Shazam! Fury of the Gods

Today, I watched “Shazam! Fury of the Gods,” which came out in theaters in March and on Max (formerly HBO Max) five days ago, and I will let you know what I thought of it.

Everyone who enjoyed the low stakes, self-contained storytelling and silly juvenile antics on screen in “Shazam!” will likely be just as satisfied with the sequel, “Shazam! Fury of the Gods.” Even with a little bigger budget and better villains, director David F. Sandberg’s sequel is happily more of the same, and that’s just fine.

Teenager Billy Batson (Asher Angel) is still dealing with all the insane events that magically turned him into a superhero (Zachary Levi) and led to his giving out a variety of similar abilities to his foster siblings Freddy (Jack Dylan Grazer), Mary (Grace Caroline Currey), Pedro (Jovan Armand), Darla (Faithe Herman), and Eugene (Ian Chen). However, he never could have thought that dangerous consequences he unleashed when, two years before, during their fight with Dr. Thaddeus Sivana (Mark Strong), he snapped the staff of the ancient Wizard (Djimon Hounsou) that give him and his family their powers.

The daughters of Atlas – Hespera (Helen Mirren), Kalypso (Lucy Liu), and Anthea (Rachel Zegler) – have been freed from their prison, and all they need is the staff to put their plan in action that could either restore their mythical land to its enchanted beauty or instead send the human world into a place of chaos and misery. Billy and his family are thrown into the fight of their lives, each wondering if they’re too young and too underqualified to have the fate of humanity in their hands.

Sara Michelle Fetters said in her review, “Once again, Sanberg tries to blend a playful, Amblin-esque tone with some decidedly nastier ideas. An opening sequence at a museum, where Hespera and Kalypso retrieve the Wizard’s broken staff, is aggressively violent. It culminates in a petrifying crescendo that would make Medusa cringe, and parents with youngsters in tow should keep this in mind before buying tickets. There’s an even worse, if brief, bit later on in which the director seemingly pays homage to the terrifying opening from M. Night Shyamalan’s otherwise laughable The Happening, and it’s suitably bone-chilling in its destructive splatter.”

The rest of the film is a blend of every teen-friendly 80s flick you can think of, which is a pro and a con, frequently at the same time. This can make things feel uneven, like the sincerely understated likability of Freddy carelessly flirting with an incognito (and unexpectedly taken) Anthea immediately juxtaposed with the immature vanity of the former’s superhero alter ego, reprised by Adam Brody) acting like a falsely scripted version of a high school nerd.

However, the emotions centering around chosen family, acceptance, diversity, understanding, and empathy remain real. The foster household that selfless parents Rosa (Marta Milans) and Victor Vasquez (Cooper Andrews) have created for their children remains superb. Fetters said, “I liked how returnee Henry Gayden (There’s Something Inside Your House) and series newcomer Chris Morgan (a veteran of the Fast and Furious franchise — and it shows) have determinedly structured their screenplay to revolve around the core group, putting front and center the dynamics that make each who they are, and the difficulties they are having communicating with one another now that they’re all superheroes.”

Fetters continued, “Levi dives even more into his Chuck-era bag of tricks than he did in the prior installment, and this can get obnoxious. Thankfully he tones down his schtick considerably in the final act, when he grounds his performance in something honest and pure. This helps make Billy’s decisions during the climax mean something, and even though I saw this ending coming from a mile away, my heartstrings were still tugged to the point that I didn’t really care how obvious this turn of events was.”

There are hints and references that this series may continue, and if the sequel proves to be a hit, even with all the confusion in the DC Extended Universe, “Shazam! Fury of the Gods” is so self-contained that inserting this hero back into the larger principal story won’t be especially difficult. Fetters said, “But if this is the final incarnation of the Shazam family’s adventures, they’ve gone out with electrifying flair and shockingly pleasant enthusiasm.” Bigger isn’t always better, and sometimes “more of the same” is exactly what’s needed to keep an audience entertained.

Spoiler alert: in the mid-credits scene, Emilia Harcourt (Jennifer Holland) and John Economos (Steve Agee) try to get Billy to join the Justice Society on behalf of Amanda Waller. In the post-credits scene, Sivana in prison meets Mister Mind, voiced by David F. Sandberg, once again, furious that he has not begun hashing out their plan. Also returning are D.J. Cotrona, Ross Butler, and Meagan Good with Gal Gadot making a cameo.

I don’t see why critics were so hard on this film. In my opinion, I still found this to be thoroughly entertaining, and I really liked how the stakes were raised while still revolving all around family. Ok, maybe there may have been a couple of times where I was thinking things should hurry up, like when they start talking when they have the other person in their grasp, but that was about it. I think this is another one of my favorite comic book adaptations. Still, if you have Max, you should see this if you didn’t see this in theaters. I think everyone will still like it and not think of it as a waste of their time. Check it out and have a good laugh.

Thank you for joining in on this review tonight. Stay tuned next month to see what I have in store next.

Memoirs of an Invisible Man

“Memoirs of an Invisible Man,” released in 1992, counts among its accomplishments the answer to the problem, what happens to the stuff inside the invisible man? Roger Ebert answered in his review, “The invisible men of the movies have traditionally been invisible because they were transparent - and not, say, because of some kind of optical refraction.” Therefore, you should be able to see the visible things inside of them. For example, the parts of their stomach.

The film does not go that far (one potentially graphic scene is shown by having him put on a coat), but there are funny moments showing his lungs filling with smoke after he puffs a cigarette. Ebert said, “I am the sort of person who is inspired to strict logic by scenes like that, and found myself wondering: What about the fillings in his teeth? Dirt under his toenails? Contact lenses? "Memoirs of an Invisible Man" would have been paralyzed as a movie if it started asking questions like that, but it does ask questions that didn't occur in the classic Claude Rains "Invisible Man" of 1933.” Also, it forces the woman in the invisible man’s life to also ask some questions, but maybe not the most provocative ones.

The story this time has Chevy Chase as a man who is in the wrong place at the wrong time when a secret government experiment goes wrong. He is turned invisible, and so are parts of the building where the experiment took place. Ebert compared, “The building is left resembling a large block of Swiss cheese with large holes here and there, as if a postmodern architect had finally been given completely free rein.”

At the time of his sudden invisibility, Chase is looking forward to a date with a documentary filmmaker, played by the gorgeous Daryl Hannah, he met in a restaurant a few days earlier. Ebert asks, “What to do? Stand her up? Or count on a certain sympathetic warmth he saw glowing in her eyes, and ask her for help?” As he decides, the plot moves along predictable lines, as the government tries to keep the invisibility secret, and a scheming spy, played by Sam Neill, tries to capture Chase for his own evil plan.

The plot is lazy and predictable. What is good about the movie involves Chase and Hannah, who have to work out between them the logistical problems of their strange relationship. It’s one thing when love is blind, but another when the lover is invisible. Chase walks in public inaudible in clothes from top to bottom, or he sneaks around invisibly and eavesdrops on people, or in one smart scene Hannah creates a face for him by painting one on with makeup.

Ebert said, “This material is intriguing enough that I wish there had been more of it.” Comedy has the application of logic to the strange, and there are many more chances here than the screenplay takes advantage of. Somehow the director, John Carpenter, seems convinced that we care about the resolution of the plot involving spies and government secrecy. Ebert noted, “We couldn't care less, since every character and every line of dialogue in these scenes is demoralized by the countless times they've been recycled.”

How about a movie that was about the real subject of this one: A relationship between a man who can see a woman, and a woman who cannot see a man? What would they really talk about? What unsettling or interesting lovable possibilities might there be? Daryl Hannah, who is onscreen some of the time all by herself (talking to Chase’s spiritual voice) makes as much of such chances as she can, and has fun with the funny strangeness of her situation. However, the movie doesn’t help her much.

I remember seeing a couple of parts of this movie back when I was a teenager. I think it was around the time when we first got cable that I saw this on one of the movie channels. However, I never bothered to think about this movie for years. That is until I was looking at Chevy Chase movies to review this month, and found out that this movie was one he starred in. When I looked up the movie, I remembered it from years ago. After seeing it, it’s nothing special. I guess if you see it, it wouldn’t hurt, but don’t expect much. This is just one of those forgettable films after you see it.

Thank you for joining in on “Chevy Chase Month.” I hope everyone enjoyed it. Stay tuned next month to see what I will review next.

Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania

Today my brother and I checked out “Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania,” which came out in theaters in February but on Disney+ a week ago, and I will let you know what I thought of it.

Appropriately for the Marvel Cinematic Universe’s smallest heroes, the likability of “Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania” are small, but still satisfying.

Life is pretty good for Scott Lang, reprised by Paul Rudd, the ex-con and now hero because of his work helping to save the world as Ant-Man, part of The Avengers team who saved half of humanity and defeated Thanos. Now he’s settled down to a normal life with girlfriend, fellow superhero and philanthropist Hope van Dyne, reprised by Evangeline Lilly. Occasionally Scott has to bail his daughter Cassie, played by Kathryn Newton, out of jail for reasons against civil disobedience, and deal with Cassie’s criticism that her dad doesn’t care about helping people.

Cassie, helped by Hope and Hope’s inventor father Hank Pym, reprised by Michael Douglas, has been creating a device to see the subatomic universe called the “quantum realm.” When Hank’s wife, Janet, reprised by Michelle Pfeiffer, sees Cassie’s device is sending a signal into the quantum realm, she tells her to turn it off – but not before the device is activated and starts pulling all of the lab equipment, Hank’s ant farm, and eventually the five of them down into the subatomic.

Scott and Cassie get separated from everyone, and end up with a group of rebels trying to avoid the cruel leader of the quantum realm. Hope, Hank, and Janet are somewhere else, with Janet – who spent 30 years in the quantum realm (which was revealed in 2018’s “Ant-Man and the Wasp”) – keeping secrets about why she’s terrified of returning. Sean P. Means said in his review, “Janet leads Hope and Hank through the seedier elements of this place, which mostly involves a not-so-pleasant few minutes with a local scoundrel played by Bill Murray.”

In the end, we find out about who is making Janet petrified: Kang, the Conqueror, played by Jonathan Majors, a supervillain whose evil spreads the multiverse.

Means notes, “Director Peyton Reed, now on his third movie with “Ant-Man” in the title, knows not to take this bug-themed superhero stuff too seriously.” That’s why the rebels include a goo creature (David Dastmalchian), and another a telepath (William Jackson Harper) who’s clearly aggravated by what people always think about. And it’s why Kang has a secondary villain (Corey Stoll), right out of Marvel canon, whose reveal is really funny.

Means mentions, “The screenplay, the first produced feature script by “Rick & Morty” and “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” writer Jeff Loveness, has some funny bits, along with gaps in its credulity that aren’t papered over by saying “it’s the quantum realm — the rules are different here.” Still, the plot gives plenty of chances for Rudd’s easygoing charm to win us over, and to give the supporting players — especially Pfeiffer — room to shine.”

Means continues, “The most intriguing thing about “Ant-Man and The Wasp: Quantumania” is Majors as Kang — who, we already know from his appearance in Marvel’s series “Loki” and in promises from Marvel Uber-producer Kevin Feige, is going to be the big bad guy for several movies to come.” Based on the evidence here, he will be someone worth following through this new phase of the Marvel Cinematic Universe.

Spoiler alert: in the mid-credits scene, every variant of Kang, let by Immortus (Majors), sympathize Kang’s death and plan their Multiverse conquering. The post-credits scene shows Loki (Tom Hiddleston) and Mobius (Owen Wilson) encountering another Kang variant, Victor Timely, on Earth in 1901.

I don’t get why critics were hating on this movie. My brother and I saw this and I found myself enjoying this a lot. There was a part where I felt as though I was going to nod off, but that was probably because of eating while watching this. However, I know that certain parts of this film seems like the scenery was like that in Star Wars, Bladerunner, Guardians of the Galaxy, or Dune, but I didn’t mind it. I still found parts of this funny, it was very humanizing, emotional, and I liked the look and action of this film. I would say this might be another one of my favorite comic book adaptations. Check it out on Disney+ if you didn’t see it in theaters. Don’t listen to the hate, judge it for yourself.

Thank you for joining in on another installment from the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Stay tuned this Friday for the conclusion of “Chevy Chase Month.”

Caddyshack II

Rita Kempley started her review by saying, “"Caddyshack II," a feeble follow-up to the 1980 laff riot, is lamer than a duck with bunions, and dumber than grubs. It's patronizing and clumsily manipulative, and top banana Jackie Mason is upstaged by the gopher puppet.”

Jackie Mason, looking gentle and miserable, replaces the irreplaceable Rodney Dangerfield as the cultural hero in loud golf pants. Mason plays a self-made Armenian millionaire who tries to get into the Bushwood Country Club to please his social-climbing daughter, played by Jessica Lundy. Naturally he is ridiculed by the arrogant members.

He avenges himself by purchasing Bushwood to turn it into a messy golf theme park open to the public. “I want to make sure that everyone has a taste of the good life,” says the tycoon. Kempley said, “Led by their snooty president (Robert Stack), the club members are determined to destroy the tee-totaler. But fear not, working-class audience members, blue blood will be spilt yet -- in a winner-take-Bushwood golf match between the antagonists.”

Kempley continued, “Peter Torokvei and "Caddyshack" writer Harold Ramis are just a couple of hackers with typewriters. They pillage the original right down to a gung-ho psycho (Dan Aykroyd instead of Bill Murray) who becomes obsessed with the Twinkie-loving gopher puppet. Aykroyd has never been so awful, his ineptitude eclipsed only by the director Allan Arkush's.”

The adorable rodent, love interest Dyan Cannon’s front muscles and Randy Quaid’s terrific work as a sick are the movie’s only pros. Mason does get off an occasional punch line. When advised by a Zen golfer, played by Chevy Chase in a cameo, to “be the ball,” he rejoins, “IF I wanted to be a piece of sports equipment, I’d be a lady’s bicycle seat.”

And “Caddyshack II,” released in 1988, viewers would as soon be golf clubs in an electrical storm.

As everyone might have guessed, this is one of the worst sequels ever made. Everything that made the first one a comedy classic is destroyed in this heartless sequel. If you loved the first movie, then avoid this one at all cost. You will loathe this, especially since no one, except for Chase, returns in this sequel. Nothing about this sequel is likable.

Sorry for posting this really late. I was really tired after work. However, stay tuned next week when I talk about a movie that I saw a little bit of as a kid in the finale of “Chevy Chase Month.”

Three Amigos

There’s hardly a moment in “Three Amigos,” released in 1986, that isn’t silly – make that incredibly outrageously and breathtakingly silly. Maybe that’s why this story of a trio of clumsy silent-movie actors turned real-life heroes is such an enjoyable ride. Patrick Goldstein compared in his review, “It’s like a cross between a big-budget Three Stooges movie and a Hope-Crosby road picture, with dozens of old cowpoke gags thrown in to spice up the brew.”

Nothing is real in this silly Western travesty – not even the poster-board sunsets. Goldstein said, “And it’s this giddy artifice that gives “Three Amigos” a delightfully fresh spin. Who would’ve thought that a movie loaded with so many corny jokes and wobbly slapstick routines could be one of the daffiest comedies of the year?”

The film takes place in 1916, when the small Mexican village of Santa Poco is being terrorized by a group of banditos led by El Guapo, played by Alfonso Arau, a criminal outlaw who looks like, as Goldstein puts it, “as if he hasn’t brushed his teeth since the Spanish-American War.” When an innocent senorita (Patrice Martinez) sees a silent movie starring the Three Amigos (Steve Martin, Chevy Chase, and Martin Short), she is so taken by their heroism that she asks their help in defeating this evil villain.

By the time the famous actors get her confused telegram, they’ve been kicked off the Goldsmith Pictures studio for demanding a raise. Now out of work, the bumbling trio are really happy to travel south of the border, thinking they’ve been hired (for 100,000 pesos) to make a quickie personal appearance.

Goldstein said, “Needless to say, these Hollywood tenderfoots are in for a rude awakening. They hit town, dolled up in their fancy, prop-department “charro” duds, only to find real bullets buzzing by their heads.” (You know they’re in trouble when a street beggar asks, “Can I have your watch when you’re dead?”) It’s the comedy of misunderstanding, and director John Landis feeds the situation for every laugh possible, taking playful enjoyment in showing how unprepared these actor heroes are for life outside the studio.

The amigos see everything as an act. Even when the bad guys start shooting, the three find time to divide the villains’ performance before the smoke clears. Goldstein mentions, “Soothing a clump of Mexican children, Short--who plays a former child star named Ned Nederlander--regales them with Dorothy Gish anecdotes. Landis even stages a deliciously loony campfire scene, where the amigos croon a Randy Newman sagebrush ballad (“Blue Shadows on the Trail”), aided by a back-up chorus of desert critters, including a scene-stealing tortoise.”

Goldstein continues, “It’s a testimony to the sad state of Hollywood these days that this is one of the few comedies in recent memory which has actually benefited from the presence of bona-fide stars.” While Martin, Newman, and “Saturday Night Live’s” Lorne Michaels have given a serviceable script, the real enjoyment here is the amigo trio’s well-done comic timing. Goldstein said, “Their trademark “Amigo” salute--which plays like a mixture of an elaborate soul-shake and a Carmen Miranda dance step--is one of those inspired pieces of nonsense that gets funnier each time they do it.”

Short is a disappointment, giving little more than juvenile silliness. However, Chase, even if he’s a little rough in his bolero jacket, is filled with charm, more mischievous and endearing than he’s been on screen in years. Goldstein credits, “Best of all, Martin emerges as a screwball comic wizard, whether he’s slyly imitating the swaggering stride of a gunslinger or gamely wrestling with dungeon manacles as if they were a clanking maze of Nautilus equipment.”

Goldstein continues, “All this nuttiness may drive you crazy--it’s like being forced to watch 90 minutes of David Letterman’s “Stupid Pet Tricks.” But Landis is a shrewd comic craftsman who realizes that attitude can be everything, especially when you’re aiming for the ridiculous instead of the sublime.” “The Three Amigos” reaches low for its silly jokes. However, in Hollywood, sometimes you have to condescend to conquer.

This is a comedy classic. If you haven’t seen it, you are missing out. Especially if you’re a fan of these three actors, who have shown up together in so many different shows, this is a must. I had seen a little bit of this movie as a kid, but I decided to go back and watch it after hearing everyone talk about how funny this was. They were not wrong, as I think everyone will have a great time laughing at this film. See it if you haven’t because this is a must.

Next week we’re going to look at another really bad sequel in “Chevy Chase Month.”

Caddyshack

For the month of May, I have decided to pay tribute to one of the funniest actors of all time, Chevy Chase. Let’s start off this month with the 1980 comedy classic, and hands down, one of the best, “Caddyshack.”

This may be a tad outdated, with its catchy soundtrack and music by Kenny Loggins, but it still shows the talent for amazing comedic timing. Mike Massie said in his review, “Director Harold Ramis would write, direct, produce, and even star in several influential, important comedy works of the ‘80s, but it’s this envelope-pushing laugh-fest that kicked off his directing career.” Although the late amazing one-liner comedian Rodney Dangerfield, Chevy Chase, and Bill Murray could definitely use more screen time (their involvement was originally meant to be simply cameos), especially seeing how much of the film is improvised, “Caddyshack” still intelligently utilizes its cast. Succeeding on so many ways, this film is also highly quotable, often being called one of the all-time funniest comedies, with a handful of lines of dialogue ranking among the most memorable in cinema. Who knew golf could be so much fun?

Danny Noonan (Michael O’Keefe), a member of an incredibly large family (Ron Frank, Patricia Wilcox, Debi Frank, and Dennis McCormack), is preparing to disappoint his parents (Elaine Aiken and Albert Saimi) with news of failed scholarship opportunities. He’s faced on finding a career at the laborious lumberyard, but currently spends his time as a caddie at the exclusive Bushwood Country Club, fighting with old people, drugs, fighting, his girlfriend Maggie (Sarah Holcomb), a desperate newcomer (Cindy Morgan), crazy partiers, and generally debaucherous activities. When he hears of a caddie scholarship that could change his future, he wants to win a golf tournament and to kiss up to Judge Smails, played by Ted Knight from the “Mary Tyler Moore Show,” the man who can recommend him for the scholarship. As events develop, a $40,000 illegal game of golf and a plastic-explosive-obsessed maintenance man raise the climax.

Assistant greenskeeper Carl Spackler, played by Bill Murray, is a solitary crazy man with an obsession for older women, constantly saying nasty things silently, charged with taking care of a destructive gopher haunting the golf course (he’s got a six-year plan for eventually becoming head greenskeeper). Massie said, “Treating the rodent like the Vietcong, he wages a personal war that’s sure to cause more damage than an entire army of critters could unleash.” Ty Webb (Chevy Chase) is a millionaire golfer who never keeps score and a philosopher with odd advice and random comments, and Al Czervik (Rodney Dangerfield) is a wealthy invest with one-liner jokes and crude sarcasm always ready to be said. For these strange people, it’s just an average day on the golf course.

Massie noted, “The story itself is rather disjointed, with three characters all trying to achieve separate goals. The gags appear to have been written first, with the plot formed around various witty setups, much like every “Saturday Night Live” movie adaptation. The premise is simple, rarely interfering with the delivery of humor, as if in place just to get the actors to cross paths – the oddball characters are the constituents that quickly become the best parts of the pervasive nonsense. It’s infrequent for three vastly different comedians to have such fitting performances together without trampling on each other’s skits; here, they pull it off admirably. Complete with an iconic dancing gopher, hilarious dialogue, and edgy elements that would lead the way for raunchy teen comedies of the future, “Caddyshack” proves that irreverence toward everything can be gut-busting and that golf doesn’t have to be just for the elderly (though predominantly for the rich).”

This movie is a must for everyone to see. It doesn’t matter if you like golf or not, this movie will make everyone bust out laughing. See it, especially to hear some of the funniest lines from Rodney Dangerfield. This movie is famous for the line, “Cinderella story. Outta nowhere. A former greenskeeper, now, about to become the Masters champion. It looks like a mirac... It's in the hole! It's in the hole! It's in the hole!” Do not miss your chance to see this.

Look out next week when I review another classic comedy in “Chevy Chase Month.”