Finding Dory - Film Review

I’ll admit, Finding Dory wasn’t on my radar in the slightest. While I enjoyed Finding Nemo, I was never as taken with it as I was with, say, Toy Story or Wall-E. And while Pixar has established itself as one of the most reliable brands in storytelling, even the studio’s staunchest supporters will admit their track record as of late has been sporadic, to say the least (Inside Out notwithstanding). And, let’s face it, is there really a strong need for a Finding Nemo sequel aside from Disney wanting to make more money?

Thankfully, Finding Dory eschews any expectations of mediocrity. It’s consistently delightful, delivering all the charm and humor we’ve come to expect from the studio. Andrew Stanton (writer/director of A Bug's Life, Finding Nemo and Wall-E) has crafted a thoughtful examination on the nature of family and how one can achieve great things, despite whatever physical or mental ailments might stand in the way. It might not be on the level of Finding Nemo, but it’s still a worthy follow up, fitting comfortably in Pixar’s ‘good, not great’ category, which is a pretty solid place to be, all things considered. Fans of the first film should walk away feeling wholly satisfied and then some.

As you no doubt have guessed, this time around the focus is on everyone’s favorite blue tang Dory. Things kick off with a heartbreaking prologue, which right off the bat put to rest any fears I had of this being a shallow sequel. (An ocean reference! Let me see if I can keep this up) In it, we’re introduced to baby Dory and see what her life was like before she ended up on her own and grew up to be Ellen DeGeneres. As a child, Dory’s parents did everything in their power to help her cope with her memory condition. They played games with her and invented fun songs to help her remember important rules about the ocean. For reasons revealed later on, Dory became separated from her family, and though she spent her formative years searching for them, eventually she forgot all about them. Her attempts were fully abandoned when she bumped into Marlin and decided to aid him in his search for his son Nemo. It’s a masterfully crafted introduction, exhibiting all the best storytelling traits that have become synonymous with the Pixar brand.

A year after Nemo was found (spoiler alert), we find Dory living ‘happily ever after’ with both him and Marlin. All is well until her memory is jogged and she starts having flashbacks to her time as a child. She remembers her a family and realizes that, more than anything, she wants to be reunited with them. With the aid of Marlin and Nemo, Dory embarks on an epic quest across the ocean to be reunited with her parents, facing many a trial and tribulation and making plenty of new friends along the way.

If this sounds familiar, that’s probably because it is. Finding Dory follows a similar story structure to that of its predecessor, and never shakes the feeling of treading familiar waters. (Boo-yah! Another one. I am the master) Additionally, its 2nd act is made up of a lot of repetitive incidental happenings –  Dory encounters an obstacle, meets a new friend, finds a solution, and the cycle starts all over again. It’s still plenty of fun, but it’s unquestionably the least involving section of the film, and the story never finds a way to satisfactorily involve Marlin and Nemo or make their subplot in which they try to keep up with Dory more engaging.

But, impressively, the screenplay, co-written by Stanton and Victoria Strouse, does a great job fitting in references to Finding Nemo in an organic way without feeling too bogged down by them. Additionally, a colorful cast of new characters help keep things from getting too stale during this section. There’s a near-sighted whale shark (Kaitlin Olson), a lovable, grumpy octopus (played by the lovable, grumpy Ed O’Neill), and, perhaps my personal favorites, two sea lions who laze about on their rock all day (Idris Elba and Dominic West).

And, of course, we have returning cast members Ellen DeGeneres and Albert Brooks as Dory and Marlin respectively. Brooks still provides Marlin with that charming, panic-first mentality; the character is relatively unchanged from the previous film. It’s DeGeneres who really gets a chance to shine here, as Dory takes the leap from supporting character to fully-formed lead. DeGeneres, who is always a delight, takes full advantage of the opportunity provided here. She instills Dory with all the charm we’ve come to expect, but now there's a level of emotional resonance which makes it far easier to empathize with the character. It's some of DeGeneres's best work.

At the end of the day, it’s the underlying themes that make Finding Dory truly effective. Stanton keeps the heart of the tail (like a fish tail! Sorry, that one was a bit of a stretch…) firmly at the forefront, while still managing to keep things light and fun. Despite its meandering middle section, Finding Dory is a worthy entry in the Pixar catalogue and a fine sequel to a classic animated film. If you have any level of affection for the original, you won’t want to miss this.

FINAL RATING: 4/5

The Lobster - Film Review

It’s been nearly a week since I saw The Lobster, and to be completely honest I’m still not sure how I feel about it.

On the one hand, it is masterfully made. Writer/director Yorgos Lanthimos has a keen visual sense and directs his screenplay, co-written by Efthymis Filippou, with understated confidence. It’s also very funny with consistent laugh-out-loud moments and thoughtful insights on dating and love.

On the other hand, it is a deeply unsettling viewing experience. Its comedy is pitch black, which some may find off-putting, and understandably so. There were moments where I wasn’t sure whether I wanted to laugh or cry. Or both. There were also moments when I could hardly bear to look at the screen.

But in the days since my viewing, The Lobster has stayed with me. It has an undeniable power, and that alone deserves merit. Film fans owe it to themselves to see this remarkable piece of work. General audiences might want to brace themselves for a challenging experience, or just steer clear in general.

In a not-too-distant future with a consistently overcast sky, being single is outlawed. Those without a significant other are taken to a Hotel, where they are instructed to find a mate within 45-days. If their attempts are unsuccessful, they will be turned into an animal of their choosing and sent off to live in the wild.

After his wife left him for another man, David (Colin Farrell) checks into the Hotel with his brother, who failed to find a mate and was turned into a dog. If he fails to find a partner, he desires to be turned into a lobster. When the Hotel manager (the wonderful Olivia Colman) asks him why, he explains they have long life-spans and remain fertile throughout their lives. “I also like the sea very much.”

Farrell is superb here, delivering a performance both subtle and sympathetic, despite his persistent dead-eyed expression. Even when we’re not quite sure what’s going on (the screenplay does an excellent job of withholding information until exactly the right moment), Farrell keeps us involved and invested. The supporting cast, featuring the likes of Ben Whisaw, John C. Reilly, Rachel Weisz and Léa Seydoux, is equally effective.

I won’t spoil specifics, but about halfway through its runtime The Lobster switches gears, abandoning the story of its first half for something new and almost entirely unrelated. It’s not wholly successful in this sudden switch; many ideas set up in the beginning are abandoned for new ones. And while the film’s 2nd half kept me involved despite the introduction of a brand new story and characters, the whole thing can’t help feeling somewhat disjointed. Though I applaud Lanthimos resistance to answering every question presented, allowing the audience to draw their own conclusions, I felt the film might have benefitted from a bit more insight into this world and the reasoning behind turning people into animals.

Another thing I had difficulty with was that The Lobster seems to be an attempt to comment on the concept of relationships, but it’s never clear what it’s trying to say. Are we over-reliant on them? Are we taking them for granted? Is love a positive thing or is it only a byproduct of humanity’s need to procreate? Lanthimos presents plenty of intriguing thoughts, but never fleshes them out in a fully satisfying way.

Perhaps The Lobster merits repeat viewings to unlock all its secrets, but it can’t help feeling slightly pretentious in its purposeful efforts to be bizarre and elusive. Chances are you will either love it or hate it. Despite this, it is an utterly fascinating viewing experience, one which I wholeheartedly recommend to anyone who appreciates cinema as an artform.

FINAL RATING: 3.5/5 

X-Men: Apocalypse - Film Review

As we walked into the theater to watch X-Men: Apocalypse, the 5,000th entry in the X-Men film series and the 4th to be directed by Bryan Singer, my friend Richie pointed something out to me:

“How is this movie taking place 10 years after Days of Future Past, but none of the characters look any older? I mean, if Magneto was, like, 12-years-old in 1944 and this film takes place in the 80s, wouldn’t he be 60-years-old now?”

X-Men: Apocalypse never bothers to address this gaping hole in logic. It appears Singer was so enthralled by the idea of an X-Men film taking place in the 80s he forgot to offer any justification or reasoning for it. With the exception of some fashion styles and pop culture references, the decision to place the film in the decade is totally arbitrary. All style, no substance.

That’s probably the best way to describe X-Men: Apocalypse as a whole. Singer has traded the emotional subtext of his earlier entries for flashy superpowers and explosions. (I feel like he’s still desperate to prove he can make BIG summer movies after his 2006 film Superman Returns was chastised for containing so little action) And while the film is nowhere near as bad as the worst this series has to offer (I’m looking at you, X-Men: The Last Stand), and not even particularly bad in general, it is easily Singer’s least engaging entry to date.

Perhaps the biggest issue is an overstuffed script lacking in nuance. Singer developed the story with past collaborators Michael Dougherty and Dan Harris, who co-wrote X-Men 2 and Superman Returns, and Simon Kinberg, who penned Apocalypse’s screenplay. Within the film’s first 20-minutes, we’ve hopped all over the globe and been introduced to multiple characters, some familiar and some new. Nothing is given any room to breathe and the sheer amount we’re expected to invest in without any context weighs down any attempts at effective storytelling. It’s so focused on being BIG and EXCITING that it forgets to sweat the small stuff and give us something to care about.

On the plus side, Singer’s strong visuals are still present and accounted for, though I’ll admit they’re bogged down by an over-reliance on green screen and mediocre visual effects. He has the benefit of working with an extraordinary team of actors, who are able to pick up the slack, garnering empathy despite a weak screenplay. James McAvoy continues to be effortlessly charming as Professor Charles Xavier. Michael Fassbender gets by on raw talent, but is saddled with an illogical character arc and motivation. Jennifer Lawrence’s Mystique is thrust into a leadership role (the X-Men series always gives that position to its Oscar winners), and thankfully Lawrence seems a bit more up to the task, her performance being slightly less sleepy than it was in Days of Future Past.

The excellent new additions to the cast Tye Sheridan, Sophie Turner and Kodi Smitt-Mcphee, playing Cyclops, Jean Grey and Nightcrawler respectively, don’t get much to do. Their presence indicates the possibility of a much better film on the horizon that focuses on Xavier’s students - their relationships and their training. I couldn’t help wishing that was the film we ended up with instead of what we got. There’s also Olivia Munn as Psylocke, Alexandra Shipp as Storm and Ben Hardy as Angel. None of them are fully fleshed out and just stand around and try to look cool while having little to no impact on anything that happens.

And what of Apocalypse himself? He might be the film’s biggest problem. The character has no depth and remains painfully undeveloped through the entirety of the film. His primary motivation is (stop me if you’ve heard this one before) World Domination. Great. Why even bother casting Oscar Isaac in the role? The excellent and accomplished young actor disappears under layers of makeup, prosthetics and armor, and the character requires so little heavy lifting acting-wise, there’s no point to having such a talented actor fill the part. Such a waste.

So much of X-Men: Apocalypse feels like a waste. Singer and his team have involved just about every single character you could possibly imagine, but they’ve put forth so little effort to involve the audience. The storytelling focus and underlying emotional themes that made the first two X-Men films and even First Class and Days of Future Past so effective are nowhere to be found. It’s just another garish display of special effects, albeit a passively entertaining one.

So after all this, you might be shocked to hear that I didn’t hate X-Men: Apocalypse. I actually moderately enjoyed it. I know, right? I’ve gone on for so long about what’s wrong with it, that I’m actually pretty surprised myself. Its flaws are many, but weren’t substantial enough to deter my enjoyment. It just barely gets by on the talent of its cast and the competence of Singer’s visuals. There were action sequences that delighted me (gotta love Evan Peters' Quicksilver) and some intriguing ideas amidst the madness. I just wish Singer would have focused less on trying to compete with the Marvel Cinematic Universe and more on his own strengths. As much as I love Singer and appreciate what he's accomplished with this franchise, it might be time for a fresh young talent to take the reigns and steer it back on course.

FINAL RATING: 3/5

The Nice Guys - Film Review

Shane Black. Buddy Comedy. Ryan Gosling. If you’re not already sold, don’t even talk to me.

Mr. Black has been one of Hollywood’s most distinct voices ever since he broke into the industry with his infamous Lethal Weapon screenplay in the mid-eighties. His directorial debut, 2005’s Kiss Kiss Bang Bang, is one of the best action-comedies of the past 20 years and features spectacular turns from Robert Downey Jr. and Val Kilmer. Hell, I even love Iron Man 3, which earned the ire of fanboys worldwide by subverting expectations and tropes with a refreshingly manic take on the superhero genre.

The Nice Guys is essentially Black’s victory lap. It treads familiar territory for the filmmaker, and if you’re expecting something revolutionary, you’ll be walking away empty-handed. But take it for what it is - a spectacular caper overflowing with zippy dialogue, a healthy dose of action and the inspired pairing of Ryan Gosling and Russell Crowe - and you’ll be more than satisfied.

Gosling is Holland March, a private investigator doing his best to raise a daughter on his own. He gets caught up in a case that involves tracking down a girl named Amelia and encounters Jackson Healy (Crowe), a violent, soft-spoken enforcer who was hired by Amelia to get March off her back. When Amelia mysteriously disappears, the two strike up a shaky alliance to figure out just what the hell is going on and end up uncovering a fiendish plot far more complicated than they ever expected.

This is exactly the kind of storytelling Black excels at: two individuals with opposing personalities and methodologies forced to work together for the greater good. It’s a winning formula (one which Black pretty much pioneered) and the film’s charms are plentiful. The late-1970s setting is perfect. The script, co-written by Black and Anthony Bagarozzi, is fast-paced, breezy and full of memorable one-liners.

But while Black’s writing and direction play a key part in The Nice Guys’ success - this has some of the best-staged action sequences I've seen this year - the plotting plays second fiddle to its main characters' relationship, and it’s the chemistry between Ryan Gosling and Russell Crowe that really makes this one shine. These guys make for one of the great on-screen duos of the year, probably the past decade. Their line deliveries and mannerisms consistently had me doubled over in my seat from laughter. Any shortcomings regarding the familiarity of plot were easily forgiven in light of their performances.

The Nice Guys excels in nearly every way and is absolutely one of my favorite films of 2016 thus far. I sincerely hope it manages to find its audience in the midst of the summer blockbuster onslaught, so Black can keep making movies like it. If you’re a fan of his work, or just a fan of action-comedies in general, you’ll exit the theater with a huge smile on your face, hoping against hope we’ll get to see these characters again in the not-too-distant future.

FINAL RATING: 4/5

Captain America: Civil War - Film Review

Captain America: Civil War contains one of the single-best action sequences I’ve ever seen. I’m not just talking superhero movies; I’m talking all movies. You’ve seen snippets in the commercials - our two opposing heroes Captain America and Iron Man, backed by their faithful posses, stare each other down at a deserted airport before rushing at each other full speed. The superhero brawl that results is so much fun and so exciting, but also surprisingly hilarious in a way that enriches the entire set-piece.

And that’s what really makes the Marvel Studios repertoire so special. They understand that humor is the key to unlocking something more important: Humanity. Civil War, the third Captain America-centric entry of the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU), never forgets to honor the humanity of its characters even amidst the spectacular effects and action. And  although Civil War overflows with dozens of characters and subplots, it still manages to tell a coherent story and take its characters on a captivating, emotional journey. Not only is this the successful culmination of a number of character and story arcs that have been in play since the MCU began with 2008’s Iron Man, it expertly piques excitement for future entries in the series. For a film series this long-running to keep you pumped and riveted for more even after 13 entries is a mighty impressive feat.

After a covert Avengers mission goes awry, causing the deaths of innocent civilians, the United Nations issues an Accords, which will give them full control over when and where the Avengers are deployed. The team is split on the decision. On one side of the argument is Steve Rogers a.k.a. Captain America, who believes the Avengers shouldn’t have to wait to get their missions approved by a committee when innocent lives hang in the balance. And who’s to say the UN would be the best people to make the decisions in the first place when politics can become so easily corrupted? Rogers has witnessed this corruption first-hand and isn’t eager to surrender his rights over to an agenda he doesn’t agree with.

On the other side is Tony Stark, a.k.a. Iron Man. He feels personally responsible for the destruction caused by the Avengers’ actions over the years. The Summons, he feels, is a way to legitimize the team and hopefully gain back the general public’s trust.

In the midst of all this Summons nonsense, the Winter Soldier, a.k.a. Bucky Barnes, a.k.a. Cap’s WWII bestie, reappears at the center of a major terrorist attack. Rogers must make a decision to defend his longtime pal by operating outside the law, which will put him directly at odds with his Avenging brethren and Stark in particular.

Civil War puts our heroes in some tough moral predicaments and offers them no easy outs. Things get messy and it’s clear the rifts caused by the film’s events will have a lasting impact on the MCU. With its themes of accountability and broken friendships, the film explores darker territory than usual. But what’s really amazing is that it also manages to be one of the most entertaining entries in the entire series. It’s simultaneously the most serious and the most hilarious Marvel movie yet.

Chalk the film's successful blending of tones up to the return of the creative team behind 2014’s outstanding Captain America: The Winter Soldier. Directors Joe and Anthony Russo, with the aid of screenwriters Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely, have done an outstanding job juggling a number of characters and themes while keeping the proceedings coherent. That they’re able to give all these heroes a moment to shine, strong motivations and even individual arcs without the entire film buckling under the weight is nothing short of extraordinary.

Where Civil War’s story comes up short is in its general lack of focus, an area in which The Winter Soldier excelled. Maybe this is to be expected with so many characters and so many plotlines to focus on, but the Captain America/Bucky storyline, which drives most of the narrative, tends to get lost in the mayhem. The film's 2nd act in particular seems to lose track of this storyline for quite some time.

But what Civil War lacks in overall cohesion, it more than makes up for with majestic spectacle and compelling character development. Performances are stronger than they’ve ever been. Chris Evans does an excellent job portraying Cap’s moral dilemma and struggle. Robert Downey Jr. is just as wonderful as he’s always been, but this time around his performance carries a depth and thoughtfulness we haven’t yet seen from the character.

I also loved the attention devoted to the supporting characters. Bucky and Sam, a.k.a. The Falcon, (Anthony Mackie) have a particularly great love/hate relationship. Some of the film’s biggest laughs come from their standoff-ish interactions. Vision and Scarlet Witch (Paul Bettany and Elizabeth Olsen respectively) have some really great moments together, which showcase not only the growth of their relationship, but their individual characters as well. It’s a major improvement over their shoe-horned inclusion in Age of Ultron.

The entire show is very nearly stolen by Paul Rudd’s Ant-Man, making his first appearance in a 'team-up' flick. He's laugh-out-loud funny in practically every scene. We also get the introduction of two new major players to the MCU, and while Marvel might be asking you to side with #TeamCap or #TeamIronMan, one thing’s for sure: by Civil War’s conclusion you will undoubtedly be #TeamSpidey and/or #TeamPanther.

With minimal screentime, we may have the best live-action Spider-Man ever in Tom Holland. He not only perfectly encapsulates the awkwardly endearing nature of Peter Parker, he nails the non-stop quip-happy exuberance of everyone's favorite wall-crawler. As a long-time Spidey fan, I couldn’t be happier and I can’t wait for him to get the opportunity to fully strut his stuff in next summer’s Spider-Man: Homecoming.

I know less about Black Panther’s comic book roots, but I’m already pumped for his solo movie, which is being directed by Fruitvale Station and Creed helmer Ryan Coogler. The character is such a badass and Chadwick Boseman does an outstanding job in the part.

I adored every minute of Captain America: Civil War. While I still favor Joss Whedon’s first Avengers film and The Winter Soldier, Civil War is easily the action film to beat this year. Marvel has raised the bar for big-budget entertainment once again, and while people may lament the supposed ‘death of cinema’ at the hands of the superhero genre, as long as Marvel keeps putting out films that are this thoughtful and this much fun, I am more than happy to stay on this bandwagon.

FINAL RATING: 4.5/5

Keanu - Film Review

I was really bummed when I heard Key & Peele would be concluding with its fifth season. I wasn’t a regular viewer of the sketch comedy series, but the sketches I did have the pleasure of seeing were enough to convince me of their brilliance and make me wish they’d keep going forever and ever.

Now, a little less than a year after their show’s final episode, Keegan Michael-Key and Jordan Peele are throwing their hat into the movie mix with their feature debut Keanu. The prospect of a Key & Peele movie alone had me sold; add an adorable kitten to the mix and I can barely keep my brain from exploding with sheer joy. And while the final product isn’t quite as inspired as one would hope, Keanu is funny and charming enough to prove its stars have what it takes to make it on the big screen.

Rell (Peele) has had it pretty rough the past couple days. His girlfriend just broke up with him and life no longer has any purpose. “I feel like Apollo Creed,” he explains to his cousin Clarence (Key) over the phone. “In which Rocky movie?” asks Clarence. “The one where he dies,” answers Rell.
Everything changes when Rell hears scratching at his front door and discovers the world’s most adorable kitten waiting there to greet him. He names it Keanu and the two become inseparable.

For the next couple of weeks, everything is looking up for Rell, until the day he and Clarence return from an outing to find his house ransacked and no sign of Keanu. According to Rell’s drug dealer (Will Forte), it was the 17th Street Blips who did the cat-napping. Now, Rell and Clarence must pretend to be gang members in order to infiltrate the Blips and save their kitty cat.

When Keanu works, it really works. Some scenes made me laugh so hard it hurt, but there are also long stretches of ill-fated punchlines and awkward jokes that don’t quite hit their marks. The majority of Keanu’s 2nd act focuses on the one-note premise of Rell and Clarence attempting to pass as cold-blooded killers in a hostile environment. This section of the film stretches on far longer than it should and distracts from the main plotline of the duo trying to save the cat. (There’s far less of Keanu in Keanu than there should be.) If the scenes of them pretending to be ‘gangsta’ had been funnier, I might not have minded as much, but the jokes fall flat far too often.

The scattered characterizations don’t help either. Clarence is a loving father and husband who avoids conflict at all turns in favor of a polite, well-mannered demeanor. He puts the needs of others before his own needs, often to his detriment. Rell insists he needs to lighten up and let his less responsible side flourish and throughout the film, in pretending to be a gangster, Clarence is able to indulge in this side of his personality. The problem is, we never get the feeling Clarence was ever this kind of person in the first place and the idea that he’s been holding back this side of his personality his whole life is under-developed.

I know, I know – this is a comedy. Characterizations aren’t as important as the humor, right? But, when the humor is so scattershot that you find yourself paying attention to these kinds of inconsistencies, it does become a problem.

By its 3rd act though, Keanu is up-and-running again, bringing both the action and the laughs in spades. It trades any semblance of reality or genuine character development for full-blown cartoonish comedy. The tradeoff works in its favor, as the jokes become more consistent and the pace picks up considerably. It’s almost enough to make you forget just how dull the preceding moments were.

Despite its sporadic quality, Keanu manages to get by thanks to Key and Peele themselves. Their comic timing and all-around charisma works wonders, carrying the film through its lesser moments. There’s never any doubt as to their abilities, and with a stronger script, they could be capable of crafting the next comedy classic. As far as first efforts go, Keanu could have been a lot worse. The frustrating thing is, with a bit more polish, it could have been a lot better too. But the pros outweigh the cons, and if you’re a fan of the duo or kittens in general, you’ll find plenty to enjoy here.

FINAL RATING: 3.5/5

Sing Street - Film Review

Oh, man. I really wanted to like this movie. I mean, really really. I adore John Carney’s feature debut Once and was hoping to find some of that magic rekindled here. But despite strong performances from its relatively inexperienced cast and a top-notch soundtrack, Sing Street’s scattershot plot and unfocused characterizations keep it from truly singing. (See what I did there? Do you hate me for it? I hate me for it)

It’s 1985. The Cure has just released ‘The Head on the Door’ and Back to the Future is captivating movie audiences worldwide. In Dublin, Ireland, a 15-year-old lad named Conor has just been informed by his parents that they can’t afford his ‘fancy’ upper class education and will be transferring him to a free state-school.

The shift is understandably jarring – the place is a zoo. Fights break out on the regular and teachers pay little mind to the chaos in the classrooms. Conor is tormented not only by his classmates, but by the school’s strict principal (Don Wycherley), who calls Conor out on his first day for not wearing black shoes. When Conor argues that his brown shoes are ‘really quite sensible,’ the principal forces him to spend the rest of the day shoeless.

Conor is befriended by Darren, another social outcast (gingers never can catch a break). In an attempt to impress Darren, Conor asks Raphina, the aspiring model who lives across the street from the school, to be in a music video for his band. She agrees, but there’s just one problem: Conor doesn’t have a band. He and Darren set off to recruit musicians for their new ‘band’ Sing Street, so Conor can woo Raphina, win the respect of his classmates and discover who he truly is.

There are elements of Sing Street I really enjoyed. As I mentioned earlier, the soundtrack is outstanding (I’m listening to it right this VERY SECOND, no matter when you might be reading this review), and I loved all the scenes that involved the band getting together and making music/movies. It’s slightly unbelievable that a group of such young kids would be quite this good at making catchy pop songs, but the performances are so fun and spirited, it’s easy to suspend your disbelief. (Carney co-wrote the original compositions with Gary Clark) I was also thoroughly entertained by Conor’s discovery of new bands and how he'd adapt his musical and fashion stylings accordingly.

While Carney’s direction is solid and he does a great job capturing the look/feel of the era, his script is a scattered mishmash of ideas and themes that never coalesces into a satisfying whole. He takes on a wide range of topics, including but not limited to growing up in 1980s Dublin, dealing with abusive authority figures, coping with your parents’ crumbling marriage, not letting your dreams get away from you, etc., but never strikes the right balance between them. Intriguing subplots are left under-developed or completely unexamined and the most interesting plotline – the formation/development of the band – takes a backseat to the more hackneyed one - the romance between Conor and Raphina, which never fully transcends its young-adult trappings.

This is by no means the fault of the young actors, who are all excellent. As Conor, Ferdia Walsh-Peelo is very appealing. He nails the quietly cocky, slightly awkward demeanor of the character perfectly, and does a great job in the film’s more emotional moments. Likewise, Lucy Boynton is beautiful and elusive as Raphina, the star of Sing Street’s music videos and the object of Conor’s affections.

The additional bandmates are great too with Mark McKenna being the standout as Eamon, a musical prodigy who can play practically any instrument. It’s just such a shame we don’t get to spend more time getting to know them, as the musical aspects are the film's strongest moments by far.

And maybe that’s the biggest problem with Sing Street: the whole thing feels like Carney was so concerned with finding the perfect musical cue, he forgot to develop a fully realized story or characters. In that regard, the film is a lot like its main protagonist, constantly shedding one identity for another without ever really finding itself. If that was Carney’s intention, more power to him. It just doesn’t make for very good storytelling.

Here's hoping this one grows on me. In the meantime, I’m going to go listen to ‘Drive It Like You Stole It’ for the umpteenth time.

FINAL RATING: 3/5