WHAT’S IT ABOUT

Terror strikes when a flight from Los Angeles to Shanghai goes down in the Pacific Ocean. Stuck on a sinking plane, survivors soon find themselves in a fight for their lives as man-eating sharks start to circle the wreckage.

MOVIESinMO REVIEW

A broken lithium battery triggers a series of calamities that truly disintegrate a passenger airplane. The action goes quickly, and the anticipation is quite real. For a moment, it seems that the movie promises to deliver something spectacular. But once the airplane lands, the sharks arrive, and the movie fails to deliver anything after this. The difference between what the movie is capable of doing and what it ultimately does turns out to be the heart of the story. Harlin made his name in the 1990s, directing action flicks that were loud, bold, and interesting enough for audiences. However, even if he possesses enough talent to make great features, the script, which was developed by four writers, treats the actors as mannequins rather than its characters, making it impossible for the camera to help them make their characters alive. Take Ben, portrayed by Aaron Eckhart, for example. He is meant to be the unwilling hero who acts as the second-in-command only after the captain gets injured. But Eckhart has very little to work with. There is one line describing his background story about taking care of a sick child, and the line is followed by no elaboration. He emerges from the crash alive, gives commands, and appears anxious, but the movie never calls upon him to earn his rank. It is not because he deserves it. The same applies to Ben Kingsley in the role of the senior captain, who has around ten minutes of screen time at most. It is just a paycheck for him. This is where the movie falters the most. Deep Water assigns roles without any justification for why anyone is in them. A disaster movie operates on how significant the danger is to its characters, and this movie makes sure to keep everyone at a distance from the action. Parents head off to the airplane toilet, leaving their children behind, and then they disappear from the movie. A pair of gamers express some feelings for one another that go nowhere. An elderly woman gives dating advice to someone, and that is her contribution. None of these people have anything more than job descriptions. The movie confuses being there with serving a purpose. The one performance that breaks through belongs to Angus Sampson, playing Dan, the loud, chain-smoking passenger whose busted phone charger causes the whole disaster. Sampson leans all the way into the character’s ugliness, and it works, mostly because he is the only actor allowed to actually do something instead of just standing in a scene looking scared. That says less about his performance and more about how little the script gives everybody else. When the sharks show up, the film adopts a pattern that drones on without variation. It’s simple: a leg goes into the water, a shark bites it off, there’s blood, and the same cycle repeats. The special effects are terrible, bearing more of a resemblance to television than to cinema. There are a few shocking deaths that were meant to be funny, including the final helicopter scene that is the only time the filmmakers realized that this is a comedy, although it is too late for the realization to make a difference. What makes this harder to shake off is that the film clearly had the pieces to say something with its setup. Every survivor lands in a different broken piece of the plane, trapped with a different problem: one group stuck underwater sharing a shrinking air pocket, another drifting in open water with nothing but a life vest between them and the sharks below. That is a smart way to structure a disaster movie, giving each cluster of survivors its own version of the same nightmare. It is one of the few ideas here that actually shows some thought. But the film never follows through. It sets up interesting situations and then resolves them the same flat way every time, with a shark grabbing someone and the scene cutting away before it means anything. There is a version of Deep Water that works. Harlin has made a great shark movie before, back in 1999 with Deep Blue Sea, a film that knew it was ridiculous and had fun being ridiculous. This one wants credit for the same campy spirit without doing the work to earn it. It plays things safe right when it should be leaning into the chaos, and the result sits in an uncomfortable middle ground, too serious to be a good time and too silly to be taken seriously. It is hard to overlook how familiar I find this whole movie! Harlin had been doing all kinds of work as a director for years now, and here he is once again, handed another mid-budget flop even while other directors with better intuitions and names are waiting for their turn to make movies. It is this frustration that underlies every unexciting frame of Deep Water. The same old familiar names appear again and again, and so the end result is a film that is sometimes impressive, but for the most part, without any content to it. Deep Water is not the worst shark movie ever made. It has one genuinely strong sequence, one performance worth watching, and a handful of moments dumb enough to be enjoyable by accident. But a movie this uninterested in its own people cannot expect an audience to care what happens to them. The crash is thrilling. Everything after it is a chore.

OUR RATING – A SLIGHT BITE 3

WHAT’S IT ABOUT

George Hardy is a shepherd who loves to read murder mysteries to his sheep, never suspecting that they can understand him. When George is found dead under mysterious circumstances, the sheep decide to solve the crime themselves, even if it means leaving their meadow for the first time and facing the fact that the human world isn’t as simple as it appears in books.

MOVIESinMO REVIEW

I saw “The Sheep Detectives,” intending to roll my eyes and fall asleep right away. A movie with the premise of talking sheep solving a murder seemed like the type of idea usually proposed by the relative of a studio executive. But somehow, as the first joke came along followed by the first moment of silence relating to loss, I found myself melting. The movie is stupid, yes, but what is more surprising is that it is full of heart, which makes this combination quite difficult to achieve. The tale is adapted from a German book titled “Three Bags Full,” and it happens in the small town named Denbrook in England. In this film, Hugh Jackman has played a shepherd named George Hardy who tends sheep by day and reads them mystery novels during the night. He takes care of every sheep as if they’re his own family; he gives them names and looks after them with a dedication that is almost devotional. He is wrong in believing that the sheep do not understand him when he talks to them. George is found dead outside of his trailer, and the local cop, played by Nicholas Braun, thinks it was an accident and goes on with his life. However, the flock knows something else. Under the leadership of a wise sheep named Lily, voiced by Julia Louis-Dreyfus, the sheep begin to investigate the nature of George’s death and find out the truth while the humans in the movie keep following them around. That cast includes George’s estranged daughter Rebecca, played by Molly Gordon, who returns home just as the murder investigation begins, and a young reporter named Elliot, played by Nicholas Galitzine, who sees the case as his big break. Emma Thompson shows up as a sharp-tongued lawyer handling George’s estate, and she steals nearly every scene she is in. Hong Chau plays an innkeeper with a soft spot for George and a secret of her own. The voice cast rounds out with Chris O’Dowd as Mopple, a sheep who cannot forget anything unpleasant, Patrick Stewart as the wise elder Sir Richfield, Regina Hall as a sheep with a bit too much pride, and Bryan Cranston as Sebastian, a loner who has cut himself off from the rest of the flock for reasons that slowly come into focus. What amazed me most was the way the film captures grief so honestly. In this tale, sheep have the special ability to overcome anything that makes them sad. Whenever they face something bad they simply get over it and they don’t see death as anything else but turning into a cloud. However, it takes only one sheep named Sebastian to show that it is possible not to shy away from grief and let it get through rather than let it go. The film suggests that learning to cope with grief, rather than absconding from it, is crucial to a deeper understanding of love. Now, as someone who watches these stories with an eye on who gets to matter on screen, I have to point out where the film falls short. There are two Black actors in the human cast: Tosin Cole as a rival shepherd named Caleb and Kobna Holdbrook-Smith as the town’s reverend. Both men are written into the story mainly to keep the audience guessing about who committed the murder. Their screen time is thin, and neither character gets much of an inner life beyond serving as a possible suspect. Regina Hall lends her voice to one of the sheep, which is a nice touch, but a voice role in a herd of a dozen animals is not the same as giving a Black actor real weight in the plot. For a film this warmhearted, it is disappointing that the Black characters exist mostly to be looked at with suspicion rather than to be understood. Technically, the film holds up well. The visual effects on the sheep are convincing enough that you forget you are watching animation layered over live action. Jackman only appears for a short stretch of the runtime, but his presence lingers over the rest of the story the way a good opening chapter lingers over a whole book. Nicholas Braun carries the middle and back half of the film with a bumbling charm that never tips into annoying, and his scenes with Emma Thompson are some of the funniest in the movie. Molly Gordon does fine work, though her role feels close to characters she has played before, which makes her arc a little easy to predict. The film does not try to reinvent the whodunit. The mystery itself is fairly simple to follow, and sharp viewers will likely guess the ending before the sheep do. That is fine, because the mystery was never really the point. The point is watching a flock of animals learn how to sit with sadness instead of running from it, and watching a group of human suspects reveal who they really are once the truth comes out. Kids will laugh at the sheep antics. Adults will feel something they were not quite ready for. “The Sheep Detectives” will not change how people think about the genre, and it does not fully deliver on the promise of its supporting Black characters. But it earns its emotional moments honestly, and it never talks down to its audience, young or old. That combination of humor and sincerity is rare enough that I am comfortable calling this one of the more pleasant surprises of the year.

OUR RATING – A SHEEPISH 7

What’s It About

A decade after his death, genre-defying filmmaker William Greaves has one last trick up his sleeve with what he considered the most important event he captured on film: a 1972 party he engineered with the living luminaries of the Harlem Renaissance. For four hours, this extraordinary group – many of whom had not seen each other in fifty years – reminisced, critiqued, argued, laughed and drank while wrestling with their place in a rapidly shifting cultural landscape. Shot on 16mm film, newly restored and now directed by Greaves’ son David, this landmark film is at once a self-exploration and an inquiry into the heart of the critical mass of energy called the Harlem Renaissance. William Greaves’ intent was not only to document these artists and intellectuals as they spoke about their lives and work but also to plumb the meaning of the extraordinary creative period in which they lived to help us better understand how culture has been passed on from one generation to another and the role that the artist plays in keeping it alive.

What’s It About

When a mysterious discovery on the outskirts of a remote Korean harbor town unleashes an unprecedented and devastating creature, the isolated village is plunged into a desperate fight for survival. With the community laying in ruins, a local police chief and a resilient policewoman must forge an uneasy alliance with a rugged group of local hunters. Together, this mismatched team ventures into the treacherous terrain to track down and destroy the relentless predator before it completely erases their home from the map.

WHAT’S IT ABOUT

When an aid worker vanishes in the first hours of war in Ukraine, a former Navy SEAL and CIA operative crosses into the shattered country to bring her home-facing mercenaries, shifting battle lines, and ghosts he thought he left behind.

MOVIESinMO REVIEW

“Man of War” is an exceptional film depicting the life of Connor (LaMonica Garrett), a former Special Forces soldier looking for closure after serving in the military. The film opens with Connor sitting alone with a bottle of alcohol, looking through photographs, holding a gun in his hands, and being riddled with scars. All of the scars Connor has on his body tell a story even before Connor opens his mouth to speak. Soon after we see Connor in the above scene, we hear a ringing cell phone. All of a sudden, the sorrow that has been building in Connor now turns into a mission. Russia has invaded Ukraine, and now Connor’s adopted daughter, Riley (Kira Kosarin), has been captured by a ruthless Russian commander named Koniev (Daniel Bernhardt). Connor calls on an old friend, Charlie (Jason Patric), to help him escape the life of peace he has been living and return to the war zone he thought he would never return to again. After arriving in Ukraine, the film changes and becomes a quest for Riley’s rescue through the partnership of Connor and Dany, Connor’s local guide (Andrew Howard). They face numerous deadly encounters as they try to find Riley before she is lost for good. Written and directed by William Kaufman, this storyline has been used in many films; however, the difference here is the location. This is not a fictitious war in an invented nation; it is the actual invasion of Ukraine being covered by media and this makes the film carry an emotional impact that most action movies fail to deliver. The action in Kaufman’s gunfight scenes is sharp and clean. Each punch that hits has a clear purpose behind it. Kaufman is one of the top directors in this low-budget action genre because he works hard to ensure that every fight is done extremely well, despite the fact that the story doesn’t have much of a backbone. There is a moment where Connor has a conversation with Dany about how war is hell and why he continues to make it a part of his life; it is a valid point, and the film seems poised to explore the significance of having a life built on violence. Instead, Kaufman has made the conscious choice to end this moment and return to the next sequence of shooting an automatic weapon. In demonstrating respect for these veterans and for the real-world stories on which they are based, Kaufman has ultimately fallen short of presenting a film that probes into what war really costs after you view it. Garrett carries the lead role with a quiet, steady presence, and it is worth noting how rare it still is to see a Black actor anchor a war thriller like this one, front and center, not as backup to a white lead. He plays Connor as a man locked down tight, controlled to the point where the audience never quite gets close to him. Bernhardt plays the villain with a cold, nasty edge, and even though he disappears for a big stretch of the middle of the film, the final clash between him and Connor pays off. The real find here is Howard as Dany. He brings humor, heart, and a real sense of loss to a man fighting to protect his family and his country at the same time. He is easily the most alive character on screen, and he gives the film whatever emotional center it has. The action itself fulfills the reason why people came out to see this film- there are plenty of explosions, gunfights, and close-quarter fighting, with most of it fairly intense and fast-paced throughout the majority of the script’s run-time. However, there are elements that show this film was made on a low budget such as; when filming certain scenes in cars they used a green screen that didn’t look very convincing; using pre-shot images of buildings outside so many times that you begin to question whether they are really actual videos; the last showdown scene had some very basic filmmaking errors regarding if/when the characters were within shooting range of each other; combined with the dark footage made it near impossible to keep track of who was where and/or who shot who. This last part of the movie had a lot of negative impacts because of the low-budget shoot. At 110 minutes, the film runs a little long for how simple its story is, especially since it throws Connor into the war zone almost immediately. Nothing about the plot will surprise anyone who has seen a rescue mission movie before. Still, there is something admirable about a film that tries to sit inside a real and painful moment in history instead of hiding behind a fictional stand-in. It does not always know what to say about that history, but the attempt to say something at all sets it apart from movies that only want to entertain. Man of War works best as a solid, well-made action film with real firepower behind it, carried by a strong lead performance from Garrett and a scene-stealing turn from Howard. It reaches for something deeper about the toll of war and the men who keep choosing to fight it, but it never fully gets there, choosing safety over hard answers. Fans of gritty, boots-on-the-ground combat films will find plenty to enjoy, even with the rough patches in the visual effects and the confusing final battle.

OUR RATING – A HARD FOUGHT 6

What’s It About

In the 1970s, Detroit, John Miller falls for a local gangster’s girl and lands in prison for a crime he didn’t commit. With his life ruined, Miller hatches a plan for revenge.

What’s It About

During the alternate events of Resident Evil 2 (1998), Bryan, a medical courier, is in the process of making a delivery when a sudden outbreak forces him to fight for survival.

What’s It About

After surviving a plane crash, a former special forces soldier finds himself trapped in the unforgiving Alaskan wilderness with his combat dog. Together, they battle the elements and other animals in a harsh landscape that would likely kill any other man or dog.

What’s It About

Based on a true story, a young Black FBI agent (Yahya Abdul-Mateen II) is sent into 1960s Mississippi to investigate a wave of brutal killings targeting civil rights leaders. Forced to work alongside notorious mafia hitman Greg Scarpa (Mark Wahlberg), he finds himself pulled into a deadly hunt where justice and vengeance begin to blur. When the system is broken, two men divided by everything agree on one thing: the law has limits. They don’t.

What’s It About

Greg Focker’s son, Henry, brings his girlfriend, a trained FBI hostage negotiator, home to meet the family. Greg soon gets worried when Henry tells everyone that he plans to propose to her.