Movie Review The Big Year

The Big Year (2011)

Directed by David Frankel 

Written by Howard Franklin 

Starring Jack Black, Owen Wilson, Steve Martin, Rosamund Pike 

Release Date October 14th, 2011

Published October 17th, 2011

I've always longed to be part of a community. I love the idea of a group of likeminded people who share a joyous passion for something. Sure, I have the community of fellow Chicago Cubs fans but we're such an edgy, angst-ridden bunch; it's hard to have a sense of community among people constantly waiting for something bad to happen.

I should consider birding. The wonderful new comedy The Big Year starring Jack Black, Steve Martin and Owen Wilson offers a wonderful, angst-free group of people whose passion is so purely beautiful that you can't help but admire and envy it, even if you don't quite understand it.

Birding and Birder Not Bird-watching or Bird-watcher

Brad Harris (Jack Black) has a crappy job and little money but he does have his birds. Brad is a passionate birder and this year he is going to chase his dream, a Big Year. A Big Year is when a birder, bird watcher to us non-birding enthusiasts, spends one year crossing North America trying to see as many bird species as possible.

Kenny Bostick (Owen Wilson) is the greatest birder in the world. Kenny set the world record with his big year not long ago. Now, with an El Nino weather pattern on the horizon, Kenny knows someone will try to break his record and he's intent on keeping his legacy, even if it strains his marriage to Jessica (Rosamund Pike).

Third Retirement is the Charm

Joining Brad and Kenny on a quest for a Big Year is Stu Preissler (Steve Martin). Stu has just retired for the third time and his Big Year is his best chance to finally make his retirement permanent.

On the surface, The Big Year sounds like a ludicrous idea for a movie; a movie about bird-watching? A movie about bird-watching starring Jack Black? What's that old phrase about judging a book?

Never Judge a Book...

Get past the cover of The Big Year however, and you find a brilliant, sensitive, smart comedy about seeking adventure and chasing a dream that only makes sense to you. There is a pioneer spirit to these crazed men chasing their bird obsession and as directed by David Frankel that spirit is infectious and entertaining.

Jack Black is the heart of The Big Year as Brad. Black provides the voiceover for the film and his sensitivity, humor and passion are as surprising as they are terrifically low-key; it's Jack Black dialed down to a regular human speed and it works.

The Surprising Chemistry of Jack Black and Steve Martin

Jack Black and Steve Martin have surprisingly great chemistry as these two very different men who have only one thing in common, but one really great thing. Martin also sparks wonderfully with his onscreen wife JoBeth Williams, adding another terrifically human level to this well-grounded comedy.

Owen Wilson has the most complex role in The Big Year. Kenny Bostick's passion is less justifiable and closer to madness than is anyone else's. Kenny, we are told, already cost himself one marriage in his pursuit of a Big Year and looks to be on the verge of losing a second.

Owen Wilson The Greatest Birder in the World

Yet, even as his marriage to a woman he clearly cares about, Kenny cannot let go of what he believes will be his legacy. Rosamund Pike is excellent as Kenny's wife, a reasonable and sensitive woman who is a great deal more patient than any one should have to be until she can be patient no longer.

David Frankel is an exceptional mainstream auteur. Frankel tells very mainstream, easily accessible stories that could, in the hands of lesser directors, become wacky and over the top. Under his guidance however, stories like Marley & Me and The Big Year, become sensitive, smart human stories that mine humor from universality and truth.

A Shortcut Here and There

Of course, The Big Year has to take a few shortcuts to get where it's going. A few scenes have an air of convenience to them but that's only because the scenes were required to keep The Big Year from being three to four hours in length.

At the very least, Frankel's shorthand dialogue is neither insulting nor simpleminded. Rather, it's purposeful, well directed and exists only long enough to serve its purpose. A good example is a scene between Owen Wilson and Steve Martin.

The Honor System

There are rumors among the birding community that Kenny Bostick may have cheated to get to his Big Year, abusing the honor system on which the whole of the Big Year concept is based. Thankfully, Stu witnesses Bostick in a moment when Bostick doesn't know he is there earnestly seeking to see a particular bird that he has heard and could technically claim as he has recognized its call.

The moment is convenient for Stu's presence to witness it but the scene is necessary as it establishes Kenny Bostick as an honest man who takes his birding seriously; a point that only makes his home life compromises more poignant and sad.

An Unexpected and Welcome Surprise

The Big Year made me smile repeatedly all the way to the end and sent me home with a giant grin as well. This is a wonderful little human comedy populated by wonderful characters whose crazy adventure is inspiring, invigorating and at times both moving and funny.

The Big Year is the most unexpected and welcome surprise of 2011.

Movie Review The Astronaut Farmer

The Astronaut Farmer (2007) 

Directed by Michael Polish

Written by Mark Polish, Michael Polish

Starring Billy Bob Thornton, Virginia Madsen, Bruce Dern, Max Thieriot 

Release Date February  23rd, 2007

Published March 6th, 2007

Mark and Michael Polish are a pair of eccentric auteurs whose vision of the world is often detached and laconic. This quality is unique and gives them a signature style few directors can claim. It also, however, makes them a rather odd choice to write and direct a mainstream, uplifting family feature. Indeed, their latest film, The Astronaut Farmer, is an supposedly upbeat family story about a man who dreams of flying into the cosmos.

Charlie Farmer is a dreamer. He has been dreaming of being an astronaut since he joined the airforce at 17 years old. He progressed through the ranks quickly and was destined for NASA when a family tragedy called him home to his family's ranch in Texas and a life he never intended. Now in his late 40's with a beautiful wife Audie (Virginia Madsen), three terrific kids, Charlie has somehow managed to not give up his dream.

In his barn, Charlie has built a real life rocket. Stainless steel, a model of the classic first NASA space rockets, Charlie's space ship is nearly ready for launch when he comes to the attention of the federal government. The head of the FAA (J.K Simmons) is determined to keep the Texas farmer grounded. Meanwhile, Charlie's lawyer (Tim Blake Nelson), gets the media involved and Charlie becomes a sensation.

Written and directed by Michael and Mark Polish, The Astronaut Farmer has some of the Polish's usual inspired simplicity. The idea of an astronaut farmer has the same kind of quaint charm as the group of misfits from Northfork who cling to their tiny home even as the government plans to flood them out of existence.

The Astronaut Farmer shares with Northfork and the Polish brothers' debut picture Twin Falls Idaho a similar laconic, detached observant quality. The differences however; are stark and somewhat damning. Where Northfork and Twin Falls Idaho are character studies that thrive under the detached, observant style of the Polish brothers. The Astronaut Farmer is much too patently commercial to thrive under this kind of direction.

The Astronaut Farmer is so disconnected from any identifiable reality that there is a sort of loopy charm to it. Unfortunately the film simply seems too tired to mine that charm for more than just the premise and a quirky opening scene of Thornton in full astronaut regalia riding a horse over the plains. From there, the film drifts and bobs and never gains any narrative energy.

The roadblocks to the farmer's success are laid out succinctly (finances, the Federal government) but because of the laid back pace and manner of the filmmaking, these obstacles never grow to provide any narrative tension. Late in the film; when a false crisis is introduced it is so poorly put together it takes several minutes to realize what happened. This was likely a problem because the false crisis is the most energetic moment in the film and the Polish brothers simply didn't know what to do with it.

The Astronaut Farmer longs to be a simple mainstream family movie. It longs to be warm and charming like a lovable puppy. However, under the direction of the undeniably talented Mark and Michael Polish, The Astronaut Farmer is remote and detached. The Polish brother's attempt at taking their quiet, quirky observant style mainstream only serves to compromise both their style and this story.

Movie Review The Adventures of Tintin

The Adventures of Tintin (2011) 

Directed by Steven Spielberg 

Written by Steven Moffat, Edgar Wright

Starring Jamie Bell, Andy Serkis, Daniel Craig, Simon Pegg

Release Date December 21st, 2011 

Published December 20th, 2011

The Adventures of Tintin is a remarkable technical achievement. Every moment of The Adventures of Tintin looks like a beautiful comic book come to life. There is no doubting the technical mastery involved in bringing 'Tintin' to the big screen; it does after all have the names Steven Speilberg and Peter Jackson over the title.

So, why am I not completely sold on 'Tintin?'

Who's Tintin?

Tintin (Jamie Bell) is a boyish newspaper reporter with a great nose for a story. Tintin stumbles on what may be the biggest scoop of his career when he buys a model ship at a flea market. The ship is highly coveted and Tintin is warned by one strange man while another man, Ivan Ivanovich (Daniel Craig) offers him a suspicious amount of money for the ship.

Having been intrigued by the warning and the bidding war over the ship, Tintin gets into investigation mode. When he returns home he finds his flat ransacked and the ship missing. After another encounter with Mr. Ivanovich, Tintin stumbles over another important clue; one that Ivanovich will kill to get his hands on.

A Voyage to India

Tintin's clue leads to his kidnapping and a trip to India via ship during which Tintin makes a daring escape with the ship's former Captain, Captain Haddock (Andy Serkis). Haddock's connection to the model ships, there are more than one, is the key to a remarkable adventure that, of course, includes a fabulous treasure.

The Adventures of Tintin is a remarkable technical achievement that delivers fun with terrific visuals and some dazzling adventure scenes. Especially fun is a chase scene set in India involving a crumbling dam, a rocket launcher and an incredibly shrinking motorcycle and sidecar.

Motion Capture Animation

I am very resistant to motion capture animation; I have yet to see it rendered in truly spectacular fashion. Tintin is, in fact, the closest any filmmaker has come to making the form palatable, at least to me. The attempt to make animation look more and more realistic is a fool's errand. Speilberg and Jackson's 'Tintin' teeters on the brink of the 'uncanny valley' , the sweet spot between animated cute and animated creepy.

The adventure of "The Adventure of Tintin" helped me in getting over a little of my resistance to motion capture animation but not completely. 'Tintin' doesn't have that joyous, Pixar quality that inspires me to write love poems about the beauty of modern animation.

Nor does 'Tintin' have the ability to make me care for and worry for the characters; not in the way I might have for a live action character. Take Indiana Jones for instance; you know Indy is in no danger of death but you worry for him nevertheless. There is less worry for Tintin; the animation gives us distance from the characters that live action 'Indy' is able to bridge.

'Worth Seeing if'

That said, I still recommend "The Adventures of Tintin." Kids and parents alike will love the film's bright colors and colorful characters. Tintin as a character is a terrific role model and Captain Haddock's story of redemption from drunk to hero is a terrifically well played arc.

"The Adventures of Tintin" doesn't reach the heights of great animated movies and falls well short of the best live action movies. Instead, "The Adventures of Tintin" rates a 'worth seeing if' rating. It's worth seeing if you have already seen "We Bought a Zoo," "The Muppets," or "Hugo."

Movie Review Slackers

Slackers (2002) 

Directed by Dewey Nicks 

Written by David H. Steinberg 

Starring Devon Sawa, Michael C. Maronna, Jason Segal, Jason Schwartzman

Release Date February 1st, 2002

Published February 4th, 2002 

Oh wow, another movie set on a college campus we haven't seen one of those in what... two or three weeks? To be fair Orange County wasn't entirely set on a college campus but I think you get my point about this being much tread upon ground.

Slackers, not to be confused with the Richard Linklater classic Slacker, stars Devon Sawa as Dave who with the help of his friends, played by Michael C. Maronna and Jason Segel, is the biggest scammer on campus. Despite the title, Dave and his friends actually work pretty hard on their scams to steal test papers and cheat on exams. They work so hard on them in fact it made me wonder if the title was an idea from the movie marketing department and not the writers director or producer.

I had a lot of time to ponder things like the title, the amount of salt on my popcorn and the calories in my Pepsi because I didn't spend any time laughing at this early worst of the year candidate.

Poor Jason Schwartzman, when last we saw him he was in the brilliant film Rushmore. In Slackers he portrays the most unlikable movie character since the babies of Baby Geniuses. Schwartzman spends the entire movie being the creepy stalker of Angela played by Model James King, collecting her hair and forming it into a doll and building a creepy shrine in his dorm room. Why anyone thought any of this was funny I have no idea. Don't get me wrong, I think anything can be funny if done right but if done wrong as it is in Slackers, it's just painful and hard to watch.

The saddest thing about Slackers though is its star Devon Sawa who I really like as an actor. He was fantastic in Final Destination and even in the God-awful Idle Hands. Sawa is charismatic and funny with a great deal of potential as a comedic leading man. Let's hope he can avoid movies like Slackers in the future.

Movie Review The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (Original)

The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974)

Directed by Tobe Hooper 

Written by Kim Henkel, Tobe Hooper

Starring Marilyn Burns, Edwin Neal, Gunnar Hanson

Release Date October 11th, 1974

Published October 11th 2014 

Texas Chainsaw Massacre is more than just a movie, it’s a marker in time. The film is a flashpoint of American history, a cultural capper on 10 plus years of some of the most uncertain and tumultuous moments in American history. Between 1963, when President John F. Kennedy was assassinated and the release of Texas Chainsaw Massacre in 1974 we saw multiple assassinations of famed leaders, the start and end of the Vietnam War and dozens of other cultural upheavals that would play a role in the creation of Texas Chainsaw Massacre. 

Tobe Hooper’s horror masterpiece reflects the moment it was created in ways only legendary films do. The comparisons are limited because so few movies are as near perfect a reflection of their time. James Cagney in Public Enemy No.1 comes to mind. One could argue for Gone with the Wind or, more recently, Get Out, Jordan Peele’s remarkable look at modern race relations, as genuine moments when art crossed over into political culture and reflected something important. 

Despite its place in the bargain genre of the slasher horror movie, I believe completely that Texas Chainsaw Massacre is one of those legendary, moment-defining movies. It’s a film thick with metaphors of the time in which it was created, metaphors that reflect the moment in time in which it was made flawlessly. You can argue that I am inferring a great deal more than what director Tobe Hooper and screenwriter Kim Henkel had in mind but whether intentional or by accident, they made the most of the moment movie of the 70’s. 

Texas Chainsaw Massacre stars Marilyn Burns as Sally Hardesty. Sally is a hippie, one of the last of a fracturing sub-culture beaten down by war and the old guard establishment. She and her friends put on a good face about it, traveling the countryside in a VW Bus, smoking marijuana and talking about peace and love but reality is creeping in on the hippie mythos as we join the story. Sally is joined by her brother, Franklin (Paul A. Partain), who is in a wheelchair. 

Franklin is just home from Vietnam and his bitterness is the first warning of the beginning of the end of the good vibes that the hippies had been living off since the mid-to late 60’s. While the rest of the group, including Sally’s boyfriend, Jerry (Alan Danziger) and their couple friends, Kirk (William Vail) and Pam (Teri McMinn) do their best to ignore Franklin, his presence is a black cloud in their otherwise sunny view of the world. 

That sunny outlook, smile on your brother, everybody get together and try to love one another, is about to face an even bigger challenge than Franklin’s bitterness. Part of the hippie ethos is picking up strays, helping those in need. It’s a wonderfully positive quality but as the hippie generation grows up and the world begins to change not in the positive way they had hoped, that worldview slowly matures from Peace and Love for all to the Me Generation of the late 70’s, a selfish worldview influenced by the growing negativity of the culture. 

That change is embodied by a hitchhiker that the gang picks up along the way, a malevolent weirdo without a name and played with icky glee by Edwin Neal. While the hippies think they are doing a good deed, the Hitchhiker appears eager to punish their naiveté. He’s rude, obnoxious and threatening. Eventually, the hitchhiker pulls a knife and the group is forced to throw him out of the van. He’s not gone from the movie however, as we will see, he’s only the appetizer for the horrors to come when the van runs out of gas and the group seeks the kindness of strangers at a nearby farmhouse.

In the 1950’s it was commonplace in small towns for people to welcome others into their homes. In small towns, doors were left unlocked and folks knew the names of almost everyone in town. A community used to be a real community and even strangers could find temporary open arms as needed. However, the spectre of Charles Manson and several other high profile murders along with a precipitous and breathlessly reported on rise in crime began to permeate small towns in the late 60’s and early 70’s and by 1974 places that used to welcome a visit were now growing paranoid and insular. 

Texas Chainsaw Massacre signifies this change with a violent and grotesque display that reflects a definitive end of such openness. When one of our hippy friends approaches the farmhouse of a stranger he has no compunction about simply opening the stranger’s door and introducing himself. There he is met by the terrifying visage of Leatherface (Gunnar Hansen) who acts as much in psychopathic rage as he does in fear, a paranoid fear of the unknown that he feels he must meet with extreme violence. 

The symbology could not be more clear. The reflection of a society growing desperately more fearful is demonstrated bluntly and shockingly by the swing of Leatherface’s meat tenderizer. No longer could strangers expect open arms from small town strangers. Wariness, and deep suspicion, especially of those hippy types, was now the order of the day in 1974 and whether intentional or not, no movie captured that moment of change in American culture better than Texas Chainsaw Massacre. 

Oh but the significant metaphors don’t end there. While the ending of Texas Chainsaw Massacre is arguably the single most iconic image in horror history, the dinner scene at the start of the 3rd act is nearly its equal. At this point, Sally Hardesty has been captured and tied to a chair at the head of a horrific layout from the Sawyer family, the family of Leatherface including his nameless, hitchhiker brother, his frightful father, Old Man (Jim Siedow) and his corpse-like grandfather (John Dugan). 

What’s missing from that group? What role is Sally being forced to play as she is being menaced and tortured? It’s a mother, of course. There hasn’t been a female presence in the Sawyer home in decades. The lack of a mother character reflects the moment of 1974, a time when women were shaking off traditional gender roles and were moving into the workforce. In their wake were a group of angry and confused husbands and sons bereft, in their minds, of the comforting presence of a woman at home. 

That’s not to say that violent men are the result of the absence of women, the point is not to blame women. The satire of this moment in Texas Chainsaw Massacre is on the male characters. It’s a reflection and deconstruction of the misogynist mindset that women belong in a certain role in a man’s world and what happens if they are not in that traditional role. 

In this case, the lack of a female presence leads to filth and violence, the most extreme behaviors standing in as the best kind of satire of old school male mindsets regarding women leaving home for the workforce. It’s hard to see this metaphor today with women so well ingrained into the modern workforce but in 1974 this image was frighteningly powerful and potent and the dinner scene in Texas Chainsaw Massacre captured it brilliantly. 

On top of being thick with metaphor, the scene is remarkably scary. Tobe Hooper and cinematographer Daniel Pearl and editors J. Larry Carroll and Sallye Richardson put this series of shots together remarkably well. The scene is shot and edited with remarkable care with the camera doing as much as the scenario to build the gripping horror of Sally Hardesty’s dire situation. As the shot moves closer and closer to Marilyn Burns’ eyes the horror turns the tension like a screw tightening in your mind. It’s incredibly powerful and would be even without the thick metaphor to give it meaning. 

Then there is that iconic ending. Sally Hardesty runs through a field, covered in blood, screaming and being chased by Leatherface who is carrying a violently loud chainsaw. As Sally flags down a passing truck and climbs inside she is a near perfect reflection of America having survived the previous 10 years screaming and covered in blood, behind us a fearsome swirling tornado of terror that represents what we’re coming out of, escaping from. 

There is Sally in the back of that truck, bathed in the blood of rioters, assassinations, Altamont, Kent State, Vietnam, staring back at the incredibly frightening recent past and looking toward an uncertain but surely less fearsome future. By the end of Texas Chainsaw Massacre, if you're like me and Sally, you are spent. You’ve been through the ringer of a horror movie that isn’t merely a visceral, gut wrenching exercise in slasher formula, but one of the most thoughtful and terrifying movie experiences of all time. 

Movie Review Terminator Salvation

Terminator Salvation (2009) 

Directed by McG 

Written by John Brancato, Michael Ferris 

Starring Christian Bale, Sam Worthington, Anton Yelchin, Moon Bloodgood

Release Date May 21st, 2009

Published May 20th, 2009 

I have not been able to get over the idea that John Connor was not initially meant to be the lead character in Terminator Salvation. As a fan of each of the Terminator movies, even the much maligned Terminator 3:Rise of the machines, I was flabbergasted that the character prophesied as the leader of the human resistance in the future of this time travel action fantasy could somehow be relegated to being a supporting character.

Now having seen Terminator Salvation, some of my fears have been alleviated and others were elevated. Christian Bale's John Connor is the lead in this story but the whole thing is stolen by Sam Worthington as Connor's nemesis/ally Marcus.

Terminator Salvation begins in 2003 with the execution of a man named Marcus. He was convicted of the murder of three men including his own brother, and he welcomes his fate. Before he is put to death, Marcus agrees to donate his body to science, specifically to Cyberdyne systems. Fans of the series are already intrigued, the uninitiated will have to wait and see.

Shifting to the future, 2018, we find John Connor not yet the leader of the resistance. He is the leader of a small band of fighters somewhere in California taking its orders from leaders aboard a submarine constantly moving in the Pacific to avoid detection by SkyNet. When most of Connor's team is destroyed in a recon mission, Connor finds that SkyNet, the robotic system that became sentient in 2007 and destroyed most of the human population, is taking human hostages.

The big question for Connor at the moment is why are robots dedicated to killing humans suddenly capturing them. The leaders of the resistance aren't nearly as interested, especially since a recent raid has given them a new weapon for fighting the machines. They think they can blow up SkyNet using this new weapon but to do so will kill the prisoners, something Connor will not allow.

The real game changer here however is Marcus who somehow finds himself alive in 2018. What he doesn't know is that he is the evolution of what SkyNet has been planning for years, a bonding of human and machine that can be used to infiltrate and destroy.

If that last bit sounds like a spoiler then you must not have seen the trailer for Terminator Salvation. Even still, the opening minutes of the movie make certain that Marcus's fate is well known before it is revealed to him later in the film. It is one of the flaws of Terminator Salvation that what should be a major stunner of a plot point is given away with such poor plotting.

Indeed, director McG, best known for Charlie's Angels, doesn't care so much about plot as he does about special effects. How else to explain how McG could move ahead with a Terminator movie where John Connor is not the lead. Clearly, he doesn't care about this story.

On the bright side, McG cares deeply for his special effects and he has created some of the most seamless and effective special effects since maybe the Lord of the Rings movies. The machines are stunningly lifelike and the big special guest, the Governator himself Arnold Schwarzenegger comes to life in ways you cannot imagine, especially considering that the Governor never stepped foot on the set.

The effects of Terminator Salvation are so impressive that the film's many, many flaws become forgivable. The fact that McG tramples all over the Terminator mythology, tossing bones here and there with little in jokes for the fans, is forgivable unless you are truly hardcore. The wooden, charisma free performance of Christian Bale, forgivable because he's so good at letting the effects be the star.

I am surprised to say that I can even forgive the almost complete lack of plot, forgivable because I was so very entertained by this next generation of computer tech. Schwarzenegger's astonishing cameo alone is nearly enough for me to recommend the movie.

Terminator Salvation is not for those who prefer movies that tell an actual story. Nor is it for those of you, a very small number I am sure, who are desperately tied to the Terminator mythology. It is however for those like me who love a good roller coaster ride and those who are very, very forgiving and especially it is for anyone impressed by things shiny and loud.

If 'blowed up good' makes you break out in chuckles you are definitely the audience for Terminator Salvation.

Movie Review Ten Tiny Love Stories

Ten Tiny Love Stories (2001) 

Directed by Rodrigo Garcia 

Written by Rodrigo Garcia 

Starring Lisa Gay Hamilton, Elizabeth Pena, Alicia Witt, Debra Kara Unger

Release Date December 2001

Published December 17th, 2002 

The title of the film Ten Tiny Love Stories, gives one the impression of a quirky little indie love story. In reality, however, writer/director Rodrigo Garcia delivers something altogether different—a takeoff of Broadway's The Vagina Monologues, as edited by the people at Lifetime television.

The film is a pseudo documentary composed of ten straight-to-the-camera monologues by ten different actresses. Some are well-known indie actresses like Radha Mitchell, Elizabeth Pena and Lisa Gay Hamilton and some are more recognizable actresses like Kathy Baker, Debra Unger, and Kimberly Williams.

Though I compared the film with The Vagina Monologues, not all of the 5-to-10 minute monologues are sexual in nature. The film opens with Mitchell remembering an old boyfriend. Then Alicia Witt remembers her first sexual experience. And from there, each actress shares, confesses, and cries over memories of past relationships.

Lisa Gay Hamilton delivers the best monologue, an actress I don't know all that well (but she has one of those faces I know I've seen before.) The story Hamilton tells is of a blind date, it begins with her being strong and assertive. Gradually, she shows her true self, and bears her insecurities in a way that is shocking and moving.

Later in the film, Kimberly Williams delivers a sad monologue on promiscuity abroad that seems innocent at the start but becomes dark as it goes on. Williams could have benefited from a little improvisation, for, at times, her monologue seems more read than delivered. It is still well delivered and definitely attention grabbing.

The interesting thing about the film is that at first I wasn't sure if I was watching a real documentary or not. Both Mitchell and Witt open the film with very off the cuff remarks as if they were telling their own story.

Elizabeth Pena however is clearly in character as a cold-hearted woman who tells of leaving her husband simply because she was bored. Her delivery is agitated and she smokes as if the cigarette were a weapon. She destroys any pretense of being real through her sometimes over-the-top meanness.

The fact that director Rodrigo Garcia is also credited as the screenwriter indicates these stories aren't true—or at least not the stories that these actresses tell. The writing is good for a man writing for a woman; something historically difficult. The film is, however, a little loosely edited. Some actresses go on too long and keep talking past the point of their story.

I'm not sure what Garcia intended to accomplish with this film. It's interesting on a sociological and conversational level, but in the end it’s somewhat aimless.

Movie Review: Death Race

Death Race (2008) 

Directed by Paul W.S Anderson 

Written by Paul W.S Anderson 

Starring Jason Statham, Joan Allen, Tyrese Gibson, Ian McShane

Release Date August 22nd, 2008

Published August 22nd, 2008

The description of Roger Corman's 1975 cult classic reads like a description of the latest Grand Theft Auto-style videogame. Racing across the country in souped up death cars, drivers in the death race get points not merely for winning but for killing opponents and pedestrians alike. Points are assigned for killing particular types of pedestrians such as old people or children.

A controversial premise back in 1975 becomes something only eye brow raising today thanks to the rise of the first person killer videogame. Why then did writer-director Paul W.S Anderson abandon the gimmick for his modern Death Race remake? Who knows.

In the new Death Race Jason Statham stars as Jensen Aimes, a former Nascar driver convicted of murdering his wife. The reality is that Aimes was framed for his wife's murder by Hennessey (Joan Allen) who needed him in her prison to drive in the ratings champion Death Race. Her former top draw Frankenstein has died and ratings have been dropping ever since.

However, after hiding Frank's death from the public and helped by the fact that he wore a mask, Hennessey plans on subbing Jensen for for Frank. The Death Race features some of the most violent and disturbed men in the world including the multiple murder convict Machine Gun Joe (Tyrese Gibson) and the man who actually killed Aimes' wife, Ulrich (Jason Clarke), driving cars equipped with weapons. The goal, win the race and kill your fellow racers. Win five races in a row and you win your freedom.

The plot construct of Paul W.S Anderson drives wildly off course from the Corman original. The future setting of this death race for some reason includes giant prison colonies, corporate run prisons and other such unnecessary nonsense. The race itself is an whole other kind of nonsense. It's called Death Race yet racers have survived race after race so well that each of the 8 to 10 racers has their own history and fanbase.

Then Jensen joins and suddenly racers are dying left and right. Half way through this death race Hennessy introduces a new danger, a giant truck filled with her henchman that begins killing racers. She seems to have instructed it to kill everyone but then there wouldn't be any more death racers and their is half a race left?

Now, I realize I am injected logic where none is welcome, this is after all a supremely dumb action flick and not some high minded drama. But, when the action is as lame as that of Death Race, I am left only to my logical mind to survive such tripe. Pulling apart the ludicrous nature of Paul W.S Anderson's script just gives me something to do while I wait for the movie to be over.

Aside from his good work in The Bank Job, Jason Statham's act has gotten supremely tired. The Transporter movies, Crank, War, Statham is playing the same character over and over and over again, varying only the character name. Sure, sometimes, as in War, he speaks with a slightly more clipped pace, but otherwise it's no different.

His Jensen Aimes is merely his Transporter sent to prison. Writers and directors may as well start naming his character Jason Statham just to make things as simple as possible for the action star. Even the sense of humor he developed working with pal Guy Richie on Lock Stock and Two Smoking Barrels and Snatch has devolved into a tired, unfunny, deadpan.

Death Race never set out to be anything more than a cheap, second rate, z-movie. Roger Corman was even kind enough to add his imprimatur just to make sure you didn't expect to much quality from this enterprise. But, most of the credit for the crappiness of Death Race falls on Paul W.S Anderson who adds to his resume of debacles from Resident Evil to Alien Vs Predator, another stupidly violent, mind numbingly idiotic, action flick.

Movie Review: Babylon A.D

Babylon A.D (2008) 

Directed by Matthieu Kassovitz 

Written by Mathieu Kassovitz, Eric Bresnard 

Starring Vin Diesel, Melanie Thierry, Michelle Yeoh

Release Date August 29th, 2008 

Published August 28th, 2008

Babylon A.D comes off far worse than it really is. That is likely because director Matthieu Kassovitz has trashed the movie in the media leaving the perception of one exceptionally bad movie. Babylon A.D is not a good movie, but with some terrific direction in the first two acts and a perfectly cast Vin Diesel, the film is not nearly as bad as it should be. In fact, if not for a third act that flies completely off the rails we could be talking about one terrific sci fi action epic.

In Babylon A.D Vin Diesel is cast as a mercenary known as Turog. Forced to live in the wilds of Russia because the American government considers him a terrorist, Turog longs to find a way home to New York. The opportunity to go home arises when a wealthy terrorist offers Turog $500,000 dollars and a way to get into the country undetected if Turog will take a package to New York City.

The package happens to be a 19 year old girl named Aurora (Melanie Thierry) whose strange abilities, including psychic visions, lead Turog to wonder if he has been set up. Aurora is accompanied by Sister Rebeka (Michelle Yeoh), her protector and surrogate mother, having raised her on a convent in a Russian hillside. Is Aurora a real psychic or is she exhibiting the characteristics of a girl gone mad from disease, a carrier of a virus meant to be spread in the United States should Turog succeed in getting her there? 

That last question is inferred by me and only vaguely addressed by director Matthieu Kassovitz. It's possible that a fuller explanation of the threat posed to or by Aurora was left on the cutting room floor. According to the director, the studio, Fox, took him out of the editing of the film and cut deeply to get Babylon A.D an PG-13 rating and a more box office friendly runtime of just over 90 minutes.

Watching the film seems to back up Kassovitz's claims. The final third of Babylon A.D is so thoroughly botched and so deeply cut that little of what is shown makes a lick of sense. As the movie attempts to untangle a thicket of a plot involving Aurora's parents and a new major religion on the rise, we are rushed to a forced, nonsensical conclusion that takes an hours worth of good work and reduces it to a whimpering, simpering, confounding end.

Babylon A.D is two thirds of a compelling, action packed, sci fi thrill ride and one third incomprehensible mess. It is clear that director Matthieu Kassovitz has a vision for this story, a grand idea to tie it all together but it never really arrives. What is left is some top notch action and effects scenes and a plot that spins out of comprehension in the last half hour before ending with a complete thud.

Vin Diesel is perfectly cast in Babylon A.D as a mercenary of the future. With that growling voice and impressive physicality, Diesel is exactly the man you want protecting you on a journey through the wastelands of outer Russia and the mean streets of New York City. If you buy the dangerous future world that Matthieu Kassovitz creates for Babylon A.D you will have no trouble accepting Diesel as that world's possible savior.

Babylon A.D had a chance to be something better than it is. It could have been more than a mere action shoot'em up with a future setting. There was, at some point, a real idea behind it. That idea was snuffed by the marketing concerns of a meddling studio, and what is left is a mess of incomprehensible plot tangles and an ending more unsatisfying than we've seen in a while. It's strange to have liked a movie as much as I liked Babylon A.D and not recommend it. But, with the final third of the film a complete disaster there is simply no way for me to justify recommending Babylon A.D.

Movie Review: Traitor

Traitor (2008) 

Directed by Jeffrey Nachmanoff

Written by Jeffrey Nachmanoff

Starring Don Cheadle. Neal McDonough, Guy Pearce, Said Tagmaoui

Release Date August 27th, 2008

Published September 10th, 2008 

Traitor has a complicated premise that is difficult to describe without taking some of the suspense out of it. This may explain why Traitor arrived in theaters with little promotion and to confused and mostly indifferent potential audiences. Studio marketers simply could not turn the trick of enticing audiences without giving away the films most satisfying twists and turns. The marketing then comes down to star Don Cheadle and while he is a respected actor, the star of Talk To Me and Boogie Nights is still not a household name.

When Samir Horn (Cheadle) was a boy he watched his devout Muslim father killed in a car bombing. Taken from his home in Sudan to the United States by his mother, Samir was a brilliant student who joined the military, made special forces and then disappeared. After years off the grid from Chicago to various points in the middle east, Samir is captured in Yemen while building and selling bombs to a group of jihadists.

After befriending the terrorist leader Omar (Said Tagmaoui) Samir, is invited into the terrorists' inner circle and eventually is asked to take part in an major attack on US soil. On the heels of the terrorists are a pair of FBI agents, Roy Clayton (Guy Pearce) and Max Archer (Neal McDonough), both of whom believe that Samir is the key to cracking the plot but for different reasons.

Directed and adapted for the screen by Jeffrey Nachmanoff, Traitor is a smart suspense flick with the popcorn thrills necessary of good entertainment and the top notch performances of a high end drama. Though the plot grows convoluted as more and more of the story unfolds, Nachmanoff keeps audiences engaged by highlighting the performance of Don Cheadle who commands the screen with an actorly presence.

The cast of Traitor is the glue that holds it together. As the plot grows a little weedy near the end, Don Cheadle and Guy Pearce keep things in line with their incredibly engaging performances. Cheadle especially has a talent for getting an audience in rapt attention. See his performances in Boogie Nights and Hotel Rwanda, Cheadle is among the most fascinating and compelling actors working today. 

Pearce, though he has acted sparingly since his blistering debut in L.A Confidential, makes exceptional use of his weary eyes and measured monotone voice, tinged here with a slight southern accent, to give his words greater import. Scenes between Pearce and character actor extraordinaire Neal McDonough, crackle with energy even as the two are just laying plot groundwork.

Traitor is not without flaws, the terrorists are weak characters and some of the twists and turns don't pay off as well as they should. Nevertheless, Traitor hits enough of the right notes to be a compelling often exciting pop entertainment. Don Cheadle may never grow into a box office titan but his talent cannot be measured in box office dollars.

See Traitor for Cheadle and Pearce, performances worth the price of admission.

Movie Review Hamlet 2

Hamlet 2 (2008) 

Directed by Andrew Fleming

Written by Andrew Fleming 

Starring Steve Coogan, Catherine Keener, Amy Poehler, David Arquette, Elisabeth Shue 

Release Date August 22nd, 2008

Published August 22nd, 2008

Since his splashy stateside debut as Alan Partridge in the indie hit 24 Hour Party People I have been left waiting for Steve Coogan to become a big star. His latest, Hamlet 2, was expected to be the launching pad. Unfortunately, a funny idea takes too long to get going and a flimsy, flailing effort only comes together for a few big chuckles at the end, after most of the audience has already checked out.

Dana Marsh (Steve Coogan) wanted to be an actor and for a time he was in a number of commercials. Unfortunately, his career never took off and now he finds himself teaching theater at a high school in Tucson Arizona. There his musical stagings of Hollywood movies like Erin Brockovich are universally panned by audiences, especially the whip smart freshman drama critic Noah (Shea Pepe).

When he is assigned a group of students whose other classes have been canceled by budget cuts, Dana has to come up with a way to reach them. Inspired by the young critic to write something of his own, Dana crafts Hamlet 2 and the students have a full on production to mount. The students take quite readily to the bizarre, offensive production, yes a sequel to the Bard's classic, co-starring Jesus and a time machine.

The description is unfortunately, funnier than the movie itself. Directed by Andrew Fleming, Hamlet 2 flails about for the first two thirds, finding only a few laughs here and there. Especially unfunny are the brief looks at Dana's personal life where Catherine Keener essays the least interesting performance of her career.

In the last third of Hamlet 2 things actually pick up. With the personal story shuffled off the stage, we get down to this ludicrous, ballsy, utterly offensive play and some actual laughs arrive. With Jesus and his time machine bringing Hamlet back to life and rescuing Ophelia before she drowns, as the gay men's choir of Tucson sings "Someone Saved My Life Tonight" the craziness of it all is enough to induce a giggle fit.

Then there is the big musical number. "Rock Me Sexy Jesus" is blasphemy of the highest form but also a jaunty, catchy, high energy pop tune that you cannot get out of your head. Arguably, the best musical moment of any movie in 2008, "Rock Me Sexy Jesus" is everything that Hamlet 2 should be but isn't. The song comes along in the funny final third of Hamlet 2 and those audience members who didn't check out during the sluggish first two thirds will absolutely love it.

If all of Hamlet 2 had the ludicrous, satiric edge of "Rock Me Sexy Jesus" it would be the funniest movie of the year. As it is, it's a slog to get through the first two thirds of Hamlet 2 and that flattens some of the admittedly funny third act. Steve Coogan still has not found the right vehicle to demonstrate his talent. Thankfully, this fall Coogan is mounting a standup comedy tour and a rumored documentary about said tour. Here's hoping this is the form he needs to break out.

Movie Review: The Women

The Women (2008)

Directed by Diane English

Written by Diane English

Starring Meg Ryan Eva Mendes, Annette Bening, Debra Messing, Carrie Fisher

Release Date September 12th, 2008 

Published September 13th, 2008

George Cukor's The Women from 1939 is an undeniable classic of wit and feminine mystique. For years many of Hollywood's top actress's including Julia Roberts when she was the biggest star in the world, have dreamed of getting a remake done. It wasn't until uber-producer Diane English, best known for TV's Murphy Brown, put the pieces together that something finally got done.

It should have remained a dream.

Meg Ryan stars in The Women as Mary Haines a rich housewife who devotes her life to her daughter and the many charities she funds. Mary's friends are a devoted lot. Sylvia (Annette Bening) is a high powered magazine editor on the verge of being fired. Debra Messing is the perpetually pregnant Edie. And Jada Pinkett Smith is Alex a character who covers all of the multicultural bases for the movie by being an african american lesbian.

None of these characters has much of a life beyond my one line description of them. The plot revolves around the friends' discovery of Mary's husband's mistress played by the sultry Eva Mendes. Eventually, the friends tell Mary who leaves her husband and finds a life on her own.

And that's pretty well it. If I am to venture a guess I think the movie is meant as a comedy. I didn't laugh much throughout so it's difficult for me to say. I did little much of anything during The Women a movie that was rendered completely unnecessary with the creation of Sex and the City. Carrie and her friends are the logical extension of Cukor's original premise and because it was a TV show it was allowed to be even more in depth and probing of these characters.

No, Sex and the City did not feature an african american lesbian but Samantha had a dalliance with a multi-culti lesbian character. The Sex and the City movie further pushed The Women into the realm of unnecessary by taking its well rounded characters to the big screen, the change in format and the title being the only things that made Sex and the City much different than The Women.

Sex and the City is funnier, sexier, smarter and more caring than this remake of The Women. With Sex and the City out there, it is a wonder why Diane English and Meg Ryan pushed so hard for this film to be made. Was it jealousy? Hubris? Did they think they could do this premise better than Darren Star and company?

Well, they didn't. Skip The Women. Get Sex and the City on DVD.

Movie Review: Bangkok Dangerous

Bangkok Dangerous (2008) 

Directed by The Pang Brothers

Written by The Pang Brothers 

Starring Nicolas Cage, Charlie Yeung

Release Date September 5th, 2008

Published September 5th, 2008

The Nicolas Cage bad hair hypothesis goes something like this. In Leaving Las Vegas, arguably Cage's finest work, his hair looks relatively normal. In the goofball actioner Con Air; Cage's hair is a salt and pepper mullet. In Matchstick Men; Cage's sartorial look is tight to the skull and looks good. In Next Cage goes with a big forehead and extensions in the back and the movie is as foolish as his hairstyle. For his latest action flick Bangkok Dangerous, Cage has gone back to the giant forehead, long weave in the back look and as per the hypothesis, the movie is as ludicrous as the hair.

Bangkok Dangerous stars Nicolas Cage as Joe, an international assassin for hire. Needless to say, Joe is not his real name. Joe is a ghost. Moving from place to place killing for whomever pays, Joe has become a relatively wealthy man. His latest job will be his most lucrative to date. Hired in Thailand to kill four men in a single week, Joe looks to make the score of his career.

With so much work and the secret of his identity to keep, Joe hires a local named Kong (Shahkrit Hannarm) to be his courier. The wide eyed Kong was a mere street thief but after meeting Joe he decides he wants to learn to be a killer. Eventually, Kong becomes Joe's student. Though this breaks his rule of no personal attachments, Joe can't help but see a little of himself in Kong.

Breaking another rule, Joe finds himself falling for a deaf, mute pharmacy worker who helps him with a cut on his arm. She is told that he is a banker but soon she will witness his true profession. The plot turns on Joe having to decide whether he will kill a rising political star or heed Kong's warning that the man is a true man of the people.

Danny and Oxide Pang already made this movie. Produced in 1999, the original Bangkok Dangerous is allegedly exciting, action packed and carries an emotional wallop. The new Bangkok Dangerous is a lumbering, clumsy, dull movie that has one impactful scene at the very end but by then, trust me, you won't care all that much.

Bored nearly to sleep by Cage's laconic voiceover and yawning attempt at looking intense, I could not help but become obsessed with that ridiculous looking haircut. I know that making fun of personal appearance is not really the realm of a movie critic, especially one with my colicky do, but I must say the hair was distracting.

Wearing a weave of black hair extensions that cling desperately to what little real hair Cage has left, the style is something akin to mangy black lab spray painted here and there but clearly losing it's hair. Look, I feel for Nic Cage. No man wants to lose his hair. With Bruce Willis having beat him to the bald look, Cage has little choice but to try and cling to what little hair he has and what he can try and attach to what is left.

Nicolas Cage's hair aside, the most damning sin of Bangkok Dangerous is being an absolute snooze. Why, if the movie were any good I might not have noticed Cage's haircut at all. OK, that's not true. But it might not be the dominant memory of the movie. As it is, Cage's cut is the perfect metaphor for the film itself, a ludicrous attempt to cling to the remains of something that came and went years ago. (the original Bangkok Dangerous came out in 1999).

Movie Review: Eagle Eye

Eagle Eye (2008) 

Directed by D.J Caruso 

Written by John Glenn, Travis Adam Wright, Hillary Seitz

Starring Shia LeBeouf, Michelle Monaghan, Rosario Dawson, Michael Chiklis, Anthony Mackie

Release Date September 26th, 2008

Published September 25th, 2008

Director D.J Caruso has had a strange career. He debuted with a funky modern noir character piece called The Salton Sea. He followed that brilliant indie feature with a braindead studio flick, Taking Lives, with Angelina Jolie and Ethan Hawke. He followed that with another piece of junk, the Matthew McConaughey-Al Pacino thriller Two For The Money.

Then Caruso remade Hitchcock's Rear Window with a modern twist and Disturbia returned the talent of the guy who made The Salton Sea. Now, reteamed with Disturbia star Shia LeBeouf, Caruso has taken another step back. With the chase movie junk of Eagle Eye, Caruso demonstrates a talent for blowing stuff up with a nihilists eye for consequence.

Jerry Shaw (LeBeouf) is something of a loser. Though he had opportunities, like a full ride to Stanford, he blew them off to become a copy technician in Chicago. One day Jerry hears that his twin brother has passed away. The brother was a military genius with a top secret job that neither Jerry or his parents knew anything about.

Days after his brothers death, Jerry's once empty bank account begins spilling cash on the street in front of him. The euphoria lasts until he arrives home and finds a large weapons cache awaiting him. A mysterious woman's voice on the phone tells him he has been activated and has 1 minute to get out of the apartment. He is captured by the FBI lead by Agent Morgan (Billy Bob Thornton).

While in custody that mysterious voice somehow ends up on his one phone call and once again Jerry is given a chance to escape. Meanwhile, a woman named Rachel Holloman is told by that same mysterious voice that her son will die if she doesn't get in a car and pick up Jerry. These two strangers are now pawns in a game of nationwide terror and can only follow orders to stay alive.

The plot of Eagle Eye is mousetrap efficient. The stakes are set and the players are put in place with proper motivations. The failing of Eagle Eye comes in not knowing what to do once all the pieces are ready to fall into place. The unfortunate fallback position of director D.J Caruso are a series of ever increasingly violent car chases.

These characters, their plight, could be interesting if the writers and director had serious intentions and an over arching point of view. But they don't. What they have is a plot on which to stage a series of car chases that at one point take on the comic pose of The Blues Brothers with nameless, faceless Chicago cop cars getting, flipped, flopped and smashed with little regard for the cops inside.

Shia LeBeouf has a tremendous talent for bringing the audience inside his character's troubles. We identify with him quickly because he is not the most handsome, or the biggest, or buffest action hero. He is street smart and witty and not every solution he invents actually works. He brings to Jerry Shaw the same qualities he brought to his hero in Disturbia and Transformers, a sense of awe of the situation he is in.

So often action movies or thrillers have characters who quickly adapt to the most outlandish circumstance. Not LeBeouf who allows himself to look and be out of his depth. It is a seeming lack of ego that endears him to audiences. Now, there are a few moments in Eagle Eye that force him to be a little more adept than your average person, but not for long and LeBeouf smoothes it over with good humor and a sly wink.

The script for Eagle Eye lets LeBeouf down by not giving his character more of an inner life. Jerry reacts to everything around him very well but the why behind his plight is weak. Eagle Eye wants to be about paranoia, technological emperialism, and big brother government. Those ideas are there in small bites but the overall purpose of Eagle is chase scene carnage.

There was an opportunity for Eagle Eye to be a modern techno thriller with a brain. D.J Caruso has that kind of talent. Sadly, Caruso has coopted his talent to the mainstream movie audience and now only delivers hyper-adrenalized, highly stylized, violence that measures on the Michael Bay scale. The funk is there in Eagle Eye, in the performance of Shia LeBeouf and the slightly offbeat energy of Billy Bob Thornton, but it is overwhelmed by mindless carnage.

Movie Review Lakeview Terrace

Lakeview Terrace (2009) 

Directed by Neil Labute

Written by Neil Labute 

Starring Samuel L. Jackson, Patrick Wilson, Kerry Washington

Release Date September 19th, 2009 

Published September 20th, 2009 

With a title like Lakeview Terrace one is not out of line to imagine a comedy about neighbors arguing over trees and zoning. Then you take into account the film's horrible poster and ad campaign which make it look like another cheeseball Hollywood thriller. Writer-Director Neil Labute is far too talented to make just another cheesy thriller.

Labute's Lakeview Terrace is a boiling pot of emotion bubbling into a raging inferno. This character based thriller ratchets up the excitement by exploiting the real ways in which people fail one another.

Abel Turner (Samuel L. Jackson) has been in the LAPD for 27 years. He is a single father of 2 children, his wife was killed 3 years ago in a car wreck. On the surface he seems like the kind of man you would wish for as a neighbor. That is not the case unfortunately, for Chris (Patrick Wlson) and Lisa (Kerry Washington) Mattson, newlyweds who move into their very first home, right next to Turner.

Right off the bat there is tension. Chris leaves the moving van in the street overnight and Turner leaves a warning ticket. Later, Turner pretends to be a carjacker and frightens Chris as he sits in his car. That incident is followed by an uncomfortable conversation where Abel seems to imply his disgust for interracial couples. And things get worse from there.

I don't want to reveal too much of this plot because there are important little insights dropped in along the way that play on the motivations of these characters. Motivation is Labute's muse in Lakeview Terrace. The writer-director goes out of his way to make certain that the actions of his characters emanate from a place of human motivation.

Jackson may be a casual racist and serious hardass but he is not some overarching, mustache twirling, super villain. His motivations are human and believable and because of that, what happens is far more shocking and surprising. The same can be said of Patrick Wilson and Kerry Washington who connect well as a couple and engage in the kinds of conversations and disagreements that real couples have.

Those little, spiky conversations where a couple pick on each other in ways that only a couple can are Neil Labute's strong suit and Wilson and Washington are terrific in delivering in those moments.

Arguably, the most thrilling aspect of Lakeview Terrace is Neil Labute's dialogue which is full of rich detail and little of that typically expository dialogue that obviously explains why characters do what they do. The script is free of those moments where characters do everything but turn to the camera to explain the plot. In Lakeview Terrace the important details are woven seamlessly into the story.

The ever increasingly nasty conversations between Abel and Chris are particularly exciting. Listen to the way Jackson leaps on Chris's words. He shifts Chris' context, he has no tolerance for vagary or the kind of faux pleasantries that people use on one another to avoid talking. This confrontational style keeps not just Chris but the audience on edge and contributes to the ever increasing tension of the story.

Breathtaking and edge of your seat excitement are cliches that critics use far too often. Nevertheless, there were more than a few moments of Lakeview Terrace where I was sitting bolt upright staring at the screen at the edge of my seat with my breath caught in my throat. Lakeview Terrace is exciting and surprising even as the conclusion feels a little too easily settled.

Neil Labute is a master who could never settle for the cliches of the thriller. In Lakeview Terrace he shatters the cliches, cuts through our expectations and crafts a devilishly thrilling entertainment.

Movie Review: A Private War

A Private War (2018) 

Directed by Matthew Heineman

Written by Arash Amel 

Starring Rosamund Pike, Jamie Dornan, Tom Hollander, Stanley Tucci 

Release Date November 2nd, 2018

Published November 6th, 2018 

A Private War stars Rosamund Pike (Gone Girl) as Marie Colvin, famed war journalist who was killed in a bombing attack in Syria in 2012. To her dying breath, Marie Colvin was a reporter, fighting to bring the facts of the story to the masses with the power of words. It was what she’d done since the 80’s when she became one of the first western journalists to interview Muammar Gaddafi when he was the name in middle eastern terror as the leader of Libya. 

The story begins on a shot of devastation in Homs, Syria where Marie was killed in 2012. We then quickly flashback to 2001 when Marie was reporting on the conflict in East Timor, Sri Lanka. Against the explicit instructions of the government, Marie went to interview members of the Tamil Tigers who were fighting a vicious, inhuman war in East Timor and were ravaged by starvation and violence. 

It was during this event that Marie was nearly killed when government backed forces attacked the rebel guides leading Marie back to a safe area where she was to write and report her story. Even after Marie told the soldiers that she was a journalist, she was nearly struck by an RPG fired by government soldiers. In that attack Marie lost sight in her left eye but still found a way to write 3000 words about the conflict and do so in time for her deadline. 

The attack in Sri Lanka however, would have long term effects on Marie as few stories had. Marie suffered from PTSD, something she dismissed but her repeated nightmares and increased reliance on alcohol indicated was true. Even this was not enough to keep Marie from going to Afghanistan and then Iraq in the wake of the September 11th attacks. It was Marie Colvin and her photographer who, against the explicit instructions of the American government and Iraqi leaders, helped to uncover Saddam Hussein’s horrific mass graves in 2003. 

A Private War bounces around in time to an occasionally confusing degree. The film does use captions to orient us to what time we are in but it’s up to us to catch up to where we are, which might be Marie’s apartment in London in the midst of a nightmare or some foreign journalist hangout in some unnamed war zone. Director Matthew Heineman is a documentarian by trade so perhaps the weaknesses of the story structure of A Private War come from inexperience in the structure of a narrative film as opposed to the more edit heavy word of documentary. 

That said, Heineman is exactly the right director for Marie Colvin’s story. Heineman’s time in the documentary world placed him in many of the same dangerous circles of the Marie Colvin’s of the world. Heineman’s previous documentary feature, City of Ghosts was filmed in Raqqa, Syria among a group of citizen journalists who likely would have been inspired by Marie Colvin had they known her. Raqqa is just 4 hours from Homs, where Marie was killed. 

Heineman’s style is strong, especially considering that the move from the intimate digital of documentary to the more filmic and controlled style of narrative feature can be jarring for some directors. A Private War is a great looking movie and that should come as no surprise as it was lensed by Academy Award winner Robert Richardson, Martin Scorsese and Quentin Tarentino protégé. The film has a similarly hazy, heady quality to Richardson’s work for Scorsese. 

Rosamund Pike is a complete badass in A Private War. She captures Marie Colvin as a human character in a way that we’re rarely allowed to see a woman in a movie. It’s not merely warts and all,  it’s honesty and bravery and the warts and all. Not only is Pike’s Marie tough, she’s also super sexy in a way that is similar to the swaggering way actors like Richard Gere are sexy when they play rebel journalists in war zones. 

Pike’s femininity is enhanced by her tenacity. The film shows her being bolder and crazier than some of her male counterparts and then shows her completely nude, stripping bare your perceptions of what it means to be tough and feminine. It’s a striking scene and one in which the nudity matters, it’s a demonstration of her character, a statement about her sexuality and desirability and how these are not separate qualities from toughness and intelligence. 

Rosamund Pike is on her way to a Best Actress nomination if there is justice in the world. Her Marie Colvin deserves that. This performance and this person deserve that tribute. It’s a shame that Marie Colvin didn’t receive this kind of recognition when she was alive to revel in it. She had already earned her stripes even before she helped put a face on the crisis in Syria and not merely her own. It was Marie Colvin’s stories about the dead and the dying in Syria that put the crisis in Syria into the homes and minds of the world and in ways many world powers would prefer she hadn’t. 

A Private War is imperfect as a movie, it’s far too episodic in nature to quite satisfy as a narrative feature but Rosamund Pike’s performance goes a long way to correct many of the qualms I had with the narrative structure of the movie. Pike is incredible and for her, A Private War is an absolute must-see.

Movie Review: Choke

Choke (2008) 

Directed by Clark Gregg

Written by Clark Gregg

Starring Sam Rockwell, Anjelica Huston, Kelly McDonald, Jonah Bobo 

Release Date September 26th, 2008

Published November 24th, 2008

The thing about Choke is if you aren't a fan of Chuck Palahniuk's disturbing prose I cannot think of one reason why you should see this movie. Choke stars Sam Rockwell as a sex addict who doesn't learn anything, doesn't really grow and really doesn't do much of anything but revel in his own crapulence. If you find that idea appealing, maybe you might like this movie.

Or you should just read Palahniuk's book.

Sam Rockwell stars as Victor Mancini. A tour guide at some nameless olden days village, Victor only maintains so he can hang out with his pal Denny (Brad Henke) and pick up the occasional quickie with a tour goer, chaperone or fellow employee. His real job, the one that pays to keep his mother in a nursing home, is getting people to save his life in restaurants.

Victor intentionally chokes on food and enjoins the person performing the heimlich maneuver on him to take care of him. Generally, when people save someone's life they feel good about and are open to further helping the victim. Victor takes full advantage of their charity. In his spare time Victor attends a support group for sex addicts. He's not there for counseling but rather to meet easy women.

Why is Victor who he is? It's his mother. Ida Mancini is a manic depressive. Her wild mood swings found young Victor constantly on the run, often from the authorities. Victor went to a number of foster homes but was always 'rescued' by Ida when she extricated herself from whatever trouble she found for herself. Now Ida is suffering from dementia and Victor spends hours pretending to be whoever she thinks he is that day.

Choke is a character study. We are to examine and I suppose learn something from Victor. Myself? I was left to observe how unappealing Victor is. Sam Rockwell is a good actor and in the right role he is exceptional. Here he seems to get Victor on a human level but he doesn't seem to bring anymore to him than what was on the page.

The role of Victor requires an actor who plays things with his face and body and voice. Rockwell puts on the airs of Victor but doesn't go much deeper. Director Clark Gregg tries to flesh things out with flashbacks to Victor's childhood but the whole Oedipal story is a non-starter.

I just can't figure out what I am supposed to have enjoyed about Choke. It's the unpleasant story of a man addicted to sex who doesn't have sex for love or to connect with another person but only for the temporary escape from his misery. I don't doubt there are people like Victor in the world but I don't want to watch a movie about them either.

There simply isn't anything to recommend about Choke. Victor begins a miserable slob and ends as a miserable slob. He doesn't really learn anything and though the ending teases a lesson learned it's confusing as to what the lesson is or whether we are seeing what are really seeing. Even if the ending meant to tease a change in his life Victor never earned the change. He didn't change his life he merely demonstrates again and again his misery.

How can anyone recommend you watch that?

Movie Review: Bruno

Bruno (2009)

Directed by Larry Charles 

Written by Sacha Baron Cohen, Anthony Hines, Dan Mazer, Jeff Schaffer

Starring Sacha Baron Cohen, Bono, Harrison Ford, Paula Abdul

Release Date July 10th, 2009

Published July 9th, 2009

If ever  a movie deserved the NC-17 rating it's Bruno, the latest prank comedy from British provocateur Sacha Baron Cohen. Best known for his character Borat, also a boundary stretching R-rated comedy, Baron Cohen's latest makes Borat look tame by comparison. 

Bruno is, according to voiceover, Austria's number one fashion guru. He sits front row at the best fashion shows and designers live for his opinion. Unfortunately, when he shows up for a fashion show dressed in a velcro suit he brings down the entire house and is blacklisted from the fashion world.

Looking for a new start Bruno moves to Los Angeles where he hopes to become a worldwide celebrity. This plot is merely a jumping off point for a lot of humor at the expense of homosexuals and really anyone unfortunate enough to wonder into Bruno's line of sight.

In targeting everyone Baron Cohen misses just about everyone. From easy targets like the homophobic Westboro Baptist Church and a Los Angeles based Psychic to one time Presidential candidate Representative Ron Paul and American Idol judge Paula Abdul, no one is safe from Bruno/Baron Cohen's onslaught of homophobic and racial humor.

It's odd but I laughed a great deal at Bruno. The sheer audacity of some of the things Baron Cohen does on screen earns your respect for his bravery and more than a few laughs. However, on reflection you realize how empty those laughs really are. Psychics and homophobes? Not exactly groundbreaking targets.

In one highly derivative moment Baron Cohen and director Larry Charles visit a church in Alabama where they claim they can turn gay people straight. The idea is that gay Bruno wishes to become straight to become a celebrity. One must wonder however if he borrowed the idea from director Charles' previous effort, the documentary Religulous where star Bill Maher took on another church with the same claim head on and in much funnier fashion.

The most awkward and seemingly unfair series of scenes involve Bruno learning to become macho by going hunting with a group of Alabama hunters. The hunters are assumed to be homophobic, mostly because they are southern not because they have gone out of their way to demonstrate it, but it is not their discomfort with gays that comes out in these scenes but rather Baron Cohen's overall creepy approach.

Baron Cohen is begging for a homophobic response from these four hunters, even going as far as stripping nude and asking to share one man's tent. I don't care how tolerant someone is, there is no proper way to respond to that. The scene is awkward, creepy and uncomfortable and if it draws a laugh it is for the audacity of Cohen and not at the expense of the unfortunate hunter.

Much has been made of Representative Ron Paul's appearance in the film. The scene set up is shocking but again it is Bruno and not Representative Paul who looks like a creep as he drops his pants in front of Mr. Paul after going desperately out of his way to make Mr. Paul uncomfortable. Would I prefer that Mr. Paul not use a homophobic slur as he does while fleeing Bruno? Yes. But I understand his frustration.

The film is by some machination is Rated-R. I must say that what I saw in the first 10 minutes of Bruno more than warranted an NC-17. Again, it doesn't matter whether you are homophobic or not, I don't think you want to witness simulated gay sex. You get just that within the first 10 to 20 minutes of Bruno.

Just because the naughty bits are censored doesn't mean what you are seeing is not pornographic. This is really pornography dressed up as a comedy. Moreover, it's Baron Cohen playing a prank on us in the audience, daring you to walk out. Trust me if you decide to see the movie and walk out after 10 minutes, you are not homophobic, you just have good taste.

I will admit, I didn't walk out. The outrageousness, the sheer audacity of what I was seeing, and often turning away from until it was off screen, was so stunning that I succumbed to the idea of what will he do next. Bruno never fails to create one scene more shocking than the next.

Is Bruno daring and provocative? Yes. It's even funny in the sense of how incredulity can often turn into laughter. But, on further review, Bruno/Baron Cohen is really just a cheap shot artist throwing random shots in all directions and missing nearly every target simply for the fact that he has no real perspective to defend.

Bruno is gay but he is an ugly stereotype of homosexuality. He confronts homophobes in a fashion that some will find admirable but doing so while essentially displaying his own homophobia defeats the satire. Trying to force people, not surprisingly southerners, into displays of homophobia is just cheap.

There is no agenda, gay or otherwise in Bruno and without a perspective to defend or put forward the result is nihilism and what's funny about that? Bruno is not pro-gay or homophobic. He is not in favor of pompous celebrity but he fails to lampoon it. Bruno is vaguely racist but shys away from exhibiting racism or satirizing it well.

I laughed at Bruno. A lot. But, upon reflection, the laughs are empty and meaningless. The comedy of discomfort often leads to this feeling of emptiness afterward. There are no ideas in Bruno, only awkwardness, discomfort and the feeling of being cheated by a prankster who pretends to be on your side, pretends you too are in on the joke when he is really just punching everyone, including the audience.

If that sounds like fun for you, so be it. It was fun for me in the moment. Not so much fun now that I think of defending what I laughed at. I laughed out of shock, incredulous at how else to react. I have never seen anything so daring onscreen before and I was hooked by it. Now, I wish I had done something better with my time and you may feel the same. That is, if you can even make it through the movie as I did.

Movie Review: Blindness

Blindness (2009) 

Directed by Fernando Meierelles

Written by Don McKellar

Starring Mark Ruffalo, Julianne Moore, Alice Braga, Danny Glover, Gael Garcia Bernal

Release Date October 3rd, 2009 

Published October 10th, 2009 

Fernando Meierelles is an infinitely talented director whose features City of God and The Constant Gardener are breathtaking exercises in visual dynamism and urgent storytelling. It leaves one utterly baffled then to find Meirelles the director of Blindness; a dreary, sluggish horror story that features a plague nearly as curious as M. Night Shyamalan's evil oxygenating trees in The Happening.

Julianne Moore and Mark Ruffalo lead a diverse cast as a husband and wife. The husband is an opthamologist who is suddenly stricken blind. The previous day he had seen a patient who suffered the same affliction. Now the doctor is blind and so is his secretary and each of his patients. His wife however keeps her sight even as she joins her husband in a mass quarantine of people suddenly having been struck blind.

In the quarantine building, the blind are herded like cattle and kept like prisoners. The internal society starts off as expected, frightened but peaceful. Then chaos sets in. A despotic young man played by Diego Luna gets a hold of a weapon and takes the food hostage. He doles out rations in exchange for first jewelry and then sexual favors.

Meirelles observes these events with a bizarre distance, as if the chaos onscreen were an expression of his chaotic mindset. Even the director seems uncomfortable with the actions of his characters. This impression comes in the way Meirelles films the action through either too much darkness or too much light. If the director himself doesn't have the stomach for his action, how can he expect that of the audience?

This is the part of the review where I talk about the elements of the movie you might find most appealing beyond the premise and the technical creation that is the film. Unfortunately, Blindness is one of those rare movies where there really isn't anything appealing. Fernando Meirelles has crafted a thriller without thrills, a parable without underlying meaning. A sloppy, slow moving, dreary slog to a meaningless meandering ending.

What could I possibly recommend about that?

Julianne Moore and Mark Ruffalo are exceptionally talented people who no doubt were excited to work with a director of Meierelles' resume. That resume likely blinded them to the quality of Blindness, a mind numbing bore of a movie with less hope and exhilaration than even Eli Roth's lowest work. Rapes to murders to people defecating in the halls in service of a go nowhere plot, Blindness is a singularly horrific movie.

Movie Review: Flash of Genius

Flash of Genius (2009) 

Directed by Marc Abraham

Written by Phillip Railsback

Starring Greg Kinnear, Lauren Graham, Dermot Mulroney

Release Date October 3rd, 2009 

Published October 4th, 2009 

The story of Robert Kearns battle with Ford and the rest of the Detroit automakers is a classic David Vs Goliath story. Kearns invented the intermittent windshield wiper and then, as he was pitching his invention to the car companies, it was stolen. The specs for his invention were simply ripped off by execs at Ford who used them as a feature on their new line of Mustangs.

That was back in the mid 1960's. It wasn't until the early 80's that Kearns finally won a verdict against the auto companies. Turning Kearns' struggle into a movie director Marc Abraham and writer John Railsback have unfortunately cut more corners than the Ford company.

Greg Kinnear stars in Flash of Genius as Dr. Robert Kearns a professor of engineering. One day as he was driving his family home during a rain storm he had an epiphany. Why couldn't the car companies include a feature that would allow the windshield wipers to adjust to changing rain conditions. When he returned home he set to work on his wife's car.

Several months later Kearns cracked the secret and with the help of his best friend Gil Previck (Dermot Mulroney), a car dealer with connections in Detroit, he got a meeting at Ford. The engineers were impressed as was management. The hitch, Kearns wanted to manufacture the wipers himself. Ford agreed in principle but after Kearns submitted his specs to Washington for government safety tests, Ford pulled the plug.

Years later, as Kearns waits for another company to take an interest, he see's Ford's new Mustang and on a rainy night see's the wipers moving intermittently. Despite he and Gil holding the patents, Ford denies having met them and a years long battle for the credit and recognition of Robert Kearns invention begins.

Director Marc Abraham has a good story and a pitch perfect performance from Greg Kinnear to work with. Unfortunately, the script from John Railsback features more sappy cliches than there are features on a Ford car. Heavy on the melodrama, Kearns' home life with six kids and a beautiful wife played by Lauren Graham is where Flash of Genius finds it's biggest problems.

The home life plot clicks along hitting every cliche like clockwork. Graham moves slowly from supportive to nervous to ill to out the door. Kearns' oldest son moves in the same clockwork motion as mom until he is needed for an emotional boost in the third act.

Greg Kinnear commits himself fully to the role of Robert Kearns and infuses the role with a quiet, dignified passion. He gets the crazy eyes from time to time but always keeps it within reason. Kearns' own commitment is certainly questionable, especially after everyone in his life drops him, but Kinnear helps you over the most questionable moments by helping you believe why Kearns did what he did.

Dramatically, there are issues not just in the family story but in the legal one. A good deal of the case rides on a decision by Gil Previck not to testify on his friends behalf. I don't know how Gil Previck's story played out but here, the whole movie turns on him being selfish bastard and Robert Kearns remaining his friend. Huh? Then again, even as Ford was stealing from him, Kearns kept driving Fords.

I liked the fact that Flash of Genius is earnest in a very old Hollywood sort of way. There is no irony or distance from the material. The old Hollywood; one man against the world set up is a good one. However, the filmmakers commitment to old Hollywood cliches undermines much of the good in Flash of Genius. I really enjoyed Greg Kinnear's performance. Modest and understated in ways he never has been before, Kinnear nearly makes the whole thing work.

Sadly, the cliches and an overlong edit make Flash of Genius something of a slog.