Review: This Means War

This Means War is an action movie masquerading as a buddy film masquerading as a romantic comedy.  Before you get too excited about that prospect, you have to remember that it is a McG movie.  So without seeing a single frame of the film, you should already know that you're about to see a flick with a shortage of character development and a glut of rapid scene cuts.  He is after all the man who directed the A.D.D. inducing Charlie's Angels and Charlie's Angels: Full Throttle.  I have to admit though, in his latest directorial effort, the finished product comes off as a bit more balanced and a lot more entertaining than his last film (Terminator Salvation).

The movie is about two CIA operatives – one a lady’s man and the other a divorcee with a soft heart – who fall in love with the same career-driven woman and use their CIA training and resources to duke it out for her love.  All the while, a German arms dealer makes his way to L.A. to exact revenge on the aforementioned smitten secret agents.  If this plot works for you, then you should absolutely see this movie.  If this synopsis leaves you with some reservations, fear not.  There are some really good elements that make this film entertaining – albeit flawed.

Reese Witherspoon is billed as the star, but really that is in name only.  Her character is the most vanilla of the principles and could easily have been played by a plethora of actresses without affecting the final product in a favorable or adverse manner.  Witherspoon’s Lauren is a means to an end – a catalyst to spark the battle of machismo mojo between Chris Pine’s FDR and Tom Hardy’s Tuck.  And this is where the film works.  Pine and Hardy are better known for their action prowess and this serves them well during the physical comedy bits, but they also show solid comedic sense and timing to match.  There’s natural chemistry between the two that emerges in their banter as they slip seamlessly between camaraderie and antagonism.  

As for the rest of the cast, they do their best to keep up with McG’s breakneck pacing.  Chelsea Handler’s sarcastic quips are as fast and biting as machine gun fire.  While at times it feels like she is delivering her stand-up routine, she ultimately steals most of the scenes shared with Witherspoon.  Daren Herbert, Kevin O’Grady, Jesse Reid, and Viv Leacock do a nice job as Tuck’s and FDR’s respective CIA teams and add value to the comedic hijinks while Til Schweiger, as Heinrich is little more than a mean scowl dressed in a dark suit.

I would half-heartedly recommend this movie with the understanding that you’re going to be treated to a brisk but shallow narrative with unrealistic action mixed in with some genuinely funny moments.  If you’re looking for a romantic comedy or an all out action film, then there are better choices.  If you are looking for a fair compromise that has something for fans of either genre, then this is a fair choice.

Standout Performance:  Chelsea Handler delivers some great ad-libs.

Read More

Review: Larry Crowne

Here is a one-line synopsis about the movie Larry Crowne.  The film is about a really nice guy who is recently divorced, recently laid off, and short on money.  All one hundred minutes of the movie play out in a fashion as bland and ordinary as that synopsis.  Beyond that, I don’t know that I feel compelled to expound much further.  The film runs about one hundred minutes and as those minutes melt away, you get the impression that Tom Hanks – as the director- intends it to be precisely so, as if such an approach gives the proceedings the feeling of authenticity.  Ultimately, it just feels like lazy filmmaking.

Tom Hanks and Julia Roberts are the two draws to this movie but their cache is not enough to keep this film from plunging into the depths of apathy.  In fact, their presence detracts from what few merits there are about this film, as clearly their respective star powers have diminished.  What makes it onto screen are two performances completely void of the vitality and charisma that planted Hanks and Roberts firmly onto the A-list – this seemingly the result of years of complacency combined with Nia Vardalos’ and Tom Hanks’ milquetoast script.  It is not quite to the level of watching the 1972-version of Willie Mays stumbling around the outfield as a New York Met, but their respective drop offs are palpable. 

Hanks is at his tolerable best when he is acting opposite Gugu Mbatha-Raw’s Talia, who shines as Crowne’s youthful newfound life coach.  She is funny and her free spirit brings energy to the middling proceedings.  The strength of their dynamic though is problematic to the film, because the chemistry between Hanks and Roberts – which is supposed to be the driving force in the film – pales in comparison.  In fact, the best scenes in the movie are those that involve the supporting cast.  Rami Malek, Malcom Barret, George Takei, and Wilmer Valderama inject a little bit of life and some light-hearted humor to offset the real world issues plaguing the protagonists.

You really do not need to see this movie.  You probably know someone who is living Larry Crowne’s life and probably doing so in a much more interesting fashion.  If this movie is to be viewed, then in my mind it is best watched on cable on a night when you find yourself in front of the television with some other work to do.  If you are a Julie Roberts fan, then you’re better off avoiding this one and waiting for the much-anticipated Mirror, Mirror.  As for Hanks, he can be seen in the Oscar nominated Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close.

Standout Performance: Gugu Mbatha-Raw as Talia turns in a refreshing performance.

Read More

Review: A Very Harold & Kumar Christmas

The best thing about Harold and Kumar is that despite all the over-the-top chicanery, things were always grounded in reality by one simple fact – everyone knows a Korean dude that rolls with an Indian dude and that when those two get together, hilarity ensues.  Not only do I know this, but I lived it.  And because of that, Harold & Kumar Go to White Castle has always held a special place in my DVD collection - all despite the fact that the closest I’ve ever been to a White Castle is the mediocre frozen sliders that can be found in your local Ralph’s. 

I have to admit that the second installment ALMOST tarnished my memory of the first with its misguided political undertones and excessive male nudity, and diminished chemistry between John Cho, Kal Penn, and Nei Patrick Harris.  Well, I can sadly report that said fete has finally been accomplished, because director Todd Strauss-Schulson's installment in the series has sufficiently put all that was good about the original movie far enough away in the rearview mirror.  The stink of A Very Harold & Kumar Christmas is indeed that pungent. 

The problem with this film is that not only is it horribly unentertaining, but also it is completely irrelevant.  It suffers from the same problem that Ocean’s 12 does in that the film tries to be overly clever with winks and nods to itself, the cast, and crew with pseudo insider jokes – such as such NPH’s sexual orientation, Kal Penn’s hiatus from acting to work at the White House, and the current 3D technology fad - that are neither clever nor funny.  These mechanisms buried in the subtext of a film can be subtle value-adds to humor, but when they are propped up as punch lines in a comedic script that suffers from a paucity of funny jokes, it just feels plane douchey. 

John Cho and Kal Penn sleepwalk throughout this film.  It feels like Cho is killing time waiting to start work on J.J. Abrams' next installment of Star Trek and Kal Penn spends most of his energy trying to come up with his next clever tweet.  I hesitate to say much more of their respective acting performances because there was very little acting that actually made it onto the screen.  As for the rest of the cast, no one else in the film does anything of merit.  Neil Patrick Harris’ act wears dangerously thin and a few other familiar faces appear for nostalgia’s sake as nostalgia is a great way to distract audiences from the actual quality of the film.

Under no circumstances, do I recommend this film unless you like waiting ninety minutes for nothing to happen.  I know there is great temptation to see it despite everything written here that screams to the contrary.  Closure is a powerful lure since this will no doubt be the last film in the series ($35M gross).  So if possible, resist the temptation.  There are plenty other bad comedies out there that you can waste your time on that won’t ruin a near classic.  Watch something else, anything else, and preserve the memory of two guys and their epic journey for really bad sliders.

Standout Performance: WaffleBot.  I kind of want one.

Read More

Review: The Thing (2011)

Let me start by answering the question that I know is weighing heavily on your mind: The Thing (2011) is not a remake of The Thing (1982).  It’s actually a prequel.  Good, now that we have cleared up that pressing question, I can tell you this: the best thing about The Thing (2011) is that it transitions seamlessly into the events that kick off John Carpenter’s classic.  When I ask myself why exactly I watched this movie, I can really point to two things: insomnia and the presence of Mary Elizabeth Winstead, whose work I adored in the thoroughly underrated Scott Pilgrim vs. the World.

The issue with this movie is that for the most part, films of this archetype are a dime a dozen.  Alien being from outer space is sent to earth for some reason (or no reason at all) and poses a threat to humankind.  Bloodshed ensues.  One thing that aids the film in drumming up suspense is that it is set in Antarctica, which creates a sense of isolationism that dials up the intensity a couple of notches.  An interesting choice on the part of director Matthijs van Heijningen Jr. was to feature the alien extensively rather than slow play the big reveal.  At the risk of sounding like a D.O.S. (disciple of Spielberg), I think the slow reveal would have been the better choice and probably would have helped to mask the overall mediocrity that pervades this film.

Mary Elizabeth Winstead is credible as the lead because she is adept at putting forth a rugged exterior that translates well into the role of a survivor.  The issue here is that the survivor is only a good as the threat and ultimately it is the alien antagonist that fails Winstead’s performance.  As for the rest of the cast, Eric Christian Olsen is bland and uninspired and has already seen his best days in Not Another Teen Movie, Beerfest, and the The Comebacks (gasp).  Joel Edgerton continues to look like a masculine Conan O’Brien, but does little to add any value to this film.  The rest of the cast – that includes Ulrich Thomsen, Paul Braunstein, and Jorgen Langhelle – spend the bulk of the film hiding under beards and hoods waiting for a violent death.

This movie is not a total miss, but only if you like films of the horror/suspense genre.  There are a few nail biting moments and a couple of stomach churning scenes that for some might be worth the price of the rental.  If you like Carpenter’s original, you may want to stay away from this one for fear that it might cheapen its predecessor.  I can’t recommend this film, but my guess is that there is a place for it somewhere at the very bottom of your Netflix queue in case you see every other movie that might be of any kind of interest to you.

Standout Performance: Jorgen Langhelle as Lars has very few spoken lines - a classic case of less is more.

Read More

Review: 50/50

Joseph Gordon-Levitt is currently my favorite actor.  He has great range and makes solid choices when choosing projects.  He was great in 500 Days of Summer and Inception; he has had some highly underrated performances such as in Brick and in The Lookout; and he is the subject of much Internet speculation as to his exact role in the upcoming The Dark Knight Rises.  Big budget, indie, comedy, drama, or action, he has done it all and done it very well.  One of his most recent projects though, 50/50, presents a unique challenge.  How do you bring humor to a film chronicling an illness in cancer that has touched so many lives in an adverse way?  Having watched the film, I can definitively say that director Jonathan Levine and writer Will Reiser provide the answer: by telling a story that has the look and feel of authenticity.

Gordon-Levitt’s Adam is a twenty-something guy treading water in a mundane relationship; he has a dysfunctional family; and he hangs out with one really good goofball friend.  He could be anyone.  He could be your next door neighbor.  He could be you.  When Adam is diagnosed with a rare form of cancer, he is forced to take a hard look at his own mortality and assess the way he manages his relationships.  There are moments of laughter and tears, of hope and resignation, of joy and pain, but through it all he finds that the more he feels isolated, the more he realizes that alone is precisely what he is not.  Through his eyes, the viewer is reminded that life is many things and demands a broad spectrum of emotions.  The brilliance of the narrative is that it reminds us of this at every turn.

Gordon-Levitt’s performance is authentic and dynamic.  He is the anchor that allows Seth Rogen to bring his brand of brash humor to the film in a way that adds value.  Anna Kendrick continues to impress as Adam’s therapist.  She is vulnerable and endearing in a way that sets her off from Bryce Dallas Howard who masterfully plays Adam’s shallow and callow girlfriend.  As for the rest of the cast, Anjelica Houston, Serge Houde, and Phillip Baker Hall bring their seasoned veteran presence and experience to the proceedings and establish a nice contrast to the relative youth of the principle characters.

I would highly recommend this film.  It will pull you in many different directions and deliver both bitter and sweet like the one-two punch of a great pugilist.  You won’t have to suspend disbelief or use your imagination to embrace this narrative.  To appreciate this film, you’ll only need to press play, sit back, and watch great writing, great directing, and great acting all come together. 

Standout Performance:  Anna Kendrick of Up in the Air and Scott Pilgrim vs. the World especially stands out amidst many strong performances.

Read More

Review: In Time

Pretend that Robin Hood is transferred to a future where time is the standard currency and in this place he sees inequity and classism run completely amuck to the extremes.  But instead of finding his own Maid Marion to join him on a crusade to assist the huddled masses, he meets a Bonnie to play opposite his Clyde.  If you can envision this in your mind then you can save yourself two hours, because -and let me not mince words here - In Time is a really bad movie.

Coming into this film Justin Timberlake – as an actor - was on a bit of a roll.  Friends with Benefits, Bad Teacher, and multiple appearances on Saturday Night Live had shown that JT possesses decent comedic timing and sense.  Poking fun at oneself and the ability to sing a ditty are valuable assets in sketch comedy, but selling action and drama is an entirely different beast. In Time proves that Timberlake is not quite ready for prime time as a dramatic lead.

But the failure of the film does not rest on his shoulders alone.  Time as a currency and the inherent problems associated with such a system appear promising as a premise, but prove difficult to flesh out in execution.  Time is a great dramatic mechanism for manufacturing a sense of urgency, but when established as the primary unit of measurement in a value system, it ironically serves to dampen dramatic turns.  The root of this issue stems from the fact that we are not naturally inclined to assign value to a day versus a week versus a month, and so on and so forth.  Time spent pondering this unnatural value system during the film is time spent not caring about the protagonists.  Furthermore, writer/director Andrew Niccol clearly attempts to use the film as a vehicle to preach about societal morals, values, and norms but the movie lacks the voice to intelligently articulate such commentary.

Timberlake is mediocre at best, but Amanda Seyfried is an utter disaster.  She has been completely unremarkable in her other cinematic endeavors (Red Riding Hood, Mamma Mia) and yet she continues to land major roles. She has one kind of performance in her repertoire and it's that of an apathetic, cold, and sterile person.  Cillian Murphy as the time police is completely neutered in this role, coming off as detached, aloof, and uninterested.  As for the rest of the cast, Olivia Wilde, Johnny Galecki, and Matthew Bomer are not onscreen long enough to rescue the film from itself.

I could go on and on about the issues with this film, but then I would be wasting time (irony abounds), so I will simply advise one and all to avoid this movie at all costs.  And if you are a huge Justin Timberlake fan, then that goes double for you unless you want to be less of one by time the credits roll.

Standout Performance:  Matthew Bomer stands out as one member of the cast who decides to give it a decent go.

Read More

Review: Warrior

In case you haven’t been paying attention, Tom Hardy is putting together an impressive body of work.  He is most associated with his role as Eames in Inception and his upcoming appearance as Bane in The Dark Knight Rises, but Hardy has also appeared in films such as Black Hawk Down, Layer Cake, and RocknRolla.  Knowing this, I was curious to see his performance in Warrior.  I have to admit, that I didn’t have huge expectations for the movie.  I knew there was a lot of positive buzz for the film during its theatrical release, but as someone who is not really a fan of MMA, I was not sure if the plot would appeal to me.

The film that director Gavin O’Connor has put together is gritty and raw from its casting, to its cinematography, to its execution.  Three men – a father and two sons – estranged from one another and broken in their respective lives are brought back together against the backdrop of an epic Mixed Martial Arts tournament.  The physical violence inflicted in the ring runs a distant second to the emotional torment and resentment that festers between these three men and the tournament serves as the catalyst to draw these issues to the forefront. 

Joel Edgerton (who looks like a more menacing Conan O’Brien) plays the classic underdog, Tom Hardy – the raging inferno, and Nick Nolte – the alcoholic father.  Each character could easily have become a bag of clichés, but the three actors do a great job of brining real depth to their respective roles.  Edgerton is believable as a journeyman fighter – turn teacher – turn fighter again and is incredibly easy to root for.  Tom Hardy brings an intense physicality to his role as Tommy Conlon – a man with a singular focus and a gift for inflicting pain.  And Nick Nolte owns the role of Paddy Conlon and masterfully conveys a sense of pain and loss in the throaty way he delivers his lines.  As for the rest of the cast, Jennifer Morrison, Frank Grillo, and Kevin Dunn are solid if not remarkable in balancing out the film. 

It’s not Shakespeare, but Warrior is very good for what it is – a film that has just the right mix of action and drama.  Not since Best of the Best, have I seen a film tests a man’s ability to remain dry eyed throughout.  It will probably never make anyone’s top ten list, but the movie will definitely entertain.  What more could anyone ask for?

Standout Performance:  Tom Hardy disappears into the role.  Look for him next in This Means War opposite Chris Pine.

Read More

Review: Midnight in Paris

Of all the Oscar nominees for Best Picture, Midnight in Paris may be my favorite.  I should preface this by saying I am something of a Woody Allen fan, having really enjoyed a number of his directorial efforts including Whatever Works, Match Point, Hollywood Ending, Everyone Says I Love You, and of course Annie Hall.  So I do have a predisposition towards his brand of filmmaking.   In regards to his most profitable work ($148M theatrical gross worldwide), I would say there is an awful lot to like about this film.

The story of an artist (Owen Wilson’s Gil) perpetually enamored with an era long since passed is not particularly original, but adding the element of time travel to the proceedings allows Allen and his cast to have fun with the premise, and in doing so take viewers on a fantastical journey.  This is of particular interest to me, because the plot involves some of my favorite literary giants (Hemingway, Fitzgerald, Eliot).  And while weaving time travel into the fabric of a film can often be extremely difficult to reconcile with the rules of logic, Allen handles it with such a light-hearted touch so as to encourage the viewer to fully suspend their disbelief.

Perhaps the strongest aspect of the film is the casting.  Owen Wilson is his usual onscreen self, but it serves him well as a hack Hollywood screenwriter aspiring for something more – a near direct parallel to his acting career.  Marion Cotillard is charming as the female lead, acting as a mirror to Wilson’s personal crisis.  Rachel McAdams channels her inner “Mean Girls” as Gil’s wife Inez.  She and Michael Sheen’s Paul are utterly grating to the senses and set up a fantastic contrast between present and past.  As for the rest of the cast, Tom Hiddleston, Corey Stoll, Kathy Bates et al do a fantastic job of breathing life into a lineup of literary and artistic giants in a way that is both comedic and authentic.

This movie is a must see.  It is charming, heartbreaking, and funny.  Paris serves as the ideal backdrop for a movie that straddles the line between reality and fantasy.  Woody Allen films do not always play well to mainstream audiences but good storytelling does.  Midnight in Paris definitely falls into the latter category.

Standout Performance:  Tom Hiddleston of Thor fame does an amazing job of disappearing into the role of F. Scott Fitzgerald.

Read More

Review: Apollo 18

Apollo 18 is yet another entry into the “found-footage” genre that started with The Blair Witch Project, but really took off with Paranormal Activity.  This film – like some of its recent predecessors (The Devil Inside, Paranormal Activity 3) – does a decent job of using the mechanisms of the genre to create the veneer of authenticity and a sense of tension, but ultimately fails to deliver a worthwhile payoff.

It’s hard to really put my finger on what I did not like about this film.  On the surface it seems promising as a horror movie with a Red Planet sci-fi vibe thrown into the mix, but so often what sounds great in theory ultimately fails in execution.  Apollo 18 is one such case.  One of the problems with this movie is that the cast is fairly non-descript.  While we get a bit of a backstory on each, the astronauts (played by Warren Christie, Lloyd Owen, and Ryan Robbins) are essentially interchangeable parts.  This is especially problematic in a horror movie, because it builds its suspense on the assumption that you care about the respective fates of the protagonists.

Without ruining the plot of the movie (I’ll leave that to the movie itself), the antagonist (or the source of all the lunar chicanery) is not particularly interesting or terrifying for that matter.  This leaves you with a film about astronauts you do not care about, facing a menace that does not scare you.  The scariest part about the film is that they managed 86 minutes of running time out of this set up.

It truly was difficult for me to watch this film – this coming from someone who has great appreciate for both the horror and sci-fi genres.  It was so difficult in fact that I quit watching before the closing credits.  I left it to the fine people who contribute to Wikipedia to let me know how things wrapped up.  I found the plot played better in plain text than it did as a visual piece.  As a kid my parents used to preach to me not to start something that I would not finish.  So I pass this advice on to you.  Don’t watch it.  Ever.  If however “found-footage” really floats your boat, be on the lookout for Chronicle.  It is generating some positive buzz.

Standout Performance:  None.

Read More

Review: The Grey

If you haven’t noticed, Liam Neeson has carved himself a nice niche as an action star.  In a genre where chiseled jaws and artificially augmented biceps inflict most of the damage, Neeson (Taken, A-Team, and Unknown) is showing that grey beards can still kick butt on screen and at the box office.   His latest flick - The Grey - is two hours of mental and physical warfare expertly captured on screen by Joe Carnahan.

The plot places a spiritually broken Ottway (played by Neeson) stranded in the Alaskan wilderness with a battered group of rough necks after a plane crash.  Stranded and lost, the band of misfits must overcome brutal weather conditions, deep physical injuries, and packs of vicious wolves to ensure their survival.  It’s the mental and physical fight to live that defines the plot and makes this film not only about the men themselves, but also about the loved-ones they’ve left behind.  You never see them onscreen in the present, but their presence in the stricken psyches of those men is strongly felt.

Liam Neeson does a fantastic job of playing a damaged man teetering on the edge.  You can almost see the baggage he is carrying embedded within the creases of his weathered face.  As for the rest of the cast, Dallas Roberts, Dermott Mulroney, Nonso Anozie, Frank Grillo and Joe Anderson serve as Neeson’s fellow plane crash survivors.  Each do an admirable job infusing distinct personas into characters that could have easily become faceless mechanisms for plot advancement.  Grillo as Diaz particularly stands out for taking his character through the full spectrum of emotions associated with death. 

From top to bottom, The Grey is a well-made movie.  The challenge of the elements and the ever-present sense of danger are palpable – so much so that the film feels like a visual form of punishment.  By time the credits rolled, I felt fatigued and a bit of despair.  Whatever a feel-good-movie is to you, this film is the exact opposite.  So if you are wondering if this is a quality movie, then the answer is a resounding yes.  As for whether it is an entertaining one - that is best left to be decided by the individual and his/her preferences.

Standout Performance: Kudos to Dermott Mulroney for starring in a movie that does not have the word “Wedding” in the title.

Read More

Review: Footloose (2011)

There are some movies that should never be re-made; Godfather, Star Wars, Raiders of the Lost Ark – movies that through a confluence of great casting, directing, and cinematography have produced truly iconic cinematic experiences.  Then there are those that should never be given a second look for an entirely different set of reasons – Date Movie, Hudson Hawk, and anything by Adam Sandler post Spanglish.

Then there’s Footloose, a movie that was an immediate classic in its time, but because of its dated music and dance has not really aged well.  Worse still is that its premise – breaking a small town ban on dancing – does not translate well to the present day.  And yet somehow, an updated version of this movie made its way into cinemas in 2011 and - even worse - found its way onto my red-eye flight from Los Angeles to New York City.

The movie plays like Step Up meets Friday Night Lights as over wrought dancing collides with teen angst in the fictional small town of Bomont, Georgia.  A forray into the deep south was inevitable as Footloose’s predecessors in the teen dance genre (Save the Last Dance, Take the Lead, etc.) had exhausted the urban backdrop.  So what else is wrong with the film besides the antiquated notion of a ban on public dancing, the hammed up southern drawls, and the uncompelling melodrama and rebellion found at every turn?  The fact that none of it comes together to form an interesting narrative from start to finish.

Kenny Womald would have been merely pedestrian in the lead role as Ren MacCormack, but his weak Boston accent tips the scales towards bad. Julianne Hough is at her best when she is dancing, but lacks any kind of charisma as an actual actress, making one wonder if it was a wise career choice to leave Dancing with the Stars. Dennis Quaid’s Reverend Shaw Moore is cantankerous enough and Andie MacDowell does little to distinguish herself as Moore’s wife.  The requisite gaggle of friends played by Miles Teller, Ser’Darius Blain, and Ziah Colon add a bit of life to the proceedings, but do not get enough to work with to really make a difference.

When I first saw this trailer, I thought that Footloose was a movie to be avoided like the plague.  A bout of insomnia on a cross-country flight has helped to reassure me that my first inclination was right.  If it is a mix of dance and drama that you crave, watch the original, wax poetic about an era long since passed, and then play a rousing game of 6-Degrees-of-Kevin Bacon. 

Standout Performance:  Miles Teller’s Willard injects a bit of comic relief to the otherwise melodramatic proceedings.

Read More

Review: Real Steel

While watching Real Steel, I couldn’t help but feel like director Shawn Levy, and writers John Gatins, Dan Gilroy, and Jeremy Leven were pick pocketing Sylvester Stallone.  Seriously, Real Steel is a complete amalgamation of Rocky and Over the Top with a little bit of Iron Man thrown into the mix.  In fact, I bet that’s how the project was pitched to the higher-ups at DreamWorks.   If Sly isn’t getting a cut of this action, then he absolutely should be.  After all, I spent half the movie waiting for robot Adrian and drunk-robot Paulie to run into the ring.

With that being said, the movie itself is by no means extraordinary, but there are a few things it gets incredibly right that make it a highly entertaining narrative.  Like Rocky, the movie is about a man - down on his luck and cast as an underdog, who is out-classed and out-gunned in every literal and figurative fight that comes his way; ditto for Atom the robot.  As protagonists, this makes Jackman’s Charlie and Atom very easy to root for.

The second thing the movie gets right is that it draws upon the relationship between an estranged father and his son – a near carbon copy of Over the Top’s premise.  The physical and emotional journey undertaken by Jackman and Dakota Goyo’s Max tugs at the proverbial heartstrings and adds an additional layer of likeability to the two principle characters that keeps the viewer engaged.

Jackman and Goyo have genuine chemistry as father and son and it is this dynamic that drives the film.  Kevin Durand, Olga Fonda, and Karl Yune do just enough to add a bit of menace to the proceedings, while Evangeline Lilly serves as the requisite token love interest.  But ultimately, the film rests on Jackman’s shoulders and as is most often the case (X-Men Origins:Wolverine notwithstanding), he delivers.

It’s not a cinematic masterpiece and not a thrill-a-minute action flick.  When you strip away the robots and the hand-to-hand pugilism, what you are left with is a narrative that centers on matters of the heart.  Real Steel is a great rental – a downright feel good movie that is great for any occasion.  And as the closing credits begin to roll, don’t be surprised if you find yourself reaching for the phone just to give your dad a shout (a la the courtroom scene in Big Daddy).

Standout Performance:  Nice job by Dakota Goyo working opposite a seasoned veteran in Jackman.

Read More

Review: Drive

Imagine your reaction to watching a movie called “Attack of the Killer Bats” only to find that there’s no attacking, no killing, and hardly a bat to be found throughout the film’s proceedings.  That’s precisely what I experienced while watching director Nicolas Winding Ref’s Drive.  The title in itself is basic if not direct and yet the film is not quite what it is billed as.  Other than two major sequences, there is remarkably little actual action-packed driving to be found.  This begs the question as to what exactly the movie is about.

It’s a character driven movie (pun intended) that centers on an unnamed stunt driver (Ryan Gosling) who is engaged in an awkward unspoken love triangle with Carey Mulligan’s Irene and her convict husband played by Oscar Isaac.  Also swimming in these murky waters are Irene’s son, Bryan Cranston’s Shannon, and some seedy low rent mafia types played by Albert Brooks and Ron Perlman.  It all comes together to form a narrative that is one part awkward courting, one part deranged camaraderie, and one part gratuitous violence.

Perhaps the oddest part of the film is that it plays like a rip in the space-time continuum – as if a slice has been cut out of the 1980’s and interjected into the present.  From the hot pink/purple font used for the movie title, to the highly synthesized soundtrack, to the lighting and cinematography, I almost expected Don Johnson and Phillip Michael Thomas to storm onto the screen in pastel colors while Phil Collins croons in the background. 

As for the cast, no one stands out as particularly good or bad, but this may be the product of the script, as all the characters seem flat and one-dimensional.  Ryan Gosling’s performance is perplexing to me as I was hard pressed to identify why it generated such positive buzz.  Cranston, Perlman, and Brooks – all accomplished veteran actors – seem at times to be going through the motions.  Of the entire cast, only Carey Mulligan does a fair job of acquitting herself although truth be told, very little is asked of her.

To be fair, the movie is a decent rental, but definitely not a must-see priority.  If you have low expectations, you’ll watch for two hours and be left scratching your head while at the same time feel moderately entertained.  If however you’re expecting a fast-paced hard action film deserving of all the praise that was heaped on this project, you’re going to wish you had those two hours of your life back.  If you really want to see a good Ryan Gosling movie, go back and watch Remember the Titans. 

Standout Performance:  Carrey Mulligan.  Look for her in The Great Gatsby opposite Leo DiCaprio to be released December, 2012.

Read More

Review: Contagion

I usually don’t like those films that feature a huge ensemble cast – a la Valentine’s Day and New Years Eve (the latter of which seemingly features half of Hollywood).  In Contagion, we have a film driven by a large ensemble cast, but is entirely different from the two aforementioned movies.  I need to start by saying I am fairly neutral in the world of Man vs. Germ.  I take one shower a day and wash my hands at all the key moments (such as before meals and after restroom stops).  For the most part, I rely on @JennieBFit to tell me when I need some Purell hand sanitizer.

I do however have two friends – Coach and Chew – who are disciples of the David Puddy School of Germ Phobia complete with germ pendant dangling from the neck.  If you fall into this segment of the population, Contagion is a film you must avoid.  Like Paranormal Activity is to teenage kids (and my buddy Jeff), and Sex and the City 2 is to most men, Contagion will scare the heck out of those who fear a simple handshake or a game of Beer Pong.

A film that features a pandemic disease as its lead, is probably not the easiest sell - although Outbreak was fairly entertaining.  But the film does a nice job of showing the global interconnectivity that exists and how easily a virus can travel across boarders.  It also pokes a bit of fun at conspiracy theorists that constantly clamor against government agencies and their suspected top-secret machinations (including yours truly who still has some reservations about the first lunar landing).

I can’t say that I enjoyed the movie (I don’t know that one is supposed to enjoy it), but I was very interested in following it to its conclusion.  The film does not always visually capture the magnitude of what is occurring in the context of the plot, but there are some great performances that ground all the gravitas in reality.  Kate Winslet, Matt Damon, and Jennifer Ehle blended perfectly into their roles, while Bryan Cranston, Marion Cotillard, Elliot Gould, and Lawrence Fishburne deliver solid performances.  Ultimately, it is the cast that differentiates this film from other ensemble vehicles, because in such films actors often are left to play caricatures – most likely the result of limited screen time.  The only person of significance in Contagion who falls into this trap is the highly overrated Jude Law.

The movie is worth renting, just not on a date night, when you’re under the weather, or if you are in a good mood.  When you do watch it, be sure to keep the hand sanitizer nearby and reserves of soap on hand.  I guarantee you that by the end of the film you will start counting the number of times you touch your face in an hour.  Germophobes, you have been warned.

Standout Performance: Matt Damon and Kate Winslet are particularly good.

Read More

2011 Movie Rankings

I watched 51 new release films during 2011.  There were some hits and a bunch of misses.  From this list of 51, I ranked the movies based on their entertainment value.  On paper, 2012 is shaping up to be a great year at the cinema, so here's hoping at the end of next year I am ranking a better crop of films.

The List of 51:

51. Johnny English Reborn (Universal)                    

50. The Best and Brightest (N/A)

49. The Dilemma (Universal)                   

48. The Change-Up (Universal)

47. Red State (SModcast)

46. Scream 4 (Weinstein)

45. Your Highness (Universal)

44. Take Me Home Tonight (Relativity)

43. I Don’t Know How She Does It (Weinstein)

42. Rio (Fox)

41. Prom (Disney)

40. Just Go With It (Sony)

39. I Am Number 4 (Buena Vista)

38. Cowboys and Aliens (Universal)

37. Green Lantern (WB)

36. Source Code (Summit)

35. Insidious (FilmDistrict)

34. The Rite (WB)

33. Sucker Punch (WB)

32. Limitless (Relativity)

31. Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides (Disney)

30. Hall Pass (WB)

29. Immortals (Relativity)

28. Battle Los Angeles (Sony)

27. Arthur (WB)

26. Paranormal Activity 3 (Paramount)

25. Transformers: Dark Side of the Moon (Paramount)

24. The Ides of March (Sony)

23. The Muppets (Disney)

22. Super 8 (Paramount)

21. The Hangover Part II (WB)

20. Unknown (WB)

19. The Green Hornet (Sony)

18. No Strings Attached (Paramount)

17. Fast Five (Universal)

16. Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows (WB)

15. Horrible Bosses (WB)

14. Rise of the Planet of the Apes (Fox)

13. What’s Your Number? (Fox)

12. Bad Teacher (Sony)

11. Friends with Benefits (Sony)

10. Captain America the First Avenger (Paramount)

9. Crazy Stupid Love (WB)

8. Bridesmaids (Universal)

7. Moneyball (Sony)
6. Midnight in Paris (Sony)

5. Our Idiot Brother (Weinstein)

4. X-Men First Class (Fox)

3. Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol (Paramount)

2. Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows part II (WB)

1. Thor (Paramount)

Read More