Movie Review The Spongebob Movie Sponge Out of Water

The Spongebob Movie Sponge Out of Water (2015) 

Directed by Stephen Hillenburg

Written by Stephen Hillenburg 

Starring Tom Kenny, Clancy Brown, Matt Berry, Antonio Banderas, Bill Fagerbakke, Rodger Bumpass

Release Date February 6th, 2015 

Published February 5th, 2015

How does a film so shamelessly appeal to the tastes of tots and stoners alike and not wind up doomed to be assailed by the culture warriors? By becoming a capitalist commodity first and an anarchic, tripped out, cartoon second. That is the journey of “Spongebob Squarepants” which innocently invaded popular kids culture in the early 2000’s and became an unassailable pop titan.

The freedom of success has allowed this Nickelodeon product to evolve in ways that no one likely imagined. From what was a minor distraction for kiddies a strange cult classic of stoner nostalgia has emerged. Over time the tots who loved Spongebob’s seemingly innocent shenanigans were joined in front of the television by their cereal slurping, red-eyed older brother who laughed at the jokes that the little ones just missed.

Sure, the creators of the series maintain the innocence at the show’s heart but their claims to innocence are certainly challenged by a product that has grown increasingly weird in most recent and slightly controversial incarnations. It’s a strange evolution that today culminates in the ultimate evidence of the show’s sneaky stoner appeal, “The Spongebob Movie: Sponge Out of Water.”

Sure, on the surface this is merely an attempt to return Spongebob Squarepants to the pop ether and make gobs of money while doing it. But, watch the film and the Dali-esque, dizzying, imagery comes roaring out at the audience in ways only those on psychotropic stimulants can truly understand. As someone who’s never experienced a drug induced freak out, I can only imagine it is something akin to the time travel trip taken in “Sponge Out of Water” by our hero Spongebob and his unlikely pal and former enemy Plankton.

If you thought Peter Fonda’s swirling, twisting vortex freak out in 1969’s “The Trip” was trip inducing, wait till you get a load of the wall of sight and sound that takes Spongebob and Plankton through time and space. Only a true stoner, wacked out on the best Maui-Wowie and grooving to Kubrick’s “2001” could truly appreciate the sites created herein. I’m not kidding, these scenes are really messed up.

Things really get tripped out when Spongebob and Plankton, on the run through time and space to escape having been accused of stealing the secret recipe for Crabby Patties, find themselves in a future world run by a talking Dolphin named Bubbles. Bubbles is voiced by the brilliant British comic Matt Berry in full Douglas Reynholm bluster. Throwing Berry into a mix that also includes Antonio Banderas as a pirate named Burger Beard, is really the last piece of evidence needed to prove that the makers of Spongebob are indeed attempting to bridge the gap between Nickelodeon comedy and Cheech and Chong.

Looking back I realize I am making this sound like a bad thing. In reality, it’s more innocuous than anything. Despite the bleating of many conservatives, there isn’t anything truly dangerous about stoners. The fact that they can be as entertained as little children by the same form of entertainment is only subversive in the eyes of those who see smoking marijuana as some sort of societal ill.

There are many more damning things that people could be doing aside from getting baked and watching “The Spongebob Movie: Sponge Out of Water.” Things like Sub-Prime Mortgages or murder for hire schemes against their employers or ironically attending WNBA Games are certainly less worthy efforts than getting stoned and laughing hysterically as a talking sponge battles Antonio Banderas as pirate named Burger Beard.

I guess my main point is that we should just be honest about the appeal of “The Spongebob Movie: Sponge Out of Water” and stop acting like it’s just a kids movie. The fact is, Spongebob has a foot firmly planted in two separate but equal satirical worlds that appeal equally and differently to two very specific sets of audiences and there is nothing wrong with that.

Let’s let Spongebob’s freak flag fly free and not be so uptight and silly as to believe that just because stoners enjoy a kids show that kids will automatically grow up to be stoners. This isn’t a nature or nurture argument over the future of our children, it’s just a silly cartoon that happens to be tripping balls and delighting children all at once.

Movie Review Mary Queen of Scots

Mary Queen of Scots (2018) 

Directed by Josie Rourke 

Written by Beau Willimon 

Starring Saorise Ronan, Margot Robbie, Jack Lowden, Joe Alwyn, David Tennant, Guy Pearce

Release Date December 7th, 2018 

Published December 6th, 2018

Mary Queen of Scots is a handsome but mostly forgettable mid-centuries soap opera starring two of our finest working actresses. Saoirse Ronan and Margot Robbie are incredible performers but there isn’t anything in Mary Queen of Scots that rises to the level of their talents. The film is not bad because Ronan and Robbie are too good for it to be bad but the story is far too thin and the film loses steam quickly given the amount of juice this story appears to have on the surface.

Mary Stuart (Ronan) is a fascinating historical figure. At a very young age, though she was heir to the throne of Scotland, she was forced to flee to France. While there, she married the French King but did not become Queen by marriage, she was 5 at the time she was promised to the 4 year old future King. When the King died young, Mary fled back to Scotland where she was welcomed back as Queen by her brother, the Earl of Moray.

Mary’s return was not welcomed by her cousin, Queen Elizabeth I (Margot Robbie). Ever suspicious, the Queen of England kept a distance from Mary that was as strategic as it was out of fear. The Elizabeth of Mary Queen of Scots appears concerned that Mary’s beauty eclipses her own and that any invitation for comparison between the two could lead to a confrontation over her legitimacy as Queen.

The flames between Mary and Queen Elizabeth were further heated by the growing tension between the Protestants and Catholics. Mary, being a proud Catholic and Elizabeth, a Protestant, each had factions to serve and keep at bay from religious leaders and members of their respective courts. The two maintained correspondence with Elizabeth acknowledging Mary’s desire to ascend to the throne if Elizabeth died but the succession discussion was as political as it was about whom God ordained as royalty.

Eventually, the two would come into more direct conflict when Mary rejected Elizabeth’s suggestion that she marry the Protestant Robert Dudley, the Earl of Leicester, ineffectually portrayed by Joe Alwyn. Mary took things a step further by marrying Catholic and English subject, Lord Darnley, her cousin. That Mary proceeded with the marriage to a family member and English subject without the Queen’s permission was a significant slight.

Eventually, it would be the Protestant and Catholic factions that would be Mary’s undoing but not before we get a baby, a pair of murders, and a rape and finally a beheading. There is a whole lot of drama packed into Mary Queen of Scots but it doesn’t land because, though Mary and Elizabeth are deeply compelling, the men surrounding them wither in comparison. Schemers, toadies, and sycophants, the men of Mary Queen of Scots do little to deepen the drama of Mary Queen of Scots.

The script repeats the same beats in Mary’s life over and over again. She rises to power, she is challenged by a man and defeats him. She rises again, is challenged by a man and out maneuvers him until finally, her luck runs out. The timeline is confusing as well as we jump ahead months and sometimes years at a time with only a few minor visual cues to indicate such a change.

As I mentioned, the production of Mary Queen of Scots is handsome. The costumes look authentic and lavish, the hair and makeup are gorgeous even as they push the bounds of believability for the period, and the sets have a lived-in and worn down quality that suits the period. I have no issues with the presentation of Mary Queen of Scots, I just wish the story had been as involving as the set dressing.

As it is, Mary Queen of Scots is something of a pot boiler but a trifle of one. The film pretends toward seedy exposes and serious costume drama and never settles on which tone it prefers. A love scene between Mary and Lord Darnley prior to their marriage is intended as a moment of sexy excess but comes across as needless and awkward in execution. Rarely is the sex in Mary Queen of Scots anything necessary or titillating, it’s either uncomfortable, criminal or merely problematic.

So if the film isn’t sexy and it isn’t serious enough to rise to the level of the great costume dramas of the past, then just what is Mary Queen of Scots? At its very least, it is a fine showcase for Ronan and Robbie who bite down on their roles with gusto. If the script were better, the male characters more well-rounded as either foes or allies, and if the film’s shifting in time narrative were cleaner and clearer, perhaps Mary Queen of Scots would work. As it is, it’s messy and narratively unsatisfying despite the stars.

Movie Review: Atonement

Atonement (2007) 

Directed by Joe Wright 

Written by Christopher Hampton 

Starring Keira Knightley, James McAvoy, Saorise Ronan, Romala Garai, Vanessa Redgrave

Release Date December 7th, 2007 

Published December 25th, 2007 

Everything about the toney new feature film Atonement screams LOVE ME to the film lover. It has that classy British setting, those classy English accents, and it arrives with more fawning praise than Mike Huckabee on a Fox News show. Critics absolutely adore Atonement with more than 86% positive notices on Rotten Tomatoes, the ultimate tracker of critical opinion. And yet, I'm unconvinced. Everything tells me I should love this picture and yet I don't. I watched it and I was unmoved. Atonement is remote, emotionally distant, and disconnected.

Atonement features highly self involved characters acting in their own self interest with little to no reason for us to care for them. It begins when one character, young Briony (played as a youngster by Saorise Ronan and later by Romala Garai and still later by Dame Vanessa Redgrave), mistakes a bit of unusual flirting between her sister Cecilia and the family gardener Robbie as some sort of violent encounter. Later, when Briony interrupts a private tryst between the two her suspicions become dangerous. Another incident, this one involving a female cousin, offers her just the opportunity to compound her misunderstandings into a criminal matter that finds Robbie off to prison accused of assault.

Avoiding a jail sentence by leaping into the war effort in France, Robbie and Cecilia remain in love as he fights to clear his name and survive having been left for dead on the French countryside. Meanwhile, Briony has grown up and come to understand her misunderstanding and all of the pain she caused. She attempts to ATONE, ho ho, for her sins by leaving the life of privilege's to follow Robbie and Cecilia into the war effort, Cecilia is an army nurse having shunned family and privilege's for the love of Robbie and a shabby flat in the city.

It's quite a story and writer director Joe Wright is quite a storyteller. The problems come too often from how the story is told. Multiple flashbacks taken from different characters points of view are meant to illustrate the many misunderstandings going on. However, as filmed these elements feel like the filmmakers way of fucking with the audience. Twists and turns basically jerk you around until finally you just don't care anymore, or at least I didn't care anymore. I can definitely see where some might not be as ticked off by the many plot machinations of Atonement, but I was irritated.

I was also irritated by these self involved characters. Whether lounging in the idyll of British upper class malaise or suffering in silence during the war these characters are so astonishingly self involved that one can't help but be turned off by them. First you have Briony who even after growing up and understanding her own foolishness. Even after willingly giving up everything to atone for her sins, she remains amazingly self involved. She doesn't give up everything to make it up to her sister and Robbie, it's all about relieving her own guilt. And she is the emotional center of the film!

As for McAvoy and Knightley, they craft a shabbily threadbare romantic pair. These two are also all about themselves with little care for each other or those around them. It's all about their sadness and their suffering. Even as war and death mount about them they show care only for their immediate self interest. How am I supposed to care about them when they care about themselves enough for all the rest of us. The supporting characters only make things worse, especially the young cousin played by Juno Temple and a sleezy family friend played by Paul Marshall.

What is truly unfortunate is that irritation was the only feeling I had throughout Atonement. For as opulent, lush and beautiful as Atonement is, it's also remote and emotionally distant. The characters emotions are mostly interior and self referential and we are outside with little ability to identify or care about these people. Given all of the big emotions in play, love, betrayal, heartache, desperation and hope, we should be invested here. But we are not.

Atonement is far from being a bad film. Joe Wright's skill as a director is well demonstrated with the gorgeous, sweeping cinematography and grand settings and costumes, Atonement  is one of the finest looking, well crafted pictures in this decade. It's the emotion and the style of storytelling that I fail to connect with.

In the end, if you are going to watch the Oscars in February you will want to have watched Atonement. Given that my detachment from the film was far from the consensus I am convinced the film will be a major contender. I however, will not be rooting for the film. I will observe any nominations with the same distant appreciation these characters seem to have for each and inspired within me as I watched their stories play out.

Movie Review: City of Ember

City of Ember (2008) 

Directed by Gil Kenan 

Written by Caroline Thompson 

Starring Saorise Ronan, Harry Treadaway, Bill Murray, Tim Robbins, Martin Landau, Toby Jones 

Release Date October 10th, 2008 

Published October 9th, 2008

With humanity forced underground, two teens try to figure out why and how they can escape. She is Lina Mayfleet (Saorise Ronan). He is Doone Harrow (Harry Treadaway). Though they weren't aware of it, Lina and Doone's parents were close friends. In fact, they were part of a secret society that were the first to try to escape from Ember. Lina and Doone have the advantage of a map handed down by the builders, the scientists who created the underground city as their own society was crushed by some unseen force, either environmental or nuclear. 

The buliders created the map and instructions for leaving Ember and locked them in a time sealed box incapable of being opened for 200 years. The box was supposed to be passed from one mayor of Ember to the next but at some point it was lost along with the instructions for reclaiming the earth's surface. Lina finds the box in a closet in her grandmothers home. She takes it to her pal Doone and together they follow the instructions leading to an extraordinary adventure.

City of Ember was produced by the folks at Walden Media whose abundance of religious metaphors can be a little ham fisted. Here the Builders stand in for a belief in a higher power. They are even thought by the truly faithful to be returning someday. The metaphor is obvious and overblown but the director, Gil Kenan, is smart not to get bogged down in the overt demonstration. Using his exceptional cast, especially Bill Murray as the town's bumbling, inept mayor, Kenan never lets things get bogged down by metaphor. He also makes great use of action, especially near the end where a boat trip mimics Indiana Jones Temple of Doom coal chute chase.

Saorise Ronan is a lovely young actress whose big eyes never portray anything but earnest commitment to purpose. Her Lina wasn't looking to leave Ember, she in fact had just received the job of her dreams as red cape wearing messenger, a job that allows her to indulge her quick feet. However, with the town experiencing growing blackouts and food shortages, it becomes her mission to not merely save herself but the community of Ember that is her surrogate family. Doone's interest wasn't leaving either, he was compelled by something to believe he could fix the generator.

When he is assigned to work as pipefitter he hopes to use it's proximity to the great generator to get in there and solve the problem. Doone's arc goes from fearful and frantic to realistic and hopeful. When confronted with evidence of a world outside of Ember Doone abandons his grandiose plans for a more arduous journey with what he hopes greater results. Doone and Lina spark well together and their entirely chaste romance, expressed only in brief hand holding, is charming in an old school, kids movie kind of way. I like movies that manage to entertain while acting their age and that is what City of Ember does.

Gil Kenan knows he is making this movie for young children and avoids any humor or violence that might overwhelm the target audience. It sounds as if he is censoring himself but the film remains entertaining which demonstrates Kenan's talent, he doesn't need to be simpleminded or vulgar to achieve the film he wants to make.

City of Ember has it's flaws but in the end what mattered was my smile. I started smiling the moment Saorise Ronan came onscreen, arriving late at school with an important assembly already underway and she needing to be on stage, till the end. Kids movies that don't condescend or speak down to kids are in too short supply. City of Ember deserves your movie dollar for simply being that kind of thoughtful kids flick. Saorise Ronan is a young star in the making and I can't wait to see what she does next. Here's hoping it's as smart and fun as City of Ember.

Movie Review: The Way Back

The Way Back (2010) 

Directed by Peter Weir

Written by Peter Weir, Keith Clarke

Starring Jim Sturgess, Ed Harris, Saorise Ronan, Colin Farrell

Release Date December 29th, 2010 

Published December 27th. 2010

Sometimes a movie will place a critic in the odd position of appreciating the artistry and craftsmanship involved and yet leaves the critic almost entirely incapable of recommending the film. Director Peter Weir's The Way Back is a movie that inspires such a feeling. The work here is exceptional but it is exceptional in delivering a cinematic experience that I would not recommend to the average filmgoer trained on mainstream, Hollywood genre films.

The Way Back tells a remarkable true story in a fashion that feels intensely real. In 1942 three men emerged in India, then under the British flag, claiming that they had walked 4000 miles from a Siberian Gulag. The journey, if true, cost the lives of 6 other members of their party and had taken them across the frozen forests of Russia, through the Gobi Desert, and finally over the Himalayas 

In 1941 we watch as Janusz (Sturgess) is accused of treason by Russian military authorities who tortured his wife in order to get a confession. Janusz is sentenced to five years in a Siberian Gulag where the harsh conditions hold life expectancy well below Janusz's sentence. The prison is surrounded on all sides by unforgiving frozen wasteland and with few supplies to hoard and fewer places to hoard them; death would seem to be the only possible escape.

The forbidding forest however, doesn't intimidate Janusz who enlists several other inmates in an unlikely escape attempt. Among the prisoners is an American named Mr. Smith (Ed Harris) and a criminal, Valka (Colin Farrell), whose only appeal is that he has a knife that could be handy for hunting and protection. Several other nameless inmates come along but all seem to melt into one behind thick accents.

The names aren't important; it's the remarkable and unlikely journey that is the star of The Way Back. Escaping the gulag turns out to be the easy part. The trouble for these brave journeymen will be surviving the forbidding wasteland and getting out of Communist territories where, if they were caught, they could easily be shipped back to Siberia. This means getting to India, more than 4000 miles away. 

The Way Back is based on a book ghost written on behalf of a Polish World War 2 veteran named Slawomir Rawicz. However, Rawicz’s account was found to be false based on documents, some in Rawicz's own hand, which showed he had been released as part of a general amnesty in 1942. Then again, records from Russian prisons amid World War 2 are notoriously unreliable, especially after more than 50 years. 

In 2009 another Polish vet named Witold Glinski emerged to say that Rawicz's story was true but also stated that it was his story as he told it to Rawicz. Investigators and historians are still weighing the truth of Glinski's claim. Regardless of truth or fiction though, the story, as captured by director Peter Weir, is a grueling trek filled with death, despair, and triumph in heartbreaking detail. 

Jim Sturgess is a terrific star for The Way Back. With his soft face and warm, kind eyes, you can't help but feel for him and root for him. Ed Harris meanwhile is just the right stalwart second in command of this journey, a man so hard you are welcome to wonder if the freezing cold of the forest or the intense heat of the desert could penetrate his cragginess. Colin Farrell then, is on hand to give the film a little life beyond Sturgess's straight arrow hero and Harris's distant toughness. I can imagine many film financiers saying no to The Way Back without someone of Farrell's star power. Even under dirty makeup and crooked teeth Farrell is a charismatic presence. 

Director Peter Weir spares no image to demonstrate how difficult this journey was, as if merely describing a 4000 mile trek from Siberia to Tibet, over the Himalayas and ending in India were not enough. There is yeoman work on the part of the cast and the makeup department to demonstrate the physical toll this 11 month journey took on the seven men and one woman, played by Saorise Ronan, who made it. 

The Way Back is extraordinarily effective. Watching the film, it is as if you can feel the bone chilling cold, the burn of the sweltering heat, and the emptiness of starvation and dehydration. Peter Weir, not unlike Danny Boyle in 127 Hours, wants to give you some approximation of the physical toll being exacted on his protagonists so those feelings can underline the feeling of triumph at the end of this allegedly true story. 

I want to recommend The Way Back because it is so very well made. Peter Weir is a master director who gives this story a visceral, agonizing and yet triumphant feel. But, based on my description is this a movie you want to see? At well over 2 hours The Way Back is an extensive and exhaustive inventory of suffering even with it’s thrilling and cathartic conclusion. The poster for The Way Back could boast the word ‘Grueling’ and count it as a positive. 

Film buffs and historians perhaps will be rewarded with a comprehensive, fictional account of what may be the greatest single physical feat that a man has ever undertaken. The truth of Witold Glinski's story remains in question but history buffs may find the details of Weir's telling of this story revealing. Film buffs will surely be impressed with director Peter Weir's masterful direction but beyond the buffs The Way Back is a tough movie and one that I cannot recommend for a general audience.

The feel good ending is great but the journey to get there is agonizing and that’s not really the reason most people go to the movies. Unless you are someone who hears a movie described as ‘Grueling’ and ‘Agonizing’ and gets excited, I would recommend not seeing The Way Back. Perhaps as a primer, read Ronald Downing’s book, ‘The Long Walk, on which The Way Back is based. If you can get through that book and think you want to see that in a movie, then see The Way Back.

Movie Review Hanna

Hanna (2011) 

Directed by Joe Wright 

Written by Seth Lochhead, David Farr 

Starring Saorise Ronan, Eric Bana, Cate Blanchett, Olivia Williams, Jason Flemyng 

Release Date April 8th, 2011 

Published April 7th, 2011 

Hanna (Saorise Ronan) is a teenage girl living in the forest with her survivalist father (Eric Bana). Eric Heller has dedicated his life to teaching his daughter skills needed not just for survival in the wild but survival in a world where unseen forces are trying to kill her. Eric's motto, drilled into Hanna's brain daily, is 'adapt or die.' The incongruity of such harsh words coming from the mouth of a lithe blonde 15 year old girl is jarring as so much of the movie Hanna is jarring.

Directed by Joe Wright Hanna is an exercise in style and substance. Wright, best known for his Oscar nominated "Atonement," brings a great deal of action movie style to "Hanna" with long, uncut takes that have the camera following characters through complex choreographed fights that are refreshing compared to most other action movie director's affinity for  super fast edits that hide the action behind layers of trickery.

As I mentioned, there is also an experimental substance as well. Unlike the brainless titillation of "Sucker Punch," "Hanna" takes a teenage girl with unique fighting skills and examines the effect such disturbing ability might have on a girl rather than dressing her in fetish gear and exploiting her nubile flesh. This examination does not come with long periods of expository dialogue but rather plays on the extraordinary face and in the actions of star Saorise Ronan.

Matching Ronan's superb performance is that of Cate Blanchett as calculated C.I.A killer Marisa Wiegler. Wiegler was Eric Heller's handler on a black op that abruptly ended. Both Hanna and her late mother were part of this aborted operation and when Heller tried to keep them from being eliminated, Wiegler tried to kill him and did kill Hanna's mother. Blanchett's deep cold performance has odd nuance and a chilling resolution. This is a relatively small role for such a well known actress but Blanchett treats the part with the seriousness of a Bond villain and the complexity of the kind of part that could earn her an Oscar nomination.

The rest of the cast, including Jason Flemyng, Olivia Williams and Jessica Barden as members of a family who befriend Hanna on her journey from Morocco to Germany to the German thugs that Marisa hires to capture Hanna and kill anyone she comes in contact with, are exceptionally well placed within this unique story. Tom Hollander is especially chilling as the constantly whistling killer, Isaacs, whose ungodly creepiness leads to a pair of exceptional final act scenes.

Complex and exceptionally well directed, "Hanna" is a real stunner.

Movie Review: The Twilight Saga Breaking Dawn Pt 1

The Twilight Saga Breaking Dawn (2011) 

Directed by Bill Condon

Written by Melissa Rosenberg

Starring Kristen Stewart, Robert Pattinson, Taylor Lautner, Billy Burke, Ashley Greene, Kellen Lutz

Release Date November 18th, 2011 

Published November 17th, 2011 

You have to be a fan of the Twilight books to appreciate The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn Pt. 1. If you aren't a 'Twi-Hard' I very much do not recommend Breaking Dawn which, when looked at objectively, is a shockingly bad movie. We begin with the wedding of Edward (Robert Pattinson) and Bella (Kristen Stewart). It's a lovely outdoor gathering that is beautifully shot and entirely forgettable. Weddings in movies tend to come at the end of the movie, it's incongruous to have a wedding at the start of the film and thus Breaking Dawn gets off on a strange footing.

From the wedding we are whisked briefly to Brazil and then off to the Cullen's heretofore unmentioned private island; just how rich are these vamps? Here is where we arrive at what was supposed to be a spectacular love scene; Twi-hards' have been buzzing about it since  Breaking Dawn hit bookshelves. As with most hype, reality cannot compete with the build-up. Edward and Bella destroy their marital bed with their passion but the naughtiest bits are off-limits because of the need for the PG-13 rating. What we get instead is the erotic power of a vampire love scene rendered as an adult contemporary music video.

The trailer has told you that Bella gets knocked up, though it's not on the first try. Director Bill Condon makes us wait through an interminable 15 to 20 minutes of Edward resisting his wife's sexual advances because their first encounter left her bruised and he doesn't want to hurt her. Here we have the erotic power of the vampire rendered moot while we watch two attractive young people play chess and engage in one of the least interesting bits of foreplay in movie history. When Edward finally does give in, that's when Bella gets knocked up and the story of Breaking Dawn Pt. 1 really is supposed to kick in.

No one, not Edward's ancient vampire dad, Carlisle (Peter Fascinelli), not random intuitive Brazilian women, or even caring pug nosed werewolf boys, knows whether a human can safely carry a vampire baby or, if she does carry the baby, can she survive the birth? Meanwhile, the werewolves decide, somewhat randomly, that a vampire baby is a violation of their peace treaty with the Cullen's and transform into their enemy. After having helped the Cullen's in previous movies and after beginning Breaking Dawn Pt. 1 wishing to maintain the peace, you can color me confused as to why the wolves suddenly found themselves itching for a fight.

I have a tendency to apply logic where it's not welcome and with that in mind here's a question: If the Cullen's can afford to buy an island off the coast of Brazil then why not just fly in their medical equipment to said island instead of bringing Bella back to Forks and risking the wrath of the werewolves? (It's a rhetorical question Twi-hards and if the answer is in the book, I don't care, it's not in the movie.) Fans of the book, I'm sure, can fill in the blanks. I however, am a film critic and from my perspective the random changes in motivations that these characters portray is sloppy and ill-conceived; it was as if the werewolves were drawn at random to be the bad guys in Breaking Dawn Pt. 1.

The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn Pt. 1 is, in all honesty, for someone who hasn't read the books, a Razzie-worthy effort in which scene after scene tumbles on to the screen with a self-serious thud. The characters are humorless which, when combined with high camp scenes of Edward and Bella's romantic chess playing and a werewolf town-hall meeting in which ungodly goofy looking CGI wolves telepathically yell at each other, makes for cringe-worthy unintentional comedy.

Stay after the credits for the biggest unintentional laugh however, as one of the best actors working today delivers one of the worst line readings of the year. It's a line read so horrible that this moment alone should have an award waiting at the Razzies. (Sorry Michael Sheen.) If you are a fan of Twilight then nothing I can say about the film is going to matter to you. I am not trashing your favorite books; I've never read them. I can only critique the movie and objectively The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn Pt. 1 is a lovely looking bad movie.

Movie Review: The Twilight Saga Eclipse

The Twilight Saga Eclipse (2010) 

Directed by David Slade 

Written by Melissa Rosenberg

Starring Kristen Stewart, Robert Pattinson, Taylor Lautner, Bryce Dallas Howard, Elizabeth Reaser

Release Date June 30th, 2010 

Published June 29th, 2010

The Twilight movies are about sex. Sex is why the Cullen family, and indeed all Vampires are so damned Gap model attractive. Sex is why Taylor Lautner’s Jacob, and the rest of his Wolf pack are shirtless for most of the movie. The denial of sex from Edward to Bella, from Bella to Jacob, is the driving force of the plot of the latest Twilight chapter “Eclipse” and it makes for one exceptionally irritating tease. Not to mention one truly irresponsible and outdated morality play.

As we rejoin the “Twilight Saga,” a young man in Seattle is being menaced in the rain. He is soon bitten and will become a Vampire, the first in an army of newborn Vamps under the control of the evil redhead Victoria (Bryce Dallas Howard). She is building an army to attack the Cullen Clan and especially Bella Swan (Kristen Stewart), the love of Victoria's mortal enemy Edward Cullen (Robert Pattinson).

Bella and Edward, reunited after Edward tried to runaway in “New Moon,” are now in the full blossom of love, as demonstrated by the two of them reading poetry in a flowery meadow together. How else would you know they were in love? Bella is still pestering Edward about becoming a Vampire while Edward talks of marriage.

Meanwhile, Bella has drama with her pal Jacob, yet another of Edward's sworn enemies, who happens to also be in love with Bella. Bella has feelings for Jacob and this love triangle is supposed to be a source of deathly, primal, tension that smolders off of the screen but as written and played it comes off much more like two boys fighting over a favored toy.

Bella and Jacob haven't spoken in the months since she chose Edward over him but, when Victoria returns to their tiny corner of Washington State, Jacob wants to know that Bella is protected and that he and his wolf pack are ready to do the protecting if Edward and his vampires can't do it. Victoria’s army leads to a truce between the Cullen clan and the Wolf pack and some newborn vampire heads get crushed in the film’s best sequence.

The battle scenes staged by director David Slade have a crisp, professional look that was desperately lacking in the first two Twilight movies. Slade's experience on the vampire flick “30 Days of Night” definitely pays off here even as he is restrained by a bloodless PG-13 rating. Did you know that Vampires are made of marble? I’m not kidding, freaking marble, like tabletops. Goofy as that sounds, the visual of marble crushed by Vampire fist and Werewolf teeth is pretty cool.

As an action movie, this is certainly the best of the Twilight brand of action. But, “Twilight” is not about Vampires and Werewolves punching and biting one another in some CGI universe. No, “Twilight” is about sex, more to the point, it's about spreading a fear and loathing of sex. Stephanie Meyer has crafted a morality play in which Vampirism and the Werewolf version of eternal love, known as ‘Imprinting,’ are merely poorly veiled metaphors for sex. The pain of turning into a Vampire, the fear of Edward’s uncontrollable ‘blood’ lust and Jacob’s animal sexuality are Meyer’s way of making sex dangerous and foreboding.

In the “Twilight” series sex is threatening, mystical and frightening unless you are married. It’s the Purity Ring of movie franchises, clinging desperately to an outdated idea of chastity as the only way to live. Teens are sexually active and the more society attempts to frighten them away from sexuality the more dangerous teen experimentation becomes. Instead of teaching teens the joy of safe, responsible sex, “Twilight” preaches abstinence through fear and encourages ignorance in the form of outdated moralism.

If you must send this chastity/abstinence/purity message then at least do it better than this. In The Twilight Saga: Eclipse, the message is delivered with Ms. Meyer and screenwriter Melissa Rosenberg employing undercooked analogies, juvenile romantic fantasy, and groan inducing monologue that run page after page apparently communicating what the writers felt could not be communicated by the cast through that talent known as acting.

Like the first and second film in the saga, “Eclipse” is for fans only. Those who love the books are blind to the immature romance, the stolid monologues, and the attempt to push an abstinence message in the guise of a Vampire movie. I’m sure if Twi-hards would pull their eyes away from Edward’s gleaming skin or Jacob’s rippling abs they would see this series for what it is; but trust me that is never going to happen.

Movie Review: The Twilight Saga New Moon

The Twilight Saga New Moon (2009) 

Directed by Chris Weitz 

Written by Melissa Rosenberg

Starring Kristen Stewart, Robert Pattinson, Taylor Lautner, Ashley Greene, Billy Burke, Kellen Lutz, Michael Sheen, Dakota Fanning, Anna Kendrick, Peter Facinelli 

Release Date November 20th, 2009 

Published November 19th, 2009

I am not a member of the cult of Stephanie Meyers. I have only skimmed her series of teen Vampire novels and I found what I did read to be insipid. Her faux- teen angst combined with proto-Shakespearean catchphrases barely serve to cover her puddle deep metaphors for chastity and purity. Sure, she's got Vampires and Werewolves but each is about as dangerous in Ms. Meyers' universe as feral cats. Never mind her complete disregard for decade’s worth of established Vampire lore. 

The movie made from her first book, Twilight, was made tolerable only through the earnest efforts of the talented lead actors Robert Pattinson and Kristen Stewart. Though they seemed as uncomfortable with Ms. Meyers goofball pseudo-romance as I was, they sold it like champs. Too bad they had to come back for a sequel.

When last we left preternaturally bummed out Vampire Edward and his beloved Bella they were sharing a moment at the Forks High School Prom. Since then Bella has been suffering nightmares that she believes can only be cured by becoming a Vampire herself. Edward declines, he likes her better not dead.

Things come to a head on Bella's 18th birthday when she cuts herself and is nearly devoured by Edward's family. Feeling guilty that he cannot protect Bella, Edward calls the whole thing off and disappears. A devastated, Bella then falls into the arms of her pal Jakob (Taylor Lautner). Too bad for Bella that Jakob too has a deep, dark, supernatural secret, he's a werewolf who kills Vampires. Ooooh, feel that tension rise?

I am supposed to believe there is tension there, I think. To tell the truth, New Moon, as crafted by directed by Chris Weitz, is such a shambles of mixed motivations, missing scenes and bizarrely edited dream sequences, it's a wonder I managed to feel anything but blind confusion. New Moon is not for the uninitiated. If you have not read the books and even if you have seen the first film, you will likely be at a loss to follow New Moon's many preposterous plot turns. Thankfully, I watched New Moon with a fan or I would have given up after the opening dream sequence or the second ghost Edward. Don't ask.

Fans of the books, I am told, will be exceptionally satisfied with New Moon. The fan I watched it with was in tears at one point from the giddy thrill of seeing her favorite scenes rendered before her eyes. She was also forced to explain things to the rest of us so often that she likely missed a few scenes. It didn't matter to her, the book lives in her brain.

Whither Mr. Pattinson and Ms. Stewart. The yeoman effort that carried them through Twilight is missing almost entirely in New Moon. Mr. Pattinson spits every piece lame dialogue through his clenched, sculpted jaw while Ms. Stewart plays with her hair and cries as her way of fighting through the morass of Stephanie Meyers' puddle deep metaphors and Bard-light dialogue. We get it Stephanie Meyers, Vampire bite equals sex. Sex before marriage means damnation. Blah, blah, blah. I have seen sixth grade school plays with more complex use of metaphor. Insipid representations aside, New Moon is a chore even without the dull witted moralizing.

The Twilight Saga New Moon is a new kind of modern blockbuster, a self reflexive movie meant only to appeal to people guaranteed to love it unconditionally. Fan, as we often must remind ourselves, is short for fanatic, and only a fanatic could so willingly overlook the glaring flaws of writer Stephanie Meyers and the movie made of her book New Moon.

Movie Review: Twilight

Twilight (2008) 

Directed by Catherine Hardwicke 

Written by Melissa Rosenberg 

Starring Kristen Stewart, Robert Pattinson, Taylor Lautner, Anna Kendrick, Billy Burke, Peter Facinelli

Release Date November 21st, 2008 

Published November 20th, 2008

I must first admit my ignorance of the Twilight phenomena. Not spending much time chatting with members of the tween set, having no teenage daughters, I was blissfully unaware of writer Stephanie Meyers anguished teen vampire romance series. Now that the series and movie have become inescapable the culture vulture in me has absorbed as much as I can about the series without resorting to actually reading the weighty tomes themselves. Does the overall ignorance of the book prevent me from offering fair insight of the movie? Hardly.

Freed of the need to refer back to the efficacy of book to movie I am able to judge the movie for what it is without the weight of the literary literalism that will, no doubt, arise within those who find Stephanie Meyers words sacred. Twilight is a loosely Shakespearean romance that lifts, as does much modern romance, from the Bard's Romeo and Juliet, a tale of tragic, agonized love. Edward Cullen is a shy, pasty faced young man with no friends in school. He hovers close to four equally pallid brothers and sisters and rejects the world around him.

Bella Swan is similar in ghostly appearance to Edward. Her pale whiteness an oddity as her character comes from the sun drenched deserts of Arizona. Nevertheless, Bella and Edward could bond over the necessity for sunscreen but they don't. Bella is also similarly afflicted with the need to avoid social interaction. Though she is adopted by a social group of boys and girls in her new school in Forks Washington, where this story plays out, Bella is never comfortable. Her elusive manner and general social discomfort are yet another bonding opportunity for she and Edward.

And bond they do. After nearly 2 acts worth of scenes of doubt and confusion, Edward and Bella admit they are destined to be together. Therein comes the major complication. Aware to us from the start, Bella is thusly introduced to Edward's deepest secret; he is a vampire. Moreover, her blood has a particular scent that drives him near frenzy. He fears that he cannot control the instinct to devour her but he cannot stay away from her either. For her part Bella is infatuated with Edward's stunning edifice. The kid is great looking. Add that face to his tortured poet manner and he is irresistible.

Now, if you can't follow the glaring metaphors, shining nearly as bright as Edward's diamond dust skin in the bright sunlight (I'll explain later), you really should pay closer attention. Meyers and now screenwriter Melissa Rosenberg, have crafted an allegory about sex, teens, hormones, abstinence and marriage. Lust, temptation and resistance are Twilight's true subjects. Vampires are merely the construct, an enticement to read more about the strength it takes to love but not make love. If Bella and Edward are anything more than lusty teens longing for a backseat or basement couch I'll eat my hat.

The dangers of the vampire are merely a representation of all that could go wrong should the teens indulge their urges. Edward could infect or even kill Bella if he allowed things to go to far. Indeed, Edward carries the burden of much of the metaphor, his being the dangerous condition. Bella is merely tempting and tempted.

The metonymy is fairly simpleminded and once you have sussed it out and discarded it as obvious; you are left with director Catherine Hardwicke and her exceptionally mediocre effort to give it cinematic life. Twilight the movie, beyond the metaphor, is a flabby, shabby effort of a mind numbing length and amateur special effects. Then there is absolute disregard for all that we know of vampires. Edward and his family walk in daylight. No burning skin, no running for cover, not even a passing reference to the need for sunscreen. Now, the Cullen clan does have issues with the sun but it's not a fiery death they fear.

Click here for my review

Movie Review Jumper

Jumper (2008) 

Directed by Doug Liman 

Written by David S. Goyer, Simon Kinberg, Jim Uhls 

Starring Hayden Christensen, Jamie Bell, Rachel Bilson, Kristen Stewart, Michael Rooker, Anna Sophia Robb, Diane Lane, Samuel L. Jackson 

Release Date February 14th, 2008

Published February 13th, 2008

David Rice (Hayden Christensen) can be anywhere he imagines in a moment's notice. Surfing in Hawaii, lunching atop the sphinx, or across his apartment without having to step around the coffee table, David has the ability "Jump" anywhere. It's a cool talent to have. David uses this unique talent to rob banks. Don't fret, he leaves IOU's. That is the premise of Jumper the latest from director Doug Liman starring the perpetually quivery Hayden Christenson.

As a teenager David Rice fell through the thin ice of a lake and was nearly killed. At the last moment he imagined the local library and was transported there. Slowly coming to grips with this new ability to go anywhere he wants with a single thought, David starts by using his new ability to escape his angry bitter father (Michael Rooker). Needing a getaway location, David takes off for New York and is soon robbing banks to finance a comfortable lifestyle. It is then that he meets Roland Cox (Samuel L. Jackson) who is some kind of supernatural cop. Roland explains the plot, David is a Jumper and Roland is a Paladin. Paladin's hunt Jumpers and kill them.

Narrowly escaping his paladin encounter, David meets a fellow Jumper named Griffin (Jamie Bell) and is warned that Paladins will kill everyone he has ever known in their attempt to find him. This leads David back home and to the girl who he left behind, Millie (Rachel Bilson). While David watches out for the Paladins, he and Millie rekindle their childhood romance. Once the Paladins arrive however, it kicks off a worldwide war between Jumpers and Paladins. 

It's not a bad comic book premise really. The problem is it's underdeveloped as a movie. The rules for Jumpers and Paladins are vague and are sloppily made up as the movie goes. along. Rules then are disregarded when the plot requires them to be. The idea is merely a hanger on which director Doug Liman and his effects team can hang a number of huge special effects shots and a travelogue of worldwide locations from Tokyo to London to Rome to whatever other touristy location a majority of the audience might recognize. The effects aren't bad, for the most part, but who cares. If I wanted to watch the world go by I would watch the Travel Channel.

Find my full length review at Geeks.Media 

Movie Review In the Land of Women

In the Land of Women (2007) 

Directed by Jon Kasden 

Written by Jon Kasden 

Starring Adam Brody, Kristen Stewart, Meg Ryan, Olympia Dukakis, Makenzie Vega 

Release Date April 20th, 2007 

Published April 25th, 2007 

As a writer myself, I am naturally sympathetic to writers as characters. I was seduced by Sideways because Paul Giamatti's sad sack, unsuccessful novelist, hit just a little close to home. Barton Fink is an almost impenetrable piece; but for the writers of the world it's a work of uncompromising genius because it's about a writer.

So, I was destined to identify in some way with Adam Brody's Carter in the new movie In The Land of Women. As a heart broken writer myself, I can easily relate to the selfish, self loathing, self centered sadness that leads one to write either wondrous prose or sad pathetic trash. Carter's writing is left purposefully vague but the writer's angst is written on Brody's face in a star-making performance.

As Carter Webb; screenwriter for 'feature length softcore erotica', Adam Brody captures that writer's longing to take what has been so desperately percolating in his brain and communicate it to a world he just knows will understand its genius. In Carter's case it's a story about his time in a pricey private high school; far removed from the typical high school experiences of the John Hughes variety.

He's been trying to write this story for years but can't find the words. He will put this story further to the side when his actress girlfriend, Sophie (Elena Anaya), gets her big break and dumps him. Devastated and looking for an escape; Carter takes up an offer to care for his grandmother, Phyllis (Olympia Dukakis), in a tiny Michigan suburb; miles and miles away from his disappointments in Los Angeles.

On his arrival in Michigan Carter finds his grandmother living in filth and slightly demented. On the bright side; his neighbors are a fantastic group of women. There is Sarah (Meg Ryan), mother of two wonderful daughters and the wife of a louse who she knows, without actual evidence, is cheating on her. Smart and headstrong and more than a little quirky, Sarah is the first to befriend Carter when he moves in.

Sarah's daughter Lucy (Kristen Stewart) is equally resourceful and headstrong but far more impetuous than her mother. She takes on Carter after her mom asks her to take him to a movie. Lucy's little sister Paige (Mackenzie Vega), is a strange little thing, funny but just slightly off in every way. This quirky trio each bring Carter into their confidence for their own reasons and through them Carter finds some of the fulfillment his life was lacking.

If you aren't rolling your eyes at that description then you are quite generous. My description doesn't quite do justice to the more subtle pleasures of In The Land of Women. Don't get me wrong, my description is accurate, but thanks to a talented ensemble, the more ugh-worthy moments become palatable and the truly enjoyable moments will have you smiling till the end.

Jonathan Kasdan is the progeny of Hollywood royalty. His father, Lawrence Kasdan, directed Body Heat, The Big Chill and Grand Canyon. Brother Jake Kasdan is a rising star, writer and director in his own right; whose Zero Effect is an underappreciated gem. The pedigree gives Jonathan a professional edge and that professional edge is not just the rub of a famous family.

Jonathan is a legit talent, smart with his camera with a good sense of control over his storytelling. He needs to work on his pacing; at times In The Land of Women drags; nearly to a halt; but, for the most part, the good natured spirit and a very talented ensemble carries over the boring aspects. The story is a little ham-fisted thanks to a couple of truly melodramatic plot points, the disease of the week, and the conveniently evil spouse, but, with time, I'm sure, Jon Kasdan will eventually work out the kinks.

Like his director, Adam Brody is a legit talent. The kid languished for a few overly ironic seasons on TV's The O.C. Now with the yoke of weekly teen melodramatics off of his shoulders he really shows what a funny, sardonic and appealing actor he truly is. His Carter Webb is a lovable sort who has your sympathy from his first pathetic whimper to his final irony laced smile.

Reminiscent of a young Tom Hanks in the looks department, he could be the heir to the throne that Robert Downey Jr was never able to claim. Filling the void of the generation's sad comic voice, Brody is angst rendered in flesh with the perfect sardonic armor and just good looking enough to be appealing beyond his humor. Downey Jr. was set to become to the 80's teens what Brody could be to this upcoming generation, a hipster icon.

Against my better judgment, I liked much of In The Land of Women. The melodramatic elements can be a little irritating and overwrought, and the film drags a bit in the middle but the overall movie works. It works because Jon Kasdan is a director with a passionate voice and a genuine love of these characters and because of a tremendously talented ensemble lead by rising star Adam Brody and a strong comeback performance by the lovable Meg Ryan.

No need to wait for the DVD, take someone you like to see In The Land of Women.

Movie Review: Zathura

Zathura (2005) 

Directed by Jon Favreau 

Written by David Koepp, John Kamps

Starring Josh Hutcherson, Jonah Bobo, Dax Shepard, Kristen Stewart, Tim Robbins 

Release Date November 11th, 2005 

Published November 10th, 2005

It is one thing for Hollywood studios to slap together big, dumb, loud blockbusters for teens and adults. But when they extend that brainless genre to kids that is where we as an audience must draw the line. The new kid targeted adventure flick Zathura is a rarity for its kind: a big, dumb, loud action movie aimed at the pre-teen market.

Two bratty brothers, Walter (Josh Hutcherson) and Danny (Jonah Bobo), bicker and annoy one another until Danny discovers a unique board game in the basement of their dad's (Tim Robbins) house. The game, Zathura, is a 50's era space adventure, a metal gears and paint concoction that was likely the X-Box of it's time.

Danny the younger brother wants to play but older brother Walter just wants to watch Sportscenter. When Danny turns the key and presses a button to start the game Walter finds he will have to play whether he likes it or not. The game has shot the boys into space and the only way to get home is to finish the game before the various meteor showers, robot malfunctions, or bloodthirsty aliens finish them.

Along for the ride is the boys' sister, Lisa (Kristen Stewart), who was supposed to keep them out of trouble but because of the game, she now finds herself frozen in cryo-sleep, as one of the game cards helpfully explains. Also joining the boys for this adventure is an astronaut (Dax Shepard) who was lost in space some 15 years ago after he and his brother had played the game.

Directed by Jon Favreau, Zathura is a surprisingly bombastic and ridiculous exercise in over modulated special effects and a complete lack of subtlety. The light touch that Favreau brought to his last kiddie flick, the very funny Elf, has been replaced in Zathura by a sledgehammer, hammering into place a pair of unlikable, often nasty, child characters into a predictable plot that is desperately padded to reach a feature length run time.

Zathura was adapted by David Koepp from a short illustrated novel by Chris Van Allsburg. The padding is necessary because Van Allsburg's book is a far from feature length at a mere 32 pages. Many of those pages are filled only with Van Allsburg's lovely charcoal drawings. That does illustrate the challenge that Jon Favreau and David Koepp faced in this adaptation but it does not excuse the choice to make the characters insufferable little brats who push the plot forward with the worst decisions imaginable all while the entire movie shrieks and rumbles like a sugared up kindergarten class. 

The special effects in Zathura are the film's strong point. Jon Favreau creates a terrifically cartoonish outer space that is perfectly in line with a child's imagination. The robots and aliens are cool looking, with the robot also providing the films few moments of genuine laughter. If I have any issue with the aliens it's that they may be a little too scary for the young audience that is being sought after by Zathura.

Unfortunately, the weak points of Zathura are a group of unlikable, unendurable characters. The brothers bicker constantly and meanly and when they aren't bickering with each other they are bickering with their dad played by Tim Robbins in a forgettable cameo or they are bickering with their even less enjoyable sister played by Kristen Stewart. Are kids, especially young brothers, often at each other's throats? Yeah, maybe. Does that make me want to watch a movie about them being at each others throat's? No, especially when the film is supposed to be a fun filled space adventure.

The game plot of Zathura is a direct lift from Jumanji and that is not surprising as both are based on books by Chris Van Allsburg. The books were, in fact, sequels though in the movie there is no recognition of one to the other aside from essentially similar plots.  Where Jumanji succeeds and Zathura fails is in creating characters we like and enjoy spending time with. Robin Williams may have his moments of being cloying and pandering but he can always pull out a big joke here and there and when he's on he is one of the funniest actors in the business. Jumanji only has a few moments of the best of Robin Williams but I will take those few moments over just about anything in the laughless Zathura.

Where is the wonder of a trip to space? Where is the excitement of adventure? In Zathura we have nothing but kids running from loud explosions in between bursts of ugly brotherly spats. Couldn't we have just one scene where the kids enjoy the magic of space? I realize the astronaut has long since been replaced by the sports or TV celebrity in the imaginations of children but come on, space is space and what kid couldn't find being in outer space more important than fighting with their sibling?

Zathura is a frustrating 84 minutes of big, dumb, loud action, special effects and sibling rivalry. Most frustrating, however, is the missed potential of such an interesting plot and such an interesting director. Jon Favreau has the potential to be a very good director if he can develop his characters better than he does in Zathura. He has the right ideas in there but the wrong approach and thus Zathura is a less than stellar effort. Safe for kids between 10 and 13 who enjoy loud noises and big bright explosions Zathura certainly has an audience but it's an audience that would be better served with more attention to character than to how loud you can crank the volume before the speakers blow.

Movie Review: Adventureland

Adventureland (2009) 

Directed by Greg Mottola 

Written by Greg Mottola 

Starring Kristen Stewart, Jesse Eisenberg, Ryan Reynolds, Bill Hader, Matt Bush, Kristen Wiig, 

Release Date April 3rd, 2009 

Published April 2nd, 2009 

When one thinks of Superbad, the hit 2007 comedy from director Greg Mottola, the first word that comes to mind is not thoughtful. That word however, provides a strong description of Greg Mottola's two other directorial efforts. The Daytrippers, the film that brought Mottola to the attention of Hollywood decision makers, was a thoughtful and gentle comic road trip. Now comes Adventureland which, like Daytrippers, is thoughtful as well as gentle nostalgic, sentimental and romantic in its offbeat way.

Jesse Eisenberg stars in Adventureland as Brennen a soon to be New York college student who was  planning for a trip to Europe for the entire the summer before college. That was before his dad lost his job and Brennen lost his funding. Now, even college in New York is in question unless Brennan can start raising money on his own.

Being more of a thinker than a laborer, Brennen finds there is not much out there in the unskilled labor market. Thankfully, an old friend, Frigo (Matt Bush), is able to land him a gig at a local amusement park, Adventureland. Brennen will be in the games section where every contest is rigged and no one, NO ONE is allowed to win a big ass panda. These are the rules laid down by the park manager Bobby (Bill Hader) and his wife Paulette (Kristen Wiig).

With only the goal of making money on his mind, Brennen is shocked when he meets Em (Kristen Stewart) a thoughtful outcast not unlike himself. The two spark some romantic chemistry quickly but there are any number of complications that will keep them apart, not the least of which is Brennen's virgin status and Em's shall we say 'experience'. This isn't so much a boundary as a truth. You will find throughout this wonderful movie that truth is a default setting for these characters no matter how complicated that truth is.

Click here for my review

Movie Review: Catch that Kid

Catch that Kid (2004) 

Directed by Bart Freundlich 

Written by Michael Brandt, Derek Haas 

Starring Kristen Stewart, Sam Robards, Jennifer Beals, Max Thierot, Corbin Bleu, James LeGros

Release Date February 6th, 2004

Published February 5th, 2004

With the success of Spy Kids, a whole genre is springing up - the Kids Action-Adventure movie. The newest example of this burgeoning genre is the kiddy heist flick Catch That Kid. Based on a Danish blockbuster called Klatretosen, Catch That Kid is a clever little heist picture with three terrific young actors and a director, Bart Freundlich, who's previous work would never lead you to believe he could pull this off.

Kristen Stewart stars as Maddy Phillips, the adventurous daughter of a mountain climber (Sam Robards), who once climbed Mount Everest. Unfortunately, Dad had a massive fall in his climb and now would prefer his daughter not climb. Maddy's mother Molly (Jennifer Beals) absolutely forbids her daughter from climbing. Of course, when we first meet Maddy she is scaling a water tower while on her cell phone lying to her mom.

Maddy's dad owns a local go-cart track where Maddy's friend Gus (Max Thierot) is a mechanic building engines for his brother’s go-carts. Maddy doesn't know it but Gus has a huge crush on her. So does Maddy's other friend Austin (Corbin Bleu), a computer geek who's skills will no doubt come in handy later in the film.

The film’s heist plot is set in motion when Maddy's Dad is suddenly struck paralyzed from the neck down, a recurring injury from his fall. The doctors say he will never walk again unless he can get to Europe for an experimental surgery. Unfortunately, that surgery costs 250 grand, money the family surely does not have. There is hope that Maddy's Mom may be able to get a loan from the local bank where she is currently installing a high tech security system but the evil bank manager Mr. Brisbane (Michael Des Barres) denies the loan.

So with the help of her friends, Maddy concocts an elaborate heist that will incorporate Gus' mechanical skills, Austin's computer skills and her climbing ability. While Gus plans the getaway and Austin cracks the security, Maddy must scale the bank walls and climb nearly one hundred feet in the air where the vault is suspended, part of a very cool, very complicated security setup that makes the film’s heist sequence a lot of fun and separates it from other heist films. Maddy must also watch her baby sister, while pulling this off, a nice comic touch.

While there is something a little unseemly about pre-teens who turn to crime in order to solve their problems, the film deftly dances around such moral quandaries. Director Bart Freundlich, who previous films were the adult dramas World Traveler and Myth Of Fingerprints, surprises us with his ability to direct such light, fun material. The pacing keeps the audience from worrying too much about the moral of the film and more focused on the action and the likable characters.

The young actors, especially Kristen Stewart, are terrific. It's the adult characters who are the problem. Jennifer Beals and Sam Robards don't have much screen time so they make little impression. Michael Des Barres as the villain is truly dreadful. The former rock singer preens and chews screen and just stinks up the screen whenever he is on. John Carroll Lynch has a small role as an assistant bank manager and like Des Barres, he is utterly grating.

Still there is enough good about Catch That Kid to outweigh the bad. Especially young Kristen Stewart who should have a big career ahead of her. The plot is fun and surprisingly original and exciting. As long as the film keeps it's pace and it's villains to a minimum, it's not a bad flick. A good way for mom and dad to kill an afternoon with the kids. On an odd note, the film was released under two different titles, Catch That Kid and Mission Without Permission. The film retained the title Mission Without Permission for certain foreign markets.

Movie Review Panic Room

Panic Room (2002) 

Directed by David Fincher

Written by David Koepp 

Starring Jodie Foster, Kristen Stewart, Forrest Whitaker, Jared Leto, Dwight Yoakam

Release Date March 29th, 2002 

Published March 28th, 2002 

David Fincher is my favorite director. For the uninitiated, Fincher is the brilliant eye behind the lens of Fight Club and Seven, two stylishly violent, high voltage thrillers that pair catchy visuals with blistering commentary on our consumer culture. Fincher's new film, Panic Room, doesn't aspire to social commentary, it's just a straight edge thriller easy to enjoy as long as you don't expect too much from it.

Panic Room stars Jodie Foster as Meg Altman, a divorcee raising a teen daughter (Kristen Stewart) and looking for a new home. A real estate agent shows Meg a gorgeous New York brownstone. 3-stories, multiple bedrooms, single bath, cable ready, and oh yeah there is this little room built by the ultra-paranoid former tenant. This room is essentially a safe built for a human being, with two feet of cement encasing two feet of steel on each side of the 6 by 10 foot area. 

The panic room is meant to keep the owner safe from a break in. Needless to say Meg and her daughter move in immediately and on their first night there is a break in, forcing Meg and her daughter to put the panic room to use. Unfortunately for Meg, the men behind the break in, Junior (Jared Leto), Burnham (Forest Whitaker) and Raoul (Dwight Yoakam, yes Dwight Yoakam playing a guy named Raoul), need to get into the panic room to get what they came for.

The first half of Panic Room encompasses the character introductions, and explores the space of the panic room and it's very good. Director David Fincher's camera helps build suspense through shadow and light. The props go to Oscar winner Conrad W. Hall's Cinematography as well for giving the apartment and the titular panic room dimension, we want a strong sense of the space and we get that while also ramping up tension between the thieves and our innocent mom and daughter duo. 

Once Meg and her daughter are inside the panic room, the film begins to lose steam. There are still a few good moments but the attempts by the gang to get inside the panic room are right out of MacGyver's playbook as are Meg's attempts to thwart them. It is those MacGyver-like logical leaps like Meg's figuring out how to hook up the panic room’s phone line and Burnham’s oh so lucky guess as to what she's doing that border on the ridiculous. That scene, amongst others, undermines the tension and kills some of the suspense.

Still, Panic Room is not a bad movie. Jodie Foster is good in a very difficult role that seems the least defined of all of the characters. Each of the bad guys is able to communicate their motives and personalities in their interaction with each other while Foster's only interaction for most of the film is her daughter, which is confined to being the protective mother. Forest Whitaker and Jared Leto have good chemistry as a team but Dwight Yoakam seems woefully miscast as Raoul, the supposed intimidator who is more laughable than imposing. 

Visually, Fincher is very much on his game, with unique camera work and one of the most visually interesting credit sequences I've ever seen. Be forewarned: if you have a problem with motion sickness you may want to bring some medicine because Fincher's camera rolling through walls and windows and flying through keyholes and air ducts can be somewhat jarring.

Movie Review: Cold Creek Manor

Cold Creek Manor (2003) 

Directed by Mike Figgis 

Written by Richard Jeffries 

Starring Dennis Quaid, Sharon Stone, Kristen Stewart, Stephen Dorff

Release Date September 19th, 2003 

Published September 18th, 2003 

Why does Hollywood seem to dislike anyone who lives outside of New York or Los Angeles? A number of recent releases show big city folk wandering off to the sticks to get away from it all and finding themselves terrorized by small town folk who don't take kindly to strangers (pause to spit tobacco). The horror films Wrong Turn and Cabin Fever both featured the scary backwoods redneck types, and the new Mike Figgis film, Cold Creek Manor, also recycles the cliché of the whacked-out redneck. That all three of these most recent examples are also less-than-stellar films should tell you something.

Dennis Quaid stars in Cold Creek Manor as Cooper Tilson, a documentary filmmaker and stay-at-home dad to two precocious kids (Kristen Stewart and Ryan Wilson). Cooper's wife, Leah Tilson (Sharon Stone), is some sort of executive, constantly jetting off to important meetings and missing her family. When their son is nearly killed by an angry New York driver, mom and dad decide that it's time to give up city life and live the ultimate yuppie fantasy of a beautiful country home.

In true money pit fashion, however, the couple chooses the absolute wrong house, a place called Cold Creek Manor. It's the kind of place that, when it's name is spoken, people look away in horror. Of course, the city folk are dense enough not to notice the many warning signs. One thing they can't avoid noticing however is the manor's former owner Dale Massie (Stephen Dorff), who, upon leaving prison, promptly breaks into the home and joins the family for dinner. As a courtesy for having sold off all of Dale's belongings, they hire him on to help rehab the rundown house.

Needless to say, Dale has some bad intentions toward his home’s new occupants and it's not long before the crazed redneck is terrorizing the family. Call it Cape Fear-light; we have definitely seen this whole thing before. The odd thing is, the trailer and commercials seemed to play up a supernatural element to the story. It's an element that is not in the actual film, where the melodrama is all too human.

Sharon Stone makes an obvious attempt to soften her image in Cold Creek Manor, playing a loving mother as opposed to her typecast sexpot roles. Unfortunately, Stone's performance in Cold Creek Manor only serves to highlight exactly why she has been typecast. Stone radiates the warmth of an icy river. Writer Richard Jeffries doesn't help much by giving her a weepy victim role instead of a fully fleshed out character.

Dennis Quaid is only slightly more effective as the father character but much of that is based on his cultivated career playing a wide range of likable good guys. Also playing opposite Stephen Dorff's well-played psycho gives Quaid the opportunity to bounce off of some good character work. Indeed, Stephen Dorff is the film’s true star. Though his character is not very well written, he infuses it with the necessary menace and smarminess to make it as believable as it can be within the ridiculously over the top story.

It might have seemed confusing to see such a mercurial director as Mike Figgis directing such a conventional thriller. The only reason I can see why he made Cold Creek Manor was to indulge his love of architecture. As he did in his little seen but well respected film Liebestraum, Figgis directs his sets better than his actors. You can see where this script would appeal to Figgis because it allows him to film a house of exquisite design. The house in Cold Creek Manor is in fact at times better shot than its stars, Ms. Stone in particular.

But great architecture does not make a great movie. Cold Creek Manor is too conventional, stereotypical and languidly paced to be a great movie, or even a good movie for that matter.

Movie Review Cold Mountain

Cold Mountain (2003) 

Directed by Anthony Minghella 

Written by Anthony Minghella 

Starring Nicole Kidman, Renee Zellweger, Jude Law, Phillip Seymour Hoffman, Natalie Portman 

Release Date December 25th, 2003 

Published December 24th, 2003 

In 1997, Author Charles Frazier set out to tell a story that had been passed through his family for years. It was the story of his great uncle H.P Inman and his arduous trek home to North Carolina after deserting the Southern army near the end of the Civil War. In translating the story to the page, Frazier created an epic love story combined it with a Homeric odyssey and bathed it in Southern gentility.

Now in the hands of Director Anthony Minghella, Cold Mountain is a portentous, pompous, epic scale film and a sure bet Best Picture candidate.

Jude Law stars as Inman, a day laborer helping to build a brand new chapel for the people of Cold Mountain who are welcoming the arrival of a new Minister, Reverend Monroe (Donald Sutherland). With Reverend Monroe is his daughter Ada (Nicole Kidman), a well-educated, Charlotte-bred woman who has never done a days work in her life. Ada is a trained pianist, a writer and lives to serve her father. The attraction between Ada and Inman is immediate though inexplicable. The timing couldn’t be worse as Inman is leaving to join the Southern army to fight in the Civil War. They exchange photographs and a single passionate kiss. They promise to write and Inman promises to come back.

At war, Inman is witness to one of the bloodiest battles of the war, the battle at Petersburg, Virginia. The battle is legendary for the massive mistake made by the northern army who, after setting off a huge explosion underneath the southern lines, charged ahead into the crater they created. Once trapped inside the remaining Southern soldiers are able to pick them off one by one as they attempted to climb out of the crater. Inman watches most of the carnage until forced to jump in and save a friend who fell into the crater.

Afterwards, Inman is injured in a raid meant to kill the remaining Northerners trapped in the crater. While recovering, he receives a letter from Ada detailing her struggles since he left and asking him to come home. Inman immediately deserts and begins a very long walk home.

In the meantime, Ada is in grave danger of her own. With all of the able bodied men of Cold Mountain off to war and her father having passed away, Ada is left to tend the farm which she can't do. With only the kindness of an old couple played by Kathy Baker and James Gammon is Ada able to survive. At the old couple’s urging Ada takes in a woman named Ruby (Renee Zellweger), a force of nature personality who's as spunky as Ada is helpless. Ruby moves in and teaches Ada how to survive.

Zellweger's Ruby is at once the film’s most interesting and most problematic performance. On the one hand, it brings the film some much-needed lightness to balance the dreariness of the austere landscape and doomed love story. On the other hand, Zellweger continues to draw laughs even as she is supposed to be drawing sympathy. Credit Renee Zellweger for her ability to keep Ruby from going over the top but the adapted screenplay does her little favor with it's cornpone wisdom and forced passages that play up the character’s lack of education. The role was initially intended for an African American actress, the change is a wise one because as written the role would have been clearly racist.

As Inman makes his trek back to Cold Mountain he also meets some colorful characters, including a lecherous priest played by Phillip Seymour Hoffman and a nasty little redneck played by Giovanni Ribisi. Then there is the odd cameo by Natalie Portman as a war widow trying to protect her sick infant and fend off the Union army creeping up on her doorstep. She takes in Inman during a heavy rainstorm and the two have an odd encounter that is chastely romantic but unnecessary. Portman's scenes drag out the runtime of the film and serve no purpose on Inman's journey other than showing what great chemistry Law and Portman could have together given more time.

Much has been said of the chemistry between Law and Kidman, including rumors of onset romance. However, in the film they share so few scenes that the chemistry is never really an issue. Ada and Inman don't fall in love with one another but rather the idea of each other. Inman headed off to war and the strong possibility of death and appears to grab on to the image of Ada, the most beautiful woman he has ever seen, as a reason to fight and a reason to keep living in the face of great tragedy. 

As for Ada, Inman is at first simply an intriguing romance but in the course of losing her father and suffering on the farm, before Ruby arrives to help her, Inman is a savior. Inman is a knight in shining armor coming to her rescue. It is the idea of one another that matters, not the person themselves. It’s that idea which makes the film’s ending all the more poetic and fascinating.

I'm not going to give away anything, Director Anthony Minghella certainly never gives anything away. For most of the entire nearly three hour runtime of Cold Mountain, the audience has a preconceived notion of what will happen and Minghella alternately delivers it and subverts it. Switching perspectives from Ada to Inman, shifting the timeline from when Inman and Ada met to the current moment of their journey. The film is at once conventional and out of sorts and I dig that about it.

That said there is another element of Cold Mountain that I didn't like. Call it the Miramax effect or maybe just something about Minghella's affected filmmaking, but everything about Cold Mountain screams out at you to appreciate it whether you want to or not. There is an arrogance to it that says the film doesn't have to be entertaining because it's above that. It's like an obnoxious person who simply assumes that you like them regardless of how you really feel. Cold Mountain seems full of itself and arrives with an air that says “Award me.”

Is Cold Mountain a well-crafted film? Absolutely. Is it among the best films of 2003? No. Does it demand that you think it is? Definitely.

Movie Review: White Oleander

White Oleander (2002) 

Directed by Peter Kominsky 

Written by Mary Agnes Donaghue 

Starring Michele Pfeiffer, Allison Lohman, Renee Zellweger, Noah Wyle, Cole Hauser, Patrick Fugit 

Releasse Date October 11th, 2002 

Published October 10th, 2002 

In What Lies Beneath Michele Pfeiffer spends the first three quarters of the film giving the best performance of her career. A performance that was vulnerable and wrenching, combining madness and sanity with depth and sexuality. Then the film becomes a typical horror slasher movie with an un-killable and unbelievable villain that ruins the entire film. Now with White Oleander, Pfeiffer is allowed to complete the performance she started in What Lies Beneath and finally give the best performance of her career.

In White Oleander, Pfeiffer stars as Ingrid Magnusson, a talented but highly troubled artist and mother. Alison Lohman is Ingrid’s daughter Astrid, who quietly witnesses her mother's madness yet still worships her. After Ingrid is sent to jail for killing her lover, Astrid is moved to a series of horrendous foster homes but cannot escape the reach of her mother who fears that she is losing control of her daughter.

The first foster home Astrid is sent to belongs to a former stripper turned born again Christian named Starr (Robin Wright Penn). At first Starr seems merely strange and highly hypocritical, she is born again but lives with a married man, Ray, played by Cole Hauser. As the story proceeds we find that there is far more wrong with Starr than mere hypocrisy. As Astrid gets to know and like Ray, Starr begins to suspect that Astrid is trying to seduce him. 

As it turns out it’s the other way around. Though Ray never tries anything with Astrid the attraction is there and leads to a dangerous climax. Ray and Starr disappear and Astrid is sent to an orphanage where she meets a fellow artist and kindred spirit named Paul played by Almost Famous star Patrick Fugit. The tentative romance is a little rushed but the actors chemistry is good enough to cover any problems caused by the poor scripting.

Astrid and Paul’s relationship is short lived as Astrid is shuttled to another foster home. This time it’s the upscale home of an actress named Claire (Renee Zellweger) and her producer husband Mark ("E.R’s" Noah Wyle). Astrid quickly begins to enjoy her new home though trouble is obvious as Claire suspects Mark’s frequent travel is hiding something. And of course there is Ingrid who, without Astrid’s knowledge, has begun to contact Claire and would like to meet her. 

Astrid is quick to notice her mothers’ malevolent intentions but Claire is oblivious and once she is drawn into Ingrid’s web Claire is quick to crumble. With Ingrid’s prodding, Claire becomes more suspicious of Mark and distant from Astrid, leading to an emotional ending that is the film's emotional climax. Watching Pfeiffer and Zellweger play scenes together is remarkable. Both actresses are giving everything they have and it is a sight to see. 

The mother-daughter relationship is the film's centerpiece and Pfeiffer and Lohman work like clockwork. Trading lines of dialogue as if they had worked together forever, their characters come to life in each other's presence. Each actress brings the best out of the other and their scenes together are riveting and intense. Oscar should call on both of these actresses.

That’s not to say that the film they inhabit isn’t flawed. Indeed were it not for the strong performances the film would no doubt collapse under it’s clichés. There is only so much sadness an audience can endure and White Oleander lays it on pretty thick, forcing Lohman into situations that would lead most sane people to consider taking their own life.

White Oleander is certainly no advertisement for the foster care system as Astrid is dropped on the doorstep of people far too obviously damaged to be real. Robin Wright Penn’s Starr is an unmarried former stripper caring for three foster kids even before she takes in Astrid. Renee Zellweger’s Claire, while affluent enough to provide a home for a child, has a history of suicidal tendencies and taking in children as if they were pets, sending them back if her husband seems unhappy. Astrid’s last foster home experience is with a Russian prostitute who has her foster children sift through garbage for things to sell at flea markets or steal from other children she takes in.

The most glaring problem is the lack of a fully fleshed out male character to balance the female centric vibe. Patrick Fugit is great but his character is far too sweet and accepting to be believed and he doesn’t get enough screen time to establish a real presence. Nevertheless it’s the two lead performances by Lohman and Pfeiffer that make White Oleander easy to recommend. Forget the ridiculous chick flick label, great performances are great performances, no matter what the gender. Great acting deserves to be appreciated, and White Oleander is blessed with great acting.