Movie Review Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. #3

Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. #3 

Directed by James Gunn 

Written by James Gunn

Starring Chris Pratt, Zoe Saldana, Dave Bautista, Bradley Cooper, Pom Klementieff, Karen Gillan, Sean Gunn, Will Poulter, Vin Diesel, Chukwudi Iwuji 

Release Date May 5th, 2023 

Published May 3rd, 2023 

Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. #3 arrives at a strange time for a Marvel movie. The Marvel film universe appears, in many ways, to be in decline in relevance and popularity. The biggest stars such as Robert Downey Jr, Scarlett Johansson, and Chris Evans, have left the MCU and the fan base is growing impatient with how the latest phase of this universe is unfolding. Add to that, Guardians writer-director James Gunn who has already abandoned Marvel to take over the leadership of the D.C Film Universe even as his final MCU movie is only now arriving in theaters. 

Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. #3 is feeling like a bit of an afterthought. Intended as a coda to James Gunn's little corner of the Marvel Universe, the film has the feel of an afterthought as well. The villain pales in comparison to Kurt Russell's towering Ego in Volume 2, the lack of the Peter Quill-Gamora dynamic feels like a pivot that no one in the Guardians universe wanted to make but were forced into, and what has replaced that dynamic here feels quite slapped together and unwelcome. 

The story of Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 picks up on an outpost called Knowhere. The Guardians and their allies are regrouping for their next gig, saving the universe when someone brings the fight to them. Adam Warlock (Will Poulter), glimpsed in a post-credits sequence in Volume 2, comes to Knowhere with the intent of kidnapping Rocket (Bradley Cooper). He's here on the orders of the Grand High Evolutionary (Chukwudi Iwuji), the man who created Rocket many years earlier. 

The Guardians turn back Warlock but not before he nearly kills Rocket. The rest of the plot will center on the gang having to enact a heist to steal the plans they need to save Rocket's life. This will involve a reunion with Gamora (Zoe Saldana), now a member of The Ravagers, who has no memory of her other life as a member of the Guardians. She's a completely different person than the Gamora the Guardians knew and she angrily asserts just how much she doesn't know the family she'd had in another life. She's willing to help out of sympathy for her sister, Nebula (Karen Gillan), but she'd rather killer Peter than listen to any of his memory of who she might have been before. 

Find my full length review at Geeks.Media 

Movie Review Avatar The way of Water

Avatar The way of Water (2022) 

Directed by James Cameron 

Written by James Cameron, Rick Jaffa, Amanda Silver

Starring Sam Worthington, Stephen Lang, Sigourney Weaver, Kate Winslet, Zoe Saldana 

Release Date December 16th, 2022 

Published December 19th, 2022 

It's not that Avatar The Way of Water is a bad movie, far from it, this is an incredibly accomplished movie. I just don't care. I can't get emotionally invested in the Avatar franchise. James Cameron's obsession with replacing human actors with CG creations leaves me cold. Without a human face to connect to, I'm left adrift amid the spectacle of Avatar The Way of Water. I can appreciate the technical accomplishment but I can't enjoy Avatar The Way of Water the way I have enjoyed so many more worthy, thoughtful. human movies such as Aftersun or Everything Everywhere All at Once, or even Women Talking, a movie that is more poignant than enjoyable but you get what I am saying. 

Where Avatar is a massive technical achievement, it's not a great movie. It's a machine tooled product and no matter how well made that product is, it's inert, it is as compelling as a really great looking appliance. I appreciate the beauty of a streamlined refrigerator with a neat LED readout and connection to my smartphone, but it's not something I am going to think about much beyond my purchase of it. Eventually, it recedes into the scenery, leaving no lasting memory. That's Avatar the Way of Water in a nutshell. 

Avatar The Way of Water is set nearly 20 decades after the first film. The story finds the Sully family, headed up by former human turned Na'vi leader, Jake Sully thriving in their forest home until the 'sky people' return. The sky people have come back to Pandora not to retrieve more 'unobtainium' but rather to conquer Pandora and make it the new Earth. That's the background story anyway, the main story involves reviving the late Col. Miles Quaritch (Stephen Lang), by placing his memories into a Na'vi Avatar and sending him to kill the biggest threat to humanity's plan, Jake Sully. 

Thinking that he can protect the Na'vi best by leaving, Jake packs up his family, including his wife, Neytiri (Zoe Saldana), sons, Netayam (Jamie Flatters) and Lo'ak (Britain Dalton), and daughter Tuk (Trinity Jo-Li Bliss). Also joining the Sully's will be their adopted daughter, Kiri (Sigourney Weaver), the miracle child of the late Dr. Grace Augustine (Also Sigourney Weaver). The fewer questions asked about Kiri's origin story, the better, I'm pretty sure not even James Cameron could explain it. 

The Sully's run off to live with the water dwelling people of Pandora, led by Tonowari (Cliff Curtis) and his wife, Ronal (Kate Winslet). Here, the Sully's will learn to swim and to live off of the bounty of the ocean. They will be treated as outcasts while slowly earning their place in the tribe and blah, blah, blah. There is nothing new here, every inch of this portion of the movie is a trope from other fish out of water movies about new people in new situations. 

Find my full length review at Geeks.Media. 

Movie Review: Avatar

Avatar (2009) 

Directed by James Cameron

Written by James Cameron

Starring Sam Worthington, Zoe Saldana, Sigourney Weaver, Stephen Lang, Michelle Rodriguez

Release Date December 18th, 2009 

Published December 18th, 2009 

Back in theaters September 23rd, 2022

Streaming Rental on Amazon Prime 

New generation tech in service of a Bush era mindset, W or HW, Avatar is James Cameron advancing film tech to a place no one has seen before while also a response to American imperialism as Cameron envisions it. The tech is phenomenal, the politics are so 2003. The story of Avatar begins just as James Cameron was crowning himself the King of the World. After his Titanic effort to bring an ocean set romance to screen, James Cameron surveyed the landscape of movies and saw that the form, as it was, could not capture his vision of his project.

So, the King of the World abdicated for several years, biding his time until movie technology caught up with his vision. After seeing Peter Jackson give life to Gollum in The Lord of the Rings Cameron finally saw something he could work with. Employing engineers and film geeks Cameron went to work advancing existing technology. That was 2006. Just about 3 years later, more than a decade after its conception, Avatar has arrived.

Sam Worthington stars in Avatar as Jake Sully a former Marine who was left in a wheelchair after a battle injury. Jake's troubles are increased with the death of his twin brother, a scientist who was to shove off for a very important mission. Since Jake has his brother's DNA he is capable of replacing him and does on a mission to a place called Pandora.

On Pandora Jake's new life will have him taking over an Avatar, a human hybrid of the planet's alien population called Na'vi. Jake's mind is transferred somehow into the body of a 10 foot, blue skinned, Na'vi warrior. He will use his Avatar to interact with the natives and convince them to move to another home, opening the way for an industrialist (Giovanni Ribisi) to move in and strip the area of a mineral called, I kind you not, Unobtainium. 

Jake's mission goes off course when he meets a sultry Na'vi princess named Neytiri (Zoe Saldana). She brings him into the Na'vi inner circle after a sign from her god tells her Jake has an important role in the destiny of the Na'vi. Indeed he does; Jake will become a true warrior and a leader after he gives up his militaristic loyalty to his human masters.

No points for guessing that Jake and Neytiri fall happily into cross-species love. The story is eerily similar to Dances with Wolves, minus Kevin Costner's ludicrous facial hair. A soldier in a strange land falls in with the natives and switches sides. I'm not spoiling anything unless you have managed to miss every trailer, commercial or review of Avatar.

Even if you have been living under a rock James Cameron's exceptionally weak script does nothing to hide its twists and turns. The script mindlessly telegraphs its every plot machination and character choice. However, as every other critic in the world reminds us, the plot is meaningless when such wondrous visuals are offered.

There is no doubt about it James Cameron's remarkable dedication to new film technology has rendered a mesmerizing digital landscape unlike any ever before on screen. The characters are stunningly realistic; the landscapes are marvelous and wait till you see the battles between flying gun ships and Na'vi on flying lizard-like creatures. Cameron has even rendered 3D in a way that isn't clunky and unnecessary.

For many the visual delights of Avatar will be more than enough to sell them on the idea of Avatar as a great movie. And, I must admit, the tech is phenomenal. I, however, needed something more.

The story told in Avatar is dopey, derivative and features dialogue so awful as to have Michael Bay look down his nose. Expository dialogue, sometimes necessary, is mind numbingly repeated throughout Avatar. Worse still are the awkward attempts at humor, most of which are dated to around the time Cameron conceived of Avatar.

Even worse still is Mr. Cameron’s preachy, dated subtext about war and natives, 9/11 and terrorism. Cameron is not the first, merely the latest, to exploit 9/11 imagery in order to manipulate the audience. The visual reference to 9/11 is part of Cameron's throwback to the Bush era politique.

It's a rather scattershot bit of commentary that regurgitates liberal complaints about a war for oil, in this case 'Unobtainium,' and an American policy of pre-emptive war that could fairly be called imperialism. All well and good except that these are the complaints of yesteryear.

Is it Cameron's fault that the zeitgeist passed him by? No, but he has to take the lumps for being unable to adapt. He's made a criticism of a President who is gone in an era when a new President looks forward to ending the policies of the past. Whining about a war for oil (Unobtainium) is exceptionally passé.

The soldier going native is even more dated. Dances With Wolves is over 20 years old now. The battle between the American government and American Indians has inspired far better and far less preachy defenses of a native people defending their way of life.

Returning, however, to the main point of Avatar, the technology, you will see this movie because the tech is far too fabulous to be ignored. You really must see Avatar just to say that you have seen what everyone will be talking about in film culture until the next time Cameron revolutionizes the medium. Just be prepared to ignore everything other than the visual splendor.

Movie Review Star Trek

Star Trek (2009) 

Directed by JJ Abrams

Written by Roberto Orci, Alex Kurtzman

Starring Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto, John Cho, Simon Pegg, Zoe Saldana, Eric Bana, Winona Ryder

Release Date May 8th, 2009 

Published May 7th, 2009 

On the great sci-fi divide between trekkies and followers of the force I am squarely in the Skywalker camp. I have nothing against Trek. In the 90's in fact I had a brief love affair with Star Trek The Next Generation. That lasted until Deep Space Nine came along and bored the crap out of me. That was followed by three exceptionally mediocre Next Generation movies that did little to bring me around to the Starfleet way, even as George Lucas was damaging my memories of his holy trilogy with his unholy prequels.

Now, I cannot be sure where I stand. After seeing J.J Abrams revamp the Star Trek legend with energy, wit and edge of your seat summer movie adrenaline, I am tempted to turn my loyalties over to Captain James Tiberius Kirk. Blasphemy? Maybe to Star Wars fanatics, but even those who've fought this battle for years must first see this exceptional new Star Trek before excoriating me for allowing Trek into places in my movie loving heart where only the Force had been before.

Star Trek the reboot begins with the birth of James T. Kirk aboard a starship Captained by his father George. It wasn't initially captained by George Kirk but after being attacked by a Romulan ship captained by the empirious Nero (Eric Bana) it was left to First Officer Kirk to go down with the ship as he evacuated the crew, including his in labor wife (House star Jennifer Morrison in a terrific cameo). George Kirk's heroism will no doubt be the model for his son.

Later in life, James T. Kirk (Chris Pine) is a rebellious Iowa farm boy with little thought of the future despite a knack for leadership and the instincts of a warrior. Thankfully, these traits are recognized by the captain of the Enterprise, Captain Pike (Bruce Greenwood) who challenges Kirk to join StarFleet. His father became an officer in just 4 years, James says he can do it in 3.

Parallel to Kirk's story is that of Spock (Zachary Quinto, TV's Heroes top villain Sylar). The son of a Vulcan elder and a human woman, Spock is the Vulcan equivalent of an outcast, one who is capable of emotion as much as he is subject to the rigorous logic that Vulcan's thrive on. It is the human side of Spock that leads him to Star Fleet and his Vulcan mastery of knowledge and combat that quickly makes him a leader.

These two men are destined to clash but history tells us that great things will come of those clashes, including a timeless friendship. This leads us to the main question many will have about Star Trek, how does it fit the Star Trek canon? The answer will be different for different audiences.

Those with the most strict fealty to Star Trek lore may poke a few holes. Those with no loyalty will set phasers on the film's use of time travel and call it a cheat. People who think like me however, not strictly tied to lore, willing to put aside the laws of physics in favor of a good time, will find clever the ways in which Director Abrams and writers Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman have found to use Trek lore and yet chart their own path to a whole new franchise.

It's a spectacularly clever device, one I won't divulge here, only to say that it isn't unfair to call it a cheat. That said, if you call it a cheat, summer movies clearly are not your cup of tea. A summer popcorn adventure is not subject to all of the rigors of typical movies. Movies that strive to mean more to our lives, movies that attempt to communicate deep human truths and reveal the soul of man are a different breed from the Star Trek-Star Wars-Iron Man movies which occasionally stumble across truths but are geared more toward the visceral excitement that is just as valuable.

People tend to trash the thrill as a base emotion. Maybe it is, but would you want a life without thrills? Star Trek delivers thrills on several different levels and I couldn't get enough. The film is first an action packed popcorn movie with spectacular effects. It is second a film that takes characters with rich histories and makes functional use of those histories to thrill us with surprise. And on another level, this is an origin story that introduces a group of charismatic heroes and fosters a newfound attachment to them. On one level trekkies will geek over this glimpse into the lives of their longtime heroes. On another level, the uninitiated will find well grounded new heroes with new stories to tell in unique and exciting fashion.

Star Trek is a visceral summer movie experience that will make you squirm in your seat, catch your breath and laugh all in the space of mere moments. J.J Abrams has a mastery of the action movie form that might be unexpected of a television veteran and while I wish he would keep the camera static during the quieter scenes, he is forgiven for likely being overly excited to get to the loud stuff, the loud stuff being so darn fun.

Fun is the operative word here. Pure Summer Movie, popcorn fun from scene one to the very end. Movies like Star Trek are why we go to the movies in the summer instead of being outside where we belong, you just can't have this much fun anywhere else.

Movie Review: Death at a Funeral

Death at a Funeral (2010) 

Directed by Neil Labute 

Written by Dean Craig 

Starring Chris Rock, Martin Lawrence, Loretta Devine, Regina Hall, Zoe Saldana, Luke Wilson

Release Date April 16th, 2010 

Published April 16th, 2010 

Director Neil Labute has a terrific eye for human behavior. It's a very particular and often quite dim view of humanity that lead to brutal yet insightful films like In the Company of Men and his magnum opus of anger and inhumanity Your Friends and Neighbors. Yet, there is also a brilliantly whimsical side to the director of the dark side of humanity.

In Nurse Betty Neil Labute took the cute as a button Renee Zellweger and had her play a woman who falls in love with a soap opera character following a psychotic break brought on by witnessing the violent murder of her brutish husband. From there begins a road picture and a strangely romantic and wondrous performance from Morgan Freeman as the killer who falls for Betty from afar. 

The strange comic sensibilities of Nurse Betty were a turn off for many audiences but for me it was a remarkable insight into a filmmaker who is tuned to a very different wavelength than most other filmmakers or other human beings in general. It is this quality that makes Neil Labute perfect for the new comedy Death at a Funeral. What other director could find so much wacky fun at a funeral? 

Chris Rock stars in Death at a Funeral as Aaron the oldest son of a family that just lost its patriarch. Aaron is a tax attorney who longs to be a novelist and lives in the shadow of his slightly younger brother Ryan (Martin Lawrence) a successful writer of trashy novels. This however is the least of Aaron's troubles as he has his wife Michelle (Regina Hall) pushing to have a baby and his mother Cynthia (Loretta Devine) constantly on the verge of a meltdown.

Oh and then there is the issue of the funeral home delivering the wrong body. Yikes! Among the funeral guests are Aaron's cousin Elaine (Zoe Saldana) and her boyfriend Oscar (James Marsden) who dreads seeing Elaine's father (Ron Glass) who has made it clear how much he hates Oscar. They are joined by Elaine's brother Jeff (Columbus Short) a minor drug dealer whose pill concoction is set to make trouble at the funeral.

Family friend Norman (Tracey Morgan) and his pal Derek (Luke Wilson) each have a different purpose at the funeral. Norman is helping out by bringing cranky Uncle Russell (Danny Glover) to the funeral while Derek will be seeking out Elaine with whom he has a romantic past that he hopes to rekindle. 

And then there is a mystery guest. Peter Dinklage plays Frank, the same role he played in the original British version of Death at a Funeral in 2007. Frank holds the key to a major subplot that drives the middle portion of the film to a wild climax that though it comes up a little short by being too easy, does not fail so completely as to sink the whole film. 

Death at a Funeral brilliantly builds comic momentum from the opening scenes involving the wrong body in the casket to the reveal of Frank's secret to Oscar's wild drug infused ride to finally sitting everyone down for the actual funeral. It's remarkable how Labute keeps all of these comic plates spinning and pays off each set piece with a big, big laugh. 

The cast of Death at a Funeral is first rate with Marsden stealing scene after scene with his acid trip wackiness while Chris Rock grounds the film by bringing the craziness back to earth with exasperated truthfulness. Rock is used to driving the comedy by prodding the actors around him with his in your face style. Here, Rock is more relaxed than ever before and it suits him. He may not be pushing the edges but his punchlines are just as strong. 

Neil Labute worked from a script that is credited to original Death at a Funeral writer Dean Craig. Indeed the characters, set pieces and other aspects of the story are almost entirely unchanged from the 2007 film. What is different is the perspective Labute and his cast brings to the picture. There is more willingness by all involved to explore the black comedy side (not a racial observation) of a story that is after all a comedy set at a funeral. 

Especially interesting is the exploration of gay panic, something that in African American circles is an especially touchy subject. This part will contain spoilers so skip to the last paragraph if you hate spoilers, Rock and Lawrence in the film's main plot deftly balance horror, acceptance and humor at the prospect of their father's homosexuality. I would have liked to see a little more attention paid to this subject, it's wrapped up a little too neatly in Rock's closing speech, but overall well handled and bold for merely being in the movie. 

Death at a Funeral is wacky and smart, slapsticky but with an eye for the laughs that don't involve bodies being dumped out of caskets. I could have done without the gross-out moments with Tracey Morgan and Danny Glover, which I will not detail here, but it's not so horrible that it ruins the film. Nor does the relatively comfy wrap up at the film’s end take away from the big laughs and wonderful discomfort of Death at a Funeral.

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: Crossroads

Crossroads (2002) 

Directed by Tamra Davis 

Written by Shonda Rhimes 

Starring Britney Spears, Anson Mount, Zoe Saldana, Taryn Manning, Kim Cattrall, Dan Akroyd, Justin Long

Release Date February 15th, 2002

Published February 15th, 2002 

Will pop stars ever learn?

It never fails that every time a pop star gains any kind of popularity their instincts lead them to acting. Madonna, Mandy Moore and Michael Jackson have all made miserable attempts at acting careers. And of course we're all still recovering from the film debuts of N'Sync and Mariah Carey. Now the world’s flavor of the decade, Britney Spears, has made her crossover attempt with the pop flavored Crossroads.

Britney is Lucy, the virginal valedictorian with a voice like an angel. On the day of her high school graduation Lucy reunites with old friends to unearth a box of childhood memories buried 10 years earlier. It seems Lucy and her friends Mimi (Taryn Manning) and Kit (Zoey Saldana) have grown apart in the last 10 years but now are coming back together for a road trip to L.A. so Mimi can become a rock star and Lucy can find the mother who abandoned her when she was just 3 years old.

So, now we have combined the road movie with the pop star vehicle, oh could this possibly suck more? Well in fact yes, yes it can and does suck even more. Lucy finally finds her mother who is played by Sex & The City's Kim Cattrall, and we are treated to one of the most stupid, mean and contrived situations this side of daytime soap operas. Lucy meets her mother and rather than go with what should be the film’s dramatic high-point, the film cuts to her friends hanging out a local hotel and Lucy returning crying as she explains that her mother hates her and wishes she was never born. How fun!

To be fair, Britney is good at eliciting sympathy. Her acting leaves a good deal to desire but she's far better than fellow pop tarts Mandy Moore and Mariah Carey. What is most striking is how young Britney looks. She is reportedly 21 years old in real life, but in the film her character is 18 and she looks about 14. That's both blessing and a curse in some ways, as her remarkable youth is a tad unnerving considering where the plot is going and considering what I am about to discuss. 

Not surprisingly, there are a couple of gratuitous shots meant to appeal to horny young boys. Britney prances around in her underwear twice in the first 20 minutes of the film. I must give Britney credit for bravely risking her virginal reputation by allowing her character to be deflowered in the film. I certainly didn't expect or really desire to see this but here we are. Britney's journey is arriving where she's going to have sex for the first time. 

The saddest thing about the film is it’s inclusion of Jeepers Creepers star Justin Long in the throwaway role of Britney's first boyfriend. Long is a tremendous comic actor as he's shows on NBC's highly underrated Ed. In Crossroads, Long appears in the film’s first 20 minutes, providing the film’s only funny moments and then is eschewed in favor of the more teeny bop, test screened hunk Anson Mount whose performance is extremely dull in comparison to the animated, funny turn by Long.'

Crossroads is as awful as we all thought it would be, and Britney, I hope, will go back to her day job. But she can do so knowing at least this was better than Glitter.

Movie Review: The Terminal

The Terminal (2004) 

Directed by Steven Spielberg 

Written by Sacha Gervasi, Jeff Nathanson 

Starring Tom Hanks, Catherine Zeta Jones, Stanley Tucci, Chi McBride, Diego Luna, Zoe Saldana

Release Date June 18th, 2004 

Published June 17th, 2004 

I thought it was an urban legend. My brother and I were discussing the new Steven Spielberg/Tom Hanks flick The Terminal when he told me the story of Merhan Karimi Nasseri. Mr. Nasseri has spent the past 15 years in the international terminal of Charles De Gaulle Airport in France after his bag was stolen with all of his identification.

The Iranian born Mr. Nasseri has lived off the kindness of the airport staff for 15 years, has inspired 2 documentaries and a French film called Tombes Du Ciel or Lost In Transit starring the legendary Jean Rochefort. Now Mr. Nasseri is a getting a big time American treatment from Steven Spielberg and Tom Hanks. Sadly, this trifle of a film is exposed for it’s light as featheriness by the dramatic true story on which it is loosely based.

In The Terminal, Tom Hanks is Viktor Navorsky who has come to New York City from his Eastern block home of Krakozhia. Unfortunately while Mr. Navorsky was flying to America, Krakozhia plunged into civil war and the government dissipated. Now in America, Mr. Navorsky is a man without a country, his Visa is invalid because the U.S government can’t recognize a ruling power in Krakozhia. Until the war ends and a new government is established, Viktor must remain in the airport terminal.

Breaking the bad news to Viktor is the not so kindly head of the airport’s Homeland Security Office Frank Dixon (Stanley Tucci). It is Frank who could find away to really help Viktor but instead strands him with bureaucratic red tape and then takes a sadistic interest in preventing Viktor from making the most of his desperate situation.

Stuck in the International terminal, that looks more like a mall than an airport thanks to the numerous real brand name stores, Viktor waits and involves himself in the lives of the airport staff. There is Diego Luna as a food delivery worker who trades Viktor free food in exchange for Viktor’s help in romancing an INS Agent played by Zoë Saldana. Although Viktor knows he can’t leave, he visits the INS office every day to have his passport declined.

Chi McBride is a baggage handler with a soft spot for late night card games. He sees Viktor as a soft mark for poker games but soon becomes a real friend. And then there is the janitor, an Indian man played by Kumar Pallana, a lovable oddball with a secret past. Pallana provides the biggest laughs of the film and none of them at his expense.

Finally, there is Catherine Zeta Jones as Amelia, a flight attendant who takes a shine to Viktor but can’t get involved because she is hopelessly involved with a married man played briefly by Michael Nouri. While she tries to resist the urge to be with the married man, Amelia and Viktor come close to romance until the plot conspires to split them.

Despite the film’s dramatic underpinnings, everything is kept very light and airy. In fact, it’s so light that it floats off the screen and almost immediately from your memory. Tom Hanks, arguably our most talented actor, here plays a sort of lovable puppy of a character whose moral fiber is so unquestionable, he is too good to be true. There is nothing wrong with a character that is virtuous but Viktor is Touched By An Angel good. Maybe that explains why Stanley Tucci's officious bureaucrat hates him so much anyone this perfect would eventually get on your nerves. Still, Tucci is too evil to be true until the plot calls for him to look the other way.

Too good to be true describes most of The Terminal which suffers from a script full of contrivances. Viktor quickly learns English, lucks into the food deal with Diego, lucks into a job working construction in the terminal and in typical forced romantic comedy fashion, he has a meet-cute with Amelia that becomes a running gag.

I have been quite hard on The Terminal to this point so I should point out that their are a number of good things about the film. Steven Spielberg's direction is typically strong in its structure and look. Cinematographer Janusz Kaminsky relishes the freedom given him by a set that was built specifically for the film and for his camera to be positioned as he pleased.

The film’s biggest star may in fact be the set created by production designer Alex McDowell. Rather than trying to wrangle shooting time in a real airport terminal, McDowell and his team of designers built a terminal inside of a Los Angeles airport hangar. The flawless design is a seamless recreation of any major airport terminal in the country right down to the uncomfortable benches, the ungodly level of branding, and astoundingly high prices.

However, without a well-told story to decorate the terrific set, the movie isn't worth anymore than it's production design. The Terminal is likable and sweet, and occasionally quite funny, but it is also inconsistent, simpleminded, and lighter than air. Tom Hanks is his typically likable self and Mr. Spielberg's direction is of his usual quality. It's unfortunate that the script by Sacha Gervasi and Jeff Nathanson is far below the quality of their work.

Movie Review: The Losers

The Losers (2010) 

Directed by Sylvain White 

Written by Peter Berg, James Vanderbilt 

Starring Jeffrey Dean Morgan, Idris Elba, Zoe Saldana, Chris Evans, Columbus Short 

Release Date April 23rd, 2010 

Published April 22nd, 2010 

A ragtag band of America's best soldiers are burned by unknown superiors and forced to go outside the law to get their lives back. “The A-Team?” No, “The Losers” starring Jeffrey Dean Morgan, Idris Elba and Zoe Saldana. Oh but don't worry, this isn't some derivative waste of celluloid, it's merely a boring rehash of tired cliches dressed up in music video edits and big explosions. OK, yeah that is rather derivative.

Clay (Morgan) is the leader of “The Losers,” a group of Special Forces soldiers whose latest mission  involves taking down a hostage taking drug dealer somewhere in South America. The mission is a lie. Instead, the man is a puppet that some CIA spook wants out of the way. The bad guy hides behind a large group of orphans to hold off people like The Losers. When Clay and his team, tech expert Jensen (Chris Evans), Second in Command Roque (Idris Elba), pilot Pooch (Columbus Short) and sharp shooter Cougar (Oscar Janaeda), find the kids they decide to rescue them. The rescue goes bad when the CIA decides to eliminate “The Losers” and instead eliminate the little kids.

Trapped in South America with no passports, identification or cash, “The Losers” seem resigned to their fate until an encounter with a mysterious woman. Her name is Aisha (Zoe Saldana) and she knows who burned “The Losers” and how they can find him and though her motives and origin are suspicious it doesn't stop Clay from falling into bed with her. ”The Losers” has a certain charm to it, especially in the loose, fun performance of future “Captain America” Chris Evans, but for the most part it lags because there is just nothing new here. “The Losers” is filled to overflow with been there, done that action set pieces and dull, lifeless effects and quick edits.

Jeffrey Dean Morgan is solid actor with a strong, manly appeal. His weathered mug and half smile seem built for gritty, grunge action movies. Too bad for him that “The Losers” is a slick, lifeless effects movie and not the kind of grungy, punk rock war movie that might suit Morgan and his performance here far better. That said, Morgan has a great sexual chemistry with “Avatar” angel Zoe Saldana and their sex scene is arguably the only reason to see “The Losers.”

Sadly, this movie is not about watching good looking people get down. Rather, The Losers is a lame caper flick in which the caper isn't very clever or original and the film-making is derivative and dull. “The Losers,” I am told, is based on a popular series of comic books. I am further told that many of the frames in the film are modeled on actual panels from the comic. This is notable for comics fans and entirely inconsequential for me. Maybe we should check out the comic and skip “The Losers” movie.