Category Archives: Film reviews

Film reviews

You’re Cordially Invited Review

Leave a comment

What’s worse than wedding plans not falling into place? Having to share your time with a whole different group of people who are not related whatsoever. That is the storyline in You’re Cordially Invited. Written and directed by Nicholas Stoller, this R-rated comedy is filled with lighthearted joy. You’re Cordially Invited made me think of the saying, “It takes two to tango!” The double-booked wedding is at the center of what must come together to make the scenario work. It is a clever comedic setup. All the moving parts, including disasters and disagreements, create a chemistry that works. There is sporadic stupidity, however it’s mostly funny and adds to the film’s comedic charm. 

The idea of weddings and marriage makes for an interesting theme. Happiness in life (and in this movie) hits many plateausand it is a mad world at one wedding venue in Your Cordially Invited. The film focuses on Jim (played by Will Ferrell) and Margot (played by Reese Witherspoon). Jim’s daughter Jenni (played by Geraldine Viswanathan) is getting married, and Margot’s daughter Neve (played by Meredith Hagner) is also getting married. One small error has led to a double-booking of the weddings. From this point on, the reality of having a wedding to remember goes into high gear with so many issues at hand. It is boisterous and entertaining. It all comes down to money and tradition—both of which play key roles and are portrayed in egotistical characterizations.

With Ferrell and Witherspoon playing the parents who mustlearn to share the venue, they both have personalities to causeanxiety to go awry. The wedding is on an island, and a lot can go wrong in that setting. For example, an alligator falls into Jim’s bed. The dim-wittedness of You’re Cordially Invited is different because it navigates new territory instead of only what many expect in family conflicts. It keeps the laughs coming by having the two opposing parties falling apart and then learning to work together to share the venue again. The common ground of family turmoil finds a relatable place in You’re Cordially Invited.

The drastic scenarios throughout You’re Cordially Invited had me sold. Surprisingly, I went in with mixed expectations, but I walked out feeling positive. With Ferrell and Witherspoon playing parents going through treacherous disasters, I felt the sense of lines being drawn and the idea of the saying, “You only live once!” The film finds itself on a mission to keep its audience in tune with the hope that happiness will eventually come around. It was sometimes hard to maintain hope given all the weird moments in the film. The stressful scenes were a little bonkers at times and had wedding bells ringing in some crazy ways in You’re Cordially Invited. It seemed like just when oneagreement was made a new can of worms opened where disasters and uncharted, yet hysterical, perils were inevitable.

This is a film where a comedy and drama combine in a lighthearted flow of writing and characterization. The wedding setting provides perspective. In the end, You’re Cordially Invitedis appealing. Three out of four stars.

Film reviews

Companion Review

Leave a comment

Why do humans rely on technology? They do for many reasons such as organization, boredom, and life essentials. But where is the line drawn? It is drawn at utilizing technology to enable human connections. Writer and director Drew Hancock pushes the boundaries of AI in Companion. It is a film that correlates with robot and human suspense for an entertaining result. The level of seriousness just right. Companion is about a matter that goes awry which leads to twists and secrets to be revealed.

The film focuses on a couple, Iris and Josh (played by Sophie Thatcher and Jack Quaid). They go on a weekend getaway at a lake house with friends. The other folks are a gay couple, Eli and Patrick (played by Harvey Guillen and Lukas Gage). There are also Sergey and Kat (played by Rupert Friend and Megan Suri). Iris is a robot and her emotions are mixed. Josh tells her, “Remember to smile and act happy!” For Iris, this is rather complicated. She displays feelings of tension which arecultivated by the narration from the very beginning of the film. The script delivers the key fact that Iris is not a normal human. Her sensitivity is the cornerstone of intriguing suspense in Companion.

The film’s genius is aided by the uncomfortable vibe in its lake house setting. Given Iris already has a boiling mind of vengeance, Companion loops in the feeling that many cans of worms are waiting to be released. Companion boils until the film’s point of destruction as so much goes wrong along the way. Iris commits homicide due to being unable to properly handle human emotions. After the homicide she walks into the living room holding a knife with spattered blood. Josh, Kat, Eli, and Patrick are stunned and horrified. Josh must figure out how to clean-up Iris’s mess which was prompted by a technical failure. Josh refers to Iris as a “companion robot” or “emotional robot.” He does this to try and cover his tracks before her functions worsen… which they certainly do. 

The film gets hysterical when it becomes a battle between an “emotional support robot” against real humans. On top of that,the scenes have an interactive component when the “emotional support robot” uses the functions on a tablet to help with functionality. This happens in moments of suspense. The storyline of covering up a murder and getting a crazy machine on the loose is results in a crazy ride that dangles shambles of wonderous audacity in Companion. AI takes a deadly turn of demise in Companion. Despite the quirky layout, what makes this film a gem is its ability to create an atmosphere where viewers must think. There is more here than what is expected and that gets the audience involved.

The vividness comes from the desperation in the performances of Thatcher and Quaid. Since Thatcher is a machine and Quaid is the consumer (of her). The error falls on both sides but there is no excuse for the cause. They both have the minds to fend for their lives. The film’s message is NEVER RELY ON TECHNOLOGY FOR HUMAN EMOTIONS! No good comes from that! The creativity behind the boisterous disasters results in a grandeur of comedy and suspense with technology going full throttle. Not entirely a masterpiece, but very close. Three out of four stars for Companion.

Film reviews

Flight Risk Review

Leave a comment

Mel Gibson directed Flight Risk, but it does not fly high. It is a thriller set in one setting that is rushed with mediocrity. My senses told me it would be a hit-or-miss experience, especially with a slated release date of October (2024) and then forwarded to now. The delay in its release stands corrected. Flight Risk is a mess of suspense with poor writing, characterizations, and a horrid foundation.

The film gears on a fugitive, Winston (played by Topher Grace). He is to go on trial, and his air marshal is Madolyn (played by Michelle Dockery). Their pilot is Daryl (played by Mark Wahlberg). Their flight is going over the wilderness of Alaska. Once they are in the sky, red flags begin to arise. Winston and Madolyn see signs of a questioning personality with Daryl. Also, he becomes abusive. Therefore, Winston and Madolyn must figure out how to keep themselves from crashing with the aircraft or battling with Daryl. Also, with Winston (as one who is a criminal), the level of trust lies in the balance of the film’s suspense.

The title and the cast are the appeal of Flight Risk. The conflict is what is the blur. The criminality part has little explanation, and the problems in the plane are boring. There are a few moments that have audiences jump. Its quality is like it belongs to a reality show in a TV movie. It is challenging to take seriously.

With Wahlberg (as the bad guy), he is the one who brings in the vindictive vengeance danger to the aircraft. With Grace and Dockery (as the protagonists), it is like Three Stooges meets Con-Air. Flight Risk lacks authenticity and big means of awry.  Flight Risk continues down its path of a disaster setup.

The film leaves many questions. What is the crime of Winston? How many charges are there? How did all the legalities begin? Why is Daryl the pilot to question? There is not much means of a foundation. Its audiences do not have much background to the upbringing of the conflict in and of itself.

The plane flies in hurdles. It is not shot vividly to create enticing entertainment. There are some moments of sharp turns, but other than that, all the conflicts are inside the plane. There is no place to escape, and only inside the plane is the boredom of time wasted in Flight Risk.

What came to my mind was the other films directed by Gibson. He is one that is known to push the envelope of violence. I wonder if this one was lighter because of going into production with his next project The Passion of the Christ. It is like he decided to direct a thriller in the sky before the intense process of his next biggest project. Regardless, Flight Risk did not display realism or in-depth moments like his other fascinating projects. I would rather revisit Braveheart or Hacksaw Ridge to feel “the envelope of violence” again. I rate Flight Riskone-in-a-half out of four stars.