The Invisible Man (2020)

For me the best horror is analogous to something real. Ghosts are less scary than what they can represent. The idea behind the update of The Invisible Man is brilliant in that it explores a very real world terror by putting it in the guess of a “horror story”.

In this case we are talking about toxic, abusive relationships. The film explores partner violence in a way that is meticulously thorough. It uses its pulpy story to look at the nature of domestic violence from the inside out. And in doing so it creates something more terrifying than a simple “monster” movie.

The idea of someone you can’t see attacking you is frightening sure. But the way a person can gaslight you and cut you off from your supports is truly horrifying. The Invisible Man with its pseudo sci fi conceit breaks this down so cleverly. The reason this form of abuse is so powerful in the real world is how easy it is for perpetrators to be invisible, for them to make it seem no real. Therefore the idea here is the perfect trope for laying it out.

And Moss is perfect here as the survivor. She has the right mix of strength and vulnerability to pull this off and she does some of her best work. Director Whannell, whose work I have only been so so with up til now, also steps up, doing just the right mix to make the story truly work both as thriller and as allegory. I found its story chilling, often my heart was racing, but deeper than that the tale was disturbing, truly, perhaps because I recognized the way this happens in the real world.

For me The Invisible Man hit all the right marks and I would recommend it with a caveat, it might be a bit too close to home for some who have experienced this for real.

The Invisible Man
Starring: Elizabeth Moss, Oliver Jackson-Cohen, Aldis Hodge, Storm Reid
Writer/Director: Leigh Whannell

Universal Monsters - The Invisible Man (1933)

The Invisible Man was one of the earlier entries in the famous Universal Monster shared universe and was directed by James Whale between his masterpieces Frankenstein and Bride of Frankenstein. It also features Claude Rains' first American film appearance although we never get to "see" him (save for one small moment at the end). Its iconic costume still strikes a terrifying image and the special effects used to make him invisible were revolutionary at the time and remain effective to this day. As a piece of Hollywood history The Invisible Man is fascinating. Fortunately it also remains a highly entertaining romp, if not quite to the level of some of Whale's other work.

Whale, as he is known to do, masterfully balances the camp with the terror. When the titular character Griffin reveals his power he is both gleefully hilarious and truly frightening. The way Griffin plays with his victims is quite ghastly but there is a sense of cartoonish villainy here. His motivations aren't complicated, simple world domination. His monstrousness is in his behavior more than his "freakishness". Unlike Dracula who is portrayed as the embodiment of evil or Frankenstein or the Wolf Man who are both victims of societal alienation, Griffin is just a bad man with bad intentions. The characters keep referring to his "madness," that he's been driven mad by the serum he uses to become invisible, but the character doesn't behave irrationally. Nothing about him suggests he is mentally ill. He is motivated quite sanely by greed and a desire for power.

In fact he is a man who discovers power and decides to use it to his own benefit, even at the expense of others. This is, like many of these monster movies of the era, a morality play. It is teaching us about how ugly this sort of quest makes us, so much so we lose our humanity. Does he have a reckoning at the end, a realization of how wrong he was? I'm not sure I buy his death bed confessions and see it more as his sorrow about his plans not working out. But there is room for each of us to interpret that ending.

The film does a wonderful job of building the world of invisibility. They show us just how much chaos can be created by someone who can't be seen. There is a clever moment in the middle where the Invisible Man talks about the challenges he faces being truly invisible from walking down stairs to being seen in the rain to eating food which remains visible until it is digested. The film even tries to come up with the science of becoming transparent, even if the science is nonsensical to modern audiences. Especially in that era the film could have got away with just making him invisible and not making it feel real, but that just isn't enough for Whale who focuses on imbuing his story with a sense of reality, as much as one can with such a fantastic tale.

I don't know if I am reading into this watching from today and looking back, but it feels like we can see some of what Whale is playing with as he builds to the much stronger Bride of Frankenstein a couple years later. Still The Invisible Man is a fun watch for many reasons, no pun intended.

The Invisible Man
Starring: Claude Rains, Gloria Stuart, Henry Travers, William Harrigan
Director: James Whale
Writer: R.C. Sherriff

Call of the Wild (2020)

Director Chris Sanders is probably most famous for playing Stitch opposite Lilo. He's a prolific animation director (although I'm not really a fan of his work outside of Lilo and Stitch) which made him well suited for this adaptation of the classic novel about a dog whose performance is all CGI. In fact so much of the movie is CGI. The film supposedly set in the Yukon was shot in California making a need for much special effects just to generate all the environments. In many ways The Call of the Wild is an animated movie.

This has its pros and cons. Some of the scenes are absolutely beautiful and the dogs are able to interact with personified expressions and perform incredible stunts, none of which would be possible with real locations and real animals. But it also gives the entire film an air of non-reality. It rarely feels authentic. Yes the effects are remarkable. The Call of the Wild shows us just how far visual effects have come. But there is no hiding the fact that Buck is not real. Very little of the film is real.

There is something incredibly ironic about a story like this, whose main theme is about and animal escaping their domestication and returning to natural, "wild" existence, which is constructed so meticulously with CGI. The film is the opposite of naturalistic. The film tones down some of this theme to play less as a comment on humanity's attempts to control the natural world and more on a romanticized notion of "freedom." The Call of the Wild here becomes more of a simple adventure story, a buddy movie, a sentimental tale. In that it works, but perhaps it looses something in toning down the novel's main purpose.

The film takes some liberties with the novel's story but generally follows the narrative. Perhaps it softens some of the animal cruelty depicted in the book as well as some of the colonialist/racist assumptions, while still telling a harrowing tale of adventure from a dog's point of view. The film, like the novel, feels a bit episodic but the story of the singular dog, his strength and bravery is palpable. It will please crowds with its shiny effects and charming story. But it does play it a bit safe. It also tells the story fairly quickly. Sometimes it uses Harrison Ford's narration to give us plot points and character developments it doesn't have time to show us.

Harrison Ford still has all the charisma he needs to be a leading man. At 77 he shows us he can still pull off a shirtless scene as he bathes in a cold river.

Call of the Wild 
Starring: Harrison Ford, Dan Stevens, Omar Sy, Karen Gillan, Bradley Witford
Director: Chris Sanders
Writer: Michael Green

Henry V (1989) REVISIT

Writer/actor/director Kenneth Branagh's Henry V was one of the first experiences I had of film adaptations of Shakespeare and was my first introduction to to Branagh's own work. In my mind he remains the reigning champion of Shakespeare film. The film's opening grabbed me in a way that brought me into the story as I didn't expect it could. One of my favourite actors ever (although I didn't know it at the time), Derek Jacobi, stands on an undressed film set and gives the Chorus speech, intentionally acknowledging the limits of film just as the Bard when writing the scene was acknowledging the limits of the stage. But in that moment we see just how powerful those mediums actually are. This is a film and it is going to transport us to another world, another time, and have us experience something we couldn't otherwise. I was hooked right away, and Jacobi's narration remains one of my favourite aspects of this film.

I remember the gleeful joy and I felt at the tennis ball scene which sets the plot in motion. Henry V acts both as climax of the Herniad plays but also a story all on its own. Branagh finds the perfect way to make one film of this story in a way that is as satisfying as watching through all three of the previous plays. He brings in the history, needed for this story to have it's impact in a naturalistic way, that feels for the uninitiated, as if it it contains the entirety of the story, and for those more familiar with the plays, he makes it feel as if it always was written that way.

This film shows what a film maker Branagh is going to become. Although a first time director, he demonstrates both an amazing visual eye (even on a low budget) but also a true talent for story telling. There is a lot going on here, British history that is far more remote for modern audiences than it would have been for Shakeseare's crowds, the culmination of three previous plays whose plot threads are all coming together, and many other moving parts including characters with names like "The Lord of Cumberland" who we have to keep track of. But he makes it all make sense and more than that, he makes it gripping.

A personal favourite for me is the young Emma Thompson's brief cameo as the french princess learning English. Unsubtitlted, the film just asks you to experience her "french" scene and it is lovely and delightful.

But what strikes me about this film is Branaghs' approach to the story, a story which is often feels meant to celebrate nationalism and conquest, which he turns into a film about the loss of war and the arrogance of elitist egos. He takes what Shakespeare gives us and makes it into the story he wants it to be. Yes, Shakespeare's work is generous in that way already and its pliability for interpretation is already impressive, but Branagh is especially skilled at this. With Henry V begins what will be one of the best runs of Shakespeare films of any film maker.

Famously he makes amazing work of Henry's "undercover boss" scene, walking through his camp disguised, to talk with his soldiers unidentified. It is a scene which tied to the history from Hal's youth, forces us to reckon with the roles classes play in the building of empires. This approach was so different than the takes which had come before on screen, takes which often were about building up the King. Also his famous staging of the St. Crispin's Day Speech is remarkable along with the battle that follows it, he juxtaposes the romance of the speech with the brutal reality of what war in that age (and truly in any) really was. The aftermath is palpable loss. Again for a first time film maker Branagh showed us that he would be a spectacular film maker, and that he can bring the Bard's works to life on the screen as no one else can.

Henry V is a lightning bolt, and strikes with as much energy and excitement. Revisiting it I was reminded of the power it had on me the first time and just how well it, as a film, stands the test of time.

Henry V
Starring: Kenneth Branagh, Derek Jacobi, Emma Thompson, Judy Dench, Ian Holm, Christian Bale, Brian Blessed, Robbie Coltrane. Richard Briers, Paul Scofield
Director: Kenneth Branagh
Writers: Kenneth Branagh, William Shakespeare

Sonic the Hedgehog (2020)

This likely should go without saying but Sonic the Hedgehog is dumb, almost everything about it is pretty damn dumb. The plot is nonsensical. The moral of the story is cliched. The whole thing is cheese. But it survives basically on its never ending charm and the fact that Jim Carrey gives a classic Carrey tour de force... if you're into that sort of thing.

I know. I know. It's based on a video game. Honestly I don't think that's an excuse for how many times the film just does stupid things to advance the plot and wields deux ex machina plot devices. But whatever. I know that's not why people go to these films. But for me honestly I'm just not sure watching the admittedly improved animated version of Sonic run fast is enough to earn my $13.99. Yes Marsden and Sumpter and the voice of Schwartz are all super adorable but in this age where they can make an awfully clever Lego movie, there is no excuse for such inanity. The banter isn't that witty. The plot doesn't capitalize on the game's mechanics in a clever, analogous way. There isn't even a scene where Sonic collects rings as he runs along as super speed! I mean how hard would that have been.

But for Jim Carrey fans, the long time fans who miss his days as The Mask, Ace Ventura and such, the man is back. His Dr. Robotnik is classic Carrey. That's not my jam so I could care less. And perhaps if it was I would have been able to squeeze more enjoyment out of this. But I imagine for his old timey fans, this will be a treat.

And for fans of the game who for some reason want to see the character brought to life and put in a sappy friendship story (you know, the sort we've seen 1000 times before?) they'll enjoy it too. Cause really the film manages by being charming to not be terrible.

I guess that's as high a praise as I can give it.

Sonic the Hedgehog
Starring: Ben Schwartz, Jim Carrey, James Marsden, Tika Sumpter, Lee Majdoub, Natasha Rothwell, Neil McDonough
Director: Jeff Fowler
Writers: Pat Casey, Josh Miller

The Photograph (2020)

Sometimes a film strikes you in a way that you weren't expecting. The Photograph with its fairly predictable romance plot ended up being so much more than just that. For me this was mostly due to Canadian director Stella Meghie's masterful work and the chemistry between Stanfield and Rae who just make you fall in love with them and their love story.

I've only seen hints of Meghie's talent in some of her previous work but here she knocks it out of the park. She finds gorgeous colour in each shot whether it's rainy New York of sun drenched New Orleans or grey London. A photograph is a visual piece of art and Meghie's work here takes full breathtaking advantage of that by making a luscious visual treat along the lines of the work of Alfonso Cuaron or Theodore Witcher or Deepa Mehta. I want to go back and watch more of her work.

She effortlessly shifts her story between the present and the past to intertwine two love stories into something delicious. I kept wanting to fault the film for its hackneyed love story but I coudln't because it sold it so wonderfully. Stanfield and Rae work so well together and what they produce here is sumptuous. I also loved that Meghie didn't fall into relying on sex scenes to make their passion palpable, she skims over that delicately, while focusing on what really works here which is their meeting of the minds.

The Photograph is adult in its approach. No matter how many times the film took a predictable turn I was on board. And I will eager await the chance to see what Meghie does next.

The Photograph
Starring LaKeith Stanfield, Issa Rae, Rob Morgan, Courtney B. Vance, Y'lan Noel, Chante Adams
Writer/Director: Stella Meghie

Bloomhouse's Fantasy Island (2020)

There is a great concept in the idea of Fantasy Island, perhaps why it keeps getting interpreted. Facing some otherworldly force that brings your fantasies to life only to deal with the fact those fantasies might not bring us what we want is a rich concept, expecially exploring the mythology of such a place. Is the force malevolent or benevolent? What is its origin? Anyways all of this would be interested, except this movie drops the ball and saps any of what could have been good about the concept.

Bloomhouse has built quite a reputation for themselves. While they have produced the amazing Get Out, The Gift, and Split as well as non-horror modern masterpieces like Blackkklansman and Whiplash, they also put out cheap horror schlock like Happy Death Day and The Purge movies. So on the hope that this concept could be played out more like Get Out and less like a Saw rip off, I went to see Bloomhouse's Fantasy Island (yes that's one of the official titles) an sadly the latter is more true.

"From the director of Truth of Dare" should have been a clue.

Fantasy Island takes the cheap route. It oversimplifies the concept with cliched fantasies and a cliched turn on those fantasies. Then when the "twist" is revealed, it goes full on camp. Most of the mythology of the island is nonsensical. Basically anything I had wanted from such a story is left out in favour of surface level story telling that is clumsy and rather boring. It leans into is Saw sensibilities which also feels cliched and takes away from the impact of the emotional resonance that could have existed otherwise.

I imagine what an "from the director of Get Out" Fantasy Island could have looked like. Why couldn't we have had that film?

Bloomhouse's Fantasy Island

Starring: Michael Peña, Maggie Q, Lucy Hale, Austin Stowell, Portia Doubleday, Jimmy O. Yang, Ryan Hansen, Michael Rooker

Director:  Jeff Wadlow

Writers: Chris Roach, Jillian Jacobs, Jeff Wadlow