The Nine Lives of the Suicide Squad

We're really winding down, folks. This is ultimately the last big weekend that we'll care about monster blockbuster releases, although truth be told there'll be some hangover for the next few weeks that we'll continue to cover. Let us try to predict the cultural, commercial, and critical potential of the two nationwide releases this week, Nine Lives (2016) and Suicide Squad (2016). I'll give you a spoiler warning - only one of these films is going to be something anyone cares about. Guess which one! We'll start with the crap:

Oh no! He's a cat now!

Believe it or not, I first learned about Nine Lives from a huge terrible cat display in a movie theater. That's not a great sign when you're a dude who writes about movies every week. It stars Kevin Spacey who finds himself inside the body of a cat! It's kind of unbelievable that this film is coming out in 2016. Aren't we better than this tired, overused, and never-loved trope?

I am literally sitting here in disbelief that this is a thing that's happening. Did Kevin Spacey really need the money? There's no way. Is it a favour to his agent? Why does this exist? Has Hollywood learned nothing from The Shaggy Dog (2006)? It really feels like a hackneyed premise that's almost a throwback to cheeky 90s family films rather than something that would actually be interesting in the current cinematic climate, child film or not. On that note, it's also dropping amidst a tremendous amount of childrens' animated films that have done really well this summer (indeed, they're just about the only ones). There's simply not a lot of room for a goofy "Kevin Spacey becomes a cat" story.

Commercially and culturally the prospects are dire. There's almost no way this movie hits big. We're not going to be discussing Nine Lives as a cult hit or sleeper. Its saving grace may be that it's technically a French film production, and director Barry Sonnenfeld has had at least as many hits as duds. So maybe it goes big over in Europe, but no one in America will care. I can't emphasize the futility of this films' existence enough. So let's move on.

It was sort of a bizarre move for Warner Bros' still fledgling DC Cinematic Universe to go with Suicide Squad as their third film. It's like as if Marvel threw up Guardians of the Galaxy (2014) after The Incredible Hulk (2008). Suicide Squad might be slightly less obscure (the presence of the Joker at least gives it a decently high profile), but it's still a strange way to cement the base for a new shared universe. Sure it gives them a chance to feature a lot of characters all at once, but out of all the DC stories, is this really appropriate?

If you begin to take the fact that Batman is really well-established (if not just in their shared universe), The Flash has proven to be a successful TV series, and we've all still got a bad taste of Green Lantern (2011) in our mouths, maybe it makes more sense. Wonder Woman is really the more natural extension, and since she's getting her own film next year, which by all rights appears to be awesome-looking, we can let that slide a bit. But for now, it's all Suicide Squad, which could be the most hotly anticipated DC film since The Dark Knight Rises (2012).

This is kid friendly, right? Like every girl will be Harley Quinn
and every boy will be Killer Croc this Halloween?

It's more interesting in the wake of SONY's now-failed Sinister Six movie (at one point that had a November 11, 2016 scheduled date - think about that a bit), that we're still getting the supervillain team-up flick we've always imagined could happen. 2016 has already proved to be a decent superhero film deconstruction year with Deadpool (2016), and Suicide Squad, if it keeps things weird and fun like it promises, ought to deliver a similarly refreshing spin on the tired genre.

With nearly no expectations just about any box office haul ought to do the trick. The bar to clear this summer is about $60 million to keep with Star Trek Beyond (2016) and Jason Bourne (2016), but considering the comparative hype level, I might actually be inclined to believe Suicide Squad banks quite a bit more than that. Seriously - who out there really needed another Star Trek or Bourne film? Exactly. Now, who out there is up for the raucous distinctive glow of Suicide Squad, whose hype machine has been in full gear for the better part of a year?

The whole thing is a pretty clear attempt to ape the marketing from Guardians. The classic rock song (even more precisely timed, though), the off-beat, energized advertising, and random anti-heroes assembled in an ad-hock team is all pretty Guardians-esque. It's all presented with a much sharper edge, though, and that aforementioned trailer was one of the best in recent memory.

Also, almost everyone involved in this is guaranteed to become a break-out star. Cara Delevingne looks...enchanting. Jai Courtney seems like he's actually having some charismatic fun (ghastly!). Will Smith could get back on top, even if it's almost bizarre that this doesn't feel like a Will Smith movie at all (it's a character that's out of his wheelhouse both in his anti-hero persona and side character nature). Jared Leto is apparently insane. Most of all though, is Margot Robbie, who is ready to explode based on the marketing alone. That's a lot better than what The Legend of Tarzan (2016) did for her career.

The one variable is the critical reaction. This seems to have plenty of cultural and commercial potential, and the general Internet conversation surrounding the picture is pretty positive. There is some fear of questionable re-shoots supposedly to make the film funnier in the wake of the Deadpool vs. Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016) fiasco. Then again, every film ever has re-shoots and it's never really anything to be worried about. It's also worthwhile to note that Deadpool only beat BvS by $30 million domestically, and the latter cranked out about $90 million more worldwide. The counter-counter-argument to that is of course, "Shouldn't a film that featured the two most well known superheroes of all time gross MORE than fucking Deadpool?" Again, it's more a matter of actually making a film that audiences want - which Suicide Squad seems to be in spades. Of course, hopefully there's still some genre left to deconstruct, if Squad does it at all. Still, the diverse cast, intriguing premise, and stellar attitude ought to work in its favor.

So there you go. Will you roll with the Squad this weekend or commit suicide after watching Nine Lives? Only you can decide!

First Impressions: Ghostbusters

There might not have a been a film this summer with more hype than Ghostbusters (2016). That is, of course, both positive and negative hype. Ever since its inception it felt like the film was hiking an uphill battle against a swarm of middle-aged complaining misogynists, who really didn't seem to have this sort of issue with the RoboCop (2014) reboot. This has unfortunately become really wrapped up in the conversation about Ghosbusters, to the point where not addressing it would seem awkward. Having said that, due to a combination of that section of the Internet being horribly and obviously wrong in addition to the fact that that conversation has been developed to death by just about everyone else, that'll be the last of that. Let's now focus on the merits of Ghosbusters the film. SPOILERS from here until forever.

Need more cat jokes.

First thing's first to get this out of the way - Ghostbusters is pretty funny, but it really doesn't stand up to Ghostbusters (1984). That's perhaps a really unfair comparison, because there's not really much that can stand up to the original Ghostbusters, not even Ghosbusters II (1989). It's also exactly as funny as SPY (2015), which ought to be expected. For some reason I can never really get into any of Paul Feig's post-Bridesmaids (2011) work, I think mostly because I'm not a chick, which is fine.

There are a lot of great moments here, though. The intro in particular starts off with a really nice dose of absurdity and then arguably does a better job at introducing the characters and this world than Ghostbusters (1984) did. From there it somewhat loses its way as it always feels like it's holding back something, preventing the film from becoming truly special.

It exists in this awkward limbo between paying homage to the original and striking out on its own. There are lots of callbacks and cameos, all of which are decently weak. I actually appreciated Ernie Hudson's return the most, near the end of the film, but they amazingly featured Bill Murray without cracking a single joke. It was also probably a terrible idea for him to be killed. That whole sequence seemed to dabble in meta-commentary on how the new crew can't stand up to the old crew, but instead of acknowledging this as fact like Jurassic World (2015) did, it ended in new crew arrogance, which seemed like a bad move.

Where the movie shines best, though, is the new stuff. It was great to see a variety of new weapons, a twerpy villain acting on his own agency rather than being a pawn, and a series of thrilling all-out brawls with the ghosties. There were also a handful of moments with legit terror, which rise above anything Ghostbusters '84 did. It always seemed like the original was more interested in the occult, old gods, and mystery rather than acknowledging that these were dead folks. Sure you've got the Scoleri brothers, the Titanic, and that dead Librarian, but they all look like this, and seem distanced from how gruesome they are. Ghostbusters '16 ups the creep factor a ton and explicitly deals with death, even if there is still a bit of a gap there as it dabbles in the science of the dead more than any spiritual or religious aspects.

On the note of the ghosts themselves, the production design and effects are outstanding. I love the neon glow style that really gives them a distinct feel. New York is artfully crafted, even if the grime of Ghostbusters '84 is missing (to be fair, the city's a whole hell of a lot better than it was in 1984). I am curious, though, how the weapons worked - there never seemed to be an explanation that the proton packs basically lasso the spirits until they can be contained, nor anything about crossing streams. Maybe these aren't rules anymore? This again is where that intersection between the remake's faithfulness vs. originality gets more muddled than it needs to be.

So now let's take some time in going into each of the characters in order that I liked them:

1) Kate McKinnon's Jillian Holtzmann is, as predicted, the obvious stand-out. She almost feels like an amalgam between Egon Spengler and Peter Venkman because she's simultaneously their biggest brain and goofiest personality. It ends up not really being analogous to anything, which was Feig's goal, which I did say I could see her fitting either role. It's the good kind of role that left me wanting quite a bit more out of her; to be pushed even farther into that goofy silly role. There are really witty scenes like this and then quite a bit where you wish she hits those heights again.

2) Chris Hemsworth commits so hard to the moronic role of Kevin, and you've got to think that his surprisingly successful stints as an SNL host have contributed to his uncanny rapport with these ladies. He's the source of a lot of the jokes as almost all three other women prove to be the straight characters to bounce off his extreme goofiness. It's also a great bit of female gaze, which helps push Ghostbusters to also be exactly as feminist as SPY was, in the sense that it's more matter-of-fact, with the guys being really dumb and getting in the way, which is actually pretty accurate to real life.

3) Kristen Wiig as Erin Gilbert is the closest thing we have to a protagonist to latch on to, and she does a serviceable job with some of the heaviest acting lifting. She is definitely the best actor of the group, their Graham Chapman if you will. She's a bit too much Skeleton Twins (2014) and not enough Welcome to Me (2014) if we were to gauge her goofiness scale while still maintaining playing a real person. She gets one desperate Bridesmaids-esque scene where she freaks out on the Mayor of New York (a game, if weirdly giggly Andy Garcia) that she does really well. Like McKinnon, I wish she was pushed to that edge more often instead of being reserved.

4) Leslie Jones as Patty Tolan was somewhat that Winston Zeddemore role, which is all sorts of ridiculous from a racial standpoint, although her inclusion seemed a lot more forced (she just shows up unannounced rather than answering a job posting), and doesn't really work as the audience surrogate that Zeddemore did. When I was calling out roles I thought Jones could have done a lot more, and she really shines when she's alone getting chased by a creepy possessed mannequin. It reminded me of this, which is probably her best SNL sketch outside of Weekend Update. Still, it's so painfully clear that she really can't act at all, which we all knew already.

5) Melissa McCarthy's Abby Yates isn't really awful as much as she's just sort of a nothing character. There's not a lot of personality there at all. Even Egon, who was a block of wood in the first run at this, was comically deadpan and could bounce off the other characters. Aykroyd's Ray Stantz is the closest analogue, but he had enthusiasm matched by an innocent appreciation for his undersung work, which very much matched Aykroyd's unbridled passion in the source material. For an actress who has the range, passion, and fury that McCarthy has, it's a surprisingly dull take on the role. There's not a lot of tension to bounce off besides Wiig, which doesn't really last long.

For everyone else it's more of the same. Cecily Strong is so damn funny, but she's hardly in this and doesn't present herself to be a foe to match William Atherton's Peck, in part because there's never any real tension there, just a weird disconnect between wanting the Ghostbusters to continue their good work but officially covering it up. The movie seemed afraid to rip-off its source material directly, which makes for a rough outcome because the original did everything so damn well. Even in the analogous mayor meeting scene you can see Kristen Wiig trying to hold back from saying "Dogs and cats! Living together! Mass hysteria!"

Totally a Stay-Puft without being Stay-Puft here.

This is ultimately the reason why Ghostbusters '16 seems like such a miff. As I said in that very first post, wouldn't it be nice if we had an all-female original action comedy rather than simply a spin on the train of a previously established IP? Feig has said that there's no way that movie would be greenlit, but if this flick had done gangbusters, we might have gotten something better. Still, at the same time, I think this summer has poked enough holes in the ridiculous Hollywood paradigm that anything made should be previously based on anything, as long as it's something. Good movies are good movies, and interesting movies look interesting because they're interesting, not because we're into whatever they're based on.

One final note, because I doubt many people caught this, since it had such dire viewership, but as a big fan of Feig's Other Space I was also pumped to see all five principal actors (the exceptions of course being Joel Hodgson and Trace Beaulieu) show up in some way or another in this. Bess Rous starts us off as the Aldridge Mansion Ghost, who adds some sincere doofiness in her first painting (I actually thought it was Kate McKinnon at first, which would have also been a great dual role). Karan Soni, following up Deadpool (2016) has a major role, as does Neil Casey, who is the principal villain. Milana Vayntrub and Eugene Cordero are blink and you miss them cameos as a girl attacked by rats and the metal band bassist respectively. Conor Leslie is no where to be seen, but it's a weird, awesome thing to see that obscure cast gathered together again.

So my ultimate appraisal of Ghostbusters is that it's good, but not great, but only because it tended to parcel what makes it good out in little bits instead of leaning headstrong into everything that could have made it weird and magical and awesome. It invites a lot of comparison to the original, which is perhaps unfair, considering that flick was Murray, Aykroyd, Ramis, and Reitman in their prime. That's really like, one of the greatest comedy teams ever. Murray alone is one of the most charismatic actors ever, and his sardonic wit is irreplaceable by any other human being alive. It was never going to match the original, but I'd be hard-pressed to find another film that comes as close as this one did, especially in its balance of terror and comedy.

Summer Jam 2016 Week 12: Bieber's Back and More Stuff Happens

Ah, the Dawn of August is upon us. We've only got one month left of this glorious exercise in discerning the Top Jams of the Season and things are really getting nuts now. We're in the thick of it now, with a flurry of hot tracks mounting an assault on our ears and bods. Who earns a title this week? Read on, loyal viewers.

Hot Jam of the Week: "Into You" by Ariana Grande



Alright, so this track has been around for a while but it really seemed to worm its way into my earballs this week. I actually had no idea this was Ariana, but it's a great evolution from "Dangerous Woman" with a really sultry rhythm and pretty fun atmosphere. It's definitely been around for a bit, and although it could certainly catch on, we're well past the proper launch time for proper threats to the Summer Throne. Then again, we almost always see some kind of late-rising jam.

Kaleo's Ristorante: "Way Down We Go" by Kaleo

Kaleo has quietly been having a great summer, with some thumping rock hits that are really fun, while also exhibiting a sort of melancholy. They're pretty great background jamming songs as well as something nice to absorb on your own. Again, it's a bit late for this to take off, and Kaleo's not quite on the pop spectrum like Maroon 5 or Imagine Dragons in Summers past.

The Boobs: "All In My Head (Flex)" by Fifth Harmony ft. Fetty Wap

I thought about slotting in "Work From Home" this week, which also seemed popular, but I wanted an excuse to talk about this ridiculous song and video. It's so obsessed with male gaze for reasons that totally escape me - why do they want to attract male viewers? Why do they even care? I suppose that's been infecting pop hits for years now, but who knows why. It all feels really exploited and ridiculous. The song's actually pretty catchy if not explicitly sexual for no real reason.

Hola Como Estas: "Don't Mind" by Kent Jones

This really follows in a long line of one-hit pop patois songs you can follow from Shaggy to Sean Paul to Sean Kingston to MAGIC! Kent Jones isn't necessarily as explicit as those guys, but it's still there. This is still a cute song, though, and has managed to stick around a bit. A late season run at things is certainly possible, but it's been middling in the mid-section of the Winner's List here. It'll really need to break out soon to do some damage.

Fucking Trolls: "Can't Stop the Feeling" by Justin Timberlake

I about guarantee that this song scores way bigger than JT's Trolls (2016). That movie looks rough as hell. Although I do kind of like the abstract fuzziness. Anyway, there's about no reason why this can't be considered the King of Summer at this point, which feels kind of like a letdown because it's just not that great of a song. Maybe Sia can mount a campaign in August to take it over?

The Biebs: "Love Yourself" by Justin Bieber

I was pretty sure that "Love Yourself" was done, but I weirdly heard it a ton this week. Like, constantly. It's still probably my favourite Bieber song ever (that's not that hard to achieve), but I legit love the restrained melody, the biting satire of a jilted yet apathetic lover, and the simplicity of the whole ordeal. This mantra of simplicity carries through all the way to the music video, which I wish was a little bit more thematically relevant, but is interesting enough.

Down the Well: "Send My Love (To Your New Lover)" by Adele

Sending your love down the well! This track grows on me the more I hear it, and after a bit of a back-and-forth start, it's now firmly cemented in the Summer Pop Jam consciousness. It's got that similar cheery break-up feel that "Love Yourself" does, and it's all about moving on and not getting hung up on stupid emotional shit. Like a lot of these late summer breakers, it's got a shot if it can keep rolling the next six weeks, but we'll see how it works out.

How Low: "Cheap Thrills" by Sia

It's got a good beat and you can dance to it! For the second week in a row Sia commands a spot at the top of the List, and for once I actually agree with the Billboard Hot 100, who also awarded her the #1 spot. This is probably the one thing that can now threaten JT (although he'd have to drop off the List entirely and stop earning any points for that to make a real difference), but Sia's now in peak hotness. I couldn't be happier, and for once my interests totally agree with America - six months in, I still can't get enough "Cheap Thrills."

Next week...

Chainsmokers and Calvin Harris have always been hanging out here, but I'm over both those jams. "Panda" has still also been on the periphery, as has "One Dance," but they haven't yet forced me to stop ignoring them like Justin Timberlake. I'm most curious about that Britney / G-Eazy collabo, which is probably good enough to do some damage here in August. Stay tuned, folks!