The Witches Doesn't Cast As Strong Of A Spell As Its Classic 1990 Predecessor But Anne Hathaway's Performance Ultimately Makes It Worthwhile

      Taking an old classic childrens story and reimagining it on the big screen along with being a remake of a previous film adaptation of the same novel, is an extremely dicey task for any filmmaker who takes the challenge of meeting both standards head on. Not only does the new version of the story have to do the original concept justice, it also must manage to be a superior film than the one that came before it. Not every director is up to the challenge with it taking a true visionary filmmaker with a firm grip on his craft to make it happen. In the case of The Witches, director Robert Zemeckis whose famous for crafting classics such as Back To The Future, Forrest Gump, What Lies Beneath, and Cast Away, proves to be the one up to task with handling both the films imaginative and directorial duties. Based on the 1983 best-selling Roald Dahl novel and a remake of the 1990 cult-classic, Zemeckis 2020 live-action adaptation of The Witches aims to bring Dahl's work to the big screen in a different style that's fun-spirited and visually appealing, while also proving to be effective in both entertaining and scaring young audiences. Does Robert Zemeckis succeed in meeting both requirements for The Witches living up to the expectations placed upon it? The answer is both a yes and no. The Witches delivers a fairly solid reimagining of Roald Dahl's story with Anne Hathaway's performance being both charming and charismatic enough to make up for any shortcomings the films script possesses, though the newest version never outdoes its previous effort.

      Based on the classic Roald Dahl children's book, the plot for The Witches takes place in 1960's Alabama with the story centering around a young orphan named Hero Boy (Played by Jahzir Kadeen Bruno), who moves in with his grandmother (Played by Octavia Spencer) after his parents are tragically killed in a car accident. Together, they encounter a coven of evil witches led by a powerful Grand High Witch (Played by Anne Hathaway), whose determined to turn all children into mice and kill them. The plot for The Witches is one that's charming and allows enough room for Zemeckis to breathe new life into the story, while remaining true to Dahl's work. The films target audience is catered towards young children and families, with it working best when not being compared to its classic 1990 version as the two are completely different approaches of the same story. The film takes a more dark tone in comparison to some of the previous work Dahl and Zemeckis have done that's aimed at kids, but never loses its sense of wicked fun with Hathaway carrying the film with her best Zsa Zsa Gabor voice impersonation. The film works most effectively when it doesn't try to remake the 1990 version, but instead opts to tell its own version of the story. While it doesn't surpass the work of that film, The Witches manages to stand on its own as being a charming yet flawed reimagining of Roald Dahl's work with its heart and creativity being the main aspects, which elevate it into ultimately being an effective effort. Whereas Robert Zemeckis both dazzled and enchanted audiences with his classic Christmas tale The Polar Express, he takes a more darker route with creeping out young children with Hathaway's witch while driving home a heartfelt message, which emphasizes that regardless of how the darkest of tunnels appear, there's always light at the end of it. Although the film may feel a bit old-fashioned in regards to telling its story as well as recycling elements from previous Roald Dahl stories, The Witches still manages to bring a freshness to its concept without relying on the previous film for comfort. 

      One of the films strongest aspects is its performances from the main cast with Anne Hathaway being the main reason to see the film as she brings much needed enthusiasm and energy to the new version of the story. She's manages to be both terrific and intimidating in her role as the Grand High Witch, an evil and powerful witch whose the leader of all witches in the world. Hathaway's performance is game with her being able to leave a strong presence throughout the film with the latter being at its most effective when her character shows up. The second strongest performance in the film goes to Octavia Spencer as the boys loving grandmother, whose revealed to be a long-time rival of Hathaway's character. Spencer turns in a beautifully heartfelt performance with her being able to completely slip into character like Hathaway, with both actresses sharing some terrific moments together on screen. Stanley Tucci does well in his supporting role as the hotel manager Mr. Stringer. Although his character doesn't carry as much depth as Hathaway's or Spencer's, he still manages to leave an impression with audiences. One of the more impressive performances in the film goes to Jahzir Kadeem Bruno as Hero Boy, who goes to live with his grandma after his parents are killed and is later turned into a mouse by the Grand High Witch. Bruno does well with playing both the human form of his character, as well as providing his voice in mouse form. He brings the right amount of empathy, charm, and heart to his character which ultimately makes the audience connect with his characters dilemma. Other notable supporting cast performances includes Codie-Lei Eastick as English boy Bruno Jenkins, whose also turned into a mouse with Jenkins providing the latter forms voice. The same is said about Kristen Chenoweth as the voice of the boys pet mouse Mary/Daisy, whose later revealed to be a young girl turned into a mouse. Chris Rock lends his voice talents as the older version of Hero Boy, who gives audiences a firsthand account of his experience as a child with the films narration. The cast for The Witches does a solid job of bringing Roald Dahl's classic tale to the big screen with them not only making it engaging, but adding both realism and heart to it. Everyone does their best job in bringing their characters to life along with making audiences connect with them. Despite them succeeding in doing so, the best performance hands down goes to Anne Hathaway as both her presence and the level of depth she puts into her role, makes the film as fun and entertaining as it ends up being.                                                              

      The films directing by Robert Zemeckis is steady-handed with him once again utilizing CGI, as well as impressive costume and set design to tell his story. Zemeckis really aimed to make this version a more children's oriented tale in comparison to the original, and it shows with him also throwing in more diversity with the remake such as the ethnicities of Hero Boy, his grandma, and fellow sidekicks who were transformed into mouses. The films cinematography makes it appear to be well-shot with creepy visuals accompanying the rich visual flare that Zemeckis brings to the story (Hathaway's characters teeth will prove to be genuinely disturbing for young viewers). The films makeup design is effective in making the witches appear to be weird and deformed looking figures in disguise that'll frighten young children. Much has been said about the physical look of Hathaway's character with the Grand High Witches overall appearance being slammed by the disability community for her having missing fingers. While their arguments appear to be ones that are valid, there doesn't appear to be any cruel intent behind the filmmakers in evoking any kind of misguided stereotype suggesting that disabled people are inherently evil nor should be looked upon with suspicion. The physical appearance of Hathaway's character along with the rest of the witches work in regards to being effectively creepy while finding a way to differentiate from the look of the previous ones in the 1990 version. The films editing moves the story at a relatively slow pace with the first part establishing the characters of the young Hero Boy and his grandmother with the film truly coming alive when Hathaway's Grand High Witch enters the frame. The music score by Alan Silvestri proves to once again be well-crafted with his work carrying gentle beats which enhance the films quieter and emotional moments, while adding thrills to the films multiple action set-pieces that standout. The films main theme is enjoyable and gives it an orchestral feel that calls back to some of Silvestri's past familiar works which turned out to be gold. In terms of the films overall directing, Zemeckis pulls through in crafting a bizaree children's tale that's visually appealing while manuevering like a typical Roald Dahl film storywise. Even though his work here proves to be a fairly solid effort, the films world building doesn't quite impress as it did with his previous work on The Polar Express. The world that the main characters find themselves surrounded by doesn't quite strike out with audiences the way a Tim Burton or Guillermo Del Toro style story would despite the films impressive cinematography and makeup design. Zemeckis does a noteworthy job with handling the films numerous action set-pieces, even if it feels at times that he tends to rely on an overuse of CGI.

      The films screenplay by Zemeckis along with Kenya Barris, and Guillermo Del Toro is serviceable though feels at times like a check off list of all the essential things required for bringing a classic Roald Dahl story to the big screen. The script follows the blueprint of bringing a Dahl book to the big screen with the main character being a young child who lose their parents at an early age and endures wild experiences that prove to be both magical and life-changing. With The Witches, Dahl's story takes a darker turn in comparison to most of his novels with the films central character being transformed into mice by witches with no way of being switched back to human form. One of the films strongest pieces of writing is the relationship between grandma and Hero Boy. Their arc serves as being the heart and soul of the story with the audience finding their bond to be heartfelt. The side characters including Bruno and Mary are well established for the audience to become connected with them, though other characters such as Stanley Tucci's feel a bit dry and only serve to help move the plot along. The script does well with placing heavy emphasis on and exploring themes pertaining to the death of one's parents, the experiencing of grief over the loss, the presence of witches, the power and strength of friendship, and the use of magic and potions. The screenplay works when driving home the films message which says that one should never give up what they are on the inside. This message is driven home by the subplot involving Hero Boy and his friends being transformed into mouses and remaining as such in a climactic twist that detours from the ending of the original film. While some audiences might consider this to be a dark and depressing ending that the young kids are never switched back after beating the witches, the new ending helps to drive home the sentimental message that Zemeckis and the writers aspire to convey to young viewers. On a scriptwriting front, The Witches follows the basic formula of adapting a classic Roald Dahl story onto film while adding new surprises to the story. It's not as meaty of a script as some of the other Dahl films, but it works well enough in giving audiences an updated version of the classic novel, even if it never reaches the cinematic heights of its 1990 predecessor.

      In the end, The Witches doesn't end up being a dud but it also doesn't serve as being a slam dunk either. It's ultimately a remake that audiences didn't ask for given that the original film told the story pretty well. The newest effort is certain to divide up fans of both the book, as well as the 1990 version with many begging the question of why Hollywood even bothered to do an unrated version if they weren't going to outdo the work prior. While The Witches doesn't come anywhere close to matching or surpassing its predecessor, it also doesn't prove to be a failure and manages to work as its own standalone retelling of the classic story, that happens to be both entertaining and charming in its presentation. The film is at its strongest when Anne Hathaway appears on screen with her going all in with the character. The story operates like any traditional Roald Dahl plot though certain plot elements may come across as feeling a bit familiar or repetitive. The film might not bring anything new or groundbreaking to the table in regards to storytelling but it still manages to be a fun family-friendly experience, that's bound to spark debate on whether certain aspects of the film are too intense or frightening for kids. One can appreciate the newest versions desire to be different, as well as adding diversity to its storyline. Although it may not present audiences with a thrilling justification for the story needing to be redone as the original film was near perfect, the newer films overall message with its story is one that's powerfully moving, and ultimately needed for today's generation of young audiences. The Witches doesn't outdo nor exceed any of the previously established versions of the story that came before it, but it has quite a bit to offer in the realm of providing sweet and innocent fun without undoing the legacy of Dahl's work or the original film. Those who are hardcore fans of the 1990 version should watch the newest version out of curiosity, or just stick to rewatching that film as the new version doesn't top it. If one can separate the different film adaptations of the book and judge the modern version of The Witches on its own merits, they'll see that there are more positive elements that outweigh the negative ones as the film is fairly well-written, directed, and acted with the amount of criticism being directed towards it being a bit excessive. As both a remake and reimagining of the iconic children's tale, it serves as being an honorable effort. If anything else, the film is worth watching for Hathaway's performance with the end result being an entertaining though average effort from legendary filmmaker Robert Zemeckis at adapting an authors work, which continues to remain a timeless story about not giving up on oneself from within.

Final Verdict: For those who are fans of Roald Dahl's story or the 1990 version, the newest version of The Witches doesn't surpass the one that came before it but manages to work on its own terms without dishonoring that film, or its original source material.

Capone Fails On Many Levels But Its Main Star Delivers A Performance That's Untouchable

       It is often said that a true testament to an actors talent and versatility is how they're able to carry an entire film on their shoulders based on their acting skills, along with elevating it to the status of being watchable if everything else surrounding them falls apart in regards to scriptwriting and directing. With Capone, acclaimed method actor Tom Hardy makes the most of his role as mobster Al Capone with him delivering his all in a film that should've been far more compelling than what it ultimately turns out to be, which can essentially be summed up as a hugely missed opportunity given that the film was aimed to be Oscar bait. Capone is a shocking misfire of a biopic that should only ever be watched for the strength of its main lead, who continuously demonstrates himself to be one of the finest actors of his generation with the capability of taking any lackluster script, and make it somewhat workable with Capone being a prime example. Unfortunately, Hardy's extreme and noble efforts to inject some much needed life into a bleak story isn't enough to redeem the film in its entirety.

      Based on true events, the story for Capone focuses on mobster Al Capone (Played by Tom Hardy), being released from prison after serving a 10-year sentence for tax evasion with him spending his final days in his secluded Florida mansion. While there, he slowly begins dying from the effects of neurosyphilis with him experiencing dementia, hallucinations, strokes, and a lack of control of his own bodily functions. As his health deteriorates, both the FBI and those closest to him try to uncover the whereabouts of where Capone supposedly hid $10 million dollars from the authorities with the latter not having any memory of where he put it. The story of Al Capone is certainly one that's compelling enough to be made into a story though the filmmakers decision to focus on the final year of his life serves as being both a strange and awkward storytelling decision​. Capone presents itself as being both an intense and personal character study of the iconic mobster with its greatest undoing being that the timeline of Capone's life the film chooses to focus on, is ultimately not that interesting in comparison to his early days as a mob boss. The films biggest problem is the fact that its poorly handled with the script being not that compelling and its talented cast of actors feeling wasted. One can't figure out upon watching the film on why it exists as it doesn't really inform the audience  on Al Capone's life, and requires that the viewer knows who he is prior to watching it. The story has the makings of a great character study and mobster flick with the biggest letdown being the choice of timeline in Capone's life that the filmmakers focus on. Capone feels like a story that was designed to sweep the award season with its fantastic acting from its main cast and solid cinematography, but literally falls apart due to incompetent writing and directing which ultimately feels uninspired. The story of Al Capone is one that's fascinating and has been handled by much stronger filmmakers thus far (Brian De Palma's The Untouchables anyone), which makes the misfiring of Capone a disappointing one given that it carries all the elements that could've made it an exceptional biographical drama. Despite the noble intentions of the actors to make up for the scripts shortcomings, it's ultimately not enough to elevate Capone from being a bad film to a decent one despite the few good moments it possesses.

      The performances from the main cast stand as being one of the films few main highlights with everyone making the most of the roles with Tom Hardy's performance as Capone being the main attraction. Whereas the rest of the movie falls apart around him, Hardy makes his character work through his masterful skills as an actor along with bringing believability to the film in regards to portraying Capone's decreasing mental state with him battling his illness. Without his performance, the film would be almost completely unwatchable as there's no glue to hold the audiences interest outside of Hardy's work. The rest of the cast turn in decent performances, though none of them match the level of work that Hardy puts into his role. The second best performance goes to Linda Cardellini as Capone's incredibly patient wife May, who struggles to take care of Al during his illness while also going toe-to-toe with him including one scene in which her character slaps Capone in the face demonstrating that she's not intimidated by him before switching back to her caring side again. Cardellini does well playing her role and manages to hold her own when sharing the screen with Hardy. Both actors demonstrate strong chemistry while managing to work well off each other. The rest of the supporting cast does manageable work with their roles while mostly hanging around in the background. Matt Dillon does well playing Chicago mobster Johnny, whose later revealed to be a ghost from Capone's past as a result of the latter's period of experiencing hallucinations. Although Dillon's part serves as being rather minimal, he makes the most of his experience and leaves an impression with audiences. The rest of the cast give noteworthy performances such as Al Sapienza as Al's older brother Ralph Capone, Katherine Narducci as Capone's sister Rosie, Jack Lowden as Crawford, an FBI agent whose searching for the millions of dollars Capone secretly his away with him going as far as comparing Capone to Hitler, and Kyle MacLachlan as Capone's physician Doctor Karlock, whose later revealed to be courted by the mob in trying to pry out of his patient the location of the $10 million dollars he hid away with Capone having no recollection of it. The cast for Capone does a great deal in trying to make up for the films shortcomings with everyone attempting to bring something to the table in regards to adding both tension and suspense to a bland script. None of the performances shown are terrible, but much of the supporting roles are too far hidden in the background to make much of a significant impact on the film as a whole with Hardy being the true standout here. The latter once again demonstrates himself as being a one man show in regards to being able to steal scenes from other actors, and become the audiences main focus. It just happens that with Capone, he becomes the films only saving grace despite his character carrying a strangely awkward voice due to his character suffering from dementia. Regardless of how one feels about the rest of the picture as a whole, it can be unanimously agreed upon that Hardy delivered a performance that's much deserving of a far superior script. 

      Whereas the film excels in the acting department, the directing and writing is where it ultimately falls apart with the story being mishandled and the film revealing a genuine lack of enthusiasm from its filmmaker behind the camera. The directing by Josh Trank (Who also serves writer, director, and editor.) aims to give the film an arthouse feel to it with the narrative taking a non-linear approach to telling its story. The film serves as being a deconstruction of the typical mobster flick with Trank attempting to give audiences a more personal side of Capone that hasn't been previously shown before. He attempts to blend both fiction and reality together simultaneously while using Capone's moments of hallucinations as a way to give audiences a glimpse of his past as being a notorious mobster, along with building up the tension throughout the story. One of the films key sequences that proves to be highly effective, is one in which the character of Capone snaps and uses a Tommy gun with both the execution of the scene, as well as Hardy's performance being well-balanced and handled. It serves as being one of the few moments in the film where the audience feels the full intensity of the plot. Trank gives the film an atmosphere that's dark, quiet, and moody with the pacing allowing the story to be a slow progression of a mobsters descent into madness with the more hallucinations he witnesses, that further drives his confusion, paranoia, and untrust of those around him. The film is well-shot with visually striking cinematography, that captures the greenish colors of the swampy Florida location along with pristine skies and trees that surround the elegant Capone estate. The film carries an appropriate look to it that brings believability to the 1940's setting of the story, while also making it feel like a mobster flick. The pacing for Capone is slow-burning but allows the audience to witness the steady deterioration of Capone's health with those around him seizing the opportunity to casually ask about where Capone stashed away the missing millions of dollars that both the mob and the FBI are searching for before he passes. The films score by EI-P serves as being both tense and well-made with the music helping to inject intensity to the story in areas where its sorely lacking in such. The films costume and set decorations both serve as being effective in transporting audiences back to the films time period with its elegant camera work delivering pans across the Florida waters, and areas around the wealthy Capone estate. In terms of the films directing, Josh Trank succeeds in providing the film with rich and elegant visuals, that make its appearance visually stimulating while delivering a sense of dread that the audience feels in regards to a shocking climax emerging with Capone's character. Trank's work here as director isn't terrible, but it doesn't do much to make it standout from being anything more than standard work for the artsy independent approach that Capone desires to take. 

      The films screenplay by Trank is where the film as a whole falls apart largely due to the foundation of the story not being strong enough to warrant a full-length feature film. The concept of a film focusing on Al Capone's final days in his Florida mansion with the audience watching his health deteriorate isn't that exciting no matter how hard the film tries to make it intense with the subplot involving the hallucinations. The audience isn't given much background on Capone prior for them to become invested in his last days nor generate any type of empathy for him. The legacy of Capone is one that's thrilling and Trank never presents the opportunity for the audience to get to understand his motives and reasonings for the past crimes he committed. The script largely assumes the audience to be familiar with Capone's biography and jumps to the end of his timeline. The character of Capone is so bland and poorly written in this version of his story, the fact that Tom Hardy is able to play his part as well as he does speaks volumes to his true testament as an exceptional method actor. The side characters all come across as feeling one note with no one besides Capone's wife feeling as if they have an extra layer of depth to them. Another main issue with the story is how uneventful it comes across as feeling with no major events unfolding as the film progresses with the one major sequence that occurs near the films climax, turning out to be one of Capone's bizarre hallucinations.

Although these scenes are generally effective, they come across as feeling too few and far between in a script that feels dry. The film also goes out of its way to introduce a recurring subplot involving the character of Capone and his illegitimate son, which never pays off despite being a consistent plot point that the film revisits repeatedly throughout the story. The film also suffers from feeling a bit pretentious in what it desires to show in terms of Capone's final days with the films overall message being one that says that those with violent pasts can be haunted by it even while suffering memory problems. While such a message can be both a powerfully effective one if done right, the audience never gets the feeling that Capone is haunted by his past crimes nor feels any kind of remorse for his actions because the character isn't presented in a way which the audience can explore his mind. The script makes it a point to show Capone be suspicious of those around him in regards to who he can trust and whose plotting to throw him under the bus, but the audience never see's any of Capone's past deeds to make him warrant such suspicion. The subplot involving the search for the rumored $10 million dollars, feels tacked on with no legitimate payoff to the story other than showing those closest to Capone attempting to find the location of the money. Capone is shown to notice the FBI watching him with the audience left questioning whether it was real or in his head. Although it aims to be a biographical piece, Capone's​ script takes a psychological thriller approach to it that bears resemblence to films such as Todd Philip's Joker and 2000's cult-classic American Psycho in regards to the filmmakers playing mindtricks with the audience in regards to them being led to believe that such a sequence or subplot is real until shown otherwise. Capone aims to walk down a similar path to those films narratively speaking, but ultimately comes across as feeling like a poor imitator as the films main storyline just isn't that intriguing to watch (Which should never be the case when making a film based around the life of someone as intimidating as Al Capone).

      As noble as its attempts are to be something other than a wasted opportunity which turns out to be almost entirely forgettable, that's the best way to describe Capone's efforts here in wanting to be something that carries a small ounce of greatness that other films on Al Capone such as The Untouchables possessed. The films biggest problem is that it doesn't exactly know what it wants to be nor say with its final message as the narrative often feels uneven at times. The film aims to be serious work but Hardy's brilliant yet somewhat goofy performance confuses the audience on whether Capone is meant to be either a bleak psychological piece, that just happens to be a biographical crime drama or a dark comedy given that Hardy's character carries a weird vocal sound when it comes to speaking along with him tending to have moments of bodily fluid accidents which pop up in random moments throughout the film. These elements add confusion to the film as the audience isn't sure what the filmmakers we're aiming for with their approach to telling this story, nor understand why this specific time period of Capone's life was chosen for the basis of the films plot. Capone aims to be a more personal type of gangster flick, but just comes across as feeling weird and boring. The film is bleak and doesn't hold much entertainment value outside of Hardy's performance, ultimately feels wasted. Only those who appreciate slow-paced arthouse films will find value out of Capone with the rest of audiences feeling underwhelmed by it, as both the history aspect of the story along with the characters feel rather empty and shallow. What could've been a fascinating story revolving around the rise and fall of the infamous Chicago mobster has been dumbed down to 104 minutes film of the audience experiencing one's own cognitive decline. While the performances of both Tom Hardy and Linda Cardellini range from being strong to phenomenal work, the film ultimately serves as a prime example of good performances not being enough to compensate for lackluster storytelling. Capone serves as being a profound misfire with Hardy's fantastic performance being the only reason such a dud should ever be watched with those looking for a compelling story revolving around the reign of Al Capone as the notorious Chicago mobster should watch Brian De Palma's The Untouchables instead as the latter serves as being a much more satisfying experience than this. Capone stands as being one of the great cinematic misfires of 2020.

Final Verdict: For fans of the mobster film genre and Tom Hardy's work in general, Capone is a failed attempt at personalizing its main subject with Hardy's performance, though fantastic, ultimately not being enough to warrant a recommend to movie lovers.

Borat: Subsequent Moviefilm Is Bold, Fearless, Hilarious And Pitch Perfect With Its Timing

      It took nearly 14 years after its release to finally happen but the much anticipated sequel to the 2006's smash hit titled Borat: The Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan, finally arrives with the main difference being that the sequel premieres on Amazon Prime compared to being released theatrically like the original film due to the Covid-19. The first Borat was a surprise hit due to the creativity of both its main character and story in addition to the crude style of its humor. The film grossed over $262 million worldwide along with garnering a well-deserved Oscar nomination for Best Adapted Screenplay. Audiences were taken aback by the films persistence in being offensive in the most hilarious way possible with it working as being part satire and part shockumentary. Borat: Subsequent Moviefilm aims to maintain the same brand of humor that the first film delivered, which made it a hit with audiences along with carrying a sense of urgency with its overall story exploring today's political climate. The sequel aims for the same level of shock value as its controversial yet cult-classic predecessor delivered, while presenting a narrative that manages to be surprisingly sentimental in certain areas. Borat: Subsequent Moviefilm resurrects the whacky and eccentric character that the first film introduced to audiences, while giving him a new mission which proves to be just as outrageous, silly, and flat-out hilarious as the first while exposing specific sectors of the American population who come across as appearing misguided or repugnant. It wasn't a sequel that audiences were particularly clamoring for, but it's one that's surprisingly needed in a year that's mostly devoid of any type of genuine laughs, along with serving as somewhat of a motivational piece for people to take the initiative in regards to voting.

      A sequel to the 2006 smash hit, the plot for Borat: Subsequent Moviefilm centers around the real-life adventures of fake television journalist Borat (Played by Sasha Baron Cohen) from the real nation of Kazakhstan. The newest film has Borat coming to the U.S. in an effort to present his daughter Irina Nowak (Played by Maria Bakalova) as a gift to Vice President Mike Pence with his actions consisting of taunting, trolling, and pranking both famous and regular individuals. Borat: Subsequent Moviefilm aims to connect itself with the original as being the follow-up that audiences have been waiting for since the release of its original. The film even goes out of its way to give audiences a brief recap of the original with the films opening narration involving Borat's character. The sequel takes the character and moves him into a newer era with a different political climate, which gives the film a sense of urgency that's layered within the path of silliness that both the characters unleash during their time on American soil. In addition to the crazy antics that the character of Borat performs, the films shock value is enhanced with the characters ability to generate authentic reactions from those he interviews, with some cases having him expose the twisted nature of some of those individuals as well as their actions and way of thinking. The first Borat worked well with audiences because it gave them a character that was so over-the-top, they couldn't resist enjoying his hilarious antics as well as waiting in anticipation for what he was going to do next with the sequel retaining that feeling. The original was designed to appear specifically as being a satirical comedy on American culture, that was full of hilarious sketches and crude gags with the sequel carrying more of a storyline that exposes controversial taboos in America such as racism, sexism, and the denial that people have in regards to the Covid-19 Pandemic being as dangerous as it actually is. At the heart of tackling these serious issues and themes, is a bizarre yet heartwarming father and daughter storyline involving Borat preparing to hand off his daughter Irina to Mike Pence/Rudy Giuliani with Borat realizing that he will miss her once he does so. While the storyline comes across as being hilariously awkward and a bit disturbing, it's handled in a way that makes it entertaining to watch as the audience realizes that the Borat's are clueless in regards to how everyone else views their arrangement. As a sequel, Borat: Subsequent Moviefilm works well in providing audiences with the same extreme and crude humor that they enjoyed about it's predecessor, while adding a extra layer to Borat's character. The film is just as shocking as the original in what it reveals about both the people and culture it explores, while further developing its main character. In a time where the political climate serves as being extremely divisive, Borat: Subsequent Moviefilm aims to generate hard laughs while delivering an eye-opening observation about the environment surrounding the main characters as they interact with different sides of the American spectrum. It may not necessarily be a better film than the first but Subsequent Moviefilm attempts to regenerate much of what audiences loved about the original, while managing to be surprising with a reasonable amount of heart behind its father and daughter storyline.

      The main element that makes both Borat films work, is the creativeness and charisma of its main stars. Sasha Baron Cohen once again demonstrates himself to be a brilliant master of disguise as he's able to fool  highly influential people, as well as regular everyday individuals into believing he's a confused and totally clueless visitor from another country with a backwards mindset in regards to understanding American culture and customs. Cohen is brilliant here with his performance appearing not to miss a beat in comparison to his work on the original film. The film works because he's able to make his character both believable and funny, while serving as the eyes of the audience in seeing how he intentionally pushes people's buttons with saying something absurd in expecting them to respond back with a reply that's just as shocking as his initial comment. Cohen manages to both entertain the audience with his characters hilarious yet crazed antics while frustrating them simultaneously, ultimately making them forgive his actions due to his clueless way of thinking. Maria Bakalova delivers an equally impressive performance as Borat's teenage daughter Tutar Sagdiyev with her character often stealing the show from Cohen. Both actors showcase strong chemistry together with the audience understanding and becoming connected with their character arcs. Sagdiyev proves to be just as shocking and oblivious as Borat towards understanding American culture, along with being misled by far-right groups. Their performances are what makes the film as fun and watchable as it comes across as being with the audience finding themselves focused on not just Borat's antics, but Tutar's as well. The rest of the cast consist of cameos from polarizing political figures including Mike Pence, Rudy Guliani in the films shocking climactic sequence/prank, and regular individuals that the Borat's come into contact with such as Jeanise Jones playing herself as being Tutar's babysitter along with surprise cameos from Tom Hanks and wife Rita Wilson. Despite most of those appearing in Subsequent Moviefilm being regular people or those serving as extras, it's the performances of Cohen and Bakalova that make the film work as well as it does in regards to being fun and entertaining despite how shocking it comes across as times.

 

      Directed by Jason Woliner in his feature film debut, his overall work is reasonably decent though comes across as feeling standard with the film being filmed documentary style with its cinematography. Woliner keeps the story moving at a relatively quick pace, which feels in line with its predecessor while spreading out the films key set-pieces involving both Borat and Tutar. He gives the story enough time for development​ in between, particularly the latter's relationship which serves as the heart of the film before the next big comedic set-piece kicks in. The films moments of nudity and sexual content are both intended and utilized for shock value either with Borat's​ character doing something outrageously inappropriate or another character being caught doing something lucid in the act, which the audience becomes disgusted by. Those who've seen the first Borat film won't be shocked or surprised by its usage here once again. Woliner's directing for the most part remains steady with him following the main characters around as well as being the eyes and ears of the audience, while allowing Cohen and Sagdiyev enough freedom to let their characters run rampant. With a film like Subsequent Moviefilm, the story doesn't require any type of advanced nor skillful directing as the film itself relies on the performances of its main actors to carry it. Any impressive technical aspects of the story or craftsmanship that Woliner manages to bring to the film, serves as being an added plus with it ultimately not being required here. What Woliner does well is position the wild and outrageous scenarios that the main characters find themselves getting into in an order that gets increasingly more funny and intense, making the audience anticipate their next act of mayhem. Both Woliner and Cohen position this film as being essentially a tour through Trumps America with their findings becoming more shocking as the film progresses, while always ensuring that the moments of hilarity remains consistent without coming across as feeling preachy. Woliner films the scenes involving Cohen's character and the real-life individuals as appearing to look like interviews with their revealing of personal thoughts or approval of the outrageously offensive things that Borat says, serving as being shocking testimonials essentially. In terms of handling the film, Woliner and Cohen prove to be a natural duo in putting together a sequel that takes it's own form rather than relying on the previous film for comfort. Given that this is Woliner's feature film debut as director, he handles helming the project smoothly. 

      The writing by Cohen combined with the collaboration of other writers such as Peter Baynham, Jena Friedman, Anthony Hines, Lee Kern, Dan Mazer, Erica Rivinoja, and Dan Swimer with a story by Cohen, Swimer, Hines, and Nina Pedrad proves to be a solid effort with the sequel taking a more personal approach with showing Borat as being a father figure despite their scenario coming across as being hilariously backwards in regards to logic. The script for Subsequent Moviefilm covers topics pertaining to the Presidency of Donald Trump and the rise of Trumpism, Barack Obama and the disapproval far-right activists hold towards him, an exploration of the type of country and backwards leadership that Kazakhstan possesses, the Holocaust and deniers of it, feminism, Covid-19, abortion, the belief in conspiracy theories, and a shocking subplot involving Rudy Giuliani and underage sex that becomes the films signature shocking moment. The sequel also gives the audience more insight into Kazakhstan with them understanding Borat's old-fashioned views regarding women and the false assumption that Barack Obama is an enemy of Kazakhstan in comparison to his successor. One of the most interesting aspects of the first Borat film was its desire to expose the most disgusting and repulsive aspects of American culture with the sequel taking a much stronger and more aggressive approach in doing so. The film is written and designed specifically to give the audience a glimpse into the world of the far-right, and how misinformation can be spread and willfully supported regarding the opposite side including candidates within the political party in question. An example of this shown in the film is the character of Borat befriending a group of Trump supporters, who are believed to support the wildest conspiracy theories regarding Hilary Clinton and Barack Obama along with them considering Democrats in general to be far more dangerous than Covid-19, which they consider to be a hoax. Such an admission is presented as being shocking to the audience, because of the reality that the men truly believe the things they're​ telling Borat. The script also allows him the opportunity to take a backseat in allowing Tutar to become the main focus at central points with their relationship being the heart of the film. This aspect of the story is handled well and proves interesting with Borat slowly realizing the mistake he's about to make in handing his daughter off to a much older man. As bizarre of a subplot that comes across as appearing, it works within the realm of the story and how both characters think. The narrative for the most part remains straight-forward despite the film feeling as if it jumps around a bit with the subplot involving Borat attempting to deliver his daughter to Vice President Mike Pence, before switching over to him connecting with his daughter before going their separate ways with her experiencing her own independence without him around for the middle portion of the film before reverting back to the subplot involving her character attempting to hand herself off to Rudy Giuliani, and finally concluding with a cleverly far-fetched plot twist involving Borat discovering that his character is responsible for the worldwide spread of Covid-19. The script for Subsequent Moviefilm juggles all these subplots and does a solid job of doing so for the most part without it coming across as feeling messy or too forced. In comparison to the original, the sequel takes a more aggressive approach in both exploring as well as poking fun at the current political climate with Cohen showing a different sector of America that Americans have become increasingly alarmed with. Cohen presents scenes that can be both hilarious as well as uncomfortable to watch simultaneously such as Borat and Tutar dancing in front of a ball full of people with the scene ending with Tutar pulling her skirt up to reveal her blood-soaked underwear to a room full of people, who look on with horror. Another​ sequence shown in the film that's similar is a scene in which Borat appears at a conference where Mike Pence is speaking at dressed up as a member of the Ku Klux Klan. The reactions he receives from those around him is shock and confusion with no one taking the initiative to speak up or kick him out, further adding to the surprise element the film is going for with the intended pranks. The script stays true to the formula of the original with Cohen's character pushing the buttons of those he interviews and comes into contact with in regards to seeing how far people will let him go with his crazed antics before he's called out on it. While the sequel carries a much deeper political undertone than the first, it never ceases to be funny and entertaining in doing so. It does experience trouble at times in regards to walking the fine line of being an eye-opener for the audience in the midst of its comedy, while flirting with fiction with the climactic twist involving Borat's character, Covid-19, and it's connection to Kazhastan. Whereas the twist is meant to poke fun at the numerous conspiracy theories regarding the spread of Covid-19, it comes across as being silly and a bit of a stretch despite it still managing to work within both the style and context of the film. In comparison to the first Borat's script, the sequel feels meatier in regards to the subplots and major topics it covers whereas the original was more well-balanced and focused narrative speaking. 

      The first Borat became a hit with audiences because of the creativity behind it, as well as the originality of the character. Sasha Baron Cohen conceived a way to explore the shady side of both American culture and politics in a fashion that not only contains clever gags and sketches, but manages to capture the authenticity of those Cohen interviews in disguise as his character. Whereas Michael Moore takes a more serious approach to exploring the shady aspects of American culture, Cohen does so in a way that makes the audience laugh while also making them pause and think about what they're witnessing on the screen. It can be argued that the sequel takes a more firm approach in diving into the current political climate in comparison to the original, but still maintains the energy and crude humor of the main characters previous outing while further exploring the Borat family tree. It may not necessarily be a better film than the first but it stands as being just as hilarious, fearless in its desire to push the boundaries of the audiences comfort zone in regards to its sketches (The Rudy Giuliani scene is genuinely unsettling and creepy to watch), and eye-opening in the revealing of a portion of the American population that's foolishly misguided and blatantly ignorant in regards to thinking. For those who enjoyed the previous Borat film, the sequel for the most part lives up to the original while providing a fresh new batch of hilarious gags and clever sketches. Both films further reemphasize the notion that Cohen is a master of disguise in fooling famous celebrities and politicians into conducting interviews with him as a form of a truth serum in revealing their true intentions and beliefs. Although his methods may come across as appearing a bit extreme and cruel for typical audiences, one can't help but admire Cohen's ambition in exposing the prejudice behind a certain group of political leaders and their followers. In a time where tensions are at an all time high given the recent Presidential election, Borat: Subsequent Moviefilm feels like the ideal film that arrived at the perfect time in hopes of moving the needle in regards to motivating people to vote while providing hardcore laughter. The film also serves as a reversal of one's own way of thinking with Borat coming to his senses in the end with him abandoning his ridiculously old-fashioned mentality, and learning to appreciate that women have rights and opportunities too. The newest Borat film isn't just a culmination of absurd pranks and sketches, but aims to add an extra amount of depth to both the script and the character himself. Although he gets overshadowed at times by the character of Tutar, both characters set out to achieve that their characters were designed to do which is to both entertain and wake the audience up to their surroundings. For a sequel that didn't have much of a reason not justification to be made at first, it makes a solid case of doing so and ultimately surprises in how well it stacks up with the first while being its own film. Borat: Subsequent Moviefilm rightfully stands as being one of 2020's surprise hits, as well as providing the much needed laughter in a year full of protests against as well as the rise of Covid-19. Subsequent Moviefilm both hilariously and unapologetically mocks everything shown that's wrong with today's politics, and does so with full conviction to entertain as well as stun it's audience.

Final Verdict: For fans of the first Borat and Sasha Baron Cohen's satirical body of work in general, Borat: Subsequent Moviefilm serves as being a worthy follow-up to its 2006 counterpart that maintains the freshness, crude humor, and eye for seeking the political truth of the original. 

Netflix's The Trial Of The Chicago 7 Engages Audiences With Terrific Performances, Confident Filmmaking, and A Timely And Relevant Story

       

      Whereas all historical dramas are made with the sole purpose of transporting audiences back to the time period in which their stories take place, some carry themes that not only pertain to the past era their stories cover, but also speak to the present one with societal issues being covered that are nearly identical to the ones plaguing today's society. With Netflix's The Trial Of The Chicago 7, the highly acclaimed historical courtroom drama serves as a reflection of the late 1960's movement regarding the protesting of the Vietnam War along with the rise of both the progressive and Black Panther parties while mirroring today's issues regarding police brutality, the push for more social reform, standing up to the establishment, and the question of whose truly responsible for mass peaceful protests turned violent. With Netflix's newest historical drama, writer and director Aaron Sorkin explores these issues and presents them in a style that's​ engaging, informative, and feels timely given that many of the same issues presented in the story have carried on to today's generation. The Trial Of The Chicago 7 is not just a well-acted and put together courtroom drama, it serves as being the film that properly and rightfully defines 2020 minus Covid-19. It's not a film that audiences particularly were craving for, but its one that's needed with its thought-provoking and timely messages.

      Based on true events, The plot for The Trial Of The Chicago 7 takes place in 1969 with the plot revolving around a notorious trial involving seven progressive activists for charges regarding conspiracy as well as inciting riots after a series of violent confrontations between armed Chicago police officers and anti-Vietnam protestors during the 1968 Democratic National Convention. One of the key aspects of the film that stands out is how well structured its story is with Sorkin giving the film the appropriate flashbacks of the events in question to give audiences more background information regarding both the case as well as the main characters being put on trial. The story is extremely well told with top notch performances from its main cast adding to the realism of the story. Sorkin manages to fairly stick to the facts surrounding the case while working off his strengths as both a storyteller and filmmaker. The film plays out like a typical courtroom drama, but is elevated through its all star cast as well as the sense of urgency that its story themes bring. In a time where the country is enduring unrest with rightful protests being spawned across the nation regarding important issues that can be considered progressive, The Trial Of The Chicago 7 feels like the necessary film to come out at the perfect time as the story shows its main characters struggle regarding fairness, equality, justice, and ending corruption all feel powerfully relevant to today's struggles.

      As well as Aaron Sorkin performs as the films director and writer, it's the performances from the films talented and star-studded cast that make the story work as effectively as it ultimately does. The ensemble cast all deliver performances that range from being highly impressive to fantastic work here with some actors managing to genuinely impress with their ability to demonstrate solid range as dramatic performers (Sasha Baron Cohen anyone). The films strongest acting work comes from Eddie Redmayne and Sasha Baron Cohen in the main roles of Tom Hayden, leader and one time President of the Students for a Democratic Society, with Cohen playing Abbie Hoffman, founding member of the Youth International Party. Redmayne continues to demonstrate solid dramatic acting chops with Cohen delivering the more impressive work of the two performance wise. Both actors demonstrate strong chemistry on screen along with allowing the audience to decide which of the two characters they side with in regards to their different approaches on how to handle the protests regarding the ending of the Vietnam War as Redmayne's character is portrayed as being more peaceful and less radical in pushing for progressive policies in comparison to Cohen's character. The latter surprises with his strong presence on screen, as well as his ability to expand on his range as a serious actor. It wouldn't be surprising if he received his first Oscar nomination for Best Supporting Actor for his work on the film. Joseph Gordon Levitt and Frank Langella also impresses in their roles as Federal Prosecutor Richard Schultz, who personally doesn't believe the seven men to be guilty of initiating the Chicago riots, with Frank Langella as the unreasonable and biased Judge Julius Hoffman. The rest of the cast deliver effective to extremely noteworthy performances with Alex Sharp as national organizer Rennie Davis, Jeremy Strong as founding member of the Yippies (The Youth International Party) Jerry Rubin, John Carroll Lynch as David Dellinger, leader of the National Mobilization Committee to End the War in Vietnam, Noah Robbins as Lee Weiner, Daniel Flaherty as John Froines, Yahya Abdul-Mateen ll as Bobby Seale, National Chairman of the Black Panther Party as well as serving as being the 8th defendant. Other supporting roles include Kelvin Harrison Jr. as Fred Hampton, Chairman of the Illinois Chapter Black Panther Party, Mark Rylance as Defense Counsel William Kunstler, and Michael Keaton as former United States Attorney General Ramsey Clark during the riots who testifies that the riots were started by the Chicago Police Department rather than by the accused seven. The ensemble cast for The Trial Of The Chicago 7 as a whole is fantastic with everyone adding something genuine to their roles, as well as the story. Much like strong ensemble dramas such as Steven Soderbergh's Traffic Paul Haggis Crash, or David Fincher's The Social Network, the cast for Chicago 7 works so brilliantly as a group that one can't pick out a single performance that ranges as being poor or lacking in comparison to the others. Every performance feels natural and important to the story with voters being hard-pressed to select a single actor or supporting actor for award season recognition. Whereas everyone gets their key moments to shine throughout the film, the best and strongest work comes from Redmayne and Cohen with Levitt, Langella, and Yahya Abdul-Mateen ll occasionally stealing the show with his powerful performance as wrongfully accused Bobby Seale. The acting ultimately plays a big part of why The Trial Of The Chicago 7 works as well as it does along with resonating with audiences. 

  

      The films directing by Aaron Sorkin proves to be well-crafted as he's able to take a basic courtroom drama and make it engaging for the audience. Although Sorkin takes liberties with the story, he sticks to the general outline while providing the audience with flashbacks that show the events in question. He proves to be extremely skillful in balancing the films timeline in regards to giving audiences glimpses of the past when the characters deliver their testimonies on the stand. The film is well-shot with stellar cinematography, that helps place the audience in 1960's Chicago along with impressive set and costume design. The editing allows the film to have a slow building pace, that allows the audience to become invested in both the story and characters. The score by Daniel Pemberton is powerful and effectively used in enhancing the realism of the era the story takes place in along with the built up drama that unfolds during the courtroom scenes. Although known more for his abilities as a writer moreso than a director, Sorkin shows exceptional skill in crafting a highly effective emotional drama that looks authentic in terms of generating the right atmosphere for the films late 1960's time period with the actors all appearing to fit their roles. Some of the films key sequences are masterfully handled by Sorkin such as the scene in which Bobby Seale's character is disciplined for speaking out in the courtroom regarding his innocence. Other scenes that are effectively done are the flashbacks showing the initiation of the riots with the standoff on the hill between the protesters and the police, as well as the moment in which one of the main characters on trial ends up getting their head cracked open by Police for no other reason than trying to prevent them from being aggressive in handling a protester trying to remove the American flag from a pole. These key scenes are well-handled and directed not only in terms of being shocking, but driving home the brutal reality of the situation to the audience. The directing by Aaron Sorkin is steady-handed with the filmmaker carrying a firm grip on directing the story. If one thought of Sorkin to be talented at only being a writer of hits such as A Few Good Men, The West Wing, and The Social Network, they'll be impressed to see his abilities as a director with The Trial Of The Chicago 7 being his second directorial work after making his filmmaking debut with 2017 Molly's Game.

      In addition to Sorkin's surprising directing efforts, he also performs his traditional task of penning the films script with the end result being a hugely satisfying and strong effort. The script for The Trial Of The Chicago 7 includes themes incorporated into the story regarding anti-war protesting against the Vietman War, racism, the use of racial stereotypes, the battle over civil rights, the black Panthers, conspiracy, revolution, and civil disobedience. Sorkin makes it a point to show that the type of trial that's depicted in the film is not a typical one, but politicized to falsely hold those leading the revolution against a corrupt establishment accountable for actions they didn't initiate. Sorkin's script presents both sides of the case with the audience getting pieces of the truth behind the initiating of the riots as the story progresses. The main characters are well-established and developed enough for the audience to become connected with the seven men put on trial for leading a revolution with Eddie Redmayne and Sasha Baron Cohen's character's presenting two different approaches to the progressive movement. Redmayne's character is shown to desire doing things the less extreme and peaceful way with him citing that violent extremism won't lead to election victories across the country for progressives, while Baron's character is less concerned about the protests turning ugly and see's their situation as sending a greater message to people than being concerned about their verdict which Redmayne's character is shown to be the opposite of until the verdict scene. Out of the two main characters, it's Redmayne's that experiences a transformation throughout the course of the film as he goes from being less concerned about what happens to the group in the end and chooses to put the movement first in an ultimate act of defiance in the films closing scene, where he lists off all the soldiers killed in Vietnam in a moving sequence. The subplot involving Bobby Seale is effective in showing his character becoming more increasingly frustrated and desperate as he's being unfairly linked with the other seven defendants for a murder he didn't commit. His character serves to further show the injustice and systemic racism, that African-Americans experience with the justice system. The audience also understands Joseph Gordon Levitt's character as he's shown to not be a villain as the prosecutor because of his understanding of what the Chicago 7 are trying to say with their movement, but is forced to paint them as being the ones responsible for the initiating of the riots. The side characters are well-established with Sorkin treating them like chest pieces in the story with the tension building both inside as well as outside of the courtroom. Sorkin does a solid job of balancing out the two sides of the case with him portraying the Chicago 7 as being flawed in their approach to demanding the end of a corrupt war, while also making their arguments understandable to the audience with the viewer being left to decide whether they agree with their methods of protesting or not. Sorkin also reveals how the mismanagement of protests with the Chicago City Police ended up being the main contributor of the riots, with him also making a point in showing how clear government interference in charging the 7 for the riots, was a way of halting the movement they're​ building, which often overshadowed the facts surrounding the case as it became less about accountability and more about the fight between the establishment and those willing to stand up against a corrupt and rigged system. The film shows how free speech can be a powerful tool in bringing about societal change, but also reveals how it can be forcibly silenced when speaking out against an obvious wrongdoing or injustice.

      Having seen the film, it becomes obvious as to why Aaron Sorkin chose to specifically bring this story to the big screen as it contains layers and themes that speak to now with the main characters struggles in fighting for equality, fairness, justice, and an end to government corruption not appearing to be much different than the many protests, that have taken place this year along with the last several. The story for The Trial Of The Chicago 7 is one that not only works effectively well, but also feels timely. There isn't a better moment for audiences to experience this story than right now with the film boasting stellar acting performances from its fantastic ensemble cast along with brilliant directing and writing to make the story something more than being just a bland historical courtroom drama. Sorkin is a filmmaker who knows what he wants to show, as well as what he wants to say with the films ultimate message regarding an impartial trial and doing what's right for others when the odds are stacked up against oneself. Here he assembles all of the key ingredients that made his past films work with an appealing cast, top notch writing, and a true story that he can transform into something that's engaging and eye-opening rather than being a boring lifetime court drama under an average filmmaker. The Trial Of The Chicago 7 is a historical drama that demands to be seen, and will not let those who do so off the hook easily after watching it. The story serves as being self-reflective of the time period it covers along with mirroring the current political climate. As far as Netflix originals go, it proudly stands as being one of its more impressive efforts with the film being destined to generate some serious award season buzzed with it being well-earned. As evidenced by the films final closing scene which serves as being both inspiring and powerful, the film serves as a great metaphor on how some issues are worth fighting over for better results, and that the needs of others ultimately outweigh the needs of one's own. Sorkin eloquently shows that through the fight that the Chicago 7 endure in the courtroom with their stance being one that's admirable, as well as unquestionably courageous given the era and how stacked the system is against them. Aaron Sorkin's The Trial Of Chicago 7 is a film that's not to be missed, and appropriately stands as being one of 2020's best films released thus far with it being perhaps the most important with its timely narrative.

Final Verdict: For movie lovers and those who appreciate well-told historical dramas, The Trial Of The Chicago 7 is a film that both desires as well as demands to be seen.