Movie Review In Time

In Time (2011) 

Directed by Andrew Niccol 

Written by Andrew Niccol 

Starring Amanda Seyfried, Justin Timberlake, Alex Pettyfer, Cillian Murphy 

Release Date October 28th, 2011

Published October 28th, 2011

"In Time" is one of the more irritating brands of bad movies. The film has a highly intriguing premise and a pair of attractive and convincing lead performers; it also has plot holes you could drive trucks through.

Pretty for Life

Justin Timberlake is the star of In Time. As Mark Salas, Mr. Timberlake is a man with little time to spare. In the future, human beings are genetically bred to stop aging at 25 years old. Once you hit 25 however, a genetically implanted clock begins to countdown.

Money in this future has been replaced by time. Each citizen is given one year to spend beginning on their 25th birthday but they can earn more time by working in factories. Not everyone has to work however; some are born into eons of time as a family inheritance.

One Good Deed

The plot of In Time kicks in when Will meets Henry Hamilton (Matt Bomer, White Collar). Henry is 105 years old after having been born to a family fortune. After so many years he still has more than a century on his clock but he's grown tired of living.

When Will saves Henry during a bar fight the two end up spending an evening discussing time and the way those that have time use it to manipulate those who don't. When Will awakens the following morning Henry has given him his time and disappeared to die.

Time Literally on His Hand. 

After a tragedy strikes Will's family, he makes the decision to use his new found time, literally time on his hand (Ha!), to destroy the time management system. To do this he travels to New Greenwich, a rich suburb where those with endless amounts of time live and avoid the shame of watching others fall dead in the streets after losing time.

As Will's scheme is revealed he is chased by Timekeeper Leon (Cillian Murphy) who will doggedly pursue him throughout his revolutionary journey. Joining Will, at first not by choice, is Sylvia Weis, the daughter of Phillippe Weis (Vincent Kartheiser), a centuries old man with seemingly all the time in the world.

Will takes Sylvia hostage but we aren't surprised when she and Will begin to fall in love and slowly morph into Bonnie & Clyde turned Robin Hood criminals who steal time from the rich and give it to the poor.

Occupy Time

The premise of "In Time'' is solid and Justin Timberlake is highly compelling in only his second lead role. Andrew Niccols directs In Time to Timberlake's strengths, playing up his charm before allowing IT to begin flexing his muscles in gun battles and chase scenes.

"In Time" has a timely premise, arriving at a time when the divide between the richest 1% in America are at odds with the other 99%; you could almost expect a movement in the movie to 'Occupy Time.' Sadly the film was completed well before the occupy protests began.

Stuck in a Plot-hole

Unfortunately, as intriguing and timely as "In Time" is, the film has a pair of logical fallacies so large that they undermine the movie as a whole. To describe these plot holes would reveal far too much about the film. All I will say is that the plot holes are fat and obvious and they render the film, especially the ending, ludicrous. For me, this makes ``In Time '' worse than most other bad movies because "In Time" isn't really a bad movie; it's one that squanders its goodness with bad choices.

If you are a fan of Justin Timberlake or Amanda Seyfried you may as well go ahead and give "In Time" a chance. If not, the plot holes render "In Time" barely worthy of a rental.

Movie Review Jennifer's Body

Jennifer's Body (2009) 

Directed by Karyn Kusama 

Written by Diablo Cody

Starring Megan Fox, Amanda Seyfried, Johnny Simmons, J.K Simmons, Amy Sedaris, Adam Brody

Release Date September 18th, 2009 

Published September 17th, 2009

Megan Fox is a beautiful woman who could coast through a very successful, if somewhat short, career if she chose. In fact, that is exactly what she did in her two biggest roles in the two Transformers movies. Her latest effort however, the horror film Jennifer's Body, requires a little more work than giant morphing robots.

Written by Oscar winner Diablo Cody this teen horror flick combines gore and humor in ways so complex some audiences won't know whether to laugh or recoil.

Megan Fox plays the Jennifer of the title. The head cheerleader and front runner for Prom Queen, Jennifer's one indulgence is her best friend Needy (Amanda Seyfried). Needy is on a completely different stratosphere from Jennifer but since they were friends as very young girls, they've stayed close.

When Jennifer takes Needy to a local, small town bar the plot kicks in. A rock band on the rise, lead by the O.C's Adam Brody, see Jennifer as their ticket to stardom. After an accident nearly kills everyone in the bar, the band offers Jennifer a ride home and she nearly doesn't survive it.

After a bizarre night in which Needy is haunted by something looking like her best friend, Jennifer is back at school the next day looking better than ever. The only difference is, she's now a cannibal demon, a succubus who eats boys. After snacking on a football star and an emo wannabe, Jennifer sets her sights on Needy's nerdy boyfriend.

The confrontation is well built and plays out entertainingly enough with Seyfried easily holding the screen with Fox, even as Ms. Fox goes all demony. However, both actresses take a backseat to writer Diablo Cody's pop savvy dialogue and Director Karyn Kusama's curious horror/comedy tone.

Jennifer's Body doesn't really know what it wants to be. The movie is played for dark laughs as it keeps a lighthearted tone not unlike Cody's Oscar winner Juno. However, even as things are light and breezy Jennifer is eating people and leaving behind a bloody mess.

This mix of gore and humor could work if the film were a little nastier. More Mean Girls Less My So Called Life. That is Mean Girls if Rachel McAdams character were a man eating demon. The template is Heathers, the 1989 black comedy starring Winona Ryder and Christian Slater. That film had the guts to get mean and allow the actors to dig into the ugly sides of their characters.

Jennifer's Body is damn near good natured even as the body's pile up. The final confrontation brings the violence as it should but by then the film has already failed to compel. Too often Jennifer's Body falls back on the clever dialogue and insightful human notes of Diablo Cody. That was good in Juno but in a horror comedy we need something more.

We need atmosphere, a consistent tone and a scare or two. Jennifer's Body is sunny when it should be dark and flat when it should be sharp. It's often funny but grows awkward when it comes time for the scars. Too bad, there are some strong elements in Diablo Cody's script and a pair of stars who seem like they were capable of more.

Movie Review Letters to Juliet

Letters to Juliet (2010) 

Directed by Gary Winick 

Written by Jose Rivera, Tim Sullivan 

Starring Amanda Seyfried, Christopher Egan, Gael Garcia Bernal, Vanessa Redgrave

Release Date May 14th, 2010

Published May 15th, 2010

“Letters to Juliet” could be a very good movie. The premise is engaging and unique and the star, Amanda Seyfried, is so cute that I suspect kittens want to hold her. Sadly, as directed by Gary Winick, “Letters to Juliet” is a wit free wannabe weepy that adheres so closely to formula that one wonders if Winick was threatened with execution if he attempted any innovation.

”Letters to Juliet” stars Amanda Seyfried as Sophie, an American girl traveling to Verona Italy with her restaurateur fiancée (Gael Garcia Bernal) for a little romance and a lot of his business. While the fiancée runs off to collect high end wines and learn new recipes, Sophie heads for the tourist traps beginning with the legendary home of Juliet Capulet.

Shakespeare's “Romeo and Juliet” was set in Verona and the townspeople with a good eye for tourist capturing, have an ancient house with just the right kind of balcony to stand in for Juliet's home. Year after year heartbroken women leave their romantic wishes on the wall.

Over time another group of women have voluntarily gathered the letters to Juliet and set about answering them. Sophie witnesses the gathering of the letters and meets Juliet's secretaries. A writer herself, Sophie accepts an invitation to answer some letters while the fiancée continues his business.

While collecting the letters to Juliet, Sophie finds one that had not been found in nearly 50 years. The letter is from a 15 year old girl named Claire who met the man of her dreams in Verona but has succumbed to family pressures to leave him and return to England. She wants to know if she did the right thing or whether she should return to Italy. 

Sophie writes back and her romantic notions inspire the now 65 year old Claire (Vanessa Redgrave) to return and find out what happened to her lover Lorenzo Bartolini (Franco Nero). Along for the ride, tsk tsk-ing all the way, is Claire's grandson Charlie (Christopher Egan) who opposes the trip and holds special enmity for Sophie for inspiring the journey.

Naturally, Sophie offers to join the search for Lorenzo and thus begins a romantic journey across Italy. Or at least, that was the idea.

”Letters to Juliet” sadly is so forced and predictable that it becomes impossible to enjoy even the minor pleasures it has. Amanda Seyfried is an actress who is easy to enjoy. She has a great smile and most notably those great big eyes. It’s hard not to  root for her in a romantic situation and yet “Letters to Juliet” somehow fails to capture that. 

Director Gary Winick adheres to such a dull formula that even the most forgiving audience will have a hard time not deconstructing what doesn't work about it. Worst of the lot is poor Gael Garcia Bernal as the straw man fiancée. Placed as a roadblock to Sophie being with Charlie, Bernal's character is never formidable and instead exists to be awful and irritating enough that we don't mind seeing him cuckolded.

Spoiler alert, Sophie and Charlie are made for each other. They hate each other at first sight. They are forced together on a road trip. They have important things in common. Not for one moment is there an inkling of tension over whether Sophie and Charlie will be together and thus the movie meanders pointlessly toward its predicted conclusion. 

The same lack of tension, drama or humor exists in Claire's search for Lorenzo. The same scene repeats several times as Claire meets a man named Lorenzo, quickly figures out that this colorful weirdo is not her Lorenzo and back in the car we go. We know from the trailer that she finds him and since the film is about Sophie and Charlie, the romantic reunion and its aftermath are an afterthought. 

It's hard to hate a movie set in Italy. The wonderful landscapes and colorful people make for fantastic movie scenery. Oftentimes in “Letters to Juliet” you will notice that Cinematographer Marco Pontecorvo gets as lost as we do in the scenery, letting his stars slip into the background as he loses himself in the glories of the setting.

Pontecorvo's occasional distraction makes for some fun, unintentional comedy, but that is really the lone pleasure one can take from “Letters to Juliet.”

Yes, I realize punishing a romantic comedy for being predictable is like punishing a horror film for too much killing but Letters to Juliet really is lazier than most other romances in the ways it adheres to formula. Add that to the assets that the film wastes, including Seyfried's cuteness and Vanessa Redgrave's grace, and the whole thing becomes worse than just being lazy and formulaic.

Movie Review: Chloe

Chloe (2010) 

Directed by Atom Egoyan

Written by Erin Cressida Wilson

Starring Amanda Seyfried, Julianne Moore, Liam Neeson

Release Date March 26th, 2010

Published March 30th, 2010

“Chloe” is one of the most frustrating films I've seen in a long time. Rarely has such skilled direction been wasted on such B-level material. Atom Egoyan is a master of mood and feeling brilliantly pushing an audience’s buttons; manipulating them into uncomfortable places and toward often stunning revelations.

He brings his skill for mood to “Chloe” and for two acts his mastery of sex, seduction and character has you hooked. Riveting performances by Julianne Moore and Amanda Seyfried tease seduce and shock and keep you guessing just how this movie could possibly end. Then the third act begins and things are downhill from there. What should have been an adult thriller quickly devolves into a highly skilled Cinemax late night trash.

Catherine Stewart (Julianne Moore) is desperate. She believes her husband, David (Liam Neeson) is cheating on her. Finding a damning photo of David while she is snooping through his I Phone, Catherine decides she needs definitive proof. To get it Catherine turns to a young woman she has seen in the neighborhood near her medical practice.

The young woman is Chloe (Amanda Seyfried) and it is clear from her manner with men and her unusual hours that she is a high end call girl. Catherine hires Chloe only to flirt with David and recount his reaction. Chloe takes things further than mere flirting but rather than being angry, Catherine finds herself turned on. This twisted scenario only grows more twisted from there as Catherine herself begins an affair with Chloe.

You get from the plot where this is likely heading but early on Atom Egoyan and writer Erin Cressida Wilson brilliantly create an atmosphere, a look, a sensuality that distracts from anything familiar. There is an air of desperation and sex that permeates Chloe in the first two acts that is truly sexy, not merely trashy. The sex is purposeful and erotic without being trashy.

Then comes the third act and things go off the rails. Though Atom Egoyan never loses his incredible gift for atmosphere he and writer Ms. Wilson fail to invent a satisfying conclusion for Chloe. Instead the film devolves from a smart, sexy and daringly adult thriller into a high end version of a direct to video soft-core porno. 

The final scenes of Chloe fly close to parody, so close that one could almost make the case that the ending is a satire of B-movie thrillers. However, there is far too much artfulness in Egoyan's direction and far too much skill from the dedicated cast for anyone to assume satire, unfortunately. 

Amanda Seyfried and Julianne Moore are an electric duo in Chloe. Seyfried, long an object of girl next door fantasies, finds a range and depth like she's never shown before. Pushed by the unbelievably talented Ms. Moore, Seyfried radiates sex so strongly that you can hardly blame a married woman for falling prey to her. Ms. Moore is no victim in Chloe mind you; her submissiveness is really an act of passive aggression that few actresses could achieve.

”Chloe” is so disappointing because I like so much of it. Atom Egoyan's direction is solid and the script from Erin Cressida Wilson, for the first two acts, is very strong. The failure comes in finding an ending that satisfies. I won't spoil it for those who still wish to see this highly erotic and often quite good thriller, but be prepared for a letdown. 

The very last scene in “Chloe” is among the most awkward and oddly humorous that I have seen. It may just be my twisted sense of humor but the seriously awkward mother son bond that comes in the final act will certainly have psychiatrists buzzing afterwards. 

Finally, you may have noticed that I had little to say about Liam Neeson in “Chloe.” Neeson lost his wife Natasha Richardson while shooting “Chloe.” He left midway through production to be at her side and returned just days after her death to wrap his role. According to IMDB Neeson's scenes were cut back to accommodate his leaving and his grief. Under the circumstances Neeson is quite good in “Chloe” but there is little that one can say about an actor working under such a circumstance.

Movie Review Mamma Here We Go Again

Mamma Mia Here We Go Again (2018) 

Directed by Ol Parker

Written by Ol Parker 

Starring Amanda Seyfried, Cher, Christine Baranski, Pierce Brosnan, Julie Walter, Dominic Cooper

Release Date July 20th, 2018

Published July 19th, 2018

Low expectations and an upgrade in the director’s chair have combined to make a Mamma Mia sequel so unexpectedly good that I am still humming about it. Mamma Mia Here We Go Again has no right to be as fun and entertaining as it is, based off of the horror show that was the sloppy, 2008 original, and yet here we are. Director Ol Parker has brought order to the chaos of the original Mamma Mia and delivered a prequel/sequel far superior to the dismal original.

Mamma Mia Here We Go Again picks up the story of Sophie (Amanda Seyfried) five years after the action of the original story. Now 25, Sophie is running her mom’s, Donna (Meryl Streep), hotel and is about to hold a gala grand opening. Unfortunately, mom won’t be there. Nor will two of her three adopted fathers, Bill (Stellan Skarsgard) and Harry (Colin Firth). Luckily, Sam (Pierce Brosnan) is at hand, along with Auntie Tanya (Christine Baranski) and Auntie Rosie (Julie Walter).

Worse yet though, Sky (Dominic Cooper), despite being Sophie’s one true love and business partner, will not be there either and is considering a job offer in New York. This leads Sophie to once again pick up her mom’s diary for some bolstering. The diary is the lead-in for a flashback to that glorious Greek summer when Donna met Harry, Bill and Sam, and became pregnant with Sophie. Best of all, it brings us the vibrant Lily James as the young Donna.

Do you recall that time you first saw Julia Roberts’ megawatt smile in Pretty Woman? If you’re my age you likely do and you remember the electricity of seeing a movie star emerge before your eyes. That’s Lily James in Mamma Mia Here We Go Again, a star bursting to life before our eyes. Sure, she was great in Cinderella and has honed her craft in other films, but here, she bursts forth with charisma to spare in a one of a kind performance.

James is so great she overwhelms all three of her male co-stars, none of whom make a dent in your memory despite being young and handsome. I could list their names but I couldn’t pick them out of a lineup even after having just seen the movie. James’ vibrancy is such that her co-stars don’t really matter, they are but mirrors through which to bask in Collins’ star-making performance. Can she sing? Yeah, well enough, but like Streep in the first film, she can sell the singing with passion and performance and that’s what matters.

I kept getting annoyed with the present day Sophie storyline for getting in the way of the flashbacks which were far more compelling. Slowly but surely however, the main story begins to turn an emotional corner. The flashback story begins to underline the action of the modern story in lovely ways and what emerges is a story for mothers and daughters and one that isn’t about the absurd and nasty notion of turning into one’s mother. One would count themselves lucky to become Donna.

As for the music of Mamma Mia Here We Go Again, my favorite performance is Waterloo, though it is arguably the most superfluous in terms of the plot. Indeed, I can recognize that praising the one performance that violates the order and structure that I have praised as a remarkable improvement over the original, is slightly contradictory. That said, Lily James and Young Harry (Hugh Skinner) really steal the show in this performance.

Director Ol Parker sets the scene in Paris where Harry and Donna met in 1979, the same summer she left for Greece. Though Donna is leaving, Harry nevertheless, throws himself at her feet and tells her he loves her and then they sing Waterloo at a French restaurant where waiters are dressed as Napoleon (Ho, Ho!). It sounds cheesy and it is, intentionally so. Director Parker directs the performance like an old school, early 80’s music video, a-la Adam Ant’s Goody Two Shoes, with wacky set pieces and even slightly grainy cinematography to really sell the bit.

Waterloo is wildly funny and a wonderfully shorthand way to bring Donna and Harry together before taking them apart. The other standout is My Love, My Life, which will leave many audience members, especially moms and daughters, a weepy mess. The trailer has spoiled that Sophie is pregnant and the correlation between her pregnancy and her mother’s pregnancy, is brought to bear on this wonderful performance with James and Seyfried singing in different time frames with the same meaning.

Ol Parker had an uphill battle to bring the unwieldy mess that was the Mamma Mia backstory into some semblance of order and he’s done an exceptional job. Sure, he takes the easy way out by mostly ignoring the problematic elements of the original backstory, but what he cobbles together works and the orderly plot helps strengthen our bond with these characters, something that was missing in the first film while we puzzled over how all of the pieces fit.

Thanks to director Parker, we can forget about the nonsense of figuring out when the film is set. It's 1979 when Donna meets Sophie’s dad, by the way, and the movie simply gets on with enjoying some Abba. The disco backlash of the early 80’s robbed us of the joy of Abba’s pop silliness and soapy dramatics and I’m glad to have it back, even if it isn’t the most respectable comeback. Abba was a heck of a lot of fun if you give over to them and we’re able to do that here with far less work involved than in the original.

By the time we reach the credits climax with Super Troupers, a reprise from the original movie, featuring the full cast in full Abba regalia, the movie has won us over with its bubbly spirit and Lily James star-calibur, Awards calibur performance. James is a powerhouse movie star. I won’t go as far as to say she deserves an Academy Award, though I am not opposed to the idea, but wow, we don’t need to see anyone else when it comes Golden Globe time, this is your Best Actress in a Comedy or a Musical, hands down.

I went into Mamma Mia Here We Go Again with a sour attitude, assuming it was going to be as insufferable as the original. What a joyous surprise to find that the sequel makes logical sense, fixes the holes punched in the space time continuum in the original, and crafts a heartfelt and quite funny story out of a bunch of goofy, funny, melodramatic tunes from one of the most underrated groups of all time. This is what Mamma Mia should have been all along, a brassy, blowsy, ballsy, belting it to the back of the room Broadway comedy in execution as much as in idea.

Movie Review: Dear John

Dear John (2010) 

Directed by Lasse Hallstrom

Written by Jamie Linden 

Starring Channing Tatum, Amanda Seyfried, Henry Thomas, Richard Jenkins 

Release Date February 5th, 2010

Published February 4th, 2010 

Dear John is a romance starring actor Channing Tatum's abs and actress Amanda Seyfried's eyes. As he takes his shirt off to reveal his ripples her wide, deep eyes travel the lengths of his musculature and boom you have a movie. This will be enough to satisfy the depraved teenage girls whose eyes will also travel the full length of Mr. Tatum's tummy again and again.

For the rest of us however, those not inclined to stare longingly at Mr. Tatum's Playgirl centerfold audition, Dear John is a dreary bore of romantic cliché and moony mawkishness.

I already described the plot, he takes his shirt off, she stares, the end, but I am sure some of you would like a little more detail. After all, Dear John did not begin life as an adaptation of Jergen De Mey's bestseller The Action Hero Body but rather as an adaptation of one of Nicholas Sparks's astonishing series of simpleminded romance hits.

Dear John tells the story of John, how inventive right. John is a soldier who while home on leave in early 2001 meets cute with Savannah (Seyfried) when she loses her purse in the ocean and he dives in to save it. She's with a boy when this happens but he has a shirt on, John doesn't and his glistening, rippling self is all it takes for that guy to go away, hell I can't even remember who he was.

John joins Savannah for a party at her home and an introduction to the special needs child she spends time with seals their fate as lifetime lovers. The love birds spend the summer together, her appreciating his repeated shirtlessness, he staring longingly if emptily into her wide pool-like eyes. Things are said but nothing is more important than their respective beauty.

Then John has to ship out and since this story is set in 2001 there is a pretty big twist coming up, wink wink. Yes, 9/11 is a plot point in this dopey romance and as the film manages to make sex, romance, mental illness, war and death trivial even the deadliest terror attack in American history can be rendered inferior when compared to the romance of two extraordinarily self important beautiful people.

What is supposed to be dramatic and romantic is captured by director Lasse Hallstrom in his typically vacant, pretty postcard style. It's a style that is relatively well placed in a film about two pretty people being pretty and for those who watch with the sound off, the style may enhance the experience. This is not an option of course for most theatergoers who will have to endure dialogue so benign and simple you can hear the breeze emanating in the characters ears as they speak. Cheesy platitudes meet at the intersection exposition and bland pop music scoring to create a mind numbing throb of vapidity. 

An ode to the ab workout, Dear John succeeds in providing fantasy material for those inclined toward Channing Tatum's rippling-ness. Otherwise, the film is one massive bore that manages to trivialize war, sex, autism and yes even 9/11. It's really rather remarkable that a film could be so offensive in such a forgettable fashion. Dear John is so dull that I can hardly muster the bile to be offended by it.

Movie Review Mean Girls

Mean Girls (2004) 

Directed by Mark Waters 

Written by Tina Fey 

Starring Lindsay Lohan, Rachel McAdams, Tim Meadows, Amanda Seyfried

Release Date April 30th, 2004

Published April 30th, 2004 

Rosalind Wiseman's book “Queen Bees and Wannabes'' is a sociological study of the lives of teenage girls. The book covers important teenage girl topics like cliques, fashions, friends, sex and drugs and provides parents with helpful advice for understanding their teenage daughters. I'm told it's a good read, entertaining even, but as a non-fiction book, it was an unlikely and difficult choice for a big screen adaptation.

This difficult task fell to Saturday Night Live head writer Tina Fey whose challenge was to create characters and a story arc from what were essentially intellectual observations of behavior. The characters and the story had to incorporate the book’s many important themes and ideas. Oh, and it had to be funny.

Lindsey Lohan stars as Cady Heron who, for her entire school career, has been home schooled...in Africa. Her parents are Zoologists who have decided to move back to America and enroll their daughter in a real high school. Once inside poor Cady must navigate the wilds of high school cliquedom from the popular kids to the nerds to the various sub-groups of each. Cady quickly realizes that high school is quite similar to the African bush with any number of obvious and hidden dangers. The jungle comparison is a good joke the film uses more than once.

After a rough first day Cady finally makes friends with a pair of outcasts, Janis (Lizzy Caplan) and Damian (Daniel Franzese), who help her navigate the difficult waters. The first lesson is to avoid the "Plastics," the meanest clique in the school and also the most popular. The plastics are three super hot girls, Regina (Rachel McAdams), Gretchen (Lacey Chabert) and Karen (Amanda Seyfried), who run the school. Later when Cady is being harassed in the lunchroom Regina saves her and the Plastics invite her to join their clique.

Though Cady isn't quite comfortable with the Plastics' way of belittling people and their constant focus on clothes and their bodies, Janis tells Caddy to stick with it as a way of exposing the Plastics as the evil that they are. However once inside, being popular becomes kind of fun for Cady and her time as a double agent becomes more and more out of control until she has alienated pretty much everyone.

The film sets up along the familiar territories of high school movies but with Tina Fey's sharp-eyed observations sprinkled in along the sides. Fey, who also has a small role as a teacher, uses this setup for a number of outside the plot observations, the best of which are quick parodies of the stereotypical homeschooled kid. Also, Amy Poehler of SNL shows up in the role of the Mom who desperately tries to be her daughter’s friend entirely at the expense of being a good mother.

Fey's observations are witty, smart and at times a little uncomfortable. Tackling the thorny issue of teenage sexuality, Fey glosses over the rough spots but makes a very cutting observation of how teenage girls in the post-Britney era have become hyper-sexualized. Check the scene where the Plastics with Cady perform a dance routine to the tune of Jingle Bell Rock wearing outfits more at home in a strip club. Any adult male who is not a little bit disturbed by this scene needs to take a step back and imagine that it’s your daughter on that stage. The point hits home quickly.

Many reviewers have drawn comparisons between Mean Girls and the 80's classic Heathers because both films share a cynical edge. Heathers is far darker than Mean Girls but it's not a bad comparison.

I would like to introduce a different comparison between Mean Girls and a high school movie of a very different genre, Thirteen. With its serious source material, Mean Girls addresses some of the same issues as Thirteen but from a comic perspective. Both films detail the way new friends shape how a young girl becomes a woman and how a seemingly normal teenage girl can in a short time become an entirely different person.

Being a comedy, Mean Girls cannot give these issues the depth that Thirteen has. But as a funhouse mirror version of Thirteen, Mean Girls has value to it beyond entertainment. I like how Mean Girls avoids melodrama while acknowledging its serious source material. Serious for parents of teenage girls who may find watching Mean Girls, and its candy coated satire, a convenient way to raise important issues with their daughters.

Most importantly, though, the film is funny. Tina Fey has a quick wit and a great ear for satire. With so many characters to manage, the character development tends to get lost but each of the actors is likable enough to sell the jokes and the character types they inhabit. Lindsey Lohan shows the same acting chops and comic touch that places her a step ahead of her teen rivals Hillary Duff and Amanda Bynes. If Lohan can continue to choose good material, she could have a very good future.

It's Tina Fey however who may have the brightest future. Taking the themes, observations and conclusions of a non-fiction book and creating characters and a story arc that employ those important elements and managing to make it funny is a monumental task. For the most part, she succeeds. The film lacks a realistic edge to provide a real catharsis, especially in its ending which raps up a little too neat, but it's still funny and smarter than most comedies of recent memory.

Movie Review Mamma Mia

Mamma Mia (2008) 

Directed by Phyllida Lloyd 

Written by Catherine Johnson 

Starring Meryl Streep, Amanda Seyfried, Stellan Skarsgard, Colin Firth, Pierce Brosnan

Release Date July 18th, 2008 

Published July 17th, 2008

I have to confess an odd affinity for the music of Abba. The safe, uncalculating earnestness of their disco pop is a pleasant little distraction on occasion. Spike Lee even managed to turn Dancing Queen into a powerful expression of the times when he used it to evoke the synthetic happiness of the late seventies in his underappreciated epic Summer of Sam.

Broadway show tuner Phyllida Lloyd captured perfectly the jaunty, uncomplicatedness of Abba's music when she brought Mamma Mia to the stage in 2005. Even the Tony's sat up and took notice. Now Lloyd has brought the superfluous fun of arguably disco's finest ambassador's (Sorry Bee Gees fans) to the big screen.

Mamma Mia stars Meryl Streep as Donna Sheridan, a former disco queen turned hotelier. Donna runs a hotel on the coast of the Adriatic that draws the bare minimum of tourists. Her most urgent project is getting the place fixed up for her daughter Sophie's wedding. Sophie has a big surprise in order for mom. While mom is welcoming guests, including her former singing pals Tonya (Christine Baranski) and Rosie (Julie Walters), Sophie is welcoming three surprise guests, each of whom is a blast from Donna's past and, more importantly, each may be Sophie's dad.

Colin Firth plays Harry with his typical British neurotic energy. Stellan Skarsgard is Bill, a globe -trotting journalist going with the free spirited flow at all times. And Pierce Brosnan is Sam, a rich guy who quickly figures out what is going on and comes to assume that he is Sophie's dad and that after all these many, many years, he is still in love with Donna.

That makes a good straight forward plot. However, Mamma Mia is far from straight. I mean straight forward. Sorry. Because the music of Abba serves as the inspiration for Mamma Mia the songs of Sweden's number one entertainment source are jammed into every corner and only some willingly adhere to the story being told.

Making things even more complicated than trying to shoehorn so much music into the movie, is the fact that the stars sing for themselves and most aren't great. Meryl Streep is good, Christine Baranski is better and Julie Walters can carry a tune but the boys are completely overmatched.

Pierce Brosnan is outright brutal as he attempts a duet with Streep. Firth and Skarsgard are equally unlistenable. They are saved, a little bit, by the massive production numbers that accompany the song and give them light and energy. A Lot of Mamma Mia is capable of skating on good intentional and the sheer willful intent to entertain.

Mamma Mia is undeniably fun and frothy. That said, if you don't love Abba you won't love this movie. It's a musical with nothing but Abba tunes. Tunes are jammed into scenes just for the fact that they are Abba tunes and regardless of whether they belong in the story. If you aren't a fan there is nothing here to appeal to you.

Jaunty and energetic in its bizarre way, Mamma Mia is a fans only entertainment that will preach well to the converted and leave the rest in the cold.

Movie Review: First Reformed

First Reformed (2018) 

Directed by Paul Schrader

Written by Paul Schrader 

Starring Ethan Hawke, Amanda Seyfried, Phillip Ettinger

Release Date May 18th, 2018 

Published June 5th, 2018

First Reformed is a fiery, explosive and controversial movie featuring a first-rate, Oscar-calibur performance from Ethan Hawke. Directed by Paul Schrader, the writer of Taxi Driver and Raging Bull and the director of American Gigolo, First Reformed tackles environmental and religious issues and pits Ethan Hawke’s ailing priest in a battle of wills with himself, his faith and the members of his congregation.

In First Reformed, Ethan Hawke stars as Reverend Ernst Toller, a thoughtful and troubled man who has lost a child and a wife in short order. He’s also ill, suffering from an illness that may or may not be cancer but these are only the beginnings of Reverend Toller’s issues. When he’s called upon to counsel a couple, played by Amanda Seyfried and Phillip Ettinger, he’s drawn into a complicated pair of lives that will change the course of his life.

Ethan Hawke is incredible in First Reformed. While I have many issues with the movie, Hawke’s performance wills me past many of those issues with his bubbling cauldron of a performance that begins at a simmer and slowly comes to a boil. Hawke is riveting as we watch him confront his faith, his mortality, despair and the seeming limits of God’s power on Earth. It’s a performance of remarkable depth and restrained passion.

The story of First Reformed is almost entirely told in Hawke’s voice with a voiceover narration that runs through the entirety of the film, ducking out only for the most needed dialogue among characters. Otherwise it is a searing stream of consciousness as Reverend Toller writes in a series of journal entries that bind the narrative. In these entries he is confronting his doubts and fears and confronting his inability to pray and his stalling faith.

Phillip Ettinger and Amanda Seyfried are subordinate to Hawke’s performance but each fills out the story well providing the motivation of Hawke’s performance. Each of them intentionally and unintentionally drive Pastor Toller to confront parts of himself that are deeply disquieting and unendingly compelling. They are joined by excellent supporting performances from Cedric the Entertainer as a morally ambiguous fellow priest and Edward Gaston as a corporate villain who happens to be the church’s main benefactor.

Many will be put off of First Reformed because it has a hardcore leftist environmental message. Hawke’s Reverend Toller is essentially evangelized into the environmental movement and if that is not something you’re comfortable with, First Reformed may not be the movie for you. Director-writer Paul Schrader gives no quarter to climate change deniers, painting them as corrupt and opposed to the will of God in equal measure.

The ending of First Reformed nearly put me off the film entirely. Up until the final moments of First Reformed I was riveted by Ethan Hawke’s award-worthy performance and powerful voiceover narration. Then the ending arrived and my blood nearly boiled when the film simply cut to black. I sort of understand the point of the ending, it’s high art if you will but it does not make for a satisfying narrative conclusion. It’s as rushed and awkward as the rest of First Reformed is deliberate and careful.

First Reformed is available now on Blu-Ray, DVD and On-Demand. I recommend it for fans of Ethan Hawke and environmental activists as well.

Movie Review Red Riding Hood

Red Riding Hood (2011)

Directed by Catherine Hardwicke 

Written by David Leslie Johnson 

Starring Amanda Seyfried, Max Irons, Gary Oldman, Billy Burke, Julie Christie 

Release Date March 11th, 2011 

Published March 10th, 2011 

Amanda Seyfried has yet to find the right movie for her particular talents. Seyfried mixes girl next door good looks, those amazing flying saucer-esque eyes, and inviting sensuality into one precocious package. She would be a dream come true in a Bertolucci movie or as captured by Antonioni's loving lens. Sadly, being a young American actress means offering her services for schlock such as "Dear John," ``Letters to Juliet," and her latest "Red Riding Hood."

Amanda Seyfried stars in "Red Riding Hood" as Valerie, the virginal daughter of a wood cutter (Billy Burke, Bella's dad from Twilight) who is promised in marriage by her mother, Suzette (Virginia Madsen) to Henry (Max Irons) the son of a wealthy family friend.

Valerie however, is in love with Peter (Shiloh Fernandez) and intends to run away with him. Their plans are thwarted sadly when Valerie's sister is murdered by a werewolf. Now, Father Solomon (Gary Oldman) is coming to the village to hunt the wolf and a dark secret Valerie did not know she carried will place her in the wolf's path.

"Red Riding Hood" was directed by Catherine Hardwicke, a talented director who has faltered under the weight of big budgets and special effects. Hardwicke is exceptionally talented in crafting warm and intimate scenes, as she demonstrated in her wonderful coming of age film "Thirteen" and in the quiet moments of her hit "Twilight."

Unfortunately, special effects simply are not Catherine Hardwicke's forte. The CGI in "Red Riding Hood," used to render the wolf and portions of the mid-centuries village, is amateurish in comparison to other CGI heavy films including such stinkers as "The Wolfman" and "Underworld: Evolution."

The Gothic air that Hardwicke attempts to bring to "Red Riding Hood" comes off campy rather than mysterious or forbidding. Attempts to mix period cliches with modern pop culture savvy feel forced and trite. What works is when Hardwicke focuses on smaller, intimate moments that take advantage of star Amanda Seyfried's innate eroticism.

The climax of "Red Riding Hood" is laughable as the filmmakers settle the allegedly mysterious identity of the werewolf by choosing a character at random. So indiscriminate is the choice of the identity of the werewolf that it is fair to wonder if the filmmakers knew the choice before they filmed it.

"Red Riding Hood" is a mess of feeble CGI and market tested pop culture. Though star Amanda Seyfried still manages to be radiant and alluring, the film is all Gothic bluster and teen targeted kitsch. Fans of Ms. Seyfried would be better served waiting for her next film, teaming with visionary director Andrew Niccol called "Now." That film hits theaters ..October 11th 2011.

Movie Review The Last Word

The Last Word (2017) 

Directed by Mark Pellington 

Written by Stuart Ross Fink 

Starring Amanda Seyfried, Shirley MacLaine 

Release Date March 3rd, 2017

Published April 13th, 2017 

Shirley MacLaine is a national treasure. Sure, I don’t like several of her films but when she’s good, there are few better. Don’t believe me? Watch “The Apartment” and then try to tell me I am wrong. MacLaine is in the twilight of her career and with her new movie “The Last Word” she has decided to write the last chapter of her career in glorious fashion.

“The Last Word” stars Shirley MacLaine as Harriet Lauson, a lonely, bitter woman whose control freak tendencies have driven away most everyone in her life. After a failed suicide attempt, Harriet stumbles across the obituaries page of her local paper and wanting the chance to control even her death, she decides to go to the paper to start the process of writing her obituary, so she can make sure she gets the last word on what is said about her.

Ann (Amanda Seyfried) is the paper’s obituary writer, a lonely but quite talented writer who lacks the courage to strike out on her own. When Ann meets Harriet, they don’t exactly hit it off but it’s only a matter of time before Harriet’s unique life and domineering personality begin to inspire Ann. After hearing that most of the people in her life despise her, Harriet decides to change her life completely to change her story and what a story it turns out to be.

I will leave the rest of the plot for you to enjoy. Shirley MacLaine is a joy to behold as Harriet makes one oddball choice after another to give herself the obituary and indeed the life she truly wants. As I write this, the story does sound clichéd but trust me when I tell you that MacLaine is so delightful that it doesn’t matter if the story seems overly familiar.

Amanda Seyfried’s job in “The Last Word” is mostly reacting to the bizarre twists and turns of MacLaine’s Harriet but she does put a nice spin on that role. Seyfried seems at times in awe of MacLaine and it feeds well into the character who, though she may not be in awe of Harriet, she’s at least consistently surprised by her new friend’s sudden evolution from crotchety old hag to fun loving yet still domineering, hipster.

Director Mark Pellington makes the smart choice to just let MacLaine drive the train. There is nothing special about the direction of “The Last Word,” but just allowing MacLaine to take the lead fits the character and the movie quite well. MacLaine’s Harriet is the dominant force for everyone around her so it makes sense that MacLaine’s performance dominates the film.

“The Last Word” is funny and sweet, sad at times, yes but with a genuine heart and wit behind the sadness. It’s a film about age and the cruelty of time and about a woman who refused to be defined by that time. In many ways that reflects MacLaine who has approached aging in Hollywood with wit and aplomb. MacLaine’s wit is as strong as ever in “The Last Word” and I recommend you enjoy it while you can.