Back in 1999, there was a science fiction adventure film released that was imaginative, inspirational and epic. It was called The Matrix. It transcended the theater and planted itself squarely in the pop culture zeitgeist of a generation. Then came a pair of sequels that most (though admittedly not all) of the people believed were a major step down. They convoluted the narrative structure of the original until it was a mess.

Then, almost 20 years later, one of the original creators of the original, returned and resurrected the series with a brand new film featuring some of the same stars and several of the same characters.

The Matrix Resurrections returns to the world of the Matrix with our favorite Neo (Keanu Reeves) back on tow. Trinity (Carrie-Ann Moss), who died in the third film, is here too. Morpheus is back, sort of, with a different actor taking the role made famous by Laurence Fishburne, although it is not quite the same.

Then there are a group of other secondary characters who make up the crew, most notably Bugs (Jessica Henwick). None of these secondary characters mean much.

Our villain from the original trilogy was Agent Smith, played by Hugo Weaving, is now being played by Jonathan Groff, in one of the more interesting takes. Agent Smith’s newness is strange and I can honestly say I am not sure how it happened. I must have missed that reason among the ton of exposition being dropped.

Another villain was Neil Patrick Harris. He plays villains surprisingly well. He has some great facial expressions that provide the Analyst with his development.

I’m not sure if you can tell from my tone so far, but I did not like this movie very much.

It started meta to the max as Mr. Anderson was shown as the creator of a video game called The Matrix and that all of Neo’s memories were inside the game as fiction instead of truth. He was shown as mentally unstable and it had been stated that he was suffering from mental illness. I have to say the whole meta narrative started to pull me in a bit. I was wondering exactly where it could go from there.

Where it did go was to Exposition City. The next hour (or more) of the film was spent telling us what had happened and how our heroes had been placed in this new reality. Some of the exposition was documented through scenes from the original trilogy to help cement the concept.

It was during this period of time that I found myself losing interest.

The action scenes continued to be repetitive and were nowhere as inventive as the ones from The Matrix.

Most of the second half of the movie was spent trying to reawaken Trinity from the Matrix and getting her out while avoiding the Swarm, which was absolutely not zombies.

I enjoyed Keanu and Carrie-Ann in their iconic roles. They were a strength of the film. It continued to look tremendous and the CGI was top notch. I’m not sure the purpose of the film. The narrative was a basic retread with a few tweaks, and the characters were flat and uninspiring. Jonathan Groff was great too, as he always is.

There is a post credit scene that is as out of place as much of the rest of the movie. I feel as if there is a story inside this film that has a comment about the overall use of nostalgia in Hollywood, but it never takes full grasp. Otherwise, there is nothing new here and The Matrix Resurrections should have just stayed in the goo.

2.2 stars

When the first Sing came out, I remember not expecting to like the film much, but enjoying it quite a bit. Now, with Sing 2 coming out, once again I was not certain that I would like the new Illumination film. However, for the second time, I enjoyed this sequel a lot.

In much the same way as the first film, our mismatched group of animal performers now are trying to put on a show on a bigger stage, for the wolf Mr. Crystal (Bobby Cannavale), whose viciousness showed through. Buster Moon (Matthew McConaughey) yells Mr. Crystal that he can guarantee the return of rock star Clay Calloway (Bono), who went into seclusion after the death of his wife. Problem was… Buster did not know where he could find Clay.

The story was pretty simple and straight-forward, with the creators throwing conflicts into the story to cause issues. Each of the main characters had something that they had to overcome in order to put on their show.

The first act of the film is a bit slow, bordering on dull. As the film progressed, the story picked up steam. In the third act, the story was mostly about the show, as the characters accomplished what they had to do in order to be successful.

Easily the best part of the movie is the music, with the exception of the opening number, Let’s Go Crazy, which would most likely have Prince rolling over in his grave. The stage show that makes up the third act is filled with amazing music and beautiful animated backdrops. The colors and brightness of these scenes leaped off the screen.

The film is filled with a great deal of voice talent, both those returning from the original and new ones to the sequel. They include Taron Edgerton, Reese Witherspoon, Scarlett Johansson, Nick Kroll, Nick Offerman, Halsey, Letitia Wright, Pharrell Williams, Tori Kelly, Jennifer Saunders, Peter Serafinowicz, and Adam Buxton.

Though the ending was predictable, it still had an emotional wallop and made the journey worthwhile (that is …after Let’s Go Crazy).

4 stars

The prequel to the Kingsman franchise, The King’s Man, finally opened after several years of pushing the film back for a variety of reasons.

In the beginning of the 20th century, the world was filled with dangers and on the brink of war. There was a cabal featuring some of the worst individuals from history such as Rasputin (Rhys Ifans) trying to push the world toward war. This led to the eventual formation of the Kingsman agency.

I did not enjoy this movie that much. Let me specify. I did think the third act was pretty good, probably my favorite part. I did think Rasputin was over the top and I enjoyed him. He seemed to fit with the idea of the Kingsman universe.

However, much of this movie did not feel like a Kingsman film. There was a long stretch where the film was more of a World War I film than what was expected. This section of the film felt out of place and was drawn out.

Ralph Fiennes played Orlando Oxford, who lost his wife around the turn of the century and had to raise his son Conrad, desperate to protect him. As Conrad (Harris Dickinson) grew to a young man, he wanted to go and serve his country in the war, but his father did whatever he could to keep Conrad safe.

I did not find the first two acts of this movie entertaining, if not dull. The overall film is a mess. It does not know what it wants to be and the tones do not work together.

Djimon Hounsou played a partner of Fiennes named Shola, and he does a decent job as always. Gemma Arterton played Polly, another who would be within the eventual Kingsman.

The film played with a lot of the real history of Europe and the world. It certainly did not make Woodrow Wilson look very good.

I enjoyed the first Kingsman a lot, but I did not like the sequel. Unfortunately, this tips to the side of negative.

2.3 stars

Aaron Sorkin has returned with his newest film that he both wrote and directed, this time the story of the week where Lucille Ball’s possible Communist ties were published and the doubt of the future of her career and the show, I Love Lucy, created a stressful and difficult workplace.

The film started in the style of a documentary, with several older version of people who were there with Lucy and Desi, talking to the camera about the events of that week. The film also used flashbacks to give us a flavor of how Lucy (Nicole Kidman) and Desi (Javier Bardem) met, fell in love and became one of the power couples in Hollywood during the 1950s.

Much like celebrities today, Lucille Ball and Desi Arnaz were interesting personalities that people wanted to know more about and, at the same time as the Communist story was being threatened to drop, a story speculating about Desi cheating on Lucy came out, adding to the stress and anxiety of the week.

The film showed us a behind the scenes look at I Love Lucy and how it was created. It showed us the powerhouse, the tornado Lucille Ball could be in search of the perfect comedic bit. The film went out of its way to show how Lucy could focus on the small details in order to make a scene perfect and how some of the crew may have taken it.

JK Simmons and Nina Arianda played William Frawley and Vivian Vance, respectively, who were the actors behind Lucy and Ricky’s next door neighbors and best friends, Fred and Ethel Mertz. JK Simmons was awesome as William and seemed to embody “Fred” beautifully. We also got to see how much he cared for Lucy and how much he had a tempestuous relationship with Vivian Vance.

As with all of Sorken’s scripts, the dialogue is sparkling and a wonder to listen to. While his direction may not reach the level of his writing, the film does a great job of showing us who these people were, despite the fact that we know all about them.

Nicole Kidman is exceptional as Lucille Ball. She brings a ferocity to the character that you may not have known existed. Javier Bardem may not look much like Desi Arnaz, but he brought a definite energy to the Cuban bandleader and gave him his own strength outside of his famous wife. The lead performances , as well as the rousing dialogue, prevents this from turning into a Lifetime movie.

Placing the film during this time is a good choice and the life of Lucy and Desi is filled with drama and comedy. I loved the way this was presented, smart and witty.

4.4 stars

Wes Anderson is one of the most original, quirky film makers working today. His style is unlike any director in the movie industry and that oddball flavor is in full display in The French Dispatch, Anderson’s latest film.

According to Anderson, The French Dispatch is a “love letter to journalists” as the film follows three separate stories of three journalists preparing their stories for the fictional Liberty, Kansas Evening Sun newspaper as they create its final issue. The three sections of the movie are “Concrete Masterpiece”, “Revisions of a Manifesto” and “The Private Dining Room of the Police Commissioner.”  Each section have its humor and eccentricities that fill the approximately balanced screen time.

I laughed a lot during The French Dispatch because there were so many things that were so silly that it was humorous. So much was presented with a sly, deadpan delivery that no one involved believe it to be funny or even strange. This, of course, made the situation all the funnier.

There is a massive ensemble cast. Wes Anderson has many of his reoccurring troupe of actors in the film, but there were others present that we have not seen in Anderson movies prior. The cast included Bill Murray, Edward Norton, Jeffrey Wright, Benicio Del Toro, Frances McDormand, Tilda Swinton, Henry Winkler, Bob Balaban, Owen Wilson, Timothée Chalamet, Léa Seydoux, Lyna Khoudri, Adrien Brody, Christoph Waltz, Liev Schreiber, Stephen Park, Elisabeth Moss, Jason Schwartzman, Fisher Stevens, Willem Dafoe, Mathieu Amalric, Saoirse Ronan, Winston Ait Hellal, Tony Revolori, and Griffin Dunne.

The first and third sections of the film were my favorites. There is an animated bit in the third story that was just hilarious. It is so clear that the whole cast was just having a ball with their bizarre characters that it came across in their performances.

The colors are perfectly mixed with stylish black and white that enhances the storytelling of each act. The writing is witty and verbose. The dialogue is rich and intricate and helps to infuse each individual character with something original and special.

If you are a fan of Wes Anderson’s work, this film is for you. If you enjoy eccentric characters and some ridiculous situations, you’ll like The French Dispatch. Yes, it is a little disjointed but it fits together sufficiently enough, I guess. It is an experience for sure.

4.2 stars