Does it need to be outstanding?

If so, maybe save the sequel for a future rental.

My mother was kind enough to attend the theater with me, and we mostly enjoyed Dumb and Dumber To. It’s good.

Definitely not ‘great,’ but still good.

If you’ve seen the trailer, some jokes are spoiled. Yet another reason to wait and rent.

The scatological humor is never strong.

Quite a bit is distasteful.

Which may be due (partly) to the rating. Gotta dial down the cursing and ratchet up the scat to nab a PG-13.

I guess?

Consider the following list:

Top Five Comedies of 2014

1. 22 Jump Street (R)
2. Neighbors (R)
3. Let’s Be Cops (R)
4. The Skeleton Twins (R)
5. Dumb And Dumber To (PG-13)

One might argue it’s generous not to swap it out with Chef (R).

This review’s only going to frustrate fans, and I feel bad for Jeff Daniels and Jim Carrey who do an outstanding job returning as Harry and Lloyd.

But the Farrelly brothers were never strong filmmakers.

The original D&D is the only great entry in their entire filmography. Everything else ranges from bad to meh.

The common theme is revulsion. There’s Something About Mary, Osmosis Jones and Me, Myself & Irene all initially trigger memories of disgust.

Now, looking back on the long-awaited sequel, it’s difficult to separate the gross from the chuckles.

What’s Funny

This is not to discredit the banana peel antics – that stuff’s hilarious.

Anything involving a zamboni (especially when combined with tree limbs) – hilarious.

Shoving people into bushes, and pointing and laughing – gets me every time.

The double-point-and-laugh is classic.

The callbacks are mostly solid; some hit home better than others.

Reused snippets from the original score resonate strongly.

Favorite bit parts, like ‘Billy in 4C’ and Seabass, make cameos.

But, again. Was it funniest to increase the morbidity factor with the blind kid? The joke’s edgy enough in the first movie.

And why…

Why, why, WHY…

…do we need close-up shots of the cat’s anus?

During post-production, how many adults watched as feathers are rocketed from a cat’s asshole, and agreed it’s an essential cutaway?

Perhaps the viewers hadn’t realized from the mutilated bird corpses what’s just taken place.

I’m not trying to hate on this movie, but that’s only one of three revolting moments. I’ll spare you the rest.

To finish on a high note, a few words on the acting.

Jesus Christ & Jack Daniels

Jim Carrey is incredibly funny. His delivery is spot on.

Watching Lloyd’s facial expressions is enough to keep the viewer in stitches.

Jeff Daniels is just as chucklesome as Harry Dunne.

He’s a terrific actor.

Rachel Melvin is an excellent addition to the cast of ‘dummies.’ It’s not easy to play slow in a convincing or funny manner, and she pulls it off with finesse.

Jennifer Lawrence is somewhere in this movie as Young Fraida. Which is odd.

If it’s her making out with Lloyd, what a strange cameo…another scene must have gotten cut out. Or something.

Anyway.

Be sure to stay through the credits for the following stinger. The images accompanying the rolling are enjoyable as well.

Dumb and Dumber To is not a disappointment.

But it’s nothing to write home about.

★★★ ★★★

Briefer takes on IMDb & Letterboxd.

Check Horrible Bosses 2 to see what knocks D&D To off the Top 5.

I’m done marginalizing film tastes in terms of gender…

…is originally how I began this review.

Yet that statement feels like the antithesis of my gut response to John Wick:

“Highly recommend for mainly male moviegoers,” my heart mentions as the credits roll.

Then the cranium cogs start whirling.

“Isn’t that rhetoric unproductive? Shouldn’t we discourage that type of thinking?” my intellectual side fires back.

Thus began the rough introduction.

While reviewing John Wick on The Screen Rant Underground, two of the hosts offered a counterpoint, mentioning their wives’ dislike. One even went so far as to say she ‘hated it.’

(Side Note: The words ‘hate’ and ‘boring’ are the two most overused descriptors in the English language.)

On a broader scale, ‘Violence’ and ‘Romance’ occupy the extremities of the gender Venn diagram.

Men prefer fighting; women prefer feeling. Simple as that, folks.

“It’s a social construct! The best movies lie in the diagram’s center! To mention the pattern is to perpetuate it!” the brain chimes in.

Still, the inescapable reality is: the paradigm exists.

Whether I like it or not.

So, to put an untidy bow on my point: Isn’t it stilted claiming a movie is excellent (better than great), but for male audiences only? Doesn’t that imply John Wick is terrible, if viewed by a female audience?

Surely there are women who enjoy gun-fu. Shouldn’t they feel insulted by the suggestion?

Anyhow, you catch my drift.

With that out of the way, here’s my Top Five Movies with the Protagonist’s Full Name as the Title –

1. Donnie Darko
2. Annie Hall
3. Forrest Gump
4. Happy Gilmore
5. Billy Madison

John Wick lands in similar territory as Denzel Washington’s character from last month’s The Equalizer.

Both protagonists also echo Tom Cruise’s Jack Reacher, another ex-CIA type.

Say what you will about his surfing abilities in Point Break – Keanu Reeves is terrific as the leading hombre.

Granted, Keanu’s John is less virtuous and less of a lady-magnet than Tom’s Jack, but both can drive in reverse like champions.

Which brings me to the first of three lessons I learned from J.W. about firearms.

Lesson 1: If you must drive at enemy gunfire, do so in reverse.

Keanu’s acting is great. Soft-spoken and pragmatic – sympathy sits with him quite nicely.

Not to mention, he does all his own fighting and stunts.

In the hand-to-hand combat, you can tell he’s absorbing all the blows. He falls off a balcony! The guy’s just terrific.

Meanwhile, the action scenes? Phenomenal.

Throughout the entire film, the epic fight sequences rival the best in cinematic history.

The gunplay is realistic and grounded. You’ve never seen such concrete shootouts.

Lesson 2: Due to recoil, handheld assault rifles can only be fired in bursts.

Wick manages to dispatch a number of thugs in an organic fashion.

As a result, the film illustrates the possibilities for less cutting and more believable action across the industry.

Lesson 3: Those who wield a pistol at the ready (like a cop entering the home of a serial killer) live longest.

The stuntwork is absolutely spectacular – far too much fiddling with convention to mention.

At one point, during an explosion, there’s an actual stuntman in the foreground, right near the fire. He catches fire! It’s awesome.

And hey – who doesn’t love John Leguizamo? Talk about reliable.

Alfie Allen catches critical heat for playing a similar role on Game of Thrones, which is unnecessary. He does a fine job for what he’s cast as.

It’s also good to see WCW’s Kevin Nash in a small part.

Ian McShane is terrific as always. Somebody’s not paying him enough.

Willem DeFoe plays a man who serves vegetable puree rather than booze at a meeting of criminal wits. Just another shiny bullet on DeFoe’s lengthy list.

Adrianne Palicki plays a solid murderess. Ironically, the only time I was ‘taken out of’ the movie was during footage of her stunt double.

Finally, the off-type villain is performed excellently by Michael Nyqvist.

In the end, John Wick may be the poster-child for breaking cliché – which, coincidentally, is shaping up to be the number one theme for cinema in 2014. So catch it in IMAX while it’s still in theaters.

There’s no stinger after the credits roll.

But hey – I’d be down for a sequel.

★★★ ★★★ ★★★

Briefer takes on IMDb & Letterboxd.

Oddity is an antidote for the jaded.

The off-putting, unsettled feeling of irksome circumstance.

The exploits of nightcrawlers, independent salesmen collecting footage of post-crime carnage, bear much estranged fruit.

Second only to Gone Girl, Nightcrawler is the best motion picture released in 2014.

That distinction, however, is ultimately subjective. Both are must-see.

Govern expectations accordingly, because it seems folks are hoping for more action-packed horror.

Nightcrawler’s a dark dramatic thriller.

Expect twisted spookery, but in a more subtle and realistic manner.

Overall, this film is very smart.

It’s a tale of moral ambiguity about the mysterious creepsters who provide found-footage for nightly television news.

It’s set in L.A and completely divorced from the creative filming industries.

The very setting, albeit typical, is oddly off-type.

Which is similar to the pacing and scene construction. Dan Gilroy, the writer/director, displays an exquisite proficiency at defying narrative conventions.

Along with montage, time lapse and alternative credits sequencing, breaking cliché is a cinematic theme of 2014.

Another setting-based narrative strength is the relative lack of sunlight. The protagonist’s eyes are never naked to unfiltered rays.

The infrequency is certainly purposeful.

Another example of the writing strength is the humor: Subtle, unexpected and consistent.

This film’s success is also due (in part) to the spectral visual style.

The shooting, editing and cinematography is masterful.

On the flip side of sense perception, the sound mixing and score is excellent.

Nightcrawler owes a hefty portion of its success to the acting.

Jake Gyllenhaal’s unseemly characterization is fantastic.

Jake is one of our finest actors working today. Source Code, Donnie Darko and Prisoners are three of the best in cinematic history.

Here he crafts an original antihero in Louis Bloom.

[Quick side note: The similarity between the name of the protagonist in James Joyce’s Ulysses, Leopold Bloom, must be purposeful, no? Especially if one considers the nickname antics involved in the two stories.]

Louis Bloom embraces his role as an opossum, monetizing the carrion of human sophistication with the utmost efficiency.

In the strangest way, his attitude is highly admirable.

For example, his belief in honest negotiation and dedicated apprenticeship endears the viewer.

On the other hand (which I won’t spoil) some of his behavior may be considered reprehensible.

Who knows?

See it and find out.

As a final note, Bill Paxton is terrific. He plays a completely different character from his role in Edge of Tomorrow, a July release which still remains one of my top ten movies of 2014.

Pax tears it up no matter what.

With too many great movies in his filmography to mention (including a number of classics from great directors like James Cameron, Kathryn Bigelow and John Hughes) I’ll just say he first debuted in 1974.

So he’s been killing it for forty years. Keep it up, Bill!

Check out Nightcrawler if you dig smart flicks.

By the by, there’s an homage to The Usual Suspects.

High-fives for those who notice.

★★★★★ ★★★★★

Briefer takes at IMDb & Letterboxd.

If you’ve seen the trailer, the animation looks sketchy. Cheech Marin covering Biz Markie certainly doesn’t help. Who knows if you’ll read my The Book of Life review?

You’re not tantalized, and who can blame you? Neither was I.

Best Animated Films 2014

1. The Book of Life
2. Mr. Peabody & Sherman
3. The Lego Movie
4. How to Train Your Dragon 2
5. The Boxtrolls

That’s right, folks. The BOL is pretty great.

The animation isn’t sketchy. Cheech’s solo isn’t hokey.

The visuals are wondrous in fact. The animation is multi-layered, lending the fabric of cartoon reality a wood grain texture.

Manolo’s hometown is beautiful; like an Hispanic Mont Saint-Michel. The other world he passes through is gorgeously rendered as well.

The humor is solid and consistent. The characters are compelling oddities.

The narrative is heart-warming and educational.

I worry because annually, the average moviegoer probably scrutinizes (at the most) two animated flicks via big screen.

Frozen is such a hit from 2013, I’d imagine most viewers anticipate the November 7^th release of Big Hero 6.

Apparently everyone (and their mother) went to see The Lego Movie; and loved it so much a Lego Batman spinoff’s greenlit.

Therefore, most have hit their animated quota. Perhaps reconsider making an exception.

This reviewer attended Book of Life with his mother, and enjoyed it thoroughly.

Dia de Los Muertos

That’s Spaniard for ‘Day of the Dead.’

The Skeleton Twins, a dusty quirkedy released in September, touched on the same theme.

BOL’s tone is a bit more light-hearted.

Cheech isn’t the only one singing, either.

Diego Luna as the voice of the protagonist, Manolo, strums and clucks a number of ballads. Expect minor swooning.

Perhaps he’s not perfect in the musical realm, but Luna does a bang-up job. He’s more soft-spoken than your average hero, but that’s what makes his character endearing.

Tanning Chatum

Channing Tatum is quickly becoming my favorite actor. Love that dude.

In the past two years he’s been fantastic in 22 Jump Street, Side Effects and G.I. Joe: Retaliation. Plus he did three cameos: Two live-action in Don Jon and This is the End and one voice-acting as Lego Green Lantern.

Speaking of street-jumping, Ice Cube plays the voice of the Candle Maker. His character is very similar to the caterpillar from Epic.

In other odd news, the Candle Maker is arguably the most Caucasian character in the entire cast. Which is similar to Tracy Morgan’s performance in The Boxtrolls; he too voices a white guy.

Ice Cube’s great. He never mails in a performance, and seems like a real stand-up guy. Keep it up, Cube!

Another favorite, Zoe Saldana, enchants as the voice of Maria. This science-fiction titan plays major roles in the Star Trek and Guardians of the Galaxy franchises.

Maria is a lovable delight.

Which comes as no surprise when dealing with Ms. Saldana.

Finally, perhaps the most praise should go to Ron Perlman and Kate del Castillo, the voices of Xibalba and La Muerte.

They play the two most interesting characters, and are perfectly suited to the task. They’re the only ones that have to perform two separate voice roles, because their characters undergo a transformation.

Del Castillo navigates a particularly difficult role. At one point she must do an extended scream and gracefully pulls it off.

Which can’t be easy!

All in all, The Book of Life is a great addition to 2014’s animated canon.

We’ll see who tops the leaderboard, come November 7.

★★★ ★★★ ★★★

Briefer takes at IMDb, RT & Letterboxd.

I’m rooting for the underdog.

Not to win or place.

Not necessarily to show, either.

The Boxtrolls is not terrific.

It’s good, but pick the superior visual treat.

The Book of Life is the movie for in-theater oggling, not The Boxtrolls. There, I said it!

The Academy nominates 3 – 5 pictures for Best Animated Feature. In the annual race to qualify, wouldn’t we prefer to have 6 – 8 competing for a slot?

The quality consistence crown goes to Walt Disney Animation. Pure and simple.

Dreamworks follows admirably in second place, pumping out solid cartoons on the reg.

The remaining horses compete for the remaining places, but would it be terrible to keep Laika in the running?

Tough to DisLaika

Despite numerous positive recommendations, Corpse Bride (2005) and Coraline (2009) still elude this reviewer.

On the contrary, Paranorman received a nomination for Best Animated Feature in 2012, and deservedly so.

Therefore Laika, LLC., the American stop-motion animation studio, earns their jockey.

Ultimately, The Boxtrolls lack enrapture; for adults mainly.

I disdain marginalizing age groups in terms of film taste.

Frozen, Despicable Me 2 and Tangled are examples of fantastic ‘animated movies.’

Let’s not call them ‘kid’s movies.’

Because tonally, The Boxtrolls is childish.

Lord Portley-Rind’s cheese humor and Lady Frou Frou’s cross-dressing opera number are funny, but a bit mundane. Perhaps immature, no?

There’s some good plot development; a number of high points, in fact.

The self-aware jokes are chucklesome, the unusual characters are compelling.

Tracy Morgan is the voice of a bespectacled Caucasian, and I fantasize a world where he wasn’t informed ahead of time.

The mid-credits sequence is the best I have ever seen.

The existentialist thugs explain stop-motion through time-lapse camera footage of their animator.

It’s an exceptional artistic snippet.

Nab the rental if you’re keen on the new stop-motion feature. You won’t hate it.

The reality is: If you’re like most people, you won’t make time for two animated flicks in the near future.

Plus, you may wish to avoid a similar in-theater experience.

Lazy Parenting

It’s rated PG, but the 3D adult ticket costs $12.50.

Doofy Dad in the back makes no effort to silence the adolescent drumming legs and flapping gums.

Surely he notices the debonair twenty-something reposition mere minutes into the feature?

This parental treasure is prompting his four children whenever the Protagonist’s name (Eggs) shows up on-screen.

“Eggs!” he cries with delight.

“Eggs!” the quartet giggles.

I can clearly see several mothers working hard to keep their collective units at a low volume.

But Doof doesn’t seem to notice. Care. Learn. Or grow.

Because, hey, it’s just a kid’s movie, right?

★★★ ★★★

Briefer takes on IMDb & Letterboxd.

This doesn’t bode well for my reading career.

Gone Girl is spectacular. A strong contender for this year’s Best Picture. I couldn’t recommend it more highly.

Reading the book isn’t necessary.

The difference between the textual and visual is minimal. Reconsider the commitment lingering on your bookshelf.

This is one flick you won’t want to miss.

Genderless Target Audience

If you’ve got a better half, bring him or her along; both of you will thoroughly enjoy it.

It’s long (145 minutes total) but should hold your interest throughout.

The screenplay for G.G. is by Gillian Flynn, the same woman who penned the novel.

If Gone Girl offers any qualitative inclination toward G.F.’s alternative texts, let’s hope Sharp Objects and Dark Places are green-lit.

Director David Fincher doesn’t have a distinct public persona like Tarantino, or an iconic physical appearance like Scorcese’s.

That doesn’t detract from his mastery of feature film direction.

Iconic motion pictures like Fight Club, Se7en, The Social Network and The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo highlight his filmography.

If a story’s a stairway, Gone Girl is a multi-tiered double escalator.

It’s extremely well written, and the tension is like radio static, vibrating angrily amidst the coiling score.

Kinetic Pacing

The story constantly switching gears.

The humor is occasional in a realistic fashion. The self-awareness is pointedly subtle.

The characters are sympathetic and well rounded.

Is it even necessary to mention Neil Patrick Harris’s performance? Can’t we just assume he was fantastic from now on?

How about Ben Affleck, everyone’s favorite punching bag? Folks who doubted him should be flogged with a sofa cushion.

Upon recommending Gone Girl, a friend’s initial hesitation hinges on Affleck’s involvement.

First of all, that’s like saying you’re missing the N’SYNC concert because you don’t like J.T.’s pipes.

Benny was never ‘bad’ at acting, by any stretch of the imagination. Folks cite 2003’s Gigli and Daredevil as Fleck Daddy’s downfall.

I can’t speak to the former, but a final thought on the latter.

Daredevil

At fourteen years old, a group of friends and I thoroughly enjoyed in the theater. Plus, it gave us a ‘walk in the shoes’ of a blind person. Whether we appreciated it or not; we were educated on a lifestyle none of us understood.

I can still cite multiple scenes in detail, and I haven’t seen Daredevil since that initial viewing.

My basic point is: Don’t skip Gone Girl because of a strong opposition to Affleck’s acting ability.

Rosamund Pike delivers a knock-out performance. She’s a semi-unknown, but a glance at her filmography proves she deserves more notoriety. I’ve a feeling we’ll be seeing more of her in the future.

The remainder of the cast is just as good, but too much detail may trigger a spoiler, so I’ll leave it at that.

The warm weather left with the hummingbirds, but at least there are solid flicks repopulating theaters.

★★★★★ ★★★★★

Briefer takes at IMDb & Letterboxd.

Read Nightcrawler for more psychological thrills.

What do The Hunger Games, Ender’s Game, Divergent and The Maze Runner all have in common?

They’re based on dystopian YA novels.

They’re also introductions to a multi-part series.

And I never stop hollering about this, but they’re all rated PG-13.

Which is ultimately The Maze Runner’s least redeeming quality.

After all, it’s my favorite of the four previously mentioned.

The MZ’s mostly a quality flick.

Although the stakes are high, the ratings-board approved shellac is still clearly visible. An educated viewer can’t shake the awareness of censorship.

For example, during the more harried sequences (mostly involving a battle or pursuit via ‘grievers’) the filmmakers use the shadowy quick-edits to obscure the violence.

Luckily the CGI monsters are shown in full.

The ‘grievers’ are buffalo-sized mechanical beetles. As far as creatures go, they’re truly outstanding, original and horrific.

The only problem stems from a false hint at the surreal.

If you pay close attention, The Maze Runner is an astounding allegory for entering adulthood. This is in keeping with the summer trend of allegorical science fiction, with Snowpiercer (which I do recommend) and The Zero Theorem (which I don’t).

The plot develops lightning fast. This in turn can lead to confusion.

Or maybe I’m just too old for this sort of thriller.

So, yes, an elevator shaft is reminiscent of the birth canal.

Yes, a labyrinth is a classic metaphor for life.

Yes, the supporting characters resemble archetypes.

But the mind-bending portion of this thrill ride’s a red herring.

Because, no, the plot doesn’t take place inside the protagonist’s head. The viewer need not be concerned with how individual events fit into the self-contained metaphor.

Consider the sequence of obstacles Thomas (played by Dylan O’Brien) must overcome while fleeing the first griever. Think about the ways he adapts to the physical environment, the increasing risk and differing tasks required to move forward.

A few notes on the acting.

The girl, Kaya Scodelario, turns in a solid performance as Teresa. As does Blake Cooper playing Chuck, the protagonist’s younger buddy.

Thomas Brodie-Sangster (of Game of Thrones fame) plays Newt, punching the thespian clock with efficiency.

Will Poulter from We’re the Millers plays a bit of a one-note character but executes the role proficiently. I like this guy; he’s going places.

Patricia Clarkson plays Ava Paige, a mash-up of Glenn Close’s Nova Prime in Guardians of the Galaxy and Jodie Foster’s Secretary Delacourt in Elysium. Much like Teresa, we learn very little about Ava.

The mix of action, suspense and adequate special effects add up to a compelling thriller and a strong entry into the YA novel-turned-film catalogue.

See it in IMAX – this is one you won’t want to miss.

Things aren’t looking good for the Ender’s Game franchise.

However, according to Wikipedia, “Two weeks prior to [The Maze Runner’s] release 20th Century Fox decided to move ahead with the sequel and pre-production began in early September 2014 in New Mexico.”

Whether or not the box office earnings compensate for the $34 million budget, it seems like we’ll be seeing a follow-up.

If anyone’s looking, I’ll be in my tent, eagerly awaiting The Scorch Trials.

★★★★ ★★★★

Briefer takes at IMDb & Letterboxd.

Ever heard of Harry Potter? This is nothing like that.

David Thewlis, also known as Professor Lupin, is the only similarity between the two narratives.

The Z.T.’s bleak, folks. It’s dark, foreboding and existential. To follow a recent trend it’s also allegorical. Therefore, things can get confusing.

[Quick sidebar: Counting Snowpiercer this marks Tilda Swinton’s second supporting role in a sci-fi allegory in the past year. What an oddly specific niche.]

Should you see it?

It depends on your viewing habits. If you’re a movie review blogger, you can do a lot worse than The Zero Theorem.

But for the average viewer, I wouldn’t recommend. There are plenty of better options available for rental. Skim some of my earlier blog posts if you need suggestions.

The price bugs me.

If you’re still interested it’s available for HD rental thru Xfinity OnDemand, iTunes and Amazon for $9.99.

Ten bucks feels like too much.

Despite the straight to VOD release, The Zero Theorem is a lot more ambitious than the trailer lets on. The preview lead me to believe director Terry Gilliam mailed it in.

But alas!

This movie contains a lot of solid material.

Where else are you going to find a pink chaise lounge?

Portions of the environment are sources of great irritation and intrigue. But I suppose that’s the Terry Gilliam thing. Much of the physical setting is reminiscent of 12 Monkeys, another mind-bending dystopian movie involving time travel and paradoxes.

Z.T.‘s futuristic landscape is elaborate and compelling. The streets are covered with graffiti; digital advertisements and adhesive ‘tags’ plastered all over the alleyway.

I’d say The Zero Theorem‘s right on par with A Dozen Bonobos.

Although I haven’t seen Brazil, my favorite Gilliam is Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas. Watch it instead if it’s eluded you thus far.

For those dead-set on catching Z.T. here’s a couple notes on the casting.

Christoph Waltz stars as Qohen, and never ceases to impress.

After major supporting roles in Quentin Tarantino’s Inglorious Basterds and Django Unchained, he plays a completely different character here.

From the cadence of his voice to the movement of his gaze, it’s obvious he works hard to differentiate himself between roles.

What a dynamite thespian – good on ya, Christoph!

Matt Damon plays a small supporting role as ‘Management,’ and he’s excellent.

So add another bullet to the long list of ‘Good Reasons to Adore Mr. D.’

David Thewlis and Tilda Swinton are great. Lucas Hedges is good.

But far and away my favorite character is Bainsley.

Mélanie Thierry delivers an awesome performance, particularly befitting the Gilliam modus operandi. She’s got that twittery futuristic spunk, the neon haired quirketude. Which sounds grating, but it’s actually quite cute and delightful.

Part of this is thanks to the writing. In order to fill out the futuristic world in a realistic fashion, screenwriters often utilize the cyberpunk diction. It’s an alien form of English, and often seems bizarre at first.

It works well here, particularly because of the acting.

Every once in a while Bainsley will say something like, “You got a mouse in your pocket?” her charisma reminding the viewer to notice the occasional warmth.

Despite the bleak premise.

There is a lot of social commentary buried throughout. Some of it is a bit on-the-nose, like the satirical news station, ‘Dumbc’ or some such silliness.

But the more subtle stuff can really bolster a scene. When Qohen first meets Bainsley, it’s jarring to see the partygoers ‘fake smoking.’ At first it seems like quirk for the sake of quirk.

These moments are a lot more nuanced than they appear, however.

During a later scene, Qohen is sitting on a park bench. The backdrop is a swarm of ‘No [Insert Fun Activity] Allowed’ signs.

The visual flood of placards is both an eyesore and quite a strong metaphor.

Terry seems to envision a future in which we’re plagued by bureaucratic overregulation.

Considering the recent discussion regarding the heroic San Franciscans and their unending skirmish against synthetic shopping totes, I’m inclined to agree with Mr. Gill.i.Am.

Finally, I really enjoyed the artificial reality. The blending of digital pornography and prostitution offers a compelling and original spin on the sci-fi construct.

By the by, it’s ironic considering Qohen’s pursuing an answer to the ultimate question.

But he can’t install a little bit of conduit?

★★★★★

Briefer takes at IMDb & Letterboxd.

Want more ponderous nothingness? Check The Tree of Life.