Gladiator II: A Continued Story of Legacy, Rage, and Vengeance

Even with familiar beats, and its inability to match the epic scale of its predecessor, Gladiator II still proves itself a worthy addition to a series that may not be quite done with its story just yet

When it comes to sequels, the cliché is that they are never as good as the first film. Honestly, I have always found this to be ridiculous when you consider movies like The Godfather II, The Empire Strikes Back, and Aliens, all second entries, are some of the greatest films of all-time.

With that said, it was definitely surprising to hear that 24 years after Gladiator, Ridley Scott was planning to release a next chapter in a story that seemed to be a perfect “one and done”, due mainly to how incredible it wrapped things up at the end. But then when news broke that both Denzel Washington and Pedro Pascal had been added to the cast, I think it was safe to say there was cautious optimism that this would turn out just fine.

The story continues years after the first movie ended. With Lucius (played by relative newcomer Paul Mescal), the grandson of former Caesar Marcus Aurelius, now a nomad fighting against the same Roman Empire he was once positioned to rule one day. Thrown into captivity, and fighting for survival as a gladiator himself, the power-hungry and devious Macrinus (Washington) purchases Lucius, unaware of the royal bloodline his newest prize possesses.

For Lucius, his path and ultimate end goal is very similar to that of Russell Crowe’s Maximus in the first movie. Whereas Maximus had his eyes on vengeance against the tyrannical and murderous Commodus (played by Joaquin Phoenix), Lucius is focused on taking out the Roman General (Pascal) who captured him.

While there are two creepy and unhinged Emperor brothers (Joseph Quinn and Fred Hechinger) at the helms now, uprooting them feels inevitable as they seem to be their own worst enemies in terms of maintaining power and order. Which Macrinus eyes as an eventual opportunity to usurp both and take over as Caesar himself one day.

Whereas the first movie mainly focused on the battlefield and fighting in The Colosseum, Scott’s biggest flex in this sequel is expanding the universe of The Roman Empire. We get to see way more of the political backdrop due to Macrinus’s aspirations, but also get an added perspective of the Roman streets, the culture, and the ever-shifting chess battle between royalty, the citizens of Rome, and the gladiators themselves. Scott and screenwriter David Scarpa (who he collaborated with on last year’s Napolean) do a remarkable job making you really feel like you are right in the middle of Rome, especially in The Colosseum with all the terrific battle sequences that take place in this one.

The performances are also universally outstanding. Mescal, while a little on the short side to play such an intimidating figure, makes up for this with his intensity and charisma. Lucius is a character driven by rage, vengeance, and wanting to redefine and recapture his legacy. If he is to become a free man, and potentially a big player in changing the scope of Rome’s power structure, he knows he’s going to have to earn it by fighting for his life and rallying those around him (including his estranged mother, played again by Connie Nielson) to see his vision.

There’s also a lot more to Pascal’s General Acacius character than what you’d guess initially upon first meeting him. He’s excellent here. And Washington is clearly having a blast chewing the scenery and throwing some Training Day like delivery and grins in for good measure. Quinn is a phenomenal secondary villain thanks to his psychopathic stares and maniacal soliloquies, with Hechinger filling in nicely as the clearly weaker and more easily manipulated of the two emperors.

There’s a lot of moving pieces, and at times, especially in the third act of the film, this Shakespearean-esque story threatens to careen off course into sheer lunacy because of the high-stakes drama taking place. But somehow, Scott keeps it all together.

Some of the storyline comes close to plagiarizing the first movie, and sometimes you feel the weight of the film’s two-and-a-half hour run time when it hits some slow points, but there’s still enough new and interesting material and characters here to warrant its existence. Especially the final act, which is epic and thrilling, and leaves the door open for a potential third film (which Scott has said he’s open to).

Ultimately, while no one was particularly asking for it for nearly a quarter of a century, Gladiator II is a rousing and successful follow-up. The storytelling, battle scenes, and character arcs all come together nicely thanks to the firm, confident direction Scott provides, and the nice writing balance Scarpa strikes in this layered piece of historical fiction.

If you were a fan of the first one (like everyone seems to be), don’t think twice about seeing it. Try to catch it in IMAX to get the full experience. It’s more than worth it.

Rating: *** out of ****

Echoing Kubrick and King - Why Mike Flanagan’s “Doctor Sleep” Remains A Slept-On Sequel

Four years later, Mike Flanagan’s sequel to “The Shining” remains a meticulously crafted and powerful look at childhood trauma, overcoming alcoholism, and quelling generational demons

When I first heard there was going to be a screen adaptation to the follow-up to The Shining, I couldn’t have been more excited. After all, it’s my favorite movie of all-time, and getting the chance to go back to “The Overlook Hotel” under the direction of Mike Flanagan, who oversaw the enormously popular Netflix show The House on Haunted Hill, seemed like a great fit. Throw in Ewan McGregor portraying a grown-up version of Danny Torrance, I had little reason to believe this movie would be a bust.

And fortunately – it wasn’t.

Far from it in fact.

The story takes place some forty years after the events of The Shining. Danny, who now goes by Dan, is a spitting image of his dad in the worst possible ways. Bordering on homelessness, he’s also a violent alcoholic, and seems to have no direction in his life. He’s almost looking for a reason to give up on everything. That is until he moves to a New England town where he meets essentially the Mother Teresa of the area, a man named Billy (played by the always steady Cliff Curtis), who takes him under his wing, and helps give him his own place, a job, and most importantly – a friend.

Without giving much of the plot away, Dan eventually discovers that there is a cult that seeks out people like him that possess his ‘Shining’ power, including a young girl he encounters named Abra Stone. This cult’s goal is to live forever, and to do this, they hunt down people like Dan and Abra and either “turn them” (make them part of their cult) or kill them slowly while sucking out their powers like vampires to extend their life forces.

The movie does an impressive job effortlessly swaying from past to present. We get to see characters from The Shining again, played by different actors this time. But the thing the movie does so well is center in on the topics of childhood trauma, addiction, and being haunted by the sins of the father. Dan is a compelling character (McGregor is excellent here) because of how scarred he is, and because of how desperate he is for redemption. Which might come in the form of protecting Abra from this cult.

The ambiance, tone, and use of the music from The Shining is remarkable. Trying to toe the line between getting Stephen King’s book and Stanley Kubrick’s vision right had to be a tall and intimidating task. But Flanagan is totally in control, especially when it comes to going back to “The Overlook Hotel”, which is chilling, scary, and nostalgic in a strange way.

Unfortunately, this movie didn’t perform well at the box office when it was released in October 2019. Call it poor marketing, or the fact that it was a sequel coming out close to 40 years later after the original, I’m not quite sure why more people wouldn’t want to see this – especially around Halloween time when horror films (like The Shining) are more popular.

It reminds me a lot of Blade Runner: 2049 in the sense of it coming out so late after the original, as well as not doing so great at the box office. However, both are excellent movies. And more proof that the whole “sequels are usually bad” stereotype isn’t true.

If you’re a fan of The Shining and/or horror films in general, I couldn’t recommend this movie more. It’s one of the most underrated films of the last five years, and it deserves to have a wider audience that shows it more love for how well it handles some very serious subjects with aplomb.

Rating: ***1/2 out of ****

“Top Gun: Maverick” Proves Once Again Why Sequels Can Still Surpass Their Classic Predecessors

36 Years Later, the sequel to ‘Top Gun’ manages to somehow, improbably, establish itself as an instant classic

When it was first announced that Tom Cruise and his longtime writing partner Christopher McQuarrie were developing a Top Gun sequel, the project was met with overwhelming skepticism by the general public. Many believed that the first was a truly great film that didn’t need a follow-up, and that in doing so, this would tarnish its legacy.

I’ll be honest, I only watched Top Gun for the first time all the way through this past summer. I had seen parts of it on TV when I was a kid, but it just never hooked me. And, while this might not be a necessary popular opinion, after watching it this summer, I feel that it’s a very average film. Granted, it was a star making performance for Cruise. However, I found the love story to be incredibly forced, the characters to be largely one-dimensional, and the ambiguity of who the good guys were fighting the entire time to be rather frustrating in terms of trying to understand the overall plot.

Everything that Top Gun glossed over and rushed, Top Gun: Maverick rectifies. Instead of being in a hurry and focusing on Cruise on his motorcycle while it’s perpetually sunset with a distracting soundtrack blasting into your eardrums until they’re bleeding, Maverick takes its time. It focuses on being a character driven story with a discernible plot right from the start. It adds layers to Maverick’s character, where he wears the pain of what happened to his best friend Goose (played by Anthony Edwards in the first film), on his sleeve.

Not only does it effortlessly make Maverick a more well-rounded and sympathetic character, but it also gives him a way more interesting love story (with Jennifer Connelly, whose character is referenced in the first film), as well as more enthralling action sequences to work with. As well as a complicated yet remarkably balanced and fascinating relationship with Goose’s son (played by Miles Teller), who still understandably resents Maverick for what happened to his dad.

Most importantly, Maverick should finally put to rest the stigma that a movie 30+ years old can’t have a successful sequel. Two recent films that immediately come to mind for me are Blade Runner: 2049 (which came out in 2017 and is one of the greatest sci-fi movies ever made), as well as Doctor Sleep (the 2019 sequel to The Shining). When both of those movies were in development, they were met with the same level of doubt and people feeling like their predecessors were untouchable for whatever reason. And both turned out to be outstanding films that simultaneously honored their roots, but also had the courage to forge ahead fearlessly with their own stories and new characters.

This isn’t to suggest all classic films deserve sequels, or even ones that get them are all rousing successes, but to merely point out that people who shrug off follow-ups to widely beloved movies should maybe be more open minded from the start. And the best example of this point is Maverick. While Blade Runner: 2049 and Doctor Sleep performed poorly in theaters due to bad marketing, Maverick continues to crush records. Currently, it has raked in nearly $1.5 billion at the box office and has a 96% approval rating on Rotten Tomatoes.

All three of these films also have another big thing in common – which is newer, fearless directors who all possess distinct visions for their movies. For Blade Runner: 2049, it was Denis Villeneuve (maybe the best director working today outside of Christopher Nolan), who already proved he could do sophisticated sci-fi after directing 2016’s Arrival. And with Doctor Sleep, it was Michael Flanagan, who demonstrated his feeling for how to direct horror after 2018’s House on Haunted Hill. And finally, with Maverick, director Joseph Kosinski once again proves he understands how to craft exciting thrillers, balancing exciting set pieces with multi-dimensional characters with interesting arcs (like in his 2017 film Only the Brave).

In the case of Maverick, the love story between Cruise and Connelly is largely fun, with a strong dose of guarded emotion added in, and the relationship with Cruise and Teller is complex and incredibly intriguing. And ultimately, those two central relationships are what makes this movie so special, especially with how the movie concludes.

What’s also remarkable about Maverick is that all the obstacles it had to overcome getting to theaters in the first place. It was completed before the pandemic but had to shelved for over two years. Usually, that would spell disaster for a movie, especially given the negative reaction across the board from the general public when this project was first announced to be in development. But after seeing how much confidence and willpower this story possesses, it’s not surprising to see it defy the odds and become such an endearing film.

Hopefully, this will help put to rest the negative stereotype that old movies can’t have amazing sequels. The three movies listed above are proof that it can still happen. And even more importantly, hopefully this movie gets more people out of their houses and more willing to want to go back to the theaters and experience films like this on the big screen.

Why “Obi-Wan Kenobi” Ultimately Proves Itself Worthy of Praise

Despite some occasional clunky storytelling and acting, ‘Obi-Wan’ is still a welcome addition to the ‘Star Wars’ cannon

The first time I ever saw a ‘Star Wars’ movie was back in 1997, when I was just seven years old. My dad took me to the movie theater to see the first film “Episode IV: A New Hope”, and its “20 Year Anniversary” special, where they released the films one by one back into the theaters. Back then, there were only three films (that is unless you count the dreaded ‘Holiday Special’), and zero TV shows.

Flash-forward 25 years later, and the series has grown exponentially. From prequels AND sequels to the first three films, as well as animated and live-action shows (especially since the streaming app Disney + has formed). Let’s be fair, Hollywood saw this as a cash cow heading into the new century, and they wisely pounced on it. And with the emergence of streaming apps heading into the 2010’s, continued to pour more money into this beloved series.

While every addition hasn’t been necessarily welcomed with open arms, when the powers at be have handled things correctly (like “Episode III: Revenge of the Sith”, “Rogue One”, and the popular TV show “The Mandalorian”), ‘Star Wars’ fans have responded with the same fervor and passion we saw back when the first three films were released nearly a half century ago.

It’s too soon to see what side of the aisle the new “Obi-Wan Kenobi” show will fall on with those same fans. After all, the series finale just dropped today (and I’m just a big enough nerd of the series to have already seen it – don’t worry, this piece won’t contain any spoilers).

From my certain point of view, I will say that I enjoyed it. Not as much as “The Mandalorian”, but after what happened at the end of Season 2 of that series – that’s obviously going to be hard to beat. Unlike “The Mandarlorian”, which is a running TV show on Disney+, ‘Obi-Wan’ is a six-episode mini-series. And I emphasize the ‘mini’ part because each episode feels like a half hour long. To put things simply, this show flies by for the most part.

The beginning of the series is a little uneven, with new characters being introduced (such as the unrelenting Reva and the charismatic Grand Inquisitor), while Obi-Wan Kenobi tries to reawaken from his exile slumber. He’s been on the desert island Tatooine for approximately ten years, watching over a young Luke Skywalker from afar, after leaving his father Anakin to die on the volcano planet Mustafar after their last climactic battle in ‘Revenge of the Sith’. Obi-Wan is defeated when we are introduced to him, torturing himself for letting Anakin turn to the dark side, and feeling like he ultimately failed him as his master. After going into hiding, he is called into action once again as the Empire keeps drawing closer to finding maybe not just him, but Luke as well.

This is the best synopsis I can give without revealing any spoilers. Suffice to say that the first three episodes serve as a set up for what becomes a hugely satisfying and thrilling second half of the series. The way the Obi-Wan and Darth Vader characters are balanced by the creators of the show is especially exceptional.

Say what you will about Disney taking over the franchise back in 2012 and all the missteps they have made along the way – they have done a tremendous job at making Darth Vader as terrifying (if not moreso) than he was when we first met the character. It’s nice to see the much-maligned Hayden Christensen get his redemption (like his character’s arc ultimately) by playing Vader again, and having the fans show him some love this time around. And the iconic voice of James Earl Jones (who is 91!) returns to voice the character. Ewan McGregor once again effortlessly steps into the role of a younger Obi-Wan, and the younger version of Princess Leia we are introduced to, played by Viven Lyra Blair, is an absolute knockout and spitting image of Carrie Fisher.

The weak points are the side plots to Obi-Wan and Vader, and occasionally Moses Ingram, who plays the new villain Reva. Ultimately, Ingram redeems herself from an acting perspective, but at times during the show she’s just not as convincing as she should be. Also, despite having a riveting new character in The Grand Inquisitor, they really miss an opportunity using him more in this series. Rupert Friend not only does incredible work making him as sinister and terrifying as possible from a body language perspective, but the voice he creates for the character is outstanding and memorable.

Besides these setbacks, this series is still a success. Maybe not as epic as expected, but like I said, the last three episodes of this series make up for the first three – and some. It’s just fun being back in this universe. Granted, I have a nostalgic tie to it given I grew up watching these movies at a young age. So maybe that means I’m a bit biased as I come into whatever ‘Star Wars’ does wanting to like it – but I digress.

Even if you’re not the biggest ‘Star Wars’ fan in the galaxy and are more of a “middle of the road” kind of fan, I would still recommend it. It serves as an interesting backstory to what Obi-Wan was doing with himself for all those years, as he waits for the right opportunity to take Luke under his wing. And if you love seeing Darth Vader get real mad and be absolutely reckless, this series provides a heavy dose of that.

It'll be interesting to see what’s next in the universe. Because Disney has made it clear – this saga isn’t going away anytime soon.

Why “The Batman” Might Be the Greatest Superhero Movie Ever

With Matt Reeves’ film hitting HBO Max this month and more people getting to see it recently, is “The Batman” the best superhero movie ever made?

When I first heard that Hollywood was doing another “Batman” film – only this time without Ben Affleck, and with Robert Pattinson as Bruce Wayne, I was immediately intrigued. To be honest, I never even saw any of the Affleck films, mostly because I have never been a big fan of director Zack Snyder and his obsession with using slow-motion at every conceivable moment. When I saw Matt Reeves was going to be directing, I became even more interested. For those that weren’t familiar with his name until now – Reeves directed three outstanding films during the 2010’s, those being Let Me In, Dawn of the Planet of the Apes, and War for the Planet of the Apes. And Pattinson, also very quietly, has turned in fantastic performances recently in more small scale movies like The Lighthouse, Good Time, and The Lost City of Z.

To be honest, it takes a lot to get me really excited about a comic book film nowadays. I feel like the market is oversaturated right now where it seems a new Marvel show/movie is coming out every other week. For whatever reason, Marvel films have never gripped me the same way a series like Star Wars did for instance. Maybe it’s because I didn’t really grow up on Marvel films and was already finishing high school when Iron Man came out. And ever since that movie, comic book films have been coming out at a breakneck pace.

But I did grow up watching the “Batman” cartoon shows and have always been fascinated with how complex and tortured a character Bruce Wayne is. Despite being a wealthy billionaire, he would trade it all in order to have his parents alive. And being the protector of “Gotham City” is really him trying to find some redemption for feeling personally responsible for his parents’ murders. Right from the start of this film, Pattinson captures this darkness and sadness perfectly. And you’re with him and believe in him as soon as we first see him emerge from the shadows.

Fortunately, The Batman doesn’t show us Bruce’s parents being killed for the millionth time. This isn’t an origin story, it’s a film that is focused on Wayne trying to find comfort in his own skin both as a person and as Batman in Year 2. Given the dark and violent nature of this film, Reeves and his writers treat their audiences like adults, wisely electing to divert away from backstory fans of the series have already seen unfold on screen. Like the series itself, Batman is established and known right from the jump. Gotham City is a chaotic mess, with crime running rampant. And the film’s greatest strength is allowing Batman to be who we want to see him as – the city’s greatest detective and protector.

One thing this movie also does so well is explore the underpinnings of why Gotham City is in dire need of a savior. Specifically, how certain politicians and members of law enforcement are corrupt and criminals themselves. Which is something the central villain in this movie, Paul Dano’s “The Riddler”, is obsessed with exposing. Outside of maybe remembering hearing Dano’s shrieking voice from the powerhouse film There Will Be Blood, he’s behind a Zodiac inspired leather serial killer disguise. And just like “The Joker”, there’s a method to the madness of “The Riddler”. Not to the point where killing people is justified obviously, but when the film starts digging into both his background as well as those who are supposed to be protecting Gotham City – you understand on some level why he’s so fed up with it all.

And we don’t just get “The Riddler” in this film. Both “The Penguin” (played by an unrecognizable Colin Farrell) and “Catwoman” (played by Zoe Kravitz) play huge roles in this film as well. And the way the movie balances these three supporting pieces so well is especially impressive. There’s sexual tension between “Batman” and “Catwoman” due to both not seeing eye to eye on everything, despite needing one another for help. We get an iconic car chase scene with “Batman” and “The Penguin” that ends with the best shot of the film in my opinion. And on top of this, the “Batman” theme is an absolute knockout that effectively heightens the drama and excitement whenever it plays – which is relatively often.

When it comes to the all-time great superhero films – this one is right up there. I still believe The Dark Knight would be considered a fantastic film even if Heath Ledger would have lived, but it’s fair to speculate if that film is a tad overrated because of his legendary (and final) performance before his untimely death. And besides “The Joker” character in that movie, the secondary bad guys are laughable and not intimidating in the slightest, that is until Harvey Dent’s transformation. This is something The Batman beats The Dark Knight at, I believe.

Most importantly, as dark Nolan’s Dark Knight trilogy is – The Batman ups the ante. And it’s justified given how gloomy the story and Gotham City is. And without giving anything away, it’s not afraid to take risks when it comes to showing another side of the Wayne family and legacy that we haven’t seen before either.

Personally, I have The Dark Knight as slightly better than The Batman, but it’s close. With Avengers: Infinity War rounding out my top three in terms of best superhero movies. But that might change over time and the more The Batman ages.

And with it being announced to days ago that The Batman 2 is already in the works, I’m excited to see where Reeves takes it from here.

Why “Dune” is the Movie to Get Us Back to the Theaters

Frank Herbert’s book series finally gets the proper screen treatment it deserves under visionary director Denis Villeneuve, and more importantly, should hopefully serve as a catalyst to getting us to come back to the theaters

Whenever I discuss movies or TV shows with people nowadays, the go-to initial question for when someone hasn’t seen something is usually always the same – “what streaming app is it on?”. A more than understandable one, given this trend was already catching on over the past decade with the rise of Netflix and Amazon Prime as juggernauts in the film industry. It is also one that has been heightened and accelerated over the past couple years especially, due to the coronavirus pandemic and many theaters being forced to shut down, and with streaming app HBO Max agreeing to a deal to carry a large percentage of new titles released in theaters nowadays.

As we have adapted to being at home more due to the pandemic, this has limited our desire to want to go to places like a movie theater. Especially when we can see most movies that are coming out in theaters right from the comfort of home.

However, Dune is not most movies.

When I first saw David Lynch’s film adaptation of Frank Herbert’s sci-fi cult book series, I was underwhelmed. I turned the movie off in the first 40 minutes because of the crappy visual effects, the muddled storyline, and the less than stellar acting (although I still have lots of respect for Kyle MacLachlan who played the main character, Paul, in this film – Twin Peaks will forever be my jam, warts and all). Which is especially surprising considering Lynch went on to be arguably one of the greatest directors of all-time, due to his outside the box and surrealistic thinking when it came to plot designs and narratives.

Even though I turned the 1984 film off early, I was certainly impressed by the universe, overarching themes, and characters. I knew this series had potential to be “Star Wars-ian” under the right director and vision.

When I heard Villeneuve was going to remake this, I was ecstatic. Very quietly, he’s directed some of the best films of the past decade. Movies like the masterpiece Blade Runner: 2049 (which still doesn’t get anywhere near the respect or amount of people watching it that it deserves), the drug cartel bloodbath Sicario featuring a blistering, brilliant performance from Benicio del Toro (how he didn’t get nominated for an Oscar pisses me off to this day), and the fantastic and unique sci-fi drama Arrival. You could make a strong case that he is the top director working today (I think he’s a little better than Christopher Nolan, but it’s close).

So naturally, I was looking forward to Dune coming out for a long time. I watched every trailer they released leading up to it. I was especially impressed with the depth of the casting, with actors like Josh Brolin, Jason Momoa, Oscar Isaac, and Javier Bardem all being in this film. All heavyweight movie stars clearly sacrificing the spotlight a little in order to be part of something truly special.

Although I could have watched the movie on HBO Max, I chose to go to the theaters by myself so I could really appreciate the startling cinematography, visuals, and costume designs. And let me tell you – it was totally worth it.

The plot is certainly a little confusing, but I’ll summarize it as concisely as I can. Paul Atreides (played by Timothee Chalamet) is a member of a royal family in another universe with many planets. His father (played by Isaac) agrees to a deal to take over a planet that produces an incredibly powerful and sacred spice – making trying to harness control over the planet very dangerous and potentially deadly. Paul keeps having troubling and confusing visions of other people on the planet, perhaps events that haven’t even happened yet. And feels as though he might be destined for something truly great, even though his future feels cloudy and uncertain at the same time.

Chalamet is terrific as Paul, specifically because he brings a vulnerability to the character, but balances it nicely with a cautiously optimistic attitude for what lies in store for him. And Momoa, just like he did in Game of Thrones, steals every scene he’s in as a big brother figure and trainer of Paul’s.

The world Villeneuve presents is absorbing, rich, and always interesting. The language the characters use is purposely ambiguous most of the time in order to keep you on your toes and to form your own opinion of what this world is all about. The costume designs, settings, and characters are expertly crafted under Villeneuve’s careful and thoughtful watch, and he effortlessly draws you in with his attention to every subtle detail you could possibly think of.

I know most of us have big screen TVs and in some cases, phenomenal sound systems, but Dune is a film you should really see in theaters in order to truly appreciate everything. This is not to suggest if you see it at home it’ll be a disappointment, but from my personal experience seeing it on the big screen, I was truly in awe of it all from start to finish.

With the buzz still surrounding this movie, as well as the sequel that will follow it (already announced), I am hoping that this movie is one we look at down the line and highlight as the film that brought people back out of their houses, and back to the theaters.

“Ex Machina” is the Psychological Equivalent to the Physicality of “The Terminator”

The 2014 cult favorite, Ex Machina, continues to age eerily well as a cautionary tale on the advances of AI, and an expansion of the themes The Terminator series explored initially

When The Terminator first released in theaters in 1984, audiences were blown away with how relentless the action was, how terrifying Arnold Schwarzenegger could be, and how impressive the special effects were. While the film is still a stone-cold classic, it has certainly aged some (the soundtrack especially stands out as super old), and only briefly touches between the action on AI and the dangers that lie with advances in it.

The sequel to it, Terminator 2: Judgment Day, double-downed on everything mentioned above, especially the special effects which are still flat-out incredible even watching the movie in 2021. T2 spent ample time trying to humanize Schwarzenegger’s stoic character as much as possible, as well as fleshing out the theme of the growing concern in enhancing technology and giving AI more autonomy. Which is why it’s ultimately better than its predecessor.

In 2014, exactly 30 years after the first ‘Terminator’ movie came out, Alex Garland released a sci-fi movie called “Ex Machina”, which still feels underseen and underrated after seven years. What’s most interesting about this film is that structurally, it does a total 180 on what The Terminator series did, in that ‘Machina’ limits the action, and instead focuses on the psyche on AI.

Without giving too much away, it’s the story of an Elon Musk-type inventor, named Nathan, played by the always solid Oscar Isaac, who holds a contest in his company in which one of his programmers, named Caleb, played by Domhnall Gleeson, wins. His award – going to Nathan’s remote mansion in the middle of the woods, which also serves as Nathan’s laboratory for where he has secretly, and successfully, created the most human-like android yet.

The android’s name is Ava, played perfectly by Academy Award winner Alicia Vikander. Caleb is told by Nathan that he has been brought here to conduct sessions with Ava, where he is to learn as much about her as possible. Basically, Caleb is serving as an intermediary third party to check Nathan’s biases on if his creation is truly as great as she is. He comes to find out quickly, she absolutely is, and perhaps even more than either one of them expect.

There is a sexual element introduced that ends up tying the film together, exploring the theme of seduction and if AI can master this art in order to persuade, and perhaps betray, their creators.

The special effects in Machina are also outstanding, and it won for Best Visual Effects at the Oscars. Ava and the other robots Nathan is working on look totally lifelike despite possessing a partially robotic exterior. The film was also nominated for Best Original Screenplay, as Garland’s ideas are deep and multi-layered. Not to mention the three central characters are developed incredibly well.

While, as said, there is some action involved in Ex Machina, it’s nowhere close to the explosiveness we have seen from The Terminator series. And that’s in no way a shot at that series, I personally think T2 is one of the greatest films ever made. But that series doesn’t go as deep into the psyche with the subject at hand as ‘Machina’ does. Garland shows determination to explore every facet. Since Ava is so lifelike, is it fair to keep her in this prison as a zoo animal? Can she be trusted? Is she capable of human emotions like love and affection? Just how powerful mentally (and maybe physically) is she?

And, as we have seen especially over the last decade, Elon Musk, and the company he founded, Tesla, have both emerged as titans in the tech industry. As said, there’s no doubt in my mind Garland crafted the character of Nathan after Musk. And just last month, Musk announced that Tesla will be releasing their very own “Tesla Bot”, a 125-pound, sleek robot that can service humans in many ways (even going to the grocery store for you!).

Talk about eerie.

The Terminator highlighted this as a cataclysmic problem in the future, ‘Machina’, 30 years later, warns that the day of super-intelligent AI is literally right around the corner. And now, with this recent announcement from Musk and Tesla, the prophecy could turn out to be potentially true. Maybe not in an apocalyptic sense like The Terminator series presents it, but still, the concern is real – and will only grow as these types of advances are made.

If you haven’t seen ‘Machina’ – I can’t recommend it enough. It’s one of the best movies of the 2010’s (I have it in my Top 5), and it’s all because of these themes involved. If you like movies that make you think, and more importantly – make you ponder about the future and what’s the come in terms of AI and technology, I can’t think of a better film than this.

Why “The Shining” Remains the Greatest Movie Ever Made

Stanley Kubrick’s ultimate masterpiece and the lengths he went to make it, combined with coronavirus lockdowns over this past year turning us all into minor versions of the Torrance family for months on end, is why “The Shining” remains the best movie of all-time

For those that have known me for a while, my favorite film for years was Sean Penn’s Into the Wild. The movie, based on the famous John Krakauer book, came out during the start of my senior year in high school in 2007. At the time, I was looking at colleges and trying to figure out what the next step in my life would be. I identified with a lot of the themes in the story at the time, and while it is still a tremendous film and I consider it to be my second favorite movie, for whatever reason, the older I get, I have become more intoxicated and fascinated with Stanley Kubrick’s The Shining.

Based on the famous Stephen King book, it’s a movie that many have seen, and a Halloween re-watch favorite especially. I have some friends that find it to be boring and overrated, while others I know consider to be an all-time great. When I first saw it in high school, I thought it was fine but nothing special. But with each re-watch, it started to draw me in, much like The Overlook Hotel in the story does to Jack Nicholson’s character. He plays a recovering alcoholic and struggling writer named Jack Torrance, looking for a fresh start for his career (looking at the silence and solitude of the hotel and its location as perfect for him completing his “writing project”), and his family.

I feel like I gained even more appreciation for this film when coronavirus shutdown the United States in mid-March 2020 through the beginning of June. Notably, the themes of silence and isolation and the effects it can have on one’s mental health. Being that I’m a writer myself, and seeing people everywhere struggle with being holed up, working remotely from home, as opposed to an office location surrounded by co-workers, on some level you could understand Torrance’s struggle to keep his sanity. Not to the extent of trying to kill your family with an ax, but let’s face it, a lot of us went through stages of absolute boredom and feeling mental strain during that time. I know I did.

There are many interesting aspects about the making of this movie, but to me the number one thing that has always intrigued me was the fact that King famously HATED Kubrick’s interpretation of his story. And I can certainly understand why considering the amount of changes Kubrick made. I won’t reveal them all, but right from the jump of the story, in King’s book, the first interaction between Torrance and the hotel manager who’s interviewing him for the position of caretaker is icy, and both characters detest each other. In Kubrick’s film, the movie opens with this scene, only the hotel manager couldn’t be nicer, and even notes how “highly recommended” Jack came. It’s a total 180 in terms of tone right off the bat, and it’s Kubrick way of setting the stage that he now believes this is his story, and he’s going to make it better than King’s initial version.

Throughout the years, the film has also spawned countless conspiracy theories. There was a documentary made in 2012 called Room 237, an ode to the famous room in the hotel from the movie. The documentary covers multiple theories from film and literature specialists and what they believe the movie is about. Without giving too many away, the most notable ones include that the movie is centered on white guilt regarding our ancestors ripping away the United States from the Native Americans, while another points out clues that it’s actually Kubrick himself admitting that he had a hand in faking the moon landing. Some of the interpretations are flat-out ridiculous and reaching, but others are actually quite fascinating.

Whenever I watch the The Shining, which is around once a month or so, I always catch something new or something I didn’t notice before. To me, that’s huge in determining overall greatness. It’s a testament to Kubrick’s genius and his ability to master the art of subtlety and establishing atmosphere. There are many points in the movie where the dialogue is sparse, and instead Kubrick focuses his camera’s lens on this massive hotel this family of three is in. Jack’s gradual slip into insanity is calculated, and expertly handled by Nicholson, one of the finest and most accomplished actors of all-time. His initial goal of finding redemption, for his career, and more importantly, his alcoholism and how it played into him accidentally injuring his young son Danny, quickly disappears. This adds to the overall dread and how things feel like they are going to ultimately play out.

Speaking of Danny, the young actor who plays him in this movie named Danny Lloyd (now a teacher and out of the acting world), is tremendous. His performance, and character in the movie, are the keys to the entire story working. After all, it’s his power of “The Shining” (a telepathic communication method where he can have conversations with other people who also have this power, even from hundreds of miles away) that this movie is named after. During the filming of the movie, Kubrick went to great lengths to protect Lloyd from knowing everything about the story, framing it as a drama and not a horror story like it really is so that he wouldn’t get scared or intimidated.

A respectable move from Kubrick for sure, which makes his decision for his treatment of Shelley Duval, who plays Danny’s mother and Jack’s wife, super alarming and bi-polar. Kubrick’s goal was to literally drive her to insanity. He berated her on set, going full-Alfred Hitchcock being a complete and utter jerk to her, with the goal being it hopefully resulting in her giving an iconic performance. While Duvall’s turn in this has been the subject to major criticism, it’s clear that Kubrick got what he wanted out of her. Wendy, like her husband, eventually becomes a shell of herself. The famous scene of Wendy swinging the bat at her husband, who is slowly creeping his way up the stairs while talking about “bashing her brains in” – that took 127 takes. And you can tell by the 127th repeat of this scene, that Duvall has lost it, and she’s no longer acting – that’s all her.

The difference in how Kubrick treated Lloyd and Duvall is stunning. It’s like when you watch Gordon Ramsay teaching kids how to cook and he’s being super nice to them when they mess up, then turning around when it comes to adults who are on his cooking shows and forcing them to call themselves “idiot sandwiches” and just being an all-out tyrant towards them.

King later wrote a sequel to The Shining, called Doctor Sleep. I won’t reveal the plot of the story for those that have yet to see The Shining and may still want to at some point. In 2019, King’s story was adapted into a film starring Ewan McGregor and directed by Mike Flanigan – and it’s also terrific. Not as great as The Shining but worth watching.

Ultimately, I feel like this coronavirus pandemic has further strengthened why this movie is an all-time great. We as a modern society had never experienced those levels of isolation until those lockdowns occurred. We all became the Torrance family there for a little while, or for single people like me, I felt like Jack in his office throwing a tennis ball against the wall losing his mind. Mental health has never been a bigger talking point than right now.

To me, it’s the greatest accomplishment in film history. A movie crafted perfectly by the best director of all-time. It’s the most atmospheric and haunting movie ever, and one that I continue to gain more appreciation for as time goes on.