Documentary Review: Client 9: The Rise and Fall of Eliot Spitzer

Client 9: The Rise and Fall of Elliot Spitzer

Directed by Alex Gibney

Written by Documentary

Starring Elliot Spitzer 

Release Date November 5th, 2010

Published December 22nd, 2010

Eliot Spitzer does not easily earn your sympathy. A child of privilege, Spitzer used a combative, bombastic style of politics to battle his way to the top of New York state political apparatus. Then, at the apex of power, he allowed his weakness for sexual encounters unencumbered by emotion, those that could be paid for without an emotional toll to pay, to end what should have been a merely colorful but deeply impactful career to be derailed.

Alex Gibney’s documentary Client 9: The Rise and Fall of Eliot Spitzer tells the three track story of Eliot Spitzer’s life from his rise to Attorney General of New York in the late 90’s to his crowning himself the ‘Sheriff of Wall Street’ where he battled corruption and dirty financial dealing in ways that few had done before to his astonishing fall from power.

Track one of Client 9 is about the exciting and sexy world of high end escorts. As Wall Street rode the boom of the late 90’s internet explosion and the rise of deregulation in Washington, high end escort services boomed to service a new crop of mini-millionaires riding high on the filthy lucre of derivatives trading and mutual fund meddling.

The best of the best of this new era of the whorehouse was New York’s Emperor’s Club where models, athletes and wannabe starlets paid their bills by offering what was dubbed “The Girlfriend Experience” to Wall Street’s elite. The Girlfriend Experience is package that allowed clients to act as if their escort was really a date, merely one that was guaranteed to end in sex.

Whether Eliot Spitzer signed up for The Girlfriend Experience or not is up for debate. What is known is that as Governor of New York; Spitzer somehow managed to set up thousands of dollars worth of escort’s services through The Emperor’s Club under the nomme de plume George Fox and that at least one of these trysts with an escort named Ashley Dupre, variously known as Veronica or Kristen depending on the client, was captured on a wiretap.

Track two of the story of Client 9 lays out the background in front of which the Eliot Spitzer’s story became the ultimate distraction. As Wall Street’s self appointed Sheriff Eliot Spitzer led a crusade against powerful Wall Street fat cats with massive bonuses and the shadiest of shady practices among traders and trading firms. In his fight Spitzer made powerful enemies such as former NYSE Chairman Kenneth Langone, former AIG CEO Hank Greenberg and longtime Republican dirty trickster Roger Stone.

These three men, two powerful and one who knows how to manipulate that power, each had a serious bone to pick with Spitzer as their money was at stake in Spitzer’s crusade against the dirty deals on Wall Street. As Alex Gibney lays out the story each of these men emerges as unabashed bad guys in interviews, in their own words they admit with relish the joy they took in watching Spitzer fall and leave plenty of evidence behind of what they may have known and even influenced in the case against Spitzer.

Spitzer’s story became the perfect distraction from the trouble Wall Street was in 2007 and 2008. AIG, with Hank Greenberg as CEO, certainly needed a distraction what with their illicit practices leading to a massive collapse that required a multi-billion dollar bailout from Washington. That they could distract from that story by watching the man who started the investigation of them seems almost too perfect, a point not missed by director Gibney.

The third track of Client 9 is Eliot Spitzer in his own words and here is where the story stumbles. In his words Spitzer is not a man prone to introspection. Thus, Spitzer is not as forthcoming as many would hope. His inability to open up combined with the roughhewn political style demonstrated throughout the story make Spitzer a less than sympathetic central figure.

Does he own what he did? Yes, but he also doesn’t offer any apologies and while he refuses to speculate or lay blame on others for what happened to him, Spitzer is enigmatic about what drove a man with his powerful enemies, high profile and so much at stake to take such ridiculous chances for mere sexual favors. These are the things of which a sex addiction is made yet, slightly to his credit; Spitzer avoids a simple diagnosis for why he did what he did.

The most controversial figure in Client 9 is not Spitzer or his powerful enemies but rather an actress. Wrenn Schmidt plays the role of Angelina the fake name of the real escort who was Spitzer’s most often paid for companion. When the real Angelina agreed to talk with Alex Gibney off camera with assurance that her name and face would never be revealed, Gibney made the controversial decision to have Ms. Schmidt act out a transcript of his interview with Angelina.

The information is revealing and it applies to all three aspects of the story of Client 9. It’s fair to say that the information she reveals is necessary to the outsize, ambitious narrative Gibney paints, one of conspiracy meeting flawed humanity in the form of a Modern Greek Tragedy. But, having an actress play act the words of Angelina leaves one feeling a little uneasy as if on slightly shaky ethical grounds.

Thankfully, Alex Gibney does not push the ethical envelope too much and admittedly there is a certain humorous irony to pushing the bounds of decency in a story about Eliot Spitzer. Nevertheless, Client 9: The Rise and Fall of Eliot Spitzer is, if at times uncomfortable, an engrossing story told with a bold voice and a grand vision, a flawed man, a flawed story and a near perfect documentary.

Movie Review: Tyler Perry's For Colored Girls

Tyler Perry's For Colored Girls

Directed by Tyler Perry

Written by Tyler Perry

Starring Tessa Thompson, Phylicia Rashad, Anika Noni Rose, Thandie Newton, Kerry Washington, Whoopi Goldberg, Janet Jackson

Release Date November 5th, 2010

Published November 5th, 2010

For all of his faults as a filmmaker, Tyler Perry has guts. Perry is a principled artist who delivers stories his way on his terms and has made a mint doing it. Critics be damned, Tyler Perry is one of the most successful filmmakers of the decade and he’s never had to compromise his vision to get there, whether you enjoy his vision or not.

Perry’s latest daring bit of storytelling is easily his biggest gamble, even bigger than dressing in drag to play Madea. “For Colored Girls'' is an attempt to corral a 20 piece stage poem into a single dramatic narrative. Nearly a dozen different actresses, often breaking out in poetic verse, going through some of the ugliest trials ever brought to screen for dramatic entertainment. It’s bold, it’s daring and it's a massive failure but it’s Tyler Perry’s unquestioned vision onscreen.

There are seven lead performances in “For Colored Girls.” They include Janet Jackson as a tyrant magazine editor dealing with a distant, possibly gay husband. Jackson’s assistant played by Kimberly Elise is an under-employed woman carrying a jobless, abusive husband and two kids. Her neighbor played by Thandie Newton is bartender who deals with childhood trauma with an endless line of sex partners.

Newton’s sister is played by Tessa Thompson and is an aspiring dancer with an accidental pregnancy. Their mother played by Whoopi Goldberg is a damaged woman whose own childhood drama sent her spiraling toward lunacy in some cultish religion. Thompson’s dance teacher, Anika Noni Rose, is a loving trusting soul who finds herself on the wrong side of the wrong man. Finally, Phylicia Rashad stars as an apartment manager slash den mother.

There are other roles as well for Kerry Washington as a social worker struggling to conceive and singer Macy Gray as a back alley abortionist as frightening as such a figure likely should be. Wrestling all of these characters into one narrative is a Herculean task. Add to that some spontaneous poetry and crushing dramatic turns involving murder, rape, abortion, Aids and spousal abuse and you have movie incapable of withstanding its own weight.

“For Colored Girls” is what you might call emotion porn. Tyler Perry crams every possible trauma into “For Colored Girls” and pummels the audience with poetic glimpses of women in the darkest depths of despair until even the most remote audience member can’t help but shed a tear. It’s the false emotion of manipulation but even if each tear is surgically extracted, they are there.

The cast of “For Colored Girls” is phenomenal with veteran Rashad as the stand out. Rashad’s character is Perry’s own invention, a narrative convenience used to tie otherwise disparate characters together. Her apartment is located right between those of Elise and Newton’s characters and she hears everything. Still, Rashad gives this character a rich emotional life. She is the beating, broken heart of “For Colored Girls.”

The rest of the cast is too busy being decimated by the Jovian burdens each is asked to carry. The despair visited upon these characters is an anchor that cannot be raised. Each actress at the very least is given a moment to shine but because that moment comes in poetic verse it resonates more as a stand alone monologue than as part of a narrative.

This is the bridge that Tyler Perry cannot cross in “For Colored Girls;” trying to make actresses breaking out into spontaneous poetic monologue feel like a natural dialogue in a typical narrative drama. He would have been better off breaking convention; take the poetic moments to a stage and break the fourth wall. Instead, Perry chooses to try to make it just like any other film drama and the effect is disjointed and unsatisfying.

Undoubtedly moving, “For Colored Girls” finds moments of great emotional force. All is undone however by a conventional approach to highly unconventional drama. “For Colored Girls” is bold and daring but fails because it was not bold and daring enough. Attempting to force all of this emotion into a singular narrative, especially one as conventionally staged as this, is a fool’s errand and it sinks an otherwise powerful idea.

Tyler Perry wildly misses his target in “For Colored Girls” but you have to respect the attempt. Few filmmakers would have the guts to even attempt to bring a complex, Female led, stage poem to the big screen. It’s fair to wonder if other filmmakers recognized how un-filmable this material is but it took a lot of guts to try and Perry’s effort has to be praised. Perry fails in “For Colored Girls” but he failed fearlessly and spectacularly.

Movie Review: Vampire's Suck

Vampire's Suck (2010) 

Directed by Jason Friedberg, Eric Seltzer

Written by Jason Friedberg, Eric Seltzer 

Starring Jenn Proske, Matt Lanter, Ken Jeong 

Release Date August 18th, 2010

Published August 20th, 2010

There is a style of comedy that has failed to develop over the past decade and yet it is still widely practiced. Call it the comedy of association. By mentioning something or mimicking something you are automatically doing something funny. That's the theory. In practice, this style has lead to a series of abysmal movies from “Epic Movie” to “Date Movie” to everything except the first “Scary Movie.”

The makers of these movies are convinced that if they make mention of something, or mimic it well, then the act of doing so is automatically funny. In the new comedy Vampire's Suck this style means mentions of Tiger Woods and Lady Gaga but nothing particularly funny about either of them.

The premise is a humorous take down of the “Twilight” series. Becca (Jenn Proske), get Becca-Bella, anyway, is the new girl in Sporks Washington, again Sporks-forks, anyway. Becca is a sad, lonely outcast as demonstrated by the music on her IPod titled Sad, Lonely, Outcast music.

At school Becca meets Edward Sullen (Matt Lanter), get it Sull... oh nevermind. Edward is a Vampire and he and Becca are destined to fall in love. Also falling for Becca is Jacob (Chris Riggi) who happens to be turning slowly into a dog, I won't give away the big brilliant reveal of what kind of dog but I'm sure things like Edward Sullen give you a strong impression of the kind of humor we're dealing with here.

There really is nothing terrible about “Vampire's Suck.” The cast is game and seems up for any kind of humiliation. Actress Jenn Proske does an exceptional imitation of Kristen Stewart nailing the tics and vocal manners that so many have noted in Stewart's performance as Bella. Sadly, the imitation is better suited for a dinner party bit than for a feature film.

Once the premise is established, in the first 2 minutes of the film, the makers of “Vampire's Suck” tick through references to the first two “Twilight” movies from Edward's introduction to Becca; he wears a hazmat suit because of her scent, to Edward's first visit to Becca's bedroom which ends with an epic blast of gas, as seen in the film's trailer.

One cannot complain when an intentionally dumb movie turns out dumb. What can be complained about is that the film is dumb without wit or purpose. Writer-directors Jason Friedberg and Aaron Seltzer demonstrate a comic theory that states if something is funny then just mentioning it is automatically funny. Mention Tiger Woods scandal, automatically funny. Mention Lady Gaga, automatically funny.

The theory does not require some witty reference to Woods' troubles or for the film's Lady Gaga surrogate to do anything funny, just featuring them is funny enough. The film fails to offer funny exaggerations of these pop culture memes, the only aim seems to glom on to the existing cultural cache, the seeming agreement among us all that these people are funny to talk about. This theory is a massive failure.

The same theory applies to the film's central fodder, the “Twilight movies.” Friedberg and Seltzer assume that just dressing their characters like those in Twilight and giving them variations on the “Twilight” character names, then automatically these characters are funny.

The “Twilight” movies with their overwrought angst, new style vampires and pretentious Puritanism are ripe for a good send up. It's a big wide target that “Vampire's Suck” somehow misses by a mile. There is no insight, no attempt to understand and expose the flaws of the series. There is merely pale imitation and dull reference.

I laughed once during “Vampire's Suck.” The scene involved the Becca character posting something on Stephanie Meyer's Twitter feed. Sadly, one good joke is not nearly enough to recommend Vampire's Suck. There are still opportunities in this genre. “Airplane” and “The Naked Gun” movies remain cultural touchstones because this type of send up movie has so much potential. That potential is unrealized in “Vampire's Suck.”

Movie Review: Eat Pray Love

Eat Pray Love (2010) 

Directed by Ryan Murphy 

Written by Ryan Murphy, Jennifer Salt

Starring Julia Roberts, Billy Crudup, Viola Davis, Richard Jenkins, Javier Bardem

Release Date August 13th, 2010 

Published August 13th, 2010

“Eat Pray Love” has one perfect scene. Julia Roberts is staying at an Ashram in India and seeking peace from the love life that has been her obsession, preventing her from finding clarity. Needing to forgive herself for leaving her loving but forgetful husband played by Billy Crudup, Julia as writer Liz Gilbert flashes back to her wedding and imagines an alternate history where instead of the comic dance he'd done at their wedding, the song they intended to dance to, Neil Young's extraordinary "Harvest Moon," plays. T

he Liz of now takes the place of the younger more frightened Liz and tells her husband all that he will not let her say in real life. The moment moves elegantly between New York and India and the song captures the scene beautifully.

It's a rare moment in what is an otherwise pedestrian film but it's so good that it brought me peace with the film and allows me to tell you now that, despite a wave of my fellow critics trashing “Eat Pray Love,” this is not a bad movie. It's no masterpiece but in its mellow, adult contemporary way, “Eat Pray Love” brings an easy smile, a few laughs and that one perfect moment.

”Eat Pray Love” is director Ryan Murphy's adaptation of the Elizabeth Gilbert's real life bestseller. As played by Ms. Roberts, Liz Gilbert left behind a sad marriage to Stephen (Crudup), a bad timing boyfriend named David who she met and moved in with during her divorce and everything else that made her life miserable yet simple in New York.

The plan is to travel, first to Italy, for the food, then to India to live and pray at an ashram and finally a return trip to Bali where at the beginning of the film she met a medicine man who predicted much of how her life would turn out.

Along the way, of course, Liz meets a cast of colorful new friends, finds peace and self discovery and as the title spoils, she finds love. Whether that love can be balanced with newfound peace of spirit is a surprisingly well played and rather unique romantic obstacle. No doubt the best of Liz's new friends is Richard played by Oscar nominee Richard Jenkins. 

Liz and Richard meet in India and he glosses her with a rather precious nickname that sticks only because Richard Jenkins truly believes in how clever it is. Jenkins sells the Pray portion of Eat Pray Love like no other actor could and even saddled with a back-story monologue that strangle many other actors, he makes it work and the movie loses something important when he leaves. 

The last portion of the film is centered on Oscar winner Javier Bardem as Felipe and Liz's willingness to believe in love again. It sounds trite, it is rather trite but you will have to try hard not to like Bardem's big broad smile and his quirky, sweet way of expressing his love. Bardem has rarely been this free and easy on screen and it suits him surprisingly well. 

I don't see why men cannot be comfortable talking about love as a concept and a feeling. Why does this frighten us so much? I will boldly state here and now, I believe in love and while I have had my heart broken more than once, I wouldn't want to live in a world where the possibility of love is not right around the corner. Films made for women, like “Eat Pray Love,” are perfectly comfortable with this subject and part of the pleasure of the film is the ease and grace with which these ideas are assessed, mulled and demonstrated. 

”Eat Pray Love” comes up short as anything more than a minor pleasure. Though Eat Pray Love seeks answers to big questions the answers too often are general and easy on the palette, few hard truths here. “Eat Pray Love” doesn’t challenge the audience, it is neither bold nor aggressive about it's ideals, aside from the love of a great Italian past. 

That said, fans of the book should be satisfied and those who have not read the book can bask in the glow of Julia Roberts and Javier Bardem's beaming smiles and Richard Jenkins' exceptional wit and depth. And don't forget that perfect moment I mentioned. Neil Young fans especially will find themselves bursting with emotions and inspirations, thoughts of lost love. It's one of the best scenes in any movie so far in 2010.

Movie Review The Expendables

The Expendables (2010) 

Directed by Sylvester Stallone

Written by David Callaham, Sylvester Stallone 

Starring Sylvester Stallone, Jason Statham, Jet Li, Dolph Lundgren, Stone Cold Steve Austin

Release Date August 13th, 2010 

Published August 12th, 2010

Take your hands and press them against the sides of your head. Now, hold them there and press as hard as you can. Stay that way for the next 103 minutes and you will have an equivalent experience to having seen “The Expendables,” Sylvester Stallone's latest desperate attempt to remain relevant.

”The Expendables” stars Stallone alongside a rogue’s gallery of has-beens, wannabes, never-wears and Oscar nominee Mickey Rourke lending his rediscovered cool to the proceedings. The has beens include Jason Statham and Jet Li as Christmas and Yang, two of Stallone's, aka Barney, fellow mercenaries for hire, former military specialists now available to the highest bidder.

Also on the team UFC champion Randy Couture, former NFL player Terry Crews and sad, pathetic former B-movie star Dolph Lundgren. Together this ragtag band is off to some unknown isle to battle today's bad guy du jour, the rogue CIA agent. This time he's played by Eric Roberts in fine high camp form.

Stallone wrote, directed and stars in “The Expendables'' and much like his previous auteurist efforts like “Rocky ..2”.. through infinity and the recent “Rambo'' reboot, “The Expendables'' has flashes of inspiration but is mostly amateurish, off key and gut punching loud and violent. Clearly, this won't be an issue for the core of Stallone's audience, those already punch-drunk from months of UFC pay per views and neck vein popping work outs. For those seeking coherence or a story The Expendables is torturous. Call it water-boarding for the soul. 

There are times when “The Expendables” feels as if it is pummeling the audience's visual and auditory fists. Stallone and his editing team cut “The Expendables” in a fashion that will spin the heads of even the most cut friendly music video directors. Fight scenes are placed in a blender with images so randomly thrust forward it's impossible to tell whose head is being busted. 

This likely helped the aging cast look a little sprayer; Mr. Statham is the only member of the male cast under the age of 40. I say male cast rather unnecessarily as Charisma Carpenter and Giselle Itie are the only female cast members but neither is nothing more than a minor damsel in distress subplot. 

When “The Expendables” slows down for moments of dialogue the editing remains front and center thanks to Sly's bizarre angles; he really thinks angling off of mirrors is clever direction. If you manage to not be distracted by the editing be prepared for nonsense dialogue meant to make the characters seem quirky, instead it just makes the whole movie flaky and cheese ridden. 

I would love to say that you could enjoy “The Expendables” on a camp level, especially the scene featuring Stallone hanging off the side of a sea plane on take off in fine physics defying fashion, but sadly the whole of “The Expendables” is too harsh for any enjoyment to escape.

Even “The Expendables” centerpiece bit of camp, Stallone uniting his old Planet Hollywood pals Bruce Willis and Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, falls flat because  of Stallone's bizarre direction. Through odd camera angles and strange cuts it's impossible to tell if Schwarzenegger, Willis and Stallone were ever actually on screen at the same time. Willis and Stallone are in frame together briefly and Stallone and Schwarzenegger are as well but never all three unless Stallone's editing team was truly so horrible that they cut the three shots, that's possible.

What's more likely is that this meeting of the action hero minds never happened and was faked in the editing. To be fair, it was a cheap ploy anyway, hard to criticize it for that. Still, it's disappointing, especially when seeing Stallone, Schwarzenegger and Willis together on screen, even for 2 or 3 minutes of mindless exposition, was the one minor pleasure that might have escaped the dreariness that is “The Expendables.”

Movie Review: Cairo Time

Cairo Time (2010) 

Directed by Ruba Nadda

Written by Ruba Nadda

Starring Patricia Clarkson, Alexander Siddig

Release Date August 6th, 2010 

Published October 10th 

Each year there are a raft of adult romances that fly under the radar and land on DVD mostly unnoticed. Here's hoping Cairo Time starring the radiant Patricia Clarkson doesn't meet that same fate. A smart, subtle and sublime romance set against the exotic backgrounds of Cairo, Cairo Time is that rare movie that doesn't mind a little quiet contemplation a some terrific coffee talk to go with it's romantic longing.

Juliette (Clarkson) is an empty nester who, with her last child having just left home, can now visit her husband while he work in international aid. Mark (Tom McCamus) has worked in the Middle East through much of his marriage, currently in the troubled West Bank in the midst of the fight over Israeli settlements.

Juliette arrives in Cairo as Mark is trapped in the West Bank, cut off by an Israeli embargo. For now she is met by Mark's long time aide Tareq (Alexander Siddig) with whom she strikes an immediate chemistry. At the airport they meet one of Tareq's old flames, Yasmeen (Amina Annabi) and while Tareq seems flustered, the memories actually bond him with Juliette.

These two lonely people, longing for others find comfort in one another and end up spending more than expected time together. Meanwhile, Juliette, when not bonding with Tareq, takes in the sights of Cairo and her touristy ignorance provides further context for her isolation and loneliness. These scenes also help to establish the lush locations of Cairo which has rarely looked so romantic and yet forbidding.

Writer-Director Ruba Nadda has worked for the past five years, since the release of her well received debut feature Sabah, to craft Cairo Time. The time was well spent as she has created a gorgeous and moving romance for thinking adults. Patricia Clarkson is her usual compelling self, witty, sexy and elegant while co-star Alexander Siddig matches Clarkson smolder for smolder.

Ruba Nadda wrote the role of Tareq for Siddig and after years of being type cast as oil barons and or potential terrorist threats, Siddig settles comfortably into the role romantic hero. Siddig and Clarkson's forbidden romance in a forbidden land gives Siddig the opportunity to play elements of his personality he all to rarely gets to play.

Cairo Time is gauzy and laconic but in it's laid back chimera it plays as a warm and comfortable adult romance. I could watch Patricia Clarkson give Alexander Siddig simmering glances all day. These two amazing actors are a wonderful match with Ruba Nadda's excellent dialogue and gorgeous, exotic locales. Cairo Time should have had a chance to charm you at the box office, let it charm you now on DVD.

Movie Review: Charlie St Cloud

Charlie St. Cloud (2010) 

Directed by Burr Steers

Written by Craig Pearce, Lewis Colick 

Starring Zac Efron, Amanda Crew, Donal Logue, Charlie Tahan, Ray Liotta, Kim Basinger 

Release Date July 30th, 2010 

Published July 30th, 2010 

“Charlie St. Cloud” is baffling in the most unique way. A supernatural drama that combines soft focus goofiness of a Nicholas Sparks romance with the 'I see dead people' conceit of “The Sixth Sense,” “Charlie St. Cloud” in the end leaves one wondering just which characters were alive and which were dead. How many films can claim to be this strangely flabbergasting?

Zac Efron stars as Charlie St. Cloud, class valedictorian of a small northwestern town where sailing is the sport of choice. Charlie and his little brother Sammy (Charlie Tahan) are first glimpsed pulling off a dangerous move to win a local sailing contest and Charlie is said to be heading off to Stanford in the fall on a partial sailing scholarship.

Charlie's plans are destroyed one fateful night when, while he was supposed to watch his brother, he sneaks out to go to a party. Sammy catches him before he can leave and insists on coming with. On the drive they are hit from behind by a drunk driver and sideswiped by an oncoming truck. Sammy is killed almost instantly; Charlie is brought back miraculously thanks to the efforts of a paramedic played by Ray Liotta.

Flash ahead five years and Charlie hasn't left for Stanford. Instead he works as a caretaker at the cemetery where his brother is buried. A vision of Sammy after his funeral convinced Charlie that his little brother is still around and the two meet at sunset in the forest each day for a game of catch.

Enter Tess (Amanda Crew) a fellow sailor who attended high school with Charlie though he doesn't remember her. She is about to leave on an around the world sailing trek but not before the two bond a little over a mutual love of boats. The two spend more time together just before she leaves for her trip but the more time Charlie spends with Tess the more complacent he becomes about Sammy until he is forced to choose between the girl of his dreams and his dead little brother.

At least that is kind of what I think was happening in Charlie St. Cloud. I am honestly unsure what the hell was going with this film's bizarre supernatural plot and confusing screenplay. By the end I could not tell which characters were alive and which were dead.

SPOILER:

Director Burr Steers throws a lot of bizarre complications into this story including a love scene in the cemetery that grows creepy even beyond the setting once the story adds some unique details about Tess that make Charlie look really bizarre and creepy unless Charlie is dead, which he may be. I would call that a spoiler maybe but I honestly don't know if any of the characters in this film were alive or dead, in limbo, in memory or a dream. “Charlie St. Cloud” makes “Inception” look like the picture of narrative clarity.

Adding to the troubled story is the soft focus cinematography of Enrique Chediak who paints everything like a Hallmark Hall of Fame low budget TV production. Long soft focus close-ups of Charlie brooding in a bar, Charlie brooding over coffee, Charlie brooding on the ledge of a lighthouse are dropped in repeatedly throughout the film lending a bland sameness to the look of the film.

Zac Efron does what he can with his goofy role, playing Charlie as a lonely, angst-ridden weirdo who happens to look like Zac Efron. Having to deal with multiple dead or seemingly dead characters that no one else can see, Efron not only must brood alone, he has numerous scenes played just talking aloud to himself and occasionally talking to ducks. As I said, the film is very confusing.

Bizarre to the point of utter bafflement, “Charlie St. Cloud” combines the worst elements of a Nicholas Sparks adaptation with M. Night Shyamalan at his most self involved and aloof. Burr Steers is a once promising director now floundering in his attempt to bring his indie film cred to mainstream features. In “Charlie St. Cloud” Steers attempts to subvert convention by sheer oddity and fails to deliver either quirky indie-ness or mainstream accessibility.

I could almost recommend “Charlie St. Cloud” for its sheer oddity. I’m not going to but I could. The film is so weird and confusing and just plain bad in such a unique way that I can almost appreciate it on an ironic, sort of camp level. If you like movies you can make fun of with your friends, ala “Mystery Science Theater,” you may be just the audience for “Charlie St. Cloud.”

Movie Review: The Sorcerer's Apprentice

The Sorcerer's Apprentice (2010) 

Directed by Jon Turteltaub 

Written by Doug Miro, Carlo Bernard, Matt Lopez 

Starring Nicolas Cage, Jay Baruchel, Alfred Molina, Monica Bellucci

Release Date July 14th, 2010 

Published July 14th, 2010

Is Nicolas Cage evolving into the next Christopher Walken? Sure, Cage is a bigger star than Walken has ever been but they share a very particular oddity that bonds them. As Cage gets older his appeal becomes ever more Walken-esque as audiences have come to anticipate and crave his peculiarity.

”The Sorcerer's Apprentice” gives Cage a terrific character in which to find his weird. Balthazar Blake is 1200 year old Sorcerer who was an apprentice to the Merlin of Arthurian legend. Tasked with finding Merlin's direct descendent, Balthazar finds himself in modern day New York pursuing a guy named Dave (Jay Baruchel) while dodging his longtime nemesis Maxim Horvath (Alfred Molina).

Naturally, Horvath wants to unleash some all encompassing evil and it will be up to Balthazar and Dave to stop it. Along the way, Dave will meet a girl, Becky (Teresa Palmer) and Balthazar will pass along to Dave a number of lessons in sorcery while becoming not just a mentor but a father figure. Well, more of a crazy uncle really.

Nicolas Cage as crazy uncle is, of course, a natural. In “The Sorcerer's Apprentice” Cage actually dials down the crazy to a steady boil but those crazy eyes still twinkle and his fans will not be the least bit disappointed. The fun of a Cage performance in a family friendly flick like this is the unlikely potential that he could fly off the handle at any moment.

Well, Cage remains fully in control and fully family friendly in “The Sorcerer’s Apprentice” but those crazy eyes, that wild hair and that which can only be described as his 'Cage-ness' looks as if it could bubble over at any moment. Cage is on the verge of a meltdown or train wreck at any moment and he is the only actor for which those things can be a good thing.

Cage was a wreck in “Bad Lieutenant: Port of Call New Orleans” and delivered one of the finest performances of his career. The same could be said of his comic book hero daddy in “Kick Ass” and his Oscar winning performance in “Leaving Las Vegas.” Any of which could have toppled over into parody or unintentional satire. Then there are movies like “Con Air” or “The Rock” or “The Wicker Man” where the train wreck combines with a plane crash and a car wreck leaving the audience in awe of his sheer brainless awfulness. Ah, but we still couldn't stop watching.

”The Sorcerer's Apprentice” thrives on Cage's near perfect level of lunacy. Unfortunately, when Cage isn't on screen in his wacky sorcerer's hat and unwashed do “The Sorcerer's Apprentice” bogs down and becomes a bit of a bore. Thankfully, Cage is never gone for long and in the final act “The Sorcerer's Apprentice” really finds it's footing as a big action, big effects summer movie.

Hey mom and dad, wanna see a live action kids movie that you don't need to bring a book or magazine too? “The Sorcerer's Apprentice” has just enough ingenuity and energy to keep you from being too bored and more importantly it will keep the kids engaged.

And finally there is the Mickey Mouse/”Fantasia” tribute that parents and kids can both love. The scene featuring Baruchel, some enchanted mops and buckets and a touch of that classic “Fantasia” score by Peter Dukas is a wonderful homage that surprisingly doesn't feel shoehorned in to The Sorcerer’s Apprentice” but rather feels elegantly immersed into this story. More importantly, it's just plain fun.

Movie Review Grown Ups

Grown Ups (2010) 

Directed by Dennis Dugan

Written by Adam Sandler, Fred Wolf

Starring Adam Sandler, Chris Rock, David Spade, Rob Schneider, Kevin James, Taylor Lautner

Release Date June 25th, 2010 

Published June 24th, 2010

Critics, like me, can decry the Adam Sandler brand of comedy all day. We do, we will, I will. But, we cannot deny its continuing success. Sandler is, arguably, the safest business bet in all of Hollywood. Even at his worst in garbage like “Bedtime Stories,” the worst film of 2008, bar none, Sandler still turns out his fans and returns on studio investments. That will not change with the release of “Grown Ups.” This thin excuse for Sandler to get his oldest friends together for a lakeside working vacation is exceptionally typical of the Sandler brand: dog doo, passing gas and copious pratfalls. It's not filmic poetry but fans of the brand do not care.

In “Grown Ups” Adam Sandler is Lenny, a 40-something Hollywood Agent married to a sexy fashion designer (Salma Hayek) and raising three spoiled kids who text their nanny to bring them things ,and spend most of their time in front of a flat screen TV. Lenny laments his children's lack of imagination but does little to change them. That is until Lenny is shocked out of his rich boy Hollywood idyll by the death of his childhood mentor and basketball coach, Coach Buzzer (Comic and Sandler crony Blake Clark).

Gathering up his wife and brats, Lenny is headed home to a lakeside retreat to meet his old pals and former teammates. There's Eric (Kevin James), the chubby one, whose wife (Maria Bello) is still breastfeeding their 4-year-old son.

Kurt (Chris Rock), a henpecked house husband under the thumb of his pregnant wife (Maya Rudolf). There is Marcus (David Spade), the single and loving ladies man. And finally there is Rob, a dopey thrice divorced vegan spiritualist married to a much, much, much older woman (Joyce Van Patten).

Beyond these minor character quirks there really is nothing to any of these characters. In the course of “Grown Ups” none of these characters evolve, deepen or expand our understanding of them. Sure, each is given an issue to play, like Sandler and his tech-obsessed brats, but each of these issues is resolved with little, if any, dramatic effort.

Like most Adam Sandler comedies, “Grown Ups” is an idea in search of a story or unifying theme that settles for being a series of occasionally funny gags and one liners. Sandler and his company Happy Madison don't so much develop screenplays really; rather, they come up with ideas, grab a camera and hope that something will come together in editing.

Nothing much comes together in “Grown Ups.” David Spade gets in a few good jabs. Kevin James falls down funny once or twice. Rob Schneider has a bit with an arrow that earns a chuckle but the good gags are few and far between. More often you get a lot of dead space in which the gang riffs in search of a punchline, often never finding it and allowing a scene to simply end awkwardly and unfunny.

None of my criticism of “Grown Ups” will matter to the Sandler cult. There is poo, there are multiple farts and the chubby guy, James, falls down funny. That's all the Sandler fan asks for and that is all that “Grown Ups delivers.” Success, it seems, is a highly subjective concept.

Movie Review: Cyrus

Cyrus (2010) 

Directed by Jay Duplass, Mark Duplass

Written by Jay Duplass, Mark Duplass

Starring John C. Reilly, Jonah Hill, Marisa Tomei, Catherine Keener

Release Date June 18th, 2010 

Published July 4th, 2010 

John (John C. Reilly) is the consummate modern lonely guy in Cyrus. We meet him when his ex-wife, and unfortunately, his only friend, Jamie (Catherine Keener), catches him furiously pleasuring himself to internet pornography. This may not be the first time this has happened as instead of running away forever, Jamie stays to tell John she is getting married.

Jamie then forces John to attend a party the following night with her and her new soon to be hubby (Matt Walsh). With their encouragement John grows increasingly drunk and pathetic until finally he is caught peeing in the bushes outside the party. Thankfully, this latest humiliation is saved by Molly (Marisa Tomei) who, instead of being horrified by John's drunken behavior, somehow finds it charming. She saves him again a few moments later from a serious party foul and even has the guts to sleep with the guy.

Is Molly some kind human Lottery ticket ready to pay off with unending patience, warmth and understanding? It sure seems that way until the all too smitten John meets Molly's 22 year old son Cyrus who still lives at home and, as John quickly discovers, shares an entirely unwholesome intimacy with his mommy. No, there is no sex involved but when he seems to join her in the shower while John waits in the bedroom, the discomfort is of a creepy sexual fashion.

”Cyrus” is a comedy that thrives on discomfort for the characters and the audience. Our sympathy for John has a healthy layer of pity. Our feelings for Cyrus are more fearful than pitying, the way one regards a man on a bus mumbling under his breath. Cyrus may look harmless but his particular affectations are more than a little terrifying as is the way far too many people have grown used to it and are better able and willing to overlook it. 

From the character perspective you cannot help but find “Cyrus” effective, you feel everything these characters project in a painfully awkward fashion. The directors, Mark and Jay Duplass (Baghead, The Puffy Chair) attempt to mimic the awkwardness of their characters in their film style to far less effect. The style is, I'm told, mumblecore and in this incarnation it is a lazy mishmash of digital handheld photography and a script left mostly blank; supposedly for improvisation but more likely out of a general, hope for the best, negligence.

Thus my personal conundrum; do I like “Cyrus” or not? I'm not sure. I'm no fan of the film style but these characters, as assembled by this top notch cast, are undeniably effective even at their most repellent. John C. Reilly's pathetic sad sack develops astonishing romantic chemistry with Marisa Tomei's warmhearted savior.

And then there is Jonah Hil as Cyrus, a role that is as repellent as it is intended. You know Hill is effective when his Cyrus actually renders Tomei's mommy character unattractive, a feet of Herculean creepiness. This is easily Hill's most challenging role to date and he rises to the challenge allowing Cyrus to be something more than merely frightening, like some low budget horror creep with mommy issues, but a more complexly off-putting type. 

Now, before you accuse me of wanting every movie to look and feel the same, let me state that I have no issue with Mumblecore as a whole. Rather, I just have yet to see this style be effective on screen beyond being merely different. There is something highly pretentious in this low budget movement, as if it were trying to shame us all for enjoying movies with bigger budgets and better known filmmakers.

A great cast in a not so great movie, “Cyrus” is oddest disappointment of 2010.

Movie Review Jonah Hex

Jonah Hex (2010)

Directed by Jimmy Hayward

Written by Neveldine and Taylor

Starring Josh Brolin, Megan Fox, John Malkovich

Release Date June 18th, 2010

Published June 18th, 2010

There is a cult that surrounds the “Jonah Hex” comic books. The character is a melding of Gothic horror and western conventions and arrived around the time that Clint Eastwood had made westerns cool again, back in the early 1970's. “Jonah Hex” has been preparing for its pop culture close up for almost that whole time.

Now, more than 30 years after its debut, with Josh Brolin in the role of Jonah, and a first time live action filmmaker Jimmy Hayward (his first feature was the animated “Horton Hears a Who”), behind the camera, the underground comics legend comes to the big screen and many are going to wish it had waited a little longer.

Josh Brolin is “Jonah Hex,” an old west bounty hunter with the ability to talk to the dead and an unending urge for vengeance against the man who killed his family. That man is Jonah's former commanding officer in the Confederate Army, General Turnbull (John Malkovich). Jonah killed Turnbull's son, Jeffrey Dean Morgan in an uncredited cameo, while trying to prevent his unit from burning down a hospital.

Soon after, Jonah had deserted the army only to be tracked down by Turnbull and made to watch as his family was burned alive. Turnbull doesn't stop there, he wants Jonah to never forget the man who did this to his family and burns his initials into Jonah's face with a branding iron. To say this was upsetting to Jonah would be a minor understatement. 

Left for dead, Jonah was rescued by an Indian tribe, because of course he was. Movies always have to go give this kind of hero a mystical rub from the noble Native American tribe. Through some kind of mystical ceremony Jonah attains his unique power to speak to the dead. The dead have the convenient ability to find people they knew when they were alive wherever they are in the world and thus the ghosts tell Jonah where to find them. What luck, right?

Megan Fox plays Jonah's favorite sex worker, Lilah, likely the only one who can stand his ugly mug. She has little function in the main plot other than being Megan Fox and wearing skimpy period sex worker clothes. There is a forced romance between Lilah and Jonah but since writers Neveldine and Taylor, the idiots behind the awful “Crank” movies, could not write a convincing romance, we are merely told that Jonah and Lilah have more than a sex worker and john relationship.

The ‘relationship’ allows the writing team to include Lilah in the film's final act shootout where she demonstrates one of many convenient talents that she and Jonah both have that are only revealed to us when the characters really need them. Characters also arrive conveniently in just the place they need to, like when Jonah is shot in the chest and passes out from the pain just a few yards from those noble, mystical Native Americans who saved his life before and are ready to save him again.

“Jonah Hex” is a clumsy, poorly crafted comic book story hampered by an idiot script that lurches between a modern story and more cutaways than an episode of “Family Guy.” The film is humorless, sexist, and even at a mere 82 minutes in length, drags from one scene to the next as if the gloom that surrounds the character of Jonah Hex were anchored on the whole movie.

To be fair, one thing in “Jonah Hex” does kind of works and it is star Josh Brolin. Despite being hampered by ridiculous burn make-up, Brolin delivers Jonah as the badass he is meant to be. Combining a little Clint Eastwood with a little John Wayne and shooting it through a Gothic, horror comic book lens, Brolin swaggers and croaks out his lines with grizzly relish. Brolin brings a cool to the movie that was lacking in both scripting and direction.

Director Jimmy Heyward and the writing team of Neveldine and Taylor undermine Josh Brolin’s performance by cutting every corner, abusing flashbacks to tell Jonah’s backstory, and provide convenient information needed to lurch the plot forward. When not abusing flashbacks they abuse handy dialogue like that from the Blacksmith who crafts Jonah’s pseudo period weaponry.

The Blacksmith who, prepare to laugh, happens to be black and named Smith (Ha!) helpfully passes along the reason why Jonah fought for the Confederacy - he was a contrarian, not a racist slave owner. Jonah was a contrarian who couldn’t stand the government telling him what to do. As Smith says, Jonah couldn’t be a racist because they are such good friends. Ugh.

Comic book fans take heart, this version of “Jonah Hex” will fail miserably and when it does DC Comics will wait a few years, find a hot rising star and start whispering about a Jonah reboot. “Jonah Hex” is too terrific a character for the company to give up on, even when this movie version of Jonah crashes and burns.

Movie Review The A-Team

The A-Team (2010) 

Directed by Joe Carnahan

Written Joe Carnahan, Skip Woods, Brian Bloom 

Starring Liam Neeson, Bradley Cooper, Rampage Jackson, Sharlito Copley 

Release Date July 10th, 2010

Published July 10th, 2010

It seems like such an awful idea. Another cheesy TV show getting a big screen treatment? Ugh. But, then the makers of “The A-Team” made some very sly moves. First they hired writer-director Joe Carnahan (Narc) to rewrite the script and direct. Then they brought in Liam Neeson, just off of his badass turn in “Taken,” and Bradley Cooper, hot off his star-making role in “The Hangover.”

Even better, the producers nabbed Sharlto Copley hot off of surprise Oscar nominee “District 9” and plucked UFC star Rampage Jackson from the hottest sport in the country to take on the iconic role made famous by Mr. T. Each move was spot on and the final product, while not great cinema, is a near perfect summer movie, a smart blend of action, star power and over the top fun.

Hannibal Smith (Liam Neeson) is a longtime Colonel with the elite Army Rangers. With his team, including Lt. Templeton 'Faceman' Peck (Cooper), Captain H.M 'Howling Mad' Murdock (Copley) and Corporal Bosco 'B.A' Baracus, Colonel Smith have run successful missions around the globe.

The latest mission takes the so-called 'A-Team' to Iraq where stolen mint plates could allow bad guys to print unlimited amounts of American currency. The A-Team must retrieve the plates and the money from an armored transport crawling with armed insurgents. This task turns out to be the easy part.

The hard part comes when Smith and his team are double-crossed by American mercenaries for hire who kill the General who sent the A-Team on their mission, steal the plates and leave the A-Team to take the blame. Under arrest and court martial from the military, Hannibal Smith and his team will need to escape if they want to clear their names and seek revenge against those that set them up.

On opposite ends of this conspiracy are CIA Agent Lynch (Patrick Wilson) and Department of Justice Investigator Charisa Sosa (Jessica Biel). Lynch was there when Smith was given the assignment to retrieve the plates and turns up to help the team escape prison. Sosa was the one who warned Face not to take the assignment, and ended up arresting the team and leading the search to recapture them. She, of course, also has a history with Face.

The plot is a mere litany of set up, big explosion, brief aftermath and repeat. It's all very easy to follow and never intrudes on the true intent of “The A-Team,” which is to provide goofball, over the top, summer movie action and fun. Though not entirely brain free, “The A-Team” will not be mistaken for great cinema; it exists and succeeds on a different path, as a well-crafted nostalgia product.

Director Joe Carnahan is a master of clever carnage, setting his stage for big explosions and surrounding the massive special effects with lighthearted character scenes, aided greatly by a game cast. Liam Neeson, Bradley Cooper and Sharlto Copley have endless fun with these goofy, charming characters. UFC fighter Rampage Jackson is fun as well but his strain as an actor, especially opposite such natural performers, is quite noticeable.

The smartest aspect of The “A-Team” is never attempting to be more than it is. This is a goofy Summer Blockbuster that aspires to nothing more than thrilling special effects and clever, funny action and character bits. The best of the bunch has the team escaping a crashing plane inside a tank with parachutes and using the tank's gun to aim the falling tank toward a lake for a safe landing all while defending themselves from attacking drone aircraft.

“The A-Team” will leave you shaking your head at how completely off the charts goofy it is, but you will be smiling the whole time. The terrific cast seems to be having as much fun playing these goofy scenes as we have watching them and director Joe Carnahan corrals all of the charm and chaos of “The A-Team” into one terrific summer blockbuster.

Movie Review The Karate Kid

The Karate Kid (2010) 

Directed by Harald Zwart 

Written by Christopher Murphy 

Starring Jaden Smith, Jackie Chan, Taraji P. Henson

Release Date June 11th, 2010

Published July 11th, 2010,

Remakes are a bad idea. They exist purely to leech off of the success of the original and have almost no artistic spirit of their own. Remakes are, generally, a lazy yet hasty rehash of the past meant to financially capitalize on idle nostalgia. Thus there was little reason to assume the re-makers of the 80's favorite “The Karate Kid” would be any different.

Fair to say, in many ways “The Karate Kid” is no different from the litany of bad remakes from Hollywood but in the most wonderful ways it has innovated. Yes, there is a touch of originality and even thoughtful attempts at more than the mere re-enactment of the past, thanks mostly to two exceptionally well cast leads and a well chosen change in location.

Dre Parker (Smith) is moving to China. His mom Sherry (Taraji P. Henson) has taken a job in Beijing and the move from Detroit seems permanent. Stranger in a strange land, Dre has not so smartly avoided learning much of the language leaving him even more of an outsider.

Lucky for him a few nice folks speak indulge his ignorance including the pretty violin prodigy Meiying (Wenwen Hong) who attends Dre's school. Also helpfully speaking English is Mr. Han, the maintenance man in Dre's apartment building. Mr. Han is even more helpful because he also knows kung fu, a handy bit of expertise that Dre can use when a group of kung fu wielding bullies target Dre for being friends with Meiying.

Mr. Han would prefer to talk out the bullies troubles with their sensei at a major league kung fu dojo but when talking fails, Mr. Han decides to enter Dre in a kung fu tournament where hopefully he can win the bullies respect through skill, determination and most of all, beating them up in a legally sanctioned fight.

From there we get a series of training scenes interrupted briefly by a surprising sweet and subtle romance between Dre and Meiying that includes one of the cutest first kisses we've seen on screen since Macauley Culkin and Anna Chlumsky in My Girl. The romance is wonderfully tame and perfectly suited to the age of the actors -both are 12 as of the film's shooting- something that is far too often overlooked in modern movies.

Director Harald Zwart does what he can to screw up “The Karate Kid.” The director of such awful movies as “Pink Panther ..2”.. and “One Night at McCool's” drives scenes into the ground by repeating the same action from different angles ad nauseum. For instance, the start of training has Dre repeatedly taking off his jacket, hanging up his jacket, putting the jacket back on, dropping the jacket on the ground and picking it back up. 

The scene pays off, quite like Mr. Miyagi's Wax on Wax off does for Daniel San in the original, but payoff or not it's still a kid repeatedly playing with his jacket. There aren't enough angles or pop music scoring that can make this interesting over the 15 to 20 minutes of screen time devoted to it.

That said Jaden Smith is such a wonderful young actor with so much of his dad Will's charm that you can tolerate even the extended jacket related scenes. Jaden and co-star Jackie Chan make a great team and when they are not tied down by that damn jacket they are a lot of fun to watch. Surprisingly, Chan does quiet and cantankerous geezer almost as well as he does flip kicks and open hand punches. 

Smith and Chan are great but they share top billing with China which despite Communism and a lack of personal freedoms is beautiful on screen. The Forbidden City and The Great Wall are indeed well worn tourist traps on the big screen but they are unbelievably gorgeous tourist traps and you won't mind yet another movie featuring them.

Is it at all plausible that Dre could run unencumbered on an empty great wall or practice atop its spires? No, but it makes for a couple of fantastic visuals. When the scene moves to the hills of China and some gorgeous mountainside locations you will have to catch your breath at the beauty. The scenery in China lends an epic feel to the production and makes “The Karate Kid” feel like something slightly more than just another cash grab remake. 

Is the new “Karate Kid'' as charming as the original? No, but it could never be. The original is not necessarily a classic piece of cinema but it is a treasure of its time period and Ralph Macchio's chemistry with Pat Morita and Morita's dignified, nuanced performance make the original something to be remembered.

The remake honors the original by not stinking up the joint and finding a few notes of its own to play. Everything rides on the strength of young Jaden Smith's budding star charisma and Jackie Chan's aging lovability and it is a magical teaming that helps you overlook the many issues that exist with this remake of “The Karate Kid”.

Movie Review Splice

Splice (2010) 

Directed by Vincenzo Natali 

Written by Vincenzo Natali, Doug Taylor

Starring Adrian Brody, Sarah Polley

Release Date June 4th, 2010 

Published Published June 4th, 2010 

I have had my share of odd experiences at the movies but the experience of the sci-fi flick “Splice” starring Sarah Polley and Oscar winner Adrien Brody ranks high on the weird meter. What begins as a moody and strangely fascinating sci-fi story about the morality and consequences of gene manipulations becomes, in its third act, a remarkable train wreck of a movie.

Clive (Brody) and Elsa (Polley) are two of the most brilliant genetic researchers in the country; their work has been featured on the front pages of national magazines. As we meet them they are creating a hybrid animal with no face or body parts but a mix of proteins with almost unlimited potential in the fight against disease.

With the success of the animal hybrid Elsa and Clive believe the next logical step is a human/animal hybrid. The pharmaceutical company funding the research shoots down that idea but if that rejection stopped Clive and Elsa we wouldn't have much of a movie. Clive and Elsa push forward and successfully combine animal and human. The result of this experiment is Dren, played by Abigail Chu as a child and Delphine Cheneac as a grown up. With her unique gene combo the transition from child to grown up is greatly accelerated.

The scenes of Dren's creation and growth are strangely fascinating and oddly humorous as Polley's Elsa becomes a surrogate mommy to Dren and treats it as one would a real human child. Brody's Clive is more reserved and skeptical, keeping a scientific distance. When this dynamic changes in the second half the tension amps up in surprising ways before finally reaching a second act climax that will leave jaws on the floor.

I will not spoil it for you. Really, you have to see it for yourself. The things that happen in the final act of “Splice” are plot wise, somewhat predictable. The outside the plot stuff, the character touches if you will, are where “Splice” goes from sci-fi weird to goofball, off the charts whacked.

The third act and the final moments of “Splice” are so completely idiotic and so easily foretold that on principle I can't recommend “Splice.” That said, there is a big part of me that not only wants you to see “Splice” but to also film your reaction as you see the developments in the final act. For all the problems of “Splice,” there is a ballsy quality that one cannot help but admire and marvel at.

“Splice” is not a good movie; it's far too predictable and the characters far too dopey for it to be any good. It is, however, bad in fun ways and shocking in the most memorable and disturbing ways. The critic in me says skip it but my twisted sense of humor says run to theaters and see this astonishingly odd movie.

Movie Review Killers

Killers (2010) 

Directed by Robert Luketic 

Written by Ted Griffin

Starring Ashton Kutcher, Katherine Heigl, Tom Selleck, Catherine O'Hara

Release Date June 4th, 2010 

Published June 5th, 2010 

I was a big Katherine Heigl fan. Stress WAS. Her graceless exit from Gray's Anatomy combined with the complete awfulness of The Ugly Truth has soured me on this once promising star. My opinion of Ms. Heigl drops even further with the release of Killers, a spectacularly lame attempt to mix action and romantic comedy.

In Killers, Ms. Heigl plays Jen, a single, sexless, 30-something on vacation in France with her parents (Tom Selleck and Katherine O'Hara) when she meets Spencer (Ashton Kutcher). Though he is vague about his private life and why he is on vacation alone in France, she is far too smitten with his rippling muscles to notice.

Months later the two are married and cut to 3 years later they remain blissfully in love and living in suburbia. The suburban tranquility of course cannot last because what we know and Jen doesn't is that Spencer was once a CIA agent. When his old boss (Martin Mull in an odd cameo) contacts him Spencer is quick to see trouble ahead.

What he hadn't counted on is finding his former boss dead and all of his neighbors, people he has known for a few years now trying to kill him. Jen too is quite surprised by all of this but unlike a normal human being who might have headed for the hills at the sight of so much danger, Jen is quick to leap into the fray and soon the couple is on the run from their killer neighbors.

There is one more twist that Jen and Spencer cannot see coming but we sure can. I won't spoil the not so surprising 'twist' but let's just say the foreshadowing by director Robert Luketic is less subtle than a trainwreck/plane crash where a plane crashes into two trains as the trains crash into one another.

Killers is a skill free exercise in formula filmmaking. Director Luketic and his cast range through the apt clichés of both action movies and romantic comedies and fail to either thrill or tickle the audience for a moment. It is hard to fathom that Robert Luketic was the director of the wonderful comedy Legally Blonde a decade ago as since that movie he has turned out one terrifically awful film after another with Killers as the spoiled cherry on top of a moldering dessert.

As for Ms. Heigl, Killers like The Ugly Truth focuses on her least attractive tendencies. Both film's fail to give her more than a sketch of a character and forced to improvise something with her talent, Ms. Heigl turns to shrill screeching and hyperventilating to convey her character.

To be fair to Ms. Heigl the character as given to her is a true bonehead. One might, if confronted by a husband who is attempting to kill his best friend in their suburban living room, call the police and not instead listen to her husband's call to retrieve a gun from their bedroom.

Logically, one might be more than a little distressed about a husband who has after three years of marriage revealed himself to be a paid assassin for the US government and possibly put concerns about a weeks old pregnancy aside in favor of seeking safe haven with the authorities. Instead, Ms. Heigl's character attends a Target Superstore to purchase a pregnancy test of every available title. If this scene sounds familiar, it should. Ms. Heigl played the same scene to more appropriate laughter in Knocked Up, a film she has subsequently disowned.  

Ms. Heigl’s Jen never acts appropriately, never reacts as a rational human being might to her situation. Ms. Heigl is at all times subject to the whims of the screenplay and never for a moment anything but a pawn pushed across the screen from one brain free set piece to the next.

Another, more adventurous actress might have found a beat to play that might make you forget that the plot is nonsense. Angelina Jolie made a wonderful camp farce of both Wanted and Mr. and Mrs. Smith using her sexuality as a comedic foil. Sandra Bullock played up her tomboy cuteness against the ludicrous backdrop of Speed.

Ms. Heigl’s reaction to the ridiculousness of Killers is to amp up the shrill factor, screeching each line through clenched teeth or a tight, forced smile. Few actresses have ever seemed as terribly uncomfortable on screen as Ms. Heigl does in Killers.

You've likely noticed that I have left Mr. Kutcher out of most of this review. The fact is he's not so horrible here. His character makes sense in the context of the film. He reacts appropriately to the situation before him and plays each beat sincerely. It makes his performance more passably forgettable than bad.

Ms. Heigl should strive to be forgettable in Killers. Sadly for her, Killers will likely linger long enough for the Razzies, those wonderful awards for the worst Hollywood has to offer year after year. This year the gracious Sandra Bullock accepted her Razzie for All About Steve in person the same weekend she won Best Actress for The Blind Side.

Fair to guess, Ms. Heigl won't be that lucky or gracious.

Movie Review Letters to Juliet

Letters to Juliet (2010) 

Directed by Gary Winick 

Written by Jose Rivera, Tim Sullivan 

Starring Amanda Seyfried, Christopher Egan, Gael Garcia Bernal, Vanessa Redgrave

Release Date May 14th, 2010

Published May 15th, 2010

“Letters to Juliet” could be a very good movie. The premise is engaging and unique and the star, Amanda Seyfried, is so cute that I suspect kittens want to hold her. Sadly, as directed by Gary Winick, “Letters to Juliet” is a wit free wannabe weepy that adheres so closely to formula that one wonders if Winick was threatened with execution if he attempted any innovation.

”Letters to Juliet” stars Amanda Seyfried as Sophie, an American girl traveling to Verona Italy with her restaurateur fiancée (Gael Garcia Bernal) for a little romance and a lot of his business. While the fiancée runs off to collect high end wines and learn new recipes, Sophie heads for the tourist traps beginning with the legendary home of Juliet Capulet.

Shakespeare's “Romeo and Juliet” was set in Verona and the townspeople with a good eye for tourist capturing, have an ancient house with just the right kind of balcony to stand in for Juliet's home. Year after year heartbroken women leave their romantic wishes on the wall.

Over time another group of women have voluntarily gathered the letters to Juliet and set about answering them. Sophie witnesses the gathering of the letters and meets Juliet's secretaries. A writer herself, Sophie accepts an invitation to answer some letters while the fiancée continues his business.

While collecting the letters to Juliet, Sophie finds one that had not been found in nearly 50 years. The letter is from a 15 year old girl named Claire who met the man of her dreams in Verona but has succumbed to family pressures to leave him and return to England. She wants to know if she did the right thing or whether she should return to Italy. 

Sophie writes back and her romantic notions inspire the now 65 year old Claire (Vanessa Redgrave) to return and find out what happened to her lover Lorenzo Bartolini (Franco Nero). Along for the ride, tsk tsk-ing all the way, is Claire's grandson Charlie (Christopher Egan) who opposes the trip and holds special enmity for Sophie for inspiring the journey.

Naturally, Sophie offers to join the search for Lorenzo and thus begins a romantic journey across Italy. Or at least, that was the idea.

”Letters to Juliet” sadly is so forced and predictable that it becomes impossible to enjoy even the minor pleasures it has. Amanda Seyfried is an actress who is easy to enjoy. She has a great smile and most notably those great big eyes. It’s hard not to  root for her in a romantic situation and yet “Letters to Juliet” somehow fails to capture that. 

Director Gary Winick adheres to such a dull formula that even the most forgiving audience will have a hard time not deconstructing what doesn't work about it. Worst of the lot is poor Gael Garcia Bernal as the straw man fiancée. Placed as a roadblock to Sophie being with Charlie, Bernal's character is never formidable and instead exists to be awful and irritating enough that we don't mind seeing him cuckolded.

Spoiler alert, Sophie and Charlie are made for each other. They hate each other at first sight. They are forced together on a road trip. They have important things in common. Not for one moment is there an inkling of tension over whether Sophie and Charlie will be together and thus the movie meanders pointlessly toward its predicted conclusion. 

The same lack of tension, drama or humor exists in Claire's search for Lorenzo. The same scene repeats several times as Claire meets a man named Lorenzo, quickly figures out that this colorful weirdo is not her Lorenzo and back in the car we go. We know from the trailer that she finds him and since the film is about Sophie and Charlie, the romantic reunion and its aftermath are an afterthought. 

It's hard to hate a movie set in Italy. The wonderful landscapes and colorful people make for fantastic movie scenery. Oftentimes in “Letters to Juliet” you will notice that Cinematographer Marco Pontecorvo gets as lost as we do in the scenery, letting his stars slip into the background as he loses himself in the glories of the setting.

Pontecorvo's occasional distraction makes for some fun, unintentional comedy, but that is really the lone pleasure one can take from “Letters to Juliet.”

Yes, I realize punishing a romantic comedy for being predictable is like punishing a horror film for too much killing but Letters to Juliet really is lazier than most other romances in the ways it adheres to formula. Add that to the assets that the film wastes, including Seyfried's cuteness and Vanessa Redgrave's grace, and the whole thing becomes worse than just being lazy and formulaic.

Movie Review Human Centipede The First Sequence

Human Centipede The First Sequence (2010) 

Directed by Tom Six 

Written by Tom Six 

Starring Dieter Laser, Ashley C. Williams, Ashlynn Yennie, Akihiro Kitamura 

Release Date April 30th, 2010 

Published September 15th, 2010

Let's not be coy about this, you know exactly what “Human Centipede” is about. You aren't reading this out of curiosity about the movie; you want to know just how sick it is. You are wondering just how sick “Human Centipede” made this critic. It has sickened numerous others and the premise and that level of sickness has fostered your fascination.

So let's get to it then, how sick is “Human Centipede?” On an upchuck scale “Human Centipede” stood at two near pukes but surprisingly no actual projectile vomiting. Yes, I managed to keep my dinner down while watching “Human Centipede,” a feat I count myself proud of. The premise alone had my stomach flip flopping as I placed the DVD in the player.

The premise could not be more vile, a twisted German surgeon, Doctor Heiter (Dieter Laser), wishes to create a human centipede. He captures subjects, two doltish American girls, Lindsey (Ashley C. Williams) and Jenny (Ashlynn Yennie) with the bad luck to have stalled their car outside the Doc's home and an unlucky Asian fellow, Katsuro (Akihiro Kitamura) who the doctor hunted down with his trusty dart gun.

With his subjects drugged in his lab he sets about explaining his plan. He will fuse the subjects via the digestive system by sewing them mouth to anus. The calm with which Dr. Heiter imparts this information to his victims is arguably as disturbing as the actual surgery which takes place shortly after time is passed with perfunctory escape attempt by one of the American girls.

We are aware, and director Tom Six makes little pretense of our being aware, that this escape attempt is merely a way of padding the film's run time. We know the doctor's experiment will be successful; the inescapable fact of the hype surrounding “Human Centipede” stipulates that a human centipede must be delivered otherwise there is no reason for the hype to exist.

Credit Tom Six for tacitly acknowledging the padding and yet using the time well to craft some strong visuals that set up other strong visuals later. Indeed, “Human Centipede” is a shockingly crisp looking film with strong angles and bright clean lines. Never before has such striking cinematography been used to present something so utterly vile. Great talent has been spent to bring us the “Human Centipede.”

So, does this mean I like and recommend “Human Centipede?” This is not as easy a question as it would seem. I must admit the film is insanely effective. Tom Six sets out with very particular goals and achieves them with great panache. Every feeling he wishes to impart to the audience is felt. You cannot escape how compelled you are to feel exactly the dread, disgust and horror that Tom Six is seeking with “Human Centipede.”

It's all so professional and strangely restrained. While one will be expecting something truly, awe inspiringly sick, what you get in “Human Centipede” is something even more twisted and ingenious. Yes, you see the human centipede and you see some sick visuals of these three people moving as one with their mouths where no mouth should ever be. Yet, the sick questions are not answered in a visual fashion. Six leaves in the audiences’ minds the twisted practical questions about the predicament facing the victims.

Please tell me you know what I mean by practical questions because one of the great horrors of “Human Centipede” is pondering for too long the excretory concerns, among other things that make up those practical questions. In this way, “Human Centipede” has the genius of the shark in “Jaws;” it's all about what you don't see.

It's clear that I appreciate things about “Human Centipede.” So why am I reluctant to recommend the film? It's rather simple now that I think about it, how does one recommend an experience like this? How can I possibly recommend you see a movie about victims’ sewn together mouth to anus? It's just too twisted. If you are someone who wants this experience I don't really want to know that about you.

Hey, I have to see this movie. As a critic, watching movies is my job. Seeing “Human Centipede” and writing about it is what I do. You have the option to not have this experience and not share the nightmares that are fading for me a day later. There is simply no way to recommend you see this movie even as it is a dastardly effective and well crafted horror movie.

Movie Review: Death at a Funeral

Death at a Funeral (2010) 

Directed by Neil Labute 

Written by Dean Craig 

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

Release Date April 16th, 2010 

Published April 16th, 2010 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Movie Review: Why Did I Get Married Too

Why Did I Get Married Too (2010) 

Directed by Tyler Perry 

Written by Tyler Perry 

Starring Janet Jackson, Malik Yoba, Sharon Leal, Tyler Perry, Jill Scott 

Release Date April 2nd, 2010 

I was very surprised when I saw Tyler Perry's “Why Did I Get Married?” It was nothing like Perry's overwrought Madea comedies with their wild shifts of plot and Perry's disturbing drag character. Married was warm and erudite with a simple set up, characters that connected in real ways and a real honesty to the way each marriage and friendship was portrayed. Returning to these terrific characters Perry finds new truths and insights but unfortunately succumbs to some of his worst crowd pleasing instincts.

“Why Did I Get Married Too?” reintroduces us to 4 couples who get together every year to renew their friendships, get away from their kids and remind themselves why they got married. There is Patricia (Janet Jackson) and Gavin (Malik Yoba), the unofficial ringleaders because, it's assumed, they have the best marriage.

There is Terry (Tyler Perry, minus the dress and wig) and Diane (Sharon Leal) seemingly passed their issues with raising kids. Angela (Tasha Smith) and Marcus (Michael Jai White) still dealing with their infidelity and trust issues and even Marcus getting a job hasn't eased their tensions.

Finally there is the continuing drama of Sheila and her new husband Troy (Lamman Tucker). They met when the couples were in Colorado last get together and have married and moved to Atlanta. Unfortunately, Troy is having a hard time finding a job, adding a bit of stress to paying for the yearly jaunt with friends, this time in the Bahamas.

Making matters worse for Sheila and Troy is the unexpected arrival of her ex Mike (Richard T. Jones) who finds out about Troy's troubles and makes things worse by needling him about it. Mike also claims to still be harboring feelings for Sheila and longs to get her alone for a moment. When he does get Sheila alone? Wow, a big scene for Jill Scott that may leave some dabbing away tears.

The trip to the Bahamas encompasses about the first hour or so of “Why Did I Get Married Too?” and does well to remind us of these characters we care about while setting the stakes for new discoveries about each of them and the new conflicts that will drive the plot.

Sadly, once the story returns to the mainland in Atlanta things go from warm yet tense to overwrought and soapy. Tyler Perry's Madea movies have always been about delivering obvious social commentary wrapped in wild, over the top comedy. He eluded those instincts in the first film allowing the film to flow naturally even through scenes that audiences were not going to be comfortable with, including scenes of extended dialogue uninterrupted by forced humor or Madea schtick. Given Perry's history these scenes were downright daring.

The second half of “Why Did I Get Married Too?” doesn't make us suffer Madea eruptions but it does indulge Perry's taste for forced dramatics, forced humor and generally overdone theatrics that take the place of the drama the screenplay fails to create. Credit this exemplary cast for managing to keep us involved even as they are forced to overplay scene after scene.

“Why Did I Get Married Too?” fails to capture the heart, humor and smarts of “Why Did I Get Married?” Writer and director Tyler Perry cannot resist the pull of simple minded over-dramatics that easily manipulate an audience toward the wanted to response. It's the same forced crowd pleasing style that has wounded each of his Madea movies. With each forced moment the promise Perry showed with the original Married slips away.

What a shame, “Why Did Get Married?” seemed like a revelation and a promise. “Why Did I Get Married Too?” squanders that promise and reveals Perry as an artist driven by the fear of not pleasing his audience rather than serving what is best for his story and trusting that the audience will follow along.

Movie Review: Why Did I Get Married?

Why Did I Get Married? (2007)

Directed by Tyler Perry

Written by Tyler Perry

Starring Janet Jackson, Malik Yoba, Tasha Smith, Michael Jai White, Richard T. Jones, Jill Scott

Release Date October 12th, 2007

Published October 13th, 2007

Filmmaker Tyler Perry had a number of interesting ideas sprinkled within his over the top dramas Diary of A Mad Black Woman and Madea's Family Reunion. Those ideas unfortunately, were overshadowed by Perry's bizarre need to dress in drag and play the matronly Madea character. This larger than life character could be entertaining but he/she was also a hurricane that destroyed the reality surrounding her/him.

One moment would be deeply dramatic, the next minute Madea storms through and we are taken out of the moment. Perry smartly leaves Madea behind in Why Did I Get Married and his interesting ideas now have a functioning reality to work within. Smart, funny and with a great big heart, Why Did I Get Married is the most mature and professional work of Tyler Perry's career.

Four couples get together year after year for a joint vacation and therapy session. For one week these couples talk about everything in their relationships and ask the honest and forthright question, why did I get married? That is also the title of the book written by Patricia (Janet Jackson) who is happily married to Gavin (Malik Yoba) and acts as unofficial counselor of the group.

Joining Patricia and Gavin for the weekend are the seemingly stable Terry and Diane, the erratic and bickering Angela (Tasha Smith) and Marcus (Michael Jai White) and the completely failing Sheila (Jill Scott) and Mike (Richard T. Jones) who show up separately though Mike does not come alone. For one week in a Colorado cabin secrets will be revealed, fights will be had and each of the couples will face crises that threaten their stability.

Tyler Perry has one of the most loyal followings in all of film, almost a cult. I never understood before but after Why Did I Get Married, I'm beginning to understand. Perry makes movies that no one else is making. I'm not just talking about films aimed at African American audiences, though that's true. Rather, I'm talking about the stories he tells, the issues he confronts. Few filmmakers have the patience or interest in these subjects.

Why Did I Get Married isn't just about marriage, fidelity, family or faith but it uses these characters, these couples to explore each of these issues with depth and understanding. Some points are simplified but the film rarely devolves to overarching melodrama. Perry's storytelling is calm and assured and never goes out it's way to be dramatic.

Perry's naturalism, the easy rapport he has with his actors, each contribute to the good natured, familiar vibe of Why Did I Get Married. This is a movie of great humor and great heart with characters you quickly come to care about. The material is naturally dramatic and Perry deftly handles the drama by establishing what is at stake in each of these relationships and resolving them in ways that are suitably dramatic but also realistic. 

Tyler Perry made a mistake in his first two films putting himself in drag as the character Madea and distracting from the many interesting and important themes he was tackling. The drag conceit was far too jokey and amateurish and, especially in the otherwise quite serious Diary of Mad Black Woman, made it impossible to take the films seriously despite their deeply meaningful intentions.

Abandoning the Madea character does wonders for Perry's dramatic intentions. Without the drag queen distraction, Perry is free to make strong points about love, marriage, family and faith in easier to swallow bites. Without Madea, Perry seems smarter and higher minded. We can now take seriously what was once seen as foolishness.

Few filmmakers deal with the issues that Perry brings to the fore and he is to be commended for that. More often filmmakers examine these issues sub textually, within genre conceits. Perry takes on marital and family issues head on and has some very interesting things to say.

It seems blasphemous to compare Tyler Perry to Woody Allen or Ingmar Bergman but in dealing so directly and honestly with relationship material, Perry is in their tradition. Less angsty and much more of a softy and a romantic, Perry bravely tackles the kind of issues that most filmmakers deal with indirectly or with snide humor.

Perry has a long way to go in terms of directorial craftsmanship. But, in terms of straight ahead honesty, he's well ahead of the game.