Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker

Director: J.J. Abrams
Starring: Carrie Fisher, Mark Hamill, Daisy Ridley, Adam Driver, John Boyega, Oscar Isaac, Anthony Daniels, Naomi Ackie, Domhnall Gleeson, Richard E. Grant, Lupita Nyong'o, Keri Russell, Joonas Suotamo, Kelly Marie Tran, Ian McDiarmid, Billy Dee Williams
Running Time:142 min.
Rating: PG-13

★★★ ½ (out of ★★★★)

**Warning: The Following Review Contains Plot Spoilers For 'Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker' **

In case you haven't heard, Star Wars fans are unhappy. About everything. Constantly. What exactly they're displeased with is anyone's guess, and we know that J.J. Abrams and Kathleen Kennedy have paid attention to that online noise. While some would argue the problem is precisely that they haven't listened to the fans, I'd counter that their real jobs are to craft the best possible story while serving the plot and characters. If that isn't done, then we'll talk. Otherwise, hysterical claims that Rian Johnson's polarizing middle chapter of the new saga, The Last Jedi, is the "worst movie ever made" almost feel like a compliment, awarding it a level of importance that probably isn't warranted. It was a mixed bag that attempted a little too much while marginalizing certain key characters. And if you really want to go there, it was also overlong, at points desperately in need of a cut and trim. But loathe it or not, it was the distinct vision of someone who clearly wasn't servicing a giant corporation, the franchise, or its fans. Johnson wasn't looking to make things easy for whoever took the reigns for this final installment, which, to no one's surprise, wouldn't be him.

Now that the series has returned to the safe, comforting arms of Lucas' successor and The Force Awakens director, Abrams, we can now officially confirm that no matter what anyone does with any incarnation of this property, the diehards will whine and complain until the cows come home. For them, Awakens was a tired retread of A New Hope, The Last Jedi veered too far from it, and somehow, they've even found an excuse to pile on the Disney Plus series, The Mandalorian, which feels like the purest, most faithful incarnation of Star Wars we've gotten since the original trilogy.

Luckily, the jury's still out on how many of these fans represent the general moviegoing population, who are probably wondering what all the fuss is about. So no, The Rise of Skywalker doesn't "undo" anything that happened in The Last Jedi to placate unhappy audiences, nor is it full of controversial creative decisions intended to enrage the masses. Like the preceding two, it's a Star Wars movie, firmly falling into the same category of in terms of quality. And it's a really good one that effectively closes this latest saga under some rather challenging circumstances. It's best not to look at it as any more than what it is because doing so has a way of both simultaneously giving it more and less credit than it deserves.

Heading into this finale without Harrison Ford's Han Solo, Mark Hamill's Luke Skywalker and to a strangely lesser extent, the late Carrie Fisher's General Leia Organa, puts even greater pressure on its newer characters carry the load, an inevitable moment that was always going to be the series' biggest hurdle, albeit one many thought wouldn't arrive until the next trilogy. Well, it's here, and the two characters (and actors playing them) who seemed most prepared, prove themselves worthy of carrying the mantle. And just as their storyline was the very best aspect of the last film, that's true again here, continuing and concluding in an equally thrilling fashion. What surrounds them is a little smoother and less messy too, even if we're kidding ourselves by pretending this is anything but a two-person show. Still, this is an immensely satisfying finish by any measure, its strengths and few weaknesses laid bare for its angry fanbase to pick apart like vultures circling Palpatine's corpse.

During an opening crawl that just might be the clearest and most concise of any recent entry, we learn that the First Order leader Kylo Ren (Adam Driver) is following a mysterious, galaxy-wide broadcast from the planet Exegol by presumably deceased Emperor Palpatine (Ian McDiarmid). Upon arriving, he finds the evil Emperor alive, and despite his ailing physical appearance, claiming responsibility for the rise of the First Order, operating in the shadows this whole time. Determined to end the Resistance for good, he enlists Kylo to find and kill Rey (Daisy Ridley), who's in the midst of continuing her Jedi training with General Leia (Fisher). But Kylo has other plans and is still determined to turn Rey to the Dark Side so they can rule the galaxy together, continuing to suppress whatever guilt, if any, he may harbor for killing his father, Han Solo.

Meanwhile, Finn (John Boyega), Poe Dameron (Oscar Isaac), Chewbacca (Joonas Suotamo), BB-8 and C-3PO (Anthony Daniels) are traveling to the planet Pasaana to seek a hidden Sith Wayfinder that will tell them Palpatine's location. With the help of Leia's good friend Lando Calrissian (Billy Dee Williams), they're close, but Kylo and his Knights of Wren are on their tails. As the connection between Rey and Kylo continues to grow stronger and more complicated, each are tempted by the other side as the former prepares to come face-to-face with her worst fears from within, and eventually confront a more powerful than ever Emperor.

If there's any creative controversy or heated discussion points in Abrams' and Chris Terrio's screenplay, it's the decision made regarding Rey's bloodline and lineage, criticized by many as dismissingly walking back The Last Jedi revelation that she's a "nobody." But at that point, Rey was, at least as far as she knew. It's just simply information given to us now that she or us didn't have then, rather than the desperate revisionist history it's been accused of.  And while that and the resurrection of presumed dead Palpatine as the chief heavy may seem like grasping at straws, Abrams wasn't exactly left with a wide variety of options following Rian Johnson's creative indulgences.

That Luke Skywalker's death in the previous film doesn't leave the gaping hole we thought it would is proof enough of Abram's ingenuity in this installment, but with Snoke killed off and Kylo straddling the line between good and evil in his relationship with Rey, bringing Palpatine back as the main antagonist seems about as reasonable as anything else. Let's face it: This guy was already a walking cadaver when we first saw him in the flesh in Return of the Jedi and he's in even worse shape now, completely immobile with tubes coming out of his back. You could argue he was always dead, but also a character whose "survival" can briefly but satisfyingly be explained with only a line or two of dialogue, which they do. And it works.

Palpatine's presence further facilitates Kylo's quest to overthrow him and turn Rey, while the latter's potential turn to the Dark Side now has greater stakes with the revelation that she's Palpatine's grandaughter, and must fight harder to deny the capacity for evil that already resides inside her, inherited through blood. If before it was nearly impossible to be onboard with the slightest possibility Rey could be tempted, there's now genuine suspense as to whether she will given the new circumstances. And if she can overcome it, while helping Kylo do the same, it'll resonate so much more than it otherwise would have. Even if the creative circumstances were less than ideal going in, it's great writing from Abrams, who really digs himself and the series out of a hole.

With this much on the line, Rey now becomes the character they've been building toward since The Force Awakens, and like Mark Hamill before her, Daisy Ridley saves her best, most confident  performance for the final film of the trilogy. It feels as if they've finally committed to her as the centerpiece, with an internal battle compelling enough to carry the load, while some of the other supporting characters find their footing again after being sidelined in the preceding film.

While there will still undoubtedly be complaints about the use of Finn and Poe, they're at least given a less meandering direction here, with Poe receiving a relatively strong sub-plot involving a masked mercenary from his past named Zorii Bliss (Keri Russell), who helps the gang retrieve that mysterious Sith message. The script also makes the best use of 3PO out of any of the latest trilogy films, highlighting him as not only an important cog in the plot, but emphasizing his character in an emotionally substantial way not seen since the original trilogy.

As strong as that all is, and how little credit Abrams has gotten for it, there's still no denying that the Resistance portion of the plot still can't hold a candle to anything involving Rey and Kylo, mainly due to Ridley and Driver's chemistry together on screen and the richness of their characters' history. In fact, you could go a step further and claim that regardless of the improvements made with the Poe and Finn, it's still a far cry from the limitless potential first shown for them in The Force Awakens. That's especially true for Poe, who, as difficult as it is to believe now, was once labeled the "next Han Solo." Even if Oscar Isaac's an actor capable of pulling that off, he was never really given the chance after his character's early promise fizzled out.

As for Boyega's Finn, there was just no coming back after the Rose Tico (Kelly Marie Tran) debacle in The Last Jedi. Abrams even seems so embarrassed by it that he basically benches the actress, only to turn around and cast Naomi Ackie in a similarly functioning role opposite Boyega. That decision would probably be fans' strongest evidence of Abrams rebuking the previous film's machinations, if anyone cared enough about them to even notice.

The better news is that both Lando and Leia are incorporated exceptionally well, as we continue discovering the amount of footage that must have been shot with Carrie Fisher (with some CGI help) for her to still maintain this big a presence. The actress' death, a discomforting elephant in the room last time out, still casts a palor over the proceedings, but with an exception. Abrams seems to have full awareness and control of that knowledge this time, using it to deliver a touching send-off that nicely fits the larger story arc. This combined with brief, but impactful appearances from Ford and Hamill at key moments only add to the power of the Rey/Kylo feud, helping to make what's likely the last time we see these original characters count for something special. 

Due to the heightened suspense involving Rey and Kylo and the Wayfinder search, for about three quarters through, this is probably the best paced outing of the trilogy until the action lags a bit in the third act with a seemingly endless Resistance battle on Exegol that can only end one way. In fairness, the same could be said for just about any other final battle that's taken place in every film since and including A New Hope. That a revolving door of filmmakers seem to share a constant refusal to shave even just a minute or two off of these has to be the most overlooked creative issue through all three trilogies, rarely mentioned as a defining franchise fault. Or more likely, an industry wide one.

With the battle intercut with Rey's and Kylo's showdown with the Emperor, we seem to be approaching a finale that looks as if it could be a close replication of ROTJ's ending. It isn't, but there's no denying we've seen enough cracks in Kylo Ren's helmet to suggest he may still have some Ben Solo in him yet, even as Rey struggles to fight a much darker side emerging within her. Besides Driver giving this trilogy its most nuanced performance and Ridley stepping up to match him this time, their feud and pseudo-relationship has easily been the franchise's biggest draw post-Lucas. And it comes to its proper and inevitable conclusion here, culminating in not only the ultimate sacrifice, but a callback that stirringly unifies all nine films in the Skywalker saga. There's no doubt this is the end, as it should be. These characters have been taken as far as they can go. And we all need a long break.

This isn't the final nail in Star Wars' coffin, as has been endlessly reported. And the franchise's "fans" should eventually recover in enough time to be disappointed by whatever comes next. It shouldn't be a hot take to claim Disney's done a commendable job handling this massive property, but they have, especially in light of the prequels. If they're guily of anything, it's overexposing what's starting to feel more than ever like a product. But then again, hasn't it always? The mundane truth that The Force Awakens, The Last Jedi and now this all fall within the exact same range of high quality, without any of the three being either the best or worst thing in existence, may be difficult for some to face. That this was the last stop in an assembly line of solid filmmaking that easily topped the awful preceding trilogy but had too many interchangeable parts to truly be as distinctive as Lucas' originals, seems like the truest assessment, at least for now.

Just about the only point everyone can agree on is that after following what has largely been an extension of the same core story on and off for over three decades, fatigue has officially set in. It's hardly a coincidence that there were so many postive notices for Rogue One and now The Mandalorian series. Newer stories with fresh characters. It's time to move on, but not right away. And while you'd never know from the reaction, The Rise of Skywalker actually lands on the higher end of recent efforts in the franchise. The real problem is that we may have already gotten too much Star Wars to even care.

10 Cloverfield Lane

Director: Dan Trachtenberg
Starring: Mary Elizabeth Winstead, John Goodman, John Gallagher, Jr., Bradley Cooper, Suzanne Cryer
Running Time: 103 min.
Rating: PG-13

★★★ (out of ★★★★)

**Spoiler Warning: This review gives away key plot details, including the ending**

10 Cloverfield Lane raises a fascinating question for any critic or audience member who might happen to share my general opinion of it. And there will likely be more than a few. What happens when 90 percent of a movie is amazing, but the last 15 minutes are so misguided and disappointing that it threatens to completely overshadow whatever greatness came before? In this case, there was a lot of it, from the overall premise to the atmosphere and performances, it shares very little in common with 2008's monster movie Cloverfield, which was throwaway fun. This isn't. It's something much more than that for a good deal of its running time. With its production, eventual release and title somehow managing to stay shrouded in secrecy, few knew this "spiritual sequel" to Cloverfield was even coming, much less what it would be about, or who would star. But more importantly, that it could be done this well. That may be why the ending is so infuriating, but for me a bigger reason is that I was treated to two of my favorite actors going toe-to-toe for 90 minutes in the service of a story that came so close to doing them and viewers proud, only to drop the ball at the end.

What eventually occurs in no way diminishes those performances, but that any studio thought the idea of John Goodman as a survivalist holding people captive in an underground bunker wasn't scary enough on its own is mind boggling. On top of that, the script attaches enough moral implications and questions to what he's doing to make Rod Serling proud. What he wouldn't be so proud of is the ending. And it's not so much that I'm completely against what they did (though I still didn't care for it), but rather how. So here's my advice: When you get to about the hour and twenty-five minute mark, just hit "STOP" on your remote and turn the missing minutes into one of those old school "Choose Your Own Adventure" books where you pick the ending. There's little doubt whatever scenario you come up with will be more compelling than what the filmmakers ultimately chose. And the sad part is, ending notwithstanding, it's still one of the year's most compelling films.

When we first meet Michelle (Mary Elizabeth Winstead), she's packing up and leaving New Orleans after an argument with her fiancé Ben (voiced by Bradley Cooper). Distraught and distracted by news of major blackouts across the country, her car suddenly hits something and careens off the road. She awakens in a basement chained to a wall with an IV in her arm. The man holding her there is the burly, intimidating Howard Stambler (John Goodman), an obsessive survivalist who's built a fallout shelter under his farmhouse in the event of an attack, nuclear or otherwise. According to him, such an attack has already occurred, claiming the lives of nearly everyone outside who breathed the contaminated air.

Michelle and a man named Emmett (John Gallagher, Jr.) who forced himself into the bunker, are told by Howard that under no uncertain terms can they leave until the poisoned air's safe, which could be two years at the earliest. Not buying the far-fetched story and assuming she's been kidnapped by a crazed lunatic (with Howard's actions doing little to contradict that), a terrified Michelle makes plans to escape, but will need Emmett's help. Even as evidence mounts that there might be some truth to Howard's claims that the terror awaiting them outside is far worse than anything he can dish out.

Whether or not this was an intentional inspiration, the premise thematically draws certain comparisons to the classic Twilight Zone episode, "The Monsters are Due on Maple Street," in which panicked, desperate neighbors turn against each another when faced with an inexplicable, otherworldly threat. This is obviously a more contained version of that but the basic idea of how far people is willing to go and the amount of force they'll exert over others for self-preservation and survival are very similar.

Frightening in its timeliness, the screenplay cleverly and indirectly tackles 9/11 paranoia, terrorism and national security through the character of Howard, who's very much grounded in the world in which we now live. With his emphasis on law and order and second amendment rights it's not hard to picture him heading out to the polls on Election Day, packing heat and wearing a "Make America Great Again" hat. That's not a knock on Trump supporters, but rather a reasonable interpretation of this character based on the evidence, as well as a credit to Goodman's complex, forceful performance, which wildly vacillates between cold and detached and enthusiastically charismatic at the drop of a dime. It's because of him that we're able to get that clear a picture of the man, knowing exactly what he stands for and what pisses him off. The writers should also take some credit for concocting a character that really hits a cultural zeitgeist they couldn't have possibly known about when this went into pre-production.

What we're fuzzier on are the stoic, often humorless Howard's exact intentions, which is where so much of the film derives its suspense. The first inclination is that he's a psychotic kidnapper since his doomsday scenario doesn't add up on any logical level and he seems to care way too much about Michelle and Emmett attempting to leave (escape?). Then the clues drop. While certain details suggest Howard could actually be telling the truth, or at least some version of it, he's still a controlling terror with whom sharing any kind of space is dangerous. And yet, because he's played by Goodman, there are these moments of humanity where it seems as if he's legitimately invested in their well being as if they were his offspring. Evolving into this dysfunctional family, they eat together, play board games and watch movies as if Goodman were reprising his role as Dan Connor on Roseanne. The whole thing is so oddly fascinating and atypical of what you'd expect, even as tension continues to build to a fever pitch around Howard's personal history and reasons for holding them.

After turning in impressive, overlooked work The Thing remake, small, character-driven indies like Smashed, Faults and Alex of Venice and in TV's short-lived The Returned, I've always contended that Mary Elizabeth Winstead is only about a role or two off from occupying the same spot her Academy Award-winning Scott Pilgrim co-star Brie Larson currently does. This film probably won't get her there but it still represents the latest in a long line of inspiring choices that show off a dramatic range few know she possesses. In fact, most of the film and her performance recalls the first act of Room, which only makes it that much more frustrating when this eventually deviates from that psychological template.

Michelle is caught in a desperate, hopeless situation right off the bat, and the thrill comes in watching her try to process that, read it, and determine how to react.  The wheels are always turning, as she attempts to negotiate her way out of this predicament and nearly every scene Winstead shares with Goodman carries this consequential weight that nearly suffocates you with suspense. There's a an unbearably tense scene at the dinner table when director Dan Trachtenberg milks the suspense to such a point that the payoff literally caused me to jump. Gallagher's Emmett at first seems to be a major dope blindly following Howard, until his personality and motivations start figuring into the equation in surprising ways.

Considering its title and the fact this supposedly takes place in the same universe as Cloverfield, an argument could be made that we know what we're getting into. I'll cop to that, but still doesn't make the final minutes of the film any less ridiculous, disappointing or poorly executed. The script eventually has to lay all its cards on the table and reveal whether this is a straight-up abduction or some kind of cataclysmic event has actually occurred outside and Howard's holding her there for her own protection and his. Or maybe it's some kind of combination of both. In other words, she has to eventually escape and see what's out there. We know this and it's fine. But even if you're satisfied with THE BIG REVEAL, they don't milk the moments leading up to it nearly enough or execute it with the amount of finesse necessary to justify it. Despite some defending the decision, it's simply incongruous with the tone of the rest of the picture. While I can get on board with the thematic justification and how it relates Michelle's backstory and overcoming the cycle of her abuse, that doesn't excuse involving aliens in a narrative that was fairly grounded up to that point.  

Trachtenberg, making his feature debut, does a masterful job creating a dread-fueled atmosphere, but even he's saddled with a pretty thankless task in the final minutes. He responds with the cinematic equivalent of clubbing viewers over the head multiple times. But he's really just shooting a screenplay that's gone off the rails and it's likely the writers (which includes Whiplash director Damien Chazelle) were only carrying out the wishes of J.J. Abrams or the studio, who determined it was more important to continue building a "universe" that satiates the appetites of comic-con crowds than put the proper coda on an otherwise excellent film. It appears to have been nothing more than a marketing-driven decision, and while it happens all the time, that still doesn't make it any less creatively bankrupt.

If stretching for positives in the disastrous final minutes, Winstead's performance remains strong even during this nonsense and the revelation that Howard wasn't lying casts the character's previous actions in a slightly different light, causing you to likely appreciate Goodman's performance even more on repeated viewings. But I'd argue the same exact thing could have been accomplished in half a dozen different and better ways than what they eventually went with. Since it's unfair to rag on an ending this much without offering up a reasonable alternative, it would have been far more effective to have the final 15 minutes continue to build legitimate doubt as to what exactly happened, how many people survived, whether the air is breathable, or the planet even habitable.

The few minutes Michelle has to investigate before the movie turns into a special effects circus are really good and should have been stretched longer. Then, and only then, if they want to pull the trigger on the reveal (even one as silly as this), it would at least carry greater impact and they could quickly get to the end credits to preserve the integrity of what came before. Of course, had it just been a more believable threat that matched the tone of the rest of the film there would be no need for this discussion. But that wouldn't sell tickets. That's what's so frustrating about 10 Cloverfield Lane, which for most of its running time delightfully shares as little in common as possible with its predecessor. And why it's difficult assessing how much a botched ending should be counted against the overall viewing experience. One major flaw doesn't erase everything else, but it does somehow strangely make it all mean a little less than it should.     

11.22.63

Creator: Bridget Carpenter
Starring: James Franco, Chris Cooper, Sarah Gadon, Lucy Fry, George MacKay, Daniel Webber, Cherry Jones, Kevin J. O'Connor, Josh Duhamel, Nick Searcy, Jonny Coyne, Tonya Pinkins, Gil Bellows
Original Airdate: 2016

★★★ ½ (out of ★★★★) 

There's always been this inherent problem in crafting any piece of entertainment around the altering an important historical event, especially one as controversial and heavily debated as the Kennedy assassination. For valid reasons it's rarely been attempted in either film or television, and the few times it has resulted in the material being handled with kid gloves, as if the creative forces at the helm were too afraid of tackling the event head-on, "changing" real history within a work of complete fiction. If altering too much brings with it accusations of exploitation and sensationalism, then anything short of that would be considered wimping out. This problem even affected the greatest time travel series, Quantum Leap, when the writers got an unusual case of cold feet when depicting the event in 1992's two-part season opener, "Lee Harvey Oswald."

11.22.63 on Hulu

Since the real conflict about attempting to stop the Kennedy Assassination lies in how far the writers are willing to go, it's only fitting that Hulu's original miniseries, 11.22.63, comes from the mind and pen of Stephen King. The author who's always had a problem with endings. And while he has a notoriously spotty track record with TV adaptations of his own work, it's to his and our benefit that this is a new era where the quality of these miniseries often exceed anything on the big screen, overseen by experienced showrunners that limit the need for King's creative involvement. With producers J.J. Abrams and Bridget Carpenter at the controls, this had as good a shot as any of his material at being a slam dunk adaptation. With the author's ideas usually working best as a jumping off point, it would be fascinating to see where they'd go with this, what they'd change or keep, and how the material could be condensed into 8 hour-long episodes.

With topnotch production design and direction, there's an urgency to the proceedings anchored by a phenomenal lead performance from an actor who initially seems miscast and an even better one from an actress who's career will undoubtedly skyrocket off the back of this. But most unexpectedly, the story transcends the assassination, with the event itself often successfully taking a backseat to the human drama and larger points made about society and the passage of time. It manages to go all in, taking a clear stand on the potential conspiracy and making no bones about the fact that our protagonist is there to physically stop this, regardless of the dangerous obstacles or consequences it would entail.

Jake Epping (James Franco), a recently divorced English teacher from Lisbon, Maine makes a stop into the diner of his good friend, Al Templeton (Chris Cooper), who offers him the opportunity of a lifetime. A chance to travel back to the 1960's via a portal in the restaurant's storage closet. But this won't be a vacation, as Jake's job is to complete a herculean mission Al couldn't pull off himself: Preventing the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. In Vietnam vet Al's view, that murder set off a chain reaction from which the country never recovered, altering for the worse the course of his life and many others he's known. He's not only prepared a detailed file for Jake with background and instructions on how to accomplish this task, but primed him on how to first determine whether there was a conspiracy.

Jake and Al survey the evidence

After a sudden turn of events leads to Jake reluctantly accept Al's challenge and travel through the portal, his trip to the past becomes more complicated when he becomes attached to the past, forming a relationship with Jodie, Texas school librarian, Sadie Dunhill (Sarah Gadon). But with the clock rapidly counting down to November 22, 1963 and the past's unseen forces working against him, he must find a way to neutralize Lee Harvey Oswald (Daniel Webber) and uncover the former Marine sniper's connection to the C.I.A. before The President's motorcade travels through Dealey Plaza in Dallas.

Having only read the first few chapters of King's novel before deciding to return to it after viewing the miniseries, there aren't many side-by-side comparisons I'd feel comfortable making. But after similar openings there is supposedly a point where this version deviates heavily, cherry-picking certain key elements to build its own universe that can fill the running time. As he previously proved in his short story, The Langoliers (itself adapted into a 1995 miniseries) the author is, if nothing else, a brilliantly twisted "idea man" when it comes to time travel. If in that tale, traumatized surviving airline passengers wake to discover the vacant past has moved forward without them, King presents an equally compelling notion here of the past "pushing back," stopping Jake from changing it. In a way, that makes perfect sense since the entire notion of altering the past is built on upsetting the universe.

You could imagine that in the hands of lesser directors and screenwriters than Abrams crew, that this idea of the past striking back (let's call it "subtly posing obstacles") could turn into a disaster, with plot contrivances and supernatural interference galore. There's certainly some of that and the Jake character definitely makes the past's job a lot easier with some ridiculous decision-making, but isn't this the hallmark of most time travel entertainment? Still, even if irresponsibility from the traveler is a perquisite for the genre, Jake is very dense.

Jake Epping arrives in the 1960's

How much of the protagonist's carelessness simply services the needs of the story, is the past's doing, or qualifies as just plain sloppy screenwriting is open for interpretation, but Jake isn't exactly careful when he arrives in 1960, a full three years before the assassination. That arrival time and the fact he's allowed to go back through the portal and reset (or erase) what he's done are really the only rules here, since Jake goes about breaking every other one Al warns him about, his actions constantly threatening to create a "butterfly effect" in the future. He doesn't exactly keep a low profile.

Whether he's buying a flashy period car, dropping his iphone and future news clippings about the shooting, giving impromptu tours of Dealey Plaza or placing sports bets large enough to make Biff Tannen blush, it isn't out of the realm of possibility to consider Kennedy was probably fine before Jake arrived. The first few episodes do in fact recall Back to the Future in how we have a crazed Doc Brown-like character in Al roping Jake into this plan and the initial scenes of our wide-eyed protagonist awed by an idealized 1960's that looks and feels authentically warm and inviting. But this is Stephen King. It won't last.

Boasting some of the more impressive photography, costuming and production for Hulu, it's clear they spared no expense and every bit of it is on the screen. With these kind of projects being shortchanged so many times throughout the author's career, it's nice to see one finally treated with the pedigree it deserves. One of the most impressive moments of the series comes when Jake's walking the hallway as school banners subtly change to indicate a jump forward in time.

Jake and Bill wiretap Lee Harvey Oswald

Preventing this culture-shifting event and managing the investigation accompanying it is really hard work. So much so that at one point Jake basically throws his hands up in the air and gives up, turning his attention to preventing another traumatic event that hits closer to his home. That is until he's forced out of necessity to bring along an assistant of sorts and go back to Dallas to finish what he intended to start. That assistant is high-strung bartender Bill Turcotte (George MacKay) and while that character's role is supposedly expanded from the book, he does accomplish something important creatively.

Without a sidekick, it's likely viewers would be forced to watch Jake plan all this alone, talking to himself as we're punished by long, drawn-out voiceovers reciting endless passages of King's book. At least here he has someone to bounce off of and share the screen with and their interactions provide some of the series' biggest laughs, whether intentional or not. Jake just leaving him above Oswald's apartment to record everything he does for months at a time while he goes to work as schoolteacher is a particular highlight. While it's easy to quibble with where they eventually take the Bill character and his overall purpose, the series wouldn't be nearly as entertaining without him or McKay's loony performance.

The big question of whether James Franco can do anything or just simply chooses to do everything he can should occupy the thoughts of most watching. Could they have picked a more jarringly modern-looking actor to play a character transported to the 1960's? Maybe that was exactly the point, but before long, Franco proves he's capable of this too, throwing himself into everything the role requires. And it gets surprisingly ugly at times since Jake rarely thinks of anyone beyond himself, frequently losing sight of why he's there. It's fun watching Franco continue to grow into the part with each passing episode, and as more is asked of him, he turns in this great old school leading man performance that's bursting with humor and humanity.

Sarah Gadon as Sadie Dunhill

It's easy to see why Franco's character is so distracted since Sarah Gadon is nothing short of a revelation as  small town librarian and accidental witness to history, Sadie. As a living, breathing artifact from a different time, it's perfect casting, but the actress goes beyond nailing easily noticeable 60's details such as accent and manner to adding little details that make her feel like much more than a love interest or plot device. An argument can be made the entire story revolves around her, and while Franco's terrific, it's at least conceivable another actor could have played Jake, albeit differently. Gadon is irreplaceable, and without her, so much of what occurs in the last few episodes wouldn't carry nearly the same resonance.

The rest of the cast is uniformly excellent, right down to Daniel Webber's psychotically unhinged portrayal of Oswald, which straddles an uncomfortable line of moral ambiguity we haven't previously seen in cinematic depictions of the assassin. He seemingly alternates from sad to scary at an instant. In a memorable supporting turn an alcoholic wife beater, Josh Duhamel finds a part he seems born to play, channeling that aura of jock cockiness into a raging 60's bully with greased hair and rolled-up sleeves.

T.R. Knight follows suit as Sadie's husband, delivering a creepy, threatening performance that's not only a far cry from Grey's Anatomy, but feels most at home in the Stephen King universe. And while their characters undeservedly get the short end of the stick in the closing episodes, Nick Searcy and Tonya Pinkins respectively shine in their scenes as the Jodie High School principal and administrator. Despite top billing, a haggard-looking Chris Cooper has similarly brief screen time as Al, present mainly to deliver time travel exposition that informs the rest of the series.

Oswald (Daniel Webber) poses for an infamous photo

As the hours, minutes and seconds close in it only makes sense that the past would push back harder than ever, throwing obstacle it can in Jake's path. The physical manifestation of this resistance comes in the "Yellow Card Man" (Kevin J. O' Connor) who pops up now and again throughout the series to warn our protagonist about the futility of attempting to change the past. Supposedly, the book goes into further detail about him, but despite my worries that this would indicate the supernatural side of King's brain taking over the screenplay, that doesn't happen. It's handled pretty well. After numerous disasters and miscalculations by the bumbling Jake, it's not a spoiler to reveal Oswald does eventually sit at his perch on the sixth floor of southeast corner window of the Book Depository with boxes stacked, armed with his Carcano carbine rifle

Whether he it's Oswald who delivers the fatal shot, whether the fatal shot is even fired, how many shooters there are, and the potential ramifications for history should this event not occur, are all questions the writers had to ask themselves since viewers will undoubtedly be asking them too, before demanding answers. It's a tough spot to be in and one made even tougher by the fact that they're adapting an author who often struggles with satisfying conclusions and had the original ending of this novel thrown out and revised by his own son. Readers will feel strongly attached to how the miniseries should end.

And as far as King endings go, this one's far from a disaster. The screenplay overemphasizes the potential consequences of an alternate outcome that probably played better in book form, but it's still immensely satisfying, at least committing to an finale that goes beyond the nuts and bolts of the history-defining event. The result ranks somewhere between the middle to top tier of King adaptations, certainly leaving in the dust some of the more problematic offerings that have sullied the author's cinematic reputation in years past. There are points that feel rushed and you can almost tell without having read the novel what was shortchanged, but it's kind of amazing just how immersive 11.22.63 still manages to be in light off its inevitable limitations. It's one of the rare King adaptations that doesn't feel entirely compromised, creating an experience you could hardly consider a waste of time.

Star Wars: The Force Awakens

Director: J.J. Abrams
Starring: Harrison Ford, Mark Hamill, Carrie Fisher, Adam Driver, Daisy Ridley, John Boyega, Oscar Isaac, Lupita Nyong'o, Andy Serkis, Domhnall Gleeson, Anthony Daniels, Peter Mayhew, Max von Sydow, Gwendoline Christie
Running Time: 135 min.
Rating: PG-13

★★★★ (out of ★★★★)

                                         **Spoiler Warning: The Following Review Contains Some Plot Spoilers**
 
If conventional wisdom is to be believed,  the colossal cultural success of 1977's Star Wars permanently altered the cinematic landscape by ushering in the blockbuster era we're still living in today. For better or worse, every studio tried to duplicate it in some form or another without truly grasping the elements that initially made it work. Unfortunately, its biggest, most shameless imitator may have been George Lucas, whose uncompromising death grip on his own franchise caused him to eventually destroy it. It's a career trajectory that eerily resembles Darth Vader's, as a rebellious young man frustrated by the corporate machine rises to power, only to eventually evolve into the very thing he despises most. It's a parallel not lost on the filmmaker, who's even commented on it himself in various interviews. Anyone looking to pinpoint the source of today's movie industry woes needn't look further than the infamous prequels. They made it okay for overhyped films with expensive effects to rake in truckloads of money, regardless of quality.

Watching J.J. Abrams resuscitation of the franchise, Star Wars: The Force Awakens, you can't help but wonder what George Lucas must have been thinking while sitting in that theater during the premiere. He finally did the right thing by relinquishing the reins to Disney and in doing so freed up another filmmaker to give movie fans the experience they always wanted, but he stubbornly refused to deliver. And ironically, it's a movie so slavishly devoted to the original trilogy that it kind of cements his legacy, as difficult and complicated as it may be.

It's far easier to root for Abrams, a skilled, if previously indistinct director who suddenly has to deliver the movie of his life in the clutch. And does he ever, by not only faithfully recreating the look and even recalling the plot of A New Hope, but triggering all the sensory feelings we had watching it. In fact, it's probably the closest we're ever going to get to seeing what a modern, shot-by-shot remake would look like without literally getting one. Some are calling it a retread. Others are saying it amounts to nothing more than fan service You can call it whatever you want but Abrams delivers exactly what's asked of him, doing right by a franchise that needed someone to step up and make smart choices.

In making the strongest, most satisfying installment since The Empire Strikes Back, Abrams follows through on his promise of more practical effects and a return to basic, character-driven storytelling. It's clear from the opening crawl that Abrams, a lifelong fan, is interested in blending the old and new, it's also the first time we can say a Star Wars movie some contains great performances. And not just great for a Star Wars movie. Providing pure, old school entertainment that greatly differs from the excessive emptiness of contemporary blockbusters, it wisely leaves us with more questions than answers, establishing a strong framework for the franchise to successfully move forward in the same awe-inspiring manner the original trilogy did.

Thirty years after the events of Return of the Jedi and destruction of the Death Star, Luke Skywalker (Mark Hamill) has vanished and in his absence the First Order has risen from the remains of the fallen Empire. Led by the masked, Vader-worshipping Kylo Ren (Adam Driver), they seek to find and destroy Luke and topple the Republic. To do so, they'll have to obtain a map to Luke's whereabouts, located inside Resistance pilot Poe Dameron's (Oscar Isaac) droid, BB-8. But when Ren and his Stormtroopers destroy Poe's Jakku village and take him captive, the droid escapes, coming across scavenger Rey (Daisy Ridley) in the desert. Soon, she encounters Finn (John Boyega), a Stormtrooper on the run whose conscience won't allow him to kill for the First Order. With Ren on their tail and desperately wanting possession of that map, they'll need help from some familiar faces to evade capture and hopefully discover the location of Luke Skywalker.

As much that goes on in this story, at its crux is something very simple that directly relates to the original trilogy, while still feeling like a very natural continuation of it. By centering the plot around the search for Luke a entirely new set of dramatic possibilities are introduced in a matter of minutes, letting us speculate on the events that happened post-Return of the Jedi that could have led to this. Just reading on the screen that Luke Skywalker has vanished  instantaneously invokes a reaction that harkens back to past, while effectively creating a scenario that lays the groundwork on which these next three films can be built.

The script (co-penned by Abrams and The Empire Strikes Back screenwriter Lawrence Kasdan) ingeniously presents Luke as almost a mythological figure, spoken about in hushed, muted tones by the newer characters who aren't quite sure whether he or The Force even exists. Hamill's mysterious absence from all print and commercial advertising for the film becomes clear very early on, as does the sound reasoning behind it. By hiding him for nearly the entire running time, Luke's importance grows to the point that his eventual appearance is practically transcendent. And it's all because of the journey taken to get there through Rey, Finn and BB-8.

Without giving too much away, there's hardly a moment in any scene that doesn't contain some kind of technical or narrative homage to the '77 film or its sequels, whether it be the scene transitions, John Williams' classic musical cues, a setting or even just sometimes a random character in the background Abrams took the time and effort to subtly squeeze in. And he doesn't digitally shoehorn them in for no reason, making sure their presence, no matter how large or small, makes sense within the context they appear. If extensive fan service is the worst problem this film has, we should all consider ourselves lucky since Abrams spares no expense in addressing the very real creative problems that torpedoed this franchise. It's great to see actual  land again, as well as real dirt. And real people instead of computerized trickery. It's unlikely that anyone thought we'd be seeing bloodshed of any kind, but that's just what we get in the opening minutes, upping the stakes considerably.

As familiar as many things are, it doesn't feel like a carbon copy because it serves to only enhance and underline what is new and original. It can't be stressed enough just how much the previously unknown Daisy Ridley is asked to shoulder as Rey, supplying the entire story with its beating heart and soul in a performance that can only be described as revelatory. As the scavenger unwittingly thrown into the battle between the First Order and the Republic, she's as essential as Luke was to the original, even if that comparison unfairly implies the character is in any way derivative. Tough and strong-willed but instantly likable and vulnerable, Ridley makes Rey so easy to pull for it's almost impossible to comprehend the results had another actress been cast.

Rey shares most of her screen time with a droid, as BB-8's importance and involvement in the action rivals that of any human character over the course of any of the previous six films.  Looking like a robotic soccer ball with a head and a winning personality to spare, it might be Abrams' most inventive creation, and a character completely on par with C-3PO (Anthony Daniels) and R2-D2. And about half-way through it occurred to me that if Artoo didn't appear at all I'd be okay with it since he's essentially been replaced. Though, it's hardly a spoiler to say he eventually shows up. It tougher to talk about Oscar Isaac's smaller role as Resistance pilot Poe Dameron, but with minimal screen time, he slips right into the Star Wars universe, as natural a fit as any of the original players. 

The sarcastic humor and witty one-liners absent from the prequels are back, with much of it coming from John Boyega's Finn, whose backstory is only touched upon, but intriguing in the sense that we get to know the person behind a Stormtrooper mask. It's a luxury we've never been afforded, having long been depicted as nameless, faceless killing machines in previous installments. They still mostly are, but what happens when one of them can't kill or doesn't believe in what he's fighting for? It's a clever idea, with the bumbling Finn going from scene to scene constantly overwhelmed by every situation, until he can find his way, with Rey's help.

Boyega's strongest and funniest scenes are opposite Harrison Ford, who reappears as Han Solo as if no time has passed at all, slipping right back into the role that initially made the actor a household name. The character isn't dour or cranky, but the same smuggler and smooth liar we remember, with Abrams getting the absolute most out of Ford as Han that he can. You believe this is exactly where the character would be and it feels like a natural continuation of his story rather a nostalgic money grab. In other words, it's no Crystal Skull.

Abrams and company seem to have found the perfect balance between introducing new characters and using already existing ones to bolster their stories. This even extends to Chewbacca (Peter Mayhew), who has more to do here than ever, and the now General Leia Organa, whom Carrie Fisher plays with a more reserved, stately bent. Her scenes with Ford are an emotional highlight, even if it's hard to not wish there we got more of them. As for Hamill, he does appear, and while I'll withhold the details, it's pretty impressive how moving it is and the work that went into earning it. It's safe to say it actually may have worth waiting every one of those thirty years to get this moment.    

With only a few notable exceptions along the way, the acting was never a strong point in the original trilogy, while in the prequels it was often a flat-out embarrassment. Add Adam Driver to the list of exceptions as Kylo Ren, giving what's easily the most complete performance in the film. And as terrifying as he is under the mask, he's somehow even creepier after removing it. Having to follow Darth Vader isn't an easy task and at first glance it's easy to think this is merely a variation on that character,  but the more we learn about him, the deeper and more complex he gets. The script plays fast and loose with his identity, putting it all out there and letting Driver just go to town, having these moments that times make the character appear pitiful and sympathetic. And it works really well, leaving a lasting impact that should carry over into the next two films, and possibly beyond.

If forced to nitpick what's practically a flawless effort from Abrams, there are really only two issues. An Emperor-like, holographic GGI character called the Supreme Leader Snoke voiced by Andy Serkis in a performance that would be a far better fit in the Lord of the Rings trilogy than this. It's especially out of place and jarring after the renewed commitment to more practical effects carried out so well throughout the rest of the film.

Lupita Nyong'o's Maz Kanata is the more successful CGI, motion capture creation, even if I could do without them making characters like this a habit moving forward. It just brings back too many painful Jar Jar memories. On the plus side, at least Snoke's only a hologram and we're left with the feeling there could be more detailed explanation (excuse?) for his existence down the road. The more intriguing second-tier villain is Gwendoline Christie's Cobra Commander-like Captain Phasma, who we could easily stand to see more of. And given the choice, the first half of the film is slightly stronger than the second and a few of the longer action scenes could have probably been trimmed by a couple of minutes, but I'm admittedly grasping at straws here.       

At this point, anything written about The Force Awakens can't help but come off as a regurgitation since everyone who's seen it knows how good it is. It's a Star Wars movie to its core and skillfully sets the table for what's to follow. And as dark as this is, there's good reason to believe its sequel could be even darker given the director attached and what seems like Abrams' unwavering loyalty to the trajectory of the original trilogy. While I still believe releasing spin-off movies during off years is a terrible idea that overexposes the brand, there are few prospects more exciting than seeing a Rian Johnson-directed sequel to this film with Mark Hamill in an expanded role.

After envisioning for years what a follow-up to Return of the Jedi would look like, it's safe to say what ended up on screen met, if not surpassed, the highest expectations. And that's coming from only a moderate fan who went in with considerable skepticism after feeling burned by Lucas' prequels, which will likely now fade from memory, if they haven't already. It's true that this is about as close to a modern remake of the 1977 film that we're going to get. And that's not a bad thing. Lucas has called it "retro" and he's right. But we've already witnessed his definition of "new" so it's hard to blame Disney for passing on his offer for assistance, especially considering these results. When he owned Star Wars he could do with it as he chose, just as we were free to criticize those controversial decisions. But with The Force Awakens, J.J. Abrams brings to the forefront the revelation that Lucas hasn't really owned his own creation for a while now. Signing it over to the fans was just a formality.
                                          

Super 8

Director: J.J. Abrams
Starring: Joel Courtney, Kyle Chandler, Elle Fanning, Riley Griffiths, Noah Emmerich, Ron Eldard, Ryan Lee, Zach Mills, Gabriel Basso, Amanda Michalka
Running Time: 112 min.
Rating: PG-13

★★★ (out of ★★★★)

Nostalgia is a powerful thing. If it hits in just the right spot it can even trick you into believing you're watching something great by reminding you of a time when you felt you did. Writer/Director J.J. Abrams clobbers us with nostalgia in Super 8 and the results are so wildly mixed I've actually avoided sitting down to share my thoughts on it for days, mostly unsure of what they'd be. Attempting to invoke the spirit of vintage 80's Spielberg directed and produced movies like E.T. and The Goonies is a risky proposition in that it could either alienate or win over audiences in my age bracket who grew up with those films and know how special they are. It takes guts for Abrams to even try to invite comparisons to them for the sake of exposing younger audiences to a type of film that's becoming increasingly uncommon.

At points feeling like an homage and at others a lesser rip-off, moments in the first hour of this Spielberg-produced project (and his fingerprints are all over it) succeeded in making me feel like a 12-year-old again, until the plot careens off the rails and almost crashes and burns like the doomed train in the film. Luckily, it recovers in the last third to finish strong, thanks mostly to the child actors whose staggeringly authentic performances save Abrams as he loses touch with the movie it seemed he set out to make. Part of me wants to shake him silly for falling short of what could have been accomplished for stupid reasons, yet he also deserves a hearty handshake for even attempting to try something like this because we do badly need it. There are far worse things than trying to make a Spielberg-style coming-of-age summer blockbuster devoid of all cynicism but not quite getting all the way there. While I'm convinced I'm more impressed with the idea behind the movie (and maybe also the movie-within-the-movie) than the actual film itself, it's still a fascinating, if flawed, discussion starter that's entertaining and not easily forgettable. Abrams' execution may be sloppy, but he knows the right buttons to push.

Set in the small steel town of Lillian, Ohio in the summer of 1979 12-year-old Joe Lamb (Joel Courtney) is still emotionally traumatized by the accidental death of his mother four months earlier and a strained relationship with his father, Jack (Kyle Chandler), the town's sheriff. He wants to send him to sports camp for a few months, insensitive to Joe's desire to stick around to help best friend and bossy aspiring director Charles (Riley Griffiths) film his low-budget 8mm zombie movie with buddies Martin (Gabriel Basso), Preston (Zach Mills) and Cary (Ryan Lee). He's also somehow been able to recruit Joe's dream girl, Alice Dainard (Elle Fanning) to play the female lead, even as she endures a family drama of her own with alcoholic father Louis (Ron Eldard). During filming the kids witness a train wreck, the results of which are stranger than your usual train wreck and are captured by their Super 8 camera. What that footage uncovers raises a lot of questions and causes much chaos, even as the military, led by Colonel Nelec (Noah Emmerich) arrive on the scene with an agenda.

The one aspect of this film that's unquestionably a grand slam are these kids and nearly all its memorable moments are supplied by these child actors who are so good together (in both the real movie and the movie within) that for a while it doesn't even feel like a homage or a tribute to better films from the 80's, but the real deal.  The dialogue between them is smart and funny, they're clearly defined and we care about the relationships between them, especially the dynamic between Alice and Joe. You'd never know this was Joel Courtney's very first appearance in a feature film and Elle Fanning leads the charge with her performance, trumping even her recent work in Somewhere as far as the layers of complexity she brings to it. She has this one huge scene everyone will be talking about involving her character's performance within the zombie movie that works on so many different levels you're likely to get a headache trying to figure out how she does it.  All the kids' performances are great and the first hour resembles the best elements of The Goonies, complete with a map and some of the character types even being dead ringers for those in that family classic. But I still couldn't help but wish it was in the service of a more inventive story.

Once the action gets rolling I couldn't help but wish the young actors' efforts were in the service of a better story.  Problems start with the big train crash sequence, which relies too much on fake looking CGI and reminds us we're watching an everyday modern day blockbuster reliant on cheesy effects rather than character. How did it not occur to Abrams that approach is completely at odds with a period coming-of-age adventure set in the late 70s? The decision to do this is so ill-conceived it made me think Spielberg could have been behind it given his inexplicable (and embarrassing) over-use of the technology in the recent Indian Jones sequel. This also doesn't really feel like it's 1979 so much as a movie that's supposed to be set during that era with kind of a close approximation of the the wardrobe and music, but little else. Not once did I think I was watching anything that took place in the 70's or even early 80's, but rather a picture paying tribute to the values of that era and the movies made during it, present especially in the relationships between the kids and their parents. Fans of his work on Friday Night Lights will be excited to finally see Kyle Chandler on big-screen, then be deflated to discover he's just being asked to play Coach Taylor with a badge instead of a whistle, but slightly meaner. As little as he's given, he's still solid, which is more than can be said for a hilariously miscast Ron Eldard who somehow plays the archetype of the drunken dad even more cartoonishly than it's written. But like an early Spielberg classic, adults are only always seen through the eyes of children, so if it worked then, it's kind of hypocritical to condemn the approach now even if Spielberg was never this blatant about it.

Mid-way through the movie turns into a sequel to Abrams' own Cloverfield mish-mashed with The War of the Worlds. And I'm not even exactly sure how the military gets involved, why citizens are being evacuated or anything. It just kind of happens all of the sudden and we go with it because we're along for the journey with these kids and they're the movie's saving grace. The decision to keep the alien creature's appearance a secret for most of the running time is perplexing, especially considering what it ends up looking like and how little a surprise that is. This isn't about unraveling mysteries, even if it would have helped to have more of the J.J. Abrams who created Lost and Fringe than the one who rebooted Star Trek. Stranger still is the decision to concoct an elaborate backstory for the alien shown in grainy black and white flashback footage that resembles the Dharma Initiative films from Lost minus the intrigue. Yet it all somehow still comes together in an ending that's already been criticized as E.T. meets Close Encounters, if you can call that a criticism. For me it rescues the movie since it recreates the sense of wonder that was present in the first hour but lost somewhere in the middle of all the chaos. Michael Giacchino's soaring, emotional score (which intentionally sounds lot like John Williams' compositions for Spielberg in the 80's) goes a long way in helping.

Being such a grab bag of plusses and minuses, when this ended I was sure I didn't like it (and reading this you're probably thinking I still don't), but that it's worth checking out despite its flaws should give you an idea how good it could have been, or maybe how badly I was rooting for its success. Spielberg's being credited as the producer but the extent of his actual involvement could been anything from being heavily involved on a day-to-day basis to just putting some money down and visiting the set once, so it isn't fair to single him out for what worked or didn't. That said, he did slap his name on it with a full endorsement and it's essentially a tribute to his filmography so it's hard to not walk away feeling its failings are somehow his fault, despite Abrams writing and directing it on his own. You also can't help but wonder why it didn't turn out as good as it could have been with all the tools and inspiration he had at his disposal. Super 8 works well enough, but in doing so only proves that past Spielberg casts a shadow too large for even he himself to escape.

Star Trek

Director: J.J. Abrams
Starring: Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto, Leonard Nimoy, Karl Urban, Zoe Saldana, Simon Pegg, John Cho, Anton Yelchin, Eric Bana, Bruce Greenwood
Running Time: 127 min.
Rating: PG-13

★★ 1/2 (out of ★★★★)

Of all the crazy ideas to come along in recent years for remakes, sequels, prequels, reboots and re-imaginings the one that always seemed to make the most sense was Star Trek. As someone relatively unfamiliar with the franchise, even I could tell it's been on life support for a while now, if the plug hadn't been pulled already. Boasting one of the worst reputations for what's generally thought of as a pop culture institution, it's been dismissed for decades as a poor man's Star Wars and its fans have been mocked as geeks and cult members. For years, just telling someone you're a fan was an open invitation for eye-rolling and giggles. If there ever there was a franchise in desperate need for a complete overhaul, it was this.

Answering the call was Lost creator J.J. Abrams and the plan was to make Star Trek "cool," for the first time. To make a movie that would placate the diehards, but also be equally accessible to non-fans like me, who have never watched a single incarnation of the show or any of the feature films. In that respect, he kind of succeeds, to an extent. But why did I feel like I was still missing something? You don't have to be a die-hard fan to appreciate what's going on in the picture but it sure would help. For everyone else, there's enough excitement thrown in that they don't feel completely left out. While I can't go as far as to call it a Michael Bay movie in space, it disappointingly comes very close to being just that, with a messy, over-complicated story and a silly villain. Long suffering fans of the crippled franchise can finally rejoice at being given a reboot of passable quality, but the end result amounts to only slightly more than any other random Hollywood action spectacle.

The plot (of which you'll probably need an instruction manual to follow) centers around the emergence of the brilliant but rebellious Captain James T. Kirk (Chris Pine) who's reluctant to carry on the legacy of his late father (Chris Hemsworth). Through an opening flashback we find out he was killed while temporarily commandeering the U.S.S. Kelvin when it fell under attack by a tattooed, time traveling Romulan named Nero (an unrecognizable Eric Bana). Now, 25 years later, Kirk is recruited into Starfleet Academy by Captain Christopher Pike (Bruce Greenwood) and called to step aboard the U.S.S. Enterprise under the command of First Officer Spock (Heroes' Zachary Quinto). Joining them is Doctor Leonard McCoy (Karl Urban), Communications Officer Uhura (Zoe Saldana) and Navigators Sulu (John Cho) and Chekov (Anton Yelchin). They'll all have to band together to defeat the vengeful Nero, who's returned from the past to finish what he started.

The only thing that sets this film apart, and what likely tricked the majority of moviegoers into thinking they were watching something of genuine substance, is that from a technical standpoint it's a definite step-up from your regular blockbuster fare. The computer generated effects are more impressive than we're used to and the action moves at breakneck speed, which I've heard is in stark contrast to the original, more methodically paced Star Trek films of the past. It's easy to be fooled into thinking this is some kind of gigantic achievement, if not for the fact that the screenplay (which in a cruel irony was scripted by Transformers: ROTF co-writers Robert Orci and Alex Kurtzman) doesn't have a brain in its head. It wouldn't be accurate to call this a time travel movie because while that element is presented the actual IDEA of it is never really explored in a meaningful way.

Supposedly, time travel has always been a key ingredient in the franchise's mythology throughout the years, but it's scary to entertain the possibility that it could have ever been executed as clumsily as here. It just isn't engaging, feels like recycled material and unless you're a longtime fan you won't have any stake in wanting the characters to succeed. Granted, much of that has to do with the film featuring one of the most laughable villains I've seen in a summer blockbuster in years. Tattooed like Mike Tyson, a scenery chomping Eric Bana turns this into even more of a joke than it needs to be. Tyson himself probably would have made a more believable villain. Some action-oriented movies don't need a strong story or multi-layered characterizations to work, but Star Trek really does and while I wasn't expecting some kind of cerebral think piece, I at least thought more effort would be put into the story than this. What does work well is the rivalry between Kirk and Spock, which we slowly start to see develop into a relationship of begrudging mutual respect. Again though, this is much more likely to play better for those with previous knowledge of the characters' history together. As one of the uninitiated, I couldn't help but feel that Abrams was condescendingly asking me to care because they're "Kirk" and "Spock" and, you know, they're supposed to be a big deal. Even though elaborate, reasonably well presented backstories are cooked up for both early on, it's still somewhat difficult to shake that feeling.

Similarly, your perception of the performances (aside from Bana's which is dreadful by any standard) mostly hinges on your familiarity, or lack thereof, of the original actors who inhabited the roles. With little to go on, I can only say the biggest surprise was Chris Pine as Kirk, who I really expected to be bland going into this. But he makes Kirk the perfect anti-hero, cocky enough to slightly piss you off, yet still likable and competent enough to root for. Regardless of what William Shatner (who was controversially left out of the film) did or didn't do before him, Pine makes this part his own for this movie, and considering the entire story revolves around him, that goes a long way. I found Spock to be a mostly passive, wooden character which from my understanding is how he's always been presented but it doesn't do Zachary Quinto any favors. He's a real stiff throughout much of this, even if his resemblance to the young Leonard Nimoy is frightening.

Fans will have to correct me if I'm wrong but it sure seemed as if Karl Urban gave the most faithful interpretation as McCoy, capturing in appearance and mannerisms what DeForest Kelley originated on the series. Zoe Saldana was obviously cast as Uhura not only for the physical resemblance, but in an obvious attempt to present a "sexier" Star Trek, which is fine since she also does a nice job with the role despite being given little to work with. A romance with her and another major character seems thrown in for shock value even though someone in the studio didn't get the memo that it isn't all that shocking. Unless the Enterprise plans on stopping at White Castle, the casting of John Cho (assuming the Sulu role George Takei made famous) is distracting while Anton Yelchin's laughable attempt at a Russian accent as Chekov seems to be added as comic relief, but I couldn't be sure. On the other hand, Simon Pegg's engineer, "Scotty" is definitely intended for comic relief, which proves to be a problem since he isn't very funny. Appearing briefly are a latex-aged Winona Ryder (as Spock's mother) and, rather pointlessly, Tyler Perry as the head of Starfleet Academy. Ads and promotional materials have wisely kept it on the down low, but Nimoy's function in the picture (as "future" Spock) is significantly larger and more important than you'd expect. It's far from just a cameo. As for his performance, it's fine. I guess. His work is just another element of the film that can't be appreciated out of context for non-fans, no matter how thrilling it is for everyone else.

Earlier this year, the somewhat messy Watchmen (which seems worse the further removed I am from it) was accused of being too slavishly devoted to the source material, but at least that took a stand and committed to it. Those who never the graphic novel wouldn't feel lost and previous knowledge of the characters wasn't integral to your enjoyment of the picture, even if the decision hurt the adaptation in other ways. Despite my unfamiliarity with the series, I harbored no prejudices toward this project and went in as open-minded as could possibly be. In fact, it's been a while since I was so looking forward to a movie I generally had little interest in (if that makes any sense). My anticipation was only bolstered by rumors that Abrams would be freeing the franchise from previous "continuity constraints" in an effort to entice newbies like myself. But he didn't completely free himself from those constraints. Instead, he walked on eggshells with the story out of fear of upsetting the hardcore fans and dumbed down everything else. The result is a movie that weirdly exists in the middle, accomplishing neither goal to its fullest. And by wanting to have his cake and it eat it too, J.J. Abrams end up not so boldly taking Star Trek where many other action movies have gone before.

Cloverfield

Director: Matt Reeves
Starring: Michael Stahl-David, T.J. Miller, Jessica Lucas, Lizzy Caplan, Mike Vogel, Odette Yustman
Running Time: 84 min.
Rating: PG-13

***1/2 (out of ****)

It's debatable whether it actually helps to know as little as possible going into Cloverfield. Shrouded in secrecy for months leading up to its release and at the center of a huge viral marketing campaign, the studio went to great lengths to make sure very little was leaked about the film. Just about all we knew was that it was set in New York City and it involved some kind of monster attack. Details about what this monster was, where it came from and especially how it looked were guarded closest of all.

On one hand this is great because it creates an element of shock and surprise when you see the film. On the other hand it isn't because when anything is hyped this endlessly and we essentially know nothing, you run risk of audiences being disappointed with whatever they see. Just ask George Lucas (although that's a little different because his Star Wars prequels did truly suck). Hype or not, internet or not, Cloverfield doesn't suck at all. In fact, it's very good and a true original as far as monster movies go.

After finally seeing it I've determined the most ridiculous complaint leveled against the film is that the shaky hand-held camera is annoying and nauseating Without it we'd really have no movie and nothing would distinguish it from any other run-of-the-mill monster movie other than the fact that the acting is a little stronger. But also, had the film not been shot this way, we probably wouldn't be hearing criticisms that the film evokes "9/11 imagery." It's okay to have New York City under attack, just please don't make it look real! This does evoke imagery of that day, but it's unavoidable. I'm convinced any disaster movie set in New York would, but this just LOOKS worse because of how it's shot.

We already, for better or worse, have gotten United 93 and World Trade Center so to complain about this now seems a little silly. I hesitate calling this movie frighteningly realistic because it deals with a premise so far out there, but that's just what it is. The people seem real. The situation seems real. And that's why it's scary. The way it's filmed and directed lets you feel like you're an eyewitness to something horrifying and enables you to envision yourself in these characters' places, maybe wondering how you'd handle it.

Rob Hawkins (Michael Stahl-David) has just taken a new job in Japan and his brother Jason (Mike Vogel) and girlfriend Lily (Jessica Lucas) are throwing him a surprise going away party. Rob's longtime friend Beth (Odette Yustman), who he slept with weeks earlier shows up with a date making for an extremely awkward situation. His best friend Hud (T.J.Miller) is given a camera and the task of recording everyone's final goodbyes to Rob. He very reluctantly agrees, unaware that he'll be recording much more than just a couple of well wishing testimonials that night. He's our eyes for most of the rest of the film as we see what's unfolding onscreen through his hand-held camera. He mostly uses this opportunity to goof off and flirt with his crush Marlena (Lizzy Caplan), who barely knows he exists. Rob and Beth argue about their "relationship" and she storms out of the party.

It's here where I wished I knew even less about the film than I did going in because what happens next is truly jarring, especially in the context of the friendly home video we've been watching thus far. Something attacks the city and that's just about all I can reveal plot-wise without spoiling anything. It's big, it's nasty and no one knows where it came from.. Rob's caught in a life and death situation with Jason, Lily, Hud and Marlena and it clear all he wants to do is get to mid-town to find Beth.

It's almost impossible not to compare Cloverfield with The Blair Witch Project, one of its obvious inspirations. Where the two movies diverge, however, is in their use of the hand held camera as a storytelling device. In Blair Witch it was essentially a gimmick used to convince us what we're watching was real. This does that, but takes it a few steps further. It cleverly uses the camera to incorporate flashbacks of Rob and Beth together, as the night's events are accidentally recorded over a day they spent together the previous month. As a result, the footage shows up intermittently during the film giving us a better sense of who they are. Hud, who's behind the camera also has a distinctive personality, which somehow finds a way to shine through in the way the film is shot, which in turn influences how we see events.

I can't recall once during the film where I stopped and thought to myself how creative the director was or how clever the dialogue. It really seemed as if no one was directing this and it had no script, which is probably the highest compliment of all. Despite his name being all over the project in the media, Lost creator J.J. Abrams is actually the producer while Matt Reeves, whose previous credits include Under Siege 2: Dark Territory and The Pallbearer, is behind the camera. He invisibly directs this with near-perfection.

Of course this has a draw back too in that an 84 minute home movie that doesn't play as if it's been edited at all will have the tendency to drag its feet at times no matter how suspenseful. If this went on any longer than an hour and a half it probably would have been too much but at this length it's just right. Reeves is also able to salvage a PG-13 rating believably because if something's too gory or gruesome to show he doesn't have to. Hud can just miss it. He's not supposed to be a professional cameraman. If there's a conversation that we're not supposed to see or hear, then we won't. Reeves can do all of this believably without us ever feeling as if we're being manipulated.

This especially comes in handy with the monster since he can take a Jaws-like approach to its unveiling, giving it to us visually in small doses throughout the film, only increasing the terror and suspense. The special effects and CGI don't become as huge an issue or as noticeable as they would be in your typical blockbuster because this sloppy style of filming distracts you from it. The execution of this technique is very, very clever and not something we've seen in a film of this magnitude before. While the ending feels slightly anti-climactic, I'm hard–pressed to think of a more satisfying one. A couple of alternate finishes are included on the disc, none of which vary much at all from the theatrical one.

It can't be overstated how wise a decision it was on Abrams' and Reeves' parts to cast, other than maybe Vogel, virtual unknowns in these roles. The performances are fine all-around, with the strongest coming from Caplan. Had what unfolds at the 20-minute mark not happened I still would have wanted to spend the entire running length of the film with these characters even if they were just sitting around the apartment talking.

Unlike Blair Witch, which was concerned primarily with using the camera to unspool its mythology, this film lets us get to know the characters and eventually come to care what happens to them. That they're fresh faces, not big stars helps speed along the process even if some of the actors resemble more famous names. Caplan and Yustman could pass as doubles for Zooey Deschanel and Jennifer Connelly, respectively. Both are also naturals and the camera loves them…even if it's a shaky hand held one. Michael Stahl-David is likable and believable as the lead. Because of the naturalness of all the performances you have to believe a lot of Drew Goddard's script was improvised on the spot. The actors provide a spontaneous feeling we probably wouldn't have gotten from more established actors, who out of habit would have turned in more mannered work. This proves that sometimes it doesn't pay to necessarily go for the most talented performers, but instead those best suited for the specific material.

It's tough to determine whether Cloverfield is a movie that plays better on the big screen or small. It feels like a giant event movie that needs to be experienced in a loud theater to fully absorb its scope, yet the direct immediacy of its technique lends itself to satisfying home viewing as well. Having not seen it on the big screen though, I couldn't accurately tell you how much is lost in translation, if anything. It's also hard to determine how well this will stand up on repeated viewings since The Blair Witch Project, hailed as masterful upon its release, now plays like nothing more than a clever stunt. There seems to be more going on here, but it'll take some time to tell just how much. If nothing else, its eventful release and box office success came as a huge relief during the notorious moviegoing doldrums of January. It's no surprise that a sequel is being planned, as unnecessary as it is.

Some may feel uncomfortable with the way the film brings to the surface 9/11 fears, anxiety and memories. Collapsing New York City skyscrapers and a decapitated Statue of Liberty can only bring one thing to mind and Abrams had to know that. He probably also knows that day has already been seeping into Hollywood whether we like it or not. But what is film, anyway, but our lives adapted on the big screen for display? If they ever stopped being that, I'd want to quit watching them. It's time to admit that Cloverfield has bothers so many people because it so effectively taps into that powerless, scary feeling of not knowing what's going on.

Mission Impossible 3

Director: J.J. Abrams
Starring: Tom Cruise, Philip Seymour Hoffman, Billy Crudup, Ving Rhames, Michelle Monaghan, Jonathan Rhys Myers, Keri Russell, Maggie Q
Running Time: 126 min.
Rating: PG-13

*** (out of ****)

Before seeing Mission Impossible 3 I remarked to someone that I didn't think I've ever seen a bad Tom Cruise movie. That streak continues. M:I:3 is less complicated than the other films in the series, is much more focused and adds a human element to the story that the other two lacked. Plus, it has a great villain, which always helps. It's probably the best in the series. That's not to say I necessarily want to see another one and it's unlikely we will since Cruise was fired from Paramount after this was released, (more due to his offscreen antics than the earnings of this film). Still, it would be a shame if people avoided this for that reason because accomplishes everything it sets out to do quite well.

I.M.F. agent Ethan Hunt is now retired from the field and spends his days training up and coming agents like Lindsey Farris (Keri Russell). When Lindsey is kidnapped by dangerous arms dealer Davian (Oscar winner Philip Seymour Hoffman) Hunt is drafted back into action and ends up getting more than he bargained for when the life of his new financee (Michelle Monaghan) is also put at risk. To save her he has to retrieve the mysterious "rabbit's foot." To the script's credit, we never find out what the "rabbit's foot" is . All we know is that it's incredibly important. I really wish more films would do this. It's so much more effective when the filmmakers don't reveal that information because whatever it is will just pale in comparison to what the viewers imagine it will be.

At the center of the story is the question of whether someone is Hunt's line of work can even have a normal relationship with somebody and there are some good scenes with Cruise and Monaghan that support it. This is an improvement over the other Mission Impossible films in that it dares to raise questions about anything. Of course, the story is beside the point. It's just an excuse to have some terrific action scenes and chase sequences and I assure you there's definitely no shortage of them. There's a great sequence at The Vatican where Hunt and his team have so many costume changes I almost lost count and a chase scene/shoot out on a bridge that will blow your mind. There's the memorable introduction of a bomb that detonates inside your head as well as the return of one of my favorite elements of the MI series: the use of masks. It's a special treat here as we get to see Seymour Hoffman do a dead-on Cruise impersonation. This guy didn't win an Oscar for nothing and it's a thrill to see him ham it up in a villainous role like this, a nice change from the usual character driven roles we see him in all the time. It makes a big difference when an actor of his caliber is cast and it's great seeing him having such a good time with it. I also liked the interplay with Hunt and his I.M.F. Team and if you don't know who Maggie Q is, you definitely will after this movie. She makes an entrance at a party you won't soon forget.

M:I:3 has some twist and turns and the movie effectively starts it's first scene at the end and then works backwards showing us how we got there, adding a heightened sense of importance to the proceedings. This is the feature directorial debut of Alias and Lost creator J.J. Abrams and he proves him himself more than capable of making the leap to big budget action without missing a beat. Tom Cruise is often taken for granted as an actor and this special edition DVD features a montage of all his films and it's really amazing when you look back at his output. We also find out on a "making of" feature on the disc that much to the director (and probably his agent's) horror he does actually perform much if not all of his own stunts. You could argue he should be contractually obligated to given the insane salary he commands per picture, but the fact remains few actors do all their own stunts. There's also a commentary track on the disc with Cruise and Abrams that's entertaining enough, as it's defintely fun to hear how they did some of the more spectacular action sequences. While my expectations couldn't have been lower heading into M:I:3, I found it was a fun, exciting way to spend two hours.