Movie Review Takers

Takers (2010) 

Directed by John Luessenhop 

Written by Gabriel Casseus, John Luessenhop, Avery Duff

Starring Idris Elba, Paul Walker, Hayden Christensen, Michael Ealy, Zoe Saldana

Release Date August 27th, 2010 

Published August 27th, 2010

Expectations for the action/heist flick “Takers” were so low they had to be scraped off of a sticky theater floor. There really was not much to be expected from a movie featuring the wooden talents of Idris Elba, Paul Walker and Hayden Christensen or the first time performance of troubled R & B star Chris Brown. Add to that a first time director and a screenplay credited to four different writers and really all the film has to be is in frame to surpass expectations.

So what a great surprise that “Takers” is more than merely in frame. Indeed this fast paced, quick witted caper flick is wildly entertaining in its mindless quick cut manner.

Gordon (Idris Elba), John (Paul Walker), A.J (Hayden Christensen), Jake (Michael Ealy) and Jesse (Chris Brown) are first glimpsed entering a high end Los Angeles bank. They will soon rob this bank with an efficient, violent flourish.

The celebration of this very successful, multi-million dollar heist is short lived as a former member of their crew, Ghost (T.I), arrives with a new opportunity. Ghost has a plan for robbing an armored car that could quadruple the amount of money they took from the bank. The plan involves complex timing and well placed violence, all right up this crew’s alley.

The biggest question is Ghost. Freshly released from prison after five years, no one can be certain whether he is motivated by greed or revenge. His plan is solid but after he finds his ex Rachel (Zoe Saldana) engaged to Jake it becomes relatively clear that he cannot be entirely trusted.

As the crew is making plans, the cops are closing in. Lead investigator Jack Welles (Matt Dillon) and his partner Eddie (Jay Hernandez) have stumbled onto a lead involving Russian gangsters linked to Ghost. The lead goes from Ghost to Gordon and from Gordon to the rest of the crew. Will the cops catch on to the plan before they can execute it? Will Ghost betray his former friends?

These questions don't really matter all that much but they lend enough context to “Takers” to give the action enough juice to be compelling. First time director John Luessenhoepp shrewdly limits the time spent with these actors talking and gets right into these actors doing the things that most other movies would spend time explaining.

”Takers” is keenly aware of the derivative nature of the heist picture and spends little time on the explanation in favor of action that rarely pauses. These actors are at their best when they are physically involved and “Takers” plays to that strength with scene after scene of action. When the movie needs any minor explanations they turn to the one actor in the cast with the chops to deliver, Matt Dillon. The veteran Dillon cleverly plays chief explainer and is only rarely bogged down with heavy exposition.

That's not to say that Dillon doesn't get physical himself. In fact, in easily the best scene in “Takers,” Dillon and Jay Hernandez give chase to a fleeing Chris Brown in an extra long chase that involves Parkour leaps and bounds, heavy hitting traffic and one well placed, unexpected bullet.

”Takers” is terrific genre entertainment, an action movie almost without pause. Clever, well employed violence combines with a super fast pace and juices “Takers” beyond its acting and story limitations. It also helps to have a guy like Matt Dillon around to do the minor heavy lifting.

Movie Review Life As a House

Life as a House (2001) 

Directed by Irwin Winkler 

Written by Mark Andrus 

Starring Kevin Kline, Kristen Scott Thomas, Hayden Christensen, Jena Malone, Mary Steenburgen

Release Date October 26th, 2001 

Published October 27th, 2001 

Life as A House starring Kevin Kline and directed by Irwin Winkler has been universally praised by critics and fans which leaves me wondering: did I see the same movie they did? I watched Life as a House in permanent awe of how derivative, obvious, and faux-deep Life as a House is. This is a middle aged man's very obvious, up his own backside, conception of what makes a deep statement about life. Honestly, I am embarrassed for everyone involved. 

Life as a House is the story of George, a depressed divorcee with a son who hates him, and who loses his job early in the film and then finds out he has terminal cancer. Is this a movie character or a biblical tragedy? With all that has happened George decides it's time to build his dream house which, for those who are a little on the slow side, is a metaphor for his rebirth. Do you get it? His life is represented by the house? Does that resonate with you? 

The house he currently lives in is a rundown shack overlooking the ocean in a beautiful neighborhood. Don't even get me started on that implausibility, which, duh, is a metaphor for who he used to be. The screenplay doesn't trust us to figure the metaphors out ourselves. Instead there is dialogue to state the obvious. You see, the rundown house is who he is when we meet him and the new house is who he is going to be. Do you get it? Because the voiceover will explain this if you don't. GAH!!!!! 

Life as a House is filled with such trite dialogue that continuously states the obvious as if leading blind audience members through a story the screenwriter thinks is so deep we won't get it. And it's sad because the actors: Kline, Kristin Scott Thomas as his ex wife, and Hayden Christenson as his son, have the ability to communicate these emotions with subtle acting. But no, instead the film is filled with leaden dialogue and a couple of hundred direct lifts from American Beauty. Yes that's right dear reader not only is the film dull, it's unoriginal.

From the voiceover narration at the beginning and end to the score to George's 'Lesterlike' rebirth, including a kiss with an underage sexpot, Life as A House is like American Beauty filtered through TV's Hallmark hall of fame.

P.S.: I refuse to make any cute housebuilding aside. Honestly, if I hear another critic use a pun title like "House is built on a great FOUNDATION HA HA," I will scream.

Movie Review Shattered Glass

Shattered Glass (2003) 

Directed by Billy Ray 

Written by Billy Ray 

Starring Hayden Christensen, Peter Sarsgard, Chloe Sevigny, Rosario Dawson, Hank Azaria, Steve Zahn

Release Date October 31st, 2003 

Published October 30th, 2003 

The New Republic magazine prides itself as the in-flight magazine of Air Force One. Its pretentiousness has been earned by years of literate intelligent discourse on policy and international politics. Appreciate their perspective or not, you have to respect that they get into these subjects that so many average Americans think are boring.

So it was a huge black eye for the storied magazine to find out one of its writers had faked numerous stories. If there is one cardinal sin in journalism, it's lying, and Stephen Glass lied on a scale that dwarfs the lies of your average tabloid rag. The story of Glass's lies and how he was finally caught are the subject of the adroit and fascinating film Shattered Glass.

Hayden Christensen stars as Glass, the youngest writer on a staff whose median age is 26 years old. The 22-year-old Glass is a rising star with a habit of looking into fantastic stories. The stories occasionally raise suspicions but the puppy dog sweetness of Glass disarms co-workers who couldn't believe Steve would make up such a story. For the most part Stephen's stories check out, he has detailed notes and phone numbers from his subjects. Those subjects can tend to be unwieldy for fact checkers, but there is enough verifiable truth to what Stephen reports that the stories go through.

As the film progresses there is a very subtle shift of focus from the character Stephen Glass to the uncovering of Glass's deception, seen through the eyes of Peter Sarsgaard's New Republic Editor Chuck Lane. The shift is signaled almost unconsciously through scenes of Glass working late to cover his lies and Lane at home with his wife and daughter. These scenes allow the audience to choose sides without feeling bad for abandoning poor Stephen.

Coming to the story with a good knowledge of what Stephen Glass did and the type of person he is (his appearance on 60 Minutes earlier this year was the tip of the iceberg as to his serial compulsion toward hiding the truth), I never felt much of any sympathy for Glass. Thus, I came to Shattered Glass with my mind made up about the man and his crimes. There are however many people willing to like Glass as he's portrayed by the gifted Hayden Christensen. His Stephen Glass is a seemingly sweet natured glad hander who remembers everybody's birthday and offers to help you move without being asked.

I read another reviewer who was familiar with the real life players and who thought the film built up Chuck Lane as more pious than he ever truly was. I would disagree with that assessment in the context of the film. Perhaps the reviewer is too close to the real situation to consider the film. Lane as played by Peter Sarsgaard is merely a put-upon editor who happens to have a serious breach of journalistic ethics thrust in his lap. 

He rightfully despises Glass and his crimes and scenes early in the film establish the two characters at odds from the beginning. Personality-wise, it's not hard for me to dislike the serial glad-handing Glass and his childish reaction to anything critical. The character of Chuck Lane communicates a similar dislike throughout the film that makes angry outbursts near the end of the film nearly as personal as professional.

Few films have shone such a clear light on the journalistic process. How a piece goes from the reporter to the page and exactly how flawed that process can be if abused. First time director Billy Ray tells his story on two levels, getting to know the character of Stephen Glass and also showing us the behind the scenes action at a magazine. If only for a moment, it makes you consider all that goes into your favorite magazines.

What really stays with you after the film however is the performances of Hayden Christensen and Peter Sarsgaard, who perfectly inhabit their opposing characters. Christensen brings an almost creepy quality to the sweetness that so many people liked about the real Stephen Glass. That creepiness makes it that much easier to dislike him, and is important for audience members who don't understand how he did such a horrible thing. Sarsgaard, despite what others might say, never makes Chuck Lane into a journalistic crusader for ethics. He's a journalist and editor who is doing the right thing and has a righteous outrage toward Glass for the serious damage he did to the credibility of a magazine that made its reputation on credibility.

As a debut behind the camera, Billy Ray shows he knows how to tell a compelling story. His visual style doesn't leave much to the memory but this is a character piece and as such, it succeeds marvelously. Shattered Glass is one of the year’s best films.

Movie Review Star Wars Episode Two Attack of the Clones

Star Wars Episode II Attack of the Clones (2002) 

Directed by George Lucas 

Written by George Lucas 

Starring Ewan McGregor, Hayden Christensen, Samuel L. Jackson, Natalie Portman, Christopher Lee, Ian McDiarmid, Frank Oz, Joel Edgerton, Anthony Daniels, Kenny Baker 

Release Date May 16th. 2002 

Published May 16th, 2002  

Did you like The Phantom Menace? I thought I did but when I watched it, to prepare for Episode 2, cracks began to show. Where I once actually attempted to defend Jar Jar Binks, I now see how completely indefensible the character is. On the 12th viewing, Phantom Menace doesn't hold up. The film was efficiently crafted but lacked a soul. Episode 2: Attack of the Clones is also efficiently crafted but like Phantom Menace it too lacks a soul.

We rejoin the story as Senator Padme Amidala, the former queen of Naboo, arrives for an important vote on the formation of an army of the republic, an idea she is uncertain about. Upon her arrival there is an assassination attempt. Amidala survives and is put under the protection of Obi-Wan Kenobi (Ewan McGregor) and Anakin Skywalker (Hayden Christensen). While Obi-Wan is assigned to hunt the bounty hunter who orchestrated the assassination attempt, Anakin is told to escort Amidala back to Naboo and keep her safe.

The setup is a little obvious but then Lucas merely uses characters as transitory figures in between awe-inspiring effects. So now Anakin and Amidala are alone and as we already know they fall in love. The inevitability of their relationship takes away from the love story, but not nearly as much as Christensen and Portman's lack of chemistry and Lucas's quickest way to get the point across scripting.

Christensen isn't bad but he's not great. Rather than communicating the tortured soul that would lead to the dark side, Christensen communicates, for the most part, with whining and crying. Christensen played a similarly whiny and tiresome character in last year's Life as A House, and at this rate it is difficult to envision him improving much beyond what we've seen. 

Natalie Portman also isn't very good at all in AOTC. Whereas in Phantom Menace Amidala had courage and intelligence, now Amidala has become full of angst and moony eyes over Anakin. Also, the fact that Amidala looks as if she hasn't aged is an unavoidable criticism. Ewan Mcgregor and Samuel L. Jackson are strong but are let down greatly by Lucas's transitory script which forgoes wit and intelligence in favor of spiritual platitude and dull transitions from special effect to special effect.

Of course, Attack of The Clones isn't about dialogue and characters, it's about action and, in that aspect, it doesn't disappoint. The special effects are spectacular, and while I still prefer real sets and actors, Lucas has done a remarkable job of creating a whole universe almost without them. The special effects give the film an epic feel, especially the many landscapes of Tatooine, Coruscant and Naboo that are fully realized places made from absolutely nothing.

Of course, the scene that will get people through the door is Yoda's fight scene. At the showing I attended Yoda's CGI confrontation with Christopher Lee's Count Dooku elicited loud cheers from the audience. I couldn't help but to get caught up a little myself.

AOTC isn't bad but it seems like two plus hours of exposition for the far more interesting Episode 3, the episode that completes Anakin Skywalker's transformation into Darth Vader. And while I would like to have seen better acting and dialogue, I have a feeling George is saving the really good stuff for the next film.

Movie Review Jumper

Jumper (2008) 

Directed by Doug Liman 

Written by David S. Goyer, Simon Kinberg, Jim Uhls 

Starring Hayden Christensen, Jamie Bell, Rachel Bilson, Kristen Stewart, Michael Rooker, Anna Sophia Robb, Diane Lane, Samuel L. Jackson 

Release Date February 14th, 2008

Published February 13th, 2008

David Rice (Hayden Christensen) can be anywhere he imagines in a moment's notice. Surfing in Hawaii, lunching atop the sphinx, or across his apartment without having to step around the coffee table, David has the ability "Jump" anywhere. It's a cool talent to have. David uses this unique talent to rob banks. Don't fret, he leaves IOU's. That is the premise of Jumper the latest from director Doug Liman starring the perpetually quivery Hayden Christenson.

As a teenager David Rice fell through the thin ice of a lake and was nearly killed. At the last moment he imagined the local library and was transported there. Slowly coming to grips with this new ability to go anywhere he wants with a single thought, David starts by using his new ability to escape his angry bitter father (Michael Rooker). Needing a getaway location, David takes off for New York and is soon robbing banks to finance a comfortable lifestyle. It is then that he meets Roland Cox (Samuel L. Jackson) who is some kind of supernatural cop. Roland explains the plot, David is a Jumper and Roland is a Paladin. Paladin's hunt Jumpers and kill them.

Narrowly escaping his paladin encounter, David meets a fellow Jumper named Griffin (Jamie Bell) and is warned that Paladins will kill everyone he has ever known in their attempt to find him. This leads David back home and to the girl who he left behind, Millie (Rachel Bilson). While David watches out for the Paladins, he and Millie rekindle their childhood romance. Once the Paladins arrive however, it kicks off a worldwide war between Jumpers and Paladins. 

It's not a bad comic book premise really. The problem is it's underdeveloped as a movie. The rules for Jumpers and Paladins are vague and are sloppily made up as the movie goes. along. Rules then are disregarded when the plot requires them to be. The idea is merely a hanger on which director Doug Liman and his effects team can hang a number of huge special effects shots and a travelogue of worldwide locations from Tokyo to London to Rome to whatever other touristy location a majority of the audience might recognize. The effects aren't bad, for the most part, but who cares. If I wanted to watch the world go by I would watch the Travel Channel.

Find my full length review at Geeks.Media