Review: Gangster Squad

Movies about organized crime forever remain en vogue.  Sure we love our nuts and bolts cops and robbers stories, but adding the element of the mob/mafia to the narrative is like putting the plot on a steady diet of steroids.  Whether captured from the law enforcement side or from the point-of-view of the crooked, they tend to be riveting tales of loyalty and betrayal against the backdrop of flying bullets.  If you’re a fan of this genre, then Gangster Squad is very much in your wheelhouse.  The problem here though is that if you love these types of movies, then you’ve probably seen L.A. Confidential and The Untouchables and if you’ve seen these two movies then there is absolutely no reason to see Gangster Squad.  It is a near perfect amalgamation of the two films sans any twist to differentiate itself.

The plot of Gangster Squad is set in 1940’s Los Angeles, a city where crime boss Mickey Cohen (Sean Penn) holds a firm grasp on the city by way o drugs, prostitution, gambling, and guns.  Tired of citywide corruption, Chief Parker (Nick Nolte) commissions war hero John O’Mara (Josh Brolin) to put together a crew of edgy but clean cops to take back the city from Cohen by any means necessary.

The packaging on this film looks solid – great cast, highly stylized visuals, and a noir-ish quality that would seem to make the movie ooze with credibility.  That director Ruben Fleischer seemingly tried to channel the vibe from L.A. Confidential is not the worst thing in the world since Confidential is one of the best of its genre.  Still, the movie never really comes together as it should.  It’s a textbook example of the sum of the parts exceeding the value of the whole.  To me this problem begins with they style and tone.  Yes, the movie is stylized, but perhaps it is overly so to the point where the gritty tone is sacrificed.  Guns and fisticuffs aside, everything feels like it’s done for show rather than an organic product of the plot. 

Another issue with the film is that it borders on camp and not in a comedic way.  The movie strives for that hard-boiled film noir feel complete with the stoic narrative voice over, but everything feels a bit too pulpy for its own good.  The sets, the rhetoric, the overacting plays more like an off-off-off-off Broadway production rather than a full length feature with an A-list cast.  At times it feels like you're watching a bunch of Hollywood stars play dress up rather than immersing themselves into a narrative and that completely shatters the reality of the film, crippling what little credibility the film maintains.

As for the work of the cast, it’s a mixed bag from top to bottom.  Josh Brolin (as leader of the Gangster Squad) shows himself well as the protagonist of the film continuing his renaissance by delivering a tough performance.  It’s not perfect, but he plays it straight and consistently delivers throughout the film despite the uneven work of his cast mates.  Also landing in the plus column is Mireille Enos as Brolin’s wife.  She does a nice job portraying a street smart woman and the physical embodiment of the personals risks Brolin’s O’Mara is willing to take to fulfill his duty.  Giovanni Ribisi rounds out the good portion of the cast with his portrayal of Officer Keeler (the brains of the outfit).  Unlike his fellow officers, his character lacks the bravado and machismo of the others and brings a sense of balance to the group.

The performances that I found most underwhelming in the film were those of Ryan Gosling, Sean Penn, and Emma Stone.  While I think Gosling is a fair actor, I fail to see this fountain of talent that so many gush about especially so when considering his last three outings (The Ides of March, Drive, and Crazy, Stupid, Love).  Of the entire cast, he is the most guilty of overacting and thus most responsible for undermining the credibility of the narrative.  As for Sean Penn, his regression into mediocrity has been a more rapid descent then the old guard in Hollywood is willing to admit.  His performances have become increasingly one dimensional as he has morphed into a caricature of himself right before our eyes.  His work in this film is lazy, unoriginal, and uninspired.  As for Emma Stone, it pains me to say this as I am a huge fan of hers, but she seems oddly out of place as the starlet in this movie.  Though she is well accomplished, her performance feels a bit green and short on the kind of emotional intelligence required to captivate the audience, thus leaving a huge void in the production.

I have spilled a lot of ink ripping this movie apart but it’s probably not as bad as I have made it sound.  The film is just entertaining enough to keep you watching until the end although probably not nearly as invested as you would be with a movie of greater merit and certainly high expectations does this film no favors.  It’s a movie; it’s make believe but you’re never able to shake that feeling from start to finish and thus this film feels like nothing more than a satisfactory way to pass two hours of your life.  Rent it.  Don’t rent it.  Either way you won’t hate yourself for it.  Just don’t expect to see anything new, fresh, or very well done lest you set yourself up for disappointment.

Standout Performance: Josh Brolin.  His O’Mara is not a particularly well written protagonist, but Brolin does a solid job of delivering the performance that the movie needs.

Read More

Review: Ted

I have never watched an episode of Family Guy or American Dad and I missed the Comedy Central Roast of Charlie Sheen so I am unfamiliar with Seth MacFarlane’s work.  In fact, I would have no idea what he even looks like had someone not told me a few years back that I had just seen him in a karaoke bar in Koreatown.  Initially I had little interest in his directorial debut in Ted as the traditional trailers and TV spots did little to pique my interest.  It was not until I saw the red band trailer (or R-rated trailer) on YouTube that I took an interest in the movie as it became evident they weren’t going to pull any punches in this comedy.  My one trepidation about the movie was whether or not the live teddy bear gag would wear thin within the first fifteen minutes of the film. 

Thankfully, it does not.

The plot of the film is a where-are-they-now story set twenty years after a lonely ten- year old boy wishes that his teddy bear would come to life.  What ensues is a brand of vulgar yet lovable idiocy.  The premise is ridiculous and the jokes profane and vulgar, but despite the best efforts of the raucously foul mouth teddy bear to misdirect, this film is a very much the amalgamation of romcom and buddy flick that has proven to be a big box office winner.  So what makes the movie all come together?

It starts with Mark Wahlberg.  I am in no way a fan of Mark Wahlberg - the serious actor, but as I mentioned in my review of Contraband, I am a huge fan of Mark Wahlberg - the comedic actor.  In my opinion, his best work leading into this movie is in the vastly underrated The Other Guys.  What makes him good at inducing laughter is the ever-so-slight awkwardness that underlies his machismo that translates easily into a punch line.  As John – the man-child owner of Seth MacFarlane’s Ted, he is such a likable character because he delivers line after line of absurdity with a high level of sincerity.  To say that he and MacFarlane have a strong chemistry trading barbs and engaging in sophomoric repartee is a huge understatement.

As for the aforementioned MacFarlane, his voice work as Ted is equally important to the success of the movie.  He perfectly complements Wahlberg’s more methodical verbal pacing with his quick delivery and sharp one-liners, which fire off faster than the punch lines at a Chris Rock standup set (circa 1999) and are just as funny.  As I watched the movie, I was amazed that no matter how raunchy or borderline offensive the jokes were, the mask of a fuzzy teddy bear worked miracles in dulling any sense of impropriety.  But make no mistake about it, underlying the boatloads of vulgarity that spew forth from Ted’s mouth, is a ton of heart.

Almost as good as Wahlberg and MacFarlane is Mila Kunis, who has mastered the art of playing the incredibly attractive yet utterly approachable woman who is almost too cool to really exist.  She has the difficult task of playing the part of the unsatisfied girlfriend who acts as the foil to the juvenile chicanery, without losing favor with the audience.  This is no easy fete to achieve – one that Katherine Heigl has failed to master in just about all of her movies, but Kunis pulls it off perfectly. 

As for the rest of the cast, the work is spot on.  Giovanni Ribisi excels at playing an uber creep - likewise for Joel McHale.  Patrick Warburton (Puddy from Seinfeld) and Ryan Reynolds are awkwardly funny in very small doses and even Laura Vandervoort – who is brought on to be just another pretty face, fits that bill perfectly.  But to me, Sam Jones, who is best remembered as Flash Gordon in the 80’s cult classic, turns in the breakout performance from the supporting cast.  His appearance in the film is a great gag that delivers huge returns.

I would definitely recommend this movie.  In fact, I myself am planning to see it a second time, as there were almost too many jokes to digest.  Without a doubt, this film is right there with 21 Jump Street as one of the funniest movies I have seen this year and that it is filmed against the backdrop of Boston, Massachusetts is a huge added bonus.  See this movie ASAP and see it with a friend, a sibling, or a significant other.  Ted is a hilarious movie that has a nice balance of romance and raunch that ensures a good time will be had by all. 

Standout Performance: Sam Jones from the cult classic Flash Gordon – a campy movie that is perfectly described in Ted as "so bad and so good” – steals the show.  If you haven’t seen that film, you should see that one too.

Read More

Review: Contraband

There is no beating around the bush.  Contraband was a disappointment, although you can never really be sure what you are going to get when it comes to Mark Wahlberg.  For every hit like The Fighter, The Departed, and The Perfect Storm, there’s a bunch of misses like The Happening, Max Payne, and Planet of the Apes.  Still, with Ben Foster, Giovanni Ribisi, Lukas Haas, and Kate Beckinsale rounding out the cast, it was hard not to feel optimistic - especially given the fact we fans of action movies demand very little from filmmakers.  Fisticuffs, a solid car chase, some semblance of a love interest, and a double cross usually do the trick.  Yet sadly director Baltasar Kormakur fails to deliver a film that entertains.

The premise of the movie is in no way ground breaking.  Wahlberg plays Chris Faraday, a former smuggler turned straight, who is dragged back into the sordid business because of family.  If you are picturing Gone in Sixty Seconds minus the parade of exotic sports cars and Nic Cage's hairline then sadly you are on the right track.

So What Made This Film Not Work?

First and foremost the biggest slice of humble pie has to go to Marky Mark Wahlberg.  To me, Wahlberg is like Channing Tatum.  They are both cut from the same cloth.  They have limited range, an inability to truly emote, have a desire to bring some urban street cred to every role they are in (even when it’s not relevant to the plot), and overt machismo and this combination of qualities makes it extremely difficult for me to take either actor seriously.  Like Tatum in 21 Jump Street, I think Wahlberg is at his best when he is doing comedy as in the highly underrated The Other Guys, which exploited Wahlberg’s mediocre acting skills to set up great punch lines.

A piece of blame pie also has to go Giovanni Ribisi, who since The Rum Diary seems intent on portraying his characters with a very high pitched nasally tone that makes you want to press the mute button.  Ribisi has been in some great movies (Avatar, Lost in Translation) but unless he was directed to portray a generic mundane low-rent drug dealer with a really annoying voice, Ribisi really misses the mark here.  He fails to bring any real menace to the screen except when he is picking on women and children, which makes us wonder why we should care about Wahlberg’s machinations. 

The biggest culprit in the failure of the movie is the set up of the double-cross.  You will see it coming about five minutes after the opening credits and spend the next hour waiting for it to materialize.  For a movie that desperately wants to be a clever heist film the way Ocean’s Eleven is, this is a major indictment and the ultimate failure of the movie.  Because the action sequences are neither big nor impressive and the acting is not top notch, so without that impact of a “big reveal,” the proceedings completely fall flat.

I don’t recommend this film, but I am not going to completely dissuade people from seeing it.  I am sure there is a segment of the population who just wants to watch my fellow Bostonian flex his muscles as I am sure that there is another segment that does not mind watching a blonde Kate Beckinsale.  I really would not suggest you go out of your way to watch it.  Perhaps you can catch it on TNT in about a year when you have nothing better to do.  Under those conditions, it might play like a cheap man’s Italian Job.    Here’s hoping Wahlberg recaptures some of that comedic magic in Ted, his next theatrical release that just got bumped up to June 29^th.

Standout Performance: Caleb Landry Jones (X-Men: First Class) turns in a convincing performance as Wahlberg’s screw up brother-in-law.

Read More

Review: The Rum Diary

The Rum Diary – the opening credits flash, the plot advances, the scene fades to black, and then the closing credit roll.  I am guessing that for most people, the movie will soon after be completely forgotten.  It is unfortunate, because director Bruce Robinson puts forth a movie that is very stylized in its depiction of 1960’s San Juan with Johnny Depp running point man for the narrative as a burned out journalist who takes a dead end job in San Juan as a means to escape life in 1960’s America.

The problem with the film I suspect is the source material.  Based on a novel by Hunter S. Thompson, you get the impression while watching the film that you are watching a movie based on Thompson’s own experiences in P.R., especially given, (Depp) Kemp’s affinity for alcohol, his left-ward leaning tendencies, and the way he becomes an active participate to the very story he is trying to report on.  It is no surprise then that Thompson was unsuccessful in getting the novel published until some thirty years after it was written.

The film is set in the 1960’s in San Juan – a stone’s throw from Cuba and Miami.  This infuses an electric vibe into the proceedings since in a historic sense, it was an interesting time in the Northeastern Caribbean given the  delicate political balance and the abundance of change in the air.  However, that is also a contributing factor as to why the film feels like such a disappointment.  As the lead, Depp’s character is not engaging so when he takes his dramatic turn and decides to become an activate participant against the swindle that is afoot, it is hard to really feel invested.  His performance is as empty as the rum bottles his character leaves in his wake.  As for the rest of the cast:

Aaron Eckhart is sufficiently nefarious, but there is a notable absence of any real consequence to crossing him, which effectively neuters him as the big-bad of the film.  Amber Heard is stunning as Chenault, but lacks screen time to truly develop into a love interest for our protagonist.   Thus it feels flimsy when she serves as part of the catalyst for Depp’s social awakening.  Michael Rispoli is adequate as an ex-pat; likewise for Richard Jenkins whose Lotterman is the epitome of a manic boss. 

Ultimately, I can neither recommend this film nor dissuade people from seeing it.  There is no better way for me to articulate it then to say it is just a movie.  You will watch it, be neither terribly entertained nor terribly annoyed, and then you will probably not think about it again until the next time you catch it on cable television.  If you are looking for your Hunter S. Thompson / Johnny Depp fix, I would suggest Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas instead. 

Standout Performance: Giovanni Ribisi – but not in a good way.  I cannot for the life of me figure out the purpose of his role or what he was trying to achieve in his approach to portraying it.

Read More