Author Archives: filmtoppings

08.27.16
by

War Dogs

ratings4

War Dogs is based on the true story of two young men, David Packouz and Efraim Diveroli, who won a $300 million contract from the Pentagon to arm America’s allies in Afghanistan.

War Dogs is surprisingly one of the smartest and most entertaining movies of the year. With two excellent leading actors and superb writing, this movie is very hard not to enjoy. Jonah Hill and Miles Teller both kill it as two twenty-something-year-old arms dealers who became millionaires by forging their way to million-dollar deals and eventually, driving Porsche’s too. Hill is unforgettable, bringing so much fun and wit to his role, and Teller is filled with soul as Hill’s partner-in-crime, as well as the film’s narrator.

This movie is being sold as a comedy, and as much gut-busting humor that’s included in the film, I would look at it in a more broad way as a hybrid of The Big Short, The Wolf of Wall Street and Catch Me If You Can. I was especially reminded of Spielberg’s Catch Me If You Can because of the idea of young men making bad decisions, as well as an awful lot of money, with Hill and Teller’s roles resembling DiCaprio’s portrayal of con man Frank Abagnale, Jr. Although the characters in this film weren’t always in illegal business, but in both films the characters decide to cheat their way to the American dream. Even though this movie is from the director of the Hangover trilogy, don’t expect goofy and nonsensical humor, because War Dogs is a LOT more than that.

If you like watching movies about true stories that you wouldn’t believe actually happened at first, then this is the movie for you. The plot is heavily fictionalized but the overall story is true, and it was a story that was not just interesting to watch, but entertaining as hell to sit through. The movie is less than two hours long, but not a moment felt rushed. The script never provides a dull moment, and there are some scenes and lines that will be difficult for you to forget. Don’t expect much action from this film either, because that’s not what War Dogs is about. War Dogs is a dangerously true story, that’s more of a dramatic than a comedic or thrilling movie, and that may be hard to believe but also very hard to forget. Please give this one a watch in theaters if you want a remarkably awesome time at the movies.

War Dogs 2016 poster.jpg

08.16.16
by

Pete’s Dragon (2016)

ratings3

A reimagining of Disney’s cherished family film, Pete’s Dragon is the adventure of an orphaned boy named Pete and his best friend Elliott, who just so happens to be a dragon.

Disney is continuing their surprising streak of great live-action remakes with Pete’s Dragon, which is based on the 1977 live-action classic, instead this time, the dragon is given a visual update with CGI instead of being hand-drawn. And once again, Disney succeeds at bringing a charming, family-friendly world of CGI to life. Although there isn’t as much visual weight and realism to the dragon as there was to the incredibly photo-realistic environment and characters in this year’s Jungle Book, there’s enough charm and fun to make it another solid and spirited Disney family flick. The is a splendid cast that helps carry the film that includes Bryce Dallas Howard, Wes Bentley, Karl Urban, and Robert Redford. Oakes Fegley, the child actor who plays Pete, does a remarkable job acting in front of his costars and sometimes in front of nothing (in the scenes in which his character must interact with Elliot). The majority of the film, however, didn’t require as much interaction with computer-generated surroundings as the leading child actors from The Jungle Book and The BFG, hence making Fegley’s performance less impressive and unique as the other actors and overall, I felt much more connected to the leads from the other two films. The standout of the cast is definitely Howard, who brings lots of life and energy to her character and delivers a notable performance from the film.

This movie may be a great time for families and especially younger kids, but that’s really the only target audience for the film. If you watch this film looking for a great story, you might not be satisfied. The story has lots of soul, but the film’s second half starts to slow down a little bit before entering familiar territory and following a formula used by too many family films.The story of a kid trying to protect an extraordinary being while the adults’ greed and fear prevents them from understanding the situation as well as the protagonist has already been used plenty of times. E.T. and How to Train Your Dragon are just a few examples of films that follow the exact same formula during most of their runtime. When the movie tried to get exciting during the final act, it was hard for me to care because of how cliched it mostly was. However, the film concludes with a great message about family and preserving your surroundings.

Although it does get too familiar at times, I can bet you Pete’s Dragon will be a great time if you go see it with your family, with lots of soul and great underlying messages, as well as outstanding cast members and writing. I wouldn’t recommend this if you’re looking for the best movie out there, but if you want to see a fun and touching family film, then Pete’s Dragon is unlikely to disappoint you.

Petes dragon 2016 film poster.jpg

08.12.16
by

Jason Bourne

ratings4

Jason Bourne (Matt Damon), the CIA’s most dangerous former operative, is drawn out of hiding when old ally Nicky Parsons (Julia Stiles) finds him, to uncover more explosive truths about his past.

Jason Bourne reminds us that the series it belongs to is still one of the greatest action franchises out there, especially with Paul Greengrass in the director’s chair, and Damon in the spotlight. In 2012, we got The Bourne Legacy, which starred Jeremy Renner instead of Damon and failed critically because it didn’t feel much like a Bourne movie because of Damon’s absence and the lack of everything that distinguishes a Bourne movie from a regular action movie. In this film, Greengrass shows us that this series can still return to form after a mistake like that. Jason Bourne follows the formula set by the first three films, with lots of impressive shaky-cam action while Bourne is running from the CIA. However, it gets even more personal this time around, as he starts to uncover a final secret from his past. The story isn’t very new but as a huge fan of the series, I never lost interest thanks to the pacing and intense action. Damon is still fantastic as the titular character, even fourteen years after portraying the character for the first time. He never loses character both physically and emotionally, and it’s so much fun to watch him constantly kick ass in all four of these films. Tommy Lee Jones portrays a ruthless CIA director who’s as perfectly written and developed as Chris Cooper’s antagonist in the first film, while Alicia Vikander is superb as a CIA agent that, in a way, resembles Joan Allen’s Pam Landy from the previous movies. Although both characters feel familiar, they are most skillfully portrayed by two excellent casting choices for their roles. Vincent Cassel is also a great villainous newcomer to the series, with an interesting backstory and great writing to his character. It’s so impressive that even though the main characters are part of the franchise’s formula, each one of them was written so profoundly, and I loved the way they were developed and portrayed.

If you’re hoping to get some spectacular action sequences from this movie, then you won’t be let down because there is plenty of intense bone-crunching and heart-racing action that’s just as great as what Greengrass gave us in Supremacy and Ultimatum. There’s an epic motorcycle chase during a riot that glued my eyes to the screen, as well as an enormous car chase in Vegas that kept me on the very edge of my seat. The incredible use of practical stunt and shaky camera work definitely hold up. Cinematographer Barry Ackroyd is more reliant on shaky cam than Oliver Wood, who shot the original trilogy; Ackroyd has however proved to be a master at capturing exquisite action and scenery with his style in films like The Hurt Locker and Captain Phillips. Here, his style may feel overdone to some, but I believe the camerawork was done impeccably, especially during the action scenes. A lot of critics have sadly been disappointed by this movie, saying it doesn’t live up to the previous work of Damon’s Bourne pictures, but let me tell you that skipping this movie is not the right move for fans of action movies and especially of the saga. Jason Bourne gave me everything I wanted and even more. It’s strikingly written, phenomenally acted, and stunningly shot and directed. It’s definitely on par with the first three films, probably even better than Supremacy. The Bourne movies have truly raised the bar for action movies, and I haven’t seen many others like them. Jason Bourne is another fantastic example that did not disappoint, so please, despite what many critics have said, go see this movie with an open mind like I did, and who knows how much you may end up liking it?

Jason Bourne (film).jpg

08.05.16
by

Suicide Squad

ratings2

In DC’s latest attempt to recover from the backlash received by this year’s Batman v Superman, A secret government agency recruits a group of imprisoned supervillains to execute dangerous black ops missions in exchange for clemency, which inevitably leads to chaos.

Suicide Squad was easily one of my most anticipated movies of the year, but I was also expecting so much from it, and unlike other films that unsurprisingly disappointed, I was almost certain I was going to get everything I wanted from this film. With great casting choices and an intriguing story, I didn’t think anything could go wrong. However, despite a few perks, Suicide Squad is ultimately a chaotic and poorly constructed supervillain extravaganza. This movie isn’t completely bad, as most of the action is tons of fun and the film’s cast is packed with awesome and entertaining performances. Will Smith leads the cast with great humor and writing, and Margot Robbie steals the movie with her insane and lively performance as Harley Quinn. Robbie always seems like she’s having so much fun in the role, as she’s always full of energy and she definitely lived up to what I expected from her. Joel Kinnaman, Jai Courtney, Viola Davis, and the rest of the cast are solid and mostly funny. I expected more, however, from Jared Leto. His take on the Joker is nowhere as memorable as Heath Ledger’s take on the psychotic villain in Nolan’s The Dark Knight, and his role is of little significance in the film. The DC universe just wastes this character in the film and I didn’t like his use in the film, although I liked Leto’s performance. Another thing I enjoyed about the movie was the amount of humor incorporated in the movie, and how much it delivered. Characters like Deadshot, Harley Quinn, Killer Croc, and Captain Boomerang were hilarious and delivered some great lines. I was impressed and overall satisfied by how much the movie made me laugh. The action mostly entertained me as well.

I was hoping Suicide Squad could help DC recover from Batman v Superman‘s terrible failure this year, however, I was wrong. Like its predecessor, the movie suffers from many continuity errors and plot holes. Many things happen that don’t make any sense later on, and although the movie tries hard, there is ultimately no emotional weight that got to me, and by the end, the story felt completely empty and pointless. The editing is too choppy and flashy, all the takes are transitioned through too quickly, and I could tell that too much was cut from the film. Not much is explained and regarded that I wish was addressed to have made more sense. A lot of the development for more minor characters was not there, so emotionally there was nothing this film gave me. Despite the backstories provided for more major characters like Deadshot and El Diablo, nothing hit me deep like other films of its genre, like Guardians of the Galaxy and other films in the Avengers saga. The film’s villain also did nothing for me, as the villain’s plot and presence were dull and effortless. The ending of the movie makes the plot and even the film itself feel so pointless and nothing seems to be in its place anymore. You may want to watch Suicide Squad for a few fun action sequences and good laughs, but don’t expect a redeeming summer blockbuster for DC, or anything close.

Official poster

07.28.16
by

Star Trek Beyond

ratings4

In the third of the Star Trek reboot franchise, the  crew of the USS Enterprise explores the furthest reaches of uncharted space, where they encounter a new ruthless enemy who puts them and everything the Federation stands for to the test.

Star Trek Beyond brings to the screen everything we love about Star Trek and more, even without J.J. Abrams in the director’s chair. Beyond is packed with great action, laughs, writing, cast chemistry, and editing. Justin Lin surprised me by how well he was able to direct this film without losing the energy, heart, and extraordinary style that Abrams brought to the first two films. You can’t get enough of Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto, Zoe Saldana, Karl Urban, Simon Pegg, John Cho, and the late Anton Yelchin (who sadly passed away due to an accident last month) as the crew of the Enterprise. They are all filled with so much energy and fun. The chemistry between all of them is golden, the writing for their characters is outstanding, and they always seem to be having so much fun in front of the screen. Sofia Boutella (who you may remember as Samuel L. Jackson’s henchwoman in last year’s Kingsman: The Secret Service) surprised me in her newcoming role to the series, and although her role wasn’t the most original character the writers could have come up with, I didn’t expect as much from her and enjoyed watching her onscreen. Idris Elba delivers a favorable performance as an evil alien warlord named Krall, but can’t nearly top Benedict Cumberbatch’s menacing Khan from Into Darkness. In the film’s last act, Krall is given a backstory that only complicates things and makes him less intimidating. The backstory they gave him felt too familiar and flat, and didn’t work well with the rest of the film.

Can a Star Trek movie ever disappoint me visually? Not quite. The effects in this movie are splendid, and although it lacks the glamorous touch Abrams gave the visual atmosphere and look of its predecessors, there is some marvelous cinematography and visual surrounding in the film. This experience was especially enhanced for me because I saw this in IMAX 3D, which explains why I felt so sucked into the movie’s setting, which was always animated beautifully. The action is shot and choreographed very well, and it’s all very fast-paced and fun to sit through. The action definitely holds up to the excitement and intensity in the first two films. This movie is a thrill ride packed with tons of sci-fi violence throughout, even though it doesn’t forget to provide the character development we want from a Star Trek movie. Expect plenty of nostalgia and throwbacks to the original Star Trek franchise and cast, the film doesn’t get rid of the great feeling that you’re watching Star Trek, a different kind of enjoyment than most other action films. If you’re a fan, you definitely won’t get let down by how much the original franchise is paid homage to, and by how much this saga still feels like Star Trek did decades ago. Although it’s not as great as the first two films, Beyond is still tons of fun to watch, with a stellar cast, plenty of vivid action and effects, and doesn’t forget to pay tribute to the late and great Leonard Nimoy, and of course, Anton Yelchin. Go see Beyond if you’re a fan, or if you simply want to have a great time at the movies.

The USS Enterprise flying through the universe, with the film's title "Beyond", and the film's billing below.

07.25.16
by

Snowden

ratings4

Snowden follows American computer professional Edward Snowden (played by Joseph Gordon-Levitt in the film), who leaked classified information from the National Security Agency to The Guardian in June 2013.

Snowden is a movie I got to see two months before its release this September, and I’m glad I took the opportunity to watch it. Director Oliver Stone delivers an interesting, complex, and well-done biopic that taught me a lot more about who Edward Snowden really was, what he did, and why he did it. The film works as both an excellent biopic and a great political thriller. I’ve seen Joseph Gordon-Levitt shine in many films over the years, but I’ve never seen such outstanding work from him like in this film. I couldn’t see Gordon-Levitt in the film, I could only see Snowden. He completely changes his appearance, behavior, and most remarkably his voice to perfectly match the figure in real life. Towards the end of the film, an interview with the real Snowden is compared to one with Gordon-Levitt’s portrayal of him, and the efforts the actor made to become the character are unbelievable. Although I don’t think Shailene Woodley was the best choice to play her character, I feel like she gave the role her best and her performance didn’t turn out to be too bad. The movie also has a great supporting cast (including Melissa Leo, Zachary Quinto, Tom Wilkinson, and Nicolas Cage), and most of them deliver strong and interesting performances. Snowden works as a biography, a thriller, and an interesting drama. The movie gives us a better glimpse at the gravity of what Snowden did, and exactly why he did it. We get some depth inside the threat of our security at the time, and the controversy behind whether the NSA was doing the right or wrong thing by looking at our actions and personal information. Oliver Stone convinced me that Snowden was doing the right thing, and for the right reasons too, which wasn’t exactly what I believed before. This movie did what a great biography should do, which is change your view and opinion about the person being focused on by learning and understanding more about them. In the first twenty minutes of the film, the editing and cinematography feels off and not the way it’s supposed to be, but it’s all polished up afterwards, despite a few moments throughout where the editing feels somewhat odd. But the film’s great performances, storytelling, and effect are what matter the most. Instead of giving us all the information about the topic that happens after the film through closing cards, we get most of it through fragments of real newscasts about what happened, which isn’t something we always get in biopics, and I thought that was a different but much more effective way to deliver the audience information. Walking out after the film ended, I was left thinking a lot about the subject and what I had just watched, which proves the film succeeded at doing its job for its audiences.

Snowden is a well-done, excellently directed, and powerfully executed biopic that you should definitely watch in theaters when its released this September, and although the editing has a few moments that needed some more polishing, its performances and writing are what make it stand out from most of the other movies I’ve seen this year. I sure hope this movie gets the audience and praise it deserves once it’s released.

Snowden film poster.jpg

07.19.16
by

Free State of Jones

ratings3

Free State of Jones tells the true story of Newton Knight (Matthew McConaughey), a disillusioned Confederate army deserter returns to Mississippi and leads a militia of fellow deserters, runaway slaves, and women in an uprising against the corrupt local Confederate government.

Free State of Jones is definitely not as bad as critics say it is. It tells a very eye-opening tale about the Civil War that’s quite an important lesson and I’m glad it was told through a film. The story of Newton Knight leading an army of fugitives, most of which were runaway black slaves, against the Confederate government, is a very interesting story and I’m glad I learned about this through this film. There are some gerat scenes that are put to film here and it’s all done very powerfully and realistically. The movie’s trailer made it look like the film would be driven by lengthy action sequences and shootouts, but there are really only a few, as the majority of the scenes use only dialogue to carry the plot. That isn’t necessarily a bad thing, but I’m just warning you that the trailer does not transmit the movie’s tone well, so don’t buy a ticket thinking that it’s Saving Private Ryan in the Civil War, as it’s much more of a Schindler’s List type of film, and I was actually glad that was the case. Matthew McConaughey is amusing in the film’s lead role, delivering lots of great dialogue, emotional scenes, and although he doesn’t completely blend into the role, I could tell that he gave the part his best.

Although the movie’s performances and historical messages are quite effective, other aspects of this film aren’t. The runtime drags on and on at many points, and there are parts at the end of the movie where it runs out of things to talk about, and just stretches its length aimlessly. Like I said before, the movie puts some great scenery to film, but unfortunately the cinematography does not capture it all very well. The camera is too shaky and not often pointed in the right angles in order to enhance the story. Cinematography is very important to me when it comes to watching films, and this film’s camerawork felt very lousy and unfocused. The editing within scenes was occasionally disruptive, as the cuts within scenes were way too fast and sometimes unnecessary. There isn’t enough consistent substance besides the film’s historical merit that makes it worth a trip to the theaters. If you want to see this movie for an interesting history lecture, then you may want it check it out (not necessarily on the big screen), but otherwise it’s not worth the trip to the theaters unless you want to see another great leading performance from Matthew McConaughey. If you do want to watch this, I’d recommend it for teens 14-15 and up, as it may be too tough for younger viewers to take in and/or watch.

Free State of Jones poster.png

07.19.16
by

Florence Foster Jenkins

ratings4

Florence Foster Jenkins tells the true story of a New York heiress who dreamed of becoming an opera singer, and never lost confidence within herself, despite having a terrible singing voice.

Florence Foster Jenkins is a delightful, charming, and very watchable film. It delivers an interesting yet poignant true story that was able to entertain and touch me throughout. Meryl Streep does not fail to carry the film excellently as the titular role. She not only delivered the charm and heart of the character, but she was able to completely transform into her role, as I was only able to see the character, and not Streep. She’s able to carry the film so well with her character’s confidence and emotion. Her character entertains but also touches, and throughout the film you often feel very sorry for her. I think it’s safe to say that Streep has earned herself another Oscar nomination for another fantastic performance. The story that’s told through this film is nothing close to an important historical lesson like most films based on true stories, but it’s an interesting biography that’s made entertaining and interesting. There’s some great humor throughout, and all of the cast does their best. The sets and costumes are all vivid and done beautifully. But what makes the story here so well told is the controversy behind the film’s titular character. Many criticised her voice and others praised it, but her husband alway encouraged her and made sure she’d always feel acknowledged. What’s so interesting is to know that all of this actually happened, and the story here really made me think. The movie feels very light-hearted and uplifting most of the time, it’s also poignant deep inside, which is what makes this film very effective at delivering its topic with great heart and emotion, as well as an empowering cast and great prestige.

Florence Foster Jenkins will not disappoint those who anticipate it, with great execution as well as a wonderful performance from Streep as the lead. It’s entertaining but also very heartfelt, and if you enjoy these kinds of movies, you should definitely go check this one out when it’s released in August.

Florence Foster Jenkins (film).jpg

07.12.16
by

The Man Who Knew Infinity

ratings4

The Man Who Knew Infinity tells the fascinating story of the life and academic career of the pioneer Indian mathematician, Srinivasa Ramanujan (Slumdog Millionaire‘s Dev Patel), and his friendship with his mentor, Professor G.H. Hardy (Jeremy Irons).

It’s amazing how films can introduce you to such amazing historical topics that were heard of by very little before. The story of the brilliant Indian mathematician Ramanujan was not known to me before I watched the film, but I was so captivated by the brilliance of an unappreciated poor man ultimately changed the knowledge of professors and universities around the world. Dev Patel is striking as the lead role, demonstrating great talent through his emotion and fantastic delivery of his lines. Patel captures the soul of his character excellently. Irons shares plenty of screentime with Patel in the film, and delivers an even more wonderful performance as the only who truly appreciated and understood Ramanujan’s marvelous intellect. Irons is strongly able to convey every one of Hardy’s emotions throughout the film, sometimes even without delivering any lines. The chemistry between the two actors is the film’s true heart and soul, and it’s what carries the movie like nothing else. Their chemistry is so touching and convincing, and you really understand how these two characters really changed each other. Although the story tends to drag at first, especially whenever these two actors aren’t on screen together, the way the film is executed is ultimately strong and effective, thanks to the amazing gravity of the topic and the groundbreaking cast and writing.

The Man Who Knew Infinity is a very underrated and unappreciated film that deserve some more attention than what it currently has. Critics in the U.S. have not liked it outside of the leading cast, and I don’t agree with what they’ve been saying about the rest of the film. Critics did not like the pacing, directing, or the way this film was shot, and I believe the reason they are criticizing it so much is because it didn’t bring them what the average Hollywood film would deliver. I’m not going as far as explosions or effects, but almost every film that we release is expected to have constant entertainment and almost no pauses. I feel like that for a film, this one was very well made. It’s a British film, so it did not feel the need to provide strong intensity throughout and cast the most popular stars around (the way films like The Social Network and Steve Jobs would do), and instead this movie only feels the need to be a great biopic and do justice to its topic. I feel like critics were let down by their expectations for the film and not the film itself. The film provided me with plenty of great dialogue and story, which is all I really needed from the film, rather than loud conversations, a fast plot, and well-known Hollywood stars filling up the cast.

The Man Who Knew Infinity has a captivating story, cast, and topic, that may not entertain you as much as it will impress you, but it’s definitely an underrated film from this year that you should watch if it’s available anywhere near you.

The Man Who Knew Infinity (film).jpg

07.09.16
by

Café Society

ratings3

Café Society, Woody Allen’s new period comedy-drama, focuses on young Bobby Dorfman (Jesse Eisenberg), who moves from Manhattan to 1930’s Hollywood, starts working for his uncle Phil (Steve Carell), and falls for his secretary Vonnie (Kristen Stewart). This leads to a series of twists and an adventure filled with romance and crime.

Earlier this week, I saw an early screening of Woody Allen’s latest feature, Cafe Society, which Allen also wrote, and even narrated himself. Woody Allen is one of the many fantastic faces behind the cameras and screens of Hollywood. Despite how much effort and ambition he puts into every one of his films, not many of them have been recognized as well worth remembering, with the exceptions of Midnight in Paris and Blue Jasmine. Is Cafe Society able to hold up to what Allen can really do? From a directing standpoint, mostly. Allen does a fantastic job bringing the ’30’s back to life with the vivid sets, costume design, and striking cinematography, all of which pay homage to the way films in the ’30’s were shot and made. Although the Coen brothers’ Hail, Caesar! from earlier this year did a much better job bringing the old days of Hollywood back to life and making me feel like I was watching a film from decades ago (and with a smaller budget than Cafe Society), Allen still tries his best to bring both the old Hollywood scenery to life, as well as the late night party terrain of New York. Allen always cares a lot about his characters, which really shows here. The cast gives it their best, with Jesse Eisenberg playing another one of those “young characters in a big world”, and once again, Kristen Stewart plays Eisenberg’s love interest. We’ve seen these two actors onscreen together many times before, but there’s always something new with their characters that we haven’t seen before. Eisenberg is quite hilarious in this film and he carries the film along very well. Steve Carell is also a standout here, with some great lines and a personality that he delivers very well. Another thing that the movie handles very well is its humor. Every instance of comedy was written superbly and made me crack up. Also, if you don’t know who the movie’s narrator is, save that surprise for after you watch the movie, if you don’t happen to recognize whose voice it is during the film.

The place where the movie really struggles and does not hold up at all is the story. The movie starts out as an entertaining dramedy set in the ’30s, which quickly turns into a romantic film. I only started to have a problem with this later, when every twist is revealed too quickly and the dramatic irony is sacrificed. Following this is just a bunch of scenes that take the film nowhere, although there is a subplot in the film that managed to work. Fortunately, the movie’s humor is consistent and never dropped, but the movie’s plot became so aimless and got to a point when it felt uncomfortable to watch, and soaked away almost everything else that made it entertaining. I never understand where the film was aiming and why. Not every movie has a message, but every movie goes a certain direction for a reason. Allen’s films usually end by either trying to teach you something, or by showing how the characters have changed throughout the film. There was absolutely none of that in this film. When I got out of the film, I was still wondering, “What was this movie trying to teach me? How did the characters change throughout the movie and how did the film’s events even affect them?” The film’s ending was probably when Allen gave up on the screenplay and decided to give the movie and abrupt ending instead of a more thoughtful one. I can imagine how much better this movie would have been of Allen wasn’t trying to leave his comfort zone with the writing. The scenery, cast and humor are all spot-on and help bring this movie a lively surrounding and feel, but the story ultimately plummets and didn’t feel like Allen put in his best work. If you’re a fan of Woody Allen’s movies, then you may want to see Cafe Society, but otherwise, I wouldn’t strongly recommend this film.

Cafe Society.jpg