OPINION: A diagnosis on summer movies

I got pretty active with going to the movies this summer. Beautiful weather makes the drive to multiplexes in Des Moines and Council Bluffs easier, which makes it strange because I didn’t actually write too much about the movies I saw.

Sure, I wrote a lot about the state of movies, but I only wrote about four specific movies across my columns from May to today. I wonder if this year is just lacking in quality. Looking at my own bookkeeping list of good movies, the number is a little lower. Maybe this year isn’t exactly inspiring?

As of this first week of September, I’ll be cutting back moviegoing again as the seasons change. It’s a shame too; the fall slate looks to have a ton of fun, original movies. With no restraint, I’d spend every weekend at the movies. Oh well.

My list of good movies has seven entries at the moment, three of them I’ve talked about previously in my columns. I’ll spare a recap of those three. “Eddington,” “Sinners” and “The Life of Chuck” occupy the top three spaces on my list, in that order.

The other four are good but maybe not as good as the first three which is why I wasn’t motivated for a full writeup. Here’s a lightning round.

I remember mentioning “Bring Her Back” at some point in my columns, although I was more focused on the experience of theatergoing in that one.

Horror has been having a resurgence recently; maybe it’s some form of escapism to have monsters and ghouls scare our souls rather than the monsters hiding in the White House. But I’ve been increasingly grumpy with horror.

“Weapons” is the closest a movie has been to making my list but just barely missing (in part due to its introduction of compelling themes but sputtering any thematic conclusion). Still, it’s a fun mystery which is becoming increasingly rare to find in this theatrical climate.

“Together,” a body horror movie with Alison Brie and Dave Franco, was my biggest disappointment of the year. It’s crazy a real-life couple can have such awful on-screen chemistry. The body horror seems tame in comparison to last year’s excellent “The Substance.”

So when I say “Bring Her Back” is still in my head as the scariest movie of the year, I mean it. There’s a unique blend of churning domestic unsteadiness and in-your-face gross-outs which are still memorable, even when it has been months since I last saw the movie.

The other three on my list all seem to have some unique problem preventing me from fully recommending. These three are “Materialists,” “Mickey 17” and “How to Train Your Dragon.”

“Materialists” is a romantic drama which is becoming rare to find in theaters. Directed by “Past Lives” director Celine Song, it would be an easy recommend if it wasn’t for a midway story beat involving a side character’s implied sexual assault which killed the audience around me.

I understand the angle the movie is going for; the pursuit of love is often exploited by monsters. With the wall the movie builds of how romantic pursuit can be entirely materialistic, it’s probably the strongest deterrent and important to understand for the female perspective.

This wall is meant to be broken down eventually; love can be found between anyone even if there’s not a penny to each other’s name. At least for our main, non-monster couple. Still, that moment is jarring. I can see it breaking others’ experiences.

“Mickey 17″ came out earlier this year, but catching it on streaming this summer has reminded me of the joy of unique, original movies. Korean director Bong Joon Ho of “Parasite” fame releasing a movie for the first time in six years is exciting, even when it’s not as good as his previous outings.

Don’t get me wrong, “Mickey 17″ is wickedly funny and carried by Robert Pattinson and his dorky character being cloned for sci-fi shenanigans, but the satire angle being ramped up in this outing can diminish the social commentary at play. Mark Ruffalo as a vain, petty leader of man hits a little too close to home these days.

Yet, a sci-fi comedy is so difficult to find these days, and one supported by one of the big five in Warner Bros. even more so. Off of pure novelty alone, “Mickey 17″ is worth a watch.

What is the opposite of novelty? Probably a live-action remake. “How to Train Your Dragon” is an animated movie released in 2010. It’s also a 2025 live-action spectacle which I believe is just as fantastic.

Hard to stomach based on my rhetoric against the trend, but this year’s interpretation of a work not even old enough to drive a car is great. Mason Thames as Hiccup may lose Jay Baruchel’s unique Canadian clash to the viking world, but great filmmaking is undeniable.

John Powell’s score is as timeless as ever, and the story having a chance to breathe this time around makes the quiet moments between Hiccup and dragon Toothless more powerful.

Yet, I feel this underlines my main problems with movies this summer. We’ve become so used to timeless stories being reproduced for more money that my recommendation of “How to Train Your Dragon” has to have an asterisk.

This year also dug up “Superman,” “Jurassic World,” “The Fantastic Four,” “Smurfs,” “I Know What You Did Last Summer,” “Karate Kid,” “Lilo & Stitch,” “Mission Impossible,” “Freaky Friday,” “The Naked Gun,” a “John Wick” spin-off and a sequel to “28 Days Later.”

If we only look at what came before, how can we celebrate what’s new?