Classic Movie Review The Pelican Brief

The Pelican Brief (1993) 

Directed by Alan J. Pakula 

Written by Alan J. Pakula 

Starring Denzel Washington, Julia Roberts, Stanley Tucci, John Lithgow, Hume Cronyn 

Release Date December 17th, 1993

Published December 27th, 2023 

The Pelican Brief stars Julia Roberts as Tulane Law School student, Darby Shaw. Darby is your average 23 year old who happens to be sleeping with her law professor, played by Sam Shepherd. After a pair of Supreme Court Justices, Rosenberg and Jensen, are assassinated, Darby develops a theory as to why these to seemingly opposing judges were killed. It turns out, the two Justices, had one thing in common, the environment. Each voted regularly against major corporations that risked polluting the environment or those that did pollute the environment received significant penalties for doing so. 

Taking out Rosenberg and Jensen reshapes the court in someone's favor and that someone is likely the person who arranged two assassinations of Supreme Court Justices within hours of each other. For some reason, only 23 year old law student who is sleeping with her professor, is capable of figuring out this conspiracy. So, Darby writes a legal brief and gives it to her professor boyfriend. The boyfriend passes it to his pal at the FBI, played by John Heard. From there, what comes to be known as The Pelican Brief, reaches the desk of the President's Chief of Staff, played by Tony Goldwyn, who takes it to the President, Robert Culp, and a conspiracy unfolds to kill Darby and bury the brief.

On a second track of story, Washington Post reporter Gray Grantham, played by Denzel Washington, is following his own theory on the assassinations. Gray has connected with a Washington lawyer who claims to have seen a memo implicating his bosses at a big time law firm in the deaths of Rosenberg and Jensen. The lawyer, calling himself Garcia, reaches out to Grantham for help but ultimately backs out of a meeting with the reporter out of fear for his life. In the midst of trying to follow the bread crumbs left by Garcia, Gray meets Darby and the two begin working together to solve this conspiracy while running for their lives from ruthless assassins. 

There is something ever so slightly off throughout The Pelican Brief. While the film is perfectly watchable, it feels weightless for a movie about the assassination of TWO Supreme Court justices and a college professor. Oops, spoiler alert. There's actually an even bigger body count than that but I don't want to give everything away regarding this 30 year old blockbuster. The Pelican Brief never feels like anything more than a trashy beach read, perhaps because that is exactly what the movie was based upon. Legendary author John Grisham may have had the pretense of a law professor, but his books were straight melodrama inflated with legal jargon. 

That said, I expected a little something more from writer-director Alan J. Pakula. After all, he's the director behind two iconic 70s movies, one of which is the gold standard of political thrillers, All the President's Men, and the other is the remarkable mystery, Klute. Pakula was more than capable of making throwaway blockbuster style movies, even in his heyday, but, paired with the two most radiant stars of the day and a book that had a solid base for an exploration of corruption and politics, I got it in my head that The Pelican Brief should be more than it is. That's on me. The Pelican Brief, away from my expectations and desires, is fine. It's breezy, it moves quickly, and it doesn't overstay its welcome. 

Read my full length review at Geeks.Media 

Movie Review The Equalizer 3

The Equalizer 3 (2023) 

Directed by Antoine Fuqua 

Written by Richard Wenk 

Starring Denzel Washington, Dakota Fanning, David Denman 

Release Date September 1st, 2023 

Published September 1st, 2023 

I was not ready for how astonishingly violent The Equalizer 3 is. In the opening scenes we see a parade of viscera, a series of dead bodies that have been wrecked and bloodied in a fashion that would shame Jason Voorhees. When we finally see the man responsible for this buffet of brutality, our old friend Robert McCall (Denzel Washington), he's being held at gunpoint but seconds away from murdering everyone in the room. In a scene punctuating moment, McCall picks up a shotgun and blasts buckshot into the backside of the main baddie as he attempts to crawl away. 

Find my full length review at Geeks.Media 

Movie Review: American Gangster

American Gangster (2007) 

Directed by Ridley Scott 

Written by Steven Zaillian 

Starring Denzel Washington, Russell Crowe, Clarence Williams III, Chiwetel Ejiofor, Cuba Gooding Jr 

Release Date November 2nd, 2007 

Published November 1st, 2007

The story of Frank Lucas could have found this enterprising, intelligent man as CEO of a fortune 500 company. The man knew how to run a business. He was a retail pioneer at heart who figured a way to cut out the middle man and bring his product directly from the manufacturer, no middle man. He sounds like an electronics dealer with his own chain of wholesale retailers.

The reality, captured in fictional form, in American Gangster is that Frank Lucas was a drug dealer and a murderer who coldly and heartlessly killed hundreds with his product and more with his own gun.

As the driver for legendary Harlem gangster Bumpy Johnson (Clarence Williams III) Frank Lucas learned the business of being a gangster up close and personal. When Bumpy died the city fell into a chaos of crime and violence and Frank Lucas longed to bring back Bumpy's sense of order and profit from it as he did.

Finding a way to get heroin without having to share with the mob and the NYPD, Frank went all the way to Vietnam to get his product which was then smuggled into the country in the coffins of US soldiers returning from the war. The result was a more pure and addictive form of heroin that Frank nicknamed Blue Magic. With his product in place Frank brought his brothers up from North Carolina and the Lucas empire was born.

Unraveling the tangled web of the Lucas drug trade is Richie Roberts (Russell Crowe). A lone good cop in department overflowing with corruption, Richie never took a dime, even when he and his partner stumbled on a million dollars of easily stealable drug money. It's good that Richie has his professional integrity because he has little else. His wife is leaving him and taking his son while his personal life consists of a series of mindless one night stands.

The collision of Frank Lucas and Richie Roberts was inevitable how it arrives and plays out in American Gangster is entirely unpredictable if you haven't already investigated the rise and fall of Frank Lucas. Indeed, Frank was for real. His reign in Harlem lasted nearly a decade. He once had more than 150 million dollars in cash stored in his home. He also murdered enemies in broad daylight in front of dozens of witnesses and was not caught.

Richie Roberts was also for real and the the path of his life through this film is fascinating and the prologue hints that even after getting Frank Lucas his life was colorful and unique. As played by Russell Crowe, Richie Roberts almost steals the picture. Crowe's Richie isn't your typical meatheaded tough guy roughing up suspects to get the information he needs to get the bad guy. Richie was a law student and eventually a prosecutor. He was a thinking man's detective even as he put forth a tough guy front.

This character could not be better suited to Russell Crowe who has played Nobel prize winner John Nash and fictional Gladiator Maximus, each to Oscar level. Don't be surprised if his Richie Roberts gets called on the morning of the Oscar nominations.

There was recently quite a heated debate at MovieCityNews.com over director Ridley Scott. A writer for the site wrote that he felt Scott is overrated as a director. He cited his examples and made some strong points about Scott's resume, which I agree, is somewhat inflated. However, after watching American Gangster I am convinced that Scott is an auteur of the highest order.

Fighting for two years to get American Gangster on the screen, Scott battled studio heads to get his vision of the film as the final product and he succeeded. This is top notch work that plays to Scott's strengths as a director of epics like Gladiator and Alien. Say what you will about Scott's many failings, his American Gangster is a modern film classic.

American Gangster can fairly be called Ridley Scott's Godfather. It is the height of his work thus far and it reflects everything he has accomplished including his earning the loyalty and trust of two of the finest actors of this generation. If Russell Crowe and Denzel Washington love Ridley Scott that's gotta mean he's doing something right.

Denzel Washington remains the king of cool in Hollywood. No one could have played the role of Frank Lucas like Denzel does. The charisma, the elegance, the cold steely intelligence rolls off the screen in waves when Denzel is on camera. His work is so effortless I worry that people will call the performance lazy. There is none of the histrionics of his Oscar winning performance in Training Day , none of the harrumphing bravado that announces a big dramatic performance.

The menace and charm are all played in Denzel's eyes. In fact, much of Denzel's Frank Lucas is in his eyes. There are scenes where that steely gaze could kill whoever it falls upon. There are other scenes, ones with his mother played by Ruby Dee and his wife (Lymari Nadal), where those eyes are as soft and inviting as Denzel in The Preacher's Wife. The entire dichotomy that is Frank Lucas can be found in Denzel's electric gaze.

That is the extraordinary talent of Denzel Washington on display in American Gangster, he makes it look so easy even as he has so much going on. Some will no doubt walk away feeling like they have seen this Denzel before. Cocky and harsh but still charismatic and even charming, there are so many levels to Denzel's performance and he plays them so well that it barely registers until after you've had time to think about, after the performance has already worked on you.

Two extraordinary actors under the direction of a director at the height of his powers creates one hell of a filmgoing experience. American Gangster is the kind of epic filmmaking that so rarely lives up to its ambitions. American Gangster more than lives up to its grand ambitions. A true powerhouse of dramatic filmmaking, American Gangster is a must see for all audiences, but especially those that want to see the movie that will be featured on Oscar night come March.

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: Fences

Fences (2016) 

Directed by Denzel Washington

Written by August Wilson 

Starring Denzel Washington, Viola Davis

Release Date December 16th, 2016

Published December 10th, 2016 

"Fences" tells the story of a family that is slowly falling apart. Based on the stage play by August Wilson, "Fences" was Directed by Denzel Washington who also stars as Troy Maxon. Troy is a gregarious man who seems like the life of the party. On closer examination however, the mask comes off and reveals a man whose gregariousness hides a deep well of pain and resentment. The older Troy gets, and the further he gets from his dreams, the more his pain and resentment comes out and is aimed at his family including his wife Rose (Viola Davis) and son Cory (Jovan Adepo). 

Troy is a former Negro Leagues baseball star who was deemed too old by the Major Leagues after Jackie Robinson broke the color barrier. With few options for employment in his adopted hometown of Pittsburgh, Troy took a job as a waste collector, a job he's held for years when we are introduced to him. It's a good job that has put food on the table but the meager $75 a week isn't what gave his family a home and is yet another story of pain and resentment for Troy related to his wounded army veteran brother Gabe (Mykelti Williamson). 

The various resentments and frustrations of Troy Maxon's life are presented by Denzel Washington as lengthy monologues, some filled with metaphoric rage and others where the bitterness rises to the top. The film was directed by Washington from the stage play by August Wilson and Washington's performance reflects the stagebound nature of the story. 

That stagebound quality is the biggest problem with the otherwise compelling "Fences." The transition from stage to the screen is often quite awkward with Washington at times belting his stagy monologues to the back of the nonexistent theater. He's Denzel Washington so most of the time even the belting to the back of the room is compelling but there are still many awkward moments. 

Viola Davis delivers a far less affected performance as Rose. Though Davis is no stranger to stage theatrics, she strikes a more measured and realistic tone for her performance. Davis isn't trying to reach the back of the theater, even her biggest emotional moments, she seems to better understand the intimacy of the film medium more than her director and co-star. 

Washington directs "Fences" as if it were still on the stage. There are a limited number of sets in the film with the family backyard being the main stage and the dingy interior of their modest home the other most prominent space and it's not hard to imagine these sets constructed for the stage. This, much like the heavy monologuing, makes for more than a few awkward, ungainly scenes, especially at the end which nearly tips over into kitsch.

"Fences" is in many ways a fine film. For all of the awkwardness in the transition from stage to screen, it's hard not to be compelled by Washington and Davis and the themes of lost youth, resentment, and betrayal. It is nearly impossible not to feel something deep for Washington as he exposes Troy Maxon's vulnerability while maintaining his vitality and strength. Davis is even more outstanding as Rose whose righteousness drives the final act of the film. 

Perhaps another director might have managed the translation from stage to screen better than Washington. As a huge fan of August Wilson and an actor who can't resist a good monologue, Washington likely fell in love with the stage version too much. A Director without that identification with the stage play likely could have rounded "Fences" into something more cinematic and less awkward. As it is, "Fences" is flawed but compelling.

Movie Review: Unstoppable

Unstoppable (2010) 

Directed by Tony Scott 

Written by Mark Bomback 

Starring Denzel Washington, Chris Pine, Ethan Suplee, Rosario Dawson 

Release Date November 12th, 2010 

Published November 11th, 2010 

“Unstoppable” is the classic mousetrap thriller. Set up, execution and payoff are so swift and efficient that it is nearly impossible to find fault. Director Tony Scott nails every element of “Unstoppable” from the relentless trouble of the train to the casting of mega-star Denzel Washington and up and comer Chris Pine to the elegant, low tech action finale. It’s not Shakespeare but as clapboard thrillers go, “Unstoppable” is pretty awesome.

In Western Pennsylvania Will (Chris Pine) is sleeping on his brother’s couch after a mistake separates him from his wife and child via restraining order. On the bright side, he has a brand new union job as a train conductor. It’s his first day and all he has to do is watch while a veteran Frank (Denzel Washington) shows him the ropes.

Meanwhile, in a train yard on the opposite end of the line a perfect storm of mistakes is unfolding. A dopey yard employee, Dewey (Ethan Suplee), was only supposed to move a train out of the way, a seemingly simple task, one that he’s done before. This time however, Dewey does absolutely everything wrong.

Having forgotten to switch tracks, Dewey jumps off the moving locomotive to hit the switch. While he’s doing this, the train kicks into high gear and takes off without a driver. Now, there is an 80 mile per hour unmanned missile rolling down the tracks. Along the same track is a train filled with kids on a field trip as well as Will and Frank.

I almost forgot to mention that the train cars are filled with toxic chemicals likely to explode if ignited say in a crash. Oh, and there is this giant curve in the track that is not all that far from Will’s wife’s apartment, a curve that an unmanned train going close to 80 MPH will not make. The only solution will involve Will and Frank having to tie their train to the out of control train and drag it to a stop, all at high speed.

If that doesn’t sound like fun to you then clearly you don’t like high adrenaline thrills. “Unstoppable” is a movie for thrill junkies who like big jolting action scenes, loud explosions where stuff ‘blows up good,’ and Denzel Washington in action hero mode. How do you not love this? What kind of person are you?

“Unstoppable” is one of the most unashamedly fun action movies to come along since the last time Denzel Washington teamed with director Tony Scott on the Subway thriller “The Taking of Pelham 123.” Where that film took its fun from John Travolta’s ham-tastic bad guy performance and Denzel’s ferocious everyman charisma, “Unstoppable’s” ham is the train and the way director Tony Scott treats it more like some snarling, escaped animal than as a train.

You may have seen in the trailer for “Unstoppable” a scene where police seem to be firing high powered weapons at the train. That was not an optical illusion; there really is a scene where police shoot at a moving train. There is some kind of explanation but the movie doesn’t linger on it. Rather, Tony Scott seems to enjoy the goofiness of this almost as much as we do.

“Unstoppable” is said to be loosely based on a true story but who cares. You aren’t seeing “Unstoppable” for some documentary recreation of events; you’re seeing “Unstoppable” for Denzel Washington and Captain Kirk battling a snarling beast that happens to be an out of control locomotive. Throw in the wild, over the top bombast of director Tony Scott with his swinging camera and bizarre color palette and you have a recipe for pure, adrenaline fueled fun.

Pardon my pull quote but “Unstoppable” is “Unstoppable” fun. Ha!

Movie Review: The Taking of Pelham 123

The Taking of Pelham 123 (2009) 

Directed by Tony Scott 

Written by Brian Helgeland 

Starring Denzel Washington, John Travolta, John Turturro, Luis Guzman, James Gandolfini 

Release Date June 12th, 2009 

Published June 11th, 2009 

Robert Shaw was three years away from his starmaking performance in Jaws. Walter Matthau was a star but certainly no action here when in 1974 the two actors teamed for The Taking of Pelham 123. Based on the bestseller by Robert Godey, the story placed this unique acting duo in an odd action context allowed them to create indelible characters. The film has developed something of a cult following amongst hardcore movie nerds.

Now comes a true action remake of the underrated 74 picture. With bigger stars and a much bigger budget, The Taking of Pelham 123 comes into modern times with bells and whistles beyond anything imagined for the original but with it's premise and highly distinct voice intact.

The Taking of Pelham 123 is essentially two guys having a very important conversation. The first guy is Walter played by Denzel Washington. Graying and rumpled, Walter has worked for the New York City Transit Department for years. He was in fact the boss of the Subway system until he was charged with taking a bribe.

Now, Walter finds himself back behind a microphone as a train dispatcher. It is in this capacity that Walter meets Ryder played by John Travolta. Ryder is a terrorist who takes a subway car full of New Yorkers hostage demanded 10 million dollars in one hour or he will begin executing people.

The conversation between Walter and Ryder takes place within this intense hour as Ryder demands that Walter first listen to him and then explain himself as they wait for the city, lead by the Mayor (James Gandolfini), to come up with the cash. With topics ranging from religion to Walter's corruption charges, these two very different men connect in ways they never imagined.

The idea of two guys talking probably doesn't set your pulse racing as an action movie fan. However, you've never seen Denzel Washington talk to John Travolta as they are filmed by the hyper-kinetic director Tony Scott. Somehow, through carefully choreographed camera whips and pans and an exceptional supporting cast, lead by Gandolfini and John Turturro, working at the edges, the conversation becomes an intense action of its own and The Taking of Pelham 123 flies on the words of Denzel and Travolta.

If the final act that takes Washington into the tunnels with Travolta fails to match the intensity of their conversation, it is still the only way to wrap up the twist that is the essential ending of The Taking of Pelham 123. It's not so much a letdown as things devolve to a rather typical chase scene, but just the way the movie had to play out.

Putting reservations aside, The Taking of Pelham 123 radiates with energy, wit and directorial flourish. The talking is fun, the action is fun and in the end even the dopey chase scene finish cannot take away from the excitement of the first two acts of The Taking of Pelham 123.

Movie Review The Great Debaters

The Great Debaters (2007) 

Directed by Denzel Washington 

Written by Robert Eisele 

Starring Denzel Washington, Forest Whitaker, Nate Parker, Jurnee Smollett, Denzel Parker, John Heard 

Release Date December 25th, 2007

Published December 24th, 2007 

Melvin B. Tolson is a renowned orator and poet. To find that he was also a champion debater and a teacher of the spoken word is no surprise. Nor is it all that surprising that the students of Mr. Tolson would go on to be champions of civil rights, leaders of men and women and fighters for social justice. Removing this surprise, a film about Mr. Tolson and his students is an admirable yet redundant act.

Fair to admit that Mr. Tolson's acts were more than 70 years ago and thus could use a proper reminding of. However, couldn't we get a more fitting reminder than a conventional Hollywood melodrama? We are talking about some very important history here. Glossing it over with superstar actors and facile, sports movie cliches seems inappropriate at best, blasphemous at worst.

Don't get me wrong, there is a lot of good here. Denzel Washington is the perfect actor to capture the innate intelligence and extraordinary eloquence of Melvin Tolson. Forest Whitaker as the President of Wiley College and the father of one of the debaters, Denzel Whitaker (no relation), is typically Forest Whitaker, a powerful, calming presence.

And yet, I am troubled by much of this well meaning, adequately crafted film. The whole is far too simplistic, playing out serious, historic instances with a typically Hollywood sheen. The typical three act structure with a third act featuring a false crisis/false dawn; real crisis/real dawn scenario seems too prosaic for something as important as what Tolson and his team accomplished.

Tacking on a love story between two of the debaters, Jurnee Smollett and Nate Parker, only makes this already false movie feel less authentic. Both young actors acquit themselves well in the debate scenes, with Smollett shining with a powerful speech on social justice that will have many dabbing away tears, but the love story makes fools of both. It was simply false and unnecessary, a nod to what is expected of modern Hollywood and not what was best for telling this story.

Worse yet is the sports movie aspects of The Great Debaters. As the Wiley College team begins a series of scheduled debates the focus on what is being argued is lost in the cliché of who wins and loses and tracking the wins and losses as if this were a sporting event. It may be true that Tolson and the tiny African American enclave of Marshall Texas took the tact of keeping score, but in the film the device cheapens and distracts.

If removing the conventional inclusion of the love story and the sports movie clichés would render the material un-filmable, then so be it. Maybe this story just wasn't meant to be told in a typically Hollywood fashion. A better form would be the documentary, one where Mr. Washington and Mr. Whitaker could tell the story of the Wiley College debaters without the distraction of melodrama and sports movie score keeping.

The Great Debaters fails for being unoriginal about a wholly original group of characters. It fails to assume the gravitas of its subject and as such, demeans it.

Movie Review The Equalizer 2

The Equalizer 2 (2018) 

Directed by Antoine Fuqua 

Written by Richard Wenk 

Starring Denzel Washington, Pedro Pascal, Bill Pullman, Melissa Leo

Release Date July 20th, 2018

Published July 18th, 2018

The Equalizer 2 stars Denzel Washington, once again in the role of McCaul, a former CIA Agent turned good guy vigilante. When we meet McCaul in this sequel he is on a train in Turkey with a fake beard. McCaul is attempting to retrieve the daughter of a woman he knows that has been illegally taken by her ex-husband and scuttled out of the country. The scene is a re-introduction to the unique set of skills McCaul has; which includes timing the way he beats up bad guys. 

This scene has nothing to do with the plot of The Equalizer 2 other than as a way of contextualizing the character for those who may not have seen the first film in this budding franchise. Then again, the plot of The Equalizer 2 is so loose and threadbare it’s hard to say which scenes are necessary and which are indulgent, unnecessary scenes intended only to show what a god-like, benevolent being McCaul is.

The plot, such as it is, kicks in when McCaul’s friend, Susan (Melissa Leo) is murdered while investigating a murder in Belgium. McCaul immediately smells a rat and decides to come out of hiding in order to investigate. His first visit is to his former partner, Dave (Pedro Pascal). Dave was with Susan in Belgium when she was murdered, helping her investigate. Is Dave a friend or a suspect? You will have to see the movie to find out but if you’ve seen a movie, you likely already know.

Antoine Fuqua hasn’t made a movie this lazy and loosely structured since King Arthur, which is the last time it felt like he was making something even he didn’t care for. The Equalizer 2 ranges from boring action to boring scenes of unneeded exposition to equally boring establishing scenes of a character who is on hand only to be device later in the movie. I’m afraid that if I even begin to describe this character it might be a spoiler as the device is so nakedly predictable.

Denzel Washington has been on auto-pilot since his 2012’s Flight. That’s the last time I can recall seeing Denzel fully invested in fleshing out and living within a character. That may sound funny for those who point to his Academy Award nominated work in Fences and Roman J. Esquire and think I am crazy, but I am not a fan of either of those performances. Both of those movies are showy, over the top, capital P: Performances, not great acting.

In Fences, Washington is performing for the stage and not the screen. His bombastic performance is ill-suited for the movie screen. Roman J. Israel meanwhile, is a different kind of over the top, a performance that is all tics and mannerisms. These performances are, at least, not boring, they have a vitality that The Equalizer 2 does not have. Despite how much he shapes this character and seems to care about it, he comes off as rather bored.

Bored is probably an unfair, even inaccurate way of describing Denzel’s performance. I’m sure his intent is to be inscrutable or unflappable, but it comes off unaffected and uninvested. Part of that is Denzel’s fault but a bigger part is the fault of Fuqua who fails to give the movie around Denzel’s performance much life. The film aims for moody but arrives at tired, it aims for gritty and ends mildly irritated.

Even the action, which had been the best part of the original The Equalizer, is lifeless in comparison and that film wasn’t exactly lively. The first The Equalizer appeared invested in its action, if not in creating memorable characters or a believable story worth investing in. Denzel’s physicality is fully present in that performance and is less so here. I’m not going to speculate about Denzel aging, because he could easily take me in a fight, despite having 20 years on me age wise, but regardless he appears slowed.

Denzel being a little slower might have worked in the film’s favor if the movie had used it but instead, the movie appears slowed down so Denzel can keep up. Denzel is at all times quicker and smarter than everyone else in the movie, even people younger than him who he apparently taught and influenced when he was a member of the CIA. I’m nitpicking here but shouldn’t this character, at very least, feel a little bit of angst about this fight?

I won’t go into spoilers but the ending of The Equalizer is nonsense. It’s filmed in the midst of a

hurricane on an empty Martha’s Vineyard or some such town and it’s a shame to say, it’s not nearly as fun or exciting as a similar scene in Hurricane Heist earlier this year. Hurricane Heist is basically a parody of an actual movie. That movie, at the very least, knew how to have fun. The Equalizer 2 has the audacity to be dour on top of being predictable, lazy and sloppy.

Movie Review Inside Man

Inside Man (2006) 

Directed by Spike Lee 

Written by Russell Gewirtz

Starring Denzel Washington, Clive Owen, Chiwetel Ejiofor, Jodie Foster, Christopher Plummer

Release Date March 24th, 2006 

Published March 23rd, 2006 

Spike Lee is unquestionably my favorite director and, in my opinion, the finest filmmaker working today. His films focus on important topics--sometimes directly, sometimes esoterically. His latest film, however, is not his usual timely topical drama. In Inside Man Spike Lee crafts his first mainstream thriller and despite its lack of relevance, Inside Man is Spike Lee at his usually crafty and skillful best.

On a typical day in New York City an indistinct truck from a painting company pulls up in front of First Manhattan Bank. A group of people in masks jump out, gather their equipment and head inside the bank. We already know they are not here to paint anything. These 'painters' are part of what we are told is the 'the perfect bank robbery.'

Clive Owen stars as Dalton Russell. He is the leader of this group of bank robbers in the new thriller Inside Man and he is the only robber we will get to know throughout the film. His accomplices are innumerable and so well hidden you will have a hard time keeping track of how many of them there are. One or two of them strip off the painting gear and mingle with the crowd and because their looks are so indistinct, they easily slip into the crowd of bank customers who are now hostages.

Opposite Russell and his cohorts is a clever detective and hostage negotiator named Keith Frazier, played by Denzel Washington. In a few quick, establishing scenes we find that Detective Frazier is under investigation by internal affairs over some missing money in a drug case. Thus, why he and his partner, played by the excellent Chiwetel Ejiofor, are not the boss's first choice to take over the hostage situation now unfolding at First Manhattan Bank. Add to that the fact that this will be their first hostage negotiation as the lead detectives, and you can understand why the department is nervous.

Finally, there is one more angle to play out in the elaborate and clever plot of Inside Man. This one involves a woman of mysterious political influence, Madeline White, played by Jodie Foster. Her job is to help high-profile millionaires keep hidden deep, dark and destructive secrets. Her new client? The owner of First Manhattan Bank Arthur Case (Christopher Plummer).

Now aware that his bank is being robbed, Mr. Case is deathly concerned about something he has hidden in a safe deposit box in the bank. He knows Madeline only by reputation. She fixes big problems by any means necessary and seems to have no moral hang ups. By the time the story plays out she will have used her considerable influence to get a face to face meeting with the bank robber Dalton Russell and live to tell about it.

Directed by Spike Lee, Inside Man does not reinvent the wheel in terms of suspense or the heist genre. What it does is take the familiar elements of the genre and simply do them better than other similar films. Working from a clever, but not exactly groundbreaking, script by first-time screenwriter Russell Gewirtz, Lee directs his first straight-edge thriller with little or no direct social commentary, his usual milieu.

The trick Spike Lee pulls off in Inside Man is bringing his considerable talent and intelligence cache to bear on a very familiar plot and genre. The film works because Spike Lee is a very talented director who knows how to build tension and suspense with his camera and by allowing his talented cast to do what they do without the interference of typical plot points.

Yes, those typical plot points, the negotiation, the red herrings, et al, are still there but the actors are not required to play to those elements. Rather they play around them allowing us to bring our own experience with this type of film into our understanding of the plot. Listen to the actors casually reference other so called heist pictures. Consider those mentions as signposts reminding us in the audience we are watching a heist picture. Meanwhile the actors play to the beat of their characters which gain depth and complexity with each passing scene.

Inside Man is a brilliantly constructed thriller patched together by arguably the best director working today. It serves not only as a wildly entertaining genre film, but also a reminder of Spike Lee's talent, which has gone atrociously underappreciated in recent years as films as disparate and exceptional as Bamboozled, She Hate Me and 25th Hour have come and gone with little notice. Watch Inside Man and remember, Spike Lee is still a genius.

Many indie artists have talked about the few mainstream compromises they must make to finance more relevant projects. The dichotomy comes down to one for the suits at the studio and then one for me. Until his recent box-office struggles, Spike Lee never had to make such a compromise. If Inside Man is the kind of studio compromise that Spike Lee must make to get his more relevant features made, then bring on the compromise.

Lee's skill with the thriller genre more than rivals his skill with social commentary.

Movie Review The Book of Eli

The Book of Eli (2010) 

Directed by The Hughes Brothers 

Written by Gary Whitta 

Starring Denzel Washington, Gary Oldman, Mila Kunis, Ray Stevenson, Jennifer Beals, Michael Gambon

Release Date January 15th, 2010 

Published January 14th, 2010 

I would characterize myself as an agnostic. I don't believe in a higher power but I am open to the idea that I myself am not all-knowing. How does my lack of faith inform my criticism? It doesn't really. The fact is Hollywood gives so little consideration to religion that it rarely comes up in a review. The new post-apocalyptic thriller The Book of Eli is, arguably, the most religious and faithful movie I have seen since I have been a critic. Rarely has religion been so unquestioningly treated in a movie and in all places, a big budget, ultra-violent, Denzel Washington thriller.

In The Book of Eli Denzel Washington plays the Eli of the title. Sometime in the distant future the world is a wasteland and Eli is simply walking. He knows where he is headed, west, but what he intends to find at the end of his journey, even he doesn't know. Eli is protecting a book that he is convinced can save what is left of humanity. Eli's travels take him through the tiny, barely civilized fiefdom of a man named Carnegie (Gary Oldman). Having discovered a rare source of clean water, Carnegie has used it as a way to create a small kingdom that he protects with roving gangs of motorcycle riding henchmen.

The henchmen are searching for a book that Carnegie is desperate to get his hands on and wouldn't you know it, it's the same book that Eli is desperate to carry west. These two were destined to meet and fight and surely one or both of them will die. Standing between the two is Carnegie's daughter Solara (Mila Kunis) who is drawn to Eli's quiet purpose driven life but also wants to protect her mother (Jennifer Beals) from her father's violent tendencies. She joins up with Eli in hope that he will teach her the fighting skill he uses to protect the book.

Directed by the brilliant brother duo Albert and Allen Hughes, The Book of Eli is gritty yet stylish in its post-apocalypse. The Hughes Brothers are masters of atmosphere and tense showdowns and when Denzel backs up under a shadowy overpass to fight off some cannibalistic bad guys, the flash of his super-cool sword cutting body after body is an awesome sight.

Denzel Washington is perfectly cast as Eli, a man of devout faith who prays nightly and knows the bible by heart. In this future the bible has been all but destroyed and Eli is a last man of faith. Carnegie too seems a man of faith but is really a charlatan who hopes to use faith as Roman Emperors did to control a weak minded populace. This tension drives the conflict as does the book Eli is carrying is a classic MacGuffin with a strong pay off.

Though I am not a believer, religion in movies doesn't bother me. In fact, I am more often irritated with movies that pretend religion doesn't exist. Characters in horror films rarely seem to pray when faced with certain death. Sci-fi too often belittles the millions of people of faith in favor of technology as a pseudo-religion.

It is terribly unrealistic for movies to ignore the millions of earnest believers who attend dutifully to their faith. The Book of Eli is the rare movie that takes religion and faith deathly seriously and while the hardcore violence may not exactly be Christ-like, it is in service of a character who is serious about his faith in God.

The Book of Eli is intense and violent but also devout and earnest about Eli's faith. Religious folk may be turned off by the grit and violence but they will no doubt appreciate the Hughes Brothers straight forward portrayal of Eli as a solemn, faithful soldier in service of God.

If the God stuff makes you uncomfortable, you can still appreciate the very cool ways in which the Hughes Brothers frame Denzel Washington slicing and dicing bad guys. Whether it's the stellar overpass scene or a Tarantino-esque bar fight scene, The Hughes Brother and Denzel know how to get their violence on.

The Book of Eli is gritty, bloody, tense and faithful all in one terrific movie.

Movie Review Man on Fire

Man on Fire (2004) 

Directed by Tony Scott 

Written by Brian Helgeland 

Starring Denzel Washington, Dakota Fanning, Christopher Walken, Radha Mitchell, Marc Anthony, Mickey Rourke 

Release Date April 23rd, 2004 

Published April 23rd, 2004

Denzel Washington has become such a consistently brilliant actor that we have begun to take him for granted. Seeing Denzel's name on the poster, you know that he will deliver a great performance regardless of whether the film is any good. Case in point, his latest film, Man On Fire, in which Denzel is terrific but the film is an utter mess. Full of child-in-danger cliches and muddled visuals, it comes from Tony Scott, a once great director who has become a parody of his own best work.

In Man On Fire, Denzel is John Creasy, a former special forces soldier who regrets the number of people he has killed over the years. Living in a perpetual alcoholic haze, Creasy finds himself in Mexico City visiting an ex-army buddy named Rayburn (Christopher Walken). Rayburn has successfully given up the guilt of being a killer and is now a happily married family man. Rayburn feels he can help Creasy by getting him a job and finds him work as a bodyguard.

As the films jangled, sunburnt, out of focus prologue explains, there is a kidnapping every 90 seconds in Mexico City and one of the most requested services is that of a bodyguard. With Rayburn's help, Creasy gets a gig guarding Pita (Dakota Fanning), the daughter of an auto manufacturer, Samuel Ramos (Marc Anthony). Though he can barely afford to pay Creasy, Samuel hires him at the insistence of his wife Lisa (Radha Mitchell).

At first, Creasy does all he can to keep emotional distance from Pita but eventually her sweetness and smarts win him over. The scenes of Creasy and Pita bonding over swimming, homework and music are given great weight because of these two amazing actors but do little to mask the tragedy that is so obviously on the horizon. The film’s ads and trailer betray the tragedy of the film even before you enter the theater. You already know that Creasy is going on a killing spree, this is a revenge film so you can infer why revenge is necessary.

The revenge scenes are as brutal as anything in last week’s dark revenge fantasy The Punisher and much like that film, the scenes of brutality overstay their welcome. Director Tony Scott achieves a languorous pace that dwells on each bit of vengeance and regardless of how justified it may seem, it begins to wear on anyone with a conscience. The real betrayal however, comes at the end of the film which entirely betrays all that came before in one twist that makes you feel dirty for having been so involved in the film’s drama.

As always, Denzel is fantastic. I can't say enough good things about Denzel, he is consistently better in each and every role. It's unlikely that any other actor could have made this role tolerable. Because Denzel is so skilled and so trustworthy, we follow this character further than we would a lesser actor. It is truly sad how Director Tony Scott betrays Denzel's performance with cheap cliche and overheated visuals that border on the absurd.

I also can't say enough nice things about young Dakota Fanning who is so much better than the roles she plays. This preternaturally smart pre-teen is going to be one terrific actress once she learns to choose better material. Like her roles in I Am Sam and last year’s Uptown Girls, Fanning is far better than the characters written for her.

The rest of the supporting cast are merely cardboard cutouts, placeholders for plot points. Especially underutilized is Christopher Walken, who gets one good Walken-esque speech, the “masterpiece of death” speech seen in the commercial. Other than that, Walken is on the sidelines for most of the film.

Director Tony Scott has sadly lapsed into a parody of his better films. The man who directed True Romance, Crimson Tide and Spy Game has fallen in love with his camera and overuses it at every opportunity. Just because you can create unusual visuals doesn't make it necessary to use them. Scott can't help washing out colors, superimposing dialogue, out of focus shots and tricks with sound and editing. Maybe he felt the visual histrionics were necessary because the script is such an awful cliche.

Nothing is more cheap and manipulative than placing a child in a dangerous situation. Man On Fire is predicated entirely on a child being placed in the midst of gunfire and being the target of unnecessary violence. A screenwriter who can't achieve real drama falls back on this type of cheap ploy, this film is built around it.

The most ludicrous part of Man On Fire is not its cheap manipulative plot or awful twist ending, it's a little coda that appears prior to the final credits. On a black background, there is a message from the filmmakers thanking the wonderful people of Mexico City for providing such a great place to make a movie. The film portrays the city as a cesspool of corruption, a place where police officers conspire with criminals to snatch children, a place where a kidnapping happens every ninety seconds. Therefore, the thank you at the end is a rather backhanded slap as opposed to a real thank you. I doubt Mexico City is going to brag about having hosted the filmmakers behind Man On Fire.

Movie Review Out of Time

Out of Time (2003) 

Directed by Carl Franklin

Written by David Collard

Starring Denzel Washington, Eva Mendes, Sanaa Lathan, Dean Cain

Release Date October 3rd, 2003 

Published October 2nd, 2003 

In his last leading role, Denzel Washington won an Oscar exploring his dark side in the cop thriller Training Day. It was Denzel's first time on the wrong side of audience sympathies, and he pulled it off magnificently. If only more roles were as well written as that one. If only his latest role, as yet another cop, had been as well written as Training Day, but it's not. It's not a bad film but as it's written it's a convoluted little thriller that toys with the audience one too many times.

Denzel is Matt Whitlock, Chief of Police in tiny Branyon Key, Florida. A town so small that the chief walks the main thoroughfare checking to see if the doors are locked, and it doesn't take long. Chief Whitlock's personal life is nowhere near as simple as his job. He is separated from his wife Alex (Eva Mendes) and is seeing his ex-high school sweetheart Anne (Sanaa Lathan) behind the back of her husband Chris (Dean Cain). Chris and Matt are also enemies and have been for a number of years. Chris is a former quarterback who was cut from his team and now works as a security guard, something Matt can't help but remind him of.

Even more complicated is the fact that though Matt is sleeping with Anne he still has feelings for his wife and wishes they could stay together. The plot kicks into gear when Matt accompanies Anne to a doctor’s appointment where she is told she has cancer. She unfortunately doesn't have the money to pay for treatment, but Matt might. Recently the Banyon Key police department busted a drug dealer and took into evidence some 450 grand. Matt thinks he can take the money to help Anne and while the case is in appeal, he will have plenty of time to replace it.

From there the film moves into its most exciting moments, Anne and Chris supposedly die in a fire in their home and all evidence points to Matt. Worse, his ex-wife is the investigating officer. So, Matt, with the help of his medical examiner buddy Chae (John Billingsley), must solve the case while preventing Alex and his fellow officers from discovering the evidence that implicates him.

This is a very dense narrative that twists and turns and at many points is quite enjoyable. However, it's also rather conventional in the sense that you have seen this setup more than a few times. It's a rather typical noir that doesn't escape the predictable formula. Denzel Washington in a noir mystery is certainly not bad thing, but Out of Time isn't a good enough movie for Denzel. 

All director Carl Franklin can do with the script written by first time screenwriter David Collard, is make it stylish and Franklin succeeds for a good portion of the film. With help from Cinematographer Theo Van De Sande, Franklin takes great advantage of the warm, tropical, color palette of his small-town Florida locale.

The most appealing element of the film is not surprisingly Denzel Washington. The film nearly succeeds on his credibility alone. Sadly, Washington can't quite make this script work on his own. It's just too convoluted, too reliant on coincidence, chance and “only in the movies” type moments. The final confrontation of the film is really disappointing because it is the same climax that every other film of this genre has. It's as if it's required to happen this way.

Out of Time is not a bad film, it's stylish and well-acted but it jerks you around too much to be a successful piece of entertainment. If you’re forgiving of cliches and don't mind being played with in rather obvious ways, then you might like Out of Time. I almost did.

Movie Review John Q

John Q (2002) 

Directed by Nick Cassavetes 

Written by James Kearns 

Starring Denzel Washington, Robert Duvall, James Woods, Anne Heche, Kimberly Elise, Laura Harring 

Release Date February 15th, 2002 

Published February 14th, 2002 

Is it me? Do I not watch the news enough? I'm asking because I've only seen one hostage situation in my life.

This guy barricaded himself in his parent's house and held his mom hostage after his step-dad tried to kick him out. It ended in one hour after the guy accidentally shot himself in the leg. Yet Hollywood would have us believe these things happen all the time. Either its some good guy wronged by the "system" or it's a showcase for some slick talking hostage negotiator who makes his own rules despite always being suspended for his out of control behavior.

The new Denzel movie, John Q., falls into the first category. And though it's everything you've seen before it's saved to a point by Denzel's dignified professional performance.

John Q is the story of John Archibald, a factory worker who's struggling to provide for his family after his hours are cut. The story really begins when, during a little league game, John's son falls ill and is rushed to the hospital where we're informed he has a heart problem and needs a heart transplant. Well, needless to say, hearts don't grow on trees. 

There are forms to fill out and once you find a heart, the surgery itself is prohibitively expensive. Cost means nothing to John who will do anything to save his son including taking the hospital emergency room hostage with all it's patients, including colorful characters played by comedian Eddie Griffin and Shawn Hatosy. It is from here that John Q. dissolves from a moving family crisis film to a stock cliched hostage movie.

The hostage scene setups are strong because of Denzel Washington. As an audience member I automatically cheer for him to succeed. But once in the hostage situation director Nick Cassevetes begins piling on the cliches. Robert Duvall stars as the calm and understanding negotiator trying not to hurt anyone and Ray Liotta is the pigheaded lout who gets to yell the classic hostage movie line, "Take the shot" as the sniper slips precariously close to our hero. 

,Considering we're only one hour in and Denzel is the lead, I seriously doubt he will be killed at this point. And of course, John bonds with his captives, he even let's a couple go, and punishes the standard jerk of the captive crowd (there is always one jerk). It's like an episode of Fear Factor, there is an element of suspense but it's network TV so no one is in any real danger.

The actors involved do all they can with their roles with Denzel doing most of the heavy lifting and James Woods helping a good deal. As the big-time heart surgeon, Anne Heche has the thankless villain role for most of the film as the head of the hospital that denies John's son's treatment. Hospital-HMO bureaucracy is supposed to be the film's main story arc but it's so overdone that by the end, the director and screenwriter are beating you over the head with the "HMO is evil" message. Who already doesn't know HMO's are evil?

Despite Denzel's best effort, John Q. is a lame parable about the evils of hospital politics buried in cliches and stock been-there-done-that situations. 

Movie Review The Manchurian Candidate

The Manchurian Candidate (2004)

Directed by Jonathan Demme 

Written by Daniel Pyne, Dean Georgaris 

Starring Denzel Washington, Meryl Streep, Liev Schreiber, Jon Voight, Kimberly Elise 

Release Date July 30th, 2004 

Published July 29th, 2004 

The 1962 original The Manchurian Candidate, directed by John Frankenheimer and starring Frank Sinatra, is an unmitigated classic. The film was the brainchild of Sinatra who saw in the complicated satire a chance at an acting comeback after a series of flops. Boy was he ever right, the film brought Sinatra back to prominence as an actor. Despite being pulled from release for 24 years after the assassination of President Kennedy, the film remained a classic.

Denzel Washington, starring in the 2004 take on The Manchurian Candidate, has no need for a comeback. He is clearly at the top of game. His director, Jonathan Demme, on the other hand could use a hit after his disastrous remake of Charade in 2002. For the record, The Truth About Charlie was not nearly as bad as the way it's producers dumped it into release. Why Demme would do a remake as his "comeback" is a fair question. Let's just be glad he did because his modernized version is the rare remake that doesn't dishonor the original.

Major Bennett Marco (Washington) is a decorated veteran of the first Gulf war. Though he seems to have it all together he is secretly plagued by nightmares that bring his memories of battle into question. Marco is not alone, other members of his squad who were involved in a memorable incident while on a recon mission in Kuwait have been having the same nightmares. Private Al Melvin (Jeffrey Wright) is slowly being driven insane by his nightmares, which mirror Marco's.

Both remember the incident in which their squad was attacked by what they thought were Iraqi militia members. Both were knocked unconscious and their lives were saved by Sgt. Raymond Shaw (Liev Schreiber), who went on to receive the medal of honor because of Marco's recommendation. However, both Marco and Melvin's nightmares play out a different scenario in which Shaw was never a hero, but in fact the entire squad was taken hostage by someone other than Iraqi militants. They were taken to a hospital and reprogrammed and two other members of the squad were murdered.

For his part, Sgt. Shaw is now Senator Shaw, a rising star in his unnamed political party (I think he's a Democrat but it's never spoken of aloud). Shaw is on the verge of being nominated for the Vice Presidency thanks to the backstage machinations of his determined mother, Senator Eleanor Shaw. Raymond also has strange nightmares about brain implants and mind control. As he confesses to Marco midway through the film, he can remember the mission as he has been told of his heroic actions but can't actually remember doing the heroic actions attributed to him.

As the plot unfolds, the mystery is whether Marco is just paranoid or if the things he dreamt about actually happened. We believe Marco because we see what he sees but it's easy for characters in the film to dismiss him especially as Marco grows more and more erratic. We also are privy to things he is not such as the behind the scenes meetings between Mrs. Shaw and the mysterious executives of Manchurian Global. Manchurian Global is a company that profits from America's foreign policy decisions by essentially betting on wars in the stock market.

The parallels with the real life Carlyle Group or Halliburton are completely intentional. Where the original The Manchurian Candidate played on our fears of the Cold War, this new version makes corporations the sinister forces working behind the scenes to rig our system in their favor. It's scarier if you've seen Fahrenheit 9/11and have seen the back room connections between the current administration, Carlyle and Halliburton. Of course, much of what these real life companies do is quite well known and helps you realize that you don't need a sleeper assassin to put your company man in the White House. All you need is a big enough checkbook.

The Manchurian Candidate is not meant to perfectly reflect reality but rather just fan the flames of conspiracy-minded moviegoers. Who doesn't love conspiracies?

The Manchurian Candidate 2004 is a paranoid potboiler with a complex plot and enough solid twists and turns to keep audiences glued to their seats. Who better than Denzel to lead us through all of the film’s complexities? His winning personality, charisma and believably carry us over a number of plot holes. Watch closely his relationship with Rosie, played by Kimberly Elise. Late in the film it hints at a whole other layer to the film’s dense plot and will make you pay to see it again.

Meryl Streep is perfectly on point in a role that won Angela Lansbury an Oscar for Best Supporting Actress in 1962. Streep should also be on track for a nomination as she is the perfect choice for this Machiavellian mother from hell. Most have drawn odd comparisons with Hillary Clinton, although a better more accurate comparison might be Lady MacBeth with her lust for power and willingness to kill to get it. Not to mention the hinted at but little seen incestuousness between Mom and Son which mirrors another historic text.

Jonathan Demme's direction has not been this solid since The Silence Of The Lambs. Those who thought he had lost his touch will be turned around after watching the way he twists and turns the audience with one smart set piece after another.

True, there are plenty of holes in this plot. The script adapted by Daniel Pyne is like a sweater that could unravel with the tug of a string for a long enough period of time. It's best not to dwell on character motivations and small plot points and focus on the stronger elements of the film like it's performances and the timeliness of its references.