If I could live anywhere in Philadelphia, I’d live not in a house or an apartment, but at one of Philly’s newest music venues, the Fillmore.

The 2,500-capacity, live-music club is big enough to hold larger music industry names yet intimate enough that you still feel a connection with the artists. A music junkie’s paradise, this venue is known for having phenomenal artists spotlighted on their stage. March 8, the day The Paper Kites and Passenger performed, was no exception.

The Paper Kites is made up of Sam Bentley, Christina Lacy, Dave Powys, Sam Rasmussen and Josh Bentley, all from Melbourne, Australia. Friends in high school, the band organically started with Lacy and Bentley writing together and they soon asked the other three members to join them for their first gig in 2010. From the first show, they couldn’t ignore their chemistry and the group has been together ever since.

Labeled an indie folk rock band, their sound is based on the intricate strumming of a guitar and three smooth voices that mesh together to create music that you cannot help but sway to. They mix classic rock vibes with a new indie perspective.

“Bloom,” their top-played song on Spotify, is what launched the band into the public eye and is the epitome of their indie feel. The Paper Kites most recent album, “Twelvefour,” features songs such as “Electric Indigo” that ventures into the band’s rock aspect, with an essence of Echosmith and the 1975.

Their 30-minute set allowed the audience to experience a complete sampling of the music they produce and truly displayed the group’s talent. Showcasing songs from both of their albums plus two EPs, the band gave the intimate audience everything they had.

When the stage lights dimmed and the roadies prepared for Michael Rosenberg (known by the moniker Passenger) to perform, the Paper Kites hit the merch table. At this time, only half of the crowd had arrived at the Fillmore so fans were able to easily interact and talk to each member of the band. Band members hugged and thanked many fans for coming out to see them play. I was impressed by the genuine appreciation the band had for their fans and the support they receive from them. They asked every fan’s name and never rushed taking pictures or signing autographs, spending genuine time with each fan who approached them.

As soon as Passenger walked across the stage I felt a giddy energy move through the audience. There was no doubt we were about to see an amazing performance, and we were not disappointed. Opening with “Somebody’s Love” from his newest album “Young as the Morning, Old as the Sea,” he captivated the audience with the bond between him and his guitar.

After opening the set he joked about how he only has one hit and not to get it confused with “Let it Go” from Disney’s “Frozen.” He continues to state that Disney is his worst nightmare and apologized if anyone came to hear Disney songs.

The rest of the night was filled with witty commentary from the artist that had the audience laughing along with him. For someone who is known for writing “sad songs” he had a surprisingly great sense of humor and upbeat spirit. How can you not laugh at someone swearing in an English accent?

For almost every song, Passenger gave his audience details and explanations about the song, adding a new perspective and deeper meaning to his beautiful set. His fourth song in the set was “27,” in which he sings, “Write songs that come from the heart/I don’t give a f— if they get into the chart, or not.” If I had to choose just one lyric to sum up Passenger, it would be this one.

He writes songs about his experiences, the good and the bad, and the people he comes across along the way. Talking in depth about his song “Traveling Alone,” he explained how it’s based on a true story about a man Passenger met in his travels. The man was traveling the world alone on a trip his recently deceased wife had planned for them to go on together.

“I couldn’t get this man out of my head and I figured it was just so depressing I had to write a Passenger song out of it,” Passenger said. The song then changes focus to a woman he later met who told him she had been in a 10-year relationship when her boyfriend left her for a younger woman. There was a unified laugh in the crowd from the female viewers when he sang the lyrics, “Men are all assholes.”

Towards the end of the set Passenger played his most popular song, “Let Her Go.” “I feel very grateful for this song. Many people write lovely songs but people don’t get to hear them — it is an amazing and humbling feeling that I can come back to Philly and play for over 1,000 people,” he commented.

Before he ended his set he spoke words that seemed very fitting for the world we are living in today: “We don’t have to put up with this bullshit. We don’t have to start blaming each other. Whatever you believe, sing it out with me.”

The audience hummed the tune of “Scare Away the Dark” until Passenger came on stage for his encore. Being his first tour with a full band playing behind him, it is obvious that Passenger is continuing to grow as a musician and writer. Ending the show with “Holes,” the audience was left with an upbeat song with lyrics that encourage listeners to carry on through the hard times they face.

The Paper Kites and Passenger will continue to tour the United States providing audiences with hope that in the age of autotune, there still are talented artists in the music industry who care more about music than fame.

Photo: Columbia

Since the release of their 2015 album “Ego Death,” the Internet has made a steady rise in popularity, even making their late night debut on “The Late Show with Stephen Colbert” in 2016.

The group had finally found their voice.

This year the group decided to continue to work together while all working on their individual sound, which lead to the creation of “Fin.” “Fin” is the debut album from the Internet’s lead singer known simply as Syd.

It’s not difficult to see how this album came to be. In a way, it’s a direct evolution of “Ego Death” told solely from Syd’s perspective. “Fin” keeps alive the groovy baselines and smooth synth tunes that made “Ego Death” so easy to listen to. Only now those qualities are subdued to allow the focus to be on Syd’s voice.

Nothing says this better than the lead song off the album, “Shake ’Em Off,” which opens with only Syd’s vocalization. It also features one of the least complex beats on the album to drive home what the focus is going to be.

By no means does Syd have a perfect singing voice and if anything her contributions to the Internet is to use her voice as an instrument to support all of the other five members. Unlike other bands, her voice doesn’t outshine anyone else, but in that way her unique soft sound becomes an advantage. It’s what made “Special Affair” by the Internet and “All About Me” off of “Fin” so special.

However, that’s not to say she doesn’t let loose a little on this project. After the release of “All About Me,” an Internet-esque lead single, she debuted “Body.” And “Body” exemplifies why she had to make this solo album. The song oozes with personality and the deep synthy bassline plays perfectly against her high voice.

Most of the tracks on “Fin” have that personal feeling, which is what is expected out of a solo album. “Insecurities,” tells the story of wanting to leave a lover, but letting your own doubt hold you back. Until about two-thirds of the way through the song breaks down and as the music changes so do the feelings of our narrator. It’s a powerful addition to the album.

Syd also has a good ear for musical composition and I think “Fin” deserves recognition for not overreaching. At only 37 minutes, not all of the 12 tracks are fully fleshed out, but instead are used as musical transitions. “No Complaints” begins by roaring in then intentionally unravelling as a lead in for “Nothin to Somethin.”

A song that I believe will be the one to be remembered is “Over” featuring 6LACK (pronounced “black”). 6lack himself dropped his first album in 2016 titled “FREE 6LACK.” The song features what is probably the closest thing to a pop beat the album offers and the chorus begs to be sung along with. There is also no denying 6LACK’s verse delivers a Frank Ocean-esque spoken section: a sound that Syd no doubt also heard and used intentionally, as Syd and Ocean are good friends.

While I doubt anything on this album will explode in terms of popularity, it doesn’t really have to. The album is full of smooth and funky beats that beg to be jammed to. Looking forward, I think there will be a lot for fans of the Internet to get excited about, and I don’t think it’s without merit so expect a second Syd project at some point in the future

Director M. Night Shyamalan has hit his stride since returning to the suspenseful horror he’s been known for since his debut.

Following his fairly well received tale of the horror of grandparents with “The Visit,” writer-director Shyamalan shines with “Split,” the story of a man dealing with 23 unique personalities living inside his mind.

“Split” opens at Claire Benoit’s (Haley Lu Richardson) birthday, which has been attended by many of her classmates including Marcia (Jessica Sula) and Casey Cooke (Anya Taylor-Joy). Since Casey was unable to reach her uncle, the three girls leave to be driven home by Claire’s father. Before entering the car, her father is knocked unconscious and Kevin (James McAvoy) enters the vehicle, knocking out the three girls.

The girls awake in a strange room and Dennis, one of Kevin’s personalities, explains they are there for a very special purpose. Over the course of the following days and through a series of flashbacks it becomes clear that Casey is more equipped to handle this situation, but her lack of friendship with the other two girls only gets them into trouble. As days pass the girls are introduced to other personalities such as Patricia, a caring female persona and Hedwig, a young boy who has the ability to take control of Kevin any time he wishes.

During this time we also see the Barry personality meet with his psychologist, Dr. Karen Fletcher (Betty Buckley), who believes that Barry is no longer the leading personality. She instead believes Dennis has taken control. She explains that Dennis believes in a 24th personality called the beast who needs to feed on innocent lives. It now becomes clear that if a 24th personality exists  the girls are in grave danger and if not, will Dennis ever let them go?

It is impossible to talk about this movie and not talk about how outstanding McAvoy is as all of Kevin’s personalities. McAvoy has the daunting task of bringing these characters to life and more impressive still is that they don’t feel like variations of the same person, but rather individuals inhabiting the same body. While the personalities of Patricia and Dennis are cold and calculated, they never feel cheesy or overdone. McAvoy brings this incredible sense of gullibility to Hedwig that is quite intentional and at any moment Hedwig could look away and be the stronger and more ruthless Dennis.

As mentioned before, M. Night Shyamalan has a checkered past when it comes to writing and directing hits, creating standouts like “The Sixth Sense” and “Unbreakable,” but also flops like “The Last Airbender” and “After Earth.” Luckily for Shyamalan, “Split” feels as though he has definitively refound his voice. “Split” delivers most of its suspense in direction, and fans of Shyamalan that shouldn’t come as a surprise. The way this movie makes you feel is possibly its best trait. A constant sense of unknowing looms over the audience. It’s powerful, and it makes you want to keep watching.

Unfortunately for this movie, the writing doesn’t hold up as well, and I believe the issue is that Shyamalan likes to leave clues so once the credits roll you can rewatch and see what was right in front of you. Obviously this put him on the map with “The Sixth Sense,” and I think he is obsessed with recapturing that. While I believe it hurt “The Visit” more, I still felt it present in “Split.”

If you have ever seen “The Sixth Sense” or “Unbreakable” and enjoyed them, I highly recommend seeing “Split.” It’s the perfect type of thriller to see on a Friday night and better yet it takes place mostly around Drexel’s campus. While it may not have audiences talking about Bruce Willis for weeks after, it is a well directed, impeccably  acted thriller just right for the post-holiday season.

Photo courtesy: Regency Enterprises

Video games, aside from a few exceptions, do not usually translate well onto the big screen.

Unfortunately for Michael Fassbender and Marion Cotillard, this held true for their adaptation of “Assassin’s Creed.” Based on Ubisoft’s video game franchise of the same name, “Assassin’s Creed” had potential with an all star cast but ultimately left much to be desired.

“Assassin’s Creed” is the story of two men, Aguilar de Nerha and Callum Lynch, both portrayed by Fassbender. The movie opens on Aguilar being accepted into the Assassin’s Creed Brotherhood as they fight to protect the prince of Granada from the Knights Templar.

The year is now 1986 where a young Cal discovers his mother has been murdered by his father and he is forced to flee. Thirty years later Cal is seen being sentenced to death for murdering a man who tried to mug him. After going under from the injection Cal wakes up in a strange place and is told he has been brought to the Abstergo Foundation in Madrid, Spain because he is the last living relative of Aguilar, the last man known to posses the Apple of Eden, and they need Cal to discover where Aguilar hid it.

The person feeding him this information is Dr. Sophia Rikkin (Marion Cotillard) who also informs him that the apple contains the genetic code for free will and could end violence in the human race. With help from Abstergo’s machine known only as the Animus Project, Cal is able to relive the memories of Aguilar as Aguilar defends the Apple of Eden from the knights.

After an initial resistance, Cal sees the positives in ending human violence. However, the more he uses the Animus, the more he understands why the assassins did what they did and believes that Abstergo may not be telling him the entire truth.

This movie was at its best during Aguilar’s sequences. The action was exciting, fast paced and served as the main source of tension building in the film. The environments created felt authentic and the scenes were well shot.

The thrill of watching a group of assassins creep through a crowd will keep you on the edge of your seat. Free running was also heavily focused on in the trailers as it is a staple of the original video game franchise, and the chase sequence lived up to the rest of Aguilar’s moments.

Unfortunately every beautiful scene of action across the Spanish countryside was surrounded and drowned out by dull and underdeveloped plot development. The present day story did not seem to carry any weight to it. As futuristic as it may have looked on paper cement walls of the movie set, the white uniforms just stood as a visual representation for the lackluster story. Whether the decision was made by director Justin Kurzel or was based purely on budget, shying away from the historical scenes hurt this film significantly.

“Assassin’s Creed” had another much more complicated problem, which was a complete lack of identity. When it was an action movie it excelled, but as previously mentioned any scene in Abstergo played as a lifeless drama. What’s worse about this is that the plot focuses on a device that could control the entire population, but at no point does the movie convey any sense of danger or importance.

The movie struggled most when it focused on its current day story and its current day protagonist Cal. Presumably this was done to avoid the issue of a meaningless present day story, which many of the games have been scolded for. However, the character created in Cal is dull and unlikable, his motives are muddled and at no point does he become relatable to the audience. Focusing so heavily on Cal created dry spells throughout the movie — maybe it would have been best if he stayed dead.

“Assassin’s Creed” had all of the pieces to create an enjoyable action experience but it tried to take itself too seriously and ended up missing the mark. Maybe Justin Kurzel feared making the movie too fantastical would make it feel campy, but unfortunately his inability to take a leap of faith left him with a dull end result.

If you are bored I would recommend seeing something else with your time, and maybe it’ll be worth the watch as an at home rental.

Released in 2016, “The Jungle Book” is a reimagining of Disney’s classic 1967 film, which itself was based off of the book by the same name, written by Rudyard Kipling. It’s the latest Disney film to get the live action remake from their cartoon origins and, arguably, their most well done adaptation.

“The Jungle Book” is the tale of a young boy named Mowgli (Neel Sethi) who was found alone in the jungle by a kindhearted and stoic black panther named Bagheera (Ben Kingsley). Bagheera takes baby Mowgli to be raised by a pack of wolves where he learns what it means to be part of the pack. However, years later there is a dry spell that causes the animals of the jungle to call a peace treaty when meeting at the watering hole. It is here that Mowgli and his wolf pack encounter Ibris Elba’s Shere Khan, an aggressive tiger who believes himself to be the law in the jungle. Khan tells the wolves that once the rains come and the peace treaty is over that they are to hand over the human or face serious consequences. Mowgli and Bagheera decide it would be best for them to leave to go back to the “Man Village” once the rains arrive, but they do not yet know the obstacles that stand in their way.

This version of “The Jungle Book” created a larger narrative from the original story that still made sense in the world of the original character. In the 1967 version of the film, there is not a lot of reasoning behind the characters actions and most of the scenes are only to get a song in, which is fine for a 78 minute animated film in the ’60s. However, the 2016 film had a well thought out plot and characterization that was genuinely enjoyable to watch.

What probably stood out the most in this movie was Shere Khan’s backstory; it intertwined his life with that of young Mowgli. Unlike his animated counterpart, this Khan had distinctive burn marks across his face given to him by a man. This is the reason why he wants Mowgli out of the jungle before becoming a man.

Idris Elba’s Khan is also genuinely terrifying. From the moment he appears in a scene, you feel yourself being captivated by his character, almost as though he can see through the screen at you. Director Jon Favreau, while not having the best track record with villains (“Iron Man 2”), made sure that this movie felt real and dangerous. I believe this movie was aimed at an audience who loved the original as children and is now grown up enough to deal with some adult scenes, though the movie does continue to be light hearted at times.

There were multiple scenes clearly meant to evoke the imagery from the original. Favreau was able to cam the scene in such a way as to make the scene appear almost in two dimensions. Of course they could not have “The Jungle Book” without a song or two, including the beloved bare necessities performed by a perfectly cast Bill Murray as Baloo.

In particular, I thought the inclusion of Kaa’s (Scarlett Johansson) hypnosis was quiet well done, as it not only had nods to the original character, but added important backstory into the movie. While it wasn’t grounded, it didn’t feel out of place or over the top in this fantastical world of talking animals.

The only real downside to this film was that the CGI was not to the level that would be expected of a 170 million dollar, completely CG movie. Comparatively, it did not stand up to something like “Rise of the Planet of the Apes,” which released five years ago and only cost about half as much. One compliment to the CGI team, however, was their outstanding ability to put Christopher Walken’s face on a King Kong sized King Louie (and haunt my dreams).

“The Jungle Book” is able to capture the sense of joy and imagination we all felt watching the original, while simultaneously adding a substantial amount of detail to the story. While this movie is a bit more mature, it is still an excellent choice for anyone who loved the 1967 version, or who just wants to see a good movie on a Friday night.

The post Disney brings magic of ‘Jungle Book’ to life with reboot appeared first on The Triangle.

Photo courtesy Universal Pictures

Writer and director Guillermo del Toro returns to dark fantasy after his break from the genre to do film 2013’s Kaiju action movie, “Pacific Rim.” His latest work, “Crimson Peak” is a self-proclaimed “gothic romance” story and stars Mia Wasikowska, Tom Hiddleston as a less evil Loki and Jessica Chastain, who plays a perfect psychopath.
“Crimson Peak” opens with the death of Edith Cushing’s (Wasikowska) mother. That night, Edith is visited by a ghastly black shadow, which appears to be the figure of her mother, warning her to “beware of Crimson Peak.”
It is the early 19th century and we see Edith, now a young woman, working on her novel. She struggles to find a publisher because no one is willing to buy a ghost novel written by a woman, especially without a love story. As she types in her father’s office, a mysterious British gentleman, who is in town looking for a loan from her father, reads a page and explains he too believes in ghosts. However, this flattery does not get Thomas Sharpe (played by the captivating Tom Hiddleston) far, as Edith’s father (Jim Beaver) soon denies him a loan for his mining invention.
Edith and Thomas begin to spend more time together. Her father soon becomes suspicious and employees the help of Holly (Burn Gorman) to discover what this Sir Sharpe and his sister, Lucille (Chastain), are hiding. Before Thomas can ask for Edith’s hand in marriage, her father discovers the family secret and pays them to leave at once. The next morning Mr. Cushing is murdered by an unknown assailant and Thomas asks Edith to marry him, as there is no longer anyone to stop him.
Months pass and Edith and the Sharpe family have moved back to their estate in England. She soon discovers there is more to the Sharpe family than meets the eye, as the spirits that are damned to walk the halls of Allerdale Hall begin to make their presences known.
Edith says it best while explaining to her publicist, “This is not a ghost story. It is a story with ghosts.” While “Crimson Peak” will send shivers down your spine, it is not meant to jump off the screen at you. It is meant to be suspenseful, slowly building the stakes until someone reaches their tipping point.
I believe the misunderstanding between what this movie is and how it has been advertised has caused some let down in theaters, especially with an October release date. While the Halloween season is usually used to capitalize on people who feel the need to see something “spooky,” regardless if it’s any good, it was probably not the best time for “Crimson Peak” to be released. If anything, it probably backfired.
What is good about the film, on the other hand, was the “power couple” of Hiddleston and Chastain. From his role in “Thor” and “The Avengers” as the lovable mischief bringer Loki, everyone knows Hiddleston can be enjoyable to watch, even while playing the antagonist. However, what came as a pleasant surprise was Chastain’s ability to play off the mystery created by Hiddleston. Chastain was in the back of every scene, seemingly for no reason at all: until the third act, where she takes over and single handedly makes the movie worth watching.
It is easy to simply scare an audience with things popping out left and right, but it is much harder to make everyone feel uncomfortable and simultaneously make everyone want to root for you.
It is difficult to think of a house that fits a movie more perfectly than Allerdale Hall fits “Crimson Peak.” As Edith spends her first night in this crumbling masterpiece of a building, a breeze blows through and she grabs onto Sharpe. The fireplace rages up as the house seems to take a deep breath in, making it very evident that Allerdale Hall is far more than just a set — it is a character in itself.
While I commend this movie for its unique tone and character development, del Toro and Mathew Robbins didn’t get everything right. At times, especially in the beginning, the pacing was oddly slow, and it felt as though the story was hardly advancing. A suspenseful thriller should keep you on the edge of your seat, fearing for the characters with unanswered questions. However, “Crimson Peak” makes you ask the wrong questions — “Where is this story line leading?” and “Who am I supposed to be afraid of?” — for the better part of the first half of the movie.
Chastain’s performance and the setting itself were some of this movie’s strongest assets and for most of the movie you are completely left in the dark as to why they are important.
Although the movie did take a while to get moving, once it did it was off to the races. Had the final act not been so satisfying, I could say this movie was, for the most part, a letdown. I would recommend this to anyone who enjoys Guillermo del Toro, Jessica Chastain or gothic romance.

The post Jessica Chastain shines in otherwise dull ‘Crimson Peak’ appeared first on The Triangle.

“Trainwreck” is a pleasant surprise for a movie with a name that is just too easy pick on.

Director Judd Apatow, writer, director and producer of “The 40 Year-Old Virgin,” “Knocked Up” and “This is 40,” as well as the producer of the famed “Bridesmaids” always seems to place himself with successful comedy projects. Amy Schumer’s “Trainwreck” is no exception. Written entirely by the female comic herself, it is an enjoyable comedy that dances the line between cheesy rom-com and a sports fan’s delight.

The film opens to show Amy and her sister, Kim, as children learning an important life lesson from her recently divorced father: “Monogamy isn’t realistic.” This sets the stage for the rest of the movie as we see Amy pass from one late night encounter to the next, only to regularly revisit her one steady man, Steven (John Cena), though things soon turn for the worst between them.

We then are moved to the men’s magazine she writes for, which prints articles like “How to masturbate at work and not get caught.” This scene is directly followed by a scene of Amy and her co-worker Nikki (Vanessa Bayer) in the bathroom talking about other immature topics. As is now brutally evident, this movie is filled to the brim with bathroom humor which may be a turnoff for most viewers.

Amy is then assigned to follow and interview the famous New York sports doctor, Aaron (Bill Hader). Unfortunately, Amy is completely oblivious when it comes to sports, which is why her editor is so excited to see her take on the doctor. Amy and Aaron are introduced and from there on slowly begin to move closer to each other, a very scary concept for Amy.

This movie has one true weakness in that the first 40 minutes heavily laden with Schumer’s self-deprecating, somewhat childish sense of humor. Anyone debating whether or not to see this movie must ask themselves one simple question, “Can I sit through an hour of her stand up?” If you can tolerate or even enjoy Schumer for an hour then the introduction portion of the film may not bother you at all.

As the top-notch comedy cast is fully introduced alongside Schumer, her script comes to life. She plays off the audience’s perception toward characters and the typical formula for romantic comedies. Her first love interest, played by John Cena, a professional wrestler and all-around tough guy, quickly finds out that they weren’t meant to be. They end up fighting over her juice box of wine at the movies and, after storming out, he leaves her because this extremely muscular man only wants to share his feelings and settle down. Who can’t appreciate the comedy in a teary-eyed overly emotional wrestler?

Every great romantic comedy is almost required to ultimately have some form of falling in love montage, complete with romantic cliches like a picnic in the park or the man picking up the woman as they kiss. However, Schumer’s idea of this concept is to garishly talk over their montage, mostly insulting Aaron and the things they decide to do together. Her writing keeps the movie fresh and keeps the audience on their toes.

“Trainwreck” separates itself from other movies of this genre with some nods to sports fans, who predominately aren’t the romantic comedy audience. These range from Marv Albert commentating on an intervention between disgruntled characters to Lebron James and Amar’e Stoudemire filling major roles in the story. “Trainwreck” is far from your average romantic chick-flick.

No review of “Trainwreck” would be considered complete without talking about Lebron James co-starring role as “Penny Pincher” Lebron, a money conscious version of himself that is absolutely perfect. At times it does feel as though he is reading cue cards that are just off screen, but I guess that is fitting considering the large presence of the SNL cast on set for this movie. Not only is James written to be tight with his money, he also constantly talks about Cleveland. This is exactly how every sports fan secretly hopes he is since his move back to Ohio. Maybe he does it to reassure himself on the move, maybe he is really just crazy for Cleveland, but his spouting continuous random facts about Cleveland is comedy gold. He even takes the time to state his tag line for Cleveland which is, “Cleveland, fun for the whole family.”

All in all, the movie has a light feel and even when the plot takes a turn for the serious; it is never too far from some kind of joke that’s used to lighten the mood again. The bottom line is that if you don’t mind Amy Schumer or you just want to see Lebron James get one step closer to “Space Jam 2,” this movie is worth the watch.

The post LeBron steals spotlight in Schumer’s crude ‘Trainwreck’ appeared first on The Triangle.

Photo courtesy Twentieth Century Fox

Gil Kenan’s “Poltergeist” is the lackluster remake of the 1982 classic that no one asked for.

Kenan, director of 2006’s “Monster House” and 2008’s “City of Ember,” takes the original film and finds a way to shoot it scene for scene while leaving out the intended story. With the exception of a few moments, “Poltergeist” fails to build any real tension or connection to the characters, and sadly, that is what makes a horror movie worth watching.

The movie opens with a close up of an iPad rather than a TV, as if to show that time has passed since the first film. The Bowen family is moving into a new house today, and as is usual, the children aren’t exactly happy with the decision. As they arrive, a sales woman greets the family. She explains that this house has been fitted with the latest technology, which doesn’t really receive mention beyond that point.

Through some dry expositional scenes, it is revealed that they are moving to this neighborhood because the husband Eric Bowen (Sam Rockwell) has been laid off. Over the next few days they start to make strange discoveries around the house: a bedroom closet that won’t open, a hidden room full of clowns and a mischievous squirrel that gives them quite a scare. They also find what is clearly a human vertebra in their garden and assume it must be from an animal, so they rebury it. However, it is only their youngest daughter Madison (Kennedi Clements) who begins to interact with the ghosts in a friendly way. The ghosts roll things across the floor to her and speak to her through the static on the television.

One night the Bowen parents go out to a dinner party and leave Kendra (Saxon Sharbino) home with the two youngest Griffin (Kyle Catlett) and Madison. Over the parents poorly written dinner conversation, it is revealed that the Bowen’s house is located on top of an old burial ground, and the bodies and the hedge stones have been moved to a “nicer neighborhood.” Meanwhile, the house starts attacking the children one by one and eventually ends up taking one of them to “the other side.” The family must now band together with the help of some experts to discover what has happened to their daughter and how to get her back.

The movie made sure to hit you over the head with its dialogue, leaving nothing up to the imagination. All the facets of the paranormal activity were laid out bluntly, ensuring there would be no confusion. This was presumably due to the movie’s brief 93-minute run time. This short length and lack of character development made the movie feel overly condensed, which results in it sorely missing its mark.

This latest “Poltergeist” film included many of the same scenes as its predecessor but forgot that a story is also supposed to include a lesson along the way. The message of the original was a commentary on our growing dependence on electronics. While the writers set up many events: a broken phone, a high tech house and a brand new alarm system, they never seemed to be able to capitalize on any of them. This left you with a feeling that you had maybe missed something, when sadly you did not.

The fact that this movie was so atrocious even though it was almost a carbon copy of the original with the only difference being the writing proves one thing. Spielberg’s original script is what made the first movie so memorable.

The sole shining light at the end of this haunted house hallway was the way it was shot. The constant sweeping camera angles gave a sense that you were there in the moment. The camera shots were long, and they slid back and forth over the shoulders of the cast. At times even cocking as the actors’ heads did. This was probably the only thing that added any element of suspense to this entire movie.

This film relies heavily on whoever is playing the family’s daughter to deliver a performance that makes the audience feel as though she can really communicate with the poltergeists. Clements’ Madison did an outstanding job. Her lines were clearly delivered, and her talks with the “people inside the television” felt like she was actually bouncing lines off other actors. Unlike the first movie, she was really the only one to really interact with the ghost before they turned on the family, so her role was crucial when setting up the plot.

To be frank, the movie just wasn’t good. It was like watching “Beauty and The Beast” and for some reason no one mentions the fact that the beast is a 10-foot tall furry monster other than when they use his name. It is truly a shame too because the tale of “Poltergeist” is a perfect allegory for today’s overly connected world. With the exception of a handful of well-shot scenes and a solid performance from Clements the movie fell apart, and its problems all began with a dismal script.

The post Remake of ‘Poltergeist’ proves totally unnecessary appeared first on The Triangle.

As Marvel’s newest venture into televised adaptions, “Daredevil” is the dark and gritty answer to its more adult audience’s prayers. The Netflix series focuses on Matt Murdock, the son of a boxer who was blinded at the age of nine in an accident that elevated his other senses to superhuman levels. Charlie Cox brings Murdock to life on his first outings as a masked superhero Daredevil.

The story follows shortly after the events of Marvel’s “The Avengers,” centering in on the rubble of Hell’s Kitchen in New York and the many new faces trying to help rebuild it. Newly graduated lawyers Murdock and his best friend and partner Foggy Nelson (Elden Henson) have just opened their own firm; it’s the first step in Murdock’s plan to help the people of Hell’s Kitchen through the legal system. As for those living above the law, he plans to take them down at night as the Daredevil.

As the show explores the beginnings of Matt Murdock’s journey, the same is done of his enemy, Wilson Fisk (Vincent D’Onofrio), the notorious crime boss otherwise known as “Kingpin.” The simultaneous unraveling of Fisk’s backstory as well as Murdock’s plays out in very similar formats: The characters make certain decisions in present day, which is often followed by a flashback to help elaborate on the reasons defining these decisions and the characters. While this presentation style often feels sluggish, the efficient writing limits moments that could bog down the story.

There wasn’t much talk about the casting of Vincent D’Onofrio. However, it is difficult to say the show would be successful without him after experiencing the entire season of excellent writing that flourished with his immense talent. Late in the season, Fisk delivers what may be the most memorable lines of the show. His speech made him appear omniscient to an extent, while poetically using a religious allegory — a common theme for the show — to draw connections between himself and the “Devil of Hell’s Kitchen.” His gravitas draws you in; every time he spoke there seemed to be an odd mix between the confused child he is on the inside and the absolute mad man he truly is.

On the other hand, Foggy Nelson is a character that helps keep the series light among the more serious situations. One staple of the Marvel cinematic universe has always been that no matter how dark and gritty the action becomes, there is always a way to squeeze in a joke or two. It’s impossible not to fall in love with the character, as Nelson’s witty banter brought a refreshing touch from the moment he appeared on screen.

As a Netflix series, the show is allowed many opportunities that were not otherwise constricted by episode length and normal TV regulations. With the exception of one episode late in the season, the plot never felt as though it dragged the viewers along; every scene felt as important as the last.

The lack of pressure to condense moments to just the bare necessities allowed the show a great deal of depth many others seem to lack. The action scenes are long and fleshed out, giving them a sense of importance rather than just a plot break to cut up boring dialogue. Longer episodes also meant that devoting an episode to some of the sideline characters wasn’t cutting them short.

The filmography in this show can be a statement on its own at times. In the second episode, Murdock goes to take down a Russian mob hideout. Even though he’s outnumbered 15 to one, he is fighting to save the life of a boy who was stolen from his father as a payment for a debt. The scene was shot as one continuous take. With an excellent performance from Cox, it not only shows off the Daredevil’s abilities, but also his weaknesses, as he pauses every chance he can to try to catch his breath. The scene is so brilliant in that it boasts of how well shot the show can be while explaining Murdock’s convictions without ever saying a word.

One advantage “Daredevil” has on some other shows is how you find yourself fearing for its characters. There is a constant sense of danger due to Murdock’s lack of experience and Fisk’s ferocity. Murdock isn’t made of steel or a god from another realm; he is just a man. This is something that separates shows like “Game of Thrones” and “The Walking Dead” from others on TV — at any moment a character you love can be stripped away from you. That added sense of danger keeps you watching episode after episode, well that and Netflix’s auto-play feature.

“Daredevil” has done its job with well-shot action, a phenomenal plot and one of Marvel’s best villains to date. The show can be tacked up as another success in the fashion Marvel always seems to achieve: They’ve brought in new viewers and excited existing fans who watch to see the extended universe. On Netflix, the MCU will continue to expand into three other hero-based shows with a team-up show soon to combine them as the titular group, “The Defenders.”

The post Netflix’s ‘Daredevil’ is latest addition to Marvel universe appeared first on The Triangle.

Photo Courtesy Columbia Pictures

“Chappie,” is the true successor to Neill Blomkamp’s directorial debut, “District 9.” Everything from the live action news shots to the realism of the characters made it remind us what we loved about “District 9.” It allowed the viewer to relive that experience of entering Blomkamp’s dark and twisted, yet somehow familiar world.

“Chappie” is the story of three thieves living in Johannesburg, South Africa. The city has just seen the release of the world’s first robotic police force, created by young engineer Deon Wilson (Dev Patel). Wilson works under Michelle Bradley (Sigourney Weaver). When the three outlaws fail to pay up to the head crime boss, as their plan is foiled by this newly licensed police force, their best hope is a grand heist to “turn off the police.” After intercepting Deon, they are fooled into believing their only hope is to accept the help of his new program, which will create an artificial intelligence. For obvious reasons, these thugs’ ideals do not match with those of Deon, and while raising the young robot to understand this new world, many problems arise.

However, their main adversary is soon revealed to be Deon’s co-worker, Vincent Moore (Hugh Jackman), who is upset because his human controlled-robot destroyers, Moose, were overlooked for Deon’s superior design. Vincent decides the only way to get back at Deon is to put the city in a place where it needs his help.

The three criminals in charge of raising Chappie are Ninja, Yo-Landi and Amerika (Jose Pablo Cantillo). Ninja and Yo-Landi play themselves set years after the fall of their rap group, Die Antwoord (“The Answer”). Their acting abilities weren’t the strongest, but they didn’t really have to be; they had to play themselves — unlikable, rude, eccentric imbeciles. It’s a credit to the way it was shot and assembled that by the end I could find myself rallying for these characters that I really had no right to want to watch. Their innocence almost gave them pardon for tricking this young robot into a life of crime.

The film was truly amazing as for over two hours, the audience was captivated by a robot. Chappie shares more features with WALL-E than Sonny from “I, Robot,” and that is definitely a good thing. WALL-E is curious and lovable; he expresses himself in such a unique way it is hard to look away from him, whereas Sonny is more of an android made to look like a human, taking that extra level of nonhuman expression away from the character. Chappie is given the near-impossible task of conveying human emotions in a very inhuman way. He expresses himself with his two antennae, like a dog’s ears, and a bar where his mouth and eye brows would be. The decisions made on how to make Chappie feel alive are what make this movie so memorable. You can feel yourself wanting to protect Chappie like you want to protect a child.

At one point in the movie, I remember taking in a swift breath in while watching someone attempt to take off Chappie’s arm. Mind you, this robot felt nothing, but it was able to make the audience feel something.

Dev Patel is a very talented actor, as best noted by his work in the 2008 motion picture “Slumdog Millionaire.” Patel felt so incredibly invested in this robot that it helps the audience suspend disbelief and gives them a real reason to rally for Chappie. So, maybe choosing to focus a movie around a rap group with no acting experience rather than Patel was a bit of a misfire on behalf of Blomkamp.

Finally, Blomkamp’s consistent ability to immerse an audience and make them believe the spectacular is reality is once again on display as he continues to pump out a gritty naturalistic style of film. What makes “District 9” so memorable is that it feels like something that actually happened. As described by Blomkamp in an interview on IGN’s U.K. Podcast, to make people believe the unbelievable, you have to give them something familiar and then blur that line. This explains his choice in casting Die Antwoord a few years after their music career — because it isn’t acting; it’s believable that these two would become criminals and wear their own merchandise because it’s all they have left.

Beyond that Hugh Jackman’s character Vincent even has an Australian background and a thick accent. But to blur the audience’s perception Blomkamp gave Jackman a horrid mullet and made his character borderline psychotic.

Neill Blomkamp, regardless of what most may say, is an artist. With the exception of Wes Anderson, no one does world-building quiet like he does. His filmography brings realism to a film without ever feeling forcefully stylized and drawing away from the story.

“Chappie” has opened to an expected $13 million; however, this movie will suffer from the recent news that Blomkamp will be helming the next film in the “Alien” franchise. Most attention and momentum, for better or worse, has been shifted to Blomkamp’s next project. It doesn’t appear as though “Chappie,” a movie that felt more like the “Robocop” sequel we deserved than the actual “Robocop,” will ever receive quite the recognition it deserves.

The post Blomkamp’s ‘Chappie’ fails to deliver on neat concept appeared first on The Triangle.