Movie Review: Dr Seuss' Horton Hears A Who

Horton Hears a Who (2008) 

Directed by Jimmy Hayward, Steve Martino 

Written by Cinco Paul, Ken Daurio 

Starring Carol Burnett, Jim Carrey, Steve Carell, Amy Poehler, Seth Rogen, Will Arnett

Release Date March 8th, 2008 

Published March 7th, 2008 

We get a lot of animated movies every years and a number of very good ones. The artists of modern animated features are, more often than not, responsible caring, smart people who have your childrens best interests at heart. That is certainly the case with the team behind the latest Dr. Seuss adaptation Horton Hears A Who.

Jim Carrey gives voice to Horton the elephant, one Theodore "Dr. Seuss" Geisel's most enduring characters. In the land of Nool Horton is popular with the little ones and teaches them about the forest. His non-traditional teaching style is frowned upon by the sour Kangaroo (Carol Burnett) who fears Horton is causing the children to use their imaginations.

The Kangaroo grows even more sour when Horton takes to talking to a small speck atop a flower. You see, according to Horton, there is a tiny population on that speck called Who's. Horton has made contact with the Who's Mayor (Steve Carell) and has vowed to protect the populace and get the speck to the safety of a mountaintop sunflower.

Horton rescued the speck after it was dislodged from another flower, something that has caused big trouble for the who's from earthquakes to massive shifts in weather patterns. If they don't get to safety soon they will be destroyed. Standing in Horton's way is that dyspeptic Kangaroo and her mean sidekick Vlad (Will Arnett) a vulture who vows to destroy the speck free of charge.

The dramatic stakes are high but Horton never gets to serious about it's situation. This is first class kids entertainment with both big laughs and smart subtext. Jimmy Hayward and Steve Martino were the minds behind this adaptation and they have kept much of Dr. Seuss's material intact, not the least is his undying respect and reverence for a child's mind.

The exceptional voice cast also keeps things light and fun. Jim Carrey, Steve Carell and Carol Burnett do a tremendous job finding just the right tones for the lead roles. Meanwhile, Seth Rogan, Jonah Hill and Amy Poehler offer terrific support.

Horton Hears A Who is as smart as it is funny. Underlying the story of Horton and the Mayor's heroic journey are ideas about spirituality and environmental concern that maybe Dr. Seuss didn't intend but become prominent in the expansion of Horton from a small book to a feature length film. The movie is about believing in something whether you can see it or not. It celebrates the imagination but also the capacity to believe in something beyond reason. Horton cloaks faith in the veneer of modern animated humor and somehow never comes off preachy.

The animation of Horton could not be a better representation of Dr. Seuss's classic style mixed with modern animated technology. The opening image of a drop of water on a leaf is breathtakingly realistic and there are striking images throughout Horton. Images that catch the eye without overstatement. Impressive and not overwhelming, a delicate balancing act. This is one terrific little movie. If you have kids then you must have Horton Hears A Who, a new animated classic for your collection.

Movie Review: Evan Almighty

Evan Almighty (2007) 

Directed by Tom Shadyac 

Written by Steve Oedekirk 

Starring Steve Carell, Morgan Freeman, Lauren Graham, John Goodman, Wanda Sykes

Release Date June 22nd, 2007

Published June 21st, 2007 

I found Bruce Almighty a little puzzling. Was Jim Carrey God for the entire world or just for the city of Buffalo where the film is set? Who knows, I guess the real question is why I am dragging such a logical question in to a discussion of a movie where logic is the least important thing imaginable? Bruce Almighty wasn't really a movie, in the sense of a series of scenes that coalesce into a story. Rather, Bruce Almighty was a concept blown up to movie length. Director Tom Shadyac and writer Steve Oedekirk simply thought of a one line pitch, Jim Carrey as God, and worked from there. The same creative bankruptcy plagues the even more logic free pseudo-sequel Evan Almighty. This film emerged from yet another one line pitch, Steve Carell as Noah.

Evan Baxter (Carell) was Buffalo's number 1 newscaster. Now he is Buffalo's representative in Congress having recently won election. Moving with his family, including his wife Joan (Lauren Graham) and their three sons, to Washington D.C; Evan has promised voters that he is going to change the world. God (Morgan Freeman) likes Evan's ambition and decides to offer Evan the opportunity to really change the world.

Dropping wood and tools on Evan's lawn, God tasks the former newsman to build an ark. The flood is coming and Evan will have to have the boat built in time if he is going to change the world and save a few lives. Evan is naturally skeptical but when animals begin following him wherever he goes, and he sprouts facial hair that Charlton Heston in The 10 Commandments would envy, he can no longer fight what God has asked him to do.

Directed by Tom Shadyac, who also directed Bruce Almighty, Evan Almighty is a spirited but lunkheaded comedy. Star Steve Carell does everything short of roll over and beg for laughs as he tries to wring some humor out the muck of Evan Almighty. It's a tribute to his talent and that of his picking up a paycheck co-star Morgan Freeman, that Evan Almighty does have a happy vibe throughout.

Unfortunately for both performers, director Tom Shadyac simply cannot get ahold of this material. Every plot strand seems to run off in a different direction and he simply lacks the ability to coax it all back into a cohesive whole. Meanwhile, as the story drifts away, the special effects, from CGI condors, tigers and bears to the abysmal, Ed Wood gone computerized, flood, all are strictly amateur efforts.

There are numerous things wrong with Evan Almighty aside from Tom Shadyac's ability to bring it all together as a cohesive whole. A glaring problem is the films gutlessness. This is a biblical tale, God is one of the stars, and yet real religion is scarce. We never learn what denomination Evan is nor do we see him in church. Piety is not entirely necessary but the film never takes a stance on just how religious Evan is aside from a brief, begrudging prayer.

This is also a film in which politics are involved and yet the filmmakers seem to have no concept of how politics or democracy works. As Evan gets into his ark building, robe wearing, shaggy bearded business he worries that he may be fired from his job. Evan is a Congressman. To fire him, the voters have to vote him out; yet he acts as if John Goodman's evil elder congressman is his boss with the ability to banish him if he feels like it.

(Side note, I am aware that Congress can expel a member of Congress, however, one single Congressman cannot fire another Congressman.) 

Of the glaring political misnomers, where is the President? The alternate universe of Evan Almighty has no President. He's not even referred to. One would think that if a nutty Congressman started dressing like Noah and building a giant ark and bringing animals, two by two, from across the globe, the President of the United States just might notice it and have a comment or two.

And in case you were wondering where Evan stands politically, the film does not assign him a political party. Fearing they might turn off potential moviegoers, Evan's politics are mysterious at best. He drives a Hummer which some would see as being Republican-ish, but that is not a great indicator. This might not matter if Evan were something of a political dupe who got elected by chance thanks to a welcoming smile and positive demeanor but the story establishes quickly that Evan is neither incompetent or incapable.

As with all things in mainstream Hollywood, this is a box office calculation. The movie must appear as all things to all people so as not to offend any potential audience. Hence, no religious affiliation for Evan nor a political party. This, of course, only serves to muddy the waters of the films comic intentions. It can't be a satire of anything because that would require a perspective. There is a muddled pro-environment message. John Goodman's evil congressman is trying to push through an environmentally unsound bill, but the details of this plot are too confused for any useful context.

So why did I walk out of Evan Almighty smiling? I'm not exactly sure. There is a big dance sequence over the credits with a lot of behind the scenes footage that is a whole lot of fun. There is also the quick witted performance of comedian Wanda Sykes who seems to be reprising her role from another awful movie, the Jane Fonda-Jennifer Lopez pseudo-comedy Monster In Law.

As she did in Monster In Law, Sykes performs the service of comic fixer. When scenes lack humor, as so many scenes in Evan Almighty seem to, director Shadyac simply cuts to Sykes for yet another of her quick witted quips and put downs. You can sense even when the quips were scripted and when they weren't, the likely ad-libs of Ms. Sykes are far funnier than the scripted ones.

There is a scene where Evan confronts congress in his full Noah garb and Sykes provides comic commentary from an entirely different location, speaking to no one but us in the audience. Intentional or not, this scene seems cobbled together as if it simply weren't working and the editors cut in clips of Sykes to make the scenes funny.

Steve Carell does what he can with this inelegant script and gamely throws his body into as much slapstick as he can endure. His attempts are kind of funny in that classic three stooges, laugh at someone else's pain sort of way, but when not throwing himself to the ground or hitting himself with a hammer, Carell is left at the mercy of this ludicrous script and left only a little dance to try and bring some life to scenes. The dance gets old quick.

Cowardly, confused and amateurish, Evan Almighty is a terrifically bad movie. And yet, I feel bad trashing it too much. Steve Carell is so talented and likable that I want to cut this film all the slack I can. That isn't much. Wanda Sykes is a real scene stealer but there is no need to waste your time seeking her out in this film when DVD's of her stand up material are readily available and free of the yoke of pulling this movie behind it.

Evan Almighty is the most expensive comedy ever made and one of the biggest wastes of money Hollywood has brought to the screen in a long while.

Movie Review: Foxcatcher

Foxcatcher (2014) 

Directed by Bennett Miller 

Written by E. Max Frye, Mark Futterman 

Starring Steve Carell, Channing Tatum, Mark Ruffalo

Release Date November 14th, 2014 

Published November 12th, 2014 

Single-minded to the point of obsession and with a documentary dedication to real-life stories and themes about the corrupting influence of money, director Bennett Miller uses his films as a prism to look at the world. From Capote to Moneyball and now in Foxcatcher, Miller's dedication to exposing hypocrisy and greed while reveling in fascinating real life stories has turned out three consecutive masterpieces. 

“Foxcatcher” tells the terrifying true tale of the events that led to the death of American Olympic wrestler David Schultz (Mark Ruffalo). Although Schultz is really only a supporting player as the story plays out, his death and the eerie signals of tragedy float over every aspect of the film. Much of what we see centers on Schultz’s brother, and fellow Olympic Gold Medalist Mark Schultz (Channing Tatum), who fell under the spell of his brother’s murderer John Du Pont (Steve Carell) just as he was training for the Olympic games in 1988. 

The relationship between Du Pont and Mark is not unlike that of Truman Capote and the killer Perry Jones in “Capote.” Capote takes advantage of Perry’s lack of intelligence to get what he wants, but his obsession with what he wants ends up consuming him. The same goes for Du Pont as he sees Mark as a pathway to being considered a great leader of men, the coach of the next great Olympian. Capote, of course, doesn’t become the villain in the way Du Pont eventually does, but their single-mindedness is similar as is their quirkiness and the outsider qualities with which both men wrestled their entire lives. 

Billy Beane, too, had outsider qualities that likely appealed to Miller. Beane was a standout ballplayer in high school who was seen as a “can’t miss” prospect. And then he missed. Beane then found his niche as a talent scout. With a single-minded purpose and the use of Jonah Hill’s Peter Brand, Beane began a quest for greatness with his often tactless reflex of powers. Beane is portrayed in Moneyball as a mercenary negotiator who stayed clear of his players so he could continue to remain a mercenary when deciding their fate. 

All three stories share single-minded determination and purpose that leads to either grand tragedy or grand triumph --- or, in the case of “Capote,” a mixture of both in equal measure. The style of all the stories is reminiscent of a documentary, because the most compelling scenes often depict two people in a room in a sort of talking head conversation that recounts the details of their lives in illuminating fashion. The tactic is most obvious in “Capote,” in which the legendary writer is essentially a documentarian with words instead of a camera. 

Some of the best scenes in “Moneyball” are between Pitt and Hill while reviewing their philosophies, with Pitt’s Billy Beane coaxing Hill’s Brand into revealing the cold-hearted numbers behind his baseball philosophy. Numerous scenes throughout “Moneyball” play out with people in chairs being interviewed about their intentions. Beane talks to the management team of the Cleveland Indians, trying to make a trade and being grilled about his unusual approach to choosing players. In one scene, Beane is interviewed by his team’s owner in a comfortable leather chair. Then Billy interviews Peter Brand about what would come to be called “Moneyball.” This approach continues until the film ends with Beane in an interview for the Boston Red Sox general manager position. 

In “Foxcatcher,” the relationship between Mark Schultz and John Du Pont essentially begins with an interview. Du Pont requests that Mark come to his home in Pennsylvania for a conversation. They end up in Du Pont’s trophy room, where Du Pont asks Mark about his family, his workouts and his goals. It’s a revealing scene for both characters, but we get our best sense of Mark as someone who is easily impressed, a quality that is his eventual undoing as Du Pont proves to be spectacularly unimpressive aside from his incredible wealth. 

The corruption of money plays a key role in a devastating scene in “Capote.” The most compelling scene depicts Clifton Collins Jr. as the infamous killer Perry Smith, who reveals that he and his partner killed the Clutter family because the criminals believed the family home had $10,000 inside their Kansas home. In the end, Smith and his partner walked away with $40. The senselessness of the cold-hearted slaying is heart-wrenching.  

Money is in the very title of “Moneyball,” which includes incisive commentary on how finances have corrupted Major League baseball. For a time it seemed that buying players was enough to purchase glorious championships -- the purity of simply playing the game and winning was being overshadowed by contracts and press releases. “Moneyball” is ironically shown as an impure way of choosing ballplayers, but it actually celebrates playing the game in the most fundamental way. “Moneyball” undermines the big-money teams by simply beating them in an actual game, and not in a boardroom with a contract. 

Finally, in “Foxcatcher,” money is the poison that flows through the life of John Du Pont. Money isolated him from reality. The disconnect between Du Pont's fantasy of himself and his sad reality was directly related to his unending wealth. Money, too, was David Schultz’s downfall. Although Schultz surely was not a greedy man his desire for a comfortable, steady job working for Du Pont caused him to overlook a number of warning signs about the millionaire eccentric. These red flags sent even his less-than-astute brother Mark fleeing the Foxcatcher estate. 

Single-minded purpose has driven greatness and tragedy since the beginning of time. Money came along later to provide further incentive and invite madness. Miller captures this reality in pseudo-documentary form. He shows his viewers that single-mindedness and money can combine for greatness or for tragedy or both. 

Movie Review: Despicable Me

Despicable Me (2010) 

Directed by Chris Renaud, Pierre Coffin

Written by Cinco Paul, Ken Daurio 

Starring Steve Carell, Russell Brand, Jason Segal, 

Release Date July 9th, 2010 

Published July 8th, 2010 

Gru (Steve Carell), the star of “Despicable Me” is a super villain. We know this because he is dressed all in black. He has a bald head, pale skin and a villainous pointy nose. He carries a freeze ray which he uses to get to the head of the line at Starbucks and he's mean to children. If Gru were anymore the bad guy he would be petting a cat a la Blofeld and twisting his mustache.

When the Great Pyramid goes missing Gru's mother (Julie Andrews) calls to congratulate him and he is forced to reveal he wasn't the big bad guy who stole it. Turns out, there is a new Super villain on the scene and he is stealing Gru's headlines. Don't worry though, Gru has a plan to get his place on the front pages back, with the help of his evil assistant Dr. Nefario (Russell Brand) and his hundreds Banana Slug looking Minions, Gru plans to steal the Moon. All he needs are the funds.

In a scene that earns the biggest laughs in “Despicable Me,” Gru heads for the Bank of Evil to pitch his Moon stealing idea. Keep an eye out for one terrifically fun toss off sight gag at the Bank that is both timely and hilarious. To get his funds the bank needs Gru to first steal a top secret shrink ray that he can use to shrink the moon to carry on size.

Oh, but that new villain in town, he's on the trail of the shrink ray and the moon as well. His name is Vector (Jason Segal), really Victor, but he thinks Vector is much more evil and when he gets the shrink ray, he puts Gru in a desperate situation. Through some strange and evil circumstances, Gru hatches a plan to steal from Vector involving three cute little orphans.

You can guess where this story is going and likely where it will end up. Three cute girls humanize the heartless villain yada, yada, yada, Pixar level storytelling this is not. What “Despicable Me” lacks in intellect it more than makes up for with big laughs. The directorial team Pierre Coffin and Chris Renaud do a terrific job playing off of classic movie super villains from James Bond to Superman. 

Parody is “Despicable Me's comfort zone but a healthy amount of cartoon slapstick, often involving the mumbling, bumbling minions, also earns big laughs. The voice cast brings a few of their own laughs as Steve Carell's Eastern European growl, Russell Brand's throaty Brit, and Jason Segal's nerd voice each has a moment to gurgle a good line. 

”Despicable Me” doesn't have the ingenuity of the Pixar cartoons but it accomplishes the simple goal of earning big laughs. The film has heart, great characters and tremendous voice acting. It also has arguably the best soundtrack of 2010. Pharrell Williams of NERD engineers a big beat Greek chorus to Gru and the girls' adventure and it's the perfect score for the big laughs and big fun of “Despicable Me.”

Movie Review: Welcome to Marwen

Welcome to Marwen (2018) 

Directed by Robert Zemeckis 

Written by Robert Zemeckis, Caroline Zemeckis 

Starring Steve Carell, Leslie Mann, Merritt Wever, Janelle Monae, Eiza Gonzalez, Gwendoline Christie

Release Date December 21st, 2018 

Published December 20th, 2018

Welcome to Marwen is a cringe-inducing drama about a man who suffered a terrible, tragic beating and reclaims his identity through art. There is a good movie to be made of this concept, but this isn’t it. Perhaps the documentary made about this story, called Marwencol, is that movie. I haven’t seen that doc unfortunately, and so I can only judge this story based on this movie and ugh, it’s not an easy sit. 

Not long prior to when this story is set, Mark Hogancamp (Steve Carell), was brutally attacked outside of a bar in his small New York town. He was left in a coma and the subsequent traumas included losing his memory of anything that happened prior to the attack and losing the ability to draw, a long time passion. As we meet Mark he is indulging in his fantasy world, known as Marwen, wherein he is a heroic World War 2 pilot who is rescued from the Nazis by a group of gun toting women who are mythic representations of the real women in Mark’s life. 

Marwen is Mark’s at home art installation where he uses 12 inch dolls to represent himself and the women in his life. There is Roberta (Merritt Wever), a kindly hobby shop owner who helps Mark obtain his dolls and supplies, Julie (Janelle Monae), Mark’s former physical therapist, Carlalla (Eiza Gonzalez), a co-worker of Mark’s at a local bar, and Anna (Gwendoline Christie), Mark’s visiting nurse. There are also two other fantasy characters in Marwen but we will get to them as they are both troublesome. 

There will soon be a new character in Marwen. Mark has just gotten a new neighbor, Nicol (Leslie Mann), who Mark is immediately smitten with. After seeing her and briefly meeting her and finding her very kind and patient, Mark goes to the hobby shop and buys a doll on which he projects her image. He even names the doll Nicol and begins to position her romantically with his doll avatar Hoagie. Here’s where the cringing begins and does not let up in Welcome to Marwen. 

Welcome to Marwen is quite loosely based on the life story of the real Mark Hogancamp, a life that has already been rendered in a well-reviewed documentary. Much of the other details are inventions of Zemeckis and writer Caroline Thompson who might have been better advised to stick closer to the real story. The invented romantic aspirations of Mark are creepy and cringe-y and render him difficult to take. 

The real Mark Hogancamp never had a Nicol, he named his characters and his town after his ex-wife, who was long out of the picture before he was attacked and a good friend whom he had no romantic designs on. The real Mark Hogancamp, on some level, understands that he’s not in a place where romance is right for him. As portrayed in this movie, Mark is a true weirdo whose fixation on Nicol has the earmarks of creepy stalker behavior, something I am sure was not intended in this supposedly uplifting story. 

I will put it to you dear reader, a strange man you’ve only just met begins to fixate on you, purchases a doll that he makes to look like you, begins to have that doll in a romance with a doll that looks like him, are you cool with that? I haven’t mentioned that he also has a few pairs of Nicol's shoes that he likes to wear and that is arguably the least creepy thing happening here. Again, the movie doesn’t intend any of this to be creepy but the way it is crafted on screen makes it unintentionally, off-puttingly, creepy. 

The movie doesn’t do much of anything to make Mark likable. Other than casting the innately likable Steve Carell, the film portrays Mark as awkward, humorless, childlike, a poor dresser, prone to violent attacks of fantasy, and a hermit. The women in his life indulge all of these qualities and reinforce them to a degree that goes beyond kindness and into the realm of fantasy where most of them only exist. The female characters in Welcome to Marwen are mostly the invention of the filmmakers and are not part of the real story as portrayed in the documentary, or so I have been told. 

Speaking of fantasy characters, there is another controversial inclusion in Welcome to Marwen. Diane Kruger voices a character named Deja who is the one character in the film universe that is not based on any of the other characters in the movie. Mark describes Deja as the Belgian Witch of Marwen, a woman so deeply in love with Hoagie that she makes his other potential love interests vanish. 

Deja is a supremely clumsy metaphor for addiction. She wears a bright blue glove that is the same color as the pain medication that Mark has been abusing. It’s hinted that Mark’s drinking problem, another addiction, was what drove away the wife he can only recall from photographic evidence and the fact that Mark was drunk the night he got beat up is part of his notion that he may have deserved the beating he received. By vanquishing Deja, Mark is symbolically vanquishing his addiction. If only life were so simple as defeating a doll. .

I debated whether to include a discussion of the other character in Marwen but I will mention it. In yet another creepy and tone deaf detail, Zemeckis includes a scene of Mark indulging in his pastime of watching his favorite porno actress, Suzette, who is portrayed by Zemeckis’ wife Leslie (Eww!). Mark likes Suzette so much that he made her a doll character in Marwen and when Nicol asks about her, Mark is not hesitant about explaining her origin in yet another cringe-y bit of tin-eared dialogue. 

It’s a shame all of this goes down this way because some of Welcome to Marwen isn’t completely terrible. The film uses some wonderful technical wizardry to bring Mark’s art to life. Mark doesn’t just play with these dolls, he poses them and takes photos of them that are genuine works of art. The film even builds to Mark’s art exhibit. As we watch Mark work, his art is alive and moving around and having dialogue and it’s all rather inventive looking.

This could be a device that deepens the story and creates an artful insight into Mark’s troubled, damaged, mind but as played by all involved in Welcome to Marwen, the dolls are yet another clumsy metaphorical device. They are there to deliver exposition and give simple metaphoric representations of Mark’s mental state. It doesn’t help that Zemeckis uses the dolls to deliver yet another creepy punchline regarding Mark; he occasionally poses his female dolls topless. Bearing in mind that these are dolls based on people in his life, it plays as another creepy and entirely unnecessary detail that the filmmakers seem to think is charming and funny. 

From what I understand about the documentary, none of what Zemeckis puts into the movie is true of the real Mark Hogancamp. He might be a creepy pervert but from what I have read about the documentary, it appears more interested in him as an oddball character and a talented artist. The romantic plot that Zemeckis forces into the movie is a completely misguided nod to mainstream filmmaking that requires that all quirky male protagonists have a love interest, even if the character has no qualities that would attract said love interest. 

To be fair, the Nicol character, as played by Leslie Mann, never realizes she’s a love interest until a truly hard to watch scene in which she has to let him down easy. It’s a supremely hard to watch and misguided scene that had me squirming in my seat. Mark is a character that is hard enough to take without the movie so forcefully trying to be sympathetic to his misguided ideas of romance. It’s meant to be an insight into his struggle but it all just comes off as forcefully sad. 

Welcome to Marwen is a technical marvel in some ways but mostly, it’s just hard to watch. The characters are all offbeat caricatures, the dialogue is full of the kind of lazy exposition you expect from action movies not from character driven drama and while the technical wizardry is neat, it can’t make up for the many other deficiencies in the story and characters of Welcome to Marwen. 

Movie Review: Vice

Vice (2018) 

Directed by Adam McKay

Written by Adam McKay 

Starring Christian Bale, Amy Adam, Steve Carell, Allison Pill, Jesse Plemons, Sam Rockwell, Tyler Perry

Release Date December 25th, 2018 

Published December 22nd, 2018 

Vice is an attempt at a satire of the former Vice President Dick Cheney. Unfortunately, though Dick Cheney is a large enough target for satire, Vice doesn’t have the teeth to make the satire work. Limp jabs at his time running the White House and the straightforward presentation of Cheney’s life, from his time as an alcoholic lineman in Wyoming through his time in the White House and his final heart transplant, the satire is so weak that it never lands a single blow on the former VP.

Christian Bale stars in Vice as Dick Cheney and the transformation is remarkable. Bale, one of the more handsome men in Hollywood, turns seamlessly into Dick Cheney. Putting on weight and undergoing four hours a day of makeup, Bale enhances the look with his voice and manner which brings Cheney to life on screen better than you could imagine. In fact, Bale is so good that he’s part of the reason that the satire of Vice doesn’t land.

Vice proceeds to tell the life of Dick Cheney in a manner that mixes up the timeframes of Cheney’s life. We start with Vice President Cheney on September 11th, after he had been rushed to an underground bunker and took over calling the shots on how the United States responded to the terror attack. The scene reflects rumors of how VP Cheney was usurping Presidential powers and the machinations are vaguely treated as menacing but the movie goes on to, unintentionally, sell the idea that Cheney, being more experienced and prepared for this moment than was President Bush, was right to takeover from Bush in this moment.

Then we flash back to how Dick Cheney got his start. In the early 1960’s Dick Cheney appeared headed nowhere. Cheney was working as a lineman in Wyoming. We see Cheney working for unscrupulous phone company engineers who care little for the employees who have little to no training or safety equipment. Cheney worked and then spent hours in bars getting drunk and getting into fights and getting arrested. 

It isn’t until his wife Lynn (Amy Adams) has to bail him out after a DUI that Cheney’s life is finally turned around. Lynn demands that Dick get cleaned up or she will take their daughter and leave and from there, the film cuts to Washington D.C where Dick is now working as a congressional intern. In the time between when Cheney  was a drunken lineman until he began  working in Congress, Cheney graduated from college and discovered an appreciation for politics.

Cheney’s start in Washington D.C came when he fell in with then Congressman Donald Rumsfeld (Steve Carell). Cheney was Rumsfeld’s intern and it is unexpected to see the Cheney we know today as a toady for someone even more unscrupulous and crude than himself but these scenes aren’t humorous, they are just sort of there. These scenes lay in important details about Cheney’s history during Watergate, his fast rise in the ranks of the Ford Administration, and his machinations within the Reagan White House, but they are the least interesting parts of Vice.

Vice doesn’t pick up strong momentum until Cheney becomes George W. Bush’s choice to be Vice President in 1999. Sam Rockwell plays George W. Bush as the flighty fratboy that the left has always believed him to be. It’s not a bad performance but there are more laughs in Rockwell’s manner, his style, the charming way he plays Bush than from anything Bush and Cheney actually do. The scenes between Bale and Rockwell are rarely funny but they aren't dramatic either, they play off of media perceptions of both men without providing much insight. 

That said, it was during the Bush Administration when Cheney, the character we know from many books and profiles, begins to emerge. We see his moves on the Iraq war, the way he used the law manipulate the country into a place where torture was legal and the film does begin to satirize the Cheney of lore as a power hungry, no-nonsense, bully. Is it funny? Kind of, in the absurdly straight-forward way that McKay frames the scenes and uses history to reflect these as poor decisions, but it is in conflict with Bale's performance as Cheney who doesn't appear to be in the fact that he's supposed to be the villain. Playing Cheney as having strong convictions is not exactly the satire we are expecting. 

It is during the time when Cheney is deciding whether to become Vice President that McKay relies on an odd but surprisingly effective device similar to one that he used in his Academy Award nominated The Big Short. McKay uses fantasy sequences as punchlines to punctuate the life of Dick Cheney. The first is a fake out ending that has Cheney retiring quietly after having been George H.W Bush’s Defense Secretary and leaving politics to become the CEO of Halliburton and leaving politics behind forever. 

This scene only evokes a bit of a chuckle and not a big laugh but I did enjoy seeing the credits begin to roll at the start of what was to be the 3rd act of Cheney’s life. This fantasy moment plays like wish fulfillment for those who despised the Bush-Cheney team and the joke is well-timed with the credits rolling far longer than you expect them to before we cut back to Cheney taking a call from George W. Bush and arranging a meeting regarding the Vice Presidency.

McKay goes back to the well of the fantasy sequence once more not long after this. The film employs a mysterious narrator, Jesse Plemons, who makes brief appearances throughout the movie, setting up a surprisingly effective reveal near the end of the movie. The narrator explains that we can’t really know what Lynn and Dick talked about the night that he decided to become the Vice President so the film goes into a remarkable, and quite funny, Shakespearean sequence in which Bale and Adams banter in the words of Shakespearean villains planning to carve up the world in their image.

For a brief moment Vice achieves its satirical potential. Cheney as the over the top Shakespearean Machiavelli figure is the perfect portrayal of the former VP. This moment combines our perception of Cheney with a touch of the reality. It's the Cheney of leftist lore and reality. Cheney is seen in Vice as a nasty politician with the ability to snake his way through the halls of power, taking power where he can and biding his time until he could turn things to his advantage. Shakespeare offers the perfect comic template to combine the aspects of Cheney that have taken hold in the public imagination.

This, however, is only one scene. It’s quite a funny scene and exceptionally well performed but it can’t make up for what is lacking in Vice which is a stronger through line of humor. The film doesn’t push the envelope beyond these fantasy sequences. It’s fine if the filmmakers are intending for us to make up our own mind about Cheney but I was expecting something more forceful, more directly critical. At the very least, I expected the Darth Vader-esque take on Cheney that holds the public imagination but the film, and especially Christian Bale, fails to push hard enough on that villainous side of our perception rendering the intended satire a toothless quality.

Vice is far too dry for my taste. Cheney is a huge satirical target and Vice doesn’t land a glove on him. George W. Bush gets far more of a roasting in Vice than Cheney does. In the bare minimum of scenes Sam Rockwell gives us an SNL worthy roasting of the former President as the slightly dopey daddy’s boy who was President in name only, a persona that many left leaning audiences will enjoy. It’s more savagely critical than anything Bale does with Chaney though both performances are solid. I just don’t know what the filmmakers, specifically director Adam McKay, is attempting to say about Dick Cheney in Vice.

Movie Review The 40 Year Old Virgin

The 40 Year Old Virgin (2005) 

Directed by Judd Apatow 

Written by Judd Apatow, Steve Carell 

Starring Steve Carell, Paul Rudd, Seth Rogen, Romany Malco, Catherine Keener 

Release Date August 19th, 2005 

Published August 18th, 2005 

The vanguard of TV writing is now headed for the big screen in big ways. J.J Abrams the creator of "Alias" is directing the next Mission Impossible film. Joss Whedon the creator of "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" and the underground hit, "Firefly", has Serenity in theaters in September and is soon to tackle Wonder Woman. First up, however, is television's most under-appreciated comedy writer, Judd Apatow.

In two network series, "Freaks and Geeks" and "Undeclared", Judd Apatow has had two of the most critically beloved and audience ignored series in history. Two extraordinarily witty and charming shows about growing up and not growing up. Both shows can now be seen as warm ups for Mr. Apatow's switch to big screen comedy in The 40 Year-Old Virgin, another witty and charming story of arrested development.

Steve Carell stars as the title virgin, Andy Stitzer. Andy lives in perpetual teenager-hood. Living amongst his action figures and video games and riding a bike to work, Andy barely even looks his age. At work Andy is the subject of derision and beliefs that he may be a serial killer. When his co-workers, Dave (Paul Rudd), Cal (Seth Rogan) and Jay (Romany Malco) invite Andy to play poker with them, the conversation quickly turns to sex and Andy is outed as a virgin despite his best efforts to the contrary. The trio seem less than sincerely sympathetic to Andy's plight, but eventually they do try and help Andy to relative degrees of success.

Each of Andy's new friends has some very... interesting advice that works in weird ways but almost always to Andy's detriment. While Dave is pining desperately for an ex-girlfriend he thinks Andy can be helped with a big box of porn. Jay thinks the cure is "drunk bitches" and Cal has a surprisingly effective idea: emulate David Caruso in Jade and women won't be able to resist.

Eventually, despite and not because of his friend's advice, Andy meets a lovely woman named Trish (Catherine Keener).  The two spark an immediate connection and thus begins a romantic plot that is smart and adult even as it is conventional romantic comedy. Carell and Keener are very good together and you have to love the way Keener throws herself into this role. She is an outsider amongst the male ensemble, most of whom have worked together before, yet she fits right in.

Judd Apatow directs 40 Year-Old Virgin with a very steady hand. Very well paced and always clever, at times the film is extraordinarily funny and often very crude but in the funniest ways imaginable. The film earns its R-rating with its language and raunchiness but that is perfectly balanced by the wonderfully sweet romance at the center.

The 40 Year-Old Virgin could have gone entirely wrong were it not for the strong lead performance of Steve Carell. The former "Daily Show" correspondent and star of NBC's doomed "The Office" manages to make Andy's virginity more than just a one-note sex joke. The character could have been a caricature akin to Pee Wee Herman or some other outrageous over the top character who you would believe never had sex. Instead Carell paints a very sympathetic portrait of a shy introverted guy who was just unlucky in his youthful exploits with women.  Andy is never a pawn of the plot or of the characters around him. He is fully formed and totally genuine. The film works because we believe in Andy and we align ourselves with Andy.

The supporting cast of The 40 Year Old Virgin is amazing, especially Paul Rudd who gets more and more outrageous and courageous in every role. Here is a comedic actor of real chops and leading man looks who is willing to completely humiliate himself if it means a big laugh, a rare breed. Romany Malco and Seth Rogan round out the top supporting roles and manage to create fully formed characters with depth and humor. The interplay of the four guys is unforced and familiar and almost always hysterically funny. It's no surprise that they have worked together before and the joy they have working together comes off the screen and affects the audience.

The real revelation of 40 Year-Old Virgin however, is director Judd Apatow who takes his place as one of the leading voices in big screen comedy. In a genre that desperately needs a new voice, Apatow is a sight for sore eyes and ears. His talent for character development and ability to sustain big laughs without having to abandon his plot is something a lot of veteran comedy directors could learn from.

Movie Review Over the Hedge

Over the Hedge (2006) 

Directed by Tim Johnson, Karey Kirkpatrick 

Written by Len Blum, Lorne Cameron, David Hoselton, Karey Kirkpatrick 

Starring Steve Carell, Bruce Willis, Nick Nolte, Wanda Sykes, Garry Shandling 

Release Date May 19th, 2006 

Published May 18th, 2006 

The daily newspaper comic Over The Hedge is a smart, self aware, culturally savvy cartoon starring woodland creatures and their incisive observations of humans in suburbia. Though the 3 panel brains of Over The Hedge, Michael Fry and T. Lewis may not be ideal for the too often soft headed children's animation market, Over The Hedge does have the built in cuteness factor of talking animals that all children love. Leave your brains, and the brains of the comics themselves, at the door - Over The Hedge is the latest cute but forgettable CG tune from DreamWorks animation.

Bruce Willis stars as the voice of R.J, a mischievous raccoon with a bit of a self-destructive side. While foraging for some food R.J gets the brilliant idea to rob a hibernating bear. In the process of stealing the bear's entire store of mostly human snacks, R.J manages to wake the not surprisingly cranky bear and destroy the whole supply of food.

The bear, voiced with gruff annoyance by Nick Nolte, is not supposed to come out of hibernation for another week so being tired he cuts a deal with R.J, restore the food supply in one week or becomes part of the food supply. R.J is lucky to make it out with his hide but where will he get all of these mostly human snacks, chips, pop, candy and such. Luck smiles on R.J when he discovers a brand new human enclave that has sprung up over the winter, a brand new suburban subdivision has cut the forest in half.

This comes as a surprise not just to R.J but also to the hibernating creatures who have made this forest their home for years. Having spent months in hibernation, Vern the turtle (Gary Shandling), Hammy the squirrel (Steve Carell) and Stella the skunk (Wanda Sykes) - amongst a large star filled ensemble- find their forest cut in half and the potential food supply nearly gone.

Enter R.J who sees this clan of woodland pals as his chance to get some help in replenishing the bear's stock. All he has to do is lead the gang into suburbia where they can help him raid homes and garbage cans for the needed supplies and once he has what he needs simply steal it all away to the bear. What R.J could not count on with this group is finding the family he never had and never knew he wanted.

I gagged a little as I wrote that last line. That type of treacle is what most Hollywood studios think you must have in all family cartoons. That warm-hearted easily digested family friendly message is a prerequisite of the genre to most studios no matter how clumsily such a simplistic message is incorporated into the film.

The fun loving creatures of Over The Hedge chafe against the constrictions of this genre required plot strand. Not that the cute characters of Over The Hedge don't lend themselves to a simpleminded family friendly message. The characters are cute and cuddly like your average family cartoon character, and such the problem is really just a lack of subtlety. The film hammers home its homespun wisdom in thuddingly obvious dialogue.

Family friendly messages are certainly not a bad thing. Both Finding Nemo and The Incredibles, a pair of Pixar animated classics, deliver family friendly messages couched in terrifically funny adventure plots. There is a way to make it family friendly without pounding the message into the ground. It's just that only Pixar seems to understand the formula.

When not forced by genre convention to blast home a message, Over The Hedge has some inspired moments of humor and insight. A funny montage in which R.J introduces the gang to the various ways humans obtain and consume food is a terrifically funny and biting commentary. Another scene in which R.J shows insight beyond his animal nature is when he introduces the gang to an SUV. Vern asks how many humans can fit such a huge vehicle, R.J's snappy reply "Usually... just one".

Those good moments are surrounded by a strong adventure plot as the gang works to obtain food while avoiding an evil exterminator voiced by Thomas Haden Church and a witchy suburban resident voiced by Allison Janney. The film gets good mileage out of both these villainous characters.

Over The Hedge is a pretty good movie but in the genre of CG animation pretty good is not often good enough. The Pixar company has set the bar so high in this genre that non-Pixar films simply cannot compete. Pixar's lovely candy colored animation is one of the great artistic creations of the past century and while other company's have attempted to match it no one has come close.

As I say a lot in reference to CG animated films, Over The Hedge is good but it's not Pixar good. I am recommending the film but with reluctance. Over The Hedge is good but not great family entertainment.

Movie Review: Before the Devil Knows Your Dead

Before the Devil Knows Your Dead (2007) 

Directed by Sydney Lumet 

Written by Kelly Masterson 

Starring Phillip Seymour Hoffman, Ethan Hawke, Amy Ryan, Marisa Tomei 

Release Date October 26th, 2007 

Published November 5th, 2007

Sydney Lumet has already been given a lifetime achievement award at the Oscars. Those awards are given to artists whose best work is long behind them. Not Lumet who with his latest film Before The Devil Knows Your Dead crafts arguably the most engaged and fascinating work in his nearly 60 year directorial career. A thriller starring Ethan Hawke and Philip Seymour Hoffman as brothers trying to find some way to pay off their debts, Before The Devil Knows Your Dead unfolds from sleeze to tragedy and back again all the while holding the audience enthralled beginning to end.

Andy Hanson (Philip Seymour Hoffman) has the look of a successful man. His wife Gina is gorgeous and he's pulling down six figures a year in his high finance gig. On the other hand he has a serious drug problem and more than a little debt to take care of. Andy's brother Hank (Ethan Hawke) is far worse off. Even more in debt with an ex-wife (Amy Ryan) draining his bank account and a young daughter to support, Hank is in dire straits. Andy has a way to solve both of their problems but it won't be easy. It involves a robbery. To say much more than that would spoil a stunner of a plot.

Albert Finney plays the boys father and delivers a performance of devastating depth and conviction. It is some of the finest work in a multiple Oscar winning career. With Hoffman and Hawke in the lead and Rosemary Harris, Oscar nominee Amy Ryan and Oscar winner Marisa Tomei on board Director Lumet assembled a can't miss cast and unleashed them on a Greek tragedy of mismatched fates, fortunes and family ties. A debut script from Kelly Masterson invigorates the old master Lumet and with this cast in place Before The Devil Knows Your Dead becomes something beyond extraordinary.

Movie Review: Brooklyn's Finest

Brooklyn's Finest (2009) 

Directed by Antoine Fuqua 

Written by Michael C. Martin

Starring Richard Gere, Don Cheadle, Ethan Hawke, Wesley Snipes, Lily Taylor, Ellen Barkin 

Release Date March 5th, 2010 

Published March 4th, 2010 

There is sluggishness to the alpha male posing of Brooklyn's Finest the latest in a long line of troubled cop movies. Richard Gere, Don Cheadle and Ethan Hawke play a three headed monster of ethically compromised cops in one of the toughest precincts in New York City. Stop me if you've heard that story before.

Richard Gere plays Eddie in Brooklyn's Finest, a depressed cop seven days from retirement. An inveterate drunk, Eddie plans on not getting killed in his last week as a cop and if that means letting a few calls go by so be it. Bad luck for Eddie that he gets stuck breaking in rookies in a week in which his Brooklyn precinct is all over the headlines.

A cop has been arrested for robbing what he thought was a drug dealer but turned out to be an honor student. Meanwhile another cop, Sal (Ethan Hawke) has just murdered and robbed an informant (Vincent D'Onofrio) and is ready for more robbing and killing as he looks to move his growing family, 5 kids with twins on the way, out of a rickety row house.

While Eddie longs for retirement and Sal risks his life in more and more dangerous fashion, Tango (Don Cheadle) seems safe by comparison, working undercover on the streets hoping to take down a major drug gang. Sure, he's dealing with deadly thugs on a daily basis but his cover is so strong he seems impervious to the danger.

In fact, Tango's cover is so good one might wonder which side he's on, especially after he gets close with Caz (Wesley Snipes) a major drug dealer fresh out of prison. Caz saved Tango's life when Tango began his undercover stint in prison. Now, as Cas is getting acclimated to the streets again, Tango questions whether he can take him down.

There is drama to be found in director Antoine Fuqua's violence fueled narrative but not much of it resonates beyond what has come before it in other, better cop movies. Fuqua's own Training Day, with Ethan Hawke no less, is a far more interesting and daring film in comparison to the well worn path walked by Brooklyn's Finest.

Don Cheadle delivers a standout performance as the least conflicted of the conflicted cops. Cheadle is a compelling actor whose intense gaze brims with calculating intelligence. To look at Cheadle is to want to know what he's thinking and follow his every deliberate move.

Ethan Hawke and Richard Gere are far less successful. Hawke is among the least convincing Italian cops in movie history putting on accent only when calling out to his stereotypically named kids Vinnie and Joey. Gere's Eddie is merely pathetic. One can argue that he is pathetic with a purpose, his redemption will rely on rock bottom dwelling, but a scene in which he proposes to a hooker is more laughable than sad.

A mixed bag of cop movie clichés, New York stereotypes and the occasional bit of hardcore violence, Brooklyn's Finest holds promise for fans of Don Cheadle and little else. One would be better served picking up Cheadle's exceptional performance in Out of Sight for a similarly smart and more nuanced performance.

Movie Review: Daybreakers

Daybreakers (2010) 

Directed by The Spierig Brothers 

Written by The Spierig Brothers 

Starring Ethan Hawke, Willem Dafoe, Sam Neill, Isabel Lucas, Claudia Karvan

Release Date January 8th, 2010 

Published January 7th, 2010 

It's such a disappointment. The first 70 minutes or so of Daybreakers is a quite compelling Vampire thriller. The last 20 minutes, give or take a few, are such a massive wrong turn that they make me wretch at the thought. I was set to recommend Daybreakers but the ending is such a poor decision, such a disastrous wrong turn that Daybreakers becomes an early worst of the year candidate.

Ethan Hawke stars in Daybreakers as Vampire Hematologist Edward Dalton. Edward lives in a future, 2017, in which vampires are the majority and humans are hunted and farmed for blood. Unfortunately, the demand for blood is soon to exceed the supply. It is Edward's job, at the behest of his demanding boss (Sam Neill), too invent a viable blood substitute.

Elvis (Willem Dafoe) has a better idea, he has a cure. Through some remarkable accident Elvis has regained his humanity and he thinks that with Edward's help he can figure out exactly what cured him and begin to return the human race to dominance. Elvis and his partner Audrey (Claudia Karvan) kidnap Edward and he is more than willing to help. Unfortunately, he is being tracked by his brother Frankie (Michael Dorman) a member of the military human hunters.

As Edward seeks the cure and his brother and boss come together to plot against him there is an effective thriller with strong stakes and strong characters. Approaching the finale the film has great momentum all it needs is a satisfying end to cap the whole thing and make a pretty terrific genre thriller.

Sadly, all that co-directors Michael and Peter Spierig come up with is a gore-laden, special effects finale that undermines Daybreakers' thriller tension in favor of splatter movie ugliness. I don't mind gore, early on in Daybreakers a minor character explodes and the scene is quite effective. The ending unfortunately takes the gore too far, using it as a means to finish the movie as if they just couldn't think of anything else.

The bloody finale is a trapdoor, an easy escape for filmmakers without the imagination or talent to come up with something better. What a shame, there is a pretty solid thriller under all of the viscera in Daybreakers.

Movie Review: Waking Life

Waking Life (2001) 

Directed by Richard Linklater

Written by Richard Linklater

Starring Wiley Wiggins, Ethan Hawke, Julie Delpy, Nicky Katt, Adam Goldberg

Release Date October 19th, 2001 

Published December 25th, 2001 

I am a collector. I collect DVD's, sports memorabilia and movie collector cups, etc. But above all I collect intelligent opinions. I love to listen to and interact with intelligent people. Richard Linklater's breakthrough animated film Waking Life is a series of intelligent conversations set against one of the most visually striking backdrops I've ever seen.

The film is taken from the perspective of an unnamed character played by Wiley Wiggins from Linklater’s Dazed & Confused. (I'll explain the “played by instead of voiced by” credit later). Wiggins’ character is trapped in a dream, though he doesn't realize it right away. In the dream he interacts with a series of run-at-the-mouth philosophers who while at times obnoxious, actually do have interesting opinions.

The conversations are meaningful discussions of philosophy, religion and the meaning of life. None of the characters claim to have the answers to the many unanswerable life questions but they are at least brave enough to discuss topics like death and existence or nonexistence of a higher power. Questions that many people would prefer weren't asked.

While the film is, at times, aimless, the animation is so lively that you are at rapt attention throughout. Linklater and his team of animators did something very unique in Waking Life, first filming the movie with live actors, Wiggins, Ethan Hawke and Julie Delpy amongst others. Then the animators used computers to animate over the shot footage, which gives the film it's dreamscape and allows for visual experimentation that could never work in a live action feature.

You know how in dreams when you know where you are but it looks nothing like it does in real life? Waking Life seizes upon that dreamy feeling and uses it's dialogue to lead it's main character and the audience to a surprisingly satisfying open-ended conclusion. It's up to you the viewer to decide for yourself what happens to Wiggins’ character at the end of the film.

Richard Linklater is weaving an amazing career, from Slackers to Dazed & Confused to Tape and now Waking Life. Linklater has established himself on the new frontier of film as art.

It's a small, unnamed generation of young filmmakers like Linklater, Allison Anders, P.T Anderson and Darren Aronofsky who are championing filmmaking as art over mere commerce. They swim against the tide of Hollywood and attempt to say something. Film as sociological art. It's not merely about entertaining the audience but about inspiring them and touching them emotionally and intellectually. If only more filmmakers shared their vision and courage.

Movie Review The First Purge

The First Purge (2018) 

Directed by Gerard McMurray 

Written by James DeMonaco 

Starring Lex Scott Davis, Marisa Tomei, Steve Harris, Joivan Wade

Release Date July 4th, 2018

Published July 3rd, 2018 

The First Purge stars Lex Scott Davis as Nya, an activist opposed to a new social experiment in crime. The New Founding Fathers of America, a right wing political party, has come to power, replacing Republicans and Democrats in the American power structure and they believe they have a solution for America’s crime problem. The idea comes from a scientist named Dr. Updale, Marisa Tomei, who isn’t convinced her idea is a cure-all.

The experiment which will come to be called ‘The Purge’ entails allowing people the opportunity to get out their pent up aggression with a night of legalized violence. For the experiment, the NFFA will cordon off Staten Island, New York and pay residents and visitors $5000.00 to stay on the Island and take part in 12 hours of legalized debauchery of all types. For her part, Nya believes The Purge is an attack on the poor and oh, how right she is, even if she doesn’t know it yet.

As the experiment of The Purge unfolds in this already crime riddled area, things begin with a strange peace. Few, if any, residents are actually engaging in criminal behavior. The NFFA has a lot riding on the night being an example of the effectiveness of their new rule and when things appear to be working in favor of the better angels of our nature, aside from a murderous crackhead named Skeletor, the NFFA decide to tip the scales a little with some outside help.

Soon, the streets of Staten Island are littered with bodies as the world watches on news networks supplied a ringside seat via drones that capture the action from on high. There is also the added attraction of first person perspective on the most gruesome crimes as some Island residents have been fitted with special contact lens cameras to capture the mayhem. The contacts are also a neat visual to help differentiate the truly dangerous from the endangered.

The First Purge is the fourth film in The Purge franchise, though the first in the continuity of the story which began being told in 2014 with Ethan Hawke and Lena Headley. The original The Purge posited an almost lackadaisical air surrounding the nationwide mayhem known as The Purge. Families discuss The Purge with the urgency of going to the supermarket or the video store. By the time of that film, The Purge is just another part of life.

The First Purge enlivens the franchise by taking it back to the beginning. Director Gerald MacMurray, taking the directorial reins from franchise creator James Demonaco, who did stick around to write the script for this outing, embraces the social satire of the original concept more blatantly than the first three films in the franchise. Indeed, MacMurray’s take on The Purge concept is straight ahead satirical polemic with the visual style of blaxploitation movies of the early to mid-seventies.

There is no hiding the politics at play here, the NRA gets name-checked as the financial backers of the New Founding Fathers of America and a scene where Nya is assaulted by a sewer dwelling, masked stranger contains a reference to President Trump that is sharply pointed. All of the New Founding Fathers of America seen on screen are doughy white guys reminiscent of a current White House casting call.

The First Purge pulls no punches in its social commentary with scenes ripped from recent American history from the smoky streets of Ferguson circa 2014 to the unrest in Charlottesville, Virginia, just last year. Though tiki torches are surprisingly circumspect, there are men in Klan robes and men in uniforms reminiscent of the German S. S that are as striking as ever and similarly worn by hate groups at the Charlottesville riots in real life.

If the characters and storytelling had been as pointed and forthright as the social satire, we’d be talking about a much better movie. Unfortunately, the characters in The First Purge wind up underwritten in favor of the atmosphere of dread and, as mentioned, the high level of social satire. That’s not to say that Lex Scott Davis or Joivan Wade, who plays her brother in the movie or Mugga, who plays a Nya’s neighbor, are bad actors. Rather, they’re just pawns of the plot rather than people whose action drives the plot.

The editing of The First Purge is also a tad suspect, contributing to a choppy style that can be a tad hard to follow and not all that pleasant to look at. The Cinematography and production design appear to be areas where the filmmakers were attempting to save money as the film’s visual style rarely stands out, aside from one scene that appears to be a full-on homage to the low budget aesthetic of a Gordon Parks or Melvin Van Peebles.

Newcomer Y’Lan Noel plays drug dealer turned leader Dmitri and gets all of the best visuals in the movie. Late in the film, as Dmitri and his crew are traveling the streets battling the mercenaries of the Klan, the Alt-Right and the NFFA, Dmitri turns full on action hero and MacMurray films him like a combination of Shaft, Bruce Lee and Killmonger. He even gets to be John McClain for a little while as he makes his way through an apartment building picking off bad guys one floor at a time.

The homages and the social satire are the best and boldest part of The First Purge which is an otherwise middling affair. The characters are thin, the dialogue is often stilted and awkward, especially the supposedly ‘Street’ dialogue which plays the hits of all the worst cliches of gang speak. I want to embrace big parts of The First Purge but too much of the movie is too subpar for me to fully celebrate what works.

Movie Review Juliet Naked

Juliet Naked (2018) 

Directed by Jesse Peretz

Written by Tamara Jenkins, Jim Taylor, Evgenia Peretz

Starring Rose Byrne, Ethan Hawke, Chris O'Dowd 

Release Date August 17th, 2018 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Movie Review Taking Lives

Taking Lives (2004) 

Directed by D.J Caruso 

Written by Jon Bokencamp 

Starring Angelina Jolie, Ethan Hawke, Kiefer Sutherland, Olivier Martinez, Tcheky Karyo'

Release Date March 19th, 2004

Published March 18th, 2004 

Director D.J Caruso is one of the most promising young directors in all of Hollywood. The Salton Sea with Val Kilmer is one of the most underrated films in years. Combining modern day Tarentino rhythms with classic Hollywood noir, Salton Sea was a rarity that combined smart writing, direction and acting. That success makes Caruso's new film, Taking Lives such a massive disappointment. Whereas Salton Sea was inventive, unique and intelligent, Taking Lives is mundane, predictable and clichéd.

Angelina Jolie stars a FBI agent Illeana Scott, an unusual criminal profiler who has no qualms about crawling in and lying down in an open grave or spending all of her free time staring at pictures of dead bodies. Illeana has traveled to Montreal at the request of a cop friend (Tcheky Karyo) to investigate a serial murderer. The killer’s M.O is to choke his victim, cut off the hands and smash the skull.

It's up to Illeana to draw up a profile of the psycho to help the Montreal cops, who include Paquette (Olivier Martinez) and Duval (Jean-Hughes Anglade), find some sort of rationale for finding the killer. They get a big break when the killer is interrupted during a murder by a guy walking home. The witness is James Costa (Ethan Hawke), a skittish young artist who claims to have never seen a dead body before. 

With Costa's help the cops draw up a sketch of the killer that they hope will lead to his capture. Another break comes when the mother of the alleged killer claims to have seen her son who she had thought was dead, an early victim of the killer. If it all sounds familiar, it is. There is nothing in Taking Lives that is the least bit original. It plays like an homage to Fincher's Seven (the credit sequence is an almost direct lift) but without Fincher and Andrew Kevin Walker's ingenious pacing, mystery and artful grunge.

Caruso seems to think that if you show really graphic shots of dead bodies that people will think of Seven and give his film a pass. This is not Seven, this is formula Hollywood with typical thriller twists and turns. Typical character mistakes and an ending so boneheaded that it would be laughable if the actors involved weren't such professionals. David Fincher this is not. 

It's hard to believe that it has been over four years since Angelina Jolie has made a good film. That was her Oscar winning turn in Girl Interrupted. Since that career highpoint, Jolie has fashioned an underwhelming career in big budget action movies, low wattage romances and a whole lot of unnecessary (though not unwelcome) nakedness. Her future still looks bright with Sky Captain and Alexander, but Taking Lives is yet another misstep in a career full of them.

Why an actor with such good radar as Ethan Hawke would choose to make this movie may be the biggest surprise of all. It's not that Ethan hasn't made a bad movie before but, generally speaking, he has a good eye for scripts and avoids formula Hollywood trash. Rounding out the cast of Taking Lives is Kiefer Sutherland in the Kiefer Sutherland role. Honestly Kiefer, fire your agent if he ever sends you a script like this again. How many times can Sutherland play oily creeps?

The film’s biggest disappointment is Caruso who wastes the talent. In transitioning from low budget to big budget, Caruso forgot the things that got him where he is. This film has none of the flare, inventiveness, or smarts of his first film. It's sad to watch Caruso simply translate a script to the screen with little to no style or substance. Taking Lives is one large step back for a director on the way up.

Movie Review: A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood

A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood (2019) 

Directed by Marielle Heller

Written by Noah Harpster 

Starring Tom Hanks, Matthew Rhys, Susan Kelechi Watson, Chris Cooper 

Release Date November 22nd, 2019 

Published November 20th, 2019

The new Mr. Rogers movie, A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood, is a revelation. The story of an Esquire reporter, Lloyd, played by Matthew Rhys, who is assigned to profile Mr. Rogers for the magazine defies conventions in ways that are entirely unexpected and delightful. Director Marielle Heller has truly come into her own with this remarkable artful yet accessible movie that is not merely about the legendary PBS kids show host Mr. Rogers, but about all that he stood for and embodied. 

A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood opens with that oh so familiar theme song of the same name. Here, however, it is sung by Tom Hanks, who portrays Mr. Rogers in a role that artfully incorporates elements of fantasy and reality. The opening Mr. Rogers Neighborhood segment is a fantasy that has Mr. Rogers introducing us to his new friend, Lloyd, a deeply troubled soul who writes for Esquire Magazine and struggles with being a new father while being estranged from his own father, Jerry, played by Chris Cooper. 

Lloyd has alienated so many people in his career that, according to his editor, played with gravitas by Christine Lahti, no one wants to be interviewed by him anymore. Only one person of note has agreed to an interview with Lloyd and that person is Mr. Rogers. The nice guy kids show host puff piece is not Lloyd’s style but with no other option on the table, he agrees and travels to Mr. Rogers’ neighborhood in Pittsburgh for the interview. 

Things are somewhat off-kilter from the start in A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood and it is a risky proposition. Director Marielle Heller, fresh off of the Oscar nominated success of Can You Ever Forgive Me starring Melissa McCarthy, risks alienating the audience by immediately having Hanks’ Mr. Roger break the fourth wall and act as narrator of the movie, introducing the more straightforward, dramatic and familiar scenes. 

Heller then chooses to transition from scene to scene using the models right out of the Mr. Rogers Neighborhood set. It’s a style that evokes the esoteric direction of a Charlie Kaufman or Michel Gondry but in a decidedly more accessible fashion. A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood is stylistically bold yet lacking in pretension. That’s likely owed to the subject, Mr. Rogers himself was notably unpretentious, a quality that Tom Hanks captures in his performance. 

Another bold choice that Heller makes is casting Hanks and Mr. Rogers in what is essentially a supporting role. The heavy dramatic lifting here is done by Matthew Rhys as Lloyd. The Emmy Award winning co-star of the hit drama The Americans, Rhys has the burden of being both a character in and of himself and the audience avatar, the one who must bring us closer to Mr. Rogers and help us to understand what made him special. 

Rhys’ performance is brimming with life and complex emotions. His backstory is brilliantly layered into the storytelling and Rhys evokes his past trauma effortlessly with his expressive, sad eyes. The scenes of Lloyd interviewing Mr. Rogers are challenging and fascinating. There is a threat that Mr. Rogers might come off as too all-knowing and benevolent as he gently yet inquisitively probes Lloyd’s obvious emotional wounds. Rhys and Hanks are remarkable for how well they ground these charged conversations in a way that feels authentic to the movie and to the memory of Mr. Rogers. 

Lloyd is exactly the kind of person who needs the kinds of lessons that Mr. Rogers taught on his show. These are lessons of compassion, forgiveness and understanding that Lloyd missed out on as a child due to his myriad traumas. Having to learn these lessons as an adult via becoming a parent with his wife Andrea, played by Susan Kelechi Watson, and by the re-emergence of his estranged father, Jerry,  finds Lloyd emotionally ill-equipped and Mr. Rogers offers unexpected guidance. 

What an absolutely lovely way to tell this story. Director Heller and screenwriters Micah Fitzerman-Blue and Noah Harpster, could have taken the easy way out, cast Tom Hanks as Mr. Rogers and call it a day. Instead, they chose daring and artful devices to reveal the way Mr. Rogers affected so many lives in so many ways and do it in a fashion that takes his lessons from the simplicity of childhood to the complexity of adulthood. 

Now that I have seen it, I can’t imagine it being dramatized any other way. I had feared that 2018’s Mr. Rogers Neighborhood documentary, Won’t You Be My Neighbor, would render A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood redundant. Instead, what we have is an even greater tribute to the legacy of Mr. Rogers, a film that masterfully evokes Mr. Rogers’ best qualities while not making Rogers out to be a saint or a metaphorical martyr for some notion of family values. 

Beautifully captured, boldly emotional and deeply affecting, A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood ranks as one of the most moving filmgoing experiences of my life and one of my favorite films of 2019, a year that is truly coming alive with incredible movies. 

Movie Review: The Da Vinci Code

The Da Vinci Code (2006) 

Directed by Ron Howard 

Written by Akiva Goldsman 

Starring Tom Hanks, Jean Reno, Audrey Tautou, Ian McKellan

Release Date May 19th, 2006 

Published May 18th, 2006 

Having read Dan Brown's worldwide best seller The Da Vinci Code my expectations for the film version were quite low. Despite his admittedly intriguing premise involving the bloodline of Jesus Christ, the holy grail, and secret societies, Dan Brown's writing style is a tedious mixture of portentous dialogue and sub-Crichton chase scenes.

Thankfully the movie version of The Da Vinci Code is blessed with talent creative enough to salvage the usable elements of Brown's intriguing premise and prop up his weak points to watchable levels. Director Ron Howard, Academy Award winning screenwriter Akiva Goldsman, and star Tom Hanks are such professionals that even Dan Brown's tiresome, predictable clichés become relatively captivating mysteries.

Tom Hanks stars in the Da Vinci Code as Professor Robert Langdon. A Symbology expert, Professor Langdon is in Paris promoting his book when he is picked up by the Paris police. Taken to the world famous Louvre museum, Robert's help is sought in the investigation of the death of the museum's curator Jaques Saurniere (Jean-Pierre Marielle).

Langdon was to have a meeting with Saurniere while in Paris but as he tells police investigator Bezu Fache (Jean Reno), Saurniere never showed. What Langdon does not know is that Fache already has a suspect in the case, Langdon himself. The body found in the grand gallery amongst some of the world's greatest artistic treasures is surrounded by pagan symbols and clues, that Robert believes he is there to help interpret.

Coming to Robert's aide is a police code breaker, Sophie Neveu (Audrey Tautou). Having observed the evidence at headquarters, Sophie has determined that Fache has settled on Langdon being guilty. She's also figured out that Langdon is very much innocent based on the same evidence. 

Saurniere happens to be Sophie's estranged grandfather. The symbols he left behind, in his own blood as he slowly died, were meant for her but she needs Professor Langdon's help in solving all of the riddles grandpa left behind. This includes a secret passed down through the ages that Saurniere has kept and was in the past the provenance of people such as Victor Hugo, Sir Isaac Newton and Leonardo Da Vinci.

With Sophie's help Langdon escapes the Louvre, with some helpful artifacts from Saurniere and clues from Da Vinci himself. They must follow the clues if they are going to prove Robert's innocence and discover the amazing secret Jaques Saurniere died to protect, a secret that could lead them to the legendary Holy Grail. 

They will also need the help of an old friend of Robert's, conspiracy theorist Sir Leigh Teabing (Ian McKellen). An expert in all things related to the holy grail, Sir Leigh lets Robert and Sophie in on the scope and scale of the mystery they are trying to solve and the tremendous danger that secret threatens to unleash.

Keep in mind, of course, that the real killer of Jaques Saurniere is still out there. Silas (Paul Bettany) an imposing, self flagellating monk of the order of Opus Dei murdered Saurniere to get to the secret himself on behalf of a shady bishop (Alfred Molina). Working in secret for the Vatican, the bishop intends to destroy the holy grail if he gets his hands on it.

But just what is the holy grail? That is a mystery I will leave for you to discover by watching the movie. For storytelling purposes it's simply the McGuffin, that thing as described by Hitchcock, that drives a mystery movie plot. Be it a mysterious brief case, some sort of world killing virus or in this case the holy grail. It's that thing that every character in this kind of film seeks and that some characters will kill for. It's the motivation for chase scenes, gun fights and love stories.

This makes The Da Vinci Code a rather typical movie mystery. The film does indeed have more than a few chases, a few bullets fired and the makings of a minor love story. The Da Vinci Code is a conventional thriller except that it's driving force happens to be rather controversial.

Writer Dan Brown spins an outlandish tale that calls into question the divinity of Jesus Christ and spins a fantastical story of a Vatican cover up, the holy grail, and a secret society call the priory of scion whose membership reads like history's hall of fame.

It's a terrific story that in his book Brown drowns out with droning dialogue and a highly predictable murder mystery. The challenge to the filmmakers was to remain faithful enough to satisfy the millions who managed to fight through the books clichés while patching Brown's many plot holes.

Writer Akiva Goldsman does what he can to repair the books worst aspect, the dialogue. Cleaning up Brown's dense, halting prose, Goldsman cuts to the quick. This at times leaves people who haven't read the book in the dark but keeps the film from having to be four hours long to explain all of the various details. At 2 hours and 30 minutes, the film is long and filled with a lot of dialogue but we can thank Goldsman for getting the films many jargon filled conversations moving.

Also thank Ron Howard for keeping things moving as well. Only pausing when he absolutely has to, Howard keeps the film humming along with chase scenes, narrow escapes and tantalizing historic scenery from Paris to London. There was no way that even talents like Howard and Goldman could plug the many holes in the convoluted Da Vinci Code plot but they are blessed with a dream cast who allow us to relax and forget about many of those rather large holes.

Tom Hanks with his friendly, aw shucks charm is always an inviting screen presence. He's become an old reliable friend on screen and no matter how implausible the plot may be you want to follow along just to hang out with our buddy Tom Hanks.

Ian McKellen may not be our pal like Tom but playing a charming English eccentric, McKellen is perfectly at home and highly entertaining. His Sir Leigh Teabing has some of the more lengthy and difficult dialogue in the film but who better than the classically stage trained englishman to deliver even the most tedious monologues. His grand accent alone is enough to lull you into believing the fantastic lies he spins.

The Da Vinci Code is no groundbreaking adventure in the way Indiana Jones was but it's not the stultifying borefest that was National Treasure. It falls somewhere in the entertaining but forgettable middle ground of those two similar adventures. Good enough for me to recommend to fans of mystery, fans of the book and especially fans of our old pal Tom Hanks.