March Memories - Bright (2017)

 

(First reviewed January 1, 2018)

Streaming on Netflix 

    Every one of us has a film in our collective memory that we initially thought was good, only to revisit after a few years and realize just how wrong you were. Bright may not have been the worst film of 2017 (that distinction remains with Alien: Covenant), but it certainly wasn't the best film to close the year on. While there are still elements of the film I continue to enjoy, appreciate, and admire, the sad fact is that this is a terrible film. Trying to create a more "mature" version of what was already delivered near-perfectly by, of all studios, Disney. More on that in a moment. 

    The best way to describe this movie, in a nutshell, is Training Day as written by J.R.R. Tolkien...on cocaine. For those unaware, the story takes place in an alternate world where fairytale creatures such as elves, wizards, and orcs live in the same world as humans. Our heroes, a human cop named Ward (Will Smith) and an orc cop named Jacoby (Joel Edgerton), are patrolling the streets of Los Angeles when they stumble upon something thought to be lost forever, a magic wand. Tension grows between our heroes as most humans have a severe distrust of orcs, believing them to be the race responsible for many problems in the world. Not helped by most of them being gangsters and affiliating themselves with an ominous figure known as "The Dark Lord." 

    Anyway, with both cops possessing a heart of gold, they find themselves in the middle of a street war between many parties who want the magic wand for themselves. Now, Ward and Jacoby must fight their way through the city to deliver the magic wand to the rightful authorities and, in the process, save the city from destruction. 

    This sounds like a fantastic idea with tons of potential on the surface. I was blown away by the fantastic combination of gritty police drama with high fantasy elements when I first watched it. I wanted so much to feel like this was the best step forward towards doing more insane ideas like this, and I sincerely appreciated the filmmakers for attempting it in the first place. 

    Then, I revisited the movie and was reminded of how my desire for what I wanted wholly overshadowed what we got. Bright is, in actuality, a perfect example of what happens when the wrong people are hired for a project like this. 

    I did not make the comparison to Training Day lightly. David Ayer, the original writer for Training Day and the director of Bright, specializes in gritty, dark, uber-masculine stories that are so aggressively hard-boiled as to make Rob Liefield blush. David Ayer has a specific voice that lends itself well to the kind of stories he prefers to tell but is so aggressively committed to that style that he doesn't seem to know how to stretch or step out of his comfort zone for anything else. As evidenced by his failed attempt at making a "mature" comic book movie with Suicide Squad. 

    In the case of Bright, David Ayer feels out of place. While it is still, at its core, a buddy cop story, its fantastical elements feel as though it should call for a director who can better balance gritty police drama with the inherited whimsy found in fairy tale creatures. I'm not saying it needed more rainbows, just that it needed to embrace the silliness a bit more. 

    To be fair, David Ayer isn't wholly to blame for the film's lack of balance. As history has proven time and time again, a movie lives and dies by the script. No matter how well performed, artfully directed, or masterfully rendered the special effects are in a film, if the script is lousy, it'll drag the rest of the movie down with it. 

    The script for Bright was penned by Max Landis, son of the late John Landis, director of such classics as The Blues Brothers and An American Werewolf in London. Max Landis is one of those Hollywood talents that's easier to appreciate than enjoy. His overall writing philosophy of treating structure as a guideline rather than a hard & fast rule is straightforward enough to appreciate. While some of his works are genuinely entertaining, like American Ultra, there are times when his writing needs much more polish before it can be production-ready, like Shadow in the Cloud. 

    However, the problem with Bright is that its aversion to specific structural elements, along with too many moments of repetitiveness, makes the story less satisfying or engaging as it should be. Too many times, the script abandons structurally sound reasoning in favor of deus-ex machina and repetitive action movie cliches. The most noticeable is how often we hear the characters cry, "I'm out of ammo." A common and realistic conflict with gun-oriented action, but even so, it doesn't need to be repeated at nausea. 

    But the biggest problem with Bright, as it pertains to the script, is how it tries too hard to be a "mature" fantastical exploration and commentary on racism and societal tension between police and civilians. As I alluded to before, this concept had already been masterfully explored and commentated on by, of all studios, Disney, with their successful and genuinely spectacular animated feature, Zootopia. 

    Zootopia is one of those rare films that, while primarily intended for younger audiences, is executed with the proper amount of respect, maturity, and intellectual prowess to render it universal enough to be enjoyed and appreciated by children and adults alike. Its exploration of race relations, bias, and cultural stigma rival that of most live-action fairs that have tried and failed to achieve the same goal. 

    *cough* Crash *cough*

    With Zootopia releasing in 2016 and Bright releasing the following year, it's too easy to make the comparison. Both are ostensively buddy cop stories exploring themes like racism and societal expectations. Still, one has a more satisfying narrative leaving the viewer with a more profound and lasting impact. Best of all, no faux maturity elements like excessive cursing or copious amounts of gun violence. Not that there's anything wrong with those, just that, like anything else, they can lose their impact when used too often. 

    Even though I've been discussing what doesn't work about the movie Bright, elements within the film are worth praising. The predominantly night-time cinematography is gorgeous and well-executed, and some of the dialogue did make me chuckle once in a while. Will Smith and Joel Edgerton have remarkable chemistry and deliver genuinely great performances. Edgerton especially has the grading task of performing with many layers of prosthetic make-up. Plus, the special effects are genuinely fantastical. 

    Sadly, all of that is not enough goodness to overlook the overall terrible mess of a film that is Bright. Its director doesn't know how to play with the more fantastical elements. Its writer doesn't know when a proper structure is needed most. Its overall themes of racism and police relations have already been explored and commented on in better films. 

    Netflix is apparently still trying to get Bright 2 out of production hell as of this writing. To which I must respectfully protest. If there is any sequel or continuation of original content they ought to focus on, it should be Warrior Nun, if not Love, Death, & Robots. 

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

Belfast - Little Sweet with the Bitter

 

For rent on Amazon, Apple TV, Google Play, and YouTube 

    I realize this review is a little late (this movie was released this past November), mainly because, I'm ashamed to admit, I had been deliberately avoiding it. Most of the time, dramatic semi-autobiographical films turn out to be nothing more than mere artistic fluff and Oscar-bait material with little to no merit outside of stroking Hollywood's ego. 

    *cough* Crash *cough*

    Fortunately, in the case of writer/director Kenneth Branagh and his semi-autobiographical film, Belfast, I am delighted to report that it is (mostly) the opposite. While not a perfect film, nor entirely original, what it brings to the table is too joyous and engaging (with an understandable dash of sadness for good measure) to pass up. As the poster declares, "Our memories make us," and it is memories of his childhood that have crafted this surprising film. 

    Rather than a traditional narrative structure, Belfast opts for a more "slice of life" approach, where various moments of the main character's childhood are displayed and explored. The main character, a young boy named Buddy (Jude Hall), lives with his family in Belfast, Ireland, in the late 1960s, during the violence between Catholics and Protestants. We see Buddy play with his friends, spend time with his grandparents, and try to get together with his school crush. All the while wrestling with the possibility of leaving his home, a prospect he does not care to entertain. 

    The film delivers a near-perfect balance between drama and levity. In between the devastation of the violence are tender moments accompanied by energetic Van Morrison songs. For every riot, there's a party. All of it is strung together with just enough connective tissue to retain a sense of cohesion while feeling more like an active memory. It's the kind of "conscious moment" storytelling that Tree of Life tried and failed to achieve. 

    The use of color (and lack thereof) is primarily clever. I don't want to spoil how it is implemented in the film, but I will say that it does a terrific job at visualizing inspirational and influential moments, however brief. 

    Belfast is yet another fantastic feather in Kenneth Branagh's cap. A genuinely heartfelt examination of childhood and inspiration. It is the right kind of different movie we needed, and I genuinely hope this one takes home the gold. 

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

March Memories - Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets (2017)

 

(First reviewed August 4, 2017)

For rent on Apple TV, YouTube, Google Play, and Amazon 

    Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets was one of those movies you wish had worked. It's based on a long-running science fiction comic series with mythology and lore that could rival Star Wars, complete with a story that commentates on the human condition. It was directed by Luc Besson, the French-born director who gave us great classics like Leon: The Professional and The Fifth Element. This is a movie that, by all accounts, should have been a hit and launched a new franchise. Instead, it landed on its face with too much stuff and misguided casting choices. 

    Based on the French comic series Valerian and Laureline, created by Pierre Christin and Jean-Claude Mézières, the story follows a pair of special operatives tasked with safeguarding Alpha: a metropolis in the stars home to a thousand planets and millions of species. Our heroes Valerian (Dane DeHaan) and Laureline (Cara Delevingne) are tasked with solving a mystery of a missing commander in The Red Zone: an area believed to be flooded with radiation. Their search for the commander brings a mysterious alien race to their attention which may or may not be connected to the commander's disappearance. Our heroes must solve the mystery and rescue the commander before something terrible happens to all of Alpha. 

    Sidenote: if the original comics' title contained both characters' names, what is the point of removing the woman's name from the film's title? 

    The parts that worked (few though they were) worked well. The special effects were incredible, the premise was creative, the designs were fascinating, and the supporting characters were interesting and textured. Which is more than I can say for the two leads. 

    I stand by my original criticism of the film's lead actors, Dane DeHaan and Cara Delevingne; they were both too young for these roles. Setting aside any gripes against the accuracy of the source material, the characters as presented in the script did not call for younger actors. Valerian and Laureline, as presented in the script, gave the impression they were highly experienced soldiers with the scars to prove it. These roles called for actors who appeared more seasoned and battle-tested. A more ideal casting would have been Jeremy Renner and Charlize Theron, or perhaps Jean Reno and Marion Cotillard. 

    Instead, we got a 31-year-old who only knows how to play psychopaths and a 25-year-old who doesn't know how to emote. Both come off less like professional soldiers and more like 8th-graders somebody let onto the set. 

    Aside from the questionable casting choices, the writing is arguably the film's weakest point. The script attempts to cram years' worth of material into a single two-hour film. As such, everything in the story is either over-explained or denied proper development. Most of the dialogue spoken by almost every character is just exposition chock-full of the dreaded phrase, "as you know": the laziest and most despised combination of words in screenwriting. If the character already knows something, why are you telling them? 

    Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets might have been better off as a Netflix series or even an anthology film in the spirit of Heavy Metal or Memories. While the movie is flawed and lacks enough weight in the right places, I continue to stand by my original statement that it's still a fascinating experience. It may not have been the end of fantastical cinema as I had feared it would be, nor was it the next big trend in science fiction as I had hoped, but it still has just enough charm to be a decent distraction in these troubling times. 

    If nothing else, it's at least a better science fiction movie with two attractive leads than 2016's Passengers. 

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

Double Feature Review

    That's right, my beautiful readers, it's time for another round of Double Feature! 

    Today, we will be looking at two brand new movies released this past week. Both films feature similar elements of minimalism and pulse-pounding thrills. Similar enough to share the same review spot here on my blog. Which one do I favor more? Keep reading to find out.

    The first item on the docket: 

Streaming on Hulu 

    Based on the novel by Taylor Adams, the story follows a young recovering drug addict named Darby (Havana Rose Liu) on her way to see her mother, who's in the hospital after a brain aneurysm. While on the road, she's stopped by violent winter winds and heavy snow blocking the highways and finds herself directed to a nearby visitor center to wait out the storm. After greeting some of the other travelers finding themselves stuck together, Darby attempts to find a cell signal outside to call her sister and check on the situation. Things take a scary and unexpected turn when she discovers a little girl tied up and screaming for help in the back of an old van. Now, Darby must figure out who the kidnappers are and call for help unless she can find the courage within her to save this little girl's life herself. 

    The film succeeds in making the most out of its minimalism: taking place in predominantly one location with a handful of talented actors utilizing the whole environment to tell a nail-biting yarn. Darby succeeds in becoming an unlikely hero with a satisfying character ark that makes you glad to eventually root for her, even if it can take a little while to get there. Havana Rose Liu delivers a spectacular performance and sells every moment she's on-screen. 

    While the violent moments (few and far between) can be pretty graphic, they never overwhelm the overall narrative. It's a compelling premise with skilled actors and a sharp script. I genuinely hope to see more of Havana Rose Liu in the future. 

    Totally check this one out. 

    Next up is something similar but not quite as engaging. 

For rent on Apple TV, Amazon, Google Plus, and YouTube 

    Some artists and other such creative types can best be described as "one note": they do one thing and one thing only, but they do it incredibly nicely. Even so, that doesn't mean that it can't get boring or overdone at times. Such appears to be the case with the latest offering from screenwriter Chris Sparling, whose previous works include Buried (a movie set entirely inside a small box with a single person trapped inside) and ATM (a film about three people trapped inside a self-enclosed ATM for fear of getting killed by a mysterious hooded stranger if they try to leave). Therefore, it should come as no surprise that his latest film, The Desperate Hour, spends most of its time with a single actor running through the woods while on her phone. I'm starting to notice a pattern. 

    The story follows a mother named Amy Carr (Naomi Watts) who receives a series of calls about an incident at her son's school while on her morning jog in the woods. She hears of an active school shooting and must make her way there, only she's about five miles away with no car. So, she has to run back, all the while making frantic calls to various people trying to piece together what's happening. 

    As you might have inferred, about 85% of the film is just various shots of Naomi Watts running through the Canadian forest while on her iPhone. Granted, the tense situation does add some drama, and the various drone shots from above the trees are pretty cool, but there are only so many ways we can watch someone screaming into an earpiece while on a hiking trail. 

    To be fair, Naomi Watts does a fantastic job as usual. The film does get some bonus points for at least trying to commentate on the tragedy of school shootings and how not enough is being done about them. Still, for a film like this, if there's something incredibly intense going on in another area, and you spend the vast majority of your time focusing only on one part of it, you tend to lose tension rather quickly. 

    A valiant effort made unintentionally dull. I still recommend checking it out for yourself but don't expect anything nuanced. 

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

Upcoming Theme Month - March Memories

 My beautiful readers, 

    Recently, I took a look back at some of my earlier movie reviews here on this blog. Upon doing so, I was, admittedly, a bit embarrassed. I clearly wasn't bothering with proper format control at the time, nor was I taking reading quality into consideration. While I feel I have come a long way since then, I need to continue learning from my mistakes and grow as a writer and a person. 

    Therefore, I thought it would be fun to revisit some of my earlier reviews and present a kind of "do-over" for those I'm the least proud of. I will likely continue to stand by my criticisms therein, but I intend to do a better job presenting and justifying them than before. 

    I may even go further back to when I was reviewing movies in video form and reevaluate my stance on a few things. 

    I will admit that part of this idea is due to the lack of interesting new material as of late. Hopefully, that will change in the coming weeks. Don't worry; I will continue reviewing new content between my revisits. 

    I hope you will enjoy my revisions of reviews past. 

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

Retro Review - Ace Ventura: Pet Detective (1994) SPOILERS

 

Streaming on Amazon Prime 

For rent on Amazon, Apple TV, Google Play, and YouTube 

    Once upon a time, there was a little boy. Having been diagnosed (sort of) with ADHD and hyperactivity, he was a bit of a handful for everyone around him. Although the boy was always happy to be playful, he found it confusing that most adults (aside from those closest to him) didn't seem to share his energy or boundless enthusiasm for what would later be known as "legal insanity." But then, one day, the boy stumbled upon a little movie starring a young and promising comedic talent named Jim Carry. The movie was Ace Ventura: Pet Detective, the story of a wacky adult who dedicated his life to protecting animals and solving mysteries. The boy grew fond of this movie, and its titular character, as he related to the detective's wackiness both as entertainment value and as a sense of reassurance that it's okay to be weird. 

    The movie has remained a favorite in the boy's collection ever since. Even when the boy got older, rewatched the movie again, and realized something about it that, well, let's just say parts of the movie haven't aged well. But we'll get to that in due time. 

    Alrighty then, on with the review! 

    Yes, it may come as no surprise to any of my beautiful readers that Ace Ventura: Pet Detective is one of my favorite comedies of all time. It's one of those movies I enjoy rewatching (for the most part) because it's one of those films that embraces its silliness, thereby encouraging the audience to have fun. Many movies, even today, seem to be afraid or ashamed to be silly, for one reason or another. As if it was something to avoid. Except being silly doesn't always mean being ridiculous. Gemini Man is enjoyably silly because of its far-fetched premise, but it works because everyone involved embraced the concept and had fun with it. Resulting in a film that succeeds in delivering fun action and an excellent concept. 

    Ace Ventura: Pet Detective is very much the same in that regard. It has an outrageous concept and has tons of fun with it, rather than try to reshape it into something that would be considered "conventional" or "acceptable." This kind of risky attitude towards producing movies has sadly declined far too much in recent years, and I'd argue that it's one of the many ways Hollywood could potentially revive itself once again. 

    For those who don't know, the story follows a wacky private detective named Ace Ventura (Jim Carry), who specializes in mysteries involving animals. His latest case involves the disappearance of a Dolphin named Snowflake, the mascot of the Florida-based Football team. This incident could not have happened at a worst time, as the Miami Dolphins are preparing for the next Super Bowl, and the team's owner is concerned about the effect on the team's morale (being just a bit superstitious). So, they seek out Ace Ventura to crack the case. At first, they don't think he's as professional as they had hoped, being so unusually silly as he is. Still, he turns out to be more insightful and intelligent than they had hoped, as he eventually uncovers someone's devious plot to take revenge on the Miami Dolphins. Despite many obstacles thrown his way, including the aggressive and antagonistic Lt. Einhorn (Sean Young) of the Miami Police Department (much more on her in a minute), Ace Ventura will stop at nothing to rescue Snowflake and solve the case. 

    Who is this angry individual, and why would kidnapping a live Dolphin be part of the plan? Usually, I would encourage you to watch the movie to find out, but I'll make an exception in this case. 

    Why? Again, I'll get to that soon. 

    Overall, the movie is an enjoyable watch! It has a decent mystery, convincing performances, and a subtle commentary on the dangers of rabid sports fandom. Not to mention some of the wittiest writing (for the most part) ever put to screen. Part of which is the result of the movie's co-writer and star, Jim Carry. 

    There was a time when Jim Carry ruled the world of comedy. Starting out as an original cast member of the skit show In Living Color, his career skyrocketed with his first major feature film, Ace Ventura: Pet Detective. From there, he went on to star in other comedy classics such as The Mask and probably my personal favorite, Liar Liar. Jim Carry carries himself (no pun intended) with a fully embraced sense of silliness very few people have ever been able to match. His style of comedy is reminiscent of classics such as Monty Python, where silliness is the order of the day. Even today, after a few hits, some misses, and a couple of misguided decisions, he's still one of the funniest people working today. At least, in my opinion.

    Okay, I think I've avoided this part of the review long enough. There's no way to discuss this movie today without mentioning its more... let's say unfortunate & outdated perspective on something. It's time to discuss the elephant in the room, which means not only a spoiler warning but a trigger warning as well. 

    You have been warned! 

SPOILERS 

TRIGGER WARNING: transgender phobia, possible homophobia, and hetero-normativity. 

     Okay, so the perpetrator turns out to be none other than Lt. Einhorn, who is also not who she claims to be. In reality (that is to say, the film's reality), Lt. Einhorn is, in actuality, a former Miami Dolphin kicker named Ray Finkle. 

    In the story, Ray Finkle caused his team to lose Super Bowl 17 (by one point) by missing a 26-yard field goal. Finkle blamed fellow teammate Dan Marino for his botching of the kick because he believes Marino held the ball laces in instead of the typical practice of holding the ball laces out. After the NFL refused to renew his contract, Finkle was ostracized and harassed by the fans, to the point of being driven mad and committed to a mental hospital in Tampa. Eventually, Finkle escaped and assumed the identity of a missing/presumed dead hiker named Lois Einhorn, undergoing plastic surgery to become a woman, and joined the police force, biding his time, waiting for the opportune moment to strike back against his former team. 

    His first move was to kidnap Snowflake the Dolphin. Why? Because the team gave Snowflake Finkle's number and trained him to make a field goal, which he took a little too personally. His next step was to kidnap Dan Marino and "punish" them for his pain. All of this had to be at the right time, the time that would hurt them the most; Super Bowl time! 

    Now, this twist comes as a massive shock to Ace Ventura mainly because, well, before the revelation of Lt. Einhorn's true identity, this happened: 

    In this scene, Lt. Einhorn is aware of Ace Venture closing in on the case and decides to try and seduce and dissuade him from going further into solving the mystery or anything else. 

    So, when Ace Venture eventually discovers Lt. Einhorn's true identity and sex, his reaction is...well...perhaps it would be better if I showed you:

    Click the link below to see what I'm talking about. Skip to 1:25 in the video's timeline to go straight to the reaction. 

Einhorn is a Man!

    Have you seen it? 

    Okay, let's talk about it. 

    There really isn't any other way to describe that moment other than as "a product of the not-as-progressive-as-we-remember '90s." Even in this presentation as a "joke," it's still not and has never been funny. The sad fact is that this scene contributes to unwarranted transphobia, homophobia (however unintentional or indirectly), and unjustified hetero-normativity, by establishing heterosexuality as the standard and only "proper" form of human sexual identity. A concept that is as harmful and toxic as anything that comes out of an insurrectionist's mouth. 

    This very moment in the film, along with the similar moment proceeding it, is the reason I cannot, in good conscience, give the movie a total four-star rating. It's the kind of situation I utterly despise because I still enjoy the rest of the movie for its creativity, energy, and comedy (the actually funny stuff, that is). To have this tasteless "joke" in the movie turns my stomach inside out. 

    To play devil's advocate for a moment, one could argue that the joke was not that Ace Ventura or anyone else was disgusted at the mere existence of a transgender person, but rather at having been fooled into getting intimate with a specific sexual orientation they did not identify with. A kind of extreme-mistaken-identity joke rather than a phobic one. Admittedly, this was my initial interpretation of the joke, as I've never found the idea of gender identification, even back then, to be all that strange or disgusting. Unfortunately, as much as I would prefer this to be the case, the sad fact is that it likely wasn't the interpretation or intention of the writers at the time. 

    But, to be fair, at least it's not as bad as what came next. 

The less said about this, the better! 

    Despite this unfortunate aspect of the film (and despite my spoilers), I still recommend checking out the movie for yourself. It is an incredible showcase of the kind of comedic talent Jim Carry is and is loaded with enough genuinely funny moments to outweigh the lesser ones. I do not believe that this movie should be hated or banned because what the writers believed was funny at the time, misguided though they were. Instead, let this moment serve as a reminder of how important it is to think very carefully before committing to an idea. 

    We can't change the movie; we can only learn from it. 

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

Miss Willoughby and the Haunted Bookshop - Bad Child's Play

 

For rent on Apple TV, Google Play, Amazon, and YouTube 

    When the late director Joel Schumacher made the infamous flop Batman & Robin in 1997, it was reported that he would preface almost every call for action with, "Remember: we're making a cartoon!" While I have no way of confirming this attitude towards the production of today's film, Miss Willoughby and the Haunted Bookshop, it certainly seems like a distinct possibility. Nearly every aspect of this film feels like it's trying too hard to be taken seriously despite its child-like execution. This may have been intended as a severe mystery for adults, but it feels more like an episode of a kid's show, and not the excellent & entertaining kind either. No, I'm talking about the kind of kid's show that talks down to you rather than engages you. 

    The story follows Miss Willoughby (Natalie Cox), a young woman raised by her legal guardian Robert Thompson (Kelsey Grammer), trained in martial arts, literature, and deductive reasoning, establishing herself as a local detective. One day, she discovers a friend of hers, who owns a local bookshop, is experiencing strange encounters with the ghost of her late father and fears herself going mad in the process. It's up to Miss Willoughby to solve the mystery and help her friend before something terrible happens. 

    This is the kind of negative review I dislike having to give. Because while I enjoy small productions like this and find most of them to be better than most Hollywood affairs, it pains me to see these more petite movies executed in such a terrible way. 

    For starters, the performances from most of the cast are amateurish at best and too over-the-top at worse. Save for the ever-reliant Kelsey Grammer, who is always entertaining in just about anything (yes, even Money Plane), most of the cast is hamming up their performances in the worst possible way. I was going to say it's high-school play levels of bad, but I've seen high-school plays with better performances than this. 

    The cinematography is terrible. Photographed by Ross W. Clarkson, the lighting is too bright, too uniform, and lacks any kind of interesting texture in every scene. Resulting in an experience that feels less like a movie and more like a canceled Nickelodeon pilot from the '90s.

    The writing, while not incredibly terrible, feels rushed and unpolished. Also, parts for possible interesting moments feel overlooked or ignored. For example, early in the film, we are shown the main character being trained in martial arts and self-defense. Checkov's Gun dictates that this should build up to a great fight scene later in the film, showcasing her honed skill and contributing to saving the day. Instead, all she does is hit one guy over the head and punch another person in the nose...both within the last ten minutes of the movie. Define "letdown." 

    A few more technical and artistic choices are made in this film that hinder its potential for decent entertainment, but it would take too many paragraphs to sum them all up. Bottom line; this film is a tragic waste of time and a lost opportunity for what might have been a fascinating series. If you find yourself in the mood for a mystery story with a potential supernatural twist, watch The Ninth Gate. At least that movie has Frank Langella hamming it up in the best way possible. 

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