Thursday, November 28, 2019

Special Thanksgiving Review!







On the morning after his 85th birthday, wealthy crime novelist Harlan Thrombey (Christopher Plummer) is found dead in his study of an apparent suicide. As the family grieves, Detective Lieutenant Elliot (Lakeith Stanfield) and State Trooper Wagner (Noah Seegan) question the bereaved family members in order to confirm their initial suspicions. Then enters private detective Benoit Blanc (Daniel Craig) to investigate the possibility of foul play. With the entire Thrombey family as possible suspects, the game is afoot.


     Knives Out director Rian Johnson stated a love for murder mysteries and it shows in this brilliantly complex but surprisingly straightforward whodunnit. There'll be no spoilers, but what I can say is that Johnson has crafted a puzzle so tightly written and meticulously put together it would make Agatha Christie proud. Johnson brings together an all-star ensemble cast putting on great performances all around, each player pulling off their characters with gusto and aplomb.

     The setting of a lone mansion out in an isolated field is nothing new for the murder mystery genre. One could say it's almost expected, especially if the manor has secret passageways and hidden rooms. There's even the eccentric private investigator whom the police call in to be the actual sleuth while they run errands and do some legwork. And ontop of all of that is a multitude of red herrings, each having their own motives and alibis for the time of death. But, as is usually the case, things are not as they appear to be. No detail is too minute, from prop knives to cases of mistaken identity both real and supposed Clue is mentioned in a funny throwaway line and the game GO is a game that Harlan liked to play with his nurse Marta, played by Ana De Armas.

     In the hands of a lesser creator, this could've been a mishmash of deceit, misdirection and fake outs. In my opinion, a good mystery is a story that gives the viewers everything they need to solve the mystery. It doesn't break its own rules or lie to the audience. It plays the game fair and square and lets you do the deducing and sleuthing alongside the gumshoe or protagonist. Here Rian Johnson plays around with the convention of the "gentleman sleuth" as Benoit Blanc's character is described as. Normally he'd be the focus, the character we spend the most time with. However, it's Ana De Armas's Marta on whom the film holds its focus. We go through her family life with her mother and sister as they live in a small apartment brownstone. We also see how she thinks on her feet and is able to outwit those who might do her harm.

     Another way that this film differs from the usual detective story is that the initial mystery is revealed early on. This sort of lulls the viewer into thinking this won't be a "whodunnit" but a "how will they get away with it." I know; that phrasing isn't as quick or punchy. In any case, There was well set-up tension all throughout the film as to how this person would succeed when everything seems to go against their favor. Every time they seemed to be in the clear, a new complication would occur, like trying to get rid of evidence, only for one of the family dogs to retrieve it like a game of fetch.

     The entire ensemble cast turned in great performances. Jamie Lee Curtis's Linda was a "keeping up appearances" uptight matriarch, Don Johnson were her doofus husband, Michael Shannon showed a slightly sinister side as the self-serving acting CEO of Harlan's publishing company. Toni Collette puts on her best "Karen" impersonation (the internet folks will get that) as Joni Thrombey, Harlan's daughter in law and a hippe-esque lifestyle guru. Joni and her daughter Meg, played by Katherine Langford, come off as the type of liberals who sound off on social injustices from the safety of their ivory towers but will turn as WASP-y as the rest of the clan if their livelihood is threatened. On the other side of the political spectrum, Jaeden Martell of the "IT" movies is given brief scenes as Walt's son Jacob, an avatar of online trolls, from whom Rian Johnson has experienced more than his fill of virtual vitriol. While Joni and Meg are shown as lacking the courage of their convictions, Jacob is outright mocked and made fun of. The Thrombeys are not nice people, except for maybe Harlan and his mother.

     Chris Evans is something of a show-stealer in his scenes as the arrogant, spoiled-rotten grandson Hugh "Ransom" Thrombey. He carries himself with an egotistical swagger sporting a sharp tongue and even sharper mind, despite never having made anything of himself. But it's Chris Evans's charm and sincerity that lets you look past the brash, immature, vulgar exterior to see glimpses of a good person underneath the playboy lifestyle. 


     Daniel Craig's Benoit Blanc is a true character right out of an Agatha Christie story. Delightfully eccentric, almost to the point of silliness but knows how to ask the right questions to get to the truth. When he finally hangs up the tux as Bond, Craig has another character he could easily turn into a franchise. Blanc is a throwback to Hercule Poirot in both method and inspiration. He didn't come off as a Holmesian type detective, or at least the ones that pass for it. Blanc isn't impossibly brilliant nor lacking in social skills or patience for courtesy. He was a gentleman sleuth through and through with a keen deductive mind. He never boasted about his brilliance like some geniuses in popular culture seem fond of doing, which was honestly refreshing.

     Knives Out  features a terrific ensemble cast, twists and turns that come right out of left field but don't insult the audience's intelligence, and some genuinely funny moments. I would definitely recommend everyone see this film as it is one of the best this year and I hope we get more like this from Rian Johnson, perhaps having Daniel Craig returning as Benoit Blanc to solve yet another oddball mystery of murder, intrigue and betrayal.

Monday, November 18, 2019

Parasite and The Quandry of Ethical Survival



     Ki-Woo (Choi Woo-Shik), has a plan to help his struggling family get out of poverty and the dirty, dingy semi-basement apartment they huddle together in. He plans to take over for his friend as an English tutor for tech company CEO Park Dong's (Lee Sun Kyun) daughter Da-Hye (Jung Ji-So). While there, he hatches a scheme to not only bring on his sister Ki-Jeong (Park So-Dam) as an art therapist for young Park Da-Song (Jung Hyoon-Jun), but his father Kim Ki-Taek (Song Kang-Ho) as Dong's personal driver and mother Chung-Sook (Jang Hye-Jin) as the housekeeper and maid of Dong's wife Choi Yo-Jeong. While the Kim family run their little collective hustle, events take a turn for the strange and things escalate to a shocking, brutal conclusion.

     Bong Joon-Ho's Parasite starts out as a kind of dark comedy, with a family on the brink of destitution while they struggle for work and are down on their luck. It's almost like the opening to Mickey And The Beanstalk with everyone huddled close together and trying to find something, anything to eat and get through the day. It'd be depressing if it weren't for the almost absurd ways they try to make money and keep their phones on through searching the house for a wi-fi signal and chasing away drunks who urinate near their window. So naturally, they'd jump at the chance at even the slightest hint of a better life when it's presented to them.

    It doesn't take long for this movie to remind me of Snowpiercer, Joon-Ho's 2013 drama about class warfare on a train rolling along a desolate planet Earth in a post apocalyptic future. The Kims, people of little opportunity and means try to climb up the ladder of success through any methods necessary. They hustle and manipulate to get some of the good fortune from those who have enjoyed an almost obscene amount of material wealth. The way they do this is ethically questionable at best, but such is the world they, and unfortunately we, live in where such methods become almost necessary to even make ends meet. The result of the cult of materialism and the bondage of modern capitalism.

    It's easy to see why this movie comes with this particular title. If anything it's pretty much on-the-nose. The Kims, in essence, feed off of the pay that the Parks give them for their work (unknowingly on the Parks's part) and then suddenly they realize that they aren't the only ones who've had this idea, or at the very least, aren't the only ones with problems dealing with their lot in life. Each family takes their turn privately looking down on the other, not recognizing the humanity in others, treating them as means to an end or as simple tools to use and discard on a whim.

     The film makes it a point to bring up young Da-Song's obsession with Native American (called Indian in the film) activities, culture and garb. Whether or not this is considered cultural appropriation is something that I am, admittedly, not educated enough to gauge, though I would say he seems particularly enamored with the watered-down "Americanized" version of it. It's entirely possible they consider it a phase of impressionable childhood fascination as one does. On the other hand, I think the inclusion of this character quirk is not just for "you little rascal" type shenanigans, but an explicit reminder of how anglo-centric cultures like majority white societies borrow or feed off of the cultures of others.

     Take the American settlers, for instance. Arriving on a land already settled by various Native American tribes. Little by little, they take and take and take until they begin to have this notion that what they have stolen was already theirs or that they deserve it more than those who have learned to balance their respect for nature with their need for consumption of food, shelter, etc; People do what they must to survive. Morality or even dignity often times don't factor into it. It simply is what it is. But it's when the bar for what constitutes "survival" raises higher and higher that one can question the morality behind the methods with any sort of authority. It's one thing for a poor man to steal a load of bread to avoid starvation. It's an entirely different thing for a billionaire to steal money from his own company for his own personal hoarding.

     Parasite doesn't try to make one family or group better than the other. All have their flaws and prejudices toward the other and engage in almost vicious condescension behind each other's backs. Park Dong constantly makes reference to Mr. Kim's raunchy stench, brought about by stink bugs introduced in the first scene. Mr .Kim repeatedly asks Mr. Park about loving his wife, to which the latter either blithely concedes or dismisses entirely.The characters constantly refer to Mrs. Park as "simple" and we get implications of Da-Hye having repeated affairs with her young English tutors. The Kims are benefiting off of the Park's wealth that Mr. Park has worked for. However, the disrespect the Parks have for Mr. Kim especially, weighs on Ki-Taek, as evidenced by multiple outbursts whenever his pride is wounded or he is insulted. He learns all too late that sometimes your dignity is the currency with which those who hire you want in trade.

     Envy and the feeling of want can drive people to unethical extremes and in our modern hyper-capitalist society that considers greed not just good but a necessity, it's its own parasitic nature that creates poverty for many, opportunities for few. Instead of trickling down like Regan promised in the 80's, capitalism, particularly for the top percentile of "job creators" and "billionaires" feeds itself like an economic ouroboros. It's a financial feedback loop that is unsustainable with prices ever swelling and less people being able to afford even basic needs. It's no wonder impoverished people turn to hustling or other less savory methods of making money simply to stay afloat. Those in need have little choice but to either take it for themselves or rely on the whims of those of means.

     We all have to consume to survive, whether it be food, resources for shelter and clothing, land, even simple pleasures. Some covet what others take for granted, and yet others squander abundance when spoiled for choice. Others think those who are without are the most free of all, unburdened by choice. There may truly be no such thing as ethical consumption under capitalism, especially today when the disparity between arbitrarily designated  "wage classes" is more severe than it has ever been.

But as the axiom goes, whatever helps you sleep at night.

Monday, November 4, 2019

The Lighthouse: All Work And No Play Makes Homer Something Something

The Lighthouse: All Work And No Pay Makes Homer Something Something

The Lighthouse.jpeg

     Ephraim Winslow (Robert Pattinsion) takes a four weeks contract job with lighthouse wickie Thomas Wake (Willem Dafoe) at a New England lighthouse. During his time on the island, the young man is driven to the brink of madness by the repetition of his duties and the irritable company of Mr. Wake. Unfortunately, a storm delays the ferry that was meant to retrieve the two men, forcing them into a prolonged isolation that pushes them both over the edge. 

     If there's one thing you can give director Robert Eggers credit for, it's that he can make small period pieces look about as authentic as possible. The production value on this movie, as well as his previous film The VVitch, is astounding. The utensils, the weathered appearance of the cabin, the menial labor on display lend a particular verisimilitude to the experience. Eggers knows how to research a time period to give you as close to a clear picture as possible. The cinematography and film aspect ratio harkens back to older films, with the end credits calling the cast "players" which was a nice touch. It almost makes the film feel like a two-man play of sorts. 

     Speaking of, both Robert Pattinson and Willem Dafoe give terrific performances. Pattinson's Ephraim showing the weary, depressed, lonely mindscape of a young man running from past failures and Dafoe's Wake is a salty former sea captain who's so full of barnacles and bullshit that even Ephraim calls him out on his almost parodist portrayal. When the two men aren't drunkenly crooning sea chanties to each other and dancing like lunatics, they let out insults. One in particular delivered by Dafoe brings chills to the blood and cements his character firmly in the mind, regardless of his somewhat comical delivery and appearance. 

     The story starts out a bit slow, building its atmosphere with a patient hand, letting the audience figure things out through dialogue and context clues. On the first night, Ephraim finds a mermaid statue in the head of his cot. Hints at his backstory involving being a timberman or woodsman in Canada as he sees logs somehow floating on the ocean surface, giving way to the siren's call of a beautiful mermaid (played by Valeriia Karaman). It's also the first threads of the tapestry of his sanity fraying and becoming untangled. 

     From there it becomes a slog, both for Ephraim and for myself, watching him doing his repetitive duties day in, day out, with Wake barking orders in the young man's ear about shirking his responsibility. I'm not saying that it's boring, but it does convey the boredom Ephraim is suffering from, which works in the movie's favor. If I know anything, it's going to work day in and and day out and doing basically the same thing over and over with little deviation. And each day passes with Ephraim working diligently, though not without incident or complaint as when he insists he swabbed the floors. It's when the reality of his continued servitude and captivity sets in that things really pick up and take a turn for the insane. 

     It's never concrete on whether or not there's something supernatural afoot, even when Ephraim commits something of a bad luck faux pas for sailors. It could easily be chalked up to coincidence that the ferry coming to whisk them away was nowhere to be found and that's perfectly fitting with the downward spiral of Ephraim's mental state. Personally speaking, I think it's all in the unfortunate man's head. Fever dreams of a mind gone mad through the doldrums of duty. His only respite being the times he spends alone pleasuring himself or getting into nightly drunken encounters with Wake, the ever-demanding taskmaster, who throws in a sea-dog's version of a "damned millenial snowflake" speech near the end.

     The Lighthouse is an interesting watch if one doesn't mind the atmosphere of loneliness, depression and performative masculinity to the sacrifice of one's sense of self. The more head-tilting and visually distinct moments (such as when a person starts sprouting tentacles, is covered in barnacles with a crown made of coral or a mermaid with a human vagina for ease of "use") are momentary slaps of "WTF-ery" that punctuate a story of a man who just flat out took the wrong job and wasn't cut out for it, driving him bonkers.

Click down below to subscribe to my Patreon!

Become a Patron!

Wednesday, October 30, 2019

Subscribe To My Patreon Today!





Hello, everybody! I've had this up for a while but haven't really promoted it a whole lot. But that changes today! Click the embedded button below to subscribe to my Patreon page! I'll have the Patreon button in every post/article going forward!

As a Patron you can:

$1- Get a producer credit in any future published works.

$2- Can make a review request (see tier for guideline details)

Constructive feedback is appreciated. If we get more patrons, we can expand benefits and perks in the future! Thank you all for your time!


Become a Patron!

Sunday, October 27, 2019

Joker Review: Sympathy For The Devil

Joker Review: Sympathy For The Devil







Arthur Fleck (Joaquin Phoenix) is a pitiful man with a condition in which he compulsively laughs until he can barely breathe. While living in a slum in 1980's Gotham City, he takes care of his eccentric mother Penny, who dreams of one day being taken care of by mayoral candidate Thomas Wayne (Brett Cullen). Every day, he goes to work as a party clown with aspirations of being a stand up comedian. Economic troubles, social unrest and his own mental anguish regarding himself, his past and the rising anger from the lower-income citizenry push Arthur into a downward spiral the effects of which not even his fevered mind could contemplate.

      This review has been something of a long time coming for me, personally.I'm not usually a big fan of villains. That's not to say I don't enjoy some villains (Rowena on Supernatural is a personal favorite of mine), but by and large when a character is a bad guy and the story needs me to dislike them, it doesn't take much prompting. But then you have stories where the villain is excruciatingly human and it's tough not to at least understand their motivations for their actions. I think that's the key factor to a good villain: motivation. Which is a steep mountain to climb when it comes to an iconic villain like The Joker.

     To call The self-proclaimed "Clown Prince of Crime" mercurial would be the grand-daddy of all understatements. His motivations change with nearly each appearance. One moment, he wants to sell fishes full of Joker-venom, the next, he wants to run for President. One time he wants to kill all of Batman's family and comrades, the next he's trying to ruin Jim Gordon's sanity.You never quite know what to expect when the gruesome grinning gangster shows up. Even when it comes to his backstory, he would "prefer it to be multiple choice." Which is pretty much at the heart of Joker.

     Let me be absolutely clear about this right now, Joaquin Phoenix gives a STELLAR performance. He puts his entire body and mind into this performance and completely owns each scene he's in. Phoenix looks like this role exacted a heavy toll on him portraying such an emaciated, pathetic figure. But at the same time, there's a dark, sinister foreboding bubbling under the surface. It gives an uneasy sense of menace to every scene he's in. Joaquin Phoenix's performance is worth the price of admission alone.

     One other mark of praise I will give the film is that the cinematography and gritty aesthetic of Gotham City were top notch. It evokes a dilapidated metropolis with the contrast of the bright lights of the rich and famous with the shadows and dim bleakness of the unprivileged and forgotten. Anyone who's seen Taxi Driver or King Of Comedy can see the influence of Scorsese dripping off of every frame of this movie. The lighting and colorization of each scene sets the tone it's meant to convey perfectly, from the darkness of Arthur and Penny watching Robert DeNiro's Murray Franklin, to the bright, vibrant bombast of Joker's "coming out" scene on the now famous staircase in The Bronx. This is a technically well-crafted movie, for whatever misgivings I may have.

     Having said all of that, this is a strange, depressing and often times uncomfortable movie to watch. The violence isn't excruciating or out of place, just abrupt and visceral. The hopelessness of economic inequality echoes the current strife of today's society with the subtlety of a sledgehammer lobotomy. As relatable as Arthur's situation can be to some, it doesn't distract from his less endearing qualities like making an entire relationship in his head about a woman he shared an elevator with and briefly stalked.

     Watching someone spiral into madness can be an intriguing experience, but it can also cause self-reflection. If we went through what Arthur endured in this movie, would we be any better or would we ourselves lose our minds? That's what the movie would like to ask, I'm sure. But it doesn't really bother to. I'd go as far to say this movie really doesn't have anything to say about anything. It's not trying to be a grand political statement about the downtrodden citizens rising up to overtake the privileged, because the main character doesn't really care about that. He just happens to relate to or come from similar situations as those who live in poverty and having their medical care cut in order for the rich and powerful to live high on the metaphorical hog.

     Another thing that the story seems to gloss over is the notion of reliable narration. Certain revelations about not only Arthur but particular interactions with other characters, namely Sophie, an apparent love interest (played by Zazie Beets), it's shown that our protagonist's view of the world isn't necessarily one we can simply take at face value. Even though it's not specifically narrated to us in voiceover (like in Taxi Driver one of the movie's clear artistic inspirations) we still see the world framed through Arthur's perspective. Which throws how people's interactions with Arthur into question. Even at the end, we're not quite sure if what we watched was even real, but then again, that's probably the most Joker-ish thing of all. 

     As something of a side note, I want to take a moment to laugh at the hand-wringing fear-mongering that the media tried to put forth about this movie being so violent, so insane, so horrible, that it would inspire incels or aggressive male douchebags into going on killing sprees. First of all, while popular culture is known for people missing the point of a story, someone who ends up shooting up any place usually was headed down that path anyway and it isn't the fault of a fictional felonious fool. Secondly, while Arthur does display creepy behavior, especially toward Sophie, he doesn't show a sense of entitlement, at least not towards her. His concerns and cares seem to stem more about his own well-being and what he can get. And third, all this movie has inspired as of the time of writing this article is a bunch of folks clogging up a stairway in The Bronx.

Now that's funny.

    

    

Wednesday, October 16, 2019

Scorsese, Marvel Movies, And You

Scorsese, Marvel Movies, And You



Photo source: Comicbook.com



Evelyn Beatrice Hall once wrote, in her 1906 work The Friends of Voltaire, "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." Fandom is a fickle, mercurial, and passionate mistress. We in "geek culture" hold the media we view in such high esteem and regard that any form of disagreement, alternate viewpoint or dismissal of it as something "less than" is, to some, considered a personal insult or an attack likened unto heresy or blasphemy. Internet flame wars rage between fans, arguing which version or "cut" of a particular film is superior to others. Fans verbally battling over who should be the one true pairing or OTP of a fictional character (without going into the lengthy but necessary discussion on LGBTQ representation or lack thereof in media). It's become so volatile that even broaching subjects to put forth an opinion at all, let alone an unpopular one, is now considered a "hot take."

     Enter prolific and Oscar-winning filmmaker Martin Scorsese. Hailed as a visionary auteur for his classic movies Taxi Driver, Raging Bull, The King of Comedy, Cape Fear, Casino, Goodfellas, The Departed, The Wolf of Wall Street, among many, many others. Countless aspiring screenwriters, directors, and filmmakers alike all look up to him as a  wellspring of cinematic knowledge. His stories are, if nothing else, undeniably human. From Travis Bickle's flawed and misguided view of the world in Taxi Driver to Leonardo DiCaprio's head-strong desire for money and notoriety in The Wolf of Wall Street, Scorsese knows how to make films about human drama in all its brutal, violent honesty. Despite the details of this paragraph, he really needs no introduction.

     In an October 2019 interview with Empire Magazine, Martin Scorsese spoke about the ever popular and ever profitable superhero film genre that has both made fans cheer and engorged movie studios wallets. "I don't see them," he said, "I tried, you know? But that's not cinema." The famous director then likened superhero movies, to which many attributed to meaning Marvel superhero movies, to be "theme parks." As per usual, the fandoms unloaded with both barrels. One side chastising the venerated filmmaker as a pretentious, out of touch film snob. Others defended Scorsese's comments, calling Marvel movies and superhero movies in general garbage or cinematic fast food, painting them as not worthy to be considered "true cinema" or "real movies."  

      This brings up the question, what is "true cinema?" Not to dive too deep into the etymology of the word, but it means basically "pictures that move." In a purely technical sense, all movies can qualify as "cinema." From Gone With The Wind to The Room, from Casablanca to The Emoji Movie. We often tend to, as flawed people, color our perspectives to the tune of our own personal tastes and preferences. Some folks will think movies like Scarface are "true cinema" in that they transcend their particular genre and speak about the human condition, in all its ugly verisimilitude. Others may look at it as a boring, overlong, needlessly violent screed on the evils of rampant ambition. Both viewpoints are individually valid.

      The conflict comes from taking our preferred tastes in medium (in this case, the kinds of movies we watch) as microcosms of our personalities and values as people. When someone calls a Marvel movie "utter garbage" or Citizen Kane "pretentious nonsense" or pick any horror movie as "vile, disgusting trash," we take it as a personal affront to our very being, or at the very least, an attempted shaming of what we enjoy as something "less than."

     I don't think Martin Scorsese is a "snob" for not liking genre movies or at least not liking the same kind of movies I like. He said he tried and it didn't work for him and that's all anyone can really ask of anyone else. But while I did find his comparison of superhero movies to theme parks a little bit dismissive, it was an apt metaphor in at least one regard, they engage the audience in an exciting and personal way and many people enjoy going to theme parks and riding the rides and experiencing some semblance of thrills, joy and excitement. It breaks up the monotony of their everyday lives and yes, provides an escape from the drudgery of the real world, even if for a couple of hours.

     Having said all of the above, his statement that "cinemas need to step up" is right in that folks do need to watch more than just the usual tights and fights fare. There are some pretty damn good dramatic or even independent films out there that deserve a lot more acclaim than they get. The Peanut Butter Falcon, which I reviewed earlier this year, was a delightful, warm dramatic film that I thoroughly enjoyed. There really is something for everyone out there if they're willing to look.

 
     According to IMDB, there's at least 10,000 movies currently released in 2019. Many of them aren't in theaters, going direct to video or TV or streaming. And even of that lesser amount, superhero movies take up multiple screenings. However, they're outnumbered by the majority of their contemporaries. I myself have watched more than my fair share of movies some would consider "true cinema" and found things to enjoy about them as well as things to criticize. Because that's what we do as viewers and especially as critics.

     Movies are meant to engage their audiences. They're meant to give back something to us for the time and money we've invested in viewing them. Whether it's a roller coaster ride of CGI action figures slamming into each other or a thoughtful character piece of a person slowly losing their mind to dementia or even a cheesy gore-filled slasher romp, if a movie engages with you, it's done it's job. Arguments can be made individually on whether or not it was a positive or negative experience, because art is subjective. It always has been. Not everyone will watch 2001: A Space Odyssey and see a masterpiece of film making. And guess what? That's okay.

      Captain America: Civil War doesn't have to be Taxi Driver. Shazam doesn't have to be The Godfather. The movies you like don't have to be like any other movie for you to enjoy them or consider them a quality cinematic experience. At the end of the day, no one can tell you what you like and what you think is a real movie or true cinema. That's something you have to decide for yourself. But can we at least not be condescending jerks to each other about it?

Sunday, October 6, 2019

Hell In A Cell 2019 Review


 WWE Hell In A Cell 2019

or

Half These Matches Didn't Get Announced Until Today!







Natalya vs Lacey Evans

    





      After at least three previous encounters on RAW, once again we have a match between Lacey Evans and Natalya basically inflicted upon us. This slow, plodding, bore of a contest dragged on and on until we get Natalya mercifully making Lacey tap, making the score (for the two of you counting) at two a piece.

Rating: One Black and Yellow polka dotted outfit out of Five.


Sasha Banks vs Becky Lynch (C)- Hell In A Cell Match For The RAW Women's Championship





     In a stark contrast to the previous women's bout, this match started off fast and furious with a brawl outside of the Cell as the structure was lowering. Once the two warrior women got back inside the Cell it was a brutal affair; chairshots to the back, ladders to the face, meteora kneedrops to the ladder, slamming repeatedly into the crimson-colored chain-link cage walls. One particularly gnarly spot involved Sasha being propped up on a chair propped on kendo sticks in the corner of the cell, only to be dropkicked by Becky into the corner wall. After a devastating Bexploder suplex off the top rope onto a pile of chairs and a Dis-ArmHer, Becky retains once more. I think this should probably seal the deal for this feud, and Sasha's heel turn has not exactly been paying off in dividends for her. While I'm not wild about the finish, this was a great opening match and a brutal women's match.

Rating: Four Chairs set up by Kendo Sticks In The Corner out of Five


Daniel Bryan and Roman Reigns vs Luke Harper and Erick Rowan- Tag Team Tornado Match




     After a messy melee at the beginning of the match, it ended up turning into a bit of a slow, but well structured match as the veteran tag team Harper and Rowan would bludgeon Roman to then beat-down Bryan when they were finished.It does take a bit to get going, with some really long pauses while Rowan and Harper have control of the match. But once it gets going, it becomes a big more interesting. Especially when Bryan counters a powerbomb by flipping Harper off of the announce table while Roman runs across the other announce tables to spear Erick Rowan through the third and final table. After a Superman Punch/Running Knee/Spear combo, Reigns and Bryan prevail in a hard-hitting bout. Post-Match, Bryan and Roman hug it out and stumble their way back up the ramp.

Rating: Three Long Bushy Beards Out Of Five



Randy Orton vs Ali





     In one of four matches announced the day of Hell In A Cell, Randy Orton and Ali's match's build up was...a backstage segment earlier tonight where Randy Orton talked trash during Ali's interview. Such is the story with a good many matches tonight. It's a clash of styles as the slower, methodical malice of Orton faces off with the high-flying acrobatics of Ali. The story of this was Orton working the midsection of his smaller, faster opponent. Despite a few hope spots (including handstanding out of an RKO attempt) Ali eats an RKO and thanks for comin'. 

Rating: Two Gnarly Welts Across The Stomach Out Of Five. 



Asuka and Kairi Sane aka The Kabuki Warriors vs Alexa Bliss and Nikki Cross (C)- Women's Tag Title Match





     This match was a real mess. Another match that was put together an announced last minute, these four women have a bit of a clusterfuck of a match. The only interesting part came at the end where Asuka, harkening back to Tajiri and The Great Muta, sprays Nikki Cross with green mist. One spinning kick to the face later, it's all she wrote and we have new Women's Tag Champions. 

Rating: Muta 2.0 out of Five  



The OC (AJ Styles, Karl Anderson, Luke Gallows) vs The Viking Raiders and Braun Strowman





      Another match with very little build-up (aside from two matches between Anderson, Gallows and the Raiders on RAW) announced only hours before showtime, there isn't too much of a story aside from The OC's inability to solve The Viking Raiders. The match ends as abruptly as it was announced as the referee throws out the match when Gallows and Anderson, not legally tagged in, kicked Braun while he was down and ignored the official's orders. And then Braun lays out AJ Styles to set up his confrontation with boxer Tyson Fury. And we get a post-match of AJ Styles pretending to be concussed. Blegh. 

Rating: One Getting Of These Hands Out Of Five.  


King Baron Corbin vs Chad Gable





     Announced today but has had minor build up due to Gable losing to Corbin in the King Of The Ring tournament. After at least two cringe-worthy moments of short jokes, Corbin endures a withering opening volley from Gable before taking control. Say what you will about his wrestling ability, Corbin has a talent for making the fans hate his guts and wish he'd get hit by a barbed wire truck and land in a salt patch. Corey Graves doing the continuous short jokes and Greg Hamilton announcing Chad as "Shorty Gable" were definite points against this match, but Gable, as he tends to, puts on a stellar performance in a winning effort against his larger opponent.

Rating: Three Short Jokes That Were Never Funny Out Of Five



Charlotte Flair vs Bayley (C)- Smackdown Women's Title Match




     After R-Truth wins back the 24/7 Title from Tamina (Who won it from Carmella backstage earlier in the night), Bayley and Charlotte begin their match in earnest with Bayley showing her own dirty tricks. After trading shots working on each other's legs, Bayley ends up tapping out to Charlotte's Figure Eight leglock and left in a heap, screaming her frustrations and taking her anger out on the steel stairs and crying. Bayley's heel run has, so far, been pretty lackluster. I'm hoping her character gets something of an overhaul soon.

Rating: Two Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Temper Tantrums Out Of Five


"The Fiend" Bray Wyatt vs Seth Rollins (C)- Hell In A Cell Match For The WWE Universal Championship 






     Give Bray Watt credit, he knows how to make a character that's disturbing and nigh invincible. Taking hits with a kendo sticks like being hit with a wiffle bat, The Fiend looks like a beast as he throws Seth into the cage walls under the blood red lighting. Even when Seth puts him through a table and hitting him with his Stomp finisher, The Fiend gets right back up, almost immediately. The crowd turns HARD on Seth as he keeps hitting at least ten or more Stomps on The Fiend, who keeps getting back up and kicking out at a count of one. The Fiend's toughness seems to win the crowd over. Or it's just being hit with everything but the kitchen sink makes things a bit repetitive. And we have Seth laying a chair, a ladder, a toolbox piled on Bray's face, Seth slamming a sledgehammer ontop of the metallic pile was enough for the ref to call a disqualification. In a match that is typically no-disqualification.

     I get the story they want to tell here, Seth going to a dark place to try and put down The Fiend only for said Fiend to rise up (particularly after the match is thrown out and the medics come to put Bray on the stretcher. AEW chants rain down upon the proceedings like an angry storm from a justifiably pissed off crowd and I don't blame them one bit. A Mandible Claw, two Sister Abigail finishers and one more Mandible Claw post-match and we get strobe lights and woozy camera movements to make things all spoopy.

Rating:





Overall Grade:






Two Mountains Of Shit Out Of Five


     The beginning of the Pay-Per-View was hot as Hell, with a great opener and a really good follow up. But as soon as the matches with little to no build up started, the quality of the show went down drastically. The matches weren't technically bad or anything, there just was little to care about or get invested in, even for me, who watches RAW and Smackdown regularly. But the ending to that last Hell In A Cell Match is infuriating, I don't even care what the intent was. Instead of calling for a disqualification, call it a ref stoppage, or have The Fiend win. Clearly it was what the fans wanted, especially when Seth kept spamming his finisher and piling up tools and furniture on Bray's face. 

      Again, I get it, make The Fiend look unstoppable, make Seth look desperate, but you seriously couldn't just have the ref stop the damn match and have a post-match thing where The Fiend makes the lights go out and vanishes from the stretcher? You couldn't have done ANYTHING other than this utter incompetence? Why even have this match in Hell In A Cell (a match usually used to END feuds) as the first match of this story?



Match Of The Night


    



     By a wide margin, this match easily was the best of the night. Inventive in its brutality, hard-hitting, damn good all around from beginning to end, Becky and Sasha both gave stellar performances, beating the absolute hell out of each other in this war of attrition.