Movie Review The Core

The Core (2003) 

Directed by Jon Amiel

Written by Cooper Layne, John Rogers

Starring Hilary Swank, Aaron Eckhart, Delroy Lindo, Bruce Greenwood, Richard Jenkins

Release Date March 28th, 2003

Published March 29th, 2003

It's not often when screenwriters make the news. When John Rogers, the co-writer of The Core, wrote in to Ain't It Cool News to dispute a review that questioned the film’s science, more than a few of us took notice and had a little laugh at his expense.

Granted, no one wants their work made fun of, but when you make a movie as unabashedly out there as The Core, you can't expect it to be welcomed as if it were written by Carl Sagan. Sci-fi films have a horrible track record of including actual science in them and the aspiration to put real science in a movie like The Core is like asking Beverly Hills Cop to include real police procedures. No one goes to disaster movies for a science lesson, they go to watch landmarks explode. The Core blows up Rome and San Francisco, mission accomplished.

Aaron Eckhart heads up an ensemble cast as Dr. Josh Keyes, a physics professor at some anonymous college. In the midst of a lecture on the layers of the Earth, Dr. Keyes is called out of class by a pair of humorless G-men. Taken on a jet to Washington D.C, he reunites with a fellow scientist and friend Sergei Levesque (Tcheky Karyo, in a rare non-villain role). The two are asked by an army General (Six Feet Under dead guy, Richard Jenkins) to theorize what environmental factors could cause a group of people with pacemakers to simply drop dead without warning.

The answer, after much lucky guessing by Dr. Keyes, is that the Earth's core has stopped spinning causing it's electromagnetic field to go haywire. Not only has it caused pacemakers to stop, but also birds have lost navigating ability and are falling from the sky. Also falling is the space shuttle which has flown off course and nearly crashes in L.A, saved only by the wits of its plucky navigator Major Rebecca Childs.

So now that we know what's wrong, there are two questions remaining. Number one, how did this happen? And number two, how do we stop it? Thankfully, the film’s trailer has already told us both of those things. A weapon that causes earthquakes has gone too far thanks to the miscalculations of its inventor Dr. Zimsky (Stanley Tucci). Conversely, crazy scientist Dr. "Braz" Brazzleton has a vehicle with the ability to tunnel all the way to the core. Once there, nuclear weapons can be dropped to kickstart the core. Apparently, no one had jumper cables.

To the science issue, I have no idea and really don't care if the science is real. What matters is if the film is any good. Some geologist writing somewhere said that the film has as many accuracies as inaccuracies and that the inaccuracies are those that are necessary for dramatic purposes. WHATEVER!

Let's get to the important stuff, how cool are the explosions. Well let me tell you in the words of the late John Candy in an old SCTV sketch, stuff blow'd up, blow'd up real good. The special effects aren't spectacular but they are entertaining in a modern day Ed Wood sort of way. The Golden Gate Bridge explosion is a cheesy treat and when Rome blows up, watching the reactions of the extras running from the Coliseum is priceless.

The Core is a bad movie but in the camp sense it's genius. Whether intentional or not The Core is full of laughs from the effects to the characters. I especially liked Stanley Tucci who seemed to be channeling Dr. Smith from Lost In Space with his whiny smugness. And kudos to Delroy Lindo for assuaging his usual calm cool persona for a geekier frazzled genius demeanor that you don't expect from him.

The Core is just plain goofy and in that sense it's a lot of fun. Though it needs to be greatly pared down from its two-hour plus runtime, it nevertheless delivers a fun little distraction.

Movie Review: Eight Below

Eight Below (2006) 

Directed by Frank Marshall 

Written by David Digillio 

Starring Paul Walker, Bruce Greenwood, Jason Biggs, Moon Bloodgood

Release Date February 17th, 2006 

Published February 16th, 2006

Disney has a formula for every kind of film. That is how we end up with such junk as Glory Road or the wretched talking dog flick Snow Dogs. That also, however, is how we end up with such surprises as the monster hit Pirates of The Caribbean and the new animal adventure flick Eight Below. We know these two otherwise diverse films are of a particular brand name formula but both are so well accomplished we not only forgive the formula we like the film more for overcoming that formula.

Eight Below is 'inspired by' a true story of doggie survival in Antarctica in the 1950's. The story was first adapted by Japanese filmmakers in 1980 for a film called Nankoyoku Monogatari, unseen by me and well, unseen by most. In Eight Below the story of eight sled dogs abandoned in the arctic winter is directed by Frank Marshall and stars Paul "Sleep" Walker.

A science team in Antarctica sometime in the early nineties is welcoming a visiting UCLA science professor (Bruce Greenwood) who is on an expedition to find a meteorite he believes may be from Mars. With his hefty check in hand, and unbeknownst to the teams lead field explorer Gerry (Paul Walker), the teams boss has agreed to a dangerous excursion over the most treacherous sheets of ice in the arctic.

This means that instead of a simple snowmobile trip, Gerry and the professor will have to travel with the teams elite group of sled dogs. This is the human adventure portion of the film as Gerry and the professor make their way out to the most remote and dangerous mountain ranges in the arctic. Along the way they see dangerous leopard seals, and avoid treacherous thin ice. Of course it wouldn't be dramatic if the  the novice professor didn't fall through some thin ice and had to be rescued. On the plus side it's a chance for those amazing dogs to show off their talent.

From there a giant storm hits forcing the human inhabitants to flee. Gerry promises to return for the dogs but with the storm growing worse and the dangerous arctic winter setting in his imminent return seems unlikely. The dogs will have to fend for themselves for several months, that is if they can even escape their chains.

Frank Marshall is a director who works infrequently. In fact Eight Below is Marshall's first big screen effort since 1994's Congo. Still his work, including that aforementioned angry monkey movie, the plane crash horror film Alive and 1990's spider comedy Arachnophobia, has an indelible quality that has managed to become part of pop culture and cult phenomena. Eight Below is sadly very likely to be his least remembered film, in terms of pop culture cache, but it may in fact be his best. The films story of cross-species friendship, love and adventure is a terrific piece of work.

Especially strong are the scenes featuring the dogs. Alone in the arctic wilderness foraging for food, fighting for survival and remaining a family. The dogs become real characters with their own personalities. The rooting interest that Frank Marshall and screenwriter David Digillio instill in the dogs is remarkable and works even for those who may not consider themselves dog lovers.

Any film starring Paul 'Sleep' Walker that manages to be as exciting as Eight Below deserves some kind of award. Perhaps I am being a little hard on Walker, he rarely actually sleeps on screen. He's just a little slow is all. In Eight Below Walker is more than effective as the conscientious adventurer whose love of his sled dog team is as strong as any familial bond imaginable. Forget the sparkless romantic subplot with co-star Moon Bloodgood, Walker's love affair with the dogs works, giving him more than enough emotional depth for us to accept him.... no matter how slow he may be.

With all of the horrendous product aimed at kids at the movies, Eight Below is a revelation. The film never condescends to being a family drama. Frank Marshall simply tells his story to the best of his abilities and that it happens to be a family friendly adventure with strong values -friendship, family, love-  is really a bonus.

Unlike other Disney branded non-animation tripe -Shaggy Dog, Glory Road, Remember The Titans- Eight Below never gives you the sense you are being preached to or being sold something. This is a film of great integrity and in no way feels compromised like much of the product Disney shovels into theaters.

Yes the film is working from a particular formula and within genre strictures. The key to the film is how Frank Marshall and his team take the established formula and improve upon it with great skill and savvy. Eight Below defies formula by improving upon it.

From looking at Eight Below and Frank Marshall's resume of pop culture home runs, I wish he would work more frequently. However, if his long delays between projects means we can have more films of the quality and exciting nature of Eight Below, Frank Marshall should take as much time as he needs for his next picture.

Eight Below is a terrific film.

Movie Review I, Robot

I, Robot (2004) 

Directed by Alex Proyas 

Written by Jeff Vintar, Akiva Goldsman

Starring Will Smith, Bridget Moynihan, Bruce Greenwood, James Cromwell, Alan Tudyk 

Release Date July 16th, 2004

Published July 14th, 2004

Will Smith says he only has a few more years of running, jumping and shooting before he needs to find another niche. Let’s hope it’s more than a few years because he is one of that genre's most-welcome stars. Yes Bad Boys 2 stunk but his latest film I, Robot, makes up for that piece of trash with a smart stylish Sci-Fi action movie.

Smith stars as Detective Del Spooner, your average everyday Chicago Police Detective. Looking around his messy apartment and his old school casual clothes you would never guess he lives in the year 2035. That is until he steps out into the streets that teem with commuters and their walking, talking robot counterparts.

In 2035 robots will be an important part of everyday society, assisting in everyday activities such as cooking, cleaning and various menial jobs that humans would prefer not to do. This might sound good to most people but Del hates it and he hates robots. His prejudice stems from an accident that is hinted at in his dreams.

It is ironic then with Del’s dislike of robots that he would be the detective forced to investigate the apparent suicide of the top robot creator in the world, Dr. Alfred Lanning (James Cromwell). Spooner knows Dr. Lanning, how they know each other is explained later in the film, and Lanning has left him a holographic projection that may hold an important clue to something even bigger than his own suicide.

Spooner, ever suspicious of robots, chooses to investigate the case as murder. He is allowed into Dr. Lanning’s labs under the watchful eye of the company’s owner Lawrence Robertson (Bruce Greenwood) and Dr. Lanning’s assistant Susan Calvin (Bridget Moynihan). It’s preposterous of course that a robot could commit a murder because they are implanted with Dr. Lanning’s three laws of robotics (They are of course the creation of writer Isaac Asimov who wrote the short story “I , Robot” which is part of this film’s inspiration but not it’s direct source).

The three laws are:

1. A Robot may not harm a human being or through inaction allow a human being to be harmed.

2. A Robot must obey the orders of a human being unless those orders violate the first law.

3. A Robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not violate the first two laws.

Of course as Detective Spooner cleverly points out, rules are meant to be broken. Dr. Lanning must have agreed because prior to his death he created a robot he called Sonny (Voice by Alan Tudyk) who can think, feel and make choices that may allow it to reconsider the three laws. The Robots, especially Sonny, are some of the most spectacular examples of CGI that we have ever seen. Lifelike and eminently believable, the robots of I, Robot stand alongside Spider-man and the creatures of George Lucas as examples of what amazing things CGI can do

Director Alex Proyas may be the best director working in the science fiction genre today. If you haven’t seen his Dark City, finish reading this and run to the video store because that film is a must see masterpiece. I, Robot is not a masterpiece but as a genre piece and a Will Smith movie, it is spectacular.

Smith’s charisma continues to mature as he does as an actor. Smith is such a welcome reassuring presence that you can forgive a few screenplay contrivances that manipulate his character into particular situations. You can also forgive a few of those all-to-well-timed one-liners that occasionally feel out of place in this straight-faced film.

Many critics have complained that this film strays too far from Isaac Asimov’s brilliant short story written as part of his Robot Dreams collection. Indeed this is Asimov’s “I, Robot” in name only. This I, Robot is cynical about technology, robots specifically, where Asimov always played the robots as conflicted good guys that may have occasionally struggled with the three laws but protected humanity.

The script for this I, Robot written by Jeff Vintar and Oscar winner Akiva Goldsman has an almost Luddite view of technology. The script shows a fear of technology more in the vein of Osamu Rezuka’s Metropolis than Asimov, though both ask similar questions. Can robots think, feel, or love?

I, Robot, doesn't have the time to answer those questions. It’s a little too busy being an action movie, but it does have its thoughtful moments and the banter between Smith’s cop and Moynihan’s scientist does offer moments of good debate about the nature of humans and robots. The film is not exactly deep but it has more interesting ideas than most big summer blockbusters and for that we should cheer.

Movie Review: Deja Vu

Deju Vu (2006) 

Directed by Tony Scott 

Written by Terry Rossio 

Starring Denzel Washington, Val Kilmer, Paula Patton, Bruce Greenwood, Jim Caviezel 

Release Date November 22nd, 2006

Published November 21st, 2006 

The space time continuum seems like simply a Star Trek invention but the fact is many scientists believe time travel is possible. The physics are still unclear but theorists have begun discussing the ethics of time travel and how travelers may effect the history they are visiting. The new sci fi thriller Deja Vu is not a discussion of ethics or science but the film does take vague advantage of the concepts to craft a quick witted action vehicle perfectly suited to the talents of star Denzel Washington and director Tony Scott.

A ferry carrying American soldiers and their families to a party in New Orleans explodes moments after leaving port. Nearly five hundred people are killed including a woman named Claire Kuchaver (Paula Patton). There is something odd about Claire's death however, something that ATF agent Doug Carlin (Denzel Washington) is the first to notice. Claire was not killed in the explosion or the ensuing fire.

Though her body washed ashore with those of the ferry victims, her injuries indicate murder and yet her car is identified as the car that was packed with explosives and placed on the ferry. Convinced that Claire's death is the key to finding the man or men responsible for for the ferry explosion, Carlin is detemined to investigate this case.

His determination and attention to detail catches the eye of FBI agent Pryzwarra (Val Kilmer) who asks Carlin to join his unique investigative unit. Pryzwarra oversees a group of scientists headed up by Dr. Denny (Adam Goldberg) who have invented a device that allows them to peer into the past at a particular moment in time and examine that place in that time from any possible, visible angle.

There are limitations. This time twisting device can only look back four days and twelve hours. It cannot fast forward and it cannot rewind. The key is watching and observing and acting on the details gleaned from observing victims, witnesses and suspects ahead of whatever incident in which they are involved. Carlin leads the team into Claire's life and eventually finds himself chasing Claire and the terrorist through time itself.

To say much more might spoil the fun of this scientifically goofy but modestly entertaining sci fi actioner. Deja Vu toys with the time space continuum and in doing so  reveals a dichotomy in director Tony Scott's telling of the story. On the one hand he has a need to make his story plausible right down to the math. On the other hand is an open admittance of the futility of trying to keep up a realistic timeline. If you can put aside the goofiness and give up on the math, there is a compelling action flick beneath thee convoluted sci fi stuff.

Denzel Washington is a different breed of action hero. He can go hand to hand or gun to gun with the worst of villains but his true talent is as a cerebral presence. His mind cooking behind those blazing eyes is fascinating to climb inside. In Deja Vu we are right there and though he is forced by plot to be clueless at times, he is never made a fool of and in the end he carries us past any questions we might have about the confounding sci fi plot.

The key to enjoying Deja Vu is working hard on the suspension of disbelief. Though it is hard to not get caught up in trying to follow the math of the movie, the folding and unfolding of this unusual timeline, you must realize eventually that the timeline is meaningless and that even the filmmakers could not keep it all straight. Once you can put that aside (if you can put that aside) there is a surprisingly edgy and exciting action picture.

The best scene in Deja Vu is a car chase in which Denzel chases after the bad guy, played by Jesus himself Jim Caviezel, through time. As the bad guy, played by Jim Caviezel, being watched four days in the past, is about to drive out of the range of the equipment, Denzel hops into a modified hummer and chases after him in hopes of keeping his four day old trail in view.

Trust me, this makes complete sense in the movie. The car crashes are big and loud but the context of the chase gives it an extra bit of edge or your seat excitement and what follows plays back into the overall plot in clever ways.

Not alot of Deja Vu makes sense. If you can follow the movie and keep its weird math in some sense of order you will likely watch the film come apart like wet newspaper. Scrtutinize to much and the movie goes to pieces. Watch Deja Vu for the action and for Denzel Washington's always charismatic and compelling presence and you will find much to enjoy in Deja Vu.

Goofy as all get out but still quite entertaining, I'm recommending Deja Vu.

I'm recommending Deja Vu.

Movie Review Hollywood Homicide

Hollywood Homicide (2003) 

Directed by Ron Shelton

Written by Ron Shelton

Starring Harrison Ford, Josh Hartnett, Master P, Lena Olin, Bruce Greenwood, Isaiah Washington, Keith David, Dwight Yoakam, Martin Landau

Release Date June 13th, 2003 

Published June 12th, 2003 

Every time I complain about a film’s marketing campaign I get emails asking me why I complain about something that has nothing to do with the film. I politely disagree with that sentiment. A film’s marketing shapes your perception and the movie Hollywood Homicide is an excellent example of my feelings. The ad campaign of the film is accompanied by a rap soundtrack that is not only misleading, it's misguided. That aside, and despite his aging demographic, Ford shows in Hollywood Homicide that he's still got that magical IT quality that makes a superstar.

In Hollywood Homicide Harrison Ford is Joe Gavilan, real estate agent by day, Hollywood homicide cop at night. His young partner is KC Calden (Josh Hartnett), who is also a part-time yoga instructor and wannabe actor. The two are brought in to investigate the murder of an up and coming rap group in a LA nightclub owned by Julius (Master P). In one of the film’s funniest moments, Joe takes time out from the investigation to pitch Julius about a house he has for sale. The murder sets the plot in motion but there is something else going on in this film.

In most cop movies, we would track from the evidence that implies the rap groups record company owner killed them for trying to break their contract. Isaiah Washington fills that vaguely Suge Knightish role. However at some point in the making of Hollywood Homicide, director Ron Shelton forgot about this by-the-numbers plot and fell in love with his quirky characters. Lucky for him, these are great characters and even better actors playing them.

As the murder plot becomes merely a subplot, it's the weird friendship between Ford and Hartnett that takes center stage and the two actors show an excellent chemistry. Ford also has a subplot with the wife of one of his fellow LAPD detectives, who also happens to be working for the bad guys. Lena Olin fills the role of Ford's love interest and brings a mature sexuality to what could have been a throwaway role. There are a couple of strands of plot also working throughout Hollywood Homicide, such as Dwight Yoakam as a dirty former cop working for Isaiah Washington and his connection to the murder of Hartnett's father. Yet again, such plot machinations are merely background for the actors.

The film’s ending is a car wreck, literally and figuratively. The figurative car wreck is the number of unresolved plot points that are simply thrown away or disregarded. Bruce Greenwood in particular gets the short shrift as his character arc is resolved with little notice to the audience as to why or how. Not that it made any difference to the plot but it didn't fit any kind of logic. You can tell a lot of this subplot was left on the cutting room floor. In fact, from the messy narrative that is on display, I would bet the director’s cut must have been just over three hours just to explain the extraneous plot points..

You can speculate for hours as to what happened during the filming of Hollywood Homicide that brought it to it's current state. Despite my praise of the film’s leads and its humor, the film is a real mess from a plot standpoint. One could wonder if the obvious allusions to Suge Knight in Isaiah Washington's character caused that character to be cut back a good deal. You can see many of the cop movie cliches fighting to surface and Shelton seemed to make a very pronounced effort to downplay those cliches. He leaves the film’s big action movie moments until the end of the film and focuses on the films strengths, it's actors and the humor they generate from their interaction.

That doesn't make the film feel any less messy but it makes it far more tolerable than it might have been. -

Movie Review: Dinner for Schmucks

Dinner for Schmucks (2010) 

Directed by Jay Roach 

Written by David Guion 

Starring Steve Carell, Paul Rudd, Bruce Greenwood, Jemaine Clement, Zach Galifianakis

Release Date July 30th, 2010 

Published July 29th, 2010 

Barry (Steve Carell) is a schmuck. He has no couth and is completely unaware of the feelings of others. He is not malicious, merely clueless. Barry's hobby is dressing and posing dead stuffed mice in intricate dioramas and when he meets Tim (Paul Rudd) for the first time it's while retrieving another dead mouse from the middle of a busy street and bouncing off the hood of his car.

That Barry is a schmuck is stipulated by the title Dinner for Schmucks but that Tim too is something of a schmuck is the overarching point of the movie Dinner for Schmucks directed by Jay Roach whose talent lies in crafting intricate dioramas of schmucks being schmucks whether they are played by Paul Rudd or Ben Stiller or Mike Myers.

Tim is a corporate climber looking to make a move to the corner office. When his opportunity arrives it comes with a caveat; Tim must find a loser to bring to a dinner at his boss's (Bruce Greenwood). The loser must be a real loser, one he and his fellow corporate VP's (Daily Show's Larry Wilmore and Office Space's Ron Livingston) can make fun of.

This is an obviously jerky scenario, one that Tim is not comfortable with and when his girlfriend Julie (Stephanie Szostak) tells him not to go through with it that seems to settle things. Then, Tim hits Barry with his car and well, mice dioramas of The Last Supper and the Mona Lisa look like just the thing to win over the boss.

The story is thin but it works as the perfect coat hanger of a plot on which to hang a number of big gags and wacky characters. Among the wackiest is Flight of the Conchords star Jemaine Clement as Kieran a mind blowingly odd artist. Though Schmuckish enough to be the perfect Dinner guest, he's actually an art client of Tim's girlfriend with designs on sleeping with her. Kieran's art involves paintings of himself as various animals, more often than not goats.

Wait till you meet the rest of the dinner guests. But, that's not till the end of Dinner for Schmucks. On the way we get to know Barry as he goes about destroying Tim's relationship, apartment and job. And yet, somehow we don't mind. Steve Carell pulls off quite a trick in Dinner for Schmucks and gets us on Barry's side even as he is a catalyst for destruction.

Steve Carell nails the role of nerdy, off-putting weirdo and yet manages to win us over. Believe it or not, by the end of Dinner for Schmucks you are ready to see this weirdo get a happily ever after, one fitting of his completely bizarre self. As for Mr. Rudd, as he was straight man to Jason Segal's oddball in I Love You Man he is an even better, funnier and more effective straight man to Mr. Carell.

The strength of Dinner for Schmucks lies in big gags and bigger goofballs. Jemaine Clement, The Hangover's Zach Galifianakis, The I.T Crowd's Chris O'Dowd and puppet comic Jeff Dunham are just a sampling of the wackos who bring the laughs in Dinner for Schmucks. Each has maybe a scene or two but it's all they need to deliver their punchline and get out. 

The classic showbiz cliché always leave'em laughing is the heart of Dinner for Schmucks. The characters get in; get the laugh and get out; making way for the next set up and punchline and payoff. It may not pay off with a compelling story but the laughs more than make up for the lack of a hardy narrative.