In case you couldn’t tell from the train wreck of a title, Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald is an utter mess of a movie. It really seems like J.K. Rowling just threw a bunch of her leftover worldbuilding notes from Harry Potter together, adding only the bare minimum of connective tissue needed to assemble a somewhat logical narrative.

The film’s plot is ostensibly quite simple. Magizoologist Newt Scamander and his friends, with guidance from the legendary Albus Dumbledore, try to find and protect Credence Barebone, a young but terrifyingly powerful wizard, as he is hunted by both the harsh and overbearing Ministry of Magic and a group of violent extremists led by outlaw Gellert Grindelwald.

Unfortunately, the story ends up being incoherent, both by over-complicating the plot and some remarkably poor storytelling choices. After an inoffensive opening sequence, the film starts to go downhill, with two early reveals that undo all of the consequences of the first film’s conclusion. The film then splits into roughly half a dozen different plot threads, tied together in some of the most contrived ways imaginable. It’s a shame too, because each of the storylines probably would have been compelling had they been properly fleshed out. Poor editing exacerbates the clumsiness of the already convoluted narrative. Some of the scene transitions are so abrupt that I wondered if there was something wrong with the copy of the film being shown at the screening.

The film doesn’t manage to stick the landing either. Most of the last half hour is taken up by a series of plot twists, each more over the top and less meaningful than the last. And the climax of the movie should have massive repercussions for the film’s heroes and the wizarding community as whole, but Rowling apparently didn’t think it was important to actually show us how the protagonists deal with events that just irrevocably changed all of their lives.

The film also does a less than stellar job at handling its large cast. All of the significant characters from the first film return, and the film introduces a gaggle of new ones. Theseus Scamander (Newt’s brother), Leta Lestrange (Newt’s ex and now Theseus’s fiancée), Nagini (yes, really), and Nicholas Flamel (an immortal alchemist) are all jammed into the movie. None of them are well developed or necessary to the plot. Nagini, especially, is completely extraneous. Not only is it absurd to reveal that Voldemort’s pet snake from the Harry Potter series was actually a cursed human witch the whole time, she serves absolutely no purpose in the movie. Her only role is standing around and looking mildly horrified at the events unfolding around her. Leta comes the closest to having a coherent arc, but the mangled storytelling robs her character development of the emotional heft it should have.

Newt and his allies, the non-magical human Jacob Kowalski and the Auror (wizard cop) Tina Goldstein, fair a little bit better, but only because they are already established characters. These weirdos with hearts of gold are pretty much exactly the same as they were the last time around. If you found them charming in Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them (I certainly did) then you’ll find a lot to enjoy here. The exception (and not in a good way) for the returning characters is Queenie Goldstein. In a pretty significant departure from her previous characterization, the telepath comes off as consistently selfish, manipulative, and gullible with no real redeeming qualities.

But you know what? Despite the movie’s many, many flaws, I didn’t hate it. Newt, Jacob, Tina, and Dumbledore are delightful, most of the jokes land well, the creatures and magic spells are clever and stylish, and the wizarding world is as fascinating as ever. Grindelwald, too, is deftly handled. He is a far more human monster than Lord Voldemort, but that makes him an incredibly effective villain. His softer approach to fascism and skill at presenting a compelling message makes it all too clear why his brand of bigotry would appeal to the wizarding populace. In particular, his speech to the witches and wizards of Paris, a chilling depiction of the malleability of the truth and the capacity humans have for violence, is  J.K. Rowling’s best piece of writing in the film.
 
Grade: C+/B- (I can’t decide and these grades are meaningless anyway)

After Marvel’s recent string of massive epics (Thor: Ragnarok, Black Panther, and Avengers: Infinity War), director Peyton Reed and writers Chris McKenna, Erik Sommers, Paul Rudd, Andrew Barrer, and Gabriel Ferrari present the most intimate story thus far in the Marvel Cinematic Universe with Ant-Man And The Wasp. The antagonists are barely villainous, the stakes are entirely personal rather than world-ending, and the action is almost entirely confined to San Francisco and the surrounding areas. It’s a nice change of pace, but it all ends up feeling a bit inessential.
 
The story begins with former Ant-Man Scott Lang (Paul Rudd) living under house arrest as punishment for assisting Captain America in Captain America: Civil War. He’s hung up the size-altering suit while the Wasp, Hope Van Dyne (Evangeline Lily) has spent the intervening time trying to find a way to rescue her mother, Janet, from the subatomic Quantum Realm that she’s been trapped in for decades. With only days left in his sentence, Hope and her father, Hank Pym (Michael Douglass), pull Scott back into the world of superheroics, since his experience in the Quantum Realm at the end of Ant-Man makes him invaluable for their mission. In their quest to reach the Quantum Realm, Ant-Man and the Wasp clash with the mysterious Ghost, played by Hannah John-Kamen, and black-market dealer Sonny Burch (Walton Goggins), who each want access to the Quantum Realm for their own reasons. In addition to being Ant-Man, Scott has to balance saving his cash-strapped security firm, maintaining a good relationship with his ex-wife and her husband, and hiding his illicit activities from the FBI.
 
The film constantly throws new problems and complications at its heroes, which keeps the movie’s pacing brisk. Unfortunately, the movie is resultantly light on character development, with Janet and Ghost suffering the most from a lack of depth. The ludicrous nature of the Quantum Realm and the technology derived from it also detract from the aspects of the movie that work. Despite the plot’s weaknesses, it provides plenty of opportunities for the things you really want in an Ant-Man movie: jokes, inventive action sequences, and psychedelic imagery. Thankfully, the movie makes the most of those opportunities. The ever-shifting scale of the battles and the frequent visual humor keep the combat fresh and entertaining, while the forays into the Quantum Realm deliver some of the trippiest imagery in the Marvel Cinematic Universe.
 
As charming and funny as Ant-Man And The Wasp is, it never manages to transcend competence. The characters are likable, but not especially complex or compelling. The functional plotting mostly serves as a vehicle for jokes, which are consistently funny if unremarkable. The light tone and small scope are refreshing, but the film never escapes the shadows of its sibling franchises. The main elements of the movie have been explored it more entertaining fashion in previous Marvel films. Spider-Man: Homecoming tells a far more engaging street-level superhero story, Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 does a better job exploring familial relationships, and the comedy of Thor: Ragnarok is zanier and funnier. As a result, Ant-Man And The Wasp fails to find a niche for itself in the greater MCU.

​Grade: B

Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom is the best of the sequels to Jurassic Park so far. If that sounds like a backhanded compliment, that’s because it is. The mediocre script (courtesy of Jurassic World creative team Derek Connelly and Colin Trevorrow) hamstrings J.A. Bayona’s striking direction and the film’s talented cast.

Years after the closing of Jurassic World, the volcano on the island of Isla Nublar, the home of all surviving dinosaurs, threatens to erupt. Former Jurassic World operations manager Claire Dearing (Bryce Dallas Howard) is tasked with relocating the remaining dinosaurs by the former business partner of Jurassic Park founder John Hammond, Benjamin Lockwood (James Cromwell). She assembles a team comprised of dinosaur trainer Owen Grady (Chris Pratt), paleoveterinarian Zia Rodriguez (Daniella Pineda), and IT technician Franklin Webb (Justice Smith), to carry out the rescue.
Of course, things start going wrong almost immediately, in exactly the ways you would expect it to. It’s a Jurassic Park movie, so you’ve got to have shady businessmen, monologues about the ethics of genetic experimentation, and dinosaurs killing people. The venerable T-Rex saving the protagonists by killing a threat, then triumphantly roaring is apparently so incredible that they felt the need to have it occur twice this time around. Engaging characters and clever jokes can make a flimsy plot compelling, but you won’t find either here. The characterizations are paper thin and most of the gags barely register as jokes. It’s actually impressive how badly Connelly and Trevorrow squander Chris Pratt’s comedic abilities. The script’s shortcomings extend to the villains as well. The antagonists are so incompetent, and their plans so poorly thought out, that I’m not sure how we’re supposed to believe that they survived into adulthood.

Unlike its predecessor, Fallen Kingdom has the visual style to make up for some of the deficits in the perfunctory screenplay. Óscar Faura’s cinematography is vibrant and foreboding, making great use of ash, fire, and shadows. The opening scene and the island escape, in particular, contain some truly memorable shots. The many sequences of dinosaurs stalking and attacking humans and other dinosaurs give Bayona plenty of opportunities to show off his talent for crafting suspense. The action scenes are remarkably tense, even if they do demonstrate a disregard for the laws of physics. The eruption sequence, in particular, massively downplays the heat of lava and the speed of volcanic ash. In the Jurassic Park universe, lava appears to only be about as hot as a seat belt buckle left out in the sun.
​
Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom is a modest improvement for the franchise, but the jumbled storytelling does its damnedest to ruin whatever enjoyment you might derive from the viscerally entertaining action and the charismatic cast. The series has to stop being beholden to the formula established 25 years ago. Showing us the same things that happened in Jurassic Park in a mildly different context is not enough to recapture the magic of the original. All of the sequels are just permutations of the same ideas, recycled into increasingly incoherent remixes. The dinosaurs deserve better.

Grade: C

After a decade and a half, the Incredibles have returned, picking up exactly where they left off. The considerably more detailed animation is the only indication that fourteen years have passed since we last saw the Parr family. Thankfully, Brad Bird’s writing and directing are every bit as strong as they were in The Incredibles, resulting in an immensely enjoyable superhero adventure.

After badly damaging their home city in their battle with the Underminer, the Incredibles (and their friend Frozone) are hired by tech moguls Winston and Evelyn Deaver, played by Bob Odenkirk and Catherine Keener, respectively, to rehabilitate the public image of superheroes by wearing body cameras while fighting crime. Being the most tactful fighter of the bunch, Elastigirl (Holly Hunter) is chosen to pilot test the program. In a series of battles, she attempts to thwart the plots of a mysterious new supervillain, known as the Screenslaver, who can control the minds of anyone who watches their broadcasts. The inventive use of superpowers, gorgeous animation, and propulsive energy in their confrontations make for some of some the most spectacular set pieces in recent memory.

Meanwhile, Mr. Incredible (Craig T. Nelson) battles a moody teenage daughter, an infant with dozens of uncontrollable superpowers, and algebra. The film covers a lot of ground. The film flirts with some trite clichés about men being incompetent buffoons when it comes to childcare, but wisely focuses most of its humor on the inherent difficulties of child raising, and how superpowers can exacerbate any problems. The storylines involving his elder children, Dash (Huck Milner) and Violet (Sarah Vowell), are unremarkable, but an increasingly exhausted Mr. Incredible trying to handle the baby Jack-Jack’s ever-expanding array of powers provides the funniest moments of the movie, with a lengthy slapstick sequence involving a raccoon being the standout.

The film’s script also briefly addresses a common criticism of Brad Bird’s previous films, particularly The Incredibles and Tomorrowland. They have been criticized for espousing the belief that special people are superior to the masses and deserve special treatment. Without spoiling any plot details, Incredibles 2 provides some nuance to this philosophy through the motivations of the Screenslaver. It doesn’t go so far as to completely refute the notion of exceptionalism, but it’s a more complex presentation of the ideology expressed in Bird’s films.

The animation in Incredibles 2 is simply sublime. The action is frenetic, with inventive and impressive use of superpowers, but never incoherent. The rest of the animation is up to the same quality as the awe-inspiring action sequences. The combination of art deco architecture and sleek technology is even more notable in Incredibles 2 than in The Incredibles. By setting most of the film in a vast cityscape, the retrofuturistic visual style is constantly on display, which enhances the feelings of nostalgia and old-fashioned optimism that permeate Bird’s script. Not to mention the facial animation, which is the most expressive of any Pixar film.

All in all, Incredibles 2 is a great animated children’s film and a great superhero film, but it falls just short of its classic predecessor. Poorly fleshed out villain motivations and the older children’s lackluster storylines prevent it from resonating as well as the original. The film’s shortcomings only highlight how strong the rest of the movie is. Elastigirl’s clashes with Screenslaver is both a dazzling display of superheroics and a charming expression of re-finding one’s professional passion while Mr. Incredible’s attempts to take care of Jack-Jack are constantly laugh inducing. So much of the film is wonderful that the flaws are only minor quibbles.
 
Grade: A-

Lady Bird is a nearly perfect coming-of-age story.  While it’s not quite a reinvention of the genre, it’s one of the best examples of how to do it right.  Writer and director Greta Gerwig has crafted one of the most genuine and insightful examinations of teenage life in recent memory.  She deftly weaves sharp dialogue, deeply empathetic characters, and a moving narrative together to create a film that surpasses others of its ilk.
​
Spanning the senior year of high school, the film depicts Christine “Lady Bird” McPherson’s (Saoirse Ronan) fraught relationships with family members, friends, boyfriends, and her hometown of Sacramento.  Deeply frustrated with nearly aspect of her life, she consistently rebels against reality.  She applies to colleges she lacks the grades for, pretends to live in houses her family couldn’t possibly afford, and rejects her given name in favor of her invented nickname.  All she wants is to leave everything she knows behind and get very far away from Sacramento, or as she disdainfully calls it, “the Midwest of California.”

Lady Bird’s mother serves as the main target of her war on reality.  The harsh, demanding matriarch of the McPherson family (a wonderful performance by Laurie Metcalf) is the polar opposite of the vibrant, impetuous Lady Bird.  Each of the women desperately wants the other to respect and understand them, but is completely unable to empathize with the opposing viewpoint.  Alternately funny, uplifting, and heartbreaking, the tumultuous relationship between the two provides the emotional and narrative core of the film.

The rest of the movie’s 93-minute runtime is packed to the brim with snippets of life at a Catholic high school.  The film’s wit and perceptiveness help the familiar narrative beats come off as genuine rather than clichéd.  Lady Bird navigates the traditional hazards of leaving adolescence: drama club, prom, disappointing romantic partners, experimenting with drugs and alcohol, etc.  However, the script smartly emphasizes the surprisingly complex inner lives of the well-worn archetypes (the straight-laced best friend, the shallow rich girl, the brooding rebel, etc.) that inhabit its version of 2002 Sacramento.  As a result, the film always feels true to the characters and the time and place they exist in, regardless of the retread territory of the stories.  

Lady Bird herself perfectly embodies the contradictory nature of being a teenager.  She’s both significantly wiser and more foolish than anyone gives her credit for and she bounces between charmingly awkward and frustratingly obstinate at the drop of the hat.  This complexity is captured endearingly by Saoirse Ronan’s winning, expressive performance, which is the best in her impressive career.

In the film’s most powerful moments, Gerwig uses Lady Bird’s characterization to explore the poignant consequences of the emotional upheaval that accompany growing up.  The impatience and anxiety of waiting to go out into the world can hide the true value of people and places until it’s too late.  Lady Bird obsesses over the flaws of her family and home, and, as a result, blinds herself to their beauty.

Grade: A

Well, the Wonder Woman era was nice while it lasted. Justice League is a return to awful form for the DC cinematic universe. It might be a leaner, more light-hearted movie than its predecessors, but it’s only a marginally better one. At least the plot’s coherent: when New God Steppenwolf invades Earth with his army of demonic insect people, Batman and Wonder Woman recruit superpowered allies to defend the planet. Apparently just aping the tone of Marvel’s The Avengers wasn’t enough- they had to borrow the narrative as well, even down to the magical, power-generating box the villain’s plan revolves around.
​
Chris Terrio and Joss Whedon’s script is most egregious in the first act. The film lurches from scene to scene with practically no connective tissue between them. Awkward exposition plagues many scenes, particular those involving Amazonians or Atlanteans. A steady stream of genuinely funny quips and banter just barely keeps the first forty minutes from being painful to watch. Thankfully, once the plot setup is finished and the disparate narratives connect, the quality of the writing improves. However, lackluster resolutions to character arcs and clumsy franchise planning continue to disrupt the movie.

The rote story at least introduces the movie’s best quality: the members of the Justice League. DC finally seems to have realized that their heroes shouldn’t be dour assholes. Charming character interactions, both funny and heartfelt, make for the most effective scenes in the film. Notably, an observation Batman makes about Superman’s humanity provides a more compelling examination of the two characters than the entirety of Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice.

The Flash (Ezra Miller), Aquaman (Jason Momoa), and Cyborg (Ray Fisher) endear themselves immediately, while Gal Gadot is once again effortlessly charming as Wonder Woman. Even Ben Affleck’s Batman and Henry Cavill’s Superman manage to display a modicum of warmth and humor. The Flash’s neuroticism and inexperience and Aquaman’s gruff machismo contrast perfectly with the unflappable Wonder Woman and world-weary cynic Batman. The supporting cast of Amy Adams, JK Simmons, Amber Heard, Connie Nielsen and Diane Lane fare more poorly, though through no fault of their own. They each appear for couple of scenes and deliver some plot-relevant information before being shuffled off.

Justice League manages to stumble in areas where director Zack Snyder’s films generally excel, with a surprisingly bland visual style. A surprisingly large portion of the movie takes place in dull, cramped building interiors or in front of green screens. Noticeably poor CGI rears its head as well. The not-quite-right upper lip resulting from the digital removal of Henry Cavill’s mustache is particularly distracting. Even when the movie does break out the spectacle, the striking imagery of Snyder’s previous work is nowhere to be found. Diminished too, are his trademark visceral, epic action sequences. Arbitrarily placed slow motion and indifferent cinematography hamper enjoyment of the fight choreography. Danny Elfman’s score is similarly lackluster, and the music is largely forgettable.  The only memorable moments are taken directly from Elfman’s prior work on Batman Returns and Hans Zimmer’s Man of Steel soundtrack.  

Justice League effectively addresses many of the shortcomings of the DCEU, but fails in so many other areas, even franchise strengths. They’ve finally got the characters right, but creating an engaging narrative remains elusive. Hopefully there will eventually be a movie worthy of the Justice League’s superheroes, but this isn’t it.

Grade: C

Nothing is too ridiculous for Kingsman: The Golden Circle. A 50’s themed resort in the middle of the Cambodian jungle, a tracking shot that enters a woman’s vagina, and Elton John wearing a rainbow feather outfit kicking people in the head in slow motion are just par for the course in the new installment of the series. Much like the original, the movie borrows its rough plot and themes from both the James Bond series and the graphic novel source material by Mark Millar and Dave Gibbons. The film then proceeds to strip any semblance of innuendo or nuance from its inspirations and exaggerates what remains to the extremes. This isn’t a criticism, in fact, its brashness is the series’ standout feature. 
​
The film’s narrative seems designed to check the boxes for a spy movie sequel. After a taxi cab battle set piece, a devastating attack by drug kingpin/50’s Americana connoisseur/Elton John fangirl/cannibal Poppy Adams (Julianne Moore) cripples the British spy organization Kingsman. In the aftermath, remaining members Eggsy (Taron Egerton), Merlin (Mark Strong), and Harry (Colin Firth) receive assistance from the Kingsman’s wealthier, more technologically advanced American cousin: The Statesmen. The two organizations then team up on a globetrotting adventure to put an end to Poppy’s nefarious plan.

Of course, the charm of a Kingsman film is not in the plot itself, but in its presentation. The Golden Circle maintains the series’ hallmark obscenity, gratuitous violence, and ludicrously over the top characters and world building. Director Matthew Vaughn’s artistic sensibilities are front and center with incredibly intricate fight choreography, kinetic editing, and uncomfortably blunt depictions of sexuality and gore. A jungle brawl late in the film is the standout sequence, combining an array of gadgets, robots, henchmen, and makeshift weaponry into a delightfully absurd mix. However, as entertaining as it is, it feels almost pedestrian compared to the go-for-broke insanity of the first film’s climax.

While none of the film’s many actors are asked to do any real heavy lifting, they are almost uniformly charming. The immense likability of the cast can actually make the viewer feel shortchanged, since the size of the cast and scope of the plot mean that each character only gets a few moments in the spotlight. Matthew Vaughn and co-writer Jane Goldman rely on the charisma of their leads to cover up the lack of character development. The Statesman members Champagne (Jeff Bridges), Tequila (Channing Tatum), and Ginger Ale (Halle Berry) suffer the most as a result, functioning as archetypes rather than characters.

The film’s treatment of its female characters disappoints as well. In The Secret Service, Roxy and Eggsy played as a superspy version of Hermione Granger and Harry Potter: platonic best friends whose skillsets complement each other. In The Golden Circle, Roxy and the rest of the women in the film serve only to advance the plot or provide motivation for the male leads. Poppy somewhat avoids this pitfall, simply by the virtue of Julianne Moore’s scenery chewing, but even she is given less characterization and screen time than the first film’s villain.

Issues extend to other areas of the film’s script. The 141-minute runtime is bloated with extraneous subplots and scenes, including another rehash of the pub fight from the first film, an abrupt detour to Glastonbury Festival, and subplots involving Harry’s recovery from the injury he sustained in The Secret Service, Eggsy and Tilde’s relationship drama, and the Oval Office during the crisis. The relatively grounded character drama doesn’t mesh very well with the darkly comic tone of the main plot and set pieces, leaving the movie feeling uneven.

The film’s politics are similarly muddled. The Golden Circle takes passing shots at politicians, the military, greed, and chauvinism as well as both pro- and anti-drug legalization activists without any real regard for consistency. It simultaneously idolizes and mocks traditional masculinity and proper manners. The film seems to know that the trappings of aristocracy are pointless, but at the same time is so enamored with them that it can’t help but to support them. In another film, it might not be as problematic, but the overall lack of subtlety in the film makes its mixed messaging more noticeable.

Based solely on aesthetic, Kingsman: The Golden Circle is an unqualified success. The mixture of cynical satire, black humor and wild action make for an intoxicating blend, but significant structural flaws hamper the film’s charms. The clunky writing stands in stark contrast to the polished production, resulting in an interesting but rather ungainly film.

Grade: B-