“Challengers” - Dripping with subtext.

After reading the synopsis of Challengers, I was very much expecting a movie about tennis. The film’s synopsis is “Tashi, a tennis player turned coach, has transformed her husband from a mediocre player into a world-famous grand slam champion. To jolt him out of his recent losing streak, she makes him play a challenger event - close to the lowest level of tournament on the pro tour. Tensions soon run high when he finds himself standing across the net from the once-promising, now-burnt-out Patrick, his former best friend and Tashi's former boyfriend.” Sounds like a tennis movie, right?

Challengers is very much not about tennis. Tennis is just the setting. Like a cabin in the woods or New York City or a galaxy far, far away. Sure, literal tennis happens in some of the scenes, but even in those scenes the tennis isn’t really tennis. Challengers is a relationship movie and the tennis we see is dripping (literally in some scenes) with sexual tension and innuendo.

Challengers is a fascinating take on the well-worn love triangle. With today’s sensibilities destigmatizing homosexuality and bisexuality, director Luca Guadagnino and writer Justin Kuritzkes are free to fully explore all three sides and points of the triangle, and in all directions. Bouncing back and forth through time, the film shows us the evolution of the triangle, crafted and shown to us within the context of a single tennis match occurring in the present. Even for those not familiar with the nuances of the sport, they will easily see the parallels and metaphors used to enhance the characters and their story.

(Mild SPOILERS ahead.)

As the synopsis states, Tashi (Zendaya) coaches her husband Art (Mike Faist) and used to date Art’s former best friend and struggling tennis player Patrick (Josh O’Connor). What the synopsis doesn’t state is that Tashi was on her way to stardom when a catastrophic injury destroyed her playing career. In the first few flashbacks, we are treated to pre-injury Tashi. She’s extremely confident, eminently likable, and laser-focused on her career. Playing at the same tournament, Patrick convinces Art to go watch Tashi play and Art is immediately infatuated. That night, the three of them find themselves making out together in the boy’s room and it’s here where the film lets us know what this movie is truly about.

The beauty of the film is there are several different ways to interpret the three characters’ tangled relationship and how each feels about the other two. I don’t think Tashi has more than shallow feelings for either Art or Patrick. She loathes Patrick, but keeps self-destructively going back to him because of her own self-loathing and self-pity (she never got over her own injury). She married Art not because she fell in love with him, but because Art is her tennis avatar. She mentions several times that she doesn’t want to be a homewrecker, then wrecks her own home after wrecking their marriage. During the almost-threesome scene, Tashi has a look on her face of pure mischief. To her, playing the two men is just a game to her, which fits her overall worldview that everything is a game. When Art says he loves her, she casually and almost dismissively responds with “I know.” Tashi’s only true love is tennis. But if you told me Tashi had deep feelings, equally for Art and Patrick, there’s a strong case for that interpretation as well.

As far as Patrick and Art, it’s easy to say these two are in love with each other and don’t know it. Tashi picks up on it right away, even blatantly asking them. When they laugh it off and deny it, Tashi proves her point and gives us that mischievous look. But I think she gets Art at least partly wrong. On more than one occasion he tells Tashi “how could someone not love you?” Art sees Patrick as his best friend and someone he’s perfectly at ease with. Patrick though? Very gay. All of Patrick’s actions are designed to get Art’s attention. Patrick was going to lose to Art on purpose in their first match until he felt threatened by Tashi taking Art away from him. Patrick trying to ruin Art and Tashi’s marriage on more than one occasion. In other words, Art loves Patrick, but Patrick is in love with Art.

Guadagnino isn’t going to make interpretation that easy though. The innuendo in the movie is thick when it isn’t just outright stated/shown. Art and Patrick chomping on churros together (even each other’s). Patrick making a point of all-but deep throating a banana while smirking suggestively at Art. Patrick literally smacking Art’s erection after the abortive threesome. A sauna scene with just Art and Patrick. That Guadagnino chose to show multiple penises, but not a single female breast or nipple (unless we count Tashi’s see-through bra in her break-up scene with Patrick). And that’s before we get to the tennis scenes.

The tennis action shots were not very well done (though Zendaya really does look and play like a legitimate tennis player), but much of that is because of the focus on the imagery. Balls flying at the camera. Sweat dripping everywhere (no tennis player - or any athlete, for that matter - would try to play with that much sweat dripping off their face, including their eyelashes). Chaotic edits going back and forth and back and forth. Close-ups on hands gripping racquet shafts and deftly handling bouncing balls. Every frame of these scenes is intentionally crafted to make you wonder what the two men are really thinking about.

Guadagnino does such a great job with these characters that at least two of them were loathsome in some way by the end. Or very sympathetic. Again, it depends on how you choose to interpret what you see. This isn’t the kind of emotion you feel from watching insipid characters like everyone in the Fast and Furious franchise. This is the kind of emotion you feel for characters so meticulously developed and so complex that you experience feelings you’ve only read about. With the mile-thick layer of sexual tension piled on, you’ll be emotionally exhausted by the end of the film and you’ll love Guadagnino for it. Or hate him.

Rating: Don’t ask for any money back. Do ask for a towel and a cigarette.

“Godzilla x Kong: The New Empire” - Loud and stompy.

Should I really be reviewing Godzilla x Kong: The New Empire with even a hint of seriousness? Probably not. Read the title and convince me this movie is in any way made by even mildly serious filmmakers. Would barely serious filmmakers put a random x in the title of their movie? No, no they would not. And that is how we get a giant lizard x giant ape film directed by Adam Wingard and co-written by Jeremy Slater.

Until directing 2021’s entertaining and deeply stupid Godzilla vs. Kong, Wingard was a little-known, indie horror director with very limited success. Slater’s filmography is even thinner yet manages to include the abysmal Fantastic Four (2015) and the somehow even worse Death Note (2017 and, bonus!, directed by Wingard). With the exception of a small handful of television episodes, Godzilla x Kong is Slater’s only credit since Death Note. In a normal universe, Slater would be driving a school bus or phoning in a community college writing course by now, but in our bizarre universe he is directing a new Insidious movie, is listed as the sole writer on the upcoming Mortal Kombat 2, and is contributing as a writer to James Gunn’s new DC Universe. If I was still getting major movie gigs after penning some of the worst films of the last decade, I’d throw random x’s into random titles as well.

Before you start getting huffy about Godzilla x Kong not being meant to win awards, trust me, I know. I took my eleven-year-old son to this film because he is the target audience. I also appreciate fun blockbusters featuring large creatures punching each other and trampling on cities. That’s why my son and I are there and why you’ll be there too. But that doesn’t mean the film is exempt from some basic filmmaking concepts.

Take the continued inclusion of conspiracy theorist Bernie Hayes (Brian Tyree Henry) in this franchise. Part of conspiracy theories is that the government is hiding something. The conspiracy theorist has little information, which is why the theorist’s goal is to expose the conspiracy so the government will release the information about the thing being hidden. We’re now into movie five of a franchise where titanic monsters like Godzilla are not a secret - having destroyed several cities - and Hollow Earth has been confirmed to the world. Conspiracy over. So, Monarch (agency that deals with monsters) researcher Dr. Ilene Andrews (Rebecca Hall) going to Bernie for help interpreting her adopted daughter Jia’s (Kaylee Hottle) scribblings is completely nonsensical because Bernie can’t possibly have information that Ilene doesn’t already have access to. But, Bernie is kind of funny, so no contrivance is too weak to keep him around, even for this film.

You know who is also kind of funny though? Trapper (Dan Stevens). New to the franchise, Trapper is revealed to be a former love interest of Ilene’s, is a titan doctor/dentist, is eccentric, and stole Ace Ventura’s shirt. If you don’t already get the gag, don’t worry - Bernie will literally call Trapper Ace Ventura to Trapper’s face.

Trapper is also an employee of Monarch, has travelled to Hollow Earth, and is a King Kong expert (maybe?!). So why not have Ilene go to Trapper with the drawings? It’s not like the forced buddy comedy between Bernie and Trapper delivers more than a polite chuckle. In fact, it probably would have worked better if it was all between Trapper and Ilene. While I applaud the film cutting down the number of human characters from the last film, um...you missed one.

On the positive side, the film starts out with exactly what we wanted - Godzilla fighting another titan (a crab-looking thing called Scylla) while trampling all over Rome. Well, Godzilla does spare the Coliseum, curling up in it like a giant doggie bed, even taking care to step over the walls when he wakes up later in the film. The problem is the fight is over in about five seconds when it should have taken five minutes. On top of that, the cinematography used in the scene (and the other fight scenes) is the atrocious shaky cam. My son commented how annoying it was to try to watch the scenes (and showed me, using his body to mimic what it looked like and it’s as funny as you are picturing) and I agree. Is it really too much to ask that we can actually see the action they spent more than $100 million on?

Back on the negative side, the first half of the movie is one giant headscratcher. Something has caused Godzilla to wake up, frolic to France, and eat all the radiation from a nuclear power plant in order to “supercharge.” As the humans and Kong are wandering around Hollow Earth, nothing is even hinted at to explain where this movie is going beyond a mysterious eyeball captured on the camera of a Monarch outpost in Hollow Earth. Eventually, they discover a tribe of people related to Jia and the movie comes to a dead stop to allow Ilene to read the movie’s plot from a wall in the tribe’s village. That is not a joke. That happened.

But wait - it gets worse. There’s a prophecy, the villain Godzilla was charging up for is just another ape called the Skar King, and the Skar King has control of another titan that caused the last ice age (yet who can’t even freeze Kong when blasting him with ice breath during a fight). The second half isn’t so much head scratching as it is mind-numbing. This is why Slater should be driving a bus, not a pen.

Did I get it all? Bad cinematography - check. Pointless characters - check. Writing that doesn’t even make sense in a Hollow Earth world with stompy titans - check. Did I mention the music sounded like a toddler imitating a cat imitating Hans Zimmer at ear-splitting volume? No? That too. Like I said, I know what the movie was supposed to be. For the stretches when titans were battling other titans, it was that movie and it was fun and entertaining (even with the shaky cam). But that doesn’t excuse flubbing so many other components of the film, especially since Wingard directed the previous film and didn’t make these same mistakes. Nor does it excuse that x in the title.

Rating: Ask for half your money back since it was harder to see the stomping than it should have been.

“Dune: Part Two” - Sand-witches.

It dawned on me that Dune: Part 2 is the first of two movies this year that will feature sandworms. I’m certain that Dune: Part 2 will be the better one, though that isn’t saying much considering the second one is Beetlejuice Beetlejuice. No, that isn’t a typo, that’s really the title. Apparently, whoever came up with that title isn’t aware that it takes saying Beetlejuice three times to summon Beetlejuice. Or…they’re TOO aware, and they know exactly what they’re doing. What was I saying? Oh yeah - sandworms.

The moment in Dune: Part Two when Paul Attreides (Timothee Chalamet) rides a sandworm for the first time made a light bulb go on in my head - that filmmakers should have leaned into immersive sound rather than 3-D visuals two decades ago. I don’t know if the particular theater I was in just had the sound turned up to Marty McFly levels or if the seats were somehow wired into the sound system, but it felt like I was riding the sandworm alongside Paul. It was awesome and all theaters should do this. And it was like that in other scenes, too. I could feel the chopping of the ornithopters blades and the rumbling of the spice harvesters. It was everything 3-D was aiming for without having to put an accessory on my face. I imagine the sound might cause some queasiness and headaches for some people (just like with 3-D), but at least the sandworm ride is worth puking for.

As for the rest of the movie, it was just awesome. When we last saw Paul at the end of Part One, he was...um, in the desert with Chani (Zendaya). That was honestly all I could remember when Part Two started and my mind was racing to try to recall more details. Luckily, Princess Irulan (Florence Pugh) journals. Reading as she writes, she helpfully recalls the events of Part One and in an organic way rather than the film lazily splashing title cards up during the opening. Director Denis Villeneuve was definitely paying attention during film class.

As we open Part Two, the Harkonnen’s now control the planet Arrakis and its unique resource, melange (spice). Glossu Harkonnen (Dave Bautista) governs the planet and is trying to stop the constant Fremen raids that interrupt spice production. Paul and his mother Jessica (Rebecca Ferguson) live among the desert Fremen people. Paul assists with raids and Jessica manipulates the Fremen into seeing Paul as a prophesied savior. Jessica is also pregnant with a girl that she literally talks with throughout the film. If you didn’t already think this movie was weird, wait until you see a bunch of shots of a fetus in-utero.

That is basically the movie. At a nearly three-hour runtime, that might sound a bit long and boring, but the excellent pacing and phenomenal cinematography make the film seem brisk. And don’t underestimate the intrigue of the story. Dune is Game of Thrones in space, with some Gladiator thrown in. Families jockeying for control where one family is seemingly benevolent while another is ruthless and cunning. On top of that, there is a religious sect quietly manipulating events; in Dune’s case, they are the Bene Gesserit (including Jessica), a group comprised entirely of women and talk in the ways of magic. You know...witches.

Speaking of witch...Jessica is my favorite character. Among an amazing cast of actors all nailing their performances, Ferguson tops them all. Through two films, Jessica has gone from devoted wife and meek member of the witch order to a kingmaker, a leader, and person whose eyes contain an intensity that would make a sandworm flee in terror. Part One kept her somewhat subdued, only hinting at her power, intelligence, and maybe even possible malice. Part Two has those things on full display, including a telepathic stare-down with the head Bene Gesserit reverend mother, Gaius (Charlotte Rampling), where Jessica taunts Gaius with her and Paul’s success.

The twist in the overarching story is that Jessica has been secretly training Paul in the ways of the Bene Gesserit (which we also saw in Part One). Paul’s additional abilities allow him to gain the trust of the Fremen, including tribal leader Stilgar (Javier Bardem), and aid in his abilities to do things that should kill him. All of this comes to a crescendo involving another Harkonnen son, Feyd-Rautha (Austin Butler).

The results of this training allow Chalamet to finally explore and portray the multi-faceted Paul. Like Jessica, Paul starts out as the good son to his father, doing everything a prince is supposed to do, only to later morph into a potential god-king. Chalamet exudes every bit of those facets in Paul, as well as inheriting and exhibiting his mother’s dagger-staring eyes. It’s chilling and awe-inspiring to see two actors so able to convey emotions with nothing more than facial expressions.

The only criticism I have of Part Two is that it’s such an amazing watch that I’m annoyed I have to wait for Part 3 (Messiah). While Part Two completes the adaptation of Frank Herbert’s original novel, the film (like the book) leaves subplots unresolved, tantalizing us with what’s to come. Just like the three-year wait for Part Two, it’ll be a long, hard wait. But it’ll be worth it to see, and maybe even feel, more death glares from Jessica.

Rating: Worth double the cost of the amazing Dune popcorn bucket you simply cannot pass up.