Tag Archives: jurassic park

“What would I do with mutant dinosaurs from an accounting perspective? Is that REALLY what we are asking?” Jurassic World Rebirth

12 July 2025

2 Comments

My God, Jurassic World Rebirth is an astonishingly stupid movie. The kind of movie that makes me angry I saw it. I don’t want to devote any more time to the damn thing by writing about it, to be honest, but I have … thoughts.

Here’s the thing. The overarching conceit – 32 years in – just doesn’t work anymore if it ever actually did past the first installment. As an audience, can we in good faith care about, worry over, or invest in the humans in peril if they are such nitwits that they willingly return to the former park setting, research lab, holding island, WHATEVER where chaos has already ensued countless times? Shouldn’t we in fact feel utter sorrow for the dinosaurs at this point? They asked for NONE of this, happily extinct until “life found a way” with greedy entrepreneurs who only worried about whether they “could not if they should” (and all the other pseudo-philosophical bromides that have peppered this film franchise).

Have these films become my generation’s version of those Irwin Allen disaster pics of yore where random celebs at various points of their careers survive an airport on fire in the middle of a hurricane which is also on fire? Paging Shelley Winters.

Rebirth director Gareth Edwards is one of our more interesting filmmakers, particularly with this kind of capitalistic science run amuck enterprise. Why didn’t he finally flip the script on its head and give us a film where without equivocation humans were the real enemies?! That would have been interesting. No one would have bought a ticket, but at least there would have been a raison d’etre.

What do we get? An L.L. Bean catalog costumed romp through Spielberg’s greatest hits:

  • Beautiful cinematography of sweeping jungle vistas
  • The epic swell of John Williams’ iconic theme (a LOT)
  • Random yuppie family members inexplicably in peril – people who should be nowhere near ANY of this but by dumb luck and poor life choices are
  • Chic product-placed SUVs
  • One whimsically likable and infinitely merchandisable pocket dino to contrast with those mean big ol’ SCARY ones just looking for a meal
  • Thumbnail tragic back stories ONLY for the characters who will clearly survive so we are manipulated into fretting over them
  • A handful of other people, each of whom will clearly get offed every seventeen and a half minutes because they’re painted as marginally unlikable
  • Absolutely zero grief from the survivors (UNLESS it’s a red herring death of a cast member who will reappear from the jungle ten minutes later)
  • Internal logic that is all over the map – e.g. don’t make a sound to inadvertently attract the dinos UNLESS we need you to scream and wail in the next scene with little existential consequence
  • Flippant jokes made amidst the carnage to show how chill the characters really are
  • Characters who periodically whoop and holler with glee at unearned “victory” or “in awe” moments – like they are attending a college football game
  • AND a terrifically talented and terrifically wasted cast who would have been better served playing Pickleball than showing up for this drivel

Scarlett Johansson plays a kind of remixed Lara Croft mercenary version of Chris Pratt’s and Laura Dern’s characters from earlier films. Mahershala Ali is the wise and world-weary boat captain with a secret heart of gold. Jonathan Bailey fares the best of the three as the Sam Neill/Jeff Goldblum arch-but-sexy-nerd “voice of reason” paleontologist. Bailey manages to wring some gold from the lines he’s given, landing a few zingers along the way – my favorite: “What would I do with mutant dinosaurs from an accounting perspective? Is that REALLY what we are asking?” Or maybe I just found that funny because it felt like an indictment of Universal Pictures still pumping these movies out.

Seriously, the film is sharp enough to cast three smart, winning, box office draws who can act but then has them wander around cavalierly for two and a half hours like they are at a blood-splattered country club. It felt like this was the direction they were given: “Yes, we know being surrounded by frantically carnivorous dinos should elicit some authentic reactions of abject fear, but we think it would be better if you portrayed your characters like they were in a Hallmark movie on their way to a county fair after grabbing a low-fat soy macchiato at Starbucks and some workout gear at lululemon. Can you make that work?”

There are simply no stakes in this film. I suppose I should tell you the hook for all the mayhem THIS time. In short, people in this Jurassic universe just don’t care about dinos anymore – they’ve moved on. Ho hum. And the remaining dinos can’t survive anywhere but a few equatorial islands. THAT could have been an interesting concept to explore in detail – how jaded and indifferent we have become as a society through the lens of dinosaurs becoming extinct, not literally but in popularity. We cavalierly cast aside such a miracle of science because it ceases to entertain; not to mention the planet’s atmosphere is so effed up these amazing creatures can’t survive here anyway. But, no, that’s just a passing thought in the first 10 minutes to set up an excursion to the equator to draw DNA from THREE – count ‘em THREE – very specific dinos (one by sea, one by land, one by air … naturally) in order for big pharma to develop a cure for heart disease. Yup, that’s why these nincompoops travel to hell on earth and get themselves killed (or mostly killed). For MacGuffins. Bailey’s character is stuck being the Jiminy Cricket conscience, periodically chastising with comments like “Science is for ALL of us, not SOME of us” and “WE don’t rule the earth … we just THINK we do.” Sigh.

Hey, Amblin Entertainment and Universal Pictures, the next time – and that is a fiscal inevitability – you start cranking up your marketing machinery to gestate another one of these Jurassic babies, just take a moment and remember what Jeff Goldblum cautioned alllllll the way back in 1993 (and I repeat for those in the back): “You were so preoccupied with whether or not you could, you didn’t stop to think if you should.”

“Thoughtful, strategic adoption of AI rather than chasing trends.” The Professionals: Inside Professional Services Marketing magazine covers launch of BD Ladder’s book “The Impact of AI on Business Development & Marketing in Professional Services” (with contribution from yours truly) #lmamkt #lma24 #AI

17 May 2024

Leave a comment

Thank you, The Professionals: Inside Professional Services Marketing magazine, for this feature and shout out.

EXCERPT: “AI is certainly not a new phenomenon, and many firms and individuals within professional services firms are experimenting and even using it to save time. However, for many firms, its full potential to deliver and enhance their business development and marketing efforts has so far not been successfully tapped. To assist with this, a leading professional services BD and marketing agency, The BD Ladder, has released a thought leadership eBook, The Impact of AI on Business Development & Marketing in Professional Services, which features eight articles from leading independent BD and marketing consultants and practitioners within the professional services. …

“In comparison to this Roy Sexton’s article offers a contrary view on the widespread rush to adopt AI. He emphasizes the importance of thoughtful, strategic adoption of AI rather than chasing trends. Sexton warns against superficial compliance and advocates for a deeper understanding of AI’s potential and limitations.”

Read more…

The eBook is available to download on The BD Ladder’s website. 

Are the kids all right? My thoughts on marketing, BD and AI in The BD Ladder’s latest eBook

7 April 2024

2 Comments

Are the kids all right? Are we too concerned with trend-chasing as opposed to delivering real value? Find out my thoughts on marketing, BD and AI in my article in The BD Ladder’s latest eBook.

Download your copy today and read the thoughts and opinions of industry leaders including Ben Chiriboga, Lynn Tellefsen Stehle, Ben Trott, David MacDonald, Megan Senese, Jennifer Ramsey, Richard W Smith, Michelle Howard, and Paul Roberts.

Thank you to Ben Paul and Lucy King who invited me to take part.

Download your copy today: https://www.bdladder.com/the-impact-of-ai-on-business-development

The kids are NOT all right … one marketer’s (cheeky) thoughts on trend-chasing and real value

By Roy Sexton, Director of Marketing at Clark Hill and Immediate Past International President of the Legal Marketing Association

I suppose I’ve become more of a contrarian as I’ve progressed through my career. I love new ideas, change, and growth, but sometimes my Spidey-sense goes off when I feel like too many people are all rushing off after the same shiny object and I don’t perceive a great depth of thinking in their discourse. Now I’m not saying that’s the case with AI right now.

I’m implying that’s the case with AI right now. 

Why do I say this? Well, for one, we’ve all been living with AI in one form another already for 20+ years. It’s baked into just about every cell phone and home media device, ubiquitously scattered across the land. It’s part of all major software applications. It’s part of every shopping recommendation we receive – and heaven knows AI-shopping suggestions sustained my spirit during the pandemic!

But in 2023 it suddenly captured the zeitgeist and, at least in my chosen profession of marketing, it seemed as if everyone feared they didn’t sound “smart” if they didn’t jump into the fray. For a while, it seemed all slapped the sentence “AI won’t take your job, but people who know AI will” into every piece of thought leadership, whether pertinent or not.

It’s AI o’clock … do you know where your children are?

Now, don’t get me wrong. I’m as enamored of AI-prompts and AI-streamlined tasks as anybody. As a glimmer into my psychology: I remember I fought voice-to-text for years, until my poor thumb screamed “give me a break with all the texting!” And now I haven’t typed anything on my phone for the better part of a decade (I think). I also am not sure I’ve proofread any of my texts in the better part of a decade either come to think of it.

And I guess that’s a bit of my concern. There’s a meme I share on social media every time I see it, and much like Yogi Berra I’m sure I will mangle its verbiage. It’s something to the effect of … “Hey, rather than have AI replace all the artists and screenwriters, let’s have it clean up the oceans.” That speaks to me. I will sound like a tin-foil hat wearing conspiracist but did the accountants get together with IT and say, “You know what … we both hate writing. Can we work on something to replace THAT?” I know AI does SO much more, but this is what hits close to home for me. Truth be told, writers are generally paid a pittance anyway, and I’m not totally convinced that what comes from AI prompts is as compelling as what comes from the human mind and heart. Plus, if the robots are doing all the writing and the responding, who’s doing the reading? Asking for a friend. Isn’t the point of marketing copy to connect with fellow humans and influence their purchasing decisions? At least that’s what I always thought.

What does appeal to me is the idea of AI clearing the decks of tasks that are not value-add and replacing with ones that generate market insight, while expanding the reach of the human minds in the room. I do believe in my bones we are at an incredible tipping point where data is concerned; AI rapidly scouring all the interwebs to inform our creative decisions, to target the right clients and customers just-in-time, and to close the deal will create greater efficiency and outcomes. This will also empower the creatives to do their work, to not have to fight their internal clients endlessly (that’s honestly where all the marketing waste is), and to focus on what they do best: innovate and connect.

I caution us as professionals to not lose ourselves in a sea of buzzwords and trends. For the past decade, every conference season, I slog through a million panel discussions where everyone hyperventilates over the next big “disruption.” Shall I rattle off a few? Big data. Internet of things. Blockchain. NFTs. Um … Clubhouse. I could go on.

What I am interested in is how we can already leverage what we have been using unknowingly for ages, not to downsize teams or confuse an already broad generational contingent even further, but rather to quickly craft holistic solutions that empower creators and consumers alike to connect over what they really need.

We’ve already seen the speed with which digital solutions can disrupt (negatively) real life, particularly the impact that social media has had on community fragmentation, political turmoil, and the dissemination of fraudulent information. When education and human comprehension don’t keep pace with technological advancement, human beings veer into “Dark Ages” dystopian times. Disruption seems clean and sleek and sexy in the rearview, but it is messy in real time. People are messy. We can’t help it. I’m not saying that’s bad and I’m not saying that’s good. I loved Thomas Friedman’s The World is Flat as much as anyone. But it remains a concern and as breathless as we are about these new tools and solutions and what they can do for the “bottom line,” let’s also consider what they will do to an already fragile human condition.

I will leave you with this anecdote, names changed to protect the innocent. I have an attorney friend – a Baby Boomer. I’m not being ageist – it’s important context. This attorney reminds me of my beloved late mother. Both reflect a fascination with social and digital platforms and a desire to connect as broadly as possible, seeing the potential in these channels for commiseration on scale and enthusiastically embracing it all. Both also are petrified they are going to “break something” every time they touch social media. Doesn’t hold them back but fear always lurks in the background. 

(Sidebar: I grew up in the era when parents told you not to sit too close to the television for fear of ruining your eyesight nor to turn it on and off and on and off for fear of breaking it. In fact, we – gasp! – took our TVs periodically to the “repair shop.” I wonder if this is why an entire generation lives in abject terror over tech. Just a theory.)

One day this attorney asked me why they don’t see the words “[their name] likes this” under posts on social. I said, “Well, when you click ‘like,’ OTHER people see that.” They then got insistent: “No, I want it to say [my name] LIKES this.” I explained again. Then a light bulb went off. I looked at their activity and realized in the time we were chatting they had started typing this as a comment “[their name] likes this” over and over and over under different posts. Paging Amelia Bedelia!

Now flash forward a few months, I get another call. On a Sunday. This attorney is apoplectic. “Why does it show I’ve left all these comments on my very important clients’ posts? I didn’t say these things. I wouldn’t say these things. Can I sue LinkedIn? I’m so embarrassed.” Again, I calmly asked, “Now describe to me what you are seeing?” (I learned this in years of similar panicked chats from my mom. I think I could have a side hustle here.) With some time, I figured out they thought the AI prompts under a given post were a string of comments they had actually left. They were so distressed about it that they had then sent emails to all said connections apologizing. THEN they reached out to me. Not a great look for someone trying to show their facility and agility in this digital age.

So, what’s the problem here? Why am I sharing this? I actually GET why the attorney was alarmed. Now, I knew what I was looking at when I saw those prompts, but they didn’t. Because the tech industry sometimes moves at the speed of “we’ll get to it when we feel like it” and other times at the speed of “we’re changing stuff and not explaining it and you can just figure it out or not,” there is likely a deep rift we will create across generations if we don’t pause a bit and implement things sensibly. Did this attorney NEED a prompt to say, “Congrats on your work anniversary?” Do any of us? Was that actually a problem that needed to be solved? And how many troubles have been created inadvertently in the process? 

What’s that line sardonically offered by Jeff Goldblum’s Jurassic Park character Dr. Ian Malcolm (who specialized in chaos theory BTW)? “Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn’t stop to think if they should.”

Now, I know those reading this ramble will shake their heads in judgment and think, “I’m shocked. SHOCKED! I had no idea Roy was such a wet blanket luddite.” Listen, I’m not. I love what we are able to do with digital and social tech and how AI can supercharge our ability to connect meaningfully and hopefully change the world for the better. But I’m not honestly seeing much of that yet in the discourse to which I’ve been privy. So just imagine I’m Ian Malcolm here. And remember he’s one of the few characters who survived.

P.S. Confessional … I first asked Chat GPT to write this article for funsies. I hated the result. Tossed it all out. And then I wrote this. You might hate it. But I don’t. And I still think that matters.

Full list of Authors in the full book:

P.S. Above depicted one of my most treasured invitations I’ve ever received in 12 years of being a member of the Legal Marketing Association. Thank you, Tahisha Fugate, MBA [she/her]! Love you and love this dynamic, brilliant, fantastic, fun group of incredible human beings.

LinkedIn post from Tahisha: “For the third year in a row, a group of Black Women in Legal Marketing and friends gathered at #LMA24. Women from firms of all sizes, across the U.S. and Canada, connected and engaged. We were thrilled to be joined by some legal marketing business partners, including Chambers USA, Passle, RubyLaw, and Jaffe to name a few.

“A special thank you to my firm Axinn, Veltrop & Harkrider LLP for their continued support of this event! I look forward to seeing everyone in DC next year. #legalmkt #marketing #businessdevelopment #DEI”

Original post with more pics.

“Life doesn’t give you seat belts.” The LEGO Batman Movie

12 February 2017

5 Comments

[Image Source: Wikipedia]

[Image Source: Wikipedia]

“Everything is (almost) awesome” in The LEGO Batman Movie, a spinoff from the 2014 surprise critical and box office hit The LEGO Movie. While LEGO Batman never quite achieves the warmhearted, dizzyingly progressive whimsy of its predecessor, it compensates with a bonkers absurdity that wouldn’t have been misplaced in a Road Runner cartoon.

Will Arnett returns to gravelly-voice the titular anti-hero, a Trump-esque (by way of Alec Baldwin) billionaire egomaniac whose idea of a good time is fighting (alone) an endlessly looped (and loopy) war on crime where the criminals never actually get locked up and the Batman soaks up a debatably earned shower of community accolades.

Arnett is a one-note hoot, and the filmmakers (director Chris McKay working with a mixed grab-bag of screenwriters Seth Grahame-Smith, Chris McKenna, Erik Sommers, Jared Stern, and John Whittington) wisely supplement his singular focus with a sweet-natured supply of supporting characters.

Cast MVPs include a sparklingly feminist Rosario Dawson as Barbara Gordon (later dubbed “Batgirl,” who quips to Arnett, “Does that make you BatBOY, then?”), a gleefully earnest and utterly over-caffeinated Michael Cera as Dick Grayson (relishing every glimmering, discofied sequin of his admittedly peculiar but comic book accurate “Robin” costume), and a dry-as-a-martini Ralph Fiennes as Bruce Wayne/Batman’s dutiful, shaken-but-not-stirred majordomo Alfred Pennyworth.

Like The LEGO Movie (and just about any children’s movie made. ever.), The LEGO Batman Movie posits a primary thesis that family is everything, even if that family is made up of a collection of well-intentioned, mentally-suspect oddballs (so it’s a fact-based film). Arnett’s Batman comically resists any and all overtures by his friends (and enemies) to connect, collaborate, and love, driven in part by a lightly-touched-upon reference to Batman’s origins losing both of his parents to a gun-toting mugger in Gotham City’s aptly named “Crime Alley.” Alfred cautions Master Bruce, “You can’t be a hero if you only care about yourself.”

This sets up a tortured bromance between Batman and his (sometimes) chief nemesis The Joker, voiced with consummate crazed sweetness by an unrecognizable Zach Galifianakis. The Joker just wants Batman to acknowledge that they have a special bond, but the Dark Knight’s cuddly sociopathy prevents him from admitting that they truly need each other. “I don’t currently have a bad guy. I’m fighting a few different people. I like to fight around,” Batman dismisses a lip-quivering, weepy-eyed Joker.

The Joker then sets on a path to flip this script, bringing a spilled toybox rogues’ gallery of delightfully random villains (King Kong, Harry Potter‘s Voldemort, The Wicked Witch of the West and her Flying Monkeys, The Lord of the Rings’ Sauron, Steven Spielberg’s Jaws, Dr. Who‘s Daleks, Clash of the Titans‘ Medusa and Kraken, Jurassic Park‘s velociraptors, Dracula, Joe Dante’s cinematic Gremlins, and a bunch of glowing skeletons) to destroy Gotham City, reclaim Batman’s attention, and re-establish their dotingly dysfunctional affection for one another.

What made The LEGO Movie such fun was its childlike ability to (s)mash-up incongruous genres (and intellectual properties), much like little boys and girls do with their actual toy collections, wherein it might not be uncommon for Darth Vader, Lex Luthor, and Barbie to team up against Captain America, He-Man, and Papa Smurf. It was nice to see this bit of anarchic, cross-promotional foolishness continue from one film to another.

For middle-aged comic books buffs, there are Easter Eggs galore. We get obscure Batman villains rarely seen in print, let alone film (Calendar Man? Crazy Quilt? Zebra-Man?!). There is a SuperFriends house party, hosted by Superman (Channing Tatum’s adorably frat boy-ish take on the character continued from The LEGO Movie) at his “Fortress of (Not-So) Solitude” complete with a DJ-ing Wonder Dog, a groovy Martian “Dance”-hunter, and an “It’s a Small World”-esque conga line of Apache Chief, Black Vulcan, El Dorado, Samurai, and the Wonder Twins. Perhaps most impressively, The LEGO Batman Movie manages to telescope nearly 80 years of Bat-history (comics, television, film) into a handful of nifty and very funny montages, simultaneously justifying LEGO’s iconically cracked take on the character while honoring all that has come before.

Upon Robin’s first joy ride in a hot rod-drawn-on-the-back-of-a-Trapper-Keeper version of The Batmobile, Batman turns to him, with his nails-on-a-chalkboard growl, and warns, “Life doesn’t give you seat belts.” And that is likely the most important message in these LEGO movies. Life is going to hand you a lot of lemons, so use your imagination and your inherent sense of joy to keep things fulfillingly messy … and, along the way, feel free to pour lemonade over the heads of anyone who tries to make you follow their arbitrary rules. Make your own rules, and break them freely and often.

________________________________

From my personal collection. Yes, I’m nuts.

Reel Roy Reviews is now TWO books! You can purchase your copies by clicking here (print and digital).

In addition to online ordering at Amazon or from the publisher Open Books, the first book is currently is being carried by Bookbound, Common Language Bookstore, and Crazy Wisdom Bookstore and Tea Room in Ann Arbor, Michigan and by Green Brain Comics in Dearborn, Michigan.

My mom Susie Duncan Sexton’s Secrets of an Old Typewriter series is also available on Amazon and at Bookbound and Common Language.

“To a canary, a cat is a monster. We are just used to being the cat.” Jurassic World

14 June 2015

9 Comments

"Jurassic World poster" by Source (WP:NFCC#4). Licensed under Fair use via Wikipedia - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Jurassic_World_poster.jpg#/media/File:Jurassic_World_poster.jpg

[Image Source: Wikipedia]

Regarding this weekend’s big summer blockbuster release Jurassic World, my animal advocate mom posted this on my Facebook wall earlier today: “But are they mean to dinosaurs? Are the dinosaurs the villains? Is it a glorified hunting movie? Inquiring minds want to know these things? Would Sarah Palin approve and reignite girls to wear clean sportsy clothes and hiking boots? Posing with bears and rabbits and deer and giraffes pretending they killed them? Because if so, my friend… ha!”

I can pretty safely say that it’s not a glorified hunting movie, and I don’t think the Sarah Palin-types would like it, as most of their stand-ins in the film get eaten pretty quickly by roaring, teeth-gnashing dinos. However, the film is a typically schizophrenic Steven Spielberg production (he executive produced this installment but directed the original Jurassic Park way back in 1993). Is the film making a satiric point about how horrible humans are to the environment, how we reap what we sow, and how we deserve any and all climate change payback which results from our rampant over-development of land, air, and sea? Or is Jurassic World just more yuppie disaster porn designed to sell Happy Meal toys, glistening Jeeps, and Patagonia safari gear? I’m still scratching my head. I just don’t know.

When you look at Spielberg’s filmography, as both director and producer, from Jaws to Close Encounters, E.T. to Gremlins, Poltergeist to, yes, Jurassic Park, he returns time and again to themes of man’s infinite ineptitude and limitless arrogance in the face of a planet, nay universe, full of mystery, wonder, and violent counterbalance. For Spielberg, karma is a four-color funny – build a beach home, destroy a burial ground, feed a cooing creature after midnight, genetically modify a reptile for an overpriced amusement park? You’re gonna get sliced, diced, and eviscerated, all to the strains of a symphonic John Williams score.

And you know what? That is ok by me!

The problem with Spielberg’s films is he wants to have his sardonic cake and eat it too. Spielberg’s movies are expensive and they make a lot of money; whether directed by Spielberg or under the auspices of Amblin Entertainment or DreamWorks, these big budget boogers are sold to every demographic quadrant an army of polished marketers can dream up, so ultimately the flicks dare not go too far. We don’t want to alienate any viewer, slurping over their Mr. Pibb and Kit Kat bites (yeah, that’s what I had today), and, consequently, any unique and incisive POV gets diluted in a gauzy haze of product placement, no matter how postmodern and ironic said placement may be.

No, Spielberg did not direct Jurassic World. Those honors (?) go to Colin Trevorrow (Safety Not Guaranteed), but Spielbergian DNA is all over this sucker. Sorry, Colin. I can only imagine this must have been like being hired for a dream design job at Apple, only to find they really just want you to arrange, into artful displays, the new Apple Watches when they arrive in stores.

Jurassic World does its job efficiently and effectively. It entertains, and it will make a mint … but it has no real raison d’etre. (Yeah, I got all fancy. It doesn’t need to exist.) It basically lifts the very plot from the first film, but this time we get Bryce Dallas Howard (how is this mugging, one-note actor still making movies? oh, right, Ron Howard’s kid) instead of Richard Attenborough and Chris Pratt instead of Sam Neill. Jeff Goldblum is now Irrfan Khan, and Wayne Knight is now Vincent D’Onfrio. B.D. Wong? Still B.D. Wong – that man must be an automaton as he hasn’t aged one freaking bit.

Seriously, these actors may be playing different characters (obvi) twenty-some years later (natch) but their narrative functions are still the same.

Portraying a grizzled velociraptor trainer (and apologist), Pratt is the best thing in the film by far. Wearing a steady exasperation that seems to suggest he wishes he had a better script with which to work, Pratt does a fine job channeling Neill’s gravitas: just because you can make a dinosaur does mean you should make a dinosaur. Pratt is a delight, one of the few actors in the film who seems to believe where he is and what is doing and who has a genuine affection for the misunderstood creatures in this world (dino or otherwise).

Howard fares less favorably as the Isla Nubar theme park’s chief executive who in sexist Hollywood shorthand is an out-of-touch, controlling, insecure ninny with a severe bob, impractical shoes, and an ever present iPhone. Ugh. It doesn’t help that her emotions range from sweaty to panicked to rigid to … sweaty.

D’Onofrio is a kick in an underwritten role as a nebulous InGen contractor who wants to use these “assets” (that’s how mean people refer to animals in this cardboard world) for military purposes. Boo hiss. Blessedly, he has the chops to fill in the mile-wide gaps the script allows. He exudes the oily opportunism of those post-millennial types who see our natural resources simply as walking/breathing/pooping dollar signs. He may as well have had Monsanto painted on his backside.

At one point, Wong’s character (you may recall he is the ethically-dubious geneticist who figured out how to fabricate dinos from whole cloth in the first place) intones what passes for a philosophical thesis in the film: “To a canary, a cat is a monster. We are just used to being the cat.” Yup, amen to that.

There is a perverse joy in seeing blank-faced, cornfed tourists hoisted by their own petards, tossed like beach balls from one pteranodon to another above Jurassic World‘s Starbucks/Margaritaville/Pandora encrusted main street. I also loved the jab at Sea World with a dino sea creature (mosaurus?) that grudgingly entertains a nautical football-arena-size stadium of onlookers but gets the last laugh when he/she gobbles a few vacationers down.

Ultimately, by the final act, when the Frankenstein’s monster dino “Indominus Rex” (cooked up by Howard and Wong to sell more t-shirts and key chains) has shredded the park top to bottom and is now fighting a pack of velociraptors and a t-rex for no real explainable reason, I was in a Mr. Pibb/Kit Kat coma. I just didn’t care.

And the adult in me kept thinking … Who is going to put these dinos back in their paddocks? Is the Hilton corporation going to rebuild their opulent hotel on Isla Nubar for future product placement? Who is going to clean up this mess, and will Starbucks return to sell more mocha-choca-lattes? And why didn’t the dinos just finish off all the humans? That’s a movie I’d pay $10 more bucks to see.

____________________________

Reel Roy Reviews 2

Reel Roy Reviews 2

Reel Roy Reviews is now TWO books! You can purchase your copies by clicking here (print and digital) In addition to online ordering at Amazon or from the publisher Open Books, the first book is currently is being carried by Bookbound, Common Language Bookstore, and Crazy Wisdom Bookstore and Tea Room in Ann Arbor, Michigan and by Green Brain Comics in Dearborn, Michigan. My mom Susie Duncan Sexton’s Secrets of an Old Typewriter series is also available on Amazon and at Bookbound and Common Language.

“The error in man is thinking nature is in our control and not the other way around.” Godzilla (2014)

18 May 2014

10 Comments

Description: Film poster; Source: Wikipedia [linked]; Portion used: Film poster only; Low resolution? Sufficient resolution for illustration, but considerably lower resolution than original. Other information: Intellectual property by film studio. Non-free media use rationales: Non-free media use rationale - Article/review; Purpose of use: Used for purposes of critical commentary and illustration in an educational article about the film. The poster is used as the primary means of visual identification of this article topic. Replaceable? Protected by copyright, therefore a free use alternative won't exist.

[Image Source: Wikipedia]

Godzilla, Warner Brothers’ reboot of the classic Japanese movie monster, is exhausting. Don’t get me wrong. I was highly entertained, even entranced, but I also feel like I was just hit over the head by a 2X4 for the last two hours.

Like the similar postmodern reinvention in Rise of the Planet of the Apes (or even, for that matter, this spring’s Noah), Godzilla, directed with a surprisingly sure hand by relative newcomer Gareth Edwards, is positioned as pointed popcorn allegory for how abysmally we humans treat this planet and the ungodly vengeance Mother Nature should unleash on us self-important ants.

In all fairness, Toho Studios’ original Godzilla series took its cues from a mid-century world traumatized by the threat of nuclear Armageddon (as evidenced by the real-life bombings of Nagasaki and Hiroshima), so Edwards is just following that argument to its logical post-9/11, post-global warming, post-Inconvenient Truth conclusion.

The 2014 edition (let’s all just agree to forget the inane Jurassic Park-meets-Independence Day debacle that was 1998’s Matthew Broderick-starring effort) is a tension-filled marvel. Edwards wisely gives us plenty of footage of the titular “monster” and his battles with the Mothra-esque MUTO creatures, but he keeps the shots murky and smoke-filled, the pacing methodically coiled, and the shocks Hitchockian in their “did I see that or didn’t I?” simplicity. Alexandre Desplat’s score is brain-thumpingly martial.

The narrative is straight-up Saturday afternoon matinee with a healthily cynical gloss of 21st century ecological nightmare. The first half of the movie is all set up as we are introduced to a scientist (a hammy Bryan Cranston saddled with an epically bad hairpiece … guess the budget got eaten up by CGI) who loses his wife (Juliette Binoche) in a tragic nuclear power plant accident that may or may not be giant-lizard-related. Flash-forward 15 years, and Cranston’s now-adult son (Aaron Taylor-Johnson, all grown up from his Kick-Ass years and looking like a steroidal Joaquin Phoenix) has tired of his papa’s conspiratorial theories as to what really offed mama.

There’s a gibberish-spewing Japanese scientist (an awfully wooden Ken Watanabe) and a gibberish-spewing British scientist (the always crackerjack Sally Hawkins) and an authoritatively gibberish-spewing American general (the genius David Strathairn who could make tax code seem fascinating).

At one point in the film, Watanabe says to Strathairn: “The error in man is thinking nature is in our control and not the other way around.” (I loved that!)

I kept expecting Kevin McCarthy or Gene Barry to show up wearing fedoras covering up their sweaty brows as they rattled through unnecessarily expository dialogue (see: 1953’s War of the Worlds or 1954’s Invasion of the Body Snatchers… but preferably if you are 10 years old and it’s 1982 and there is nothing else on television).

Of course, Taylor-Johnson has chosen a military career, much to the chagrin of his academic dad. He is returning from service in some unidentified locale, eager to reignite all-American family time with his perpetually anxious wife (Elizabeth Olsen, spinning gold out of a thankless role) and his toddler son. As mayhem ensues and the various screaming creatures destroy Honolulu … and Las Vegas … and San Francisco … somehow Taylor-Johnson’s character managers to be in every setting, save the day, and find another means of transport to get him closer to home. Ah, Hollywood logic.

But, here’s the thing … it all works, pretty marvelously. There are no winky-nudge-nudge sexist/racist/xenophobic Michael Bay-style jokes/asides/quips and the carnage (while PG-13 friendly) is believable and haunting (and any movie that blows up Las Vegas is ok in my book). The pacing is ominous and steady and relentless, and, without being a shrill polemic, the film reminds us, in no uncertain terms, that how we treat (or mis-treat) this planet has dire consequences for us all …

In this case, primordial creatures who’ve lived in the earth’s core for eons until the lure of radioactive weapons and waste draw them out will obliterate us all in some kind of H.P. Lovecraft/Ray Bradbury fever dream … but, hey, I said it was an allegory!

___________________________

Reel Roy Reviews is now a book! Thanks to BroadwayWorld for this coverage – click here to view. In addition to online ordering at Amazon or from the publisher Open Books, the book currently is being carried by Bookbound, Common Language Bookstore, and Crazy Wisdom Bookstore and Tea Room in Ann Arbor, Michigan and by Green Brain Comics in Dearborn, Michigan. My mom Susie Duncan Sexton’s Secrets of an Old Typewriter series is also available on Amazon and at Bookbound and Common Language.