TV Review: Netflix Series “Safe” is a Twisty Mystery Channeling Its Inner Harlan Coben

I finally got around to watching Netflix’s bingeable mystery series “Safe.” 

I’m somewhat baffled as to why Hollywood hasn’t tapped the talents of thriller writer Harlan Coben in a more significant way. 

His suburban-oriented thrillers serve as perfect blueprints for compelling movies and television series.

The first time I read a Coben novel was in 2001 when I picked up “Tell No One” at my local book emporium — which features this killer neon orange cover:

It’s a book I perpetually recommend. Bridget actually had to procure me a new copy of the “first edition” a few years ago because my original copy wasn’t returned (memo to self: don’t loan out books you want back). 

“Tell No One” was made into a critically-acclaimed French theatrical film (which has streamed on Netflix in the past). 

While a number of projects based on Coben’s novels are currently being developed in “Tinseltown,” overseas production houses have been producing the author’s wares for years. 

In addition to “Tell No One,” his novels “Just One Look” and “No Second Chance” were adapted into French miniseries. Coben also created an original series for British television called “The Five.” (“No Second Chance” and “The Five” currently stream on Netflix). 

“Safe” is Coben’s first collaboration with Netflix (the series is a co-production with Canal+). 

As I’m writing this post, news broke that Coben closed an exclusive five-year deal with Netflix to develop 14 existing titles along with future projects — including his “yet-to-be” published novel “Run Away.” 

After viewing “Safe,” I can understand why Netflix is making the investment. 

While “Safe” isn’t based on one of Coben’s novels, the eight-episode series has all the ingredients that make his thrillers so delicious. 

The protagonist in “Safe” is Tom Delaney (Michael C. Hall), a surgeon living with his two teen daughters -- Jenny (Amy James-Kelly) and Carrie (Isabelle Allen) -- in a gated community in England. 

Tom is still grieving the recent death of his wife when Jenny (who is 16) goes missing after attending a friend’s party. 

That occurrence sets Tom into a frenzy of worry — exacerbated by the fact that her 19-year-old boyfriend Chris Chahal (Freddie Thorp) has also gone missing after the party. 

What ensues is a tangled web of lies, deceit, murder, and mayhem as Tom becomes an “amateur sleuth” tracking down the whereabouts of his daughter. 

The premise might sound simple, but the execution of the narrative is what makes “Safe” so compelling. 

Hallmarks of Coben’s thrillers are relatable characters and stories. The protagonists are people like you and me — untangling mysteries built on scenarios that could befall any of us. 

I recognized one of the plot elements used in “Safe” from Coben’s 2006 novel “Promise Me.” 

In “Promise Me,” the novel’s protagonist (recurring character Myron Bolitar) makes two neighborhood girls promise him that if they are ever in a bind (for example, the prospect of having to catch a ride with a friend who is intoxicated) and are afraid to call their parents, they must call him. 

There is a similar situation in “Safe” involving Tom Delaney’s best friend Pete Mayfield (Marc Warren), a fellow doctor who helps Tom track down clues.

There are a number of enjoyable performances in “Safe.” In addition to Michael C. Hall’s turn as a grief-stricken father, it was nice to see Amanda Abbington in the series. 

I enjoyed Abbington as Mary Watson in “Sherlock” and Josie Mardle in “Mr. Selfridge” — both series have been favorites of mine the past few years. 

In “Safe,” Abbington plays Detective Sergeant Sophie Mason — Tom Delaney’s girlfriend and neighbor. She’s good at playing soulful, melancholy characters in British dramas. 

Overall, the entire cast is solid in “Safe.” 

As the yarn unravels in “Safe,” the literal walls of the story’s gated community make way for the metaphorical walls people create in their lives. 

“Safe” is a series that keeps you up into the wee hours of the night — “just one more episode.” 

It is an engrossing tale that epitomizes what it’s like to read a Harlan Coben thriller. 

Previous post: Movie Review: "Incredibles 2" is More Incredible Than the Original 

Movie Review: “Incredibles 2” is More Incredible Than the Original

It took me a little over two months, but I finally had a chance to see “Incredibles 2” in the theater. 

A longer wait than I had planned...

Earlier this summer, I purchased “The Incredibles” on Blu-ray because it had been several years since I’d seen it, and I wanted to revisit the film prior to viewing the sequel. 

I’m glad I did since “Incredibles 2” picks up right after the events in “The Incredibles.” 

One of the things I appreciated when I saw the first movie was the “look and feel” of Brad Bird’s sophisticated superhero movie. 

The style is “Mid-century modern” — the clothes, houses, furniture, cars, televisions, radios, and appliances look like they stepped out of the 1950s and 1960s. 

We live in a neighborhood that was developed in the 1950s. For many years I subscribed to a magazine called “Atomic Ranch” which focuses on Mid-century design (and wrote a blog post about a house in our neighborhood that was featured in an issue):

I think the aesthetic is perfect for these movies — it is obvious writer/director Bird has a fondness for that era. It gives the films a feel that is both “retro and modern” at the same time, painting a world that feels like it has a real history. 

“Incredibles 2” picks up with the Parr family — Bob, Helen, Violet, Dash and baby Jack-Jack — battling the villain known as the Underminer. Our heroes win the day, but there is collateral damage to City Hall. 

As a result, the government decides to put the screws to the superhero population (once again). The Parrs find themselves down on their luck, leaving Bob and Helen to figure out which one of them is going to get a “normal job” again. 

But family friend Lucius (the superhero Frozone) comes to Bob and Helen with an intriguing proposition. An entrepreneur named Winston Deavor is a superhero fanboy and has hatched a public relations plan to build public trust in the "Supers."

It is determined that Helen — who is the stretchy superhero Elastigirl — needs to become the poster child for the campaign. Deavor and his sister Evelyn (who looks like an animated version of actress Lisa Rinna) send Elastigirl on missions in New Urbem — a vast, NYC-like metropolis in “The Incredibles” universe. 

It is on those missions that Helen encounters a hypnotic villain known as Screenslaver. 

Before long, our heroes are embroiled in a mystery that will once again require the daring and cunning of the world’s Supers to save the day. 

While the story itself might not tread the most original territory, I found the narrative in the film to be appealing. A big part of that has to do with the fact that the Parr family is likable and relatable. 

There is one sequence where Bob — haggard from having to pick up the slack with the kids while Helen is away — laments, “I haven’t been sleeping. I broke my daughter. They keep changing math. We need AA batteries, but I got AAAs, and now we still need AA batteries. Put one red thing in the load of whites, now everything is...pink. And I think we need eggs.”

It is a small moment in the movie, but one that made me chuckle. It is the sort of smart dialogue that Brad Bird infuses into his animated tomes. 

The action sequences are all really well crafted, and more interesting than the first movie. That’s not a suprise since they are able to do more things in the world of computer animation than they were 14 years ago.

The score for the movie was composed by Michael Giacchino. His orchestral stylings definitely enhanced the vibe. One of the interesting bits learned in the movie is that the superheroes in the "Incredibles-verse" have their own theme songs. Here is Elastigirl’s suitably retro-sounding theme:

Speaking of "retro-sounding" things... back in 2004 when the original "The Incredibles" was released, the music used in the teaser trailer was the theme song from the 1969 James Bond film "On Her Majesty's Secret Service." It stood out to me the first time I saw the trailer (because it is one of my favorite Bond themes): 

For me, though, it is the look and feel of “Incredibles 2” that helps set it apart from other animated fare. I could endlessly analyze the mint green appliances (the dishwasher is the fictitious “DishAid Deluxe” brand), Saarinen-inspired “tulip tables,” and various chairs that looked like they stepped out of Eames's repertoire. 

I also love all of the retro televisions featured in the film. 

Disney Style actually has a page to help you achieve the “look of the ‘Incredibles 2’ home for yourself”: https://style.disney.com/living/2018/06/13/incredibles-2-home/

Even though it took me a couple months to see “Incredibles 2,” I’m glad I had the opportunity to see it in the theater. 

I wasn’t sure how a sequel to a 14-year-old movie would turn out. Brad Bird & Co. managed to deliver the goods again — a visually-stunning movie that, in my opinion, is more incredible than the original. 

That feat is pretty rare these days... 

Previous post: Movie Review: "Crazy Rich Asians" is a Throwback to 90s Romantic Comedies 

Movie Review: “Crazy Rich Asians” is a Throwback to 90s Romantic Comedies

One of the things I lament when I look at the typical fare at today’s box office is how few “romantic comedies” are on the slate. 

When I talk about “romantic comedies,” I’m not talking about Judd Apatow-esque films frosted with moments of sophomoric potty humor and raunch. 

I’m talking about films like “My Big Fat Greek Wedding,” “Pretty Woman,” and “When Harry Met Sally.”

The new movie “Crazy Rich Asians” is something of a throwback to the romantic comedies of yesteryear. 

“Crazy Rich Asians” follows Rachel Chu (Constance Wu), a NYU professor who is dating Nick Young (Henry Golding) — a doting boyfriend who (unbeknownst to Rachel) comes from one of the wealthiest families in Singapore. 

Early on in the film Nick asks Rachel to accompany him to his friend Colin’s wedding in Singapore (where he is set to be the best man).

“I want the whole island to meet the brilliant Rachel Chu,” Nick tells Rachel as he makes his pitch. 

This setup allows for one of the key devices used in many romantic comedies — familial drama and tension as a way for Rachel and Nick to explore their relationship with one another. 

The matriarch of the Young family is Eleanor Young (Michelle Yeoh) — an devout Methodist who has old school proclivities as it regards her son. Her vision for Nick’s future isn’t meshing with her son’s desires. 

Before we know it, the unassuming Rachel is dealing with more than she bargained for, tip-toeing around family politics and cultural values different from her own. 

“Crazy Rich Asians” is based on Kevin Kwan’s 2013 novel of the same name. 

The best romantic comedies feature appealing casts, wearing appealing outfits, eating appealing food, doing appealing things in appealing locales. 

“Crazy Rich Asians” is no exception to that rule. It is a bright, colorful, frothy film that has poignant and funny moments strewn throughout. 

One of the most endearing characters in the film is Peik Lin (Awkwafina), Rachel’s friend from college who helps our protagonist navigate rough family waters. 

"Crazy Rich Asians" employs a number of common tropes seen in romantic comedies. That fact didn’t bother me in the slightest. Director Jon M. Chu is adept at the helm and keeps things feeling fresh. 

There are a few instances in “Crazy Rich Asians” where the narrative amps up the “dramatic tension” in a manner that can feel a tad bit over-the-top. Ultimately, though, the film transcends those moments and does a decent job maintaining a consistent tone throughout. 

Stories set around weddings tend to create instant “relatability” for audiences. If you’ve ever been in love — and had to deal with the peculiarities of your mate’s family — you’ll likely find a lot to like in “Crazy Rich Asians.” 

While the film might not be the “definitive” romantic comedy (for my money, that title goes to 1998’s “You’ve Got Mail” -- a favorite of mine and Bridget's), I had a lot of fun watching “Crazy Rich Asians.” 

Because the film has been a critical and financial success at the box office, the wheels are in motion for a sequel based on Kevin Kwan’s second book in the series titled “China Rich Girlfriend."

At the film’s core are Rachel and Nick — you’ll find yourself rooting for the pair as the story unfolds. Both actors — Constance Wu and newcomer Henry Golding — have chemistry and make for an endearing couple on screen.  

“Crazy Rich Asians” is charming and makes for an enjoyable evening at the multiplex. Definitely a trip worth booking. 

Previous post: Movie Review: Netflix's "To All the Boys I've Loved Before" a Likable Teen Rom-Com 

Movie Review: Netflix’s “To All the Boys I’ve Loved Before” a Likable Teen Rom-Com

Netflix has been doubling down on the romantic comedies lately. 

Three of the streaming giant’s new releases this summer — “Set It Up,” “The Kissing Booth” and “Like Father” — sent the message that bubble gum romantic comedies are likely to become a staple of Netflix’s original content strategy moving forward. 

The latest entry is the surprisingly sophisticated teen rom-com “To All the Boys I’ve Loved Before.”

“To All the Boys I’ve Loved Before” is based on the YA novel of the same name by Jenny Han (part of a three-book series including sequels “P.S. I Still Love You” and “Always and Forever, Lara Jean”).

The film tells the story of Lara Jean Song Covey (Lana Condor), a 16-year-old teen who is a hopeless romantic. She and her three sisters (Lara Jean is the middle child) are being raised by their widower dad Dan (John Corbett).

Lara Jean keeps a set of love letters she has written (but hasn’t sent) to all the boys she has loved throughout her life — when she “has a crush so intense” she doesn’t know what else to do. 

She writes the letters for herself — storing them in a special hat box her mom left her. 

One of Lara Jean’s loves is Josh — the “boy next door” who has been dating Lara Jean’s older sister Margot (Janel Parrish). When Margot breaks up with Josh (because she is leaving home to attend college in Scotland), Lara Jean’s feelings for the boy return.

Lara Jean thinks the five letters are “safe and sound” in her room, until a classmate named Peter Kavinsky (Noah Centineo) approaches her at school and mentions having received the letter written about him.

Our protagonist has to deal with the ramifications of her letters being out in the wild — crafting a way to save face and avoid further embarrassment. 

While the setup for “To All the Boys I’ve Loved Before” might sound routine for a teenage romantic comedy, the performances in the film help set the story apart. 

Lana Condor is believable playing the socially-awkward Lara Jean. Her performance doesn’t feel contrived. She has a sincerity that adds authenticity to the film. She is the beating heart of “To All the Boys I’ve Loved Before.”

On the whole, the entire cast is likable. That’s what makes the movie work. 

There’s one particular scene in “To All the Boys I’ve Loved Before” that harkens back to the teen rom-coms that John Hughes became famous making back in the 1980s. 

In the sequence, Lara’s Jean father Dan is trying to cheer up the melancholy girl, and takes her out for a bite to eat at a greasy spoon called “Corner Cafe” — a place he and Lara Jean’s mom frequented when they were dating. 

Dan tells Lara Jean that her mom would play Tears For Fears “Everybody Wants to Rule the World” over and over again on the jukebox. 

As the song plays, Dan talks about how his wife would dance around the aisles: “I think back, and I think ‘Man... I should have been up there dancing with her.’”

He encourages his daughter to let the world see her for the woman she is. 

Little moments like this help “To All the Boy’s I’ve Loved Before” rise above the standard teen rom-com fare. 

As a result, “To All the Boy’s I’ve Loved Before” is a romantic comedy worth checking out.

Previous post: Learning How to Be an Advocate for the University of Nebraska System 

Learning How to Be an Advocate for the University of Nebraska System

The readers of this blog are well aware of the passion Bridget and I have for the University of Nebraska at Omaha. 

As 1996 graduates of the university, we’ve stayed involved with the institution via the UNO Hockey program (never missed a home game in the program’s 20-plus year history) and the UNO Alumni Association. 

Part of the reason we support the university is because Bridget and I (who started dating as students at Omaha’s Westside High School) both earned Regents Scholarships from UNO — which paid for five years of tuition at the school. 

I can’t appropriately express in words how important those scholarships were to our future. Being able to graduate debt-free with our undergraduate degrees allowed us to start our own marketing communications business (Image Building Communications) in 1996. 

I recall Bridget sitting in a hallway at UNO’s Arts and Sciences Hall (talking on a giant cellphone that looked like something used to call in mortar fire) negotiating our first office lease. 

Like many of the NU system alums currently residing in Nebraska (who graduated from UNO, UNL, UNK, and UNMC), we are able to live the life we want to live because of the educational opportunities afforded to us by the university.

On Wednesday, Aug. 22, Bridget and I were invited to attend the “Alumni Association Advocacy Summit” at the Nebraska Champions Club in Lincoln, NE. 

I was excited to have the opportunity to visit the Nebraska Alumni Association’s beautiful venue. I’ve walked by the Champions Club when we’ve attended Husker Football games, but have never had the opportunity to see the interior (the facility sits on the west side of Stadium Drive, across the street from Memorial Stadium). 

Attendees had the opportunity to hear from university officials who work on advocacy efforts, engagement initiatives, and lobbying efforts at state and federal level. The alumni association directors from were also on hand to talk about outreach and education efforts. 

I’d like to thank our friend and former “Public Relations Case Studies” classmate Lee Denker — UNO Alumni Association Executive Director — for inviting us to attend this event: 

Denker and Elizabeth Kraemer (who is in charge of programming for the UNO Alumni Association) have really made us feel like a part of the university.

The event featured a “working dinner” (the spread at the buffet was delicious) and those in attendance were able to interact and offer suggestions for potential strategies the university might employ in activating alums to act on the university’s behalf.

This was the first time Bridget and I had ever been approached about this topic. In my opinion, it is prudent for the NU system to forge relationships with alums who might help them build and implement more compelling “advocacy campaigns” in the future. 

In today’s media climate it is incredibly important for businesses and organizations to expand their sphere by engaging with "influencers" who can talk directly to potential clientele, members, and advocates. 

It was also nice to have the chance to chat with Heath Mello at the event. Heath joined the University of Nebraska in 2017 as Associate Vice President and Director of State Relations: 

Bridget and I first met Heath back in 2008. He lives in our neighborhood, represented our district in the Nebraska Unicameral, and has been a member of our neighborhood association. 

During our conversation, I got the sense a long-term goal is to build a connected web of alumni across the state who are more engaged with the university system.

Business-guru Seth Godin brilliantly illustrated this concept in his 2008 book “Tribes: We Need You to Lead Us.” 

It all starts with a vision. 

Education needs to be the cornerstone of a society that hopes to achieve, accomplish, and advance. 

If you have an opportunity to give back to an institution of learning that helped you along the way, I would strongly encourage you to do so. 

If you’d like to learn more about becoming an advocate for the university system, visit University of Nebraska Advocates website. 



Related blog post: Maverick Landing: The Latest Addition to UNO's Reimagined Front Door 

Previous post: Oscars Adding a "Popular Film" Category... My Thoughts 

Oscars Adding a “Popular Film” Category... My Thoughts

By now I’m sure you’ve heard the news regarding the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences adding an “Outstanding Achievement in Popular Film” category to the Oscars. 

On the surface, the concept sounds ridiculous — shameless pandering to the glut of superhero and sci-fi spectacle films currently dominating box office receipts.

The academy tried to remedy the lack of “popular” movies contending for the top prize when they extended the number of “Best Picture” noms from five to 10 several years ago. 

That remedy was apparently not enough. 

My question is this: “Why is this even an issue?”

Personally speaking, I think this speaks to a systemic issue with the types of movies we are seeing made and marketed. Things like “cinematic universes” might be popular, but they are increasingly sucking up all the oxygen at the box office. 

As a sci-fi/fantasy movie lover, I am happy that “geeks” are finally having their moment in the pop culture zeitgeist.

The question is whether “geekdom” — and the marketing drive to appeal to those demographics — is having a detrimental impact on the types of movies favored by audiences (compared to previous decades). 

In the 1990s, a number of “popular” films were nominated — and won — the Oscar for Best Picture. 

Here is a list of "popular" films that won the top prize in the 1990s:

1990 — “Dances With Wolves” — $424,200,000 (worldwide)

1991 — “The Silence of the Lambs” — $272,742,922 (worldwide)

1992 — “Unforgiven” — $159,018,007 (worldwide)

1994 — “Forrest Gump” — $677,945,399 (worldwide)

1995 — “Braveheart” — $210,409,945 (worldwide)

1997 — “Titanic” — $2,186,772,302 (worldwide)

Six of the 10 winners in the 1990s were films popular with mass audiences. 

The 2000s started off in similar fashion. The 2000 film “Gladiator” ($475,640,427 worldwide) and the 2003 film “The Lord of the Rings: Return of the King” ($1,119,929,521 worldwide) won the Oscar for Best Picture in their respective years. 

But things started to change a decade or so ago as increasingly “smaller” movies started winning the Oscar for Best Picture. Films like “The Artist,” “Birdman,” “Spotlight,” “12 Years a Slave,” “Moonlight,” and “The Shape of Water” weren’t particularly popular. 

Is it a coincidence that the trajectory towards “smaller” movies dominating at the Oscars has happened during the decade-long rise of the Marvel Cinematic Universe at the box office?

I love Marvel movies (I just purchased the 4K Blu-ray of “Avengers: Infinity War”). While I appreciate the MCU, it has created a world where sequels and spinoffs dominate more than ever before. 

We saw three Marvel movies this year — all basically “chapters” in a giant story — released in February (“Black Panther”), April (“Avengers: Infinity War") and July (“Ant-Man and the Wasp”).

It’s hard to believe there was a time when movies like “Forrest Gump,” “Braveheart,” and “Gladiator” were “summer blockbusters.” 

These days, it is a relative rarity to see a movie like “Dunkirk” released during the summer movie season. 

Instead, we get a glut of sci-fi and superhero movies — made for an international audience — dominating the box office. The alternate summer fare is generally heavy on Judd Apatow-like “raunchy” comedies and low-brow horror movies. 

I don’t want to diss the movies I love. 

Since viewer habits aren’t likely to shift anytime soon — and since it is highly unlikely we’ll see a movie like “Forrest Gump” make a half-billion dollars again — you have to wonder if there might be some merit to having a “popular film” category at the Oscars. 

I’m not suggesting it is particularly good solution, and it reeks of a desperate attempt to make the Oscars more relevant. 

However, many of these box office behemoths are really well crafted. Are they being summarily ignored because they are bright, flashy popcorn movies? 

Ultimately, it comes down to the movie. While popcorn movies like “The Martian” and “Mad Max: Fury Road” received best picture nominations in recent years, movies like “Ready Player One” and “Mission Impossible: Fallout” are unlikely to receive nominations in the top category. 

Back in 2012, I loved the James Bond movie “Skyfall.” It was a beautifully drawn film. At the time, I told people I thought it deserved an Oscar nomination for best picture.

But because it was a sequel in a long running action movie franchise, it didn’t stand a chance. 

For the record, I thought “Skyfall” was a far superior to “Oscar-bait” films like “Moneyball,” “Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close,” “War Horse,” and “Midnight in Paris” — all best picture nominees that year. 

Had there been a “popular film” category in 2012, “Skyfall” would have been included (and likely would have been the winner). 

It is worth noting that the Academy has stated a film can be nominated for both the “Outstanding Achievement in Popular Film” and “Best Picture” categories. I don’t know how many dual nominees we’re likely to see. 

While I’m not in love with the concept of adding an “outstanding achievement in popular film” category, I’m not against it. 

There is an entire class of film — largely released between October and January — made for the express purpose of dominating awards season. Some of those films are excellent — others are mediocre. 

But because they fit a certain “type,” some mediocre films receive nominations for the top prize (even when there are popcorn movies that are far better). 

It might be nice to see films like “Blade Runner 2049” garner more recognition. 

Previous post: Movie Review: "The Meg" is Crazy Fun 

Movie Review: “The Meg” is Crazy Fun

The new shark-based action thriller “The Meg” epitomizes the definition of a “popcorn movie.”

“The Meg” is a big, flashy production that recalls amusing event films of the 1990s like “Twister” and “Jurassic Park.” 

“The Meg” follows the exploits of Jonas Taylor (Jason Statham). In the prologue of the movie, Taylor — a naval officer — is part of a botched submarine rescue attempt where an “unknown force” in the Mariana Trench forced him to abandon crew members.  

Five years later, we follow a billionaire named Jack Morris (Rainn Wilson) as he visits an underwater research facility (Mana One) he funds. Dr. Minway Zhang (Winston Chao) and his daughter Suyin (Bingbing Li) are overseeing a mission to explore what is believed to be a hidden section of the Mariana Trench — located below a layer of hydrogen sulfide. 

The mission is led by Jonas Taylor’s ex-wife Lori (Jessica McNamee). The trip starts off normally, but things soon go awry when the crew comes in contact with a large sea creature. 

Before long, the “powers that be” at the research station arm twist Taylor (who is living in Thailand) to go on a rescue mission to save the lost scientists. 

What follows is a series of events that unleash a giant, pre-historic shark (a carcharodon megalodon) from the depths of the Mariana Trench. 

“The Meg” will never be mistaken for high art, but it is a tremendous amount of fun. 

While watching the movie, my buddy Scott and I found ourselves looking at each other saying, “They’re gonna need a bigger boat!”

Part of the reason for the buoyant feel has to do with some solid visual effects sequences and judicious editing. 

“The Meg” was directed by Jon Turteltaub. He helmed the “National Treasure” franchise (two movies I really liked). He has a penchant for taking pedestrian material and turning it into something light, enjoyable, and eminently watchable. 

Earlier this week I finished Steve Alten’s novel “The Meg” (read my review). Even though the book felt like a ready-made screenplay, the movie adaptation varies significantly from Alten’s novel. 

That fact didn’t limit my enjoyment of the big-screen version of “The Meg.” 

There are some fun bits in the movie. 

I won’t give anything away, but there is a sequence involving “Pippin The Yorkie” (where the pooch is trapped alone in Sanya Bay). The dog’s exploits in the movie have prompted a #savepippin hash on Twitter, and “The Meg” movie’s official Twitter put this graphic out yesterday: 

There are also a number of cute moments between Suyin’s daughter Meiying (Sophia Cai) and Jonas Taylor — inevitably a move to soften Statham’s macho exterior. 

If you are looking for a good time at the movies, head to your local multiplex, grab a tub of buttery popcorn, check your brain at the door, and see “The Meg” — a ridiculous movie worth diving into on the big screen. 

Previous post: Book Review: "The Meg" By Steve Alten