Riddle of Fire - Little Film With A Big Heart

 

Rent on Apple TV, Google Play, Amazon, and YouTube 

    Sometimes, a movie is so unexpected, heartfelt, and enjoyable that you can't help but wonder, " Where has this been hiding all this time?" Riddle of Fire is a coming-of-age Summer film that successfully fuses the fantastical with the natural, or "realistic" as some folks prefer. A film that is soaking in classical fantasy fair with magic and unusual quests while dealing with the madness of the modern world. Like the young protagonists, the film doesn't care how unrealistic its ideas are; they're having too much fun just going there!

    Set in modern-day Wyoming, the story follows a trio of young friends enjoying their summer vacation and getting into all kinds of mischief, including "borrowing" a brand new game console to play together. Things get a little complicated when they learn that the TV has become password-protected, and the only one who knows the password is the mother of one of the boys, who is down with a terrible cold. They try to wheedle the mother for the password and come to a special agreement: if they can help her feel better by providing her with her favorite Blueberry Pie, she will give them the password to the TV. The trio set out on their quest to find the means of acquiring the unique Blueberry Pie, leading them on a journey filled with danger and mystery, making some new friends (including a young girl escaping her terrible family), and having unexpected developments that will put their resolve (and possibly their friendship) to the test. 

    The real selling point of this film is the young cast. Charlie Stover, Phoeve Ferro, Lorelei Olivia Mote, and Skyler Peters possess amazing chemistry and deliver incredible performances. At no point in the film did I feel like the kids didn't want to be there, nor did they refuse to put anything other than 100% effort into their characters! They also played off well with the adult cast members and vice versa. While I do have my favorites of the little performers, their outstanding professionalism as a unit cannot be understated! 

    Another highlight of the film is its visual style & cinematography. Captured on Kodak 16mm film (prominently mentioned in the opening credits), the movie feels like a time capsule of classic fantasy films from the 1970s, such as Jabberwocky and Pete's Dragon. The visuals also lend themselves well to the classic gritty independent vibe of the same era, bringing to mind indy classics like The French Connection and The Harder They Come. I don't mean to say that Riddle of Fire shares similar narrative or tone styles with either of those classics. However, the visuals harken to another fascinating time in cinema history when there was an incredible feeling of change in the air. Riddle of Fire captures that beautiful and classical aesthetic thanks to the talented eye of cinematographer Jake Mitchell. 

    Writer and director Weston Razooli makes his feature film debut with this gem, and I am already excited to see what he has in store for us next. The performances from the young cast suggest and showcase a level of patience and leadership that is often hard to find in young directors. With his script, he blends all the strange and contrasting elements together playfully and coherently. This person is very much in touch with his inner child. 

    Riddle of Fire is a must-watch! It is a fantastic, promising start for the rest of the year and a strong contender for my favorite film of 2024. Please do not miss or overlook this delightful labor of love. 

Ladies & gentlemen, I am TheNorm; thank you all for reading. 

Road House (2024) - Needs A Different Title

 

Streaming on Amazon Prime

    The original Road House from 1989, starring the late Patrick Swayze, is regarded by some, myself included, as a seminal classic in cheesy modern western action bags of cinematic candy. It's a film that only demanded a little from the audience and utilized the inherent talents of its star almost perfectly. Probably the most infamous aspect of the film is how some fans prefer to stop the film before the last 20 minutes for various reasons, not the least of which is the unfortunate departure of Sam Eliot's character, who has become a legend in his own right. Or that some people prefer to not watch the movie star rip out a guy's throat with his bare hands; that might also have something to do with it. 

    Then, as if we needed further proof of Hollywood's story crisis and ongoing creative implosion, MGM Studios (owned by Amazon) released a shiny new remake of Road House starring Jake Gyllenhaal and directed by Doug Liman, late of The Bourne Identity, Edge of Tomorrow, and Locked Down. On the surface, it seems like another desperate attempt from the dying Hollywood system to cash in on a recognizable I.P. with little effort put into making a compelling experience (filmmaking by accountants, if you will). 

    And yet, the film is genuinely okay. Despite the film suffering an unnecessarily unfair disadvantage by being an in-name-only remake, not to mention yet another case of a creative boycotting their creation after getting screwed over a theatrical release, taken on its own merits, the film is pretty fun. It has a decent individual spirit that deserves to stand independently rather than be forced to mascarade as a remake. Make no mistake, it is technically a recreation of the same general plot as the classic, as mentioned earlier, and it's a plot that has served as the basis for many classic Westerns and Martial Arts movies made before (and the film makes multiple references to that notion throughout the runtime). However, it might have been received more favorably if it had not been for the copied/pasted title. 

    Much like the original, the story follows a modern vagabond named Dalton (Jake Gyllenhaal), who is hired by the owner of a bar called The Road House to serve as the new head bouncer. The place is regularly terrorized by a bunch of aggressive and entitled muscleheads who turn out to be part of a sinister scheme to drive away the business for some big bad guys' evil schemes. Dalton won't have any of it and just wants to do right by the little guys getting trampled on by the big evil meanies. That is, assuming he can also outrun his dark past. 

    One of the most significant differences between the two films is the protagonist, Dalton. In the original, he was primarily the strong & silent type who enjoyed making a decent living as a bouncer, having been professionally trained and treating it as an underrated, admirable profession. As portrayed by the late Patrick Swayze, Dalton has an air of Samurai-like calm & nobility that further contributes to the classic new sheriff-in-town motif the film emulates. It is a character synonymous with Swayze's screen presence and abilities as a performer that no one in their right mind would ever try to top. 

    In the remake, Dalton (as portrayed by Jake Gyllenhaal) is a down-on-his-luck former MMA fighter with a death wish trying to escape an unfortunate event from his past. Plus, Dalton in the remake is less of a stoic Samurai type and more of a witty, legally insane goofball type who behaves as cordially as possible while kicking your ass. A character type that is similar to the original but very much its own thing, which I mostly appreciated. 

    In all seriousness, Jake Gyllenhaal carries the entire movie! He successfully handles the action beats with as much commitment as he puts into line delivery and character embodiment. Gyllenhaal has landed himself as an enjoyable character actor who easily handles the needs of a leading man. It's not easy to play a role in such a way that makes you feel safe and slightly terrified at the same time. Furthermore, he delivers a performance that is clearly his own thing without attempting to recreate the iconic previous portrayal, which I greatly appreciate. 

    Overall, the film does a decent enough job of delivering a fun and cheesy piece of action schlock that would be expected of any given movie that utilizes the classic "stoic warrior comes to a troubled town" plot seen in nearly every other action movie that tried to capitalize on the Kung-Fu craze of the 1970s. Suppose you look past the in-name-only aspect of the title and distance this movie from the classic it pretends to remake. In that case, you'll be in for a fun ride with decent action scenes (albeit with occasionally questionable bits of execution), fun performances (including a scene-stealing villain performance by Conor McGregor, whom I hope gets more roles after this), and enough of its own charm to sway you into justified enjoyment. 

    Don't consider this a remake; it's an in-name-only homage! 

Ladies & gentlemen, I am TheNorm; thank you all for reading.