Tag: 2 out of 4

Check out my interview with director Alex Herron here!

Did you know that every week of the year, all 52, there is likely one or two horror movies coming out?

It’s honestly kind of wild. If one wanted, they could dedicate their entire website to reviewing horror films, from festivals, random streaming services, and VOD releases, and probably easily fill out 20 plus a month. Everyone is making horror films, because its a lot easier to be scary, than funny.

Is that why Alex Herron is releasing Dark Windows, his second horror film, after doing more than 100 Music Videos before that? Probably not, but the introduction sounded nice enough for a film I would know one else involved in. So I am going to make my pictures lyrics from music videos he directed instead.

“Shining through the city with a little funk and soul
So I’ma light it up like dynamite, whoa oh oh” 

Tilly (Anna Bullard) is sad. Sad might not be enough. She is downright devastated. Her friend Ali just died. Unfortunately, it seems to have been from a car accident, when things got out of control one night. And Tilly was driving the car.

So she feels like all of her friends and Ali’s family blame her. Thankfully, two of her friends, Monica (Annie Hamilton) and Peter (Rory Alexander) have a getaway planned. Not a cabin in the woods, but certainly a big house in the countryside that they are able to stay in. To swim and be with nature and grieve and hopefully move on.

Things get a little bit uncomfortable right away, when Monica invites Andrew, the boyfriend of Ali who does not like Tilly right now. Then alcohol gets bought. Then the Wi-Fi goes out. And sure enough, a masked person is terrorizing the house.

Also starring Morten Holst, Rachel Fowler, Jóel Sæmundsson, Vanessa Borgli in various roles, and Grace Binford Sheene as Ali.

“All I ever wanted
Was to see you smiling (smiling) “

One of the best parts of Dark Windows is its very limited cast. Outside of a few characters introduced in the earlier funeral scene, that give you enough to guess who might be terrorizing our older teens, its really just about these three individuals after their friend died. It really gives you time to learn not just more about them, but of course, why they all suck.

I mean that in the nicest way. But through some flashbacks, we do get to see that they all had some part in leading up to their friend’s death, and hey, sort of, maybe, kind of, deserve to be fucked around with from it. Since they lied about the events to everyone else and the authorities. I am not saying anyone DESERVES to die, or be stalked, but hey, no one is an Angel here either.

The movie benefits from a shorter run time, because honestly, once they are in the cabin, it takes awhile for anything to happen. Sure we get some glances of someone in the background occasionally, and every once in awhile a new realization about their past, but most of the frights and/or intense moments are saved for an avalanche at the end. Without the ending that we got, this movie would be certifiable dud. So I guess, saving it all for the end is a boon. I love the acting at the end, and I can’t namedrop who is involved for obvious reasons, but they deserve a lot of props for the emotion in that scene, and it really just elevated everything. For reasons I can’t say, I personally felt connected on a similar level almost. No, don’t worry, I am not going to murder or attempt to murder anyone.

Overall, the Windows in Dark Windows I found to be mostly normal colored. I liked the ending reveal and consequences the most, and I think it can be worth it on a slower evening.

2 out of 4.

Holy shit, why are there so many brand movies this year?

Air Jordan, the movie. Tetris, the movie. Barbie, the movie. Blackberry, the movie. And now a movie about Beanie Babies?

More importantly, why are so many of those movies on that list like, really, really good movies? Is it nostalgia and brand awareness? Or is it something greater. Each great one is great for different reasons. But let’s see about The Beanie Bubble, and watch it burst in real time.

I would burst with excitement if I got to look so stylish. 
This movie is so specifically about the characters, that I need to describe the plot through their lens.
We have Ty Warner (Zach Galifianakis), CEO of this TY Warner company, who made toys, and would eventually make beanie babies, and make a shit ton of money!

But then we have the women who helped him get there.

Robbie (Elizabeth Banks), one of Ty’s girlfriends, who helped him get sales on other products, increasing the wealth of his company, and helping expand it overseas.

Sheila (Sarah Snook), a later girlfriend and single mother, whose kids and her helped come up with backstories and names for very popular beanie babies at the start.

And Maya (Geraldine Viswanathan), an hourly employee who helped connect their company to the internet, the first corporation to do so with their product, and track ebay sales, and figure out how to work with the secondary market, instead of against it.

The women who made the Beanie Babies take off, and the man, who treated them like shit along the way.

“What the fuck is the internet?”

Unfortunately for my list of brands above, The Beanie Bubble is the only one I didn’t feel deserved a 3 or 4! Just an okay 2. And that is a shame, because the story of how Beanie Babies got popular, got super popular, and then became worthless, is an interesting one. A nice microcosm of society and wealth in that story, on artificial supply and demand, and on how you can get too much of a good thing (one that is ruined by greed).

Its just the story is told sloppily, and I hate when it really takes to get to the point. The goal of the movie is to talk about these three women and hype them up, so we get three different stories. And it keeps transferring between the stories. But we got things taking places in the 80’s, and the 90’s. Despite the fact that this movie has a large YEAR shown on the screen and shows it changing when we switch, it still isn’t inherently helpful. Generally, one would see the year and assume its just going forward in time, not backwards, and forward, by a decade, back and forth.

Sure, we can see that Ty is being a sleazeball, but he isn’t the biggest sleazeball in all three stories until around the same time in the movie. So we get an avalanche of sleaze, with a confusing time span because of it. I wouldn’t say this is the sort of movie that needs to be told chronologically, but it would have probably been better.

For example, Ty continually gets mad about Great Britain and sales at many points throughout the film, but we don’t know why in particular, until the end of Banks’ plotline. And that is not the sort of thing that needed to be a “ah ha!” moment in the story. I don’t feel like the movie was better by keeping that a secret for so long, it didn’t have to keep hyping her ending of the storyline for a payoff.

I do think Galifianakis was unrecognizable on the promotions for this film. Something was done with his face, a fake nose? I am not sure. But you can tell it in the voice. I loved in particular Viswanathan’s plot in this movie. It is the easiest to follow, the easiest to see why she was screwed over, and the only one who has her own Wikipedia page to see what she did after the fact. Unfortunately, the other two involve relationships, and a lot of time is spent focusing on that aspect, with less on the actual company commitments, it just makes him feel more like a bad boyfriend than the scummy businessman he happens to also be.

2 out of 4.

This film was watched as a part of the Seattle International Film Festival (SIFF).

Oooooh. Love to Love You, Donna Summer. Donna Summer is one of those names I know and recognize, but if you asked me on the spot to name her songs, I would struggle. I just can’t remember them. I could tell you she is a Disco Queen, and not much more after that.

But I certainly knew the “Love to Love You, Baby” song. I knew that was Donna Summer. And sure enough, this documentary told me a lot more that I did not expect.

For example. That song was her first US hit, after being around in Europe for a good time, including Germany in their musical scene. The version of Donna Summer that sang that song was like a character she was playing, as someone who never really considered herself as sexy. But most importantly about that song, is I never knew it was over 15 minutes long, released as a single that way, and got popular that way. Holy shit, that is a long song.

The sexiness and moans of the song really just build up over time, and it makes sense that it became a SENSEation. The live versions played at the time, even longer and sexier, led to people ripping off their clothes and touching themselves in concerts? And it became a huge gay anthem and skyrocketed her to fame? And this was the main START of her career? Holy shit, what a boost.

In fact, I’d say more people have heard any of her released songs than have read any one of my reviews. Donna Summers is certainly more successful than me. 

But Dunna Summer performed for a long time. She had a lot of hits. Last Dance, Hot Stuff, She Works Hard for the Money, This Time I Know It’s For Real, I feel Love, Bad Girls, and of course MacArthur Park, which got its own Weird Al parody. Disco was dead after the 70’s, but She Works Hard for the Money came out in 1983, and she was still producing similar sounds and hits. Nevertheless, she persisted.

Now, the only other point I will talk about briefly, to not spoil, is her decline from fame. When her fans turned on her, based on comments she allegedly said in an interview. Based on when her music became more faith based music, versus what she was known for. And honestly, from my outsider perspective, I understand completely the hate she received from her fanbase from it. She never recovered from it in terms of success again, and it makes sense. I don’t fully believe it was a misquote. A tragic fall, that makes sense, from a formerly loved individual.

Now despite it being full of nice sick beats, and even interviews with Giorgio Moroder, which is always a nice surprise to see him pop up. But it is STILL just a documentary about a famous person, with an edge of “but you didn’t know the real person beneath the celebrity,” which at this point is basically a trope. Of course we don’t know Donna Summer the mom, or the college girl, or the grandmother.

And frankly, this documentary brought it up because it is being made by one of her daughters, but it isn’t an interesting part of her personality. I learned she is decently funny and an actress at the same time, but other than that, she was great at singing, and had a lot of backing, and got famous, and then lived the rest of her life in the background until she passed.

So once again, I rate a documentary on a celebrity as okay. If you want to learn about her, it is perfect for you. But nothing groundbreaking in this documentary, nothing unusual in its style. Not a must watch unless you want to watch.

2 out of 4.

This film was watched as a part of the Seattle International Film Festival (SIFF).

Who is Mary Tyler Moore? I mean that seriously. It is a name I recognize, and I know she did a lot in TV, but honestly, I know nothing about her. I didn’t know what show she was in before she was in the show with her name. I don’t know anything else she did. I know jack, about Mary.

And honestly, that is me missing out.

She was cast as the “wife” in the Dick Van Dyke Show, completely unknown woman at the time. This started a few years after I Love Lucy was going. And she wasn’t the main character, like Lucy was. But she was eventually given more personality, and given some humor for her character, and she was seen as a great, woman and sure, house wife. But her character was more than just a housewife, she had some independence. But everyone did love her.

And unfortunately, all shows must end at some point. It is what she does with her time after, that matters even more.

If I was Mary Tyler Moore, people would probably know who I was.

You see, for the next few years, it didn’t go well. But, she did eventually get to star in her own show. The Mary Tyler Moore Show. And what is wild about this show is that she wasn’t married. It wasn’t about her finding love. And it was just about her being a single woman, in the work world, and making a path for herself. Relatively unheard of for media at the time. And it was very successful and long running and led to her doing even more projects, in theater and in film. Hell, she earned 75% of an EGOT, the damn Oscar being the one just out of her reach (but she was nominated).

Mary did a whole lot, and was a strong feminist icon, without even attempting to be one. She just wanted to be as real as she could.

Mary is a hero.

And I think this is a fine, relatively standard, look at her career, and life. Including with interviews she gave in the past during this time. However, it is relatively normal and basic of a documentary. Just because she is an icon, does not immediately make it a must watch or anything. I don’t think it did much unique with the story. It was very by the books, and hey, that is fine. There isn’t anything wrong with it. It is just standard.

This is a documentary for people who want to learn more about Mary Tyler Moore and it does that job perfectly fine.

2 out of 4.

This film was watched as a part of the Seattle International Film Festival (SIFF). Year of the Fox has its World Premier on Saturday, May 13 2023.

One might wonder what the Year of the Fox refers to. I of course naturally assumed this was Chinese Zodiac reference. And no matter how many times I have seen those episodes of Jackie Chan Adventures, where they had the amulets based on the zodiac, I gradually accepted yes, there is probably a year of the fox. But I was wrong! No fox at all!

Pretty wild, but also, not wild in the sense that its a wild animal. Nah, they got a rooster though.

Year of the Fox was a film that stood out to me when looking for movies to watch for the festival. Something about the plot or the name just drew me to it. Hope it was justified!

Dang, those flowers should be put in the grass. They can’t grow on these tiles. 

Ivy (Sarah Jeffery) was adopted at one point. From two straight up white, rich parents. Is it the dream? Well, only if wealth is the dream. Because now she is 17 and her parents are going through a divorce. She doesn’t love her mom as much as her dad. Her dad is fun! He takes her on trips. He shows her the world!

So when given the chance, she decides to go live with him, and she can still hang out with her friends. Now these parties are wild. They are doing coke in the bathrooms. And don’t care about underage drinking. Is this something she wants to be doing with her life?

Unfortunately, it turns out that the social and wealthy elite aren’t always sunshine and lollipops. People get taken advantage of. People get led astray. And these relationships might not be ones that Ivy would like to grow.

Also starring Jane Adams, Arden Myrin, Balthazar Getty, Lexi Simonsen, and Jake Weber.

I have two rules: Don’t touch my Percocet, and do you have any Percocet?

Year of the Fox was one of the first films I was able to see during the festival. And I can certainly say it has very gorgeous scenes and interesting situations for some of the characters. But in all honesty, it doesn’t ramp up until the very end. I would say it takes awhile to get going, but in reality, the main going is just the climax of the film.

Year of the Fox is certainly a good idea for a story. It is just a bit boring along the way. Which is a shame, because I think Jeffery did a fine job in the lead, and so did the actor playing her father. You could tell he was a sleazeball, we just didn’t know his levels of sleaze.

Year of the Fox isn’t a bad film, it is just too long for the effort I believe. Because again, it has some nicely shot areas for a few of the scenes, and I enjoyed the first and final party scene. But I am having a huge problem remembering anything else about the film, and it isn’t just because I watched a lot of movies this festival already. I watch a lot of movies all of the time. It just doesn’t have a lot for me to remember after the fact.

2 out of 4.

This film was watched as a part of the Seattle International Film Festival (SIFF). The Mattachine Family has its world premier on Friday, May 12, 2023. You can see my interview with the director here!

Without a doubt, I think if I just saw the name of this film, I wouldn’t have given it a second thought. The Mattachine Family? That is a real fancy sounding word that I don’t understand, being the illiterate adult that I am. Turns out, Mattachine isn’t really an adjective to describe the type of family, but it can be a reference to many things.

Personally, I think that it mostly would refer to The Mattachine Society, which ended up being an early organization that came about for gay rights. Huh, look at that, I am learning already.

And before I get further, it is most important to point out that this film with many producers, also has Zach Braff attached as the executive producer. Which means he is putting that Scrubs money to good use. Diverse films!

If you look closely, those steps are The Mattachine Steps. Damn, I was wrong!

This is a story about family, which you probably got from the title.

Specifically, it is about Thomas (Nico Tortorella) and Oscar (Juan Pablo Di Pace). Thomas and Oscar are not only in a relationship, they were foster parents for a little kid! Wait, let’s back up a little bit.

Oscar used to be an actor! He was a child star, on sitcoms, got really famous and was himself a foster kid. So it makes sense for him to want to do the same. Things came crashing down when it came out that he was out.

Thomas and Oscar met at one point, and the rest is history! Just kidding, it has its ups and downs as well. In fact, Thomas is a photographer and is struggling to figure out what it means to have a family as an adult gay man. But fostering a kid is certainly one way.

But then, well, his mother is better, and takes him back, after a year in their life. And it turns out, Oscars career is finally starting to pick back up. So he is going to be away filming. And their kid is gone. So what is Thomas to do? He is alone, not sure where to go on in life. Should he try for adoption? Should he ignore kids completely and just focus on living his life with his friends? Being an adult is hard, and it turns out, so is making a family.

Also starring Garret Clayton, Khalilah Joi, Jake Choi, Heather Matarazzo, Emily Hampshire, Colleen Foy, and Annie Funke.

What is love if it is not holding someone from behind in your arms?Let’s go back to that “What is Mattachine” introduction I gave. Well, from the screenshot, you can see that there are Mattachine steps. These steps are known as outdoor workout stairs. Oh, so like, designed actually to be used for exercise? Maybe the real Mattachine family is the one that you need to put work into, and hopefully in the end, it will work out.

But if you dig deeper…you find out that they were outside of the home of Harry Hay…the founder of the Mattachine Society. Oh good, we are back to that, and it looks like I was right! But hey, the metaphor works nicely as well.

Anyways, this is a very unique film I would say. It isn’t really a standard family film, it isn’t a romcom for the leads. It is almost like dealing with a middle age crisis on what to do for the rest of your life, if you want a family but can’t seem to have one. Obviously the goal here is to define families in a more broad sense, for the friends and people you have in your life and choose to spend your time with. But it is certainly in the drama film, if not loosely, barely, in the romance genre side of things.

I think all of the leads did a fantastic job. They felt believable and were fully fleshed out characters. At the same time, this film had so many ideas floating in it, with the side characters and subplots. I wasn’t sure what the film was meant to be about, until we really got to the final scenes and conclusions began. In my mind, it felt like that this film was maybe first envisioned as a pilot for a television show, that can continue to tell the story of these friends and characters as they continue on for life, but somewhere it pivoted into what we have. I know it isn’t true, but it is the feeling I get from the film, with how disjointed some moments are from scene to scene.

Again, well acted, and honestly, a beautifully shot film. And if the “driveway fall” doesn’t suck you in early on, I am not sure if movies are meant for you.

2 out of 4.

This film was watched as a part of the Seattle International Film Festival (SIFF). Anu has its world premier on Sunday, May 14, 2023. You can see my interview with the director here!

If there is anything we vastly need more of, it is stories of non-white people in films. I fully believe that, and it is up to us as movie watchers to seek out these stories when they become available.

That was my driving factor for seeking out the film Anu. Anu is actually based on the book, Looking for Bapu, which came out in 2008. Written by an Indian-American woman, about a kid growing up in a mixed culture environment. And now, with Anu, telling the same story, is with Indian American director, Sudeshna Sen.

See? Exactly what I want, new perspectives, from people who aren’t like me, and non-male directors is only a plus at this point. Throughout these festival reviews, I will try my best to highlight and seek out films that aren’t the standard.

And if I don’t, Anu said she would glare at me all night and I don’t need that on my mind.

Anu (Diya Modi) is a preteen Indian American girl living in the Seattle region (hey, that is where I live. And where the festival is!) and has to deal with normal preteen girl issues. However, her life starts to change really early on when her grandfather, Bapu (Abhijeet Rane) passes away unexpectedly. With this, her life does begin to unravel a bit. She loved her Bapu, and she misses him, and how can she go on living without him?

From there though, she begins to see visions of him as a ghost! And it is definitely real. Anu wants to begin a quest to bring him back to life as a reincarnation of Siddhartha. But before that can happen, she has to go on a spiritual journey…in her own neighborhood and school. She has to become holy. Whether it is fasting, giving fortunes, or changing her style, she knows she needs to be able to bring him back, that is the only solution left in her life.

Also starring Lowell Deo, Pratik P. Shah, Tanvee Kale, Hudson Bruener, and Eden Campbell.

Clearly a walk to remember. Oh, no, different movie.

Anu is a classic coming of age story, or at least, a coming of age story, where culturally the way the character acts and interacts with her surroundings makes it more unique than the standard film of this variety. First I want to talk about the main actress, Diya Modi. This is her first feature length film where she has a major role and she knocks it out of the park. It is arguably my favorite aspect of the film. Her character has flaws and makes mistakes and acts like a girl that age, and is not some “perfect kid” learning to deal with death. She is a regular kid, learning to deal with death, through the good and bad reactions one might go through based on what they were taught.

Rane as Bapu was also delightful, and I wish he had more screentime. (This is arguably the plot of the film as well, getting him more screen time).

And although it is easy to remember the things that Anu did in the film in order to complete her spiritual journey, I will acknowledge I don’t remember much more of the film. It was great to see local sights and sounds, and just hear a character saying “Ballard” (a neighborhood of Seattle), but I don’t think the other supporting characters added enough for the full film. Her parents, her friends, it all becomes a little bit of a blur.

Anu is certainly not close to being a bad film; it was certainly a unique and interesting film! It is just also one where I was hoping for a bigger character catharsis and cast to help elevate it into bigger and better levels. It also gave me enough interest to seek out the book the film is based on, even if it is meant of elementary/middle school aged students.  I hope that the lead continues her acting career, not just for diversity sake, but because she handled the lead role so well.

2 out of 4.

See my interview with the director/producer of Attack of the Doc!, Chris Gore, here!

If you are someone around my age, and I hate to say this, male, with a big cable package growing up, you are likely familiar with Attack of the Show! It has an exclamation point, but no, it is not a musical. It started out in 2005, as a sort of replacement for the show The Screen Savers. You see, The Screen Savers was on TechTV, it was a live show, throughout the week, about technology and all of that. But then G4 bought TechTV, started to show more video game based TV show, and eventually replacing The Screen Savers time slot with Attack of the Show!

So what is the show? Good question. It was a lot of things. It was hosted at the start by Kevin Pereira and Kevin Rose. It was about movies, video games, weird stungs, fun games with celebrities, nerd culture, and more. It was about the internet and rose with internet humor, starting to show viral things to the masses, in case they missed it. Eventually, Olivia Munn joined their cast, in her real breakout role, becoming an even bigger deal and TV show. You know, because she was a woman who was good at joking around “with the guys” and giving them a taste of their own medicine.

It was barbaric and mediaeval and cutting edge in a lot of different ways. It is one of the first shows to ever incorporate twitter in any way to its broadcast. It is a show that didn’t like to ask questions or permission, but just constantly tried to get away with more and more.

It lasted about 7 years, and disappeared into a sea of Cops reruns, as G4TV like many specialty tv stations, began to show the same basic reality shows most of the day, because it gave more profit than original programming.

It also was a show that had this in it. Amazing!

So clearly, I watched some Attack of the Show. Weirdly enough, I thought I had memories of watching it in 8th grade, but that was before it came out! Instead, it wasn’t until college, in like 2007-09 or so that I remember seeing it a lot. Watching with friends, seeing the viral videos and wild and wacky shenanigans was for sure ground breaking at the time. It was like all of the best parts of the internet in one package so everyone can be included. To clarify, I mean the best parts of the internet that can be shown on television.

It is a show that can only exist in a time bubble, and nothing that can be recreated now. Afterall, they tried, even with bringing back Kevin Pereira to host in 2021. But the ratings weren’t there, the viewers didn’t care, and it was a different beast. Why couldn’t it exist anymore? Why did it have problems? Well, the documentary, Attack of the Doc!, goes into all of that and it is pretty clear why it couldn’t exist today.

The director of the documentary is Chris Gore, who was the official Film Critic of Attack of the Show!, and had his own segment called DVDuesday. A weekly segment about new releases and what should be bought or rented or skipped. So he is someone intimately familiar with the material, and had a lot of people on to tell the story of the rise and fall of the show. And the documentary was put together through funding and Kickstarter in order to be made.

Overall, I would say it is a nice history of the show. What the documentary could certainly do less with is strange rants about woke or cancel culture. And lamenting the changing of humor. That made things weird and uncomfortable for me, personally. And made it something I wouldn’t fully love to watch multiple times. But it does show a lot of the greatest hits and makes it clear why it existed, which is one fans of the love would love to go through. The extra commentary? A weird move, but hey, it was a move they wanted to make.

2 out of 4.

New Jackie Chan movie?!

Hooray! It has been some amount of time. Honestly, I think I just naturally assumed at this point he retired. As of this moment, he is 69 years old (nice) and spent his life doing action films and hardcore stunt work. It must take a tole on his body and at some point, you gotta stop pushing yourself so hard and actually enjoy the fruits of your labor. You know, unless the retirement age keeps going up. But that is another topic.

This time Jackie Chan is seemingly picking a new sort of costar. A horse. A horse he is, presumably, going to Ride On. Thus the title.

But over the last fifteen years, there was no guarantee we would get classic Jackie Chan action. He is in more drama films and films where he has a small role. So this could have all been a ruse, who knows!

There is a mask, what if it is not Chan behind the mask?

First of all, this was not a ruse! Lao Luo (Jackie Chan) is an old man, who is mostly staying out of people’s way. He has a daughter, Xiao Bao (Haocun Liu), who wants him to just be chill and careful. It turns out he used to be a stuntman for films. So he had to do hard tasks, and his body took a beating. Huh, sounds familiar. But eventually, at some point, a mishap did happen, and it took a big toll on Luo, where he for sure had to stop.

This led to other issues. And eventually, many debts.

So now he is just is raising a horse, notably Red Hare, basically his best friend. They train together and trust each other. So when some debt collectors come and try to attack Luo, he is able to fight them off, with the help of his horse, and some recordings have this go viral.

Turns out, this was just what he needed to get back into the game. An older man, sure, but the horse? Hell yeah. They can do exciting horse action stunts, doesn’t matter his age.

Where does that leave us? An old man, who was already injured before, putting his body on the line again. And still debt issues and legal issues at the same time. Too much for a retired life.

Also starring Rongguang Yu, Kevin Guo, Jing Wu, and Joey Yung.

Is there anything stronger than the bond between a man and his horse?

Ride On is a film that has a lot going on with it. In fact, I would say, too much.

In one obvious way it feels like a love letter to Jackie Chan’s career, just hiding it behind a new face. It is really easy to see this plot aspect, especially when it comes to the character trying to protect the horse, yet still push the horse to more and more dangerous stunts, despite the obvious limitations. The initial disgust and anger towards using CGI for a stunt, even though it was one that clearly would hurt. And of course another moment looking at a montage of the characters “past stunts” when they were younger.

That is the movie I was hoping to see, while still getting the benefit of some interesting cool fight and stunt work. Yes I wanted it both ways.  But I knew that at least the fights and stunts throughout the film would actually be helped with CGI and safety would be a concern, because it is not the 80s anymore and there would be no chance of disaster.

And so I was happy with the fun fights and stunts and classic Jackie Chan humor with these fisticuffs, just also with a horse.

Unfortunately, the film is bogged down with the legal and debt story. That is likely another aspect of stunt work they wanted to highlight. These people are movie stars, whose bodies decay and don’t get the riches the face stars get. And they have legal problems that can tear their lives apart. But that aspect of the film just wasn’t given to us as well as the other exciting parts. It slowed down the film, and didn’t really give the best context.

I wondered of course if this film, Ride On, was meant to be a retirement film for Chan. But IMDB showed 7 titles currently in Upcoming, it means that Chan had a couple year break, maybe from just COVID concerns, and now he is still going forth and ready to do his thing.

2 out of 4.

Before I forget to fit this scene in naturally, please watch this clip from the 2009 film Black Dynamite: here. It is about Little Richard! And so is this documentary.

I have been pretty excited to watch this one as soon as I heard about it. I missed it when it came by for Make Believe Seattle, but thankfully it is also getting released in many cities around the USA, so the opportunity didn’t leave me in the dark for too long.

What is not to like and want to learn about Little Richard? A famed musician, who helped invent Rock ‘n Roll, who was known for being gay, at a time when he could be jailed just for being black.

I go into this documentary acknowledging that I am pretty dumb on this subject, so I am excited to be enlightened.

Don’t ask me to name more than 1 Little Richard song, please. 

To be fair, I didn’t know how open Little Richard was about his sexuality. Specifically, I assumed he had kept things private in that regard, because it was the 1950’s. But it wasn’t like a big secret. He talked about it in interviews, on the road, on stage, and a lot of places. He was also very fluid, he wouldn’t let sexuality stop him from having relationships with whom he wanted to pursue. I mean that in the least creepiest way of saying that.

He was a man living his life the way he wanted to live it.

One of the most exciting things I learned from this documentary were the original lyrics and purpose of the song Tutti Frutti. Which I will not spoil in this review. But obviously you can look that up without the documentary, if you really wanted to know.

There is a lot more to learn about Richard in this documentary, how he got his start, how he kept his success, and the strives he overcame. And honestly, that is about it. I don’t think it ever really went on a bigger, deeper dive on the subject. There weren’t big hidden secrets uncovered. It was just a lit on the normal level by the end. And hey, that is fine. I did learn some things. I just thought I would get a little bit more by the end as well.

2 out of 4.