Movie Review: Catch Me If You Can

Catch Me if You Can (2002) 

Directed by Steven Spielberg 

Written by Jeff Nathanson 

Starring Leonardo DiCaprio, Tom Hanks, Christopher Walken, Amy Adams, Martin Sheen

Release Date December 25th, 2002 

Published December 24th, 2002 

Less than a week ago, Leonardo DiCaprio entered theaters with Gangs of New York, his first truly adult performance. He returns in his new film portraying a kid again. In Steven Spielberg's Catch Me If You Can, DiCaprio is famed teenage con man Frank Abagnale Jr, the youngest man ever to make the FBI's most wanted list. Though DiCaprio is playing a teenager in this film, it is yet another grown up performance that announces DiCaprio as an actor of great depth.

The true story of Frank Abagnale Jr. is one made for the big screen. Before the age of 19, Abagnale had been an airline pilot, a lawyer, and a doctor. He was also a master check forger. The story is told in flashback as FBI agent Carl Hanratty (Tom Hanks) arrives at a French prison to retrieve Abagnale who had served two years in the prison for the same crimes he was charged with in the States. We flashback to young Frank and his picturesque family life. Frank's father, Frank Sr. (Christopher Walken), and his mother (Natalie Baye) seem to be happy. Unfortunately his father's business is going under and the IRS is beating down their door. The stress is breaking up the marriage. This leads Frank Jr. to hit the road and begin his life of crime.

Frank writes a series of bad checks before the banks finally cut him off. Then, inspiration strikes in the form of an airplane pilot. Seeing the respect and admiration people showed for airline pilots, Frank sets about becoming a pilot (or at least looking the part.) After conning officials at Pan Am into giving him a uniform and enough background information to be able to talk a good game, Frank sets about being a pilot. Using his uniform and sheer bravado, Frank starts forging checks from Pan Am. The uniform gave him instant credibility and Frank's ability to charm the female bank tellers meant never even having to produce an ID to have a check cashed in any bank in the country.

With the FBI onto his pilot scheme, Frank settles in Atlanta where a chance encounter with a sweet little nurse named Brenda (Amy Adams) leads Frank to become a doctor. He fakes a degree from Harvard Medical School and watches Dr. Kildare. Suddenly, he's working the night shift as the head on call doctor in the emergency room. Thankfully, being in charge of a group of doctors means that Frank is never left to tend to a patient. Frank's relationship with Brenda leads to yet another close call with the feds, and has Frank headed for Europe.

Despite his adept criminal mind and quick wit, Frank is still a kid and still a sloppy criminal and the FBI is quickly on his path. In one amazing encounter, Frank actually comes face to face with the FBI agents on his tail and crafts an amazing lie to make his escape by posing as a secret service agent. The scene relies on a great deal of convenient timing and luck, but then I'm sure the real Frank Abagnale was the beneficiary of convenient timing and luck throughout his criminal run.

Indeed, Frank Abagnale's story is true. He was the youngest man ever to make the FBI's infamous most wanted list. He did cash forged checks over a three year span that totaled over 4 million dollars and he did impersonate a doctor, an airline pilot, and a lawyer and even for a short time a French teacher in his own high school. His first taste of how to run a good con, he made it a full week as a French substitute without actually speaking any French.

Why did Frank Abagnale do all of this? The likely answer is because he thought he could get a way with it. Spielberg however can't help tossing in a little pop psychology as a partial explanation. The film posits that the break up of his parents' marriage and his desire to reunite them by buying their problems away caused Frank to become a criminal. That and his father's hatred for the government kept Frank on the run. 

DiCaprio however never communicates a tortured victim, but rather, an excitable teen who lacks a good solid hobby. If there had been extreme sports in Frank's day, he may have just risked his life on stupid stunts. In place of that, his need for a constant rush leads him to crime. FBI agent Hanratty becomes his unwilling accomplice, providing Frank with the reason to keep running. What fun is being a great con artist or a great anything for that matter, if no one is around to appreciate it?

Spielberg is a preeminent story teller and in Frank Abagnale he has a great story. Unfortunately, Frank is too good of a guy for there to be any great drama. The film makes great use of the audience as Frank's co-conspirators. With his charm and wit, DiCaprio has the audience cheering for him to get away and you can't help but laugh at the way Frank toys with the people who attempt to deny him. However, the audience never really understands the gravity of his situation. Stealing four million dollars is a serious thing; it's grand theft. Yet, Frank is so likable and the narrative is so forgiving to him one would think it was okay for him to get away.

In many ways, Catch Me If You Can reminded me of a far better film, The Talented Mr. Ripley. Both films are about troubled youth con men. Both guys are loners who are desperate for attention and both draw the sympathy of the audience; however, Ripley is far more dramatic than Abagnale. His longings and crimes add weight to the character that Abagnale lacks. Catch Me If You Can is far more flashy than Ripley is and, for that reason, the drama is lacking. Frank never seems to be in any real danger.

Both DiCaprio and Hanks are strong but Catch Me If You Can still seems weightless. It isn't a comedy but it's not nearly dramatic enough to be taken seriously. Yes, this is a true story. But something tells me the real story is a little more dramatic than the featherweight screen version. All of that said, Catch Me if You Can is wildly entertaining and with Spielberg, Hanks, and DiCaprio, you have a trio incapable of making a bad movie together. Catch Me if You Can may not live up to all of your expectations but it is nevertheless entertaining. 

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 Larry Crowne

Larry Crowne (2011) 

Directed by Tom Hanks 

Written by Tom Hanks, Nia Vardalos 

Starring Tom Hanks, Julia Roberts, Bryan Cranston, Gugu Mbatha Raw, Taraji P Henson

Release Date July 1st, 2011 

Published June 30th, 2011 

"Larry Crowne" is a disappointment on multiple levels. First, and most important, is how truly awful a movie "Larry Crowne" is. Boring, banal, pointless and at times bordering on amateurish. Then there is the fact that the film stars two of the biggest stars of the past 25 years of film, Julia Roberts and Tom Hanks.

And finally, there is the fact that Tom Hanks co-wrote and directed this failure of sub-sitcom humor and cloying romance. Tom Hanks had shown so much promise as the director of the charming period rock n' roll movie "That Thing You Do." To see him deliver something as charm-free and banal as "Larry Crowne" is just sad.

Tom Hanks stars in the title role of Larry Crowne. Larry is maybe the nicest, sweetest guy you would ever want Tom Hanks to play; he's Forrest Gump minus most of the mental handicaps. Larry was in the Navy for more than 20 years but when asked about it he's quick with a humble smile and an admittance that he was just a cook. Awww.

Larry's wife divorced him several years ago, before they could have kids but after they had bought their suburban dream home. Since then, Larry has thrown himself into his work, taking great pride in being an eight time employee of the month at U-Mart, a Wal-Mart/Target Superstore clone.

Unfortunately for Larry, he never went to college. At UMart you can only move up to management if you have a degree and without one, Larry can't move up so he must move on. Fired from his beloved retail job, Larry finds the job market unwelcoming. Lucky for him, his neighbor has an idea, Community College.

If Larry can get a degree maybe he can get his job back or an even better job. Is the movie over? No, it has only begun as Larry returns to school and immediately acquires a new best friend, a perfect pixie named Talia (Gugu Mbatha-Raw) who immediately sets about changing Larry's life around; new clothes, new haircut, new friends and boom, slightly new Larry. She's a manic pixie dream-best friend. 

Meanwhile, in another movie, Julia Roberts plays a slightly alcoholic Community College professor who happens to have Larry Crowne in one of her classes. From time to time the camera ditches Larry to follow the professor into her sad life with her porn addicted, unemployed husband, Dean (Bryan Cranston).

Oh if only she could get a little Larry time; his cuddliness and good humor would without a doubt brighten her day and solve all of troubles. Oops. I maybe should have offered a spoiler alert there. Then again, did you think "Larry Crowne" was going to star Tom Hanks and Julia Roberts and they weren't going to be matched up?

The fact is, romantic comedies aren't about suspenseful plotting, they're about setting believable, interesting, roadblocks between potential love mates and watching them humorously negotiate said roadblocks on their way to a chirpy happy ending. Rom-coms are about the journey and in the case of "Larry Crowne," it's not a great journey.

Tom Hanks and Julia Roberts demonstrate a stunning lack of chemistry in "Larry Crowne." In fact, Hanks has a great deal more chemistry with young Gugu Mbatha-Raw than with Julia Roberts. That however, would be a different, possibly more interesting movie. That movie would at least have the tension of a cross-racial May-December romance.

"Larry Crowne," on the other hand, has no tension whatsoever. As Roger Ebert points out perfectly in his review, Larry Crowne begins as a good guy and progresses through the movie as a good guy before ending as a good guy. There is no arc to "Larry Crowne." We know where the movie is going and it gets there with a minimum of humor and zero tension, as if complicating the plot might make the audience uncomfortable.

Oh, but there is the porn addict husband, right? He's a source of tension isn't he? He's played by Breaking Bad's Bryan Cranston. That must be contentious? But it's not, the script deals the husband out of the story with such simplicity as to have simply forgotten he was even there.

It's shocking and sad just how bad "Larry Crowne" is. I am a huge Tom Hanks fan but I cannot deny just how banal the whole thing is. The humor is amateurish, the romance is lifeless and perfunctory and the movie just sort of stands around smiling pleasantly and hoping that all of the Tom Petty songs on the soundtrack, there are like a dozen of them, will be entertaining enough to distract from the dullness of what little story there is.

Movie Review Hall Pass

Hall Pass (2011) 

Directed by Peter and Bobby Farrelly 

Written by Peter and Bobby Farrelly, Pete Jones, Kevn Barnett 

Starring Owen Wilson, Jason Sudeikis, Jenna Fischer, Christina Applegate, Richard Jenkins

Release Date February 25th, 2011 

Published February 24th, 2011

Peter and Bobby Farelly haven't been relevant since they rode the public's brief fascination with Jack Black in the early 2000's to a hit with “Shallow Hal.” Since then the brothers have floundered half focused on new material and half obsessed with making a movie about the Three Stooges. The Stooges movie has been gestating since the late 90's with a variety of acting combinations dropping in and out with nothing to show for it.

Finally, the guys who started the man-child comedy revolution with movies like “There's Something About Mary” are back at full strength and making the kind of movie that was their forte. “Hall Pass” is a small miracle of outrageously raunchy humor with a good heart that made ``Mary,’ “Kingpin” and “Shallow Hal” hits.

Owen Wilson stars in “Hall Pass” as Rick, an early 40's father of three happily married for more than 15 years to Maggie (Jenna Fischer). Three kids have taken the spark out of the marriage lately and more and more Maggie is catching Rick lusting after other women like a horny old teenager.

More troubled are Rick and Maggie's best friends Fred (Jason Sudeikis) and Grace (Christina Applegate). They have no kids and no spark; leaving Fred to masturbate in the front seat of their minivan lest she catch him. (If you're wondering how that bit of information pays off, see the movie.) Rick and Fred commiserate over their troubled love lives at a local coffee shop while lusting after an Aussie barista named Leigh (Nicky Whelan) whose nubile-ness represents everything they fantasize about.

After speaking to a mutual friend “The View's Joy Behar in an unshowy cameo) Maggie and Grace come up with the idea of a Hall Pass. The concept is simple, one week off from marriage to do whatever the guys want, guilt free. Either they will spend the week striking out or they will get whatever cheating they were going to do anyway out of their systems.

This is the kind of simple, straight forward set up that Ron Howard and Vince Vaughn botched in “The Dilemma.” The Farrelly Brothers demonstrate that it takes more than just the idea to make the movie; you need characters and big gags that pay off to really make it work.

Owen Wilson shows a heretofore untapped talent for playing a middle aged dork. Usually cast as the life of the party guy, Wilson slips effortlessly into the role of Rick like one in the long line of 80's rock 'n roll t-shirts Rick thinks is cool. What Rick and Fred think is cool goes a long way for laughs in “Hall Pass.”

Jason Sudeikis is a real scene stealer in “Hall Pass;” offering the same kind of randy, goofy, raunch-ridden asides that he brought to his equally funny supporting role in last year's “Going the Distance” with Drew Barrymore and Justin Long. Sudeikis plays a great douchebag but when the role calls for him to morph into a good guy you believe it fully.

The gags in “Hall Pass” range from the classically Farrelly bathroom jokes, including some truly explosive diarrhea, to more self aware stuff reflecting the ways in which guys really talk. A scene taking place in the home of a mutual friend that neither Rick or Fred really like demonstrates that guys can be as catty as women are about the people they envy, they just have a more blunt and colorful way of being catty.

”Hall Pass” is uproariously funny with big gags mixing with strong characters and in the end a believable amount of heart minus the treacle that most other, similar films pack on when they don't have the goods to really earn audience sympathies. The Farrelly Brothers haven't been this funny in over a decade. See “Hall Pass” and rejoice and who knows, maybe that Stooges movie will actually come out someday.

Movie Review: Drive Angry 3D

Drive Angry 3D (2011) 

Directed by Patrick Lussier

Written by Todd Farmer, Patrick Lussier

Starring Nicolas Cage, Amber Heard, William Fichtner, Billy Burke, Tom Atkins, Charlotte Ross

Release Date February 25th, 2011 

Published February 25th, 2011 

Didn't Nicolas Cage already play a guy who escaped from hell? What movie was that? Didn't “Con Air” guy escape from hell? What about that “Bangkok Dangerous” hitman character? “Ghost Rider?” I don't remember or really care. Nicolas Cage is the only actor on the planet who could so nonchalantly play a guy who escaped from hell and leave you wondering if he's done it before.

”Drive Angry 3D” stars Nicolas Cage as John Milton and if you get the reference in the name you are not likely the target audience for this movie; an almost delicious bit of irony. Milton, as he prefers to be called, John is just too ordinary, is hunting for a cult leader (Billy Burke) who murdered his daughter and has taken Milton's baby granddaughter hostage with the intent on sacrificing her in order to literally raise hell to earth.

How intent is Milton to save his granddaughter? Well, he literally escaped from hell and to top that off, he stole Satan's very own God Killer shotgun. After torching his own muscle car in order to kill some bad guys, Milton needs a ride. Enter Piper (Amber Heard) who has a 69 Charger and enough bad attitude to match Milton bad guy for bad guy.

Together Milton and Piper set on the cult leader's trail all the while being tracked themselves by a cryptic man in a suit who calls himself 'The Accountant' (William Fichtner). We learn that 'The Accountant' works for the Dark Lord Satan but whether he is out to help or hinder Milton's quest is debatable until the end.

”Drive Angry 3D” is directed with great energy by Patrick Lussier who brought a similar edgy, low brow, ugliness and grit to his remake of “My Bloody Valentine.” Unfortunately, that film was a million times more inventive than anything in “Drive Angry 3D” which plays like a series of car chases broken up by Nicolas Cage grunting and standing slump shouldered, lost in thoughts none of us could even imagine. Don't get me wrong, there is a heavy amount of kitsch to be mined from Cage in “Drive Angry 3D” but not the so bad its good kind.

Cage brings zero humor to the role of Milton and co-star Amanda Heard is similarly far too earnest for this material. “Drive Angry 3D” cries out for the kind of over the top Nicolas Cage that drove his “Bad Lieutenant: Port of Call New Orleans” to heights of manic, lunatic, craziness. Instead, a subdued Cage in “Drive Angry 3D” cannot make even a scene of fully clothed love making while shooting bad guys work as a comic set piece.

There is a good deal of effort on display in “Drive Angry 3D,” especially from Director Patrick Lussier who deserved better from his star. “Drive Angry 3D” has the elements in place for some seriously B-Movie fun but Cage refuses to have any fun and the movie sinks under the weight of his seriousness.

Movie Review The Adjustment Bureau

The Adjustment Bureau (2011) 

Directed by George Nolfi 

Written by George Nolfi 

Starring Matt Damon, Emily Blunt, Anthony Mackie, John Slattery, Terence Stamp 

Release Date March 4th, 2011

Published March 3rd, 2011 

Fate versus free will is the debate at the heart of “The Adjustment Bureau,” or so the movie wants you to believe. There is little ambiguity about the side the film comes down on: Both Sides. Surprise! A mainstream entertainment that tries to be all things to all sides; hey taking a side might cost a potential ticket buyer.

As irksome as the compromised plot of “The Adjustment Bureau” is, I can't stay mad at the movie because the makers placed Matt Damon and Emily Blunt at the center of their faux conflict. Damon and Blunt have such wonderful, unforced romantic chemistry that “The Adjustment Bureau” adjusts from a bad idea to a not terrible bit of romantic goofery.

Matt Damon stars in “The Adjustment Bureau” as Congressman David Norris, a rising star and bad boy Democrat. We meet David as he is running for Senate from the great state of New York and falling victim to one of the lamest scandals ever to befall a politician, especially one from New York.

With his campaign derailed, David is preparing his concession speech in a hotel men's room when he meets Elise (Blunt), hiding out in said men's room to avoid hotel security. She hears much of David's lame speech and unintentionally nudges him toward something slightly more genuine.

What we see of the speech doesn't really warrant the political superstardom the movie claims for David but maybe the better stuff is on the editing room floor. It doesn't really matter, the film's depiction of politics is not central to the plot which really kicks in after David takes a private sector gig, working for his pal Charlie (Michael Kelly).

Men in hats played by Anthony Mackie and Mad Men's John Slattery have been shadowing David since we met him and after he loses they step in to inform us that David has to have his path adjusted. It will be Mackie's job to slow David down on his way to work so an adjustment can be made at work. When that slowdown doesn't happen, David winds up meeting Elise again and his path gets out of control.

The man in charge or the Chairman or God or whatever, doesn't want David and Elise together; it's not part of David's life plan which may or may not involve the Presidency. Should David choose to continue pursuing Elise he will be lobotomized and the process will begin all over again, just with someone other than David.

Unfortunately, David's attraction to Elise is more powerful than the threat to becoming President or potential frontal lobe dismemberment. He chases her down and when one of the adjusters decides to help him out, plans begin to diverge toward chaos.

The ideas in “The Adjustment Bureau” are interesting but they are not all that well explored. The film is based, not surprisingly, on a short story by Phillip K. Dick which explored the theme of fate versus free will in a more thorough and concise manner in a much shorter amount of time.

Writer-director George Nolfi appreciates the ideas of Dick's story but his movie doesn't really explore the themes. Instead, we get a lot of chase scenes and scenes between Matt Damon and Emily Blunt that do well to distract us and then scenes with Damon and Anthony Mackie that remind us that the movie isn't very good.

Nothing against Mackie, it's not his fault that his character is more functionary than character. The same goes for John Slattery and Terrence Stamp who don't so much have character arcs as spots they have to hit in order to throw a wrench in Damon's plans. That wouldn't be so bad if they at least had interesting things to say, maybe if they were funny or brought any real energy to their work. 

But no, these adjuster characters have few emotions beyond being tired from their ungodly workload; there are several billion people with paths to adjust. Their dialogue is mostly expository with Mackie coming off, at times, like he has one of those videogame bubbles over his head in order to illustrate the instructions Damon must have for his next move in the game. 

Now, it sounds like I hated “The Adjustment Bureau” but I don't. Despite the major plot issues I walked out of “The Adjustment Bureau” smiling thanks to stars Matt Damon and Emily Blunt. Damon is at his charismatic best investing David Norris with the oily charm of a politician and the ability to convert genuinely into an average guy. 

When Damon is opposite the beautiful Ms. Blunt his eyes light and the whole movie seems to perk up. Emily Blunt has that essential quality of a star ingenue; beauty combined with that something behind the eyes that holds an audience in rapt attention to whatever she is trying to communicate. These two brilliant people together are irresistible and when the rest of the plot gets out of their way, it works. 

Is that really enough to recommend “The Adjustment Bureau?” Well, for me it is. It's hard to say whether this appeal will be there for all audiences; fair to guess that many people will be so disappointed with the failed sci-fi plot that they can't like the movie. For me, Damon and Blunt are worth the price of a ticket and in the future, easily worth a look at the Redbox.

Movie Review: Take Me Home Tonight

Take Me Home Tonight (2011)

Directed by Michael Dowse 

Written by Jackie Filgo, Jeff Filgo 

Starring Topher Grace, Anna Faris, Teresa Palmer, Dan Fogler 

Release Date March 4th, 2011 

Published March 3rd, 2011 

Nostalgia is a great selling point; so long as the seller knows truly what is being sold. You are essentially selling memories back to those who had them. You are selling familiarity and the comfort of things remembered. The makers of “Take Me Home Tonight” are aware of what they are selling and the pitch is funny enough that you won't regret buying it. 

Topher Grace is the star of “Take Me Home Tonight” as confused underachiever, Matt Franklin. Sure, Matt graduated from M.I.T but he's now back home in California and working at Suncoast Video at the mall. Matt has no idea what to do with the rest of his life but his day takes shape when into his store walks his high school crush, Tori Fredericking (Teresa Palmer.) 

She is attending an annual party being thrown by Matt's twin sister Wendy (Anna Faris) and her jerk boyfriend Kyle (Chris Pratt), a party Matt has always skipped. He will be attending this year however because tonight he will finally ask for Tori's number. Along for the ride will be Matt's only friend Barry (Dan Fogler) who skipped college but is intent on getting the experience of college back in a single night. 

It's an epic night with fights and drugs and sex and all kinds of classic 80's music from the title song, courtesy of Eddie Money, to The Safety Dance, to INXS and even a breakdancing scene. I think I heard a little Duran Duran in there as well; you can't have an 80's set movie without Duran Duran can you? 

Continuity nerds may want to skip “Take Me Home Tonight” as there are plenty of anachronisms to catalog but for those who don't know what year a particular song was released or when a particular TV show debuted, you should be able to focus on the more charming elements of this warm bit of Nostalgia.

Of all of the cast members on “That 70's Show,” another warm bit of nostalgia, Topher Grace has always been my favorite. Grace has an every guy quality, a nebbishy charm, that makes him more relatable than Ashton or Danny Masterson and the rest who all seemed to work very hard at appearing cool. 

Grace did yeoman's work on “That 70's Show” demonstrating how ‘trying’ to be cool is a futile effort. Called upon to continually sacrifice his dignity, Grace did so with a genuine comic flair. He has brought that same genuine quality to his film work, though few have noticed, his movies like “Win a Date With Tad Hamilton,” “In Good Company” and “P.S” have been almost universally ignored. 

Box office success however is not the measure of a good performer and Grace shows in “Take Me Home Tonight” why he is so damn likable, he works harder at it than most do. Grace is funny; he has a good instinct for the laugh. He's handsome in a non-threatening way, i.e. you could leave your girlfriend alone in a room with him without worry. 

It all adds up in “Take Me Home Tonight” to a lead character who is easy to like and easy to root for and it's shocking when you realize how many movies fail at creating that character. On the weekend “Take Me Home Tonight” hits theaters so does a movie called “Beastly” where not one thoughtful, interesting or even modestly likable character emerges. 

See “Take Me Home Tonight” for that warm, nostalgic feeling it offers and for Topher Grace, a funny guy who deserves a better box office fate than some of his former co-stars who have seen so much unearned adulation and star-power despite having a lesser resume.

Movie Review: Beastly

Beastly (2011) 

Directed by Daniel Barnz 

Written by Daniel Barnz 

Starring Alex Pettyfer, Vanessa Hudgens, Mary Kate Olson, Neil Patrick Harris, Dakota Johnson

Release Date March 4th, 2011 

Published March 3rd, 2011 

Take the legendary French faery tale “Beauty and the Beast” and cross it with the elegant and joyous Disney cartoon and Jean Cocteau's artist's rendering of the story from 1946 and then throw all of it in the trash save for the very barest bones of the original premise and you find “Beastly,” a dreary rendering of a 2007 novel that was already a shallow recreation of what came before.

”Beastly” stars Alex Pettyfer as Kyle an ugly on the inside Big Man on Campus who tells anyone who will listen how easy life is when you are incredibly good looking. He's ‘Zoolander’ without the irony and dumber. Kyle is cursed by Kendra (Mary Kate Olson), a witch, who sentences Kyle to magically become as ugly on the outside as he is inside.

Suddenly, Kyle has scars all over his head and weird tattoos that cohere to the seasons as they pass. Kyle has one year from the beginning of his curse to find a woman who will love him despite his hideousness.  The top candidate for this gig is Lindy (Vanessa Hudgens), a not so popular but pretty girl who cares about the environment.

How Lindy comes to live in Kyle's posh riverside digs, paid for by his news anchor daddy (Peter Krause), is one of a litany of contrivances in “Beastly.” Briefly, Kyle becomes a stalker Batman who rescues Lindy from drug dealers and saves her druggie dad from a murder rap. The filmmakers craft this scenario with a deathly seriousness that only underlines how over the top nutty it all is.

Then there is Kyle and Lindy's eventual romance which happens as they spend several months with Kyle's tutor, played by Neil Patrick Harris as a blind man, studying one single poem. Now, to be fair, with the amount of depth given to these two characters one cannot be surprised that it would take them several months to read a single poem but one would think they would eventually move on to the meanings and themes at least.

Now, no one wants to watch these two pretty folks learn anything; we want to watch them fall in love. And what a treat that is as after their months of poem reading, Kyle and Lindy do fall in love but her daddy gets in the way leaving Kyle only days to get her to say 'I love you.’ This leads to the film's next bizarre contrivance called 'why doesn't dorko just answer his stupid phone instead of waiting to confess his love at the last minute of the last day.' But that is a little too spoilery, so I won't go into it.

”Beastly” is a serious bit of foolishness, a post-ironic love story that begs for a little knowing wink and someone other than Neil Patrick Harris to puncture the pompous sincerity on display. Nothing against Mr. Harris who has the film's only sense of humor but he is merely playing his ‘How I Met Your Mother’ character as a blind guy. It's a lazy performance but then Harris is likely the only one who saw the writing on the wall and figured 'why bother with my best effort.'

Alex Pettyfer sure is pretty and with “Beastly” and last month's “I Am Number 4” Hollywood seems dedicated to making him happen. That's lucky for Mr. Pettyfer because if Hollywood were merit based rather than 'look at me' based he might be struggling for a TV pilot right now. Instead I am sure Mr. Pettyfer is readying some sort of summer or fall picture that will once again show off his shirtlessness.

In fairness to Alex Pettyfer, Hollywood did the same thing to Johnny Depp and Heath Ledger and both reacted by going into their heads, rebelling against the system and finding depths that no one expected of them. Mr. Ledger's sad fate aside, Mr. Pettyfer still has a chance to rebel against the image makers and craft his own path to real stardom.

Movie Review: Battle Los Angeles

Battle Los Angeles (2011) 

Directed by Jonathan Liebesman

Written by Chris Bertolini 

Starring Aaron Eckhardt, Ramon Rodriguez, Michelle Rodriguez, Bridget Moynihan 

Release Date March 11th, 2011 

Published March 10th, 2011 

The sci-fi action flick "Battle: Los Angeles" has me quite torn. On the one hand, it is a brutal exercise in poor filmmaking techniques and terrible writing. On the other hand, the chaotic intensity of "Battle: Los Angeles" builds to a surprisingly rousing conclusion that any red blooded American can only cheer for.

Aaron Eckhardt stars in "Battle: Los Angeles" as Master Sgt. Michael Nantz, a 20 year Marine veteran who has just filed his retirement papers. Sgt. Nantz is plotting life after the marines when a meteor shower begins impacting off the coast of Santa Monica. Unfortunately, these are not meteors but rather alien beings intent on war.

With forces stretched thin Nantz joins a unit led by the much younger and very green, Lt. William Martinez (Ramon Rodriguez). The rest of the unit is populated with war movie stereotypes much older than the actors playing them and is more notable for its PC multiculturalism than for any one of the performances. However, Michelle Rodriguez joins the film late and offers a dash of tough chick vitality.

The unit is tasked with rescuing civilians trapped at a Santa Monica police station. The civilians include a veterinarian played Bridget Moynihan and a father (Michael Pena) protecting his son. Two other children are present as well though the film does a poor job of mentioning who they are or why they are present.

The task at hand for the unit is laid out like a videogame and, as shot by director Jonathan Liebesman (Darkness Falls), it feels a lot like a first person shooter game. The camera whips about as if it were being controlled by a caffeine addled gamer preventing the audience from gaining any perspective on the action at hand. Audience members prone to motion sickness might want to bring medication.

The characters are mostly forgettable; the dialogue is filled with atrocious cliches and malapropisms. The film style is so hectic in "Battle: Los Angeles" that you really don't know what's happening from one scene to the next. So, you're probably wondering: What is good about "Battle Los Angeles?"

Director Jonathan Liebesman makes up for many of the film deficiencies by establishing an intensely chaotic tone that despite awful dialogue and by the numbers characters can be quite compelling. The film's final act in which Eckhardt leads a ragtag crew back into action to take out an alien outpost that controls deadly, unmanned alien drones builds to a rousing finish.

The ending takes advantage, for better or worse, of our inclination toward patriotism. If you cannot be moved by our troops at their bravest readying for the biggest battle the country has ever seen, even if it is against fake aliens, then you are definitely not the audience for "Battle: Los Angeles" which doesn't literally wave the American flag but definitely salutes.

Hectic and at times completely awful, "Battle: Los Angeles" gains its appeal from star Aaron Eckhardt who commits fully to the premise and sells you on his guts alone. He believes in the action around him and because of him you do to, sort of. Most of the movie is pretty terrible but when Eckhardt leads the final battle you will work hard not to be moved to cheer, a little.

Movie Review Red Riding Hood

Red Riding Hood (2011)

Directed by Catherine Hardwicke 

Written by David Leslie Johnson 

Starring Amanda Seyfried, Max Irons, Gary Oldman, Billy Burke, Julie Christie 

Release Date March 11th, 2011 

Published March 10th, 2011 

Amanda Seyfried has yet to find the right movie for her particular talents. Seyfried mixes girl next door good looks, those amazing flying saucer-esque eyes, and inviting sensuality into one precocious package. She would be a dream come true in a Bertolucci movie or as captured by Antonioni's loving lens. Sadly, being a young American actress means offering her services for schlock such as "Dear John," ``Letters to Juliet," and her latest "Red Riding Hood."

Amanda Seyfried stars in "Red Riding Hood" as Valerie, the virginal daughter of a wood cutter (Billy Burke, Bella's dad from Twilight) who is promised in marriage by her mother, Suzette (Virginia Madsen) to Henry (Max Irons) the son of a wealthy family friend.

Valerie however, is in love with Peter (Shiloh Fernandez) and intends to run away with him. Their plans are thwarted sadly when Valerie's sister is murdered by a werewolf. Now, Father Solomon (Gary Oldman) is coming to the village to hunt the wolf and a dark secret Valerie did not know she carried will place her in the wolf's path.

"Red Riding Hood" was directed by Catherine Hardwicke, a talented director who has faltered under the weight of big budgets and special effects. Hardwicke is exceptionally talented in crafting warm and intimate scenes, as she demonstrated in her wonderful coming of age film "Thirteen" and in the quiet moments of her hit "Twilight."

Unfortunately, special effects simply are not Catherine Hardwicke's forte. The CGI in "Red Riding Hood," used to render the wolf and portions of the mid-centuries village, is amateurish in comparison to other CGI heavy films including such stinkers as "The Wolfman" and "Underworld: Evolution."

The Gothic air that Hardwicke attempts to bring to "Red Riding Hood" comes off campy rather than mysterious or forbidding. Attempts to mix period cliches with modern pop culture savvy feel forced and trite. What works is when Hardwicke focuses on smaller, intimate moments that take advantage of star Amanda Seyfried's innate eroticism.

The climax of "Red Riding Hood" is laughable as the filmmakers settle the allegedly mysterious identity of the werewolf by choosing a character at random. So indiscriminate is the choice of the identity of the werewolf that it is fair to wonder if the filmmakers knew the choice before they filmed it.

"Red Riding Hood" is a mess of feeble CGI and market tested pop culture. Though star Amanda Seyfried still manages to be radiant and alluring, the film is all Gothic bluster and teen targeted kitsch. Fans of Ms. Seyfried would be better served waiting for her next film, teaming with visionary director Andrew Niccol called "Now." That film hits theaters ..October 11th 2011.

Movie Review Paul

Paul (2011) 

Directed by Greg Mottola 

Written by Simon Pegg, Nick Frost

Starring Simon Pegg, Nick Frost, Seth Rogen, Jason Bateman, Kristen Wiig, Bill Hader 

Release Date March 18th, 2011

March 17th, 2011 

"Paul" is the "Citizen Kane" of nerd humor, the movie all other nerd movies will be compared to for years to come. "Paul" stars beloved geeks (I use the term Geeks with love) Simon Pegg and Nick Frost as a pair of sci-fi loving Brits on holiday at Comic-Con who decide to road trip to their favorite alien hot spots. Along the way they meet a real alien named Paul (Seth Rogan) who takes them on an exciting and very funny adventure.

Paul was directed by Greg Mottola whose nerd credentials include "Superbad" and the cult romance "Adventureland." Mottola infuses "Paul" with unexpected heart and sensitivity that coexists surprisingly well with uproarious R-rated gags. The script comes from stars Simon Pegg and Nick Frost whose geek humor knowledge is seemingly limitless. You will have to see "Paul" twice to capture all of the nerd references packed tightly into the 104 minute runtime.

The geek chic extends to the supporting cast including Jason Bateman from the cult TV series "Arrested Development," Joe Lo Truglio from the cult comedy troupe "The State" and Kristen Wiig and Bill Hader who bring SNL's loyal fan base to the film. Finally, "Paul" ends with a cameo that the trailer spoils but I will not. Let's just call it a shocking and gory appearance by a geek goddess and leave it at that.

"Paul" is an uproarious R-rated comedy that manages to be funny and sweet without lapsing into cloying or pandering. Much of the film's surprising maturity comes from the voice of Seth Rogen who brings his typical foul mouth shtick to the film but also a newfound warmth and tenderness to his voice. Rogen offers a reassuring vocal performance that grounds "Paul" within its wacky alien universe of geek references and broad physical humor.

Paul is one of the funniest movies you will see in 2011, and even though it is early in the year, it will remain one of the funniest movies of 2011. "Paul" is a brilliantly funny sci-fi comedy that never fails to be outlandish and raunchy and sweet at once. Simon Pegg, Nick Frost and the voice of Seth Rogen are a terrific comic trio and with all of the geek cred they bring to the film you have the makings of a cult classic to which all other nerd movies will be compared.

Movie Review Win Win

Win Win (2011) 

Directed by Tom McCarthy 

Written by Tom McCarthy

Starring Paul Giamatti, Burt Young, Amy Ryan, Bobby Cannavale 

Release Date March 18th, 2011 

Published March 17th, 2011 

Mike Flaherty (Paul Giamatti) is struggling. His law practice is not making any money and the stress has begun to manifest itself in breathless panic attacks that mirror heart attack symptoms. Mike needs money and when he stumbles across an opportunity to make some money through an ethical loophole with one of his clients (Burt Young) he takes it.

Since "Win Win" is a movie we know that Mike's decision will have very particular consequences or it wouldn't be in the story. What writer-director Thomas McCarthy creates in order to arrive at those consequences and the wealth of emotions involved in when and how Mike's ethical lapse is revealed is the hook of "Win Win," a small human story about a good man whose flaws cannot mask his true nature.

Paul Giamatti is spectacularly well cast as Mike Flaherty. His unique face communicates worry and sadness while his clipped line delivery makes him sound desperate and close to out of breath even when he's in a relaxed moment. Giamatti's nervous energy has been his calling card since his breakthrough performance in Howard Stern's "Private Parts" through his rise to stardom in "Sideways."

Alex Shaffer plays Kyle in "Win Win." Kyle is the main complication to Mike's money making scheme. Having run away from home and being only 16 years old, Mike and his wife Jackie (Amy Ryan) are forced to take Kyle in while they sort out the situation with his mother and his Alzheimer's afflicted grandfather. The connections between these characters are something I want you to discover by seeing the movie.

The movie poster shows Kyle in wrestling gear sitting next to Mike. Wrestling appears in Win Win as both literal, Mike coaches a High School wrestling team and as a clever undercurrent to the main story as Mike wrestles with his conscience over his scheme, and, more importantly, about how not to get caught while Kyle wrestles with his past including his recovering drug addict mother (Melanie Lynskey) who also has a connection to Mike's scheme.

Writer-director Thomas McCarthy has an eye for small human stories. He was the writer and director of "The Station Agent," a small highly observant and smart picture about unique characters who form an odd family. McCarthy then directed "The Visitor," another film about unlikely family ties, this time an older white college professor and a young, immigrant African man and wife.

McCarthy approaches these stories with compassion and a thoughtful curiosity about how his characters live from day to day and how they interact with changing circumstances that are mundane by movie standards but are things real people are experiencing everyday. "Win Win," like "The Station Agent" and "The Visitor," is a warm, kind and modestly funny movie that compels you with great characters who reflect lives you can relate to, sympathize with and still be entertained by.

Movie Review Push

Push (2009) 

Directed by Paul McGuigan

Written by David Bourla 

Starring Chris Evans, Dakota Fanning, Camilla Belle, Ming Na, Cliff Curtis 

Release Date February 6th, 2009

Published February 5th, 2009 

Director Paul McGuigan directed the clever, funny, con-man comedy Lucky Number Slevin. It was his first feature and it should have portended great things for his career. Sadly for his Slevin follow up McGuigan chose Push, a terribly goofy comic book movie about psychic superheroes and a government conspiracy. Where Slevin was endlessly inventive, Push is predictable and sloppy.

What a shame.

Handsomely mild actor Chris Evans stars in Push as Nick a man on the run since his father was hunted down and murdered by a mysterious  government entity. Since then Nick has lived off the grid in Japan hoping to keep a low enough profile to be left alone. That all changes when Nick is discovered by a teenage psychic named Cassie (Dakota Fanning) who has had a vision about him and her and their deaths.

On the bright side, she's also had a vision about a young woman named Kira (Camilla Belle) who may be able to save them. Kira is the only person ever to escape from the shadowy government forces chasing Nick and Cassie and if they find her she could be the key to bringing the conspiracy down. Add in a helpful psychic con man (Cliff Curtis) and another more powerful psychic hiding out as a fake psychic (Ming Na) and you have a misfit team ready for battle.

The premise of Push plays not at all unlike the TV series Heroes. Both are about shady conspiracy, hunting down people with special abilities and wild special effects. Both are also wildly divergent in quality, Heroes can vary from week to week with good episodes and not so good ones. Push has one chance to work and fails.

I have been a little dismissive of the story potential of Push. There is certainly nothing wrong with a comic book style movie about superheroes. The key is making those heroes compelling and their journey interesting beyond their powers. Director McGuigan and screenwriter David Bourla fail this by vaguely defining the powers and muddying the government conspiracy premise.

Not that a cleaner narrative might have made much of a difference. The super powers on display, people pushing other people with their minds or controlling objects with their minds or seeing the future, simply are not all that interesting. The best superheroes have powers that comment on their personality. The abilities reflect the man (or less often the woman) and we learn something about them through their uniqueness.

No such comment or reflection emerges from Push. Instead we have a series of dull, uninspired effects scenes.

I expected much more from Director Paul McGuigan. Lucky Number Slevin was the kind of debut that promises so much more from a director's future. It was a far from perfect movie but a clever, funny, imaginative film. Push is nearly the complete opposite. Derivative and uninspired, Push is disappointing beyond Director Paul McGuigan. It's disappointing to have to have sat through such a lacking effort.

Movie Review Mr. Brooks

Mr. Brooks (2007) 

Directed by Bruce A. Evans 

Written by Bruce A. Evans, Raynold Gideon 

Starring Kevin Costner, Demi Moore, Dane Cook, William Hurt, Marg Helgenberger

Release Date June 1st, 2007 

Published May 31st, 2007

The career of Kevin Costner has had many ups and downs. He has been one of the biggest stars in the world and People Magazine's sexiest man alive. He's also been the most reviled man in Hollywood and a grand punch line after his triple failures, Waterworld, The Postman and Wyatt Earp. He has recently tried to reinvent himself as a character actor and a comeback kid, a perception fed by well received performances in The Upside of Anger and Open Range.

Now however, as he tries to reclaim leading man status; Costner is once again flailing. First, there was the disastrous Rumor Has It, a pseudo sequel to The Graduate with Costner as a middle aged Ben Braddock. Now comes Mr. Brooks a disaster of a different kind, one that isn't really Costner's fault.

"The Hunger has returned to Mr. Brooks, it never really left"

That is the opening title card to the new thriller Mr. Brooks, a title card that thrusts us into the midst of the madness of a man named Earl Brooks (Kevin Costner). Earl is a proud father, a loyal husband and a respected businessman who runs a major box company. However, in his spare time he is the thumbprint killer, a maniac who likes to pose his victims after killing them and then get off over the photos he takes.

He has been at this for years and for years has been careful to not get caught. He even managed to stop killing for 2 whole years with the help of  weekly A.A meetings, though alcohol never played a part in his compulsion. Then the hunger returned and he selected a pair of victims. Unfortunately, he wasn't as careful as he used to be. He left the curtains open and across the street, an amateur cameraman saw him commit murder.

Luckily for Mr. Brooks the cameraman, call him Mr. Smith (Dane Cook), is a sick puppy like himself. Smith doesn't want to turn Brooks over to the cops, rather he wants to learn from Mr. Brooks, he wants to kill. Thus sets up an uncomfortable partnership between the steely, calculating Mr. Brooks and the unnerved novice Mr. Smith.

That is just one of several plots running concurrently in this rather misguided take on the Dr. Jekyll, Mr Hyde mythos. Also jammed into this plot is a backstory and sub-storyline for Demi Moore as the cop investigating the thumbprint killer and another different killer and a credulity stretching plot for Danielle Panabaker as Mr. Brooks' daughter who may have inherited the serial killer gene.

A glance at director Bruce A. Evans' resume offers a few clues as to why Mr. Brooks  turned out so goofy. Evans wrote the lauded screenplays for epics like Cutthroat Island, Jungle 2 Jungle and Kuffs, a Christian Slater guilty pleasure that he also directed. Curiously, Evans hasn't directed since Kuffs. Maybe he was waiting for something that could match the goofball pleasures and squirm inducing discomfort of that early nineties crime comedy.

Mr. Brooks is certainly goofy but it's not supposed to be. It's intended to be a thriller but thrills are in short supply compared to the unintentional laughter induced by some of the bizarre choices made. There are more than a few moments of unintended humor such as watching comic Dane Cook attempt to appear credible as an actor opposite the veteran Costner. The disdainful glare of Costner's Mr. Brooks towards Cook's Mr. Smith plays like Costner's silent commentary on his co-star.

Despite the loopy plots and unintentional humor there are a few honest pleasures in Mr. Brooks, not least of which is the chemistry between Kevin Costner and William Hurt. These two veteran actors are so in sync and so on the money that you hate the movie for the constant interruptions of their interplay. Taking time out for Demi Moore's lame backstory and a search for another serial killer aside from Mr. Brooks and the daughter's story and Dane Cook's story all serve to upstage the film's one and only asset, the Costner-Hurt duo.

In the few moments that Costner and Hurt get to play we actually get to dig into Mr. Brooks' character and find out how he ticks and why he does what he does. The potential is there for a very unique take on the classic serial killer picture, a movie from the killer's perspective. Few killers are as uniquely villainous as Mr. Brooks, the upstanding businessman and father who happens to be a serial killer.

What a waste, Mr. Brooks had all sorts of potential and wasted it all on dopey, distracting subplots. Director and co-writer Bruce A. Evans is not a bad director really, just inexperienced with a seeming lack of confidence. Evans lacked the courage to jettison what was clearly not working and focus things where they were working, with Kevin Costner and William Hurt riffing and roaring.

Oh, what might have been.

Movie Review: 28 Days Later

28 Days Later (2003) 

Directed by Danny Boyle

Written by Alex Garland 

Starring Cillian Murphy, Noah Huntley, Naomie Harris, Brendan Gleeson, Christopher Eccleston

Release Date June 27th, 2003 

In 2003, while the masses sought out mindless entertainment real film fans were eagerly anticipating the release of a much buzzed about British horror film that portended the end of the world. Oh yeah and it's got zombies. 28 Days Later, from Trainspotting auteur Danny Boyle, was released some 6 months earlier  worldwide, creating an anticipation among American horror and indie film fans. When 28 Days Later finally reached the States, it had not lost any of the buzz. 

The Plot

In a scenario that likely made Republicans smile, a group of animal activists break into a research facility and release a group of monkeys who they believe are being abused. Unfortunately, the monkeys happen to be infected with a disease that the doctors call the rage virus. The infection is passed by blood and when the monkey bites a human, it takes little more than 30 seconds before that person becomes a mindless flesh-eating zombie. The zombies can be killed like any normal human being but they are also excessively quick and strong.

Within 28 days, the virus has spread throughout the whole of Britain. Only a few lucky people remain uninfected. One of the uninfected is Jim (Cillian Murphy) who has just awakened from a coma to find the hospital entirely empty. He then finds the neighborhood around the hospital empty, then finally all of London. That is until he stumbles into a church filled with zombies.

Jim escapes with the aid of a pair of survivors, Mark (Noah Huntley) and Selena (Naomie Harris). They give Jim the 411 on what has happened since his coma and then accompany Jim to his parent's home where he finds his parents dead. It's not long before the zombies arrive there and Mark is killed by Selena after he is bitten. As she has explains to Jim, if someone is infected you have only seconds to kill them before they turn. She won't hesitate to kill Jim if the same happens to him.

The two then venture out to find new shelter and stumble upon a father and daughter (Brenden Gleeson and Megan Burns) who are hiding out in what remains of their apartment building. Though they have had little to no interaction with the outside world, they have heard what they believe is a recorded message on the radio about some military officers who may have a cure for the virus. Whether that is true or not, the soldiers at least offer protection from the zombies and that is good enough to get them on the road. Once arriving at the military base, they find a ramshackle crew who is no more well prepared than they are.

When 28 Days Later arrived in theaters in 2003, it arrived in the wake of September 11th, 2001. It arrived in America in a moment of great panic, fear, and paranoia. Newspapers and TV broadcasts stoked the flames with stories about Anthrax in the mail, Monkeypox potentially becoming airborne, and the looming specter of terrorism, violent, biological, or otherwise. Thus, a movie about a fast spreading virus leaving city streets littered with bodies and the detritus of abandon, was one that felt immediate and relevant. Without intending to, director Danny Boyle had tapped the zeitgeist in a most urgent fashion. 

Though the zombie thing gives the film a far-fetched feeling, the grave fears of terrorism and disaster  comes in Boyle's camerawork that has a mind’s eye feeling to it. It's unsettling the way in which the camera, under the guidance of future Academy Award winner Anthony Dod Mantle, becomes like a dream from your own mind. The washed out look of 28 Days Later feels like it comes from your subconscious, formed by your own fears and anxiety the state of the world. 

There is no camp in 28 Days Later, nothing that breaks the immersion. Danny Boyle's incredible vision is unrelenting. Where other horror films tend to undercut the horror with a sense of bleak humor, Danny Boyle shows no interest in letting the audience get comfortable or take a breath. The atmosphere of 28 Days Later is oppressive and all encompassing until it reaches the ending. Only once the credits have begun to roll are we in the audience able to relieve the tension. A cleansing breath finally comes once the lights began to come up but, for me, the visceral effect of 28 Days Later lasted until the following day when I was finally able to shake it from my subconscious. That's just how effective 28 Days Later is. Even today, 22 years later, the experience of 28 Days Later on the big screen lingers in my mind, drawing me back to that anxious, post 9/11 world. 

Movie Review: Yesterday

Yesterday (2019) 

Directed by Danny Boyle 

Written by Richard Curtis 

Starring Himesh Patel, Lily James, Joel Fry, Ed Sheeran, Kate McKinnon 

Release Date June 28th, 2019 

Published June 27th, 2019

Yesterday was a complete delight. Directed by the ingenious Danny Boyle, Academy Award winner for Slumdog Millionaire, and Love, Actually writer-director Richard Curtis, Yesterday is charming, romantic, and quite funny. The acting is wonderful as well with a core duo of newcomer Hamish Patel and Lily James providing romantic and friendly chemistry that leaps off of the screen. All of that, and some of the greatest music of all time and Yesterday becomes irresistible. 

Jack Malik (Patel) has spent 10 years trying to make his music industry dreams come true with no success, but with his trusted friend and manager Ellie (James) always at his side. Despite Ellie’s constant support, Jack finally appears ready to give up his dream and return to teaching when something dramatic happens. On his way home from his last gig, Jack gets in an accident just as all of the electricity on the planet goes out for 12 seconds. 

When Jack wakes up in the hospital the following day, minus his front teeth, he makes a reference to The Beatles that Ellie dismisses in unusual fashion. Later, after Ellie gives Jack a guitar to replace the one he lost in the accident, Jack goes to play “Yesterday” by The Beatles and his friends react as if they have never heard the song before. A confused Jack returns home in a rush and begins googling The Beatles only to find that they no longer exist in any way. 

Apparently being the only person on the planet who remembers The Beatles songs, Jack decides to start performing Beatles songs from memory, not without a serious struggle, as if he had written them. Jack finds success in a fashion not unlike the Fab Four, with a brief struggle and then a massive breakout, all while Jack wrestles with his conscience over the decision to capitalize off of someone else's art and his relationship with Ellie which he has misjudged for the past 20 years. 

Director Danny Boyle is a directorial chameleon, leaping from genre to genre, country to country and masterwork to mediocrity. Yesterday, thankfully, is in the masterwork category. While the movie is minor in social relevance, unlike his Steve Jobs or Slumdog Millionaire, it is masterful as a work of genre. Yesterday is gloriously, ridiculously, heart on its sleeve romantic in ways that modern Hollywood has struggled to be for decades. 

Much of the credit, of course, goes to screenwriter Richard Curtis, who has been at the forefront of the romance genre since the 90’s and the release of his Four Weddings and a Funeral. Curtis is a genius at giving a unique spin to the romantic cliches that are at the heart of the romance genre dating back to the early days of sound in film. What makes Yesterday even more unique is Curtis teaming with a visual master like Danny Boyle who places Curtis’s big romantic ideas into a wonderfully visual, eye-catching package. 

Of course, both Boyle and Curtis are helped by the fact that they have somehow secured the chance to use some of the greatest music of all time to tell their story. It’s famously not easy to get the rights to use the music of The Beatles in a project but the team of Boyle and Curtis were apparently enough to get this movie a break. Of course, I am sure, $10 million dollars in rights fees also helped their case. 

The music in Yesterday isn’t used as you might think. You might assume that Jack deploys the songs in a specific fashion related to his place within the story. Instead, the movie subverts expectations by having Jack simply record Beatles songs in an almost random order, just as he is able to remember them. It’s a clever approach that allows the story to exist outside of The Beatles. Was this done in case the producers could not get the rights to The Beatles and they acted accordingly in building the story? Perhaps, but the approach works nevertheless. 

The supporting cast of Yesterday is exceptionally well chosen. Kate McKinnon of Saturday Night Live fame plays Jack’s new, high powered manager who treats him like dirt even as she is giving him worldwide fame. McKinnon’s oddball dialogue which combines radical honesty with a sociopathic zeal, rarely fails to get a laugh in Yesterday. It’s a brilliant comic performance. McKinnon is backed up by pop star Ed Sheeran who sheds all pop star ego to play himself as a fan of Jack who is willing to compare himself to Salieri to Jack’s Amadeus in one particularly great scene. 

Yesterday, as I said at the start, is a complete delight. It’s a delight for any audience that gives it a chance but it is a special treat for fans of The Beatles. Yesterday is a love letter to The Beatles that balances idolatry and fandom without becoming overly precious. Yes, the film is entirely uncritical of The Beatles but it felt to me like a genuine appreciation and not overly worshipful. The Beatles are only part of this story and not the entirety of it. 

The heart of Yesterday is the romance between Jack and Ellie and the struggle to escape preconceived notions of romance and friendship. There is a warmth and complexity to Jack and Ellie’s relationship that I bought into simply because I loved these two actors so very much. Hamish Patel and Lily James are just wonderful together and I fully believed in their choices, from Jack being blind to Ellie’s feelings to her heartache and his revelation. It’s a simple but well portrayed arc and I think everyone who loves a good love story will appreciate it as much as I did. 

I was a little worried by the trailer for the film that Yesterday would simply be a movie with a clever premise and little more. What a wonderful thing to have all of my worries dashed in the first few scenes and then to grow more and more comfortably immersed in this movie as it unfolded. Yesterday invites you in and if you are open to it, especially if you love this music, and you simply fall in love with it. Yesterday is just so darn charming.

Movie Review Sunshine

Sunshine (2007)

Directed by Danny Boyle

Written by Alex Garland 

Starring Cillian Murphy, Rose Byrne, Cliff Curtis, Chris Evans, Troy Garity. Michelle Yeoh

Release Date July 20th, 2007

Published July 19th, 2007

Director Danny Boyle hasn't always been my favorite director. I am one of the rare critics who found Trainspotting tedious. 28 Days Later was an undeniably impressive move into the horror genre. But with the release of his minimalist family drama Millions, I joined the Danny Boyle fan club. That was such a wonderfully small film with such grand ambitions that it burst from the screen.

Now, with his latest film Sunshine, Boyle once again shows that there is no genre limitation to his work. Sunshine is an intellectual dissection of morals, instincts and the basics of human nature all couched in a sci fi landscape with a dash of old fashioned horror movie tossed in for good measure. It's great idea that unfortunately gets lost in space.

Sunshine stars Cillian Murphy as science officer named Capa. A keep his own council type, Capa is the outcast of an international space flight crew that includes Captain Kaneda (Hiroyuki Sanada), Life support officer Corazon (Michelle Yeoh), Navigator Trey (Benedict Wong), chief mechanic Mace (Chris Evans), medical officer Searle (Cliff Curtis) and pilot Cassie (Rose Byrne.

This is the crew of Icarus 2, a crew charged with the modest task of saving the world. It's 2057 and the sun is dying. Soon the earth will be pitched into a permanent, lightless winter and all life will quickly die. The Icarus 2 project's goal is to kickstart the sun by precisely dropping a nuclear weapon, the size of Manhattan, into the center of the sun.

This is the earth's last best hope after the first Icarus project failed and was never heard from again. That is until Icarus 1 is heard from by Icarus 2. As the crew moved out of range of earth communications they found another signal in the middle of space. It's a several years old distress call from Icarus 1. Now the crew must decide whether to continue the mission as planned or to rendezvous with Icarus 1 to check for survivors.

The side trip would be beneficial to Icarus 2 which could take on a second nuclear payload and thus two chances to save the world. Also, Icarus 2 has suffered some damage on the way, so scavenging what they can from Icarus 1 could be a big help if the crew somehow manages a return flight home.

That is the surface area of Sunshine, a deep and disturbing idea from the fluid minds of the 28 Days Later team of director Danny Boyle and writer Alex Garland. Beneath the surface of this homage to Kubrick's 2001, is a terrific study in character and the effects of isolation on the brain. With a large and capable ensemble we witness unique human dynamics emerge and an intriguing study of people in confined spaces under intense pressure.

Interesting idea, but where do does the movie go from there? For Boyle and Garland the exercise in human endurance unfortunately devolves into a slasher plot involving the survivors of the original mission. Up until that plot emerges, and in minor moments thereafter, there are a number of really interesting and abstract  ideas in Sunshine.

Danny Boyle is a director highly skilled in crafting tense, character testing situations and filming them with precision. In Sunshine his skills take aim at a terrific ensemble cast and put them through a series of trials and tribulations that are eye catching and intense. Cliff Curtis is a standout as the medical officer who is drawn to the ship's observation deck for searing stares at the surface of the sun.

We don't truly understand his motivations but Searle's odd musings and matter of fact approach to his insane and painful sunlight obsession are quite intriguing. Also good is Michele Yeoh as the life support officer Corazon. In charge of the ship's oxygen garden, Corazon's cabin fever has bonded her to her plants as if they are her children. When an accident destroys most of the garden, it pushes Corazon to unexpected lengths. Her character is unexplored by the end of the second act but there is nevertheless some very fine work from the underrated Ms. Yeoh.

Sadly Rose Byrne, Troy Garrity and Chris Evans are, for the most part, cyphers. Portrayed as delicate, ignorant and determined in that order, each takes that one character trait and is able only to work that. Whether there wasn't enough screen time for each to go deeper in their character or if they just weren't that interesting and thus left on the cutting room floor, is undetermined. My guess would be the latter.

As for star Cillian Murphy, this is another strong performance from this peculiar performer. Murphy's odd physicality and palpable vulnerability give an interesting twist to his characters. These traits work especially well for Murphy when doing genre work as he did as the villain in the thriller Red Eye and as he does here in Sunshine. His uniqueness gives a different context to typical characters in typical movie situations.

Sunshine is an ambitious sci-fi epic that comes up just short of greatness. Bowing to commercial concerns, director Danny Boyle succumbs to the money men and abandons the idea driven elements of Sunshine in favor of 28 Days Later in space. This approach is no doubt more marketable but it's far less satisfying.

That said, there is enough good work, from the cinematography of Alwin Kuchler, to the terrific, for the most part, ensemble cast, to Boyle and Garland's many unfinished ideas, that I can give a partial recommendation to Sunshine.

Movie Review Slumdog Millionaire

Slumdog Millionaire (2009) 

Directed by Danny Boyle 

Written by Simon Beaufoy

Starring Dev Patel, Freida Pinto, Irrfan Khan

Release Date December 25th, 2008 

Published December 24th, 2008 

Danny Boyle has never appealed to me as a director. His Trainspotting and 28 Days Later are such bleak and ugly examinations of humanity that each made me want to vomit. To date, Boyle's work has been little more than flashy, overwrought ugliness set to electronica and punk soundtracks intended to pound you into submission.

Then there was Millions, one of the oddest and most delightful little movies of the last decade. A sweet, sorrowful, hopeful little movie where director Boyle abandoned most of his worst habits in favor of telling a loving compelling story populated by wonderful characters. That film should have gotten the attention that is now being heaped upon Boyle's latest effort Slumdog Millionaire. In essence, Slumdog is the marriage of the sad, ugly kinetic-ism of Boyle's early work and the sweet, smart, thoughtful Millions. The combination yields mixed results.

Slumdog Millionaire tells the story of Jamal who is being assaulted by the police when we meet him. Jamal is accused of cheating on the TV show Who Wants To Be A Millionaire where he is one question away from winning 20 million rupees. His status as a so-called Slumdog, a boy from the slums of Mumbai, has the host of the show and the police wondering if he is cheating.

He isn't. What is happening for Jamal is that the questions somehow all seem to relate back to memories from his life growing up. Whether it's stumbling on a Hindu god after watching his mother brutally murdered or knowing the inventor of the revolver because his brother began carrying one for their protection, each question leads Jamal on a journey through his past, a journey he takes his interrogators on in order to convince them he is legit.

Jamal's motivation for going on the show, surviving the cops, and winning the money, is a girl named Latika (Freida Pinto). He and his older brother Samir took Latika in when they were young orphans. They were separated several times but Jamal would always find her. He found her again just before going on the show and hopes she will be watching and finally come find him.

That is the story of Slumdog Millionaire and it is compelling and romantic. Unfortunately, director Danny Boyle's over-caffeinated, highly stylized handheld camera and propulsive score distract and keep the story at an untenable emotional distance. The images whir by at such a frenetic pace that you are at once bedazzled and bewildered.

It's a neat trick to make a movie with such an astonishing pace. Sadly, the sacrifice is the emotional connection between the audience and these characters. While I was dazzled and propelled and moved to the edge of my seat by the intensity of Slumdog Millionaire, I couldn't find the time to really connect with the characters emotionally.

The style and even the flashback heavy structure of Slumdog Millionaire prevent the characters from standing out amongst the flurry. Things happen so fast that scenes fail to have the impact that I am certain they were intended to have. When the film does slow down for a moment at the end; I was too exhausted to be invested in the moment.

Slumdog Millionaire is a furiously paced, artfully crafted movie that well displays the talents of director Danny Boyle behind the camera. Sadly, those gifts give short shrift to what should be an emotional as well as visceral connection. That means that Slumdog Millionaire is a good movie that should've been, could've been a great movie.

Movie Review Milk

Milk (2008) 

Directed by Gus Van Sant

Written by Dustin Lance Black 

Starring Sean Penn, James Franco, Josh Brolin, Victor Garber, Diego Luna

Release Date November 26th, 2008 

Published November 25th, 2008 

The life of Harvey Milk is an inspiration. The first openly gay elected official in the country was a bold, brave and brilliant man. He was a fighter and a politician and a flawed soul. A movie about his life needs to capture these aspects of Harvey Milk and the Gus Van Sant movie Milk comes up just short. It's not that Milk is poorly made or even that it fails to honor the man. It's just that such an atypical hero deserves something far more than a very typical biopic.

Sean Penn takes on the role of Harvey Milk picking up his life story in the early 1970's when a fully closeted Harvey cruised a young gay man in a New York subway. That young man was Scott Smith (James Franco) and he drew Harvey out of the closet and into the life he had always longed for. The two moved to San Francisco and opened a camera shop in the Castro District. That area of San Francisco is now a famously gay enclave but when Harvey and Scott arrived that wasn't the case. Milk slowly but surely ingratiated himself in the community, he drew people to him and eventually as the community changed with him, he became its leader.

His rise from community organizer to politician was filled with potholes and roadblocks but eventually Harvey was elected to the City Board of Supervisors where an alliance with Mayor George Moscone (Victor Garber) would make history and repeated run-ins with fellow supervisor Dan White (Brolin) would lead to tragedy. To tell the story of Harvey Milk's life Gus Van Sant has Harvey narrate his own story in flashback. As he sits at a table alone in his apartment Sean Penn as Harvey recalls the incidents of his life into a tape recorder. The device frames the film but it's one of many signs of just how typical the movie is.

The flashbacks unfold in predictable fashion recalling all of the well known moments of Harvey's life that shine a positive light on him. Leaving out a few of the less flattering moments, generally celebrating the things that Harvey Milk accomplished in the all too short time he was in public service. There is nothing terribly devastatingly wrong with Milk. It just shouldn't be so typical. This is the same biographical formula applied to every life from Ray Charles to Johnny Cash to any famous person you can think of whose life has been brought to film in the last decade.

The movie suffers from what I like to call Van Sant-itis. This is a malady that affects movies directed by but not written by Gus Van Sant. Movies like Finding Forrester, Good Will Hunting and To Die For are all enjoyable movies but each lacks the director's full engagement. Watch Elephant, Gerry, Last Days or Paranoid Park and you can see a fiercely committed director dedicated to bringing his vision to the screen. There is an almost visceral difference in the directors engagement with his filmmaking in these films, especially when compared to the often soft focused laziness of his non-writing credited films.

Milk is as close as Van Sant has come to committing to another writer's vision, he seems to really care about Dustin Lance Black's work, but as the film goes along you sense the drift in Van Sant's attention. As the movie goes on, after brief early love scenes, the film drifts into conventional biopic mode and rolls to its tragic finish on a wave of typicality. The only truly outstanding thing about Milk is Sean Penn. He embodies Harvey Milk mind, body and soul and his commitment almost overcomes the strict adherence to biographical formula. Penn's performance is as brave and bold as the man he plays but he is hemmed in by the numbers biopic recipe.

Milk is a disappointment only because I was expecting something more from it. The film suffers from building expectations. It suffers from our expectation of something better than your average Hollywood biopic.

Movie Review Mile 22

Mile 22 (2018) 

Directed by Peter Berg 

Written by Lea Carpenter 

Starring Mark Wahlberg. Iko Uwais, Ronda Rousey, John Malkovich

Release Date August 17th, 2018 

Published August 16th, 2018 

Mile 22 is some hot, flaming, garbage as a movie. I’m shocked that such a mess could feature the talent of Peter Berg behind the camera and Mark Wahlberg in front of it. Not that they are no stranger to nonsense, they did make Lone Survivor together, a film that amounted to the Black Knight from Monty Python written as a soldier in Afghanistan, but that film is Die Hard compared to the ludicrous, chaotic, rubbish that is Mile 22.

Mark Wahlberg, sort of stars in Mile 22 as James Silva, a CIA operative. I say 'sort of' because the performance is so unhinged and disconnected that it is hard to say if he is fully aware of what is happening in the movie. Wahlberg seems far more invested in the idea that his character is a troubled super-genius than in the plot which has him leading a team that broke up a Russian spy ring in an American suburb and is now in some foreign locale following up on what they found.

The plot kicks in when Li Noor (Iko Uwais from The Raid franchise), drives right up to the American Embassy and presents evidence that could lead to the discovery of a cache of some deadly poison. However, he won’t give up the evidence, one of those Hollywood encrypted computer disks that even the world’s great hackers can’t hack, (Gah!), until Wahlberg agrees to take him to America and away from the people trying to kill him.

Uwais is a tremendous physical performer and he gets one truly spectacular fight scene that demonstrates that but his casting appears to be little more than a marketing attempt to evoke the worldwide success of The Raid and The Raid 2. Uwais is supposed to be desperate yet duplicitous and yet his blank-eyed stare only ever looks tired when he’s supposed to seem menacing or slightly untrustworthy. He’s checked out in only a slightly different way than Wahlberg it would appear.

Poor Ronda Rousey makes her film debut in Mile 22 and it’s rather embarrassing. Rousey plays Sam, one of Wahlberg’s lieutenants, and while she’s believably a badass, she is cringe inducing when attempting dialogue. Saddled with an expository scene with co-star Lauren Cohan, Rousey mumbles her way through a wince inducing exchange where she seemed about as natural as a mixed martial artist in a mud wrestling competition.

Mile 22 appears to have been edited with an eye toward satisfying absolutely no one. The film is hard to watch at times as Berg and his team slash cut from perspective shots to security camera footage in the most jarring fashion possible. Berg favors odd angles as well and thus the editing combined with the cantilevered angles and too loud soundtrack obscure the action and assault the senses all at once.

I have always disliked Berg’s fantasy approach to supposedly realistic action. His Lone Survivor with Wahlberg a few years ago had a real life story to tell but the violence was so cartoonish it obliterated the real life story. The stars of Lone Survivor may have been real life heroes but Berg’s cartoonish exploitation of their real life struggle rendered those men like animated caricatures, bulletproof and apparently made of rubber and steel rather than flesh and bone.

That same cartoonish violence and amping of the stakes beyond the point of believability is present in Mile 22 as well. Each character in Mile 22 suffers through a scene where they are injured to a degree that would be unsurvivable by an actual human being. And then, when they aren’t defying the ability of the human body, the odds are so heavily stacked against the survival  of our heroes that that we can’t help but laugh and wonder just how dumb or bad at their job the bad guys must be for the heroes to survive.

I don't understand how Mile 22 came to be. Mark Wahlberg and Peter Berg are a good team of director and actor. The last two Berg-Wahlberg movies, Patriot's Day and Deepwater Horizon, are legitimately good movies. Patriot's Day was one of the better movies of 2016, a legitimately emotionally involving action movie about the real life Boston Marathon bombing that felt visceral and alive. Here however, both director and leading man appear to be paycheck players who do not care a lick about the movie they're making or how remarkably bad that movie is. 

So, why is this movie called Mile 22? I am legitimately wondering why this movie is called Mile 22? I watched all of Mile 22, or what my mind could take before I had to look away to shake off the latest assault on my senses, and I still have no idea what the title is about. Perhaps it was a production title and they simply didn’t bother to change it? That would fit with how little anyone appears to care about the quality of Mile 22, one of the worst movies of 2018.