Waiting to exhale

Jane Levy crawls her way through a hole in a scene from Don't Breathe. Image courtesy Sony Pictures.

One of the beauties of the horror/thriller genre is the evaluative flexibility it offers when a film doesn't fulfill its designed premise. Simply put, movies in that genre can remain entertainment despite, or perhaps because, they are the exact opposite of what their genre intended. Take, for example, Don't Breathe, which is spectacularly ridiculous yet thoroughly entertaining because of it.

There is an interesting idea driving Don't Breathe that would work effectively as a nice genre piece. It's a simple premise involving a trio of young burglars (Jane Levy, Dylan Minnette and Daniel Zovatto) breaking into the house of a blind veteran (character actor Stephen Lang) and his guard dog to steal a few hundred thousand dollars hidden somewhere in his home. That the burglars find themselves out of their element – the film outlines the group's inexperience heading into the heist – and go from being the perpetrators to the victims in short order is a pretty nifty bit of reversal. The basic elements of a lean, cruel, nasty little picture are right there, and the filmmakers (director Fede Alvarez and his co-writer, Rodo Sayagues) play up the grittiness of the abandoned Detroit locale to solid effect.

But the overall effect more often than not is one of pure silliness, with scheduled scares turning into moments of laughter instead, and the film is loaded with inanities. There's no logical reason why they should expect Lang's unnamed soldier to keep such a large quantity of money at his house that resides in the middle of a dilapidated neighborhood. Reasons why the soldier shifts from borderline helpless old man to something akin to a blind superhero and back and forth throughout the rest of the film remain a mystery as well, and the ending has little to no reason for its craziness. Taking a step back from this film reveals how little logic exists between the lines.

Even with its failings as a horror (or as a thriller), there's still enjoyment to be had from Don't Breathe. The film is a perfect example of cinema as a shared experience, one in which the right audience can get behind the action and play along with the characters through their travails. And there is some indication Alvarez and Sayagues aren't necessarily taking things too seriously either. It feels as if they hedged their bets a little while writing Don't Breathe to incorporate the scary bits while keeping the tone at least slightly campy (sometimes flat out campy whenever Lang has more than three lines of dialog). The premise is too much to work completely as they might have intended, yet there is a decent amount of Scooby-Doo style shenanigans going on along with one rather Velma-esque moment in a pitch-dark basement. That their previous effort was the bloody, ghoulish and mostly extravagant Evil Dead reboot lends some credence to this theory.

Alvarez does pass himself off as a capable director with a strong eye for a tracking shot and willingness to experiment a little with some sequences to keep the audience somewhat off balance. He really has a fair amount of fun with the house itself, turning the abode into a character unto itself, an entity not to be trusted for those trying to escape its confines. There's nothing particularly scary about the soldier's home, yet it does serve as a terrific little place for some bloodletting and revenge from the two sides involved in this burglary gone very wrong. It also helps the film is tight enough to come and go without overstaying its welcome completely, aside from a skosh of dragging in the third act.

It would be nice if Don't Breathe had anything more to say about the circumstances its characters find themselves in. There's an inkling of a point about the poor being trapped by their lot in life, only for Alvarez and Sayagues to undercut it with a sizable plot twist. It might have been a little more interesting too if the motivations of the burglars remained less than pure, to perhaps have the one invaded be as pure as the characters initially believe he is. Still, there's enough to be had from this film to make it worth a look with the right group of people. Don't Breathe never made me shiver or tense up in my seat like it probably intended, but it never bored either. And if you're not going to be good, you might as well be interesting.

Review: Three out of Five Stars

Click here to see the trailer.

Rating: R

Run time: 88 minutes

Genre: Thriller

Ask Away

Target audience: Late teens to early 20s viewers searching for something a little different than the rest of the summer fare.

Take the whole family?: The R rating is a little harsh, but it is best to keep anyone much younger than 13 at home.

Theater or Netflix?: Netflix it with friends or go to a midnight screening.

Does the film understand rape?: There is one notably discomfiting moment in this concerning one character's view on rape that does question whether the film has a full understanding of the implications. The intent is clearly rape despite the character's assertion otherwise, and I'm willing to give the film the benefit of the doubt to say it reflects the character's twisted view. It is a little closer than it should be though.

Watch this as well?: Fellow 2016 release Green Room is a more effective and contemplative version of Don't Breathe. Also flag down Panic Room for a fun little house invasion thriller, along with this film's clear forefather, Wait Until Dark.

Pete's Dragon a soaring, heartfelt wonder

Pete (Oakes Fegley) and Elliot meet in Pete's Dragon. Image courtesy Disney.

A few days of processing have not yet helped me come to grips that the reboot to Pete's Dragon is a legitimately wonderful film. Pete's Dragon, the Disney film with the doofy looking animated dragon and little else memorable about it has spawned a real piece of art, a heartfelt ode to family and understanding with nuance and depth. Pete's Dragon – again, Pete's Dragon – has inspired a film that is great and charming and loving and nuanced.

Not that this modern incarnation of the story of an orphaned boy (Oakes Fegley this time) and his friend/guardian/dragon Elliot living in the woods near a town called Millhaven completely eschews its source material. Rather, Pete's Dragon thrives on the old school live-action Disney lineage it inherited and uses it as a means to keep away from the horrifying. Films like Escape to Witch Mountain, Freaky Friday, Bedknobs and Broomsticks and, of course, the original Pete's Dragon are often campy to the bone, placing characters into odd situations and having them adapt quickly with a strange sense of humor about the whole thing. And, like those films, the characters in Pete's Dragon (played by Bryce Dallas Howard, Wes Bentley, Karl Urban, Oona Laurence, Robert Redford and Isiah Whitlock Jr.) lack a true depth of malice to them, as any villainy they may possess is overwhelmed by the care they have for one another. Urban, the character closest to serving as a big bad, ultimately abandons his selfish intent once the risk of injury to his family becomes a reality. Then again, those other films didn't get quite so deep with their characters, one of the many ways Pete's Dragon separates itself from the older fare. The movie very much employs that goofy retro vibe as a tool, it ultimately sheds the tackiness prohibiting those films from being more than footnotes in Disney's catalog (despite my unabashed love for Bedknobs and Broomsticks). Unlike those other movies, Pete's Dragon is fun and has heart sprinkled with bits of sadness.

Yet it remains strange for Pete's Dragon, of all the remakes and reboots that have come and gone in the last few years, to be this beatific and engaging. It's an unexpectedly wonderful film offering heart, fantasy and a touch of the blues to a genre otherwise intently focused on unearned happiness and glee. The lives of the central pairing are in equal turns light and sad, the joyful glee of gallivanting and flying together undercut slightly by a sense of loneliness they share. They're effectively alone together, two beings relying on each other for fulfillment, survival and joy. Director David Lowery and co-writer Toby Halbrooks have shown how the darkest parts of childhood – the sense of loneliness one feels when the universe stops paying attention to a solipsistic soul – is balanced by a loving, caring and sometimes unconventional family. There's a moment late in the film that summarizes this, when a few characters a series of hugs between characters shortly after a perilous moment. Emotionally, the scene is effective – viewers may begin to combat all of the feels arriving at once – and it serves a practical character development beat to boot. It's the symbolism though, the expression of a major theme in the film in a quiet yet powerful way, that makes it such a devastating moment despite the uplift it represents. Sometimes its nice to enjoy getting crushed emotionally so thoroughly.

Again, all of this from a remake of Pete's Dragon. It's often astounding what people can conjure with a premise as silly as mishaps among a boy and a poorly animated dragon. The filmmakers, however, realize having a dragon around offers a gateway to some form of great adventure. They lift a little from fare like The NeverEnding Story and How to Train Your Dragon to show the majesty that is riding free in the sky, unburdened by the weight of the world or the limits of imagination. There's a sense of magical romanticism to the whole engagement, as the concept of flying upon a dragon's back has a certain allure and majesty to it not associated in other forms of flight.

The filmmakers depict the arising joy beautifully, sharing the wonderment with the viewers and offering watchers, Elliot and Pete a few moments of fun to leave take a break from the sadness of their situation. Neither the absolute joy of escapism nor the crushing heartbreak of loss and disappointment take precedence in Pete’s Dragon. They work in harmony with the other, the heart feeding life to the soul and the soul providing the motivation for the heart to keep living. It’s what makes Pete’s Dragon so terrific in the first place, as it can be difficult to find a movie at peace with itself like this one is.

Review: Four and a half out of Five Stars

Click here to see the trailer.

Rating: PG

Run time: 102 minutes

Genre: Family

Ask Away

Target audience: Families in need of a just-before-school-starts activity.

Take the whole family?: This movie will bother really young kids – one young boy proclaimed it to be too scary during the opening sequence – but kids older than 7 should be fine.

Theater or Netflix?: There are far worse ways for families to avoid a hot summer afternoon.

What is it with Disney and feral children?: This is the third Disney property to feature a child raised in the woods by animals in the last 12 months, joining The Good Dinosaur and The Jungle Book. That the three characters have lost their families too makes a lot of sense; the company has a weird obsession with orphans, and kids who grow up in the wilderness are the most in need of saving from a strong family unit.

Watch this as well?: Some of those old Disney films, like Bedknobs and Broomsticks, Freaky Friday and Swiss Family Robinson, are at least a little fun to watch, albeit outrageously dated as that last one is. A couple of ’80s films, Don Bluth's animated classic The Secret of NIMH and the aforementioned NeverEnding Story, share this film's sad vibe and will very much freak a few kids out in the process.

Little on the line for this Suicide Squad

Will Smith and Margot Robbie star in Suicide Squad. Image courtesy Warner Bros.

With a better script, better fight sequences, more thoughtful approach to its premise, and a deeper understanding of several of its characters, Suicide Squad could have served as the antidote to the DC dourness that has weighed down the studio's other efforts, the spunky, rebellious younger sibling of the Superman-driven franchise. The name itself hints at a series with a little more bite to it than the average superhero fare, something a little more dangerous than a sullen god from Kansas. Then again, if wishes were fishes, David Fincher would be in charge of this project, and Suicide Squad wouldn't suffer from the rather notable problems that opened this paragraph. For a movie whose sole purpose for being is to appeal to ravenous comic book fans, Suicide Squad does a piss poor job of fulfilling that reason to be.

Suicide Squad is a difficult movie to mesh with due to its haphazard assemblage and a plot that is hideously stupid even for a comic book adaptation. The story segmentation is weighted so poorly character arcs are either blunted or pushed through without any time to develop organically. Viewers learn little about Jai Courtney’s Captain Boomerang or Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje's Killer Croc (Adam Beach’s Slipknot exists to be killed off early), and they get force fed the backstories for Will Smith's Deadshot, Jay Hernandez's Diablo, Cara Delevingne's Enchantress, Joel Kinnaman's Rick Flagg and Margot Robbie's Harley Quinn. That the movie spends so much time focusing on Deadshot and Quinn, and the audience comes away with little real insight to their characters aside from within the two-hour window is disappointing and worrisome for the impending solo film for Robbie's Harley Quinn.

It is a reflection though of the underlying issue inherent within the concept of Suicide Squad that would stump even the best of filmmakers, let alone one as inconsistent as writer/director David Ayer. The very nature of the film is to have villains serve as the heroes (in this case to replace Superman after his demise in the last DC film), which raises the question of whether or not a person can be a proverbial bad guy when he or she does something heroic. In other words, if someone commits a heroic act, must it be somehow within their very nature to do so in the first place? Suicide Squad offers lots of forgiveness for its characters, showing them to be devoted fathers, misunderstood beasts, self-loathing arsonists, love-struck fools, and Australian to provide some grounding for their heroism. Therein lies the fundamental problem with Suicide Squad: humanizing the villains too much removes the aura of malevolent ambiguity from those characters, thus making them far less interesting to watch. Suicide Squad is a film large on bravado yet without the means or willingness to fulfill the promises it keeps, like the short kid in elementary school who taunted the bigger kids then ran away when any threat of repercussion emerged. It claims to be a legitimate anti-hero movie, yet it lacks the willingness to make any of its characters unlikable. Deadshot is considered the world's greatest assassin yet is provided moral codes, scumbag assassination targets, and a precocious 11-year-old daughter to call upon to strengthen his verve ( although Smith probably wouldn't have taken the role had he been a remorseless killer).

If there is any one character who does fit that description, its Viola Davis’ Amanda Waller, the woman who formed the Suicide Squad in the first place. Waller is a ruthless, stone cold bureaucrat, a woman who knows the right buttons to push behind the scenes to get things done but is willing and able to get grab an assault rifle and fire off a few rounds when the time calls for it. Surrounded by figures who want her dead and more, Waller stands her ground and then some, turning some of the scariest figure in DC’s catalog into withering husks. Davis fills out all of those requirements perfectly, exuding authority and just the right amount of menace in her delivery.

Suicide Squad would be a pretty interesting film if it mirrored Waller’s personality, yet the film is much more akin to the characterization of the Joker as portrayed by Jordan Catalano (or, rather, Jared Leto). Leto does not offer an optimal or particularly interesting interpretation of the most intense villain in the DC universe; his portrayal is more of a poseur, a guy whose tough act is never menacing or particularly dangerous. Like the film he’s in, Leto’s Joker is gaudy, feckless and otherwise mostly harmless.

Review: Two and a half out of Five Stars

Click here to see the trailer.

Rating: PG-13

Run time: 123 minutes

Genre: Action

Ask Away

Target audience: DC Comics fanatics.

Take the whole family?: Stick with the PG-13 rating. The film is tame for what it should be, but it still contains oodles of graphic violence.

Theater or Netflix?: Netflix is acceptable, although matinee it if you do have a burning desire to see it.

Any sympathies for Harley Quinn?: Loads of it for both actress Margot Robbie and for the character. Aside from an inconsistent accent, Robbie does the best she can for a character built to be eye candy for the male members of the audience. It's a terrible reduction for a female character made interesting for her tragic backstory (which the film botches because of course it does) and for her ingenuity and feisty nature. Contrary to the film's assertions, Joker isn't what makes Harley Quinn interesting.

Watch this instead: DC has had its best luck adapting its material in the animated realm, in particular TV series like Batman: The Animated Series (Harley Quinn originated from that show), Justice League, Justice League Unlimited and Teen Titans.