Mufasa: The Lion King (2024)

Score: 3 / 5

Remember when Disney made sequels to its major animated features as direct-to-home-video flings? We all had one we liked. With few exceptions, we can all agree most of them were "bad," and while I generally don't use or approve of such evaluative words, I do agree that most were subpar technically and artistically in most aspects of their existence. Some are still fun, though, and a select few include some really brilliant moments. The Lion King was no exception to the Disney sequel tradition, spawning in addition to the Timon & Pumbaa television series, The Lion King II: Simba's Pride in 1998 and The Lion King 1½ in 2004. While The Lion King (1994) is simply not a favorite of mine (the stage musical far surpasses it in my esteem), its sequels are surprisingly among my preferred of the period. They include music and characters and humor that adds to my appreciation of the original rather than detracting or taking the material in a weird new direction.

Mufasa: The Lion King is in a similar vein, marking the first sequel to a Disney live action remake of a classic since (and I could be wrong here) 102 Dalmatians in 2000. The origin story of its title character, it's curious this is the film Disney chose to make after the passing of James Earl Jones, to whom they notably dedicate this picture. Young Mufasa learns about Milele, a mythical paradise which his small pride hopes to find, from his beloved parents (Anika Noni Rose and Keith David), from whom he is violently taken (and effectively orphaned) by a sudden flood. Saved from hungry crocodiles far downriver by another young cub named Taka, Mufasa is adopted into another pride, this one run by King Obasi (Lennie James). Obasi wants nothing to do with the outsider, but his son Taka and Taka's mother Eshe (Thandiwe Newton) care for him and raise him to be a conscientious and helpful leader in the pride. Cared for by the females, he learns to hunt and provide for the males.

While hunting, Mufasa and Eshe are attacked by two white lions, Mufasa killing one. The other escapes to its own pride of albino outcasts, led by Kiros (Mads Mikkelsen), whose son is now dead. Vowing revenge, Kiros leads the white lions to slaughter the royal pride. They do, with Mufasa and Taka barely escaping with their lives. Together, they work to find the lush oasis of Milele and live in peace with their new friends Sarabi (Tiffany Boone) and Rafiki (John Kani). But Kiros still hunts for them, and a final battle looms, fated, to determine the true king of... well, the Serengeti, I guess?

Much like the original classic, this story has the hallmarks of mythic storytelling and functions according to the logic of both fables and tragedies. As an origin story and personal trauma drama, Mufasa is an affecting if archetypal tale told with conviction and resonance. As a franchise entry -- following the "live action"-esque 2019 remake -- it adds some new lore and characterizations that I found fun and thoroughly entertaining. As a standalone film, however, this movie never quite reaches beyond itself and often feels a bit lost in its own visual splendor, a problem that plagued its predecessor. A few new musical numbers -- penned by Lin-Manuel Miranda, who I wish would just stop -- tend toward the forgettable, even if they do add some charm to the film's occasional doldrums. And as fan-service for a company seemingly doubling down on making money over telling worthy stories, Mufasa is pretty great, especially if the kid in you always wanted to know why Pride Rock looks the way it does, how Scar got his name and his wound, and why a possibly insane mandrill would bless a lion's cub.

Various elements will work for different audiences, and your endurance will be tested regardless. Visually, the whole thing is stunning, and frankly the ingenuity and shock of Kiros and his albino pride had me audibly gasping in the auditorium multiple times. Then again, the misadventure our heroes take through a snowy mountain pass felt forced and strange as far as spectacle goes, and made me want to look at a map for snowy mountain ranges in that region. In terms of voice acting, there's not much joy here, especially with the childish and wholly unnecessary framing story of Simba and Nala's daughter Kiara (Blue Ivy Carter) being scared by a thunderstorm and told the story of her grandfather by Rafiki while Timon and Pumbaa (Billy Eichner and Seth Rogen) recite an obnoxious series of low-brow jokes about bodily functions and Disney's legal department. But Mikkelsen is a welcome voice here, bringing suitably sly menace to a character not dissimilar from the villain we know and love, and the two leading stars (Aaron Pierre as Mufasa and Kelvin Harrison Jr. as Taka) carry the film capably.

What does work exceptionally well is director Barry Jenkins (Moonlight, If Beale Street Could Talk, The Underground Railroad), who was by no means in his element here. His work in American life is almost forgotten in this fantasy African realm of pseudo-realism, but the high-tech and enormous budget don't seem to scare or overwhelm the veteran auteur. His regular cinematographer James Laxton shoots things with a patience and interest that can only have been bred in real-time hands-on interaction with real actors physically embodying the lions in physical proximity. What is surely the state of the art will be revealed by others, but mark me: when inside details about how this film was created are clarified, movies will change for the better. Much like Peter Jackson's groundbreaking work on Gollum (and other creatures) in The Lord of the Rings, there is technology here that will pave the path forward to more realistic digital characters rooted firmly in live performances by actors. And Laxton draws us in with gentle and graceful approaches, which is not the norm for this studio, this genre, or this age. He makes you want to breathe deeply to experience this beautiful world through your other senses.

And while I wouldn't even say this is the best example of photorealistic moviemaking from Disney -- that accolade must still bejewel the crown of The Jungle Book -- it does improve upon The Lion King by treating its characters like actors rather than like animals who inexplicably dance and sing, choosing now to let them emote and express in increasingly accessible ways. I don't really like all Miranda's new music, but Jenkins makes them more interesting by staging and dramatizing them the way he does. In fact, I'd be interested to see if a film like this launches Jenkins into more mainstream fare, and I enthusiastically agree with a rumbling I read somewhere that he'd do well to direct a film adaptation of something like the Broadway hits Hamilton or Once on this Island. Jenkins isn't able to control the story here, and does feel a bit railroaded into his lane, but his choices within what is under his control are brilliant and help the movie rise above expectations set by what came before. The film pulses with energy and with artistry, and I couldn't look away from its splendor, even when studio and IP constraints threatened to bore me.

Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny (2023)

Score: 3.5 / 5

We begin this adventure with a flashback to 1944 -- which, if you are anal about these things too, occurs about six years after The Last Crusade -- as Indiana and his colleague Basil Shaw (Toby Jones) attempt to loot a Nazi train loaded with art and artifacts. They're looking for the Lance of Longinus, the "holy spear" that supposedly pierced the side of Christ during his crucifixion, which turns out to be a fake. The Nazis capture them, but it doesn't take too long for them to grab another great bit of mystery history: half of Archimedes' Dial, an "Antikythera" orrery meant to locate fissures in time and possibly allow for time travel. They escape with this half of the Dial before the train is derailed by the Allies.

Launching forward in time, the movie proper begins in 1969 (about twelve years after Kingdom of the Crystal Skull), as Dr. Jones is preparing to retire from Hunter College. Harrison Ford breathes new vibrancy into this character, who is about a decade younger than the actor himself, not through any remarkable physical work but rather through his experience of age. We got whiffs of it in the previous film, but here Mangold works with Ford to showcase Indiana's world-weariness, yes, but not in a hard-boiled way. He's still smart as a whip, fiery and impassioned, and willing to just do rather than hem and haw about things. It's not the existential agony of aging Mangold handled so hauntingly in Logan from both Patrick Stewart and Hugh Jackman; this is poignant and resonant fulfillment (and some dissatisfaction) found at the end of a long and distinguished career, and it's fleshed out effectively over the course of this film. Unfortunately, Ford is aggressively de-aged here (which doesn't bother me as much as some who simply cannot abide the uncanny valley phenomenon); I say "unfortunately" because, physical appearance aside, it's jarring to hear Ford's gravelly, real-life voice of today coming from himself looking rather like he looked forty years ago.

Indiana's motives have never been particularly clear to me in this franchise, beyond a vague sense of historical responsibility and anti-fascism, but for the first time, I really understood what drives him in this film: he is, at heart, an academic, and so when the thought of time travel begins to gestate for him, his eyes spark to life at the prospect of ending his life in some of the history to which he's devoted his career. Why should this matter to him? Well, he's lonely and depressed. This film brusquely changes direction from the end of Crystal Skull by mentioning that Indiana's son Mutt (who was played by Shia LaBeouf) died in Vietnam and that Marion (Karen Allen) has left her depressed husband and filed for legal separation. It's a crude but workable way to cut out Mutt -- who everyone hated, and I will never understand why -- and of course Marion herself, who is probably still as capable of helping the action as Indiana. I'd have liked this story to include both those characters more, because Crystal Skull is unfairly maligned by audiences for completely mysterious reasons to me (I love it and have never heard any rational arguments against it beyond unspecific personal taste preferences... and of course the fridge scene), and I'd like to see how an aging Indiana Jones handles suddenly having an adult family.

But what about the plot? Without his family, who will Indy team up with? Never fear, Phoebe Waller-Bridge is here, playing Helena Shaw, the now-adult daughter of Basil Shaw from the prologue. Helena reveals that she is Indiana's goddaughter and that her father died after years obsessing over the Dial. She herself wants to pick up his research, and so Indiana reluctantly gives her his half of the Dial. Then enters the villain: Mads Mikkelsen plays a Nazi astrophysicist named Jurgen Voller. He is also de-aged in the opening flashback; Mikkelsen will always be the best casting choice for a villain from vaguely eastern Europe. Voller, who is after both pieces of the Dial, was working with Hitler during the war but now has his own aims, something that he announces in the film's dramatic lurch to its climax and which I won't spoil here. He attacks the school, murdering some faculty and framing Indiana, who takes to horseback in a spectacular chase sequence through a moon landing parade, an antiwar protest march, and the NYC subway.

Helena, meanwhile, is revealed to be an antiquities smuggler, seeking historical artifacts to sell on the black market to buttress her gambling debts. That, for me, was perhaps the single biggest disappointment in this film, because it's a contrived gimmick meant to spark action and comedy rather than reveal any characterization or offer storytelling originality. Her greedy opportunism allows the film, soon enough, to hop over to Tangier, where she's trying to sell and ends up collecting another sidekick in Teddy (Ethann Isidore). From here, it's a regular Indiana Jones adventure, with his ragtag team trying to thwart the pursuing fascists even as they lead them to the treasure.

But this is not a Steven Spielberg film, and it's also not particularly adept with its action sequences. Mangold is a wonderful director, but I can't help but wish Spielberg had agreed to direct the final Indiana Jones movie. There is some connective tissue -- call it artistic integrity -- missing between Crystal Skull and Dial of Destiny; most people felt that between the third and fourth film, but not me. I feel it now. The editing is clunky and the action choreography is often awkward and incoherent; the fault could be on multiple heads, but this is a far cry from the thrilling precision of similar sequences in major recent action sequels like John Wick and Mission: Impossible.

Think I'm being harsh? Look at two sequences and tell me otherwise. First, the car chase through Tangier is an absolute mess, when it could (seemingly easily) be both visually satisfying and logically sound. Secondly, and more damningly to my mind, there's a scene in which Indy and Helena travel to the Aegean to ask an old friend to help them dive to an old shipwreck that might contain the other half of the Dial. The setup is frustrating enough, dramatically (looking snidely at the screenplay by committee that needed more workshopping), because the old friend is Antonio Banderas, getting top billing for roughly three scenes of work, who seems to be pretty gay with his hunky shipmates. After almost no time, they're all jumping into the deeps and Indy finds himself in a sunken ship surrounded by eels. It's a fabulous concept, of course, and scratches the "icky creature" scene in each movie of this franchise; Indy is taunted at one point that eels are like underwater snakes, which he fearfully and indignantly rejects the thought of. But the scene itself is so poorly composed that it's difficult to see and even harder to remember; terrible lighting, miserable cinematography, an over-reliance on CG action, little cause or reason, and a bizarre deus ex machina make what could have been a brilliant and terrifying scene a good time for a bathroom break.

And then there's the film's ending sequence, which I desperately wish to have had more of. So rarely in these films do we see the full effect of whatever magical item Indiana has rescued or restored: sure, the Ark lets out some ghosts that melt people, the Stones bring fertility to the village, the Grail saves Henry Jones from his nearly fatal gunshot, and the replaced Skull allows the aliens to reactivate their ship and leave Earth. It's usually a fast scene with little grounding in reality, lots of magic and mystery, and then we're done, so when this movie started hinting at time travel, I expected the same. I was so wrong. I don't want to spoil the ending, but they do indeed travel to another time -- one wholly unexpected and endlessly satisfying for both plot purposes as well as an insight into Archimedes himself -- and we hang out there for a while. It's a great sequence, one that allows Ford the chance to let Indiana be truly in awe of his life's work and the experience of being present in history. A climax to a series that reveals more about the main character than we've ever seen? Yes, please! I just wish we had had more time with that, or that it could have been more foregrounded in the two hours that led to this sequence, because it kind of comes out of nowhere, floors us, and then the movie ends.

I hope that, while this is the last Indiana Jones film, Harrison Ford isn't done making movies. His dramatic work here is the best he's given in a few years, and I'd love to see him lean into dramatically heavy roles for older men, maybe showcasing his real skills and remarkable humor in ways we haven't seen much from him since the '80s. I also hope this film doesn't fall prey to the polarized and polarizing critical commentary of our social media, because it won't survive that. Dial of Destiny is a multilayered puzzle box meant to satisfy young audiences as well as old fans of the series, to bridge the gaps between loved and unloved entries, and to ultimately try to end an iconic franchise. It's not going to win everyone, but I hope people don't mindlessly junk it along with Crystal Skull; even as a fan of that film, this new one made me want to rewatch it and enjoy it afresh. A final thought: Dial of Destiny is about two similar men (again, a familiar trope in this series between Indy and his villains), one who wants to control history, the other who, by appreciating history too much, has become inert and stuck in history with regret. There's a lot going on here, more than an Indiana Jones has the right to offer; I just wish it had been a little more. Or wasn't the end. Or both.

Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore (2022)

Score: 4.5 / 5

Unpopular opinion: I really love these movies. The staggering amount of creativity and detail crafted to realize such a magical "wizarding world" in this franchise is the kind of stuff movies are made for. Transporting in the best way, they stop just shy of escapism because they also deal with real, dark issues. This newest installment hits topical issues perhaps a little too solidly, with a significant plot point hinging on an attempt to steal an election and defraud the public. But it doesn't quite feel pandering to current issues because there is so much world-building happening. Perhaps that's why some don't like these films; each one is actively, aggressively engaging with the kind of fantasy world-building that usually works best in an initial installment of a franchise, not halfway through the series. It's a bit exhausting at this point, when we should be invested in character and drama rather than in catching all the exciting new tidbits.

Five-ish years have passed since Gellert Grindelwald -- again in a new form, this time played by Mads Mikkelsen -- launched his war, and now he's angling for social and political acceptance and adoration. His quest has briefly stalled as he is arraigned by the International Confederation of Wizards, but due to procedural inadequacies (and some moles), he is acquitted of his crimes against the wizarding and Muggle worlds and is suddenly launched into the global spotlight as a candidate for Supreme Mugwump. It's a lot of plot to take in, and the film moves at a breakneck pace to cover its ground, both narratively and geographically. Characters in China in one scene are in Germany in the next, and the amount of creative design is never less than overwhelming.

Newt (Eddie Redmayne) and his group of friends are tasked by Dumbledore (Jude Law) with a series of globe-trotting adventures to thwart Grindelwald's acolytes from assassinating political leaders and attempting to steal the election. One infiltrates Grindelwald's followers, one is imprisoned and needs release, one is framed for attempted murder, and all try to keep safe a Qilin, a magical deer-like creature that can determine someone's purity of spirit and thus bestow the office of Supreme Mugwump to the most deserving. This movie is all about its plot, obviously, and so the characters are thinly written and mostly undeveloped, compared to the massive character work done in the first two installments. Case in point: Credence (Ezra Miller) feels mostly shoehorned in here, and his story is getting less compelling by the minute. Whereas he initially was a fascinating character, and was essentially a MacGuffin for the mystery plot in the second film, here he just pops in a few times to learn that he's been lied to repeatedly and that his choices have been the product of gaslighting and abuse.

But I could hardly believe its opening scene brings the romantic relationship between Dumbledore and Grindelwald to the fore; it's a quietly entrancing scene of afternoon tea as the attractive two stars remember their affection and passions privately. The blatant queerness still isn't satisfying, but at least it's canon now, rather than relegated to internet message boards and digital missives from the author. And there are still nuggets of joy for fans, such as the physical humor Newt undertakes to distract the prison guards (if that's what the strange scorpion-like mini-manticores are?) by dancing his way to his brother Theseus's cell (Callum Turner). Similarly, the film works hard to repair the relationship between the No-Maj Jacob (Dan Fogler) and his paramour witch Queenie (Alison Sudol), and that finally has a really nice concluding feel to it. On the other hand, Newt's tenuous relationship with Tina (Katherine Waterston) has all but fizzled out, and she doesn't even appear until the penultimate scene of this film, sadly. 

What else can be said in brief? I'm feeling more hesitant than usual to critique this film because of several factors. First, it doesn't work on its own terms, but rather as a continuation of the story. Second, it's supposedly only the third entry in a five-part series, and it's hard to see where exactly the story is headed next. Third, it's more politically engaged than previous entries, but slightly out of its time; while its aggressive concerns about racism and governmental fraud have been timely for the last six years now -- and fit well with its setting of 1930s Berlin -- now they feel less nuanced and more like flogging a dead horse. Fourth, and I hate even saying this, the production studio has put further installments of this series on hold to determine if they will be commercially viable, which is about the greediest thing they could say to whip up fans into a frenzy, to say nothing of their lack of artistic integrity as a studio.

I absolutely loved the introduction of a professor from Ilvermorny (the U.S. wizarding school), a Charms instructor named Lally Hicks (Jessica Williams). Her spunk and charm are much needed, and she's a breathtaking screen presence. The Yusuf Kama (William Nadylam) storyline here is deeply emotional, finally validating his presence in the previous film. And other than that, it's all fun magical mayhem, just as we expect from the series. I personally love this franchise, despite a few issues with writing and editing, because of its creativity, its performances, and its production design, and so I hope David Yates and Steve Kloves and team continue their brilliant and fun work.

Arctic (2019)

Score: 2.5 / 5

Mads Mikkelsen is lost. Stranded alone somewhere in the Arctic Circle, he survives off fish and the plane in which we can only assumed he crash-landed. His distress beacon -- which we can similarly assume he uses to signal daily -- apparently works, as one day a helicopter appears in the sky. When it crashes in a sudden gust, we can see the hope draining from Mikkelsen's eyes. In a film with only two (?) actors and maybe enough dialogue to fill a single page, the weight is almost fully on Mikkelsen. He carries it admirably through physical strength and endurance and just enough actual acting skill to remind us that we're not watching a documentary.

The lone survivor of this latest aircraft crash is so badly injured she can barely move, and indeed doesn't move during the film. Mikkelsen works tirelessly to help her instead and eventually discovers the location of a building he estimates to be a few days' walk away. Lashing his nearly comatose companion to a sled, he drags her across the ghostly landscape, along snow drifts, across rocky outcroppings, and through icy crevasses. They never make it to the potential shelter. It's amazing they even survive the half-distance they travel together, considering the frostbite, polar bear, and broken bodies they suffer en route.

Oops, was that a spoiler? I suppose so. But did you really expect them -- or at least him -- to not survive? Unless you've seen Open Water, surely not. No, this is the film of man-against-nature in which man does not win, but does survive. At the last, another helicopter appears in the sky, and the deus ex machina is enough to make you wonder if this was all some strange Greek tragedy.

It was not. Gorgeously photographed by Tómas Örn Tómasson, the arctic comes thrillingly to life and captures the bleak aesthetic of a man alone against an infinite void. And while Mads is amazing, so are the athletes on American Ninja Warrior. The rest of Arctic is so dull, it's almost not worth commenting upon; narratively plain, lacking insight or depth, and only featuring a single brief encounter with a polar bear. It's so realistic it also suffers the boring realities of life. This is a survival film of Mikkelsen, sure, but also of the audience. You may not make it out alive. Or awake.

At Eternity's Gate (2018)

Score: 3.5 / 5

A highly unconventional biopic, At Eternity's Gate seeks to dramatize and hypothesize the final days of Vincent van Gogh.

Not terribly concerned with realism, time, or facts, we flow through his life with impressionistic images and vignettes more than scenes. He travels around France, painting constantly, seemingly forever in a state of exhaustion and bewilderment. His brother (Rupert Friend) lovingly cares for him when he's able, and he meets kind folks (Mads Mikkelsen) along the way. But he's mostly alone, painting feverishly and drawing the disdain of other artists who do not understand his style (Oscar Isaac). Van Gogh cannot support himself, and his destitution is only enhanced by his mental state.

The film doesn't quite suggest the nature of van Gogh's other-ness, though it could be a form of mental illness. It seems more likely that it's a disorder of some kind -- what we might call a disability -- that allows him to see the world differently than the rest of us. What way this might be is similarly unclear. Cinematographer Benoit Delhomme attempts to take us inside van Gogh's head, often using between intimate handheld cameras and changing lenses and focus to shift our awareness of the environment. He even includes some almost-first-person shots that feature heavy blurs in the lower third or half of the screen; it's a very specific choice, and one that served to baffle me more than anything. It's not likely to be an accurate estimation of van Gogh's vision, thus an odd way to identify his POV.

Willem Dafoe gives a solid performance as the suffering artist, and while his performance carries the film, it's not the most interesting or beautiful part of the picture. For me, it was all about the cinematography and the screenplay. The two work together to craft a fairly radical approach to filmmaking, especially in the biography genre, and while it's not always effective in telling a story or even providing enlightenment, the film manages to impress its aesthetic and strangeness on you. You feel it, you just don't always know what it is you feel.

Rogue One: A Star Wars Story (2016)

Score: 5 / 5

It's the Star Wars we've always wanted.

Stepping away from the Skywalker saga was a risky move on the franchise's part, and one that has more than paid off. We finally get a better understanding of galactic life away from the Jedi and the famous protagonists of the other films, an experience of war unlike any we've seen in the series. Of course, those of us who love the books have entertained these stories for years, but to see them in all their glory on the big screen is quite different. I suspect this film will also speak to fans of the video games, as it features violent action in a more grounded way than a cadre of Jedi with their lightsabers.

In every conceivable way, this is an improvement over The Force Awakens. Where the latter uses recycled plots, vague foreshadowing, sentiment and nostalgia, and ultimately nothing visually new, Rogue One features a totally fresh and inspired narrative, a contained standalone premise, intrigue and uncertainty, and constant new images, places, and sensations. From its first desolate scene, this picture revs up the energy and the novelty, and from there it keeps getting better. There is some shaky editing and pacing in the first half hour or so, as we jump from place to place and various characters with breakneck pace and bewildering connection, but it mellow out by the halfway point and brings the strands together in focused precision. By the time we reached the climactic battle on an idyllic beachfront, I was so overwhelmed with awe and excitement I was shaking in my seat.

A word of forewarning: you may want to reconsider taking your kids to this one. The film is about spies and impostors, paranoia and violence, and in case you weren't sure, war. There's a lot to admire in its female hero -- who doesn't succumb to a narrative of romance -- and its ragtag team of misfits who band together to bring down the Empire, a trope I expect we'll see a lot more of in the next four years of our political climate. And yet children may not appreciate or understand that our fabulous rebels are panicking, ruthless and desperate, and that their behaviors include targeting each other out of suspicion and self-interest; there's a lot of tension when the people you're working with will kill you at the slightest provocation, and when they're targeting the people you love. Similarly, while the film features little bloodshed (these are blasters and lightsabers, after all, not guns and machetes), it is first and foremost a war film. With its extended battle sequences, be prepared for some fatigue and the deaths of loved ones.

I might add that it's not all gloom and doom. It's a rousing story, one which surpasses its somber ending by sheer virtue of its ability to find light and hope in the darkness. This is achieved through an expert script, a fabulous score, and its little nods to the rest of the franchise. Keep your eyes open for Darth Vader, who is featured in a scene that will remind you of Halloween in its horror and violence; it reminds us why he is actually a bad guy. A few surprise visits from old faces such as Bail Organa, the thugs from the Mos Eisley cantina, our favorite robots, rebel senators and pilots, and of course our princess in white keep things interesting and fun. The most shocking (and apparently hotly debated) appearance comes from a digitally recreated Peter Cushing as Grand Moff Tarkin. While some have criticized his appearance, I'd say he looks pretty good for being dead for 22 years. I don't think the filmmakers should have featured him as much as they did, considering they had an almost equivalent villain in Ben Mendelsohn's Director Krennic, but his presence was certainly enjoyable.

I might be blinded by my own enthusiasm, but this was for me one of the best pictures of the year. Timely and smart, risky and strong, it parades its spectacle out in arresting beauty and haunting import. Felicity Jones leads the adventure with intense command, and the visionary Gareth Edwards yet again shows his skills as a big-budget director with an eye not just for explosions but meaning. Make sure Rogue One is on your holiday list. You won't have a bad feeling about this.

IMDb: Rogue One

Doctor Strange (2016)

Score: 4.5 / 5

I shouldn't be surprised by what Marvel Studios produces anymore; with a budget that big, they can do just about anything and gt away with it. Yet Doctor Strange is not unlike Ant-Man in providing a suitable origin story for a new hero (who is unconventional and nauseatingly typical at once) while expanding our understanding of and appreciation for the world of the MCU (Marvel Cinematic Universe). Sure, it's got its dull, prideful hero who suffers a loss and spends the rest of the film seeking redemption. Sure, it's got its fake anti-hero villain with creepy eyes and accent who gets disintegrated at the end. Sure, it's got a potentially great female love-interest/sidekick who is woefully underwritten. But it's still a ton of fun.

If you can get past Benedict Cumberbatch's American inflections, he performs flawlessly as the doctor, showcasing his own intellect in a markedly different manner than we've seen before. He imbues some remarkably deadpan comedy to the wealthy, proud New Yorker, even when he has come to the end of his hope. He plays the character not unlike Robert Downey Jr.'s Tony Stark in the first Iron Man, and his best moments are during his training in Kamar Taj and especially its library (his interactions with librarian Wong steal the movie).

Frankly, I was expecting a nightmare of visual effects, like in Ant-Man, as our hero bends reality and traverses  alternate dimensions. And while it is largely just that, the filmmakers have a couple of tricks up their sleeve. Most important is that everything feels weighted: great cinematography and sound mixing (and, yes, VFX) keep it all feeling substantial and grounded. While the images on screen begin to look like Inception run amok, director Scott Derrickson (Sinister, The Exorcism of Emily Rose) keeps the action focused precisely and tightly on the actors. He also lets the background chaos order itself into impossible kaleidoscopic shapes; I wonder if the patterns that result are in fact easier for us to watch, allowing both Derrickson and the audience to peripherally absorb it without becoming too distracted.

Doctor Strange might host the best cast of any Marvel movie yet. Mads Mikkelsen plays Kaecilius, the baddie with glowing purple eyes and cracks in his face, and Chiwetel Ejiofor hammers out his Mordo with conviction and the promise of becoming a future anti-hero (stick around after the credits, guys!). Rachel McAdams is not as present as much as she should be, but she proves herself to be a capable and fully-functional heroine in her own right. Of course, the best parts of the film belong solely to Tilda Swinton, the Ancient One who teaches sorcerers in Kathmandu. Ethereal and surprisingly funny, she handles power and control of the film in a way Anthony Hopkins would have liked to in Thor. And then she made me cry at the end.

In context of the other films, this one fits nicely behind Ant-Man for the reasons I gave above. It feels a little disjointed after Civil War -- because dammit I want to know what happened to everybody! -- but it provides several pieces that will come into play later on down the franchise path. It reveals the Infinity Stone of Time and its power. It connects to the "multiverse", which we've heard of before in Thor and in Ant-Man. And it sets up (or, rather, teases) what we might expect in Ragnarok one year from now. The mid-credits scene (which I suspect comes from the third Thor, much like the Civil War scene we saw after Ant-Man was lifted from that film) shows Strange offering to help Thor and Loki find Odin. Which seems a bit, well, strange, since the last time we saw Odin and Loki was in The Dark World, when Thor thought Loki had sacrificed himself, but the latter was impersonating an apparently absent Odin. I guess we'll have to wait a while to find out what shenanigans are happening in Asgard.

One last note: the score in this movie is everything. Michael Giacchino is brilliant.

IMDb: Doctor Strange