Movie Review The Pope's Exorcist

The Pope's Exorcist (2023) 

Directed by Julius Avery

Written by Michael Petroni, Evan Spiliotopoulos 

Starring Russell Crowe, Daniel Zovatto, Alex Essoe, Franco Nero 

Release Date April 14th, 2023 

Published April 15th, 2023 

The Pope's Exorcist is a very silly movie that doesn't know it's a very silly movie. That makes it one of my favorite movies of 2023 so far. I love a good unironic bad movie. The makers of The Pope's Exorcist appear to be earnestly attempting to entertain and failing by being as mediocre and misconceived as possible. It's as if we know that the movie is doomed but the people making it are entirely clueless and we can't warn them, we can only marvel at the bad decisions that led them to so earnestly and obviously fail at their intended goal. 

From the moment that star Russell Crowe. now fully into his Orson Welles, Frozen Peas period, sits himself on a little Vespa, The Pope's Exorcist is doomed to induce snarky giggles. Who thought that having him on a scooter for the entire movie was a good idea? From there however, it's all downhill. The Pope's Exorcist appears to have been a failed script for a cop drama that was reworked into being about an exorcist who works for the pope. 

Crowe's Father Amorth is your classic Cop who plays by his own rules, occasionally working outside the law to get his suspect. The Pope, played by Franco Nero, is the Chief who does what he can to keep the heat off of his rogue cop because despite his flaws, he gets the job done. Then there is a Papal Internal Affairs panel that threatens to take away Father Amorth's badge if he doesn't start, I don't know, exorcising demons inside the boundaries of Papal law? Maybe. 

Naturally, the next big case for Father Amorth will put him to his biggest test as he uncovers corruption inside the church. In this case, the truth of the Spanish Inquisition is hidden in the bowels of an Abbey that belongs to a troubled family. Alex Essoe plays a mother of two, a teenager played by Laurel Marsden, and her silent little brother, Henry )Peter DeSouza-Feighoney), who remains deeply traumatized after nearly dying in the accident that killed his father. 

This trauma makes the boy susceptible to a demon when his family moves to this Spanish Abbey with plans to fix it up and flip it. The demon escapes a tomb in the basement, possesses Henry and calls for Father Amorth to fight, but not before he helps introduce another cop movie trope in this not-a-cop movie. Through Henry's possession, we meet a rookie Priest on his first case, Father Esquibel, played by Daniel Zovatto. When he proves to be no match for the demon, he takes on the role of Father Amorth's rookie partner. 

Find my full length review at Geeks.Media

Movie Review: The Greatest Beer Run Ever

The Greatest Beer Run Ever (2022) 

Directed by Peter Farrelly

Written by Peter Farrelly, Peter Currie, Pete Jones 

Starring Zac Efron, Russell Crowe, Viggo Mortensen, Bill Murray 

Release Date September 30th, 2022 

Apple TV 

Leave it to Peter Farrelly to take a great story and pull its teeth. In fairness, he was awarded a Best Picture statue for doing just that to the life of Jazz music legend Don Shirley and his longtime friend Nick Vallelonga. There however, Vallelonga takes much of the blame for the mediocrity. It was Vallelonga who wrote the self-serving screenplay, much at the expense of the story of Shirley which was lost amid the eye-rolling, uplifting pap in Vallelonga's script and Farrelly's bland direction. Of course it won Best Picture, Hollywood loves to reward uplifting pap. 

The proof of concept for my theory about Farrelly being the go-to director for taking a good story and rendering it supremely mediocre however, comes with his latest directorial effort, The Greatest Beer Run Ever. Here we have a story so insane, so unbelievable, it should make an amazing movie. The true story has a guy from New Jersey deciding that he's going to take cases of Pabst Blue Ribbon to his buddies fighting in Vietnam in 1967. John 'Chickie' Donahue really did this! It's impossible to believe right? It should be an amazing movie. 

Sadly, The Greatest Beer Run Ever is directed by Peter Farrelly, a director whose movies could be sold as baby-proof for their remarkable lack of hard edges. That's not to say that Farrelly's movies aren't controversial, rather they are controversial for all the wrong reasons. Green Book is an almost complete fabrication, a vile white washing of the life of Don Shirley in favor of burnishing the egotistical legend of Nick Vallelonga. Similarly, The Greatest Beer Run of All Time should be a sharp elbowed rebuke of America's involvement in Vietnam. Instead, it's a soft headed comedy about friendship and bravery, tempered with being sad for a few people who didn't come home. 

Chickie Donahue (Zac Efron) is beloved in his small New Jersey neighborhood though not so much at home. A Merchant Marine by trade, Chickie tends to only work when he feels like it and spends most nights getting drunk in a bar owned by The Colonel (Bill Murray). Chickie and his buddies are former military men who went through Korea as kids while the specter of World War 2 hangs over the heads. While at the bar watching brutal footage of the war in Vietnam on the news, Chickie and his friends are upset that the media only shows the horror and seems to dismiss the soldiers who are fighting and dying. 

Click here for my full length, angry, review of The Greatest Beer Run Ever at Geeks.Media. 

Movie Review: Body of Lies

Body of Lies (2009) 

Directed by Ridley Scott 

Written by William Monahan 

Starring Russell Crowe, Leonardo DiCaprio, Mark Strong, Oscar Isaac

Release Date October 10th, 2009 

Published October 9th, 2009

Russell Crowe and Leonardo DiCaprio. Two of the biggest stars in the world starring together in a movie. That's a big deal. So why doesn't it feel as big as it should be? Body of Lies is the movie, a CIA spook movie about middle eastern politics from director Ridley Scott. Is it as simple as Body of Lies being less than a great movie? Maybe. Or it could be that Crowe's heart isn't in and thus his star power shines less bright.

Roger Ferris is the CIA asset on the ground in the middle east. The intelligence he gathers is the most valuable of anything the CIA can gather. Ferris gets closer than any military on the ground ever could by blending into the background, speaking fluent arabic and finding just the right person to get him what he needs.

Back in Langley Virginia, Roger's handler is the head of Middle Eastern affairs Ed Hoffman (Russell Crowe). Ed uses high tech gadgets and insanely expensive satellite technology to track not just the world's leading terrorist but to pinpoint Roger himself from space. This technology is put to especially good use early on when Roger and a middle eastern co-hort investigate an Iraqi terrorist hideout and end up in a fire fight. The satellite image sends exact coordinates to attack helicopters that arrive just in time to save Roger and his latest intel.

This latest discovery is big and a plan is hatched using it to suss out the location of the world's most wanted terrorist other than Osama Bin Laden. The plan is ingenious and dangerous with a moral complication that will draw an important distinction between Roger and Ed and what they are willing to do to fight the war on terror.

Ridley Scott is a pro behind the camera. His work on the gritty, sun drenched streets and vast deserts of Iraq and the crowded dusty streets of Amman Jordan is impecable. Scott's action scenes are crisp and exciting, filled with energy and suspense. The trouble for Body of Lies comes from a script without an underlying idea.

There is a plot with a sound engine in DiCaprio's very active hero. However, one is at a loss to delineate the message of Body of Lies. What are the underlying politics. What other than some kick ass action scenes made Scott want to make this movie. The story cries out for a deeper meaning beyond the pale love story between DiCaprio and a Jordanian nurse and the father/prodigal son relationship between Crowe and DiCaprio.

The major hole in Body of Lies is Russell Crowe. The Oscar winner cuts an original, somewhat quirky character, an arrogant almost bumbling bureacrat. Unfortunately, there isn't really much behind the quirks. There is no real arc to the character. Crowe's Ed Hoffman begins as an arrogant jerk and ends an arrogant jerk. He learns no lesson, gets no comeuppance, not even a sharp sock to the jaw that the character so richly deserves.

That is unlike DiCaprio's Ferris who begins as a cold blooded terrorist killer and humanizes throughout. When the dangerous game begins to unfold Ferris is careful, cautious and thoughtful where Hoffman is impetuous and self aggrandizing. My comparison here is not without reason as late in the film Scott reveals what may be his missing thesis. These two men represent the two poles of American foreign policy.

The stretch is exceedingly thin as Crowe is portrayed as a bumbler who acts without thought while DiCaprio is heroic because he is deliberative and patient. The point is as heavy handed in Scott's one scene to lay it out as it is unseen throughout most of the movie. The one scene seems a last minute desperate attempt to give the action of Body of Lies a purpose beyond its series of action. It plays simply as hamhanded and desperate.

There is great work in this movie from Mark Strong as the head of Jordan security apparatus. He and DiCaprio go head to head and the battle of wills, the melding of egos and mutual respect gives their scenes weight. Strong is a heavy presence but he like Crowe and DiCaprio suffers for not having something deeper driving him, something beyond plot requirements.

There is too much good about Body of Lies to dismiss it. Scott is still a talented scenarist even with a thin story to tell. DiCaprio is an engaging hero and Crowe at the very least is charismatic, even on auto-pilot. Body of Lies has some tremendous action and spycraft and that is enough for me to recommend it for fans of big time action.

However, Body of Lies is a good movie that could have been, should have been great.

Movie Review 3:10 to Yuma

3:10 to Yuma (2007)

Directed by James Mangold 

Written by Halstedt Welles, Michael Brandt, Derek Haas

Starring Christian Bale, Russell Crowe, Ben Foster, Gretchen Mol 

Release Date September 7th, 2007

Published Septembeer 6th, 2007 

Director James Mangold made a splashy directorial debut with the gritty crime drama Copland. Though most remembered for star Sylvester Stallone's weight gain for the lead role, Copland was in fact quite good. His next feature earned him even more acclaim. Girl Interrupted was nominated for multiple Oscars and won one for Angelina Jolie's tremendous supporting turn.

Then Mangold drifted toward the mainstream with a pair of forgettable studio efforts, the dull time travel romance Kate & Leopold and an oddball thriller called Identity. Both were pro level efforts but they lacked heart. Then in 2005 Mangold found himself again and delivered Walk The Line. The biography of Johnny Cash was everything one could ask for in a bio of the legendary man in black.

As great as Walk The Line was however, with 3:10 To Yuma James Mangold has crafted his first masterpiece. This moody, manly western, based on an Elmore Leonard short story, stars Russell Crowe as Ben Wade a badass outlaw whose gang is a group of mad dog killers who will follow him straight to hell if need be.

The plot of 3:10 To Yuma is as stripped down and straight forward as any classic western. One brave man must escort a murderer to the 3:10 train to Yuma prison. There the killer will be hanged for his many crimes. Complicating manners is the bad guys gang of badass killers who will ride through hell or high water to rescue their boss.

It's not the plot that matters, but rather the motivations, the actions and interplay between the exceptional characters. Russell Crowe inhabits the evil Ben Wade with snaky charm and a sharp tongue. Though admittedly a killer and an obvious menace, Crowe's Ben Wade has the kind of charm that few women could resist and few men can compete with.

Compared to Crowe's Wade, Christian Bale's stalwart good guy Dan Evans is a bit of a wet blanket, initially. Part of the story of 3:10 To Yuma is Bale's Evans earning the respect of Ben Wade and those of us in the audience harboring a secret affection for Wade's charms. This battle between good and evil, shaded with the gray of desperation, fear and greed, is played out with blood, guts and bullets but more than anything, great old school filmmaking.

James Mangold's direction of 3:10 To Yuma is nearly flawless. From his dusty western landscapes to the brilliant interplay between Russell Crowe and Christian Bale, Mangold manages a classic western that never feels stale. Though this is a remake, there is no retread vibe here. 3:10 To Yuma modernizes the western aesthetic without gimmicks like modern scoring or quick cuts but rather with the awesome star turns of Bale and Crowe.

In the supporting cast I especially loved the inclusion of Peter Fonda as an old west lawman. Fonda has not been this good in awhile and his inclusion is yet another nod to the old school western, his dad Henry made a few pretty good westerns back in the day. The supporting performance that nearly steals the film however, belongs to young Ben Foster whose intensity almost exceeds Crowe and Christian Bale, two of our more ferocious leading men period.

As he showed in Alpha Dog and 2005's Hostage, Foster can play live wire with the best of them. In 3:10 To Yuma it's more of a controlled burn than a live wire but it's as fierce as those performances with a touch more maturity. Foster is developing into an excellent go to character actor and may have found a real niche with this performance.

My favorite scene in 3:10 To Yuma is one of the more quiet moments in the whole movie. Dan Evans and a small posse are hiding Ben Wade, preparing for the trip to Yuma, at Dan's farm. Wade joins the family for dinner and when Evans leaves the table to check in with the posse guarding the doors, Wade begins a conversation with Evans' wife played by Gretchen Mol, in her dowdiest school marm frocks. Mrs. Evans is fearful of Wade but its not long before you wonder if she'd be willing to run off with him if given the chance.

Crowe gets much of the attention in this scene but Ms. Mol's subtle changes in expression, her flushing cheeks and darting eyes are near perfect. The scene is perfectly captured by Mangold with tight close ups and framing that seem to draw the two actors into the same frame without them moving an inch. Though I noticed these subtle movements, I was watching for them, most audiences will experience them seamlessly and, I think, be as mesmerized by them as I was.

There are a number of similarly strong scenes in 3:10 To Yuma including much of the third act which takes place in a single hotel room as Evans waits to take Wade to the train even as the place is surrounded by Wade's gang. The original 3:10 To Yuma spent most of its runtime trapped in one hotel room under similar circumstances, these scenes in the new 3:10 To Yuma are as much a nice throwback nod to the older film as they are a necessary piece of plotting.

3:10 To Yuma is a masterpiece of style and substance. While some may fault the films logic of manhood and respect above all else, I dug the old school western values. I especially bought into the idea that Crowe and Bale's characters would hold these ideals above all else and be willing to give their lives for them.

When awards season rolls around in late December and early January expect to see 3:10 To Yuma on a number of lists. Especially keep an eye out for Russell Crowe who delivers a performance here that is arguably the best of his career.

You must see this movie!

Movie Review: A Good Year

A Good Year (2006) 

Directed by Ridley Scott

Written by Marc Klein

Starring Russell Crowe, Albert Finney, Marion Cotillard, Abbie Cornish, Tom Hollander, Freddie Highmore

Release Date November 10th, 2006

Published November 10th, 2006

Can I recommend a movie based on one lovely line of dialogue? I'm serious, there is a line of dialogue in the new romantic comedy A Good Year starring Russell Crowe, that put an uncontrollable smile on my face. I was so excited by this one line that I sent it as a text message to a friend while the movie was still on because I wanted to make certain I did not forget it. Other than this one line of dialogue, A Good Year is an entirely underwhelming, by the numbers, romantic comedy with less weight than the film it's printed on.

Max Skinner (Russell Crowe) is in the business of making money. As a stock broker in London he gets up early in the morning to game the bond system and earn the ire of every other broker in the country. As we meet Max he has just made millions of dollars in some sort of shady bit of business. Max has no remorse for his actions, he proudly takes a victory lap at a bar frequented by fellow brokers. After things on the market calm down, Max receives a letter informing him that his Uncle Henry (Albert Finney) has passed away. Max hasn't seen his uncle in nearly a decade. However, since Max is Henry's only living relative; he gets all of Henry's estate including a sizable vineyard in Provence France. Seeing an opportunity to cash in, Max leaves for France intending to sell the vineyard.

Max spent many wonderful summers at his uncle's vineyard. His greatest childhood memories are linked to this place and to his beloved, larger than life uncle. As these memories begin to flood back, as Max works with his uncle's long time employees, Du Flot (Didier Bourdon) and his wife Ludivine (Isabelle Candelier), to restore the vineyard, Max begins to wonder if he should keep the place. The plot of A Good Year is as predictable as a sunrise in the east. Max, the soulless stock broker, regains his soul at the vineyard. Wacky supporting characters help and cause trouble in equal portion and a beautiful French girl, Fanny Chenal played by Marion Cotllard, will steal Max's heart. Oh and yes, there is the obligatory roadblock; in the form of Christie (Abbie Cornish) who may or may not be uncle Henry's daughter and the rightful heir to the vineyard.

As the mechanics of the plot click away on rusty gears, star Russell Crowe does all he can with the material, not least of which includes a little of the kind slapstick humor more suited to Adam Sandler than to a former Oscar winner. There are moments in A Good Year where Crowe bounces from dignified and classy to Benny Hill style goof to Tom Hanks romantic. The schizphrenic performance still manages to be rather entertaining and when it comes time for Crowe to deliver the romantic zinger that seals the movie's good vibes, he nails it, belts it all the way to the back of the room and takes a bow.

Director Ridley Scott is far better known for the histrionics of Gladiator than he is for his soft and cuddly side. Much unlike the director who piled up the bloody bodies of Gladiator or Kingdom Of Heaven, the Ridley Scott of A Good Year is a purring pussy cat, lying in the sun and lounging on windowsills in A Good Year. Scott's efforts here don't extend much beyond an opening scene in which he tosses in an odd, out of place camera trick that would be more at home on the Gladiator battlefield than in this cookie of a romantic comedy.

Ridley Scott's joy in filming something as superfluous and lightheaded as A Good Year comes through in the little touches. The softly lit flashbacks to Max and his uncle (young Max is played by the terrific child actor Freddie Highmore), Russell Crowe's bouts of uncomfortable slapstick -awkward but fun- and of course the filming of that one line of dialogue that I love so much. So should I give you the line that makes this movie? No, I think you should actually see the movie. Get your significant other, get some popcorn and some candy, sit in the dark and marvel at the simple, elegant ease of such a predictable romantic comedy plot. Then when you hear that line that I'm talking about, and I honestly don't see how you could miss it, kiss your date and smile.

A Good Year is movie candy, empty calories, nothing but sugar. It has the potential for an upset stomach but it tastes so good going down. A Good Year for all intents and purposes is not a very good movie. It is however, modestly entertaining and then there is that one line. That amazing, lyrical, poetic, romantic line of dialogue so well delivered by Russell Crowe. This one line made me smile so much I can't help but forgive the many minor flaws of the softhearted, slightly softheaded A Good Year. Watch the movie and let me know if you catch the line I'm talking about.

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 Master and Commander The Far Side of the World

Master and Commander The Far Side of the World (2003) 

Directed by Peter Weir 

Written by Peter Weir 

Starring Russell Crowe, Paul Bettany, James D'arcy, Billy Boyd

Release Date November 14th, 2003 

Published November 13th, 2003 

I've never been exposed to the work of author Patrick O'Brien. His high-seas adventures are the kind of tales that always appealed to my father, a student of history, especially naval history. So Master & Commander: The Far Side of the World is an opportunity for my dad and I to bond over a movie, the film’s historical accuracy pulled apart over a dinner cooked by my mom. So you can understand why I was looking forward to this film and why I might seem to gush a little bit about this tremendous Oscar-worthy adventure.

Take the essential elements of Errol Flynn's classic high seas serials and a dash of Herman Melville and you get a sense of what you’re in for in Master and Commander. Lucky Jack Aubrey (Russell Crowe) is the Captain of the British navy ship the Surprise. Lucky Jack's mission is to hunt down and either sink or capture the French profiteer ship the Acheron (pronounced as Ack-Eron). It's 1805, and Britain is at war with France and its leader, Napoleon. 

Though the Acheron is larger and better armed than the Surprise, the Surprise’s 197-man crew has complete faith in Captain Jack--everyone, that is, but the ship’s surgeon Stephen Maturin (Paul Bettany). It's not that Maturin doesn't trust Captain Jack's abilities, however he functions as Jack's conscience as the captain begins to see the Acheron as his white whale. Two times early in the film the Acheron snuck up behind the Surprise and nearly sank it. The captain is determined to not let it happen again. Maturin feels that returning to Britain for repairs is a more prudent solution.

Even as Captain Jack and Maturin disagree vehemently over tactics, the two are good friends who spend their free time dueting, Maturin on the cello and Jack on his violin. Crowe and Bettany played a similar relationship in the Oscar winner A Beautiful Mind and their familiarity and ease working together shows.

The rest of the cast of Master and Commander run together and, especially during the battle scenes, it's difficult to tell them apart. The one other cast member able to make a real impression is Max Perkis as Blakeney, a teenager who both Captain Jack and Maturin take under their wing. Blakeney is also quite interesting from a historical standpoint as not only a teenager, maybe only 13 years old, but an officer on the Surprise. This seems unreal but it is historically accurate that children as young as 13 were taking positions in the British navy.

Master and Commander is the first non-documentary ever to be allowed to film on the famed Galapagos Islands, where Maturin is allowed to indulge his love of nature and, in a pre-Darwin scientific discovery, develops an obsession with a flightless bird that would be an amazing find. It would be, but in his search of the island, he discovers the hiding place of the Acheron and must rejoin Captain Jack for the film's climactic battle.

Based on the first and the 10th book of Patrick O'Brien's 20 volume series, Master and Commander was a dream project for producer and Fox Chairman Tom Rothman who acquired the rights to the books while O'Brien was still alive but was unable to get it made until after the author’s death in 2001. It wasn't until three studios--Fox, Miramax, and Universal--pooled $125 million that the film even seemed viable. Finally, after landing director Peter Weir and Crowe, Rothman had the tools to turn the dense, character-driven adventure into a film.

With so much rich dialogue and innumerable characters Master and Commander seems an unlikely blockbuster but in the capable hands of Weir, who also co-wrote the script with John Collee, it is an epic action adventure movie that evokes classic Hollywood filmmaking. In its scope and scale it's reminiscent of Lawrence Of Arabia, but may be more akin to Gladiator, another modern epic that also starred Crowe. The combination of realistic stunts and seamless CGI is what true blockbusters should aspire to. Too many computer generated effects can be distracting and more often annoying. Master and Commander proves there is no substitute for real actors and real stunts. Let the Oscar season begin with Master and Commander firing the first shot.

Movie Review State of Play

State of Play (2009) 

Directed by Kevin MacDonald 

Written by Matthew Michael Carnahan, Tony Gilroy, Billy Ray 

Starring Russell Crowe, Ben Affleck, Rachel McAdams, Robin Wright Penn, Jason Bateman, Jeff Daniels, Helen Mirren 

Release Date April 17th, 2002 

Published April 16th, 2002 

Some of my favorite movies of all time have featured crusading journalists. All The President's Men is, of course, the best known, but my favorite is Ron Howard's underrated The Paper. I know I am likely alone on that one but Howard's bustling newsroom filled to overflow with quirk ridden reporters and columnists makes me smile every time I watch it. Michael Keaton may be best remembered as having played Batman but for me he will always be the ink stained wretch who kept after the story even after the paper had gone to press. Randy Quaid, Glenn Close, Robert Duvall and Marisa Tomei round out a brilliant cast in a movie that dripped with ink.

Now comes State of Play, another crusading journalist story, this one with the kink of having notorious reporter hater Russell Crowe as of all things a reporter. It's a sensational piece of casting, working for the aforementioned kink and because Crowe is just so charming. What source wouldn't turn cartwheels to help this guy get a scoop.

Crowe is Cal McCaffrey, a 15 year veteran newsman at the Washington Globe. While the rest of the industry is on laptops and blogging, Cal is still all about the pen and the kind of shoe leather journalism that gets you information you could never get in an email or a Facebook posting.

McCaffrey is investigating an odd double homicide when his best friend, a Congressman named Stephen Collins (Ben Affleck) suddenly comes to the center of all Washington headlines. Collins' top assistant and secret bedmate has been killed or maybe committed suicide and the Congressman is in hot water. He turns to Cal for some sympathy and boy does Cal owe him one.

You see, Cal has a history with his best pals' wife (Robin Wright Penn) and doesn't think the Congressman is going to let him forget about it. So, Cal quickly helps the Congressman with some crisis strategy and even crosses an ethical line by trying to convince one of the paper's online bloggers, Della Frye (Rachel McAdams) to not report certain details about the Congressman's affair.

Eventually, the murder Cal is covering comes to cross paths with his pals political scandal and Cal has no choice but to join the two stories and begin looking for answers. Answers about the murder, about a potential Government and Corporate conspiracy and some very uncomfortable questions about his best friend the Congressman.

Russell Crowe joined the cast of State Of Play a week before shooting began, Ben Affleck shortly after Crowe, and yet both are terrifically well cast.. Crowe is especially good, coming to perfectly embody the role of a hardscrabble reporter. With his greasy, floppy hair and a guy that says he spends all day hunched over a keyboard, Crowe owns this character and it is through him that State of Play succeeds.

Affleck is strong as well but he's much more in the background of this story than the commercials may be. Scenes where we are focused on Affleck's Congressman are arguably the weakest of the movie but that is no comment on Affleck's performance but rather of how compelling the newsroom scenes with Crowe, Rachel McAdams and the great Helen Mirren as their crusty editor are.

We are left wanting more of those scenes and are a little letdown when Crowe is offscreen so other information can be imparted.

There are some little inconsistencies in this allegedly modern newsroom. First comes with a line from McAdams about people wanting to read their big scoop stories and 'get ink on their fingers' as if the story weren't going online well ahead of the print edition. The other minor niggling detail is, really could a scandal ridden Congressman really walk into a shady hotel or even less plausibly, A Washington D.C Newsroom, without someone hitting Twitter or Facebook within seconds with the news that said scandal ridden Congressman has just walked in.

The film and the plot have neither the time or the inclination to tackle such modern technological issues. Realistically, the film doesn't have to address these things for it to be a highly entertaining popcorn thriller but someday some movie will and that movie will be the definitive movie of the modern newspaper.

State Of Play aims to pay tribute to old school journalism and tackle the modern problems plaguing modern journalism and in the performance of Russell Crowe and in an end credits montage, elements of State of Play are indeed like a Hallmark card to a dying breed of dogged journos.

It is as a thriller where State of Play aims to find an audience and it is a good if not great one. When Crowe accidentally stumbles into some serious danger you will hold your breath waiting for him to be safe again. There are one or two of those moments in State of Play and they are tense and exciting enough and the ending just twisty enough for me to say check out State of Play.

Movie Review Robin Hood (2010)

Robin Hood (2010) 

Directed by Sir Ridley Scott 

Written by Brian Helgeland 

Starring Russell Crowe, Danny Huston, Scott Grimes, Cate Blanchett, Oscar Isaac, Mark Addy 

Release Date May 14th, 2010 

Published May 13th, 2010 

Russell Crowe is a superstar and despite his personality defects, prickly interviews and phone throwing incidents, Crowe's films have always showcased his natural charisma. As was said of classic male movie stars of the past 'Men want to be him, Women want to be with him.' That has been the essence of Russell Crowe.

Lately however, Crowe has chafed against this persona and his ache to pursue a different reputation led to a terrific performance as a roguish and paunchy reporter in “State of Play” and now a buffed up action hero “Robin Hood.” While the movie “Robin Hood” rewrites the English legend, Crowe rewrites his own history essaying Robin as a stoic, charmless action hero that could as easily been played by Vin Diesel.

As King Richard (Danny Huston) wages war in France following a trip to Palestine and Israel in the Crusades, Robin Longstride is one of the King's Archers for hire. No longer entirely loyal to the crown following a horrific massacre of Muslims, Robin Longstride is soon to leave and return to England.

Joining Robin are his long time friends and fellow Archers Will Scarlett (Scott Grimes) and Alan A'Dayle (Alan Doyle) and his onetime antagonist turned loyal friend Little John (Kevin Durand, in a rare good guy role). The way back to England leads to the discovery of a French ambush on English Knights. King Richard is dead and his crown is to be returned to England along with an ancient sword that belongs to Sir Robert Locksley (Douglas Hodge).

Robin and his merry men will return to England dressed as knights, return the crown and reap a reward, or so they had hoped. Winding up in Nottingham to return the sword, Robin meets Lady Marion (Cate Blanchett), Locksley's wife and Sir William Locksley (Max Von Sydow) who engages Longstride in a deal, Robin will take on the role of his son in order to maintain the lands after his death; he will also become husband to Lady Marion.

Meanwhile, as the craven Prince John becomes King John, the French plot an invasion to take advantage of the Royal chaos. Stoking the fires is King John's best friend Godfrey (Mark Strong) who has joined with the French and is leading the invasion. Needless to say, Robin, his merry men, and the people of Nottingham get caught in the midst of all of this intrigue and many a sword is swung and arrow flown.

Directed by the brilliant Sir Ridley Scott, “Robin Hood” treads very similar ground to his Oscar winning epic “Gladiator” and his massive flop, the crusades epic “Kingdom of Heaven.” Scott has a great deal of love for the ancient world, warrior codes and the brotherhood of war. He evokes the age exceptionally well with detailed landscapes and costumes, well used CGI and some terrific cinematography.

Where “Kingdom of Heaven” failed is in the same way “Robin Hood” comes up short; both films swamp the viewer with the ugliness and depravity of the ancient world and leave little for people to enjoy beyond the carnage. Characters suffer because Scott's attention to period detail apparently means depicting men with courage minus charisma and charm.

While Cate Blanchett is allowed to look radiant even while covered in mud, Russell Crowe plays Robin subdued, withdrawn and modestly tortured. His bravery is evident in battle and you can see why his men are loyal to him but he comes up short in the aspects of personality that make him a compelling movie character.

Mirthless, constipated and withdrawn, the Crowe that was so captivating in “Gladiator” and so charming in “State of Play'' is caked in mud and blood and is basically part of the scenery in “Robin Hood'' until the battle scenes awaken his warrior side. The battle stuff is very good, almost the equal of “Gladiator,” but “Robin Hood '' is over 2 hours and 20 minutes long and the battle scenes are merely a third of that run time.

“Robin Hood '' has moments that are as amusing as any classic action epic but the quiet moments are so quiet that lethargy sets in and the audience begins to withdraw nearly as much as Mr. Crowe does. The battle returns the Russell Crowe we’ve come to enjoy then he recedes and we wonder where is the star, where is the spirited rebel. Is Russell Crowe so desperate to create a new persona that he can no longer find joy in his work

If he can’t enjoy it, how can we enjoy it?

Movie Review: Cinderella Man

Cinderella Man (2005) 

Directed by Ron Howard 

Written by Cliff Hollingsworth, Akiva Goldsman 

Starring Russell Crowe, Renee Zellweger, Paul Giamatti, Craig Bierko, Bruce McGill 

Release Date June 3rd, 2005

Published June 2nd, 2005 

Legendary depression era writer Damon Runyon dubbed James J. Braddock 'The Cinderella Man'. Runyon, best known for his unique patois and shady underworld characters, found some things he liked about the Braddock story. There was the the underdog unlikeliness of the story and the sports setting, however, the square Mr. Braddock was not really Damon Runyon's favorite kind of character. Runyon may not have been taken much with Ron Howard's equally square biography of Mr. Braddock which takes its name from his writing. Cinderella Man, starring Russell Crowe, features some awesome boxing but the earnest sentimental drama out of the ring crosses quickly over to out and out schmaltz.

Russell Crowe stars as James J. "Bulldog" Braddock who in 1929 was a top ranked Light Heavyweight contender. Braddock was flush with success, cash, a beautiful wife named Mae (Renee Zellweger) and three gorgeous kids. Sadly however in a Jobian succession of ills, Braddock lost nearly everything in the stock market crash of 1929 and a subsequent hand injury that would eventually sidetrack his promising career.

In 1933 Braddock was forced from the ring by his injury and a series of bad fights, mostly ugly brutal losses, though to his credit Braddock was never knocked out. With bills piling up, winter coming and his family living in a dirt floor apartment, Braddock attempts to find work on the docks of New Jersey but there are more men than shifts and he and many others are often excluded.

Forced to beg his former boxing promoters for money, Braddock finds sympathy from his former manager and trainer Joe Gould (Paul Giamatti) who pulls strings to get Braddock his boxing license back and lands him an important fight at Madison Square Garden, playing punching bag to a new top contender. Braddock shockingly knocks the kid out and in so doing, he earns the admiration of fans for his gutty style and his obvious underdog status.

One fight leads to another and eventually Braddock has a showdown with the champion of the world, Max Baer (Craig Bierko). The champ is reputed to have killed two men in the ring, is much bigger than Braddock, and given Braddock's time away from the ring, there is much speculation that Baer might just make it three in ring kills. Braddock's wife Mae is certainly concerned, a bit of drama the film mines for dramatic tension near the end of the film.

Going in to Cinderella Man with no knowledge of whether James J. Braddock won or lost the championship fight lended a great deal of compelling drama to the film's boxing scenes which on top of the suspense, are extraordinarily shot by Director Ron Howard and Cinematographer Salvatore Totino. The boxing is by far the best part of Cinderella Man. The audience I watched with cheered and clapped at the end of each fight as if they were inside that smoky rundown gymnasium.

If the rest of Cinderella Man were as good as the boxing we would be talking about one of the best movies of the year. However the film's script by Cliff Hollingsworth and script doctor Akiva Goldsman is so achingly sentimental you have to fight your eyes to keep them from rolling. The non-boxing scenes overflow with the fairy tale goodness of James Braddock the family man. Braddock is treated with such a soft touch you can hardly believe he would have the will to punch someone, let alone become a boxing champion.

The only thing that keeps Cinderella Man from becoming a complete loss, aside from the boxing, are the performances of Russell Crowe, Renee Zellweger and Paul Giamatti. This awesome cast of real pro actors handle even the most squeamish of squishy dialogue with just the right amount of earnestness and distance. This is a fairy tale underdog story that happened to come true so earnestness and sentimentality are to be expected, but without these great actors this may have well become a Hallmark Hall of Fame TV weepie.

I cannot say enough great things about the boxing scenes in Cinderella Man. Russell Crowe nails the pose, the athleticism, and the raw power of a real boxer while Howard directs around whatever deficiencies Crowe may have had. The boxing scenes are extraordinary and very compelling and really the most memorable thing about Cinderella Man.

It's not that the rest of the film, from the home life drama to the social drama of the depression era setting or the romance between Crowe and Zellweger, never works but that it's all a bit too safe. Despite the gritty ghetto setting and the dingy dive boxing arena, there is very little grit or dirt in Cinderella Man. Braddock was well known for his decency and honor, wonderful qualities but no one is perfect. Director Ron Howard portrays James Braddock as if he were positioning him for sainthood.

This earnest portrayal grows weary after a while and you long for some little bit of dysfunction, some flaw, anything that could shed some light on how this eminently decent gentlemen became a brutal warrior in a boxing ring. Certainly his desperate situation, the fact that he was fighting to feed his family, played a large role in his determination but what aspect of his personality drove him to be a championship contender in the first place? That element is missing from Crowe's performance and the film as a whole.

Director Ron Howard has never been known for his gritty storytelling. You expect Howard to indulge his crowd pleasing nature. He indulges a little too often in Cinderella Man but with the extraordinary boxing scenes and the power of his cast, Howard manages to keep Cinderella Man, at the very least, entertaining all the way to the final bell. It could have been a real contender but as it is, Cinderella Man is a bit of fluffy feel good entertainment.

Movie Review: The Next Three Days

The Next Three Days (2010) 

Directed by Paul Haggis 

Written by Paul Haggis 

Starring Russell Crowe, Elizabeth Banks, Brian Dennehy, Olivia Wilde, Liam Neeson 

Release Date November 19th, 2010 

Published November 18th, 2010 

Paul Haggis loves a story that examines fate and chance and the seeming randomness of life. Bringing order to the chaos of life was part of what made his “Crash” such a fascinating drama. It was messy in the ways it brought characters together, crashing them together emotionally and sometimes physically, yet there was fate seeming to shine down on each character and reveal that there may have been no other way for these things to happen.

”Crash” is a remarkable film filled with powerful performances and emotions that deepen with repeated viewings. It's the opposite experience of Mr. Haggis's latest film, “The Next Three Days.” Ostensibly a prison break thriller about a husband trying to save the life of his accused murderer wife by busting her out of jail, “The Next Three Days” is, in reality, a gutless exercise in thriller machinations and not the kind of emotional, thoughtful examination of fate that Haggis would like you to think it is. 

Russell Crowe stars in “The Next Three Days” as Community College English teacher John Brennen. John is a great dad to 3 year old Lucas and a loving husband to Lara (Elizabeth Banks), his workaholic wife who, when we meet her first at a dinner with John's brother and overly flirty fiancée, has just left a rather confrontational day at the office. Lara and her boss were seen to have a wild screaming match just before each left for the day. The next day, as John is getting his son breakfast and mom is leaving for work the police burst through the door and Lara is arrested, charged with murder. Lara's boss was found dead in the parking lot and Lara's car was seen leaving the scene and her fingerprints are on the murder weapon.

Three years later, John and Lara have exhausted her appeals. Lara is going to spend the rest of her life in prison unless John does something drastic. He could appeal to the Supreme Court but without new evidence that won't help. His only real option, once Lara has attempted suicide, is to break her out of prison and get her and Lucas out of the country. Oh, but how will an average, pudgy, College professor plan a prison break?

My plot description is limited to portions of the first act. The second act, featuring a stellar cameo by Liam Neeson, is where “The Next Three Days” moves from sad family drama to attempted thriller. Where Haggis's talent for examining fate through the actions of characters in extreme emotional distress, The Next Three Days becomes a boilerplate thriller with very little interest in examining the motivations of the characters or allowing them depth beyond the function they perform in the hackneyed thriller plot. 

This is not the fault of Russell Crowe who pulls off quite an acting challenge in “The Next Three Days.” Crowe first has to convince us that he is not an action hero and then turn John Brennen into enough of an average action hero that he can do the things needed to break Lara out of prison. Given Crowe's movie born reputation as a tough guy whose characters could easily be capable of attempting a prison break it is remarkable to see Crowe show such vulnerability and then morph that vulnerability into desperate necessity.

If only the rest of “The Next Three Days” had Crowe's determination. Sadly, director Paul Haggis lacks his star's nerve. Surrounding Crowe's tour de force performance is a soporific movie that cannot bear the ambiguity needed to really give the thriller stuff a charge. Never for a moment are you allowed to see John as anything but heroic nor are you allowed to wonder too much about Lara's guilt or innocence.

A more daring film would allow John to do things less than heroic in order to achieve his goal. A more daring film might have asked some more daring questions about Lara's guilt or innocence. Instead we get a scene at the movie's end that removes all doubt and lets the characters and the audience off the hook. Rather than pushing us to question what we would do in a similar situation Paul Haggis keeps his questions superficial and easy to answer.

“Crash” could be dismissed as superficial but Haggis introduced an idea behind the heavy emotions on display; the idea of fate and that of the randomness of life a destiny, for good or for ill, could emerge. There are few, if any, challenging ideas behind the facile thrills of “The Next Three Days” and the film suffers mightily for it.

In the end, “The Next Three Days” has the compromised feel of a very Hollywood production, the kind of market tested drivel that is meant to leave audiences reassured that there values haven’t been challenged. Were it not for Mr. Crowe, I would call it boring, but with him and his determined performance, “The Next Three Days” is merely a failure.