“Bullet Train” - Come on ride the train.

As I struggled to come up with a theme for my review of Bullet Train, I skimmed through other, early reviews for ideas. To my surprise, Bullet Train has divided other critics almost right down the middle (currently sitting at 53% positive on Rotten Tomatoes; 49 on Metacritic). Beyond that, I also discovered Bullet Train brought Quentin Tarantino to the minds of a significant portion of critics, including a friend of mine that attended the same screening as I did. While I can see why they had that immediate thought, comparing Bullet Train to any Tarantino flick is to completely misunderstand Tarantino movies.

In case you haven’t noticed, I have never written a full review of a Tarantino film. Yeah, that surprised me a little as well, because I’ve seen all four movies he’s directed in the fourteen years I’ve been writing reviews. In fact, the only thing I’ve said about any of his movies during that time is including Once Upon a Time...in Hollywood in my 2019 Year in Review, saying “It’s Tarantino jerking off to himself in a mirror for two hours, then remembering he wanted to show an alt-history version of some Manson-cult murders.” Can you guess how I feel about Tarantino films?

Based on the reviews of Bullet Train, the parallel to Tarantino seems to be that Bullet Train contains a bunch of stylized violence surrounded by witty and glib banter. Fair enough, but that’s where the parallel stops. Hell, that describes every Marvel movie and nobody is confusing MCU films with Tarantino. And let’s not pretend that Tarantino invented banter or stylized violence. All he did was take 1970s kung-fu movies to the next level and wrap it in lessons learned from Jack Lemmon and Walter Matthau flicks (to name just two legends of banter) or all 80s action flicks.

The main reasons I dislike Tarantino movies are that Tarantino seems to become bored with his own movies, as evidenced by the ends typically exploding in bloodbaths for no good reason (ex. Django Unchained), and his movies taking themselves way too seriously. Bullet Train makes neither of those mistakes. Its climactic bloodbath follows an entire film of bloodbaths and it is very much aware of itself as a non-serious action flick. If there is any director that Bullet Train should remind people of, it’s Matthew Vaughn (the Kingsman franchise).

Have I said too much about Tarantino, who has literally nothing to do with Bullet Train? Yep, and I apologize. It just annoys me to see Tarantino, one of the most overrated directors in the history of film, invoked as the reason to crap on Bullet Train, a film that does banter and stylized violence better than almost every Tarantino film. Here’s a head-scratching quote from Ann Hornaday (Washington Post), epitomizing such:

As if we needed more proof of the Tarantinization of contemporary cinema, “Bullet Train” barrels into theaters to remind us. A generation ago, Quentin Tarantino’s “Reservoir Dogs” - followed by the even more popular “Pulp Fiction” - electrified audiences and the film industry alike, sending a jolt of visual energy and compulsive verbiage through an action genre that had gone moribund. Ever since, we’ve been awash in imitators who have sought to master QT’s branded elixir of sadistic violence punctuated by expository flashbacks, deep-cut needle drops and grandiloquent pronouncements on pop-culture arcana.

Has it gotten old yet?

Hornaday inexplicably continues:

If you’re craving one more variation on the well-worn theme of promiscuous bloodlettings accompanied by glib verbal filler, Leitch has served up a presentable slab of grist for an increasingly creaky mill.

Yes, Ann, I am craving it. Just like every moviegoer who enjoys glib action flicks. The reality is that Bullet Train is not just an entertaining romp of a popcorn flick, but a well-written romp featuring a cast of memorable characters portrayed by actors clearly having a blast in their respective roles. As much as the marketing would have you believe Brad Pitt is the star of this film, the entire cast makes you think the marketers didn’t actually watch the film. A cast featuring exquisite performances from Pitt, Aaron Taylor-Johnson, Bryan Tyree Henry, and Joey King, with great support from Sandra Bullock, Hiroyuki Sanada, Michael Shannon, Andrew Koji, Zazie Beets, and Bad Bunny (as well as a couple of perfect cameos).

Pitt plays Ladybug, an assassin who believes bad luck follows him around. Not for him though, but for everyone around him. Even cars. Ladybug is tasked by his handler, Maria Beetle (Bullock), to snatch a briefcase from a bullet train heading to Kyoto. Unbeknownst to Ladybug, he is sharing the train with several other assassins who also have an interest in the briefcase, assassins who all have connections to each other. These connections are revealed to us through a series of flashbacks, which also double as character development, as well as revelations in real time. All of this plays out in the eight cars of the train, woven through a series of fight sequences and the banter we crave so much. The tightness with which everything is woven is a testament to director David Leitch and screenwriter Zak Olkewicz (adapted from the novel Bullet Train by Kotaro Isaka).

All things on the train eventually lead to the reveal of the owner of the briefcase, crime kingpin White Death. Is White Death on the train? Is White Death waiting for them at Kyoto? Is White Death actually Maria Beetle? Are you White Death? You’re going to have to watch the film to find out. And you should watch the film. Not only is the mystery revealed, but all of the loose ends and side stories are tied up in a beautiful, if not blood-drenched, bow. If that doesn’t get you excited for a film, then you probably liked The Hateful Eight way too much.

Rating: Don’t ask for any money back - it’s worth the ride.

“The Lost City” - Pretty, but dumb. No, wait, that’s pretty dumb.

Have you ever been to a comedy show or open mic night where the comedian absolutely bombed? That’s what The Lost City is, but with a little bit of silly action and a lot of hammy acting. I’m not saying it is completely unwatchable or cringe worthy like that tanking comedian. In fact, it has moments where it approaches fun. But you know you’re watching a bad movie when the actors are visibly laughing at the absurdity of their own movie during the movie. The Lost City is Romancing the Stone as seen through the eyes of clown that hasn’t slept in three days.

(SPOILERS - Not much to spoil, so you’re probably in the clear.)

Loretta Sage (Sandra Bullock) is a depressed, widowed, middle-aged, romance novelist. Arguably the best scene of the film is the opening scene, where we find the two heroes of Loretta’s novels trapped in a temple ruin, surrounded by snakes, a villain, and his evil henchman. There is some soapy dialogue, then the heroine questions how all the snakes happened to be in the temple and why they weren’t biting any of the henchman. We hear Loretta’s voice saying delete and elements of the scene start vanishing until nothing is left. We then cut to Loretta at her desk trying to work out how to end the book. This scene felt fresh and grabbed my attention. I thought we might get to see this happen several times throughout the film as Loretta searched for that perfect ending. Unfortunately, that was the one moment of cleverness in the film.

In an attempt to get Loretta out of her house and promote her new book, her publisher, Beth (Da’Vine Joy Randolph), badgers Loretta into going on a book tour. We jump to a dressing room, where Loretta is being primped for her appearance on a talk show. Loretta is wearing a hot pink, all sequin, onesie that even she questions the existence of. Her new social media manager, Allison (Patti Harrison) assures Loretta that this is what all the kids are wearing. Rather than fire the dipshit on the spot, Loretta accepts that she has been dressed like her grandmother’s lipstick and goes out on-stage. In fairness, Bullock tries to save the joke that is the unitard with some physical humor (struggling to get up on a tall stool), but the only joke is on her since she has to wear that outfit for most of the film.

Joining her on stage is Alan (Channing Tatum), the Fabio-like cover model for her books. Unlike Loretta, Alan actually wants to be on the stage because his entire career is making appearances as the books’ hero, Dash. The women in the audience ask a couple of questions, but are really just there to see Alan take his shirt off. And not just take it off, but have it ripped from his body by Loretta. Predictably, the movie tries to make another joke here by having Loretta get tangled in Alan’s hair, followed by Alan tumbling off the stage, leaving Loretta standing there holding Alan’s wig. You see, it’s always funny when a depressed neon crayon is left holding the long, blonde wig. Do you see the sleep-deprived clown now?

Thoroughly mortified, Loretta decides to leave and Alan follows her, trying to apologize and console her at the same time. The only problem is Alan is also kind of an imbecile and Loretta has nothing but contempt for him. Once outside the building, a car pulls up and Loretta thinks it’s the Uber she ordered. She gets in, only to realize she’s being kidnapped, and is taken to see Abigail Fairfax (Daniel Radcliffe), an eccentric billionaire who believes Loretta can help him find an ancient treasure called the crown of fire. Prior to writing romance novels, Loretta had studied archaeology and her late-husband was also an archaeologist. So, all of her romance novels double as action romps in jungle and ruins, but with heaving breasts and bulging packages.

This is also the part of the movie that turned really turned me against it. It was bad enough to see Bullock forced into the adult equivalent of Ralphie’s bunny pajamas, but why did she need to be kidnapped as plan A? To make matters worse, the film tries its comedy hand again by commenting on Abigail being a gender neutral name and Abigail having two brothers also with female-not-female names. The only thing missing from the scene is a 1950s clown honking its own nose.

Since Loretta refuses to help Abigail, he drugs her and takes her to the island where he believes the crown is hidden. Meanwhile, having witnessed her initial kidnapping, Alan decides to mount a rescue attempt. He and Beth hire an ex-Navy SEAL named Jack Trainer (Brad Pitt) and Alan is supposed to meet Jack to provide him information. Alan insists on going with Jack because he is in love with Loretta. Like you must with all romance literature, just go with it.

In additional to being a nincompoop, Alan is also a klutz. This doesn’t work on any level because he’s Channing Tatum. In one scene, he struggles to put a tiny suitcase into the back of truck, despite looking like he could bench press the truck, then is dancing with Loretta as smooth as silk in a later scene. Again, he’s Channing Tatum. We could believe him being a dope, but not uncoordinated. On the plus side, the closest this film ever comes to being funny is because Tatum has gotten better at his timing.

Besides that opening scene, the other worthwhile scene is when Jack (with Alan in tow) infiltrates Abigail’s camp to rescue Loretta. It’s a very good action scene and features the solid comedic timing from Tatum I mentioned. If the film had done more scenes like this and less like the pink nightmare, it would have been much more fun to watch.

As it was, the film could have been a whole lot worse. It’s the kind of romantic comedy that’s been missing from theaters for quite some time and I’m not sure if that’s a good or bad thing. Despite it having some insulting bad humor and giving us characters with several unappealing traits, I did find myself enjoying it every now and then. It’s just really disappointing to see a movie introduce a clever concept - the movie acting as a mirror for Loretta’s book - then abandoning the concept altogether. Maybe next time let the clown sleep instead of forcing him to tell jokes.

Rating: Ask for seven dollars back and an apology to Bullock for dressing her like Barbie’s tampon.