Movie Review: "Creed"

In my last blog post which reviewed the year 2015 in film, I listed 13 movies which I didn’t get to see but hoped to get to later. So far in 2016, I’ve seen four of them, the latest of which is “Creed” which I just saw last night, Saturday the 22^nd of January, 2016. I was so moved by the film that I couldn’t wait to write this review. To be honest, when I first heard about the movie in 2014, I rolled my eyes thinking Sylvester Stallone was yet again trying to squeeze more dollars out of the franchise. The last  film in the series I saw was “Rocky V” in 1990 and I didn’t enjoy it much. I completely skipped the sixth film “Rocky Balboa” which was released sixteen years later in 2006. So I wasn’t expecting much from “Creed.”

Word-of-mouth marketing is a powerful tool in the world of cinema. I later got word that “Creed” was very good and after seeing the strong reviews from critics (it scored 94% on Rotten Tomatoes), I added it to my must-see list. I had seen another Boxing film in 2015 called “Southpaw” which starred one of my favorite actors Jake Gyllenhaal, so I wondered if “Creed” would be better.  

It’s not even close. “Creed” is a superior film to “Southpaw” but maybe it’s not even a fair comparison since the former is inspired by a nostalgic legacy. Legacy is very much what “Creed” is about and much like the protagonist, it seeks to walk down its own path and carve a new arc from the storied history of “Rocky.” The plot is simple. Adonis Creed is the lovechild produced from an affair Apollo Creed had while married. Apollo died in the ring at the hands of Ivan “I must break you” Drago in “Rocky IV” before Adonis was born. So Adonis grows up without a father figure and jumps from one Juvenile home to the next.

Ivan Drago vs Apollo Creed from "Rocky IV"

Apollo Creed’s widow (played by Phylicia Rashad aka Mrs Huxtable), in a touching gesture of empathy, decides to take the child of the woman her husband had an affair with under her wing and raise him as her own. He gets a nice job at a Financial Services firm in Los Angeles where they live, but can’t shake his allure for Boxing (dude travels to Mexico to fight on weekends). But Adonis is a self-taught boxer. He's never been trained. So his talent is raw and needs to be honed. He goes to the elite Delphi Boxing Academy in L.A. to speak to a trainer but is rebuffed. So he decides to move to Philadelphia, against the wishes of his step-mom, (who by the way gives a great speech about the perils of Boxing which she lived through while caring for her late Husband after his grueling matches) to seek out another trainer.

Adonis is in Philly to seek out his father’s rival-turned-friend Rocky Balboa, played by Sylvester Stallone. Rocky is now a senior citizen that runs a restaurant named after his deceased wife Adrian (who can forget his iconic screaming of “ADRIAAAAAN!!!” in earlier “Rocky” films?). Adonis tries to convince Rocky to train him but he refuses. The film is fleshed out from there. While in Philly, Adonis meets Bianca, an up-and-coming singer/songwriter who lives in his apartment complex and prevents him from getting a proper night’s rest with her loud music.

Where do I begin with how much I enjoyed this film? Perhaps by focusing on the people that made it so great.

Director Ryan Coogler

This young man is just 29 (will be 30 in May) and his work so far gives one optimism for the future of Black cinema (along with Ava DuVernay and other promising talents). He has worked with Michael B Jordan before, on his first feature film "Fruitvale Station," a 2013 cinematic take on the police shooting of 22-year-old Oscar Grant. The film was a big success. On a reported budget of $900,000, it grossed $17,000,000 worldwide (with over 90% of that total coming from the domestic market) and made a name for Coogler.  

He also co-wrote "Creed" and I love how much time he spent at the beginning of the film fleshing out the character of Adonis, the protagonist. In case you're wondering, "Creed" has been a critical and commercial success. On a budget of $35 million, the movie has so far grossed $119 million worldwide. With the awards buzz it has received, it could top out at $130 million or surpass that. So that's two strong films under the belt of up-and-coming director Ryan Coogler. What's his next project? It's BIG. Marvel announced this month that he will direct the feature film for "Black Panther" which is due in 2018. Interestingly enough, Ava DuVernay was in talks with Marvel to direct the film but the talks broke down. This makes up for the disappointment many felt at the time. Very much looking forward to the film and the trajectory of the career of Mr Coogler

Michael B Jordan

Variety in acting roles relies a lot on authenticity. Heck, acting in of itself is all about authenticity of the performance. The actor has to be able to convince the audience of his embodiment of the role he is playing. The Spike Lee film "Chi-raq" comes to mind. I'm yet to see it but curious because I like the work of Spike Lee. I do however call into question the casting of Nick Cannon as a Gangster rapper in the film. I saw the trailer and cringed at the clips of him in character. I just didn't buy it. Perhaps because of his previous happy-go-lucky roles in film and MTV skits. He also smiles too damn much. But then, "Chi-raq" is supposedly satire so perhaps Cannon's entire performance was an exaggerated wink? I'll find out when I see it.

I use that as an example to emphasize how gloriously authentic MBJ was in his role in "Creed." The first film I ever saw him feature in was 2012's "Chronicle," a movie written by Max Landis (son of John Landis, who famously directed Michael Jackson's "Thriller" short film and music video) about three teenagers who gain superhuman abilities. It's an atypical film about having super powers and I encourage seeing it. I even own it on DVD . The Michael B Jordan in that film reminded me a lot of Nick Cannon. Smiling all the time, the life of the party, cracking jokes, etc. His performance in "Creed" as the protagonist is all business. Gritty business. You feel the pain he carries with him throughout the film and it helps to understand the anger with which he lashes out due to his circumstance. After suffering the blip that was "Fantastic 4," it's great to see him bounce back here.

Tessa Thompson

As you move from one talent to the next in this film, you start to understand the frustration of the movement behind the #OscarsSoWhite hashtag that originated last year and is back again this year. Tessa Thompson is another positive highlight in this movie. The first movie I saw her in was 2014's "Dear White People," directed by another promising young black director, Justin Simien (his first feature film). The movie is a fantastic take on race relations on a predominantly white college campus and Thompson played an unapologetically outspoken radio broadcaster who wore her politically incorrect views on her sleeves. It was pretty much an indie film which grossed $4.4 million in the U.S alone (it wasn't released internationally, to my knowledge). Considering it was set entirely on a College campus, I can't imagine the film cost up to $500,000. Simien crowd-funded the flick and I read he raised $40,000 for production costs from there. Unfortunately, I haven't been able to get the full cost of the film. Such is the case with certain independent projects. "Dear White People" was a success that I would encourage all to see.

In "Creed," Thompson plays the love interest of Adonis but she has plenty of depth with her own dreams, aspirations, and challenges. The chemistry between the two is fluid. There is one particularly cute scene in the film where she teaches Adonis Philly slang while on a date, which they both agreed wasn't a date but actually was. Part of the warm banter between the two. The word she taught him is used so often by someone from Boston I follow on twitter that I initially thought it was a Boston word. Little tidbits like that I enjoyed.

Sylvester Stallone

Let's revisit the #OscarsSoWhite hashtag again, shall we? The only Oscar nomination "Creed" received was for "Best Supporting Actor" for the Italian Stallion. He also just won his first Golden Globe for the same role. Some of the frustration at not seeing Ryan Coogler nominated for "Best Director" or Michael B Jordan nominated for "Best Actor" spilled over into some criticizing Stallone's wins. I myself wondered about Stallone's performance and how it managed to garner such recognition. This was before I saw the movie. After watching it, I completely understand. While I get the frustration over the black talent behind this movie not getting any recognition, I believe Stallone fully deserved his. 

In "Creed" we see Sylvester Stallone in a completely different role. He is a mentor, father figure, and passer of the torch to the next generation and Zeus help me he executed it soooo well. He also deals with a lot of tragedy and challenges which I won't spoil here but add so much emotional depth to his character and the movie. We get to see Rocky Balboa, the hero of the previous six films in the franchise, adjust to life as an old man moving on with his life. I'll be rooting for him at the Oscars.

Some extra tidbits. Sylvester Stallone is a lifetime Everton Football Club fan and the stadium makes an appearance in the film. Under what circumstances? Watch it to find out. FYI: the picture above with him holding up the Everton scarf is not included in the movie. Here is some trivia you can play with at your next party: Sylvester Stallone played a goal keeper in "Escape to Victory" in 1981 along with Pele and other famous footballers.

Also, there was a powerful moment in the beginning of the movie when Adonis is sparring at the Delphi Academy in Los Angeles. The camera quickly picks up two little boys staring at him in awe and it said so much about being a being a role model in society. The scene also said that role models are human beings with their own hurdles they attempt to scale in their lives. It's a quick scene in the film and it's subtle but keep your eyes peeled for it.

"Creed" is an emotional triumph. It is so much more than boxing. It's about life. It's about the heartbreak of the loss of loved ones. It's about the downside of the celebrated sport of Boxing. This shares a narrative with the new Will Smith film "Concussion" which looks at the dangers of life in the NFL. "Creed" is about the need for father figures. In the beginning of the film when we first see Adonis in the foster home, the camera pans over other faces of young black boys locked away. Each of the faces shares the same helpless look, a sad but required statement about the challenges of young black lives (WHICH MATTER) in so many societies.

There is enough potential here for "Creed" to spin off its own series of films much like "The Hobbit" successfully did thanks to "The Lord of the Rings." Word is that Coogler won't return to direct the planned sequel due to commitments like "Black Panther" and other films. Hopefully another director is found to handle the sequels properly.

Ok, as a gym rat, I had to mention this. The above picture is part of a popular hashtag on instagram (in physical fitness circles)  called #TransformationTuesday. It is posted every tuesday and features a "before" and "after" comparison of physiques changed by rigorous training. This picture in particular was posted by Michael B Jordan's trainer @MrCalliet. They worked together previously on "Fantastic 4," where MBJ played superhero Johnny Storm. The less said about "Fantastic 4," the better, but they decided to work together again and the results speak for themselves. MBJ looked RIPPED in the movie and it was such an inspiring sight. I can't express how motivating it is to read about actors transforming their bodies for film roles. Will Smith for "Ali," Chris Hemsworth for "Thor," Henry Cavil for "Man of Steel," and others. 

The amount of running in this movie (as in the first "Rocky" film) speaks volumes about the amount of cardio required by Boxers to build the stamina they need to last 12 rounds in the ring taking physical punishment. This was yet another part of the movie that I enjoyed. I left the theater last night promising to increase my running for the rest of the year. I might even pay frequent visits to the stadium in Surulere (in Lagos, Nigeria, for my international readers) to box more.

In summary, "Creed" is a wonderful movie. I regard it as a feather in the cap of black cinema but give all the props in the world to the superb performance of Sylvester Stallone who served as an iconic anchor for the flick. The boxing scenes by the way are up close and riveting. It is playing now in Nigerian cinemas everywhere so go see it.

2015: A Hollywood Year in Review

And so comes to an end one of the most anticipated years in film in recent movie history. It was the year of BIG summer blockbusters with tent pole popcorn flicks reverberating from IMAX speakers, and, a year for lesser-known gems that will have the awards circuit buzzing in early 2016.

The Record Breakers

We had not one, not two, not three but FOUR record breakers this year. Two were expected, while the other two surprised many including myself. For me, 2015 was the year of Ultron. For three years since the first “Avengers” film dazzled us all with a then-record-breaking weekend of $207 million back in 2012, I waited with breathless anticipation for the sequel. I watched every single trailer (I now regret this and will whine about this later), memorized the lines, and drowned my twitter feed in one “Age of Ultron” tidbit after another. Based on the number of pre-orders on the movie ticket website Fandango, many expected “Age of Ultron” to match or exceed the weekend box office haul of the first film. It’s didn’t quite make it, thanks to a number of sporting events that took place the weekend it was released, one of which was the highly anticipated Mayweather vs Pacquiao Boxing match which drained a sizeable number of the 18-35 male demographic that normally makes up a large chunk of viewership for comic book film adaptations. “Age of Ultron” had to settle for an opening weekend haul of $191 million, which at the time, was good for the second biggest opening weekend in domestic box office history. Domestically it grossed over $459 million + an overseas cume of $946 million for a total intake of $1.4 billion. Good for 3^rd place on the biggest movies of 2015 list

Next came the surprise that many didn’t see coming; “Jurassic World.” I was excited for the film and penciled it in on my “must see” list, but didn’t expect the reaction it got. It was HUGE. The movie blazed past not only “Age of Ultron,” but also squeaked by the original “Avengers” and set a new opening weekend record of $208 million. Many attributed the success of the film to not only big-screen Dinosaur nostalgia, but also the rising star power of Chris Pratt (of “Guardians of the Galaxy” which was my favorite movie of 2014), and of course good execution of the film itself. The film has grossed $652 million in the U.S + $1 billion overseas for a total haul of $1.6 billion. It is the top grossing movie so far for 2015, but that isn’t going to last for much longer. Why?

Because (I think I broke a rule by starting a new paragraph with “Because” but whatever. Haha) of the last cinematic juggernaut of 2015; “Star Wars: The Force Awakens.” There was no surprise here as to the reaction this film would get. The only question was whether or not the actual movie would be good enough to justify all the hype. Thankfully, it delivered. Believe it or not, this was my first ever Stars Wars film which puts my nerd card in danger of being revoked. I do plan to make amends and watch all the prior films in the franchise dating back to 1977. I think the only other movie franchise that can match it for longevity is James Bond, which began in the 1960s.

Star Wars powerbombed its way past “Jurassic World” to the tune of $248 million during its opening weekend to set the new domestic box office debut record. As I write this blog post, the film has grossed $554 million domestically and should be over a $1 billion globally by the time you’re done reading this sentence. The movie is yet to open in China and there is speculation that it could go on to challenge “Avatar” ($2.7 billion) and “Titanic” ($2.1 billion) for biggest box office draw in cinematic history. We’ll find out soon enough. Not done with box office records though, more below.

Saying goodbye (again, and officially) to Paul Walker

Another huge billion-dollar-grossing film which actually kicked off the 2015 summer season was “Furious 7.” Released on April 3^rd, the film set the record for the fastest time to reach $1 billion, doing so in 17 days. This was the other surprise many didn't see coming. “Jurassic World” later broke this record in 13 days, and "Star Wars: The Force Awakens" just broke the record again, doing so in 12 days. What's most impressive about the performance of "Star Wars" in grossing $1 billion so quickly is doing so *without* opening in the big market that is China, which is really impressive. For many that saw “Furious 7,” the late actor Paul Walker, who had been part of the franchise since inception (along with Vin Diesel) in 2001, was a huge draw. He passed away in a car accident (tragic case of life imitating art) in 2013 and didn’t finish shooting all his scenes. His brother was brought in to complete them aided by Computer generated imaging. The final scene in the movie that paid tribute to him was so heartbreaking, I almost shed a tear in the theater. “Furious 7” went on to make $1.5 billion. One more member of the $1-billion-box-office club in 2015 is the animated movie "Minions" which took in $1.1 billion during its theatrical run. Altogether, these five films have grossed over $6 billion globally. The total box office haul for 2015 is expected to be north of $10 billion and five movies will account for 60% of that total. What a year! Below are two top 10 lists with the first being the domestic figures from the North American box office and second being the global figures. Both via BoxOfficeMojo.Com

A year to remember for Oscar Isaac

Mr Isaac has been on a roll since 2014’s critically acclaimed “A Most Violent Year” and he stayed in the limelight in 2015. In April he starred in the Artificial Intelligence movie “Ex Machina” which was raved about by critics everywhere. Unfortunately, it wasn’t released here in Nigeria and I didn’t get to see it. On a budget of just $15 million, the film grossed $25 million in the U.S and another $11 million overseas for a total of $36 million. Even assuming an additional 50% of the production budget in marketing costs, the small film still turned a profit. Oscar Isaac followed that up with “Star Wars: The Force Awakens” and his purple patch continues in 2016 when he will play the role of Apocalypse in the highly anticipated forthcoming X-Men movie.

The Rock bounces back from "Hercules"

I’m a huge fan of the Rock but can readily admit that 2014’s “Hercules” was only worth seeing because he was in it. It got blown out of the water by Scarlett Johansson’s “Lucy” during the same opening weekend and overall, was an average movie. Film careers are like business cycles with peaks and troughs so we knew Dwayne Johnson would return to Box office supremacy soon. 2015 was a great year for him as he reprised his role as DSS (Diplomatic Security Service) agent Hobbs in “Furious 7” which is the most commercially successful film in the franchise. He wasn’t done there. On May 29^th, he returned to the big screen as a Los Angeles Fire Dept Air Rescue Helicopter pilot in the disaster movie “San Andreas.” On a $110 million budget, the movie grossed $473 million globally. Consider “Hercules” forgotten. The Rock will be back in 2016 with Kevin Hart in “Central Intelligence.” Speaking of Kevin Hart, I saw his movie “The Wedding Ringer” in January of this year. Not good enough to make my top 10 list but a decent comedy still. He will also have a busy 2016. In addition to co-starring with the Rock, he will also be seen in “Ride Along 2” with Ice Cube, the sequel to the 2014 film.

The consistent Mr Gyllenhaal

I am such a big fan of this actor. Since 2012, he has delivered one solid performance after another. “End of watch” in 2012, “Prisoners” in 2013, “Nightcrawler” in 2014 (in a performance so good many felt he deserved a “Best actor” Academy Award nomination) and this year in “Southpaw” (July) and “Everest” (September). It’s been rumored that Eminem was supposed to play the lead role in the former but backed out for one reason or another. He still appeared on the soundtrack. 50 Cent co-starred with Jake as his Boxing promoter. "Southpaw" cost $30 million and made all its money back domestically plus extra; $52 million. It took in an additional $39 million overseas for a total of $91 million. "Everest" cost $55 million and grossed $43 million in the U.S and $158 million overseas for a total of $201 million. Cheers to Jake's casting agent. They're still going strong on the script-picking game. There was another film released in 2015 that starred Gyllenhaal called “Accidental Love,” a romantic comedy. It actually isn’t a 2015 movie. It was filmed waaaaay back in 2008 but financing issues delayed its release. Critics destroyed it so we’ll just pretend it never happened. Haha. Gyllenhaal will be back next year in the drama “Demolition.” 

Everybody hates Chris (when he's not Thor)?

Chris Hemsworth suited up again in 2015 as the Norse God of Thunder for “Age of Ultron” but also headlined two more films this year. He played a hacker in “Blackhat” (January) and a shipwrecked sailor in “In the heart of the sea”(December). Last year, when I saw the 2015 film schedule, I thought Hemsworth was going to have a massive year and was looking forward to writing about it on my blog in my year-end review. Sadly, things didn’t turn out that way. The only success he saw at the box office was in “Age of Ultron” which sets him up nicely for his third movie as Thor due in 2017. “Blackhat” was an abysmal flop. The film cost $70 million (not including the cost of marketing) but made only $8 million domestically and $11 million overseas. OUCH! “In the heart of the sea” also bombed. On a reported budget of $100 million, it has made just $22 million so far domestically and a further $53 million overseas. It might make back its production budget but there’s also the cost of marketing to recoup which seems unlikely. Both movies were trashed by critics so I avoided them. I was really looking forward to “In the heart of the sea” and was disappointed it didn’t deliver.

One has to wonder if Chris Hemsworth can still headline a film outside the Marvel franchise. His last non-Marvel outing at the box office that yielded dividends was 2013’s “Rush” (also directed by Ron Howard who helmed “In the heart of the sea”). On a $38 million budget, the film pulled in $90 million globally. A year before that in 2012, he also had success with “Snow White and the Huntsman” which cost $170 million but pulled in $396 million globally.  Chris Hemsworth will return to the big screen in the 2016 remake of “Ghostbusters” which stars an all-female cast and gender flips the franchise. He will be playing the eye-candy receptionist in the movie (which makes sense since the stars of the film are all women). Looking forward to seeing how that turns out.

American film goers let me down with "Tomorrowland"

I was REALLY looking forward to this film! It was fresh. It was ORIGINAL. Think about it; the five biggest movies of 2015 are all parts of franchises. Hollywood has been playing it safe. So along comes Disney (it was distributed by Buena Vista) and director Brad Bird (“The Incredibles,” (2004) “Mission: Impossible-Ghost Protocol” (2011)) with something new and what does the audience do? Turn their backs on it! What a travesty! This film easily made my top 10 list for the year and would have made my top 5 if it wasn’t for the brilliant “Inside Out” (which came from Pixar, the same studio for whom Brad Bird made “The Incredibles” and “Ratatouille” [2007]). “Tomorrowland” was about the power of inspirational dreams, of innovation, and it closed with a strong message. While these aren’t new topics covered by Hollywood, I appreciate the way the movie approached them. The film cost a whopping $190 million to make (the special effects explain why) but fell short domestically with a $93 million haul. It made a further $119 million overseas for a total of $208 million, but when you include marketing costs (which could have been up to half of the $190 million production budget), the film fell short of expectations. Had it been successful, we could have seen a new franchise. Sadly, the risk didn’t pay off so it’s back to more sequels. *Sigh*

A rant on movie trailers

Earlier, I mentioned how I later came to regret watching so many trailers for “Age of Ultron.” At the time, I was soooo hyped up for the film that I didn’t care. My extreme anticipation for the movie gobbled up every trailer in sight. When I finally did see the film, it felt like the trailers had given most of it away. I’ve seen a lot of complaints on twitter about this tendency to give too much in trailers and the latest culprit is the highly anticipated “Batman vs Superman” film due next year. The early trailers led us all to believe it was a conflict between the two heroes but the latest trailer gave away a plot twist which many felt it didn’t have to. I won’t reveal it here in case you haven’t seen it, but somehow I doubt that’s possible if you’re geeked about the film. Anyway, I’ve resolved not to watch any more trailers for the film. Easier said than done, but I’ll try to be strong.

The Worst films I saw in 2015

Three movies I saw this year made the list:

Seventh Son

Mortdecai

Fifty Shades of Grey

Production on “Seventh Son” began in 2011 and it should have been released in 2013 but there were a number of delays, one of which I’m sure is the studio realized they had a big turd on their hands and were it not for costs already incurred, would have dropped the movie altogether. I saw this film back in January on a date. A first date for that matter. It was so bad, I was convinced the date was ruined. In my defense, my date picked this crap, and I’ve never let her hear the end of it. Haha. On a budget of $95 million, the film grossed a deplorable $17 million in the U.S. The overseas market came to its rescue with a $96 million gross for a total haul of $114 million but once you factor in marketing costs of anywhere from 30% to 50% of the production budget, the movie was a commercial bust. 

“Mortdecai” stars Johnny Depp and is another bomb to add to his resume. He was recently listed as the top overpaid actor in Hollywood by Forbes, taking over from Adam Sandler. A consistent fat paycheck despite a string of stinkers earned him the dubious honor. I still regard him as one of the most versatile actors in Hollywood though. Anyway, where is my excuse for seeing this film? Oh, yea, I saw it on cable, not in a movie theater. On a production budget of $60 million, the film grossed a your-studio-exec-could-get-fired-over-this $7 million in the U.S. It took in a further $39 million overseas for a total draw of $47 million. To put that in perspective, "Southpaw" cost half of "Mortdecai" ($30M) but made almost twice as much money at the box office ($91M). Johnny Depp did achieve some success at the box office in 2015 in the form of the Crime drama “Black Mass.” On a budget of $53 million, the movie grossed $94 million globally.

I watched “Fifty Shades of Grey” partly for the hype and out of curiosity to see bondage on screen (Yea, I know, there are other options, but we're talking Hollywood here). The script and dialogue were godawful but the movie was still an astronomical commercial success thanks to material that sold itself without much help (the books did it all). With a price tag of just $40 million, the movie grossed $166 million in the United States and a further $404 million overseas for an orgasmic total of $570 million. Even if the film didn't make an additional dime overseas, it already made more than 4x its production budget in the U.S alone. Heck, let's assume an additional $40 million was spent on marketing the movie bringing its total cost to $80 million. It was STILL a success in America alone. But HALF A BILLION DOLLARS?!? No one should be surprised that a sequel is in the works. If the scenes get more freaky, I just might see it. Haha.

Without further ado, here are my top 10 movies for 2015:

10) Jurassic World

9) Mad Max: Fury Road

8) Ant-Man

7) Star Wars: The Force Awakens

6) Tomorrowland

5) Inside Out

4) Mission: Impossible - Rogue Nation

3) The Martian

2) Kingsman: The Secret Service

1) Avengers: Age of Ultron

There were a number of good films I didn’t get to see this year. In no particular order:

Ex Machina

Infinitely Polar Bear (Starring Mark Ruffalo aka The Hulk from “Avengers”)

Trainwreck

The Diary of a Teenage Girl

Straight Outta Compton

Everest

Sicario

The Walk
Spotlight (Mark Ruffalo again, this time playing a Boston Globe journalist)

Creed

The Big Short

The Hateful Eight

The Revenant

Some of these are limited releases and should hopefully get wider releases next year.

2016 looks like another promising year in film. See ya then!

Atheist Ijeoma Oluo gets the definition of Atheism wrong

Whether directly in the flesh, punctuated by a handshake and a smile, or indirectly via social media, I always find it refreshing to meet a new atheist. Especially if she's female and from Nigeria. Rare combination, trust me. Since I returned home five years ago in 2010, I've met just two women that are non-believers with one of them being more agnostic than atheist. Nigeria being the patriarchal, overly religious nation that it is, it's not as easy for women to be open about not subscribing to the supernatural as it is for men. The subject of this blog post doesn't even live in Nigeria. She lives out in the west, where it's easier for women to be more open about their diverse views on theism. See her Twitter profile below;

 Ijeoma penned an article on her beliefs for the Guardian which you can read HERE

The title reads as such; 

"My atheism does not make me superior to believers. It's a leap of faith too."

I am in 100% agreement with her that what you believe doesn't make you superior to others. The second sentence is where Ijeoma mixes up what she personally believes about atheism with what it actually is. Here is a quote from her article;

Ijeoma is of the opinion that because we as humans are unable to prove that a God doesn't exist, atheism can somehow be equated with theism on the basis of faith. This couldn't be more off the mark. The burden of proof doesn't lie with atheists, it lies with believers who made the claim that a God exists in the first place. If you make a claim that is only supported by how you feel, and is not supported by any tangible evidence, how can you make the argument that those who disprove your claim because of a lack of said evidence are also making the same "leap of faith"?

Let me flesh this out with a demonstration. I want you to take a moment to stop reading this blog post and look behind you. 

Did you see it? 

There is an aqua blue Unicorn with a translucent horn feeding on stardust 3 feet behind you. 

Look again. 

Still can't see it? 

Well guess what; I STRONGLY BELIEVE in my heart of hearts that it's there. I have no further proof than that. Just my "faith." Now, if you dismiss my belief in the existence of the aqua blue Unicorn filling its stomach with a healthy meal of  stardust behind you, can I reasonably state that your disbelief in my claim is a "leap of faith" simply because you can't prove that it is not there? I cannot. Hopefully this illustrates what Ijeoma gets wrong.

The lovely thing about social media today is that one can immediately engage with writers. Take a look at this exchange on Twitter between Ijeoma and a twitter user with the name "The Humble Atheist."

It was a very illuminating exchange that led to my conclusion that Ijeoma was projecting her personal thoughts on Atheism on the actual definition and muddying the waters. Atheism is a lack of belief in the supernatural. Simple.You can't change the definition of a word based on your feelings. If you think YOUR atheism is based on "faith" then that applies only to YOU. 

In closing, here are further analogies below that make it pretty clear that describing atheism as a "belief" is as ridiculous as saying "off" is a tv channel, "walking" is a brand of car, and "barefoot" is a brand of shoes. Haha! 

Film Review: "Ted 2"

Earlier today (saturday the 27th of June) while running weekend errands, I picked up some dry cleaning. I attempted to pay with my debit card but the point-of-sale machine wasn't working. "Our network connection has been f**king sh*t all day" said the attendant. I laughed at the remark and went next door to a bank to withdraw cash from the ATM.

Now, as an advocate of foul language when the situation calls for it (mainly frustrating moments but conversely, moments of exhilaration, and heck, even to emphasize a point without being on either end of the emotional spectrum), I had no problems with the dry cleaning attendant's use of foul language. More context reveals I've been patronizing their business for a little while and formed a friendly relationship with the attendants. But what if I, as a customer, was instead my more conservative sister or perhaps an older customer like my Father? I wondered how much factors like my age (I'm still under 35), the age of the attendant (she looks under 35), and the familiarity built up during the months of our business/customer relationship contributed towards the words she chose to describe her p.o.s irritation. 

Mind you, this is in the great West African nation of Nigeria. A conservative country that seems to be experiencing a subtle liberal tilt, going by what looks like a growing societal acceptance of dropping F-bombs in everyday conversation. Or perhaps that's just my bias talking. Anyway, I did wonder if the foul mouthed dry cleaning attendant had seen the foul mouthed movie "Ted 2" which was released yesterday in the United States and in select countries around the world. I saw it last night and there was a noticeable split in my theater as we took in the latest offering from Director (and star) Seth MacFarlane, who plays Ted.

A bit of background on Mr MacFarlane; He is an Emmy award winning television series creator that dabbles mostly in animation and comedy. He is the creator of the popular animated series "Family Guy" and co-creator of two other tv series, "American Dad!" and "The Cleveland Show." If you watched the 2013 Oscars, Seth MacFarlane was the host. His brand of comedy is in-your-face and unapologetic. While he has to tone it down for network television, movies like "Ted" and "Ted 2" give him free reign to execute the most vulgar, x-rated jokes imaginable. These jokes, I must add, are hilarious and executed in fine form. Just in case you haven't seen it, below is the trailer for "Ted" released back in 2012. 

"Ted" was made with a production budget of $50 million. Domestically, it grossed $218.8 million while overseas it did even better with a $330.5 million gross for a massive total of $549.3 million. A half billion dollar return for a $50 million movie meant "Ted" is the second most successful R-rated comedy of all time behind only the $586.6 million worldwide gross of 2011's "The Hangover 2."

As you can glean from the above trailer, (which, by the way, is narrated by Patrick Stewart aka Captain Jean-Luc Picard of "Star Trek" and Professor Charles Xavier of the "X-Men") Ted is the pot smoking, childhood-toy-turned-best-friend of Mark Wahlberg, whose girlfriend (played by the adorable Mila Kulnis) has asked him to move out of their shared apartment because he was becoming a nuisance. The film follows the journey Ted takes to an independent life. Now check out the trailer for the subject of this blog (You're thinking "finally!", right? What was the point of all the drivel leading up to this point, anyway?).

The trailer lays out the premise: Ted marries his girlfriend from the first movie and they intend to have a baby. This intention is complicated by the obvious fact that he is a stuffed toy Bear. So they look for a sperm donor and all sorts of adult hilarity ensues until the state of Massachusetts (the film is set in Boston) ups the ante by telling the couple they can't have a child because Ted is not a person, but rather, property. From here, the movie takes on a social justice angle as Ted hires a lawyer (played by Amanda Seyfried) to fight the State for his right to be recognized as a person.

I'm wondering if the film will benefit from word-of-mouth since it was released on the same day the United States Supreme Court made the historic decision to declare same-sex marriage legal in every State. "Ted 2" could fuel the equality narrative at least among those that see the film. Speaking of those that saw the film, I mentioned earlier there was a noticeable split in my theater. More than half of us were damn near falling out of our chairs in laughter while the other half didn't flinch. Seth MacFarlane really swung for the fences with the over-the-top adult dialogue and gags and his liberal ideologies were on full display. 

How you react to the material could be juxtaposed with how you'd react to the obscenities uttered by your local dry cleaner in 2015. Ideologies aside, I enjoyed the film. I liked the underlying message thrown in with the comedic chaos on screen. I also liked the celebrity cameos (I won't give any away) who weren't just thrown in to smile but were given great dialogue to work with. One particular cameo that took place in the Grocery store where Ted works was fantastic. Speaking of the dialogue, the winning element for me in this movie were the jokes. They're littered with pop culture references and executed very well. My favorites involved authors F. Scott Fitzgerald and J.R.R Tolkien. Also, since "Ted 2" is distributed by Universal Studios, the theme song from another popular film from Universal was borrowed (along with a memorable line) for comedic purposes and treated with a knowing wink by MacFarlane. I thought this added to the film's appeal.

Ultimately, this is a sequel which, like all other sequels, has to face up to the challenge of topping the original which preceded it. The first "Ted" movie in 2012 was about a foul mouthed, marijuana smoking Teddy bear. "Ted 2" is about a foul mouthed, marijuana smoking Teddy Bear. Nothing new on offer in that regard. As of this writing, the movie's friday performance at the box office suggests it will underperform the $40+ million projection it was expected to gross this weekend. It pulled in $13.2 million on friday and is now expected to bring in about $34 million for the weekend. That's a 37% drop from the $54 million pulled in by the first movie in its weekend debut which was enough to top the box office back then. This time, with tough competition from "Jurassic World" and "Inside Out," a third place finish is all but assured for "Ted 2."

Remember, the first film cost $50 million and it made its entire budget back plus $4 million extra in only 3 days back in 2012. This time, it's going to need a few more weekends plus help from overseas ticket sales to make its money back.The larger budget for the sequel has reportedly ranged between $65 to $85 million. Still, I think this sequel has enough legs to stand on its own. It won't make a half billion dollars like the first film but I think there is enough material here to satisfy audiences and turn a profit for Universal Studios. 

Universal, by the way, is having a bumper year. "Furious 7" (released in March) has grossed $1.5 billion globally and is in the top 5 biggest movies of all time. The aforementioned "Jurassic World" has also made over $1 billion worldwide and it's only been out for 3 weeks. Yet to come is "Minions" which is an offshoot of the animated "Despicable Me" franchise and is expected to bring millions more into the flowing coffers of the studio. So even if "Ted 2" turns out to be a financial disappointment, the studio is already in position to offset the loss.

But I don't think "Ted 2" will be a disappointment. I think it is a well made comedy that should be enjoyed with an open mind and appreciated for its message on equal rights. Enjoy!

2014: A Hollywood Year in Review

It's been another memorable year for the movie industry. With regard to box office returns, 2014 has so far raked in $10.22 billion domestically and looks like it will finish in 4th place (since 2010) behind the record haul of $10.92 billion in 2013 and $10.83 billion in 2012. I doubt it can catch and surpass the $10.56 billion earned in 2010 because the last two blockbusters of the year, "The Hunger Games; Mockingjay - Part 1" ($306 million so far) and "The Hobbit; The Battle of the Five Armies" ($168 million), are already well into their respective theatrical runs. I can't see both movies mustering up an additional $400 million between them, beyond what they have earned so far, that would be required to push 2014 into 3rd on the annual earnings list.

Source: BoxOfficeMojo.com

Looking back on this year, there were notable moments to reflect on;

Saying Goodbye

Legendary actor/comedian Robin Williams tragically committed suicide on August 11th. He was 63 years old. Unknown to me and many others, he had been battling severe clinically diagnosed depression for many years. A sad irony considering he had spent his career bringing laughter to millions of people around the world for decades. He can currently be seen in theaters in "Night at the Museum: Secret of the Tomb" which is the third movie in the series. He has a few more movies he completed before his passing which will be released in subsequent years. His talent will be sorely missed.

Actor Philip Seymour Hoffman was only 46 when he was found dead in his New York City apartment on February 2nd. Cause of death was listed as a heroin overdose.  Two movies featuring him were released this year; The British espionage thriller "A most wanted Man," released in July, and the science fiction, action adventure "The Hunger Games; Mockinjay - Part 1," released in November.

A great year for "ScarJo"

If I could single out one actress for having a memorable year, it would be Scarlett Johansson (whose name has become an unofficial portmanteau, "ScarJo," by fans). First, there was the wonderful science fiction, romantic comedy "Her," directed by Spike Jonze, where Johansson played the voice of an artificial intelligence software whom Joaquin Phoenix, the lead character in the film, falls in love with. Now technically, "Her" is a 2013 movie because it was released on December 18th, 2013. But being 3 weeks into the last month of 2013, the movie didn't really take off until this year. 

Against a $23 million production budget, the movie grossed $25.56 million domestically, and $21.78 million overseas for a global total of $47.34 million. It was nominated for five Oscars (including "Best Picture") and won one for "Best Original Screenplay" earlier this year at the 2014 Academy Awards ceremony. If you haven't seen this movie, do so.

In April of this year, we were treated to two more movies starring ScarJo. The big budget, action/adventure superhero film "Captain America: The Winter Soldier," and smaller budget science fiction thriller "Under The Skin." Produced by Marvel studios and distributed by parent company Walt Disney, the Captain America movie was the sequel to 2011's "Captain America: The First Avenger." This is the third movie ScarJo's Black Widow character has featured in in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, following "Iron Man 2" in 2010, and "The Avengers" in 2012. The Winter Soldier was a resounding success. Hailed by critics for its mature storytelling, the $170 million movie grossed $259.76 million domestically, and $454.31 million overseas for a gargantuan total of $714.07 million globally. That's close to double the $370.56 million in global returns posted by the first movie, "The First Avenger." The film is the third highest grossing movie of 2014 at the U.S box office.

The same box office success story cannot be said for "Under the Skin." Costing $13.3 million, the movie grossed $2.6 million domestically and $2.7 million overseas for a global total of $5.3 million. But to view "Under the skin" as a commercial failure misses the mark. It received an 85% score on the popular movie review website Rotten Tomatoes, and was generally lauded by critics. The movie is set in Scotland, where ScarJo plays an alien driving around in a van picking up unsuspecting men, whom she takes back to her lair and consumes in a very unconventional way. Bottom line, the film enhanced Ms Johansson's profile and is considered another feather in her cap. I watched it and found it refreshing.

She wasn't done there. To cap off a great year for Scarlett Johansson, the summer blockbuster "Lucy" blasted into theaters in July. How impressive was its performance? It went head-to-head with "Hercules," starring former pro-wrestler Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson and beat it to number 1 at the box office over the weekend of July 25th, when both movies were released. "Lucy" cost $40 million and made all its money back in THREE days! It grossed $43.89 million during its opening weekend to take the number 1 position at the box office while "Hercules" grossed $29.8 million to come in second. Keeping the comparison going, "Hercules" cost $100 million (more than double "Lucy's" budget) and grossed $72.68 million domestically, and $170.7 million overseas for a global haul of $243.38 million. "Lucy" almost doubled that return. It made $126.66 million in the U.S and a whopping $332.2 million overseas for a spectacular global return of $458.86 million. 

I really enjoyed this movie and was rooting hard for it to succeed. I saw it twice in theaters and thoroughly enjoyed the concept of the plot, which is centered on Psychokinesis. The success of the movie could be attributed to a combination of ScarJo's star power, her exposure from the Marvel superhero movies, and audiences craving a female lead in a blockbuster film. In all, 2014 is a year that Scarlett Johansson will never forget.

American movie goers experiencing Tom Cruise fatigue?

Since "Eyes Wide Shut" in 1999, we have been blessed with a Tom Cruise movie every year except for 2009. He was featured in two movies in 2012 so he made up for 1999 anyway. I am a fan of Tom Cruise and look forward to his movies (specifically Action) every year. This year, he gave us the science fiction action movie "Edge of Tomorrow," which co-starred an impressive Emily Blunt. I thoroughly enjoyed this movie and was hoping it would do well at the domestic box office but "sadly," it didn't. Let me explain why "sadly" is in quotes. "Edge of Tomorrow" cost $178 million but "only" made $100.20 million at the domestic box office. "Only" is also in quotes because grossing $100 million is successful under normal circumstances. Also, this was the first movie outside of Tom Cruise's successful "Mission: Impossible" franchise to soar past the $100 million mark in a long while. Critics also liked the film. It scored an impressive 90% on Rotten Tomatoes. 

But with a price tag of $178 million (not including marketing costs which can range from an additional $50 million to $80 million or more), the film had to at least break even which it did not. At least, not domestically. It could be audience fatigue fuelled by resentment from Cruise's last sci-fi movie, "Oblivion," released in 2013, which cost $120 million and only made $89 million domestically. I saw that film but didn't enjoy it much. Still, it should not be forgotten that Tom Cruise is a big international star and can rely on foreign audiences to boost returns for his films when they fall short domestically. "Oblivion" grossed $197.06 million overseas while "Edge of Tomorrow" made $269 million so both cannot be called commercial failures. Next year, Mr Cruise returns to familiar territory with his fifth "Mission: Impossible" movie which I expect to warm the hearts of American movie goers when it arrives. Can't wait.

More Religious blockbusters to come?

2014 featured two big blockbuster biblical films that featured big stars. The bible is filled with entertaining stories about larger-than-life events (whether they really happened is a different kettle of fish altogether that's inconsequential here since we're talking about movies) which Hollywood has noticed can translate into big profits. Who can forget Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ," released in 2004, that cost $30 million, grossed a MASSIVE $370.78 million domestically, $241.11 million overseas, for a total of $611.89 million? Hollywood definitely got the message. The two movies (amongst other smaller budget religious films like "Son of God, " "God's not dead," and "Heaven is for real") were hit and miss though.

"Noah," starring Russell Crow, was released in March of this year and cost $125 million. It made $101.2 million in the U.S and $261.43 million overseas for a respectable total of $362.63 million. I saw the movie and liked it. I particularly enjoyed how the movie dealt with the impact on one's conscience making a decision like Noah's can have. It humanized him and I found it relatable.

"Exodus: Gods and Kings" stars Christian Bale who played Moses. It was released just 3 weeks ago on December 12th. It cost $140 million and has so far grossed a paltry $52.48 million in the U.S and a more impressive $96.3 million overseas for a total of $148.48 million so far. The movie has been affected by controversy surrounding director Ridley Scott's decision to cast Caucasians as the Egyptian title characters while listing people of African descent to play slaves. In addition to that, the critics have not been kind to the film. It scored an awful 29% on Rotten Tomatoes which suggests that, controversy aside, it was just a poorly executed film. I decided to skip it.

Superhero movies still going strong

Source: www.boxofficemojo.com

Of the top ten highest grossing movies at the U.S box office for 2014, four of them were superhero films that collectively grossed $1.02 billion. This is not including "Transformers: Age of Extinction." If you consider that a superhero film, the total rises to $1.27 billion for 2014. The momentum is doing anything but slowing down. In october of this year, both Warner Bros studios (which owns the rights to DC Comics) and Marvel studios made headlines when they announced their respective superhero movie schedules as far into the year 2019. With the HIGHLY anticipated Marvel studios "Avengers" sequel due in May of 2015, followed by "Ant-Man" in July of the same year, then Warner Bros' EAGERLY anticipated "Batman vs Superman: Dawn of Justice" due in 2016, expect more superhero films to make a regular appearance on the year-end-highest-grossing-films list for the next 5 years at least.

That concludes my highlights for the year. Without further ado, here are my top 10 favorite movies of 2014:

10) Snowpiercer

9)   The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies

8)   Dawn of the Planet of the Apes

7)   Edge of Tomorrow

6)   Lucy

5)   Captain America: The Winter Soldier

4)   X-Men: Days of Future Past

3)   Gone Girl

2)   Interstellar

1)   Guardians of the Galaxy

It was tough putting this list together. These movies could swap places easily. Also, this list is subject to change. At the time of this writing, I just got my hands on "The Equalizer," "Nightcrawler," and "Boyhood," the latter two of which have received critical acclaim this year. Looking forward to watching them all and getting my hands on other great movies I may have missed.

Mischaracterizing Racism

In a blog post titled "But My Racism Is Better Than Yours", my college buddy "Ofili Speaks" said the following:

People get upset that Iggy Azalae is doing rap music but can’t understand why other people are upset about a Black storm trooper…

They feel their racism is better, sleeker, much better but can’t comprehend how it’s the same thing as another person not wanting a black storm trooper because it infringes on white culture just like an Australian Iggy supposedly infringes on black culture.

At the end of the day we all think our racism is better!

It would help to provide some background. His blog post was inspired by a lengthy, spirited facebook debate that took place this past weekend. Here is the status message of the mutual friend that sparked it:

That the comments tally ran into triple digits is a testament to how engaging the debate was. Our mutual friend posted the status message in response to what I think was a twitter rant (which I can't recall, too many comments to go digging) and an article from Malek Mouzon titled "The Silence of the 'Black' White Musicians". An excerpt from the latter:

I hope that by the time this article posts it no longer applies. But as of its writing, the following is a small list of musicians who have yet to make a public statement or acknowledgement of Michael Brown's murder and the racial epicenter that is Ferguson, Missouri. In no particular order, they are: Justin Bieber, Macklemore, Iggy Azaela, Katy Perry and Miley Cyrus.

I chose the above five for a very specific reason; they are what I like to call "Black" White Musicians. They are entertainers who have been inspired by some facet of Black culture and whether through authentic means or appropriation have gone on to repackage it for the masses under their own guise.

The above musicians enjoy and in many ways reap the rewards of the best parts of Black culture and yet... are surprisingly absent when it comes to the worst.

It's frustrating to watch white musicians be so ready to have legions of Black dancers/singers behind them, work with Black producers, sing about how "we" do and then be nowhere to be found when a Black tragedy takes the national stage. 

Mr Mouzon's article, posted a little over a week after the fatal shooting of 18-year-old Michael Brown, echoed the sentiment of quite a number of people on social media. On of my favorites was on twitter:

For the record, I partly disagreed with the facebook post. While I don't feel any white rapper should feel obligated to comment on any issues affecting the black community, I can understand why they would be criticized for keeping silent. As for black music "belonging" to black people, that was largely ignored by almost everyone that commented. I don't remember anyone feeling it was worth their time discussing. I've never heard any rational person say any genre of music "belongs" to any particular race and feel that was just added to the facebook status message for the purpose of sensationalism.

Now, as far as Mr Ofili's blog post is concerned, which is what I am focusing on, I felt it was important to provide some background because reading Mr Ofili's post without prior knowledge of what informed it, would lead one to incorrectly assume the racist reactions to actor John Boyega playing a Storm Trooper in the latest "Star Wars" movie mirrored those towards rapper Iggy Azalea.

The fringe minority (my assessment of their numbers is my assumption, I could be wrong, there could be many more, this is still a racist world) of people that expressed displeasure with John Boyega's casting did so simply because of his race. No one that I know that dislikes Iggy Azalea feels that way because she is caucasian. Not one of the 192 comments on that facebook post that were not fans of her based their sentiment on her race.

Mr Ofili is guilty of false equivalence in his post. Speaking for myself, I am not a fan of Iggy Azalea. I think she is a joke of a rapper without an ounce of originality. But am I "upset" that she is "doing rap music" and think she is an "infringement" on black culture, as described by Mr Ofili? Not at all. That's quite an extreme characterization that misses the mark completely. Black culture has been very accepting of white rappers. You see it in stadiums where a good number of African Americans attend concerts thrown by caucasian rappers. Iggy is free to rap to her heart's content. That's not the issue, based on the background I provided earlier.

I mean, if I'm racist because I don't like Iggy Azalea, what about the following three rappers I'm a fan of?

 Eternia, from Ottawa, Canada

Invincible, from Detroit, Michigan

  Dessa Darling, from Minneapolis, Minnesota

These are three skilled rappers that are good at their craft. I've never heard of any backlash towards any of them based on their race. If Mr Ofili is going to slap a "better, sleeker" racism tag on criticism of Iggy Azalea, surely that would apply to others in her genre that fit her racial makeup. But that is simply not the case.

Maybe Mr Ofili will shed more light in a subsequent post. For now, based on what he's written, I can't agree with where he is coming from