Life Sentences

Through multiple series on Netflix, I've become a fan of writer-director Mike Flanagan. Author Stephen King has become a fan too. Flanagan's adaptation of King's Gerald's Game -- thought to be an unadaptable book -- was so creatively successful that King allowed him to film a sequel to The Shining that even acknowledged the existence of the Stanley Kubrick movie that King despises.

Every now and then, usually in one of his novella collections, Stephen King offers up a story outside the borders of the horror genre for which he his known. When they're adapted into movies (as all his writing inevitably is), they often garner more acclaim than than the horror films; The Green Mile was Oscar-nominated, Stand By Me is widely loved, and The Shawshank Redemption (according to the users of IMDb) remains "the best movie ever made."

That's a long wind-up, but it's all to say that I was really interested in what Mike Flanagan, who has won me over with his work in horror, could do with a non-horror story from the "master of horror." That new movie is The Life of Chuck.

Part of the reason for the long wind-up is that I feel like I can't actually say much about the movie itself. The Life of Chuck isn't exactly a story that turns on a "twist," but I do feel like the more you know about it going in, the more of the essence of it would already be dribbling away. Suffice it to say that the title is not a misdirection. It really is the story of the life of one Chuck Krantz, divided formally into a three-act structure... but with the three acts presented in reverse order. It touches on many emotions and themes along the way, but is primarily a story about finding the joy amid hardship and loss.

Anyone who has watched those Mike Flanagan projects I linked to in my intro will know that he likes to work with the same actors again and again, always picking up new performers along the way, but staying fiercely loyal to his "repertory company." The Life of Chuck is no exception; you'll see Flanagan staples like Kate Siegel, Samantha Sloyan, and Rahul Kohli. Relative Flanagan newcomer Mark Hamill gets an especially juicy role in the last half ("act one") of the movie.

But The Life of Chuck brings many other people to the mix -- many of whom it would be great to see integrated into the "company" -- including Chiwetel Ejiofor, Karen Gillan, Jacob Tremblay, Carl Lumbly, and Matthew Lillard. Mia Sara, who had formally retired from acting, came back to work with Flanagan. A huge child talent has been brought to film in Benjamin Pajak. You get exquisite narration from Nick Offerman. And other recognizable faces are happy to turn up just for one fun scene, people like David Dastmalchian and Harvey Guillén.

And of course, you get Tom Hiddleston in the title role. Interestingly, the sprawling nature of the story -- incorporating dozens of characters and spanning many decades -- means that Hiddleston actually isn't in that much of the film. But it all absolutely turns on his performance. One scene in particular, at the very heart of the movie, is very much the make-or-break moment for the entire story. Together with scene partners Annalise Basso and Taylor Gordon, Hiddleston musters all his considerable charisma into a completely physical performance that encapsulates everything the story is about.

I enjoyed The Life of Chuck very much... though I would not say it's without faults. By the time the entire narrative has been revealed, it's unclear why the opening of the story ("act three") needed to go on quite as long as it did. I'm also not sure whether that one key scene in the middle, good as it is, can alone sell you on the notion of an entire life lived to the fullest. Still, I did find the movie joyful and uplifting. And the sprawling (and excellent) cast alone feels like reason enough to give it a try. I give The Life of Chuck a B+.

Enterprise Flashback: The Xindi

Season three marked several changes for Star Trek: Enterprise -- most notably the beginning of a season-long story arc with the episode "The Xindi."

Weeks into their exploration of the Delphic Expanse, Enterprise seems no closer to locating the mysterious Xindi who attacked Earth. Now they have a lead that a Xindi might be imprisoned on a nearby mining colony. But to get information from him, they might need to stage a prison break.

As we get into season three, we'll see whether the Xindi arc really changed this series that much. But two other notable changes with this episode suggest to me that this effort to reform this series and increase ratings was misguided and no more than skin deep.

First, the show officially changes its title at this point, from simply Enterprise to Star Trek: Enterprise. When the series was created, a bunch of suits made the call that somehow the name "Star Trek" was an albatross around the show, an off-putting moniker that might keep the masses from tuning in for their more action-oriented (and sexy!) science fiction show. Now, suits decided that not calling it Star Trek was dragging it down, as though there were hordes of Star Trek fans out there who either didn't know this was a Star Trek show, or who would somehow come back and try it again now that the words "Star Trek" were officially in the name. Regardless, this is all changing the wrapping paper on the same gift.

We also get the "Yacht Rock"-ification of the already-atrocious main title theme. Having dealt with complains about "Faith of the Heart" for two years, the Powers That Be decided the way to "fix it" was to give it a bouncier remix with a furiously strummed guitar and a splash of percussion. In a vacuum, personal taste could easily lead you to find this version better or worse -- but in the context of the show, it feels undeniably worse to me. A key problem of "Faith of the Heart" is how terribly it butts up against whatever tension-filled teaser the series is trying to set up each episode. This Xindi story arc, by its nature, sought to raise the stakes every episode, but now the contrast with the theme song was even worse, smash cutting from action and tension to something you'd find right around 100 on the FM dial in every major radio market of the time.

In this day and age, though, both those changes are easily swept away by the "Skip Intro" button. So enough of that, let's talk about "The Xindi" as a start to the new season. It's... not great either.

If the concern was that Enterprise (excuse me -- Star Trek: Enterprise) was only appealing to a dwindling audience, it's wild how much this episode doubles down on all the same stuff it's been doing, stuff that presumably drove away others who had sampled the show. T'Pol now has catsuits in multiple colors! We've escalated from lubing up in the decon chamber to back rubs and shirtless boob-cupping, masquerading as "sleep aid" meditation!

Also, they are definitely trying to chase the success of 24. Not only have they embarked on a season-long story arc, but they've added a heaping dose of Jack Bauer to their character recipes -- both Trip and Archer have different moments in this episode bordering on the "who do you work for?!" style torture that was one of 24's signatures. And things are grittier throughout, with plot points involving a severed finger, crawling through sewage, and air ducts with fireballs.

But it seems the series still fails to recognize what the best or most interesting thing is about any given episode. Here -- to me, anyway -- it feels like the fun revelation is that the Xindi aren't a single species, but five different species with factional conflict among themselves. Except that the way the script is structured, that isn't a revelation. The episode opens with a conference that just shows us all the Xindi right out of the gate. So when Phlox later discovers there might be two Xindi species, akin to Cro-Magnon and Neanderthal ancestors on Earth, it just falls flat. And all for what? To bookend the episode with the most cliche of villain monologuing?

Or how about giving the MACOs some compelling scenes, if you're trying to make such a big deal out of a new military force being here? Despite the presence of two significant TV stars -- one recognizable at the time (Steven Culp) and one on the cusp of fame (Daniel Dae Kim), the MACOs really don't do much. They're part of a big action sequence at the end, but Enterprise has staged many good ones over its two years, and this one doesn't feel like anything special. About all that's different for the presence of the MACOs is that Reed is even more annoying than usual in this episode, whining about how they're taking his job. (Maybe if he'd been doing his job with any skill whatsoever, they wouldn't be there in the first place)

Other observations:

• Two of the Xindi species are rendered in CG. The aquatic ones look pretty good -- helped by the fact that they don't have to be on camera at the same time as actors in sci-fi makeup. The insectoid Xindi, on the other hand, have problems with lighting, and don't quite seem to be believably in the space.

• Boy, the exposition explaining the new "command center" is super awkward. Archer has a pretty awful "as you all know" speech about it, as the camera tracks him all the way around the room to show off the set.

I feel like "The Xindi" kicks off this season in a rather lackluster way. Filled with mindless action and laughably gratuitous sex appeal, it promises nothing new the show hasn't already been doing. I give it a C+. But of course, it really is just setting the table. Perhaps the meal yet to come will be better...?

Now With More Pirates!

Years ago, I wrote about the board game Maracaibo -- a beast of a game from designer Alexander Pfister that ultimately proved to be too much for my gaming group. But it has a fair amount in common with another game we enjoy more, Great Western Trail, and so I always remained open to revisiting it.

I still haven't done that. But I have now played the game's spin-off, Pirates of Maracaibo.

Pirates of Maracaibo keeps many of the same core elements of Maracaibo -- you sail around the Caribbean, gather treasure, upgrade your ships, and tromp through the jungle, all trying to amass the most points. But the game board has been replaced with a deck of cards that are arranged on the table like a map, with new cards dealt to replace the ones scooped up by players as you go.

I was interested in Pirates of Maracaibo because it seemed like it might be a simpler version of Maracaibo. Having now played it a few times, I'm really not sure that it is. It feels like some element of every major theme or mechanic in the original game is present somewhere in the spin-off. There's just a lot to understand before you can start the first game. And that probably all makes sense -- if somebody truly wants an "easier Maracaibo," then Great Western Trail exists.

But Pirates of Maracaibo does play faster than its "big brother." It shaves about a quarter of the run time off the Maracaibo experience. Maybe Maracaibo fans who have played that game many times would point to some critical change that the Pirates version is lacking, some element that justifies the longer run time. Or maybe you just like playing longer games -- some groups do. But for me, it's nothing but a good thing that a substantially similar game has been released in a smaller package.

Still, Pirates of Maraciabo is very much a gamers' game. I'm not going to bring any new people to the hobby with it, nor will I convince any people who haven't liked Alexander Pfister's other designs that they'll enjoy this one. (Even if this time, two other co-designers are credited: Ralph Bienert and Ryan Hendrickson.) It all comes down to what my same group thinks of this game versus the others. It's clear that Pirates of Maracaibo isn't a big enough hit to displace another game we're already playing. Whether we like it enough to put it into rotation with the others? That remains to be seen. For now, I'd give Pirates of Maracaibo a B.

Enterprise Flashback: The Expanse

With their ratings falling short of those set by Star Trek: Voyager, the writers of Enterprise decided they needed to do something flashy to grab (or re-grab) viewers. Perhaps inspired by shows like 24, they decided that the upcoming third season of the show would feature a season-long story arc. They laid the groundwork for it with their season two finale, "The Expanse."

When an alien ship attacks Earth, killing millions (including Trip's sister), Enterprise is recalled to Earth to take part in the investigation and plan next steps. While en route, the Suliban show up to bring Archer to meet their mysterious benefactor from the future. He reveals that the attack was the work of the Xindi, a race receiving help from rivals in the Temporal Cold War, to preemptively prevent the future destruction of their planet by humans. Enterprise is then dispatched to the home space of the Xindi, a strange "expanse" of weird phenomena. Their mission: to locate the Xindi and prevent a subsequent, even more massive attack. But stalking them to their destination is the Klingon Duras, looking for revenge on Archer.

There is a lot going on in this episode -- so much that reportedly 10 minutes of additional footage was cut entirely. This one episode has to spin down the stories being left behind -- the Temporal Cold War and Klingon skirmishes -- and set up something that hopefully fans would talk about all summer, bringing people to the show when it returned in the fall. Certainly, they've come up with a hell of a teaser: a strange sphere showing up and carving a canyon through Florida with an orbital laser. (It makes for another awkward smash cut to the show's jarring theme song. They really ought to consider getting a new one for the next season. Wink wink.)

The Xindi attack is not subtly inspired by the then-quite-recent 9/11 terrorist attacks -- and as such, the writing and acting is all rather grounded and realistic. We see the unfolding of news, with estimates of the deaths being revised upward again and again. We watch the characters grapple with their own feelings about what's happened. We see that some of these prequel characters aren't taking this in what other Star Treks would show as the "Starfleet way"; they're going to be out for revenge. Still, the emotions feel rushed to me. I think you really feel that 10 minutes of cut footage -- not for the subplots excised entirely (such as one reportedly involving Archer's Earthbound girlfriend), but in how truncated the remaining scenes feel.

But then, the emotions aren't the point as far as the series is concerned. This is a bid to revitalize the show -- and in retrospect, knowing that it would only last two more seasons (and become the first Star Trek in nearly two decades not to run seven years), you can see just how desperate a bid it was. They've got to throw in every possible hook about this "Delphic Expanse" that they can, to bring you back next season. A ghost story about a ship whose crew got turned inside out? Spooky footage of a Vulcan crew going insane? Mention of the more conventional soldiers Enterprise is bringing with them? New weapons the ship will be carrying? Aren't you excited?!

Well... kind of. I mean, I understand why that's the focus. But again, other parts of the story get shorted because of it. It's strange that they even put on the table the idea that some crew members might elect not to go to the Expanse when they ultimately don't explore the matter at all. (Apparently, Hoshi's feelings on that in particular was another one of the subplots cut completely for time.) T'Pol being recalled by the Vulcan High Command, only for her to give up her commission to stay with Enterprise, similarly doesn't amount to much -- not when they've played the "T'Pol might be leaving" card at least twice before.

It's weird to me that the biggest action of the episode isn't about the Expanse or the Xindi. Instead of showing us a taste of what they hope will excite us next season, the big set piece is a battle between Enterprise and the Klingons. It's staged well enough, and the visual effects look great. But it also kind of undermines the notion that the show will be reinvigorated by this new story line; here's the action they so crave to show us, and it has nothing to do with what's being set up for next season.

Other observations:

• This whole "test attack on Earth" is good for setting up a story, but terrible in its internal logic. The Xindi could have tested that weapon anywhere. Why do it on Earth itself, warning humanity that you plan to destroy the whole planet? 

• I cannot believe we're still playing T'Pol as skeptical about time travel after everything she and Enterprise have been through. It's not logical.

• ...though it's fun that other Vulcans are still "non-believers." I like the scene where a Vulcan psychologist covertly tries to test Archer's sanity.

• When Trip and Reed visit the Xindi damage in Florida, the canyon carved by their weapon looks pretty good. The two stiff CG characters we see "walking" up to the edge in the wide shot look terrible -- really undermining the somber tone the scene is going for.

There are good parts of "The Expanse." Some are even tantalizing in the way the writers hope. But the overstuffing of the episode undermines its effectiveness. I give it a B-.

And with that, season two of Enterprise comes to a close. Overall, I think it's a small step down in quality from season one. But it would have been a much bigger step had things not really picked up near the end of the season. Almost all my choices for the top five episodes of season two come from the last handful of episodes: "The Breach," "Regeneration," "Carbon Creek," "Judgment," and "Cogenitor."

Next up, season three: the show gets an official title change, a revised theme song, and embarks on a year-long story arc. 

Enterprise Flashback: Bounty

As Enterprise was drawing near the end of season two and about to kick off a new ongoing storyline, it first wanted to address an existing storyline: Archer's relationship with the Klingons. That was at the center of "Bounty."

Archer is captured by a Tellarite bounty hunter, who means to deliver him to the Klingons. Meanwhile, a virus triggers early pon farr in T'Pol, who is trapped in the decon chamber with Phlox and quickly losing her emotional control.

Archer hasn't exactly excelled at diplomacy through two seasons of Enterprise, so I do like the idea of putting him in a situation where essentially must use diplomacy -- persuading a morally-conflicted bounty hunter to release him. Guest star Jordan Lund is a good scene partner for Scott Bakula, in the role of the bounty hunter Skalaar. The character is well-drawn, with clear doubts about what he is doing, and equally clear determination to ignore those doubts to achieve his own ambitions.

All of that makes it a bit of a weird choice for the character to be a Tellarite. The pig-faced race from the original series was, like Andorians, a nearly blank slate that Enterprise could put their prequel stamp on and flesh out. But I feel that before building to a more well-rounded and realistic alien race, the writers ought to have begun with the few established touchstones: Tellarites are not just literally pig-headed; they're stubborn, belligerent, and gruff in demeanor too. Skalaar is none of those things: friendly, empathetic, and thoughtful. And I feel like it would be a lot easier to accept this atypical Tellarite if Enterprise had thus far spent any time showing us typical Tellarites.

If the writers aren't following up on any established Tellarite story, though, they are following up on their ongoing Klingon story. This is a good development in my book, as early Klingon episodes of Enterprise had left relations with them in entirely too good a place. I'm much more into this prequel paving the road to the conflict we would "later" see in the original series.

Speaking of Klingons, we get the actor behind one of the most famous Klingons (Gowron) in this episode... playing a different alien. There's no mistaking the voice and eyes of Robert O'Reilly as the character Kago. My only question is why his role is so small, particularly when Enterprise has now demonstrated itself more than willing to bring in veteran Trek actors to be on the show. He does at least make a meal of the quirky bit part.

As for the B plot? After the original Star Trek made pon farr famous, any follow-up series with a Vulcan character is eventually going to do its version. And appropriately, Roxann Dawson directs this episode, since her character B'Elanna was at the center of Voyager's bonus pon farr episode. Who better to sensitively guide Jolene Blalock through some objectively embarrassing writhing and flirting and panting and grinding and everything in between? Still, there's something lurid to her performing all this that didn't seem to be the focus when it was Leonard Nimoy or Tim Russ doing it, you know? The "stripped down inside the decon chamber" element of it all doesn't help. (Though they try to come off as "equal opportunity" by putting Phlox in that situation for the first time.)

Still, Blalock commits to the bit, so it doesn't come off as silly as it could have. And I think it helps that John Billingsley is her scene partner for most of the episode. I've often commented on his strong acting on the show. Here, he wisely avoids the expected "comedic" take on having to rebuff the advances of a chemically-altered friend, instead playing someone caring and sympathetic. (Once she escapes, the brief scene in which she comes onto Malcolm Reed is icky in all the ways the rest of the episode could have been.) I feel like the trio of Blalock and Billingsley in front of the camera, with Dawson behind it, keeps a story that could go so wrong mostly on the rails.

Other observation:

• Phlox again mentions Denobulan medical ethics when bluffing T'Pol, reminding us that his people don't believe in treating a patient against their will. While I do still love that conceit, if it keeps coming up only in situations where Phlox going to violate that rule, aren't we basically painting him as an unethical person?

"Bounty" isn't doing anything particularly novel with its main storyline, so I'll call it a decent-but-shaky B-. In a sense, it's the final episode of this version of Enterprise -- the next episode is the season two finale, which sets up the new "season-long story arc" phase of the series.

Presence, Accounted For

My favorite movie so far in 2025 had been Black Bag, director Steven Soderbergh slick spy thriller in a tight 90-minute package. When I wrote about it, I mentioned that it was the second of two brisk films Soderbergh released just weeks apart. (And both written by David Koepp.) I've now been able to catch up with the other one, Presence.

This is story of the Payne family -- Rebekah and Chris, and their teenage children Tyler and Chloe. Rebekah seems to be caught up in some sort of white collar crime. Chloe is mourning the recent death of a close friend. Tyler is acting out in mean-spirited ways, as Chris struggles to get him back on track. But all these struggles seem smaller than the ghostly presence living in the house they've just moved into. As its existence becomes undeniable, Chloe becomes convinced it's her dead friend Nadia, and means them well. But that may not extend to Chloe's new boyfriend Ryan.

While that synopsis captures the bullet points of the narrative, it leaves out the most distinct element of Presence: the way the ghostly entity of the story is portrayed. The ghost is the camera. Everything unfolds exclusively from the POV of the spirit. Yes, this means that I was "taken in" and watched another "gimmick movie," after noting that the last several movies I watched that similarly revolved around a stylistic conceit were all underwhelming. Needless to say, I was willing to take a chance on Soderbergh (and Koepp) -- and I was glad I did.

For the most part, the movie doesn't want to be caught showing the audience how hard all this was to pull off. It has a conventional scene structure, cutting to black for moments to indicate the passage of time. There aren't really any overly hokey moments where action is weirdly staged for the camera's benefit. And the gimmick serves a point -- the audience can derive a lot about the thoughts and feelings of the "presence" simply by the things it chooses to look at.

But make no mistake, this would have been quite a challenge to film. Everything unfolds in the space of a real house, with Soderbergh handling the camera himself since there was no way to hide a large film crew. Each scene is an unbroken single take (a "one-er"). Sometimes this is straight-forward enough, but several major sequences of the movie last five minutes or longer, crossing between rooms, going up and down stairs, or positioning things in just the right way to support a visual effect.

This all demands a high degree of very technical acting from the cast, all while they still work to give emotionally grounded performances. And reportedly, they did it all in a mere 11-day shooting schedule. So hats off to Lucy Liu, Chris Sullivan, Callina Liang, Eddy Maday -- the core family -- and West Mulholland, Julia Fox, Natalie Woolams-Torres, and Lucas Papaelias, rounding out almost everyone else you see in the movie. No one is really given a moment to submit for Oscar consideration (not that the Academy gives much consideration to horror movies anyway)... but nearly all of them have a theater-like moment where they have to convey a powerful emotion on the spot, regardless of the artifice of the real-world situation. This cast pulled me into the story.

And it's a truly interesting story, in that it's a classic horror "slow burn." To me, it's kind of wild that a movie under 90 minutes could be a slow burn -- there's no time to take it slow. But you go through all the expected phases trying to understand the situation and its ramifications. There are character subplots and arcs, and an appropriately satisfying conclusion. If I were to be down on one aspect of the story, it's that they kind of hide information from you to preserve an upcoming "twist ending." I felt that as soon as one vital piece of knowledge was dropped about halfway through the movie, the conclusion of the story felt obvious. But I don't necessarily mean that as a bad thing. The story proceeds to its correct and inevitable conclusion, given what has unfolded so far -- and by that point I was more than invested enough to enjoy the rest of the journey.

I give Presence an A-. The pairing of Steven Soderbergh and David Koepp really served up a one-two punch to start 2025, and are basically the mark to beat for me for good movies in the months left to go.

Platonic -- Ideal?

Those familiar with Apple TV+ shows have been talking about Seth Rogen's recent satire, The Studio. But in my pile of countless shows (that I'll never claw my way to the top of), I've only recently finished the Apple TV+ show he made before that, Platonic.

Sylvia and Will were life-long friends who drifted apart after Will's marriage. But years later, Will is getting divorced, and the two find themselves back in each others' lives. That may prove a challenge to everyone around them, as each finds themselves at a major crossroads in life: Sylvia is considering a return to the office after years as a stay-at-home mother, and Will is clashing more and more with his business partners at his craft brewery. Plus... the two aren't an entirely good influence on each other.

Platonic is a reunion of sorts for the team that made the comedy movie Neighbors. My review of that movie was mixed, though I did note the comedic prowess of Rose Byrne. Here she is again, cutting it up with scene partner Seth Rogen -- and the two make for a solid comedy duo. Nicholas Stoller, director of Neighbors, clearly recognizes this. He's co-creator of Platonic (with Francesca Delbanco), and I would imagine made it with them in mind.

The very premise of the show helps get around a question I raised about another recent rom-com TV show, Nobody Wants This. Funny as that show is, I noted that it's constantly "the middle act" of a romantic comedy -- a series of misunderstandings that threaten the lead couple's ongoing relationship. Platonic tells you right in the title what the relationship of this lead couple is. Others around Sylvia and Will may question it at times, but they don't, and neither should the audience. There's no "will they, won't they." This is two "bros" that happen to be of the opposite sex, having each others' backs in one moment and putting the other up to terrible things the next.

Unsurprisingly, with the show all about those two, you're not going to like it at all if you don't like the banter between Rogen and Byrne. For me, it works. Each meets the other halfway from (what I perceive to be) their usual points on the comedy-drama continuum. There are other good performances on the show; they're just very much not the focus of the storytelling. A few that I particularly enjoyed: Luke Macfarlane as Sylvia's husband Charlie, who gets perhaps two or three episodes of the 10 to really be silly himself; Carla Gallo as Sylvia's friend Katie, who almost drunkenly lobs one-liners with razor precision; and Vinny Thomas as Omar, an employee at Will's brewery, who absolutely shines in what's really the smallest of parts.

Platonic tells a satisfyingly complete story in 10 episodes, and since Seth Rogen did go on to make another television show after it, you'd think that would be that. Think again! Later this year, the show is set to air a second season. I for one think that could be interesting without "stretching the taffy" -- it's easy enough to imagine that life-long friends will just keep getting into new hijinks. I give season one of Platonic a B+.