oliasdoug-407-409444 Reviews

Take Shelter (2011)

I honestly wanted to like this film.

[2/10 · 1 July 2021]

....and why not? Look at what we have here: 1. An intriguing film trailer that could capture the attention of just about any fan of the sci fi/horror/ doomsday genre.

2. Michael Shannon & Jessica Chastain, 2 very talented, if not somewhat stereotyped actors.

3. And speaking for myself, as someone who grew up in the Midwest: a person who's been fascinated by tornadoes since my grade school years.

4. Amazing, albeit brief, CGI effects.

By all rights, this film could've/should've worked for me. But it's not the first time a film's trailer has overamped the overall quality and essence of what turned out to be, essentially, 2 hours of my life wasted.

SPOILERS***********

First, director Nichols is trying to stress the breakdown of the marriage via Shannon's nightmares. Fair enough, but the underplayed, low-key series of revelations gets tiresome after awhile, until we feel like we've been drawn into an afternoon soap opera.

Second, with the overblown scene at the Lion's Club dinner added in to assumingly "spice things up," it takes all but the last 4-5 minutes of the film to reach the point of genuine fear and awe with the movie's inevitable climax. You heard me correctly: almost the full 2 hours, taken up with BUILD-UP.

Third, and most unforgivable, IMHO, you can see that climax coming from 100 miles away.

And fourth, that climax is DOWNPLAYED to the point of disbelief. I mean, I SEE what Nichols was ultimately trying to do with this entire project: make an "art film." Don't intensify or stress ANY part of the movie to tell the story and/or make your point. Keep everything on the down-low. And in the few seconds before the film ends, when the abject horror of the subject matter could have made for a nightmarish, unforgettable ending, we're treated to the main characters, seeing their world about to come to an end, with a shrugged-shoulders attitude, the rough equivalent of, "Well...looks like it's gonna rain."

To be fair, I'm not saying every sci-fi/horror story has to have an in-your-face, pounded into your head ending. But I maintain that, even with "art films," there can often be a very fine (if not blurred) line between a slam-bang ending, and a low-key ending that makes you silently fill with feelings of shock and awe. It's JMHO that Nichols took the wrong path with Take Shelter.

Rocketman (I) (2019)

Should have expected this.

[7/10 · 19 May 2019]

It's going to get very mixed reviews. I predict many will love it, and many will revile it. I was caught somewhere in the middle. Without giving any actual spoilers away, consider this:

1. If you absolutely HATE musicals, save your money. This is the John/Taupin equivalent of a Rodgers & Hammerstein. It is not presented as a straightforward biopic in the same manner as BOHEMIAN RHAPSODY. 2. Much as I love Elton John, this "rock & roll fantasy" of his life treads a little too far into campy territory for me, with 2, maybe 3 very (thankfully) brief moments in the film that can only be described as cringeworthy. ("Oh, come on, guys--seriously?" moments.) There were times when I genuinely felt this was going to end up as the Ken Russell version of TOMMY for the new millennium. 3. Never, at any point in the film, is Paul Buckmaster mentioned or acknowledged. This infuriated me! For those who don't already know: in the early days of EJ's career, Paul was the orchestrator who provided EJ with the BEAUTIFUL, lush string accompaniments that added so much to EJ's early music (classic example: EJ's soundtrack to the 1971 French film, FRIENDS) and, IMHO, could have been a big player in his success as a burgeoning artist, firmly introducing/establishing The Elton John "Sound." He SHOULD have been a part of this film--even a small one, if deemed necessary--but for him to be utterly omitted from the story mystifies me. Maybe someone in the know can enlighten me on this.

These 3 things, however, are about my only problems with the film. Credit must be given where it's due:

1. Taron Egerton is actually pretty amazing. Some might see his acting as occasionally over the top, but frankly and for all we know, maybe EJ really did act that "extremely" at times, considering his anger issues. His singing, most of the time, is virtually spot-on, catching EJ's lilting singing style quite well. 2. The supporting cast: Jamie Bell (Bernie Taupin), Bryce Dallas Howard , Richard Madden (EJ's agent & self-centered 1st lover), Stephen Graham (Dick James), Tate Donovan (L.A.'s Troubador Club manager Doug Weston), Gemma Jones (Ivy, EJ's grandmother, I think...? Or friend of the family?) & Steven Mackintosh (EJ's cold, uncaring father)...and all others in the film, essentially faultless. ESPECIALLY Jamie's portrayal of Bernie. Wow. 3. You can't really find fault with the staging and choreography of the musical numbers. Very professionally done. 4. You will learn many things about EJ's life in this film that you may not have known before...I know I did. 5. Have a few Kleenexes handy. Enough said. 6. Don't leave right away after the credits roll.

So, is it worth seeing? My criticisms aside (and we all know what they say about opinions), it really comes down to this: if you're a fan--and especially a DEDICATED fan, like me, who's followed him from his humble beginnings in America in the summer of 1970--go see it. Decide for yourself if my gripes hold any water.