors and cameos that seem to find their way into the final cut (a lengthy 2 hours and 40 minutes) but none truly develop into anything memorable. Margot Robbie's Sharon Tate is really the only other actor who appears in more than a few scenes, and she plays a bubbly, naive aspiring actress as well as can be expected, but it's sensationalism and wall covering. A great, tragic familiar story to weave into an otherwise fictional account that's driven almost entirely by the two leading men.

As always, Tarantino spins an entertaining tale. You can see glimpses of his own personality hidden within nearly every frame, and he's evolved as a film maker (not too much), and despite a pretty satisfying ending, it doesn't capture the lightning in a bottle from 1994, and isn't worthy of comparisons to "Pulp Fiction". Although set in Hollywood, this film carries the torch of the Western genre, which is where Quentin has been spending a lot of time lately ("Django Unchained," "The Hateful Eight"). His next project is rumored to be his last (it won't be) and is either the third entry in the "Kill Bill" saga, or an R-rated Star Trek story that he's been wanting to make for some time. My vote is both end up happening in the next decade, although I really did enjoy seeing Pitt and DiCaprio sharing the screen.

People tend to compare or rank Tarantino's films, and use that as a barometer of how good this film is, so obviously the top three films of his are "Pulp Fiction," "Reservoir Dogs," and "Inglorious Basterds," but this one definitely earns its way into the top five with the combination of acting, entertaining story, and satisfying ending. This summer seems to lack strong independent films, and although you could argue that a 95 million dollar budget doesn't really qualify, until he directs "Star Trek," he's still an indy rebel.

If you're a fan of good acting, "Once Upon a Time... In Hollywood" is a clinic. If you like revisionist historical fiction stories, you're in luck. And if you just like entertaining movies, you won't be disappointed. Caution: if you can't handle a slow burn that doesn't really follow any sensible plot lines, you might not like it. It's not for everyone, but I for one found it to be one of the best movies I've seen this year. I expect it will garner some awards recognition come winter, and deservedly so. 9/10.

Avengers: Endgame

It's been awhile since I did a review, but it was... inevitable... that I review "Endgame". I will keep it spoiler-free because it's the right thing to do. The good news is that the previews throw out some red herrings, so if you can avoid spoilers, you will be thoroughly surprised and entertained. The bad news is that spoilers abound, so if you use the Internet regularly, you need to see the film before they snake their way into your life. People will be talking about this film fast and furious, and no, Ant-Man (Paul Rudd) does not fly into Thanos' butt to kill him.

Nearly a year after the cataclysmic and abrupt ending to "Infinity War", audiences have been salivating and theorizing in anticipation of the epic finale to the ten year and multi-billion dollar Marvel Comic Extended Universe. It's not the actual finale, but it marks the end to phase three. For those unfamiliar, phase one introduced our core heroes (Hulk, Iron Man, Thor, Captain America) and ended with 2012's "Avengers". Phase two was the core sequels, introduction to the "Guardians of the Galaxy," the Avengers sequel, "Age of Ultron" and "Ant-Man". Phase three expanded the universe with Dr. Strange, Black Panther, Spider-Man, and Captain Marvel. The culmination of Phase Three is "Endgame" and now this summer's "Spider-Man: Far From Home" will technically wrap up Phase three, but more likely will jump start Phase four ("Black Widow," "The Eternals," "Dr. Strange 2," "Black Panther 2," "Guardians of the Galaxy 3"). Are you all caught up now?

Thanos (voiced brilliantly by Josh Brolin), who is perhaps the greatest antagonist of the 21st Century (not living in the White House), has decimated the universe with the devastating snap of his fingers. Our surviving Avengers are aimless, searching for purpose and direction now that half of the human population has suddenly vanished. Their only hope is to seek out the infinity stones and hope that they can turn back time to bring their friends back and stop Thanos.

Time travel. Why did it have to be time travel? I'm glad you asked. Ever since we were introduced to the infinity stones in an agonizing fashion over nearly twenty films, we have been slowly meant to believe that there is a cosmic force more powerful than any fathomable law of physics or science. The stones collectively showed their true potential during "Infinity War" and so they are the most valuable treasure in history. They do a nice job of explaining the Marvel version of time travel theory, which is far different than that of "Back to the Future" or "Hot Tub Time Machine." Anyhow, the only way to undo the "snappening" is to go back and change history.

It's no coincidence that the survivors of the snap happen to be our original heroes; Captain, Iron Man, Thor, Hulk, Black Widow. This film is their swan song as they make way for the new generation of heroes who we have come to respect and love.

Iron Man (Robert Downey Jr.) has been the face of the Avengers since day one. His films have literally created everything that followed in both tone and credibility. Marvel could have easily gone the direction of DC and been a scattershot of single films, but the vision, the exceptional casting, and most importantly, the stamina to get to the endgame is nothing short of remarkable. Iron Man was the one who showed the most character growth from start to finish, and his portrayal and performance in his final appearance (his salary is untenable. He's made over $200 million as the character with salaries and back end cuts rising with each film). Downey's portrayal of Tony Stark is effortless as usual, and drives the essence of the entire franchise. His final film is subtle, but full of emotional baggage, and inner-struggles (par for the course with Tony).

If Iron Man is the face of the franchise, Captain America (Chris Evans) is the heart. His moral compass is always true, and it's his unwavering courage, loyalty, and spirit of fight that has made him so endearing over the years. Evolving from a boy scout to a jaded, scorned warrior, and back to somewhere in between. It's Captain's journey that is the most heartbreaking in the end, and to be candid, Captain America is the strongest character developed from start to finish in "Endgame" and it's a fitting ending to his legacy.

Thor is my favorite Avenger, and admittedly, his role in "Endgame" was disappointing to say the least. After his rip-roaring showing of might as the God of Thunder at the end of "Infinity War" he descends into more comic relief and less godliness than is necessary. It's probably the most glaring mistake by the writers and directors, but hey, you can't expect perfection.

Captain Marvel (Brie Larson) joins the team (obviously) to help balance the scales of power in the revenge plot against the Mad Titan, and we are treated to a glorious three hours of ebbs and flows of action, emotion, and ultimately, a finale fitting of "Return of the King" or "Return of the Jedi" status.

The final battle sequence will go down in history as one of the more epic battles in cinematic history, and makes the whole buildup worthwhile. The whole twenty-two film, ten-year journey.

After a year of speculation, anticipation, theories, set photo leaks, scrutinized interviews, and attempts to figure out what finally happened after Thanos' snap, we have closure. Maybe now we can all rest now. Until July's "Spider-Man: Far From Home." "Avengers: Endgame" is tremendous, and checks all of the boxes of what makes a cinematic titan. Personally, a little disappointed, but critically, I was blown away in every way imaginable. 9/10.