Movie Review Downsizing

Downsizing (2017) 

Directed by Alexander Payne 

Written by Alexander Payne, Jim Taylor 

Starring Matt Damon, Christoph Waltz, Hong Chau, Kristen Wiig 

Release Date December 22nd, 2017 

The soulful Alexander Payne has ventured into new territory with his part sci-fi, part romance, Downsizing. Starring Matt Damon, Downsizing tells the story of Paul Safranek, a Midwestern schlub dealing with the daily grind of a job he doesn’t love, a home he can’t afford, and a wife, Audrey, who may or may not love him, played by Kristen Wiig. Paul’s typical Midwestern domesticity is upended by the discovery of Downsizing which gives humanity the chance to shrink to about 5 inches tall and help save the environment by consuming less.

Paul and his wife are not immediate adapters to Downsizing. In fact, the process of Downsizing is nearly a decade old when Paul decides that he is interested in the process. Paul is particularly intrigued when he’s told by a friend played by Jason Sudeikis, that downsizing means living like a millionaire on the salary of a middle class nobody. Paul and his wife’s savings turn into millions of dollars in assets if they choose to downsize.

Where the film goes from there is a real trip. Paul undergoes the procedure and is set to live out his life at 5 inches tall. Audrey pulls out at the last possible moment and Paul is left to fend for himself in this strange new world called Leisureland. Losing half his mini fortune in the divorce (I have no insight as to why Kristen Wiig was cast for such a small role), Paul is forced to take on another job he doesn’t like and begins dating another woman he doesn’t particularly like and seems content to live the same life he lived at regular size.

Thankfully, Paul’s neighbor Dusan, played with charm by two-time Academy Award winner Christoph Waltz, has other plans for his new best friend. At a party at his neighbors' home Paul drops acid and has his first trip. Then in the aftermath he meets Ngoc Lan (Hong Chau) and the two become friends. At the behest of Ngoc Lan, Paul begins following his long ago dream of being a doctor, he was a physical therapist before Downsizing, treating those who may or may not have willingly downsized, a relatively minor but intriguing plot point.

Find my full length review in the Geeks Community on Vocal 

Classic Movie Review Jurassic Park 3

Jurassic Park 3 (2001) 

Directed by Joe Johnston 

Written by Peter Buchman, Alexander Payne, Jim Taylor 

Starring Sam Neill, Tea Leoni, William H. Macy, Alessandro Nivola 

Release Date July 18th, 2001 

Published June 14th, 2023 

After having compromised to make arguably the worst movie of his remarkable career, The Lost World Jurassic Park, Steven Spielberg was finally ready to leave the dinosaurs behind. There was no amount of money that studio executives could promise Spielberg in order to get him back in the director's chair for Jurassic Park 3. That said, staying on as Executive Producer, and retaining his lucrative back end deal, Spielberg did have a hand in choosing his directorial successor. 

Joe Johnston is a long time friend and collaborator of Steven Spielberg and happened to be coming off a pair of well liked and successful films, the 1995 blockbuster, Jumanji, and the critically beloved 1999 drama, October Sky. That plus having worked behind the scenes on each of the previous Jurassic Park movies made Johnston the most natural choice to pick up the reigns on the popular franchise. With Johnston came a new writing team for Jurassic Park 3. Out was writer David Koepp and in was the unlikely duo of Alexander Payne and Jim Taylor, fresh off the success of very non-Jurassic Park indie hits Citizen Ruth and Election. 

It's strange to think that Alexander Payne chose to follow up Election, a black comedy of razor sharp wit, with something as wit-free as Jurassic Park 3. Much like Spielberg did his career worst work on The Lost World Jurassic Park, it would be fair to say that Jurassic Park 3 marks a low point in the career of Alexander Payne and Jim Taylor. A paycheck is a paycheck and being hot off of a critical and commercial hit created the strange cosmic coincidences needed to put the future auteurs behind Sideways into the Jurassic Park universe. 

That said, while I do think this is the worst script of the career of Payne and Taylor, that doesn't mean the movie is that bad. Jurassic Park 3 is actually an improvement over The Lost World Jurassic Park. Director Joe Johnston smartly keeps his Jurassic Park movie under 100 minutes in length and maintains a frenetic pace throughout its 96 minute runtime. A script this thin could not sustain a movie much longer than that, especially with characters this obnoxious and simplistic. Making Jurassic Park 3 any longer than 96 minutes would be an agonizing watch. As it is, it's not great but it is fast and the action is genuinely well directed. 

Jurassic Park 3 returns Sam Neill to the role of Dr. Alan Grant. After being greatly missed in The Lost World Jurassic Park, having Neill back in Jurassic Park 3 is, at the very least, a welcome bit of nostalgia. Also briefly back is Laura Dern as Dr. Ellie Sattler. Her inclusion is perfunctory and convenient, a loving nod to the original Jurassic Park. She's there to be used as needed by the script to underline a plot point early on and provide a convenient ending for the film. 

Sorry, my cynicism keeps sneaking through. I was talking about being happy to see Dr. Grant again. Sam Neill is a steady, calming, soothing presence in Jurassic Park. He's an absolute necessity as he provides a grounded element amid the chaotic special effects frenzy that Joe Johnston is unleashing in Jurassic Park 3. It's easy to see where Johnston's work on Jumanji influenced his work here. Much like Jumanji, Jurassic Park 3 is at its best when it doesn't stop running, upping the stakes, and being an action movie. 

The plot kicks in when Dr. Grant receives an offer to play aerial tour guide for a rich married couple. Paul and Amanda Kirby have charted a plane to fly over Isla Sorna, the second of John Hammond's dinosaur islands and the location of the last movie, The Lost World Jurassic Park. Grant is promised that the plane will not land on the island and that he will just narrate a few facts about what few dinosaurs can be seen during the flyover. What he doesn't know is that he's actually on a dangerous rescue mission. In a convoluted opening sequence, Paul and Amanda's son, Eric has been stranded on the island.

The crew aboard the plane are actually mercenaries who've been hired to extract the boy from the island. Naturally, things don't go well and people end up getting eaten by dinosaurs. Since we don't know the names of the actors playing the mercenaries, and they lack what I like to call 'main character powers,' they're the first to go. The only name supporting actor, Michael Jeter, is also doomed for being a liar and a bit of a weasel, bad guys getting ugly comeuppance is a trope of the Jurassic Park films, aside from John Hammond, the greatest villain of the series, who gets to escape because he's played by kindly grandpa, Richard Attenborough. 

Find my full length review at Geeks.Media 

Movie Review I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry

I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry (2007) 

Directed by Dennis Dugan 

Written by Barry Fanaro, Alexander Payne, Jim Taylor 

Starring Adam Sandler, Kevin James, Jessica Biel, Ving Rhames, Steve Buscemi, Dan Akroyd

Release Date July 20th, 2007

Published July 20th, 2007

For every little bit of progress Adam Sandler makes as an actor; he seems to take one step back. His performance earlier this year in the 9/11 drama Reign Over Me was a tremendous step forward for Sandler as an actor, if a bit of a step down from his usual box office stature. Like his very impressive turn in P.T Anderson's Punch Drunk Love which Sandler followed with the juvenile animated effort 8 Crazy Nights and the dull, unfunny rage of Anger Management, Sandler chooses to follow Reign Over Me with the childish attempt at P.C laughs in stereotypical clothes, I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry.

Larry Valentine has a big problem. As a firefighter who rushes into the blaze to save lives, his life is often on the line. His work is very dangerous and with two kids at home to take care of, Larry wants to make sure they get his pension should something happen to him. Unfortunately, a paperwork snafu, in the wake of his wife's untimely death, has left Larry in a real bind. Should he be killed in action, his kids won't get his pension unless he gets married.

Unfortunately for Larry, there is only one person he would trust enough to make sure his kids were taken care of. his lifelong pal, Chuck Levine. This is where Larry crafts a real hairbrained scheme. Seeing a story in the paper about how the city of New York has legalized domestic partnerships for gay couples, Larry gets the idea to marry his pal Chuck.

Chuck is not exactly the ideal choice for this scam. He has a rather legendary reputation as a ladies man. In fact, when we first meet Chuck a pair of sexy twin sisters are fighting over him after he slept with both of them. Later, when Larry goes to tell Chuck his plan, he interrupts him while he is romancing several women at the same time.

Nevertheless, Chuck owes Larry his life after a fire call went bad, so he agrees and the two head for Canada to make it legal. Things get complicated when the city challenges the authenticity of their relationship and Larry hires a sexy lawyer named Alex (Jessica Biel) who immediately strikes a chord with Chuck and puts the whole scheme on thin ice.

This being a typical, brainless Adam Sandler effort you expect and get just about every stereotype known to man thrown in as comic asides. However, surprisingly enough, the biggest problem with I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry is not insensitivity, the film actually offers a pro gay agenda. Rather, the problem is much simpler than that. It's just not a very well made movie.

Directed by Adam Sandler's pet director Dennis Dugan (Big Daddy, Happy Gilmore), I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry never establishes a solid tone or any kind of charm. The film is crude and resorts more often to dull slapstick than to anything organically plot driven. The plot should be the focus, it's a big broad topic with many opportunities for satire. That, sadly, is well beyond the intellectual scope of Dugan and Sandler.

While there will be many who will be offended by the many stereotypes at use in I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry, you will be surprised how fairminded and pro gay the film really is. Though the support is shallow because of the gutless direction of Dennis Dugan and the strip mined script by Sandler and Barry Fanaro, the film's heart is in the right place.

What really stinks is that you can see the potential for something a little more thoughtful, deeper and more satisfying. Jim Taylor and Alexander Payne, the team behind Election, About Schmidt and Sideways, delivered a version of this script that, those who have read it, say is sharper and more pointed in its humor and perspective. That version was flamed in favor of a more Sandler friendly version with all of the slapstick and self serving ego indulgences that are Sandler's hallmarks.

My biggest fear was that I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry would be a series of stereotypical jokes with a liberal use of the word f****t. Watching it, that is what we get. However, a heavy dose of positivity manages to balance things out in a very surprising way. That positive feeling however, is not enough to make the film funnier than it is or more believable than it is.

I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry suffers the ego of its star Adam Sandler who compromises much of what might have worked in the film in favor of fellating his own ego. What a shame, there was a good deal of potential here.

Movie Review: About Schmidt

About Schmidt (2002) 

Directed by Alexander Payne 

Written by Alexander Payne, Jim Taylor

Starring Jack Nicholson, Hope Davis, Dermot Mulroney, Kathy Bates, 

There have been a few times in Jack Nicholson's career where the image of Jack, the iconic ladies man, Laker fan Jack, the famous image, overcame the actor Jack Nicholson. Films like Wolf and even his role as The Joker in Batman showed Nicholson mugging for the camera and playing off his image rather than his talent. Then, in the early 2000’s, Nicholson seemingly set out to destroy ‘Jack’ the image and return to Jack the Actor. The Pledge, one of the best films of 2001, showcased Nicholson in a role stripped of any glamour or vanity. The Pledge is a slow boil performance that is both subtle and heartbreaking. And in About Schmidt, Jack goes for yet another unglamorous, though more mainstream, role as an aging retiree trapped in a life unlived.

As Warren Schmidt, Nicholson is a 66-year-old insurance company actuary. It’s a job Warren tells us has endowed him with the ability to determine just how long people will live. Thus, Warren is well aware of his own mortality as he sits at his retirement dinner with his wife of 42 years played by June Squibb. 42 long years, 42 very, long, years. As Warren describes in a very funny voiceover: “Who is this old woman in my bed?”

Warren and his wife have one daughter, Jeannie (Hope Davis) who is soon to be married. Though he is not allowed to say anything about the wedding by his domineering wife, Warren secretly hates his daughter’s fiance, played by Dermot Mulroney. This isn't your typical ‘no man is good enough for my daughter hatred.’ As Warren introduces his daughter’s fiance, in his voiceover, we are quick to see just what a real doofus this guy is.

Now retired with little to do Warren spends his days with crossword puzzles and watching TV. While flipping channels he comes across one of those child-reach infomercials where some celebrity tells you that for 22 dollars a month you can feed a starving child. Warren, for some reason, likely boredom, writes down the phone number, and is soon doling out the cash and writing letters to a six year old African boy named Ndugu.

The voiceover narration in About Schmidt comes from the letters Warren writes to Ndugu, and just hearing Nicholson open a new letter with the words "Dear Ndugu" provides the funniest and saddest moments of the film. Nicholson’s rye recognition of how he’s really talking to himself 

It is not long after Warren retires that his wife passes away, leaving Warren with an empty house and a newly purchased Winnebago in his driveway that his wife had purchased to drive cross country for their daughter's wedding. Taking to the road, Warren's adventures including a sad, tragic meeting with a couple of fellow RV drivers that is a terrific diversion from the main story. The film however gains it's true narrative thrust when Warren arrives for his daughter's wedding and ends up staying with the groom's mother Roberta (Kathy Bates). Her full on personality is immediately at odds with Warren's quiet dignity. A scene where Warren and Roberta share time in the hot tub is pure comic bliss that shows Nicholson at his slow boiling best.

Director Alexander Payne is a true pro, a visionary comic auteur that deftly combines realism and comedy. About Schmidt is filled with moments of warmth and humor that never seem fake. Thanks to one of the best scripts, casts and directors of any film in the last year.

Movie Review Juliet Naked

Juliet Naked (2018) 

Directed by Jesse Peretz

Written by Tamara Jenkins, Jim Taylor, Evgenia Peretz

Starring Rose Byrne, Ethan Hawke, Chris O'Dowd 

Release Date August 17th, 2018 

Published October 15th, 2018 

Juliet, Naked stars Rose Byrne as Annie, a museum director in a small suburb of London. Annie’s life is growing a bit stale. Her job is boring, her sister is a mess, and her boyfriend, Duncan (Chris O’Dowd), is obsessed with a rock star named Tucker Crowe (Ethan Hawke) who disappeared into obscurity after making just one really successful record. For 25 years Duncan has collected and obsessed over scraps of information that he puts online at a website he made and dedicated to Tucker Crowe. 

At first, Duncan’s obsession was cute but after a few years of living together, Annie has grown tired of it and of Duncan. The plot kicks into gear when a mysterious package arrives at Annie and Duncan’s home. Annie finds it first and inside finds something called “Juliet, Naked.” Juliet was the name of Tucker Crowe’s only record and the ‘naked’ of this title refers to demo tracks of Tucker’s first record more than 25 years old. 

For an obsessed fan like Duncan, Juliet, Naked is like finding ancient religious scrolls or an authentic shroud of turin. It’s legitimately, to Duncan, an act of betrayal when Annie finds the CD and listens to it before he gets the chance. The betrayal deepens when Annie states that she finds the record insufferable and says so in a review that she posts on Duncan’s own website under an assumed name. 

Things take a turn for the surreal when the real Tucker Crowe reads Annie’s review and sends her an email telling her he agrees with her. Tucker has been a ghost for 25 years for a reason and part of it is how much he doesn’t like his own music. Tucker and Annie begin to correspond and as they grow closer, she and Duncan grow further apart until apart is all that they are able to be. With Duncan out of the way can Annie actually be in a relationship with the target of her ex’s obsession? 

Clever sounding premise aside, Juliet, Naked is one of the bigger disappointments of 2018 for me. I have been anticipating this movie since I heard about it. The film is based on a novel by Nick Hornby, my favorite writer whose books have inspired a couple of terrific movies, including an all time favorite of mine, High Fidelity starring John Cusack. I desperately wanted this movie to be great and sadly, it's only okay. 

What are the specific issues with Juliet, Naked? For starters, a complete lack of ambition. The movie is so elegiac, so lacking in vitality that it feels at times to be at a crawl. I don’t need this to have the pace of a Fast & Furious movie but the montage of Annie and Tucker’s email exchange is glacially paced even as it features very charming actors providing voiceovers for the scene. Even with Ethan Hawke and Rose Byrne, the scene is lifeless. 

And then there is the character of Tucker who is a complete disaster. Ethan Hawke plays Tucker as a sincere and forthright failure, a loser who has multiple kids by multiple mothers and lives off the residuals of his one big album, sleeping on a pull out bed at his ex’s farm so he can be close to his youngest son. That’s a lot of stuff to play as a character but Hawke doesn’t do much of anything with it. The film appears to rely solely on the charm of Hornby’s character to make Tucker interesting but somehow he appears stuck in the pages and not on the screen. 

The film reaches toward a moment of transcendence when Annie invites Duncan to come over and have dinner with her and Tucker at her home as a goodwill gesture. Duncan can hardly hold back on his fanboying and tells Tucker how much he loves his record and what it means to him. Tucker replies that he hates the record and the person he was when he made it. Duncan is wounded but defends himself and his love of Tucker’s record. It’s a good moment capped off by Duncan saying that art is not for the artist but for those who appreciate it before storming off. 

The film approaches something fascinating here about the relationship between artist and fan but director Jesse Peretz fumbles the moment slightly. Is Duncan a fool or are we meant to sympathize with his love of Tucker’s music? Is Tucker a jerk? Yeah, kind of. He’s kind of like those people who can’t graciously accept a compliment and instead come off as rude and unappreciative of genuine kindness. 

That could be a perfectly acceptable response on Tucker’s part but the way it plays in the moment makes both Duncan and Tucker look equal parts jerk and offender. We do find out why Tucker hates his own creation in the following scene but he really loses our sympathy in the previous scene and the rest feels like the character and the movie are making excuses for his rude behavior, excuses that don’t hold water. 

If Duncan is a buffoon then let him be a buffoon. Juliet, Naked takes such pains to be evenhanded about these characters that it lacks any perspective whatsoever and leaves a wishy washy impression of all three central characters. Director Jesse Peretz took a similarly even handed approach to his comedy Our Idiot Brother starring Paul Rudd to a similarly wishy washy effect. It’s as if he doesn’t want to offend anyone to a point of pointlessness and an aimless narrative. 

This is supposed to be Annie’s story and yet until the end of the movie, Annie is a mostly listless character. The world continually happens to Annie aside from when she posted her negative review of Tucker’s record. Everything that happens with her after that is dictated not by Annie but by everyone else. Rose Byrne is capable of carrying this story but the movie continually lets her down scene after listless scene. 

All of that said, Juliet, Naked is not a bad movie. It suffers from a conventionalism that is rampant in modern movies, an eagerness to not offend anyone or make anyone uncomfortable. Everybody is flawed and no one judges anyone and even when they do, they are justified in doing so. This is supposed to be akin to realism but in the sacrosanct world of romantic comedy, realism doesn’t translate. Pretty much all romance is hyper-realized or idealized because real romance is hard work and we don’t go to the movies for hard work. 

There is no hard work in Juliet, Naked. The filmmakers want both to be ‘realistic’ and exist in the idealized world or romantic comedy. The dissonance is maddening and leads to a movie that moves with little momentum, features idealized characters in a contrived narrative and yet the filmmakers want to play at being taken seriously because the problems these characters have, their flaws and how they work towards overcoming them have a whiff of the real. 

Perhaps it is possible to make a funny romantic comedy that is also based in something real and insightful but Juliet, Naked never bridges that divide. Instead, it’s a maddening, slow moving, not entirely terrible movie featuring some genuinely good actors and some genuinely good moments. There is a good movie here but it’s missing a director who knows how to get at what is good about it.