| AVATAR Rated PG-13 for intense epic battle sequences and warfare, sensuality, language and some smoking. Action/Adventure/Sci-Fi/Thriller 162 minutes 
4 stars |
Phrase it as you will (sight to behold, wide screen spectacle, visual wonder) there is no denying that Avatar presents one dazzling, impressive, jaw-dropping image after another. The love story, ecological lesson, and other messages embedded in the story are of passing interest, but not compelling. But there’s no danger of boredom when the viewer is kept engrossed by technological legerdemain. The movie won’t tax one’s thinking faculties but, brother (a significance-laden word in the film), it’s a grand show throughout for the eyes.
It’s 2154 and humankind is on a moon named Pandora to mine an incredibly valuable energy source (in rock form) called unobtainium (one of the great, fake names for an element ever), meaningful in that the native inhabitants, the Na’vi, haven’t any intention of cooperating in their land’s exploitation. The Na’vi (ten feet tall, blue tinted, large eyed, with feline features, and amazing dexterity) have a mystical/spiritual connection, and communication, with nature. The world they inhabit is strange, beautiful, and colorful and comprised of towering trees, dense forests, deep valleys, vast oceans, even floating mountains. All of this is captured in visuals that are continually surprising and awe-inspiring. If this place isn’t an idea of paradise, then nothing is so that the corporation looking to exploit Pandora is nothing less than an ecological villain, this brought home by its manager Carter Selfridge (Giovanni Ribisi, suitably callous) who is backed by the overwhelmingly armed, battle hardened military force directed by Colonel Miles Quaritch (Stephen Lang, savoring every second of his villainy).
To learn, and infiltrate the Na’vi, the corporation has funded a program by brilliant scientist Dr. Grace Augustine (Sigourney Weaver, dandy) to create Avatars. That is, Na’vi physically correct but mind/body controlled, due to their DNA, by human “drivers.” Though completely untrained, Jake Sully (Sam Worthington, a fine job) has taken the place of his smarter, deceased brother after losing the use of his legs in some unnamed war (he’s a marine). Grace logically fears Jake is something of a lose cannon while Colonel Quaritch wants to use him as a spy to gather information for an assault on the Na’vi. They are both right. Jake quickly falls into the hands of Neytiri (Zoe Saldana, only seen in computer generation but verbally dexterous) who is pressed into service to educate Jake in the ways of the Na’vi. He learns from and falls in love with her. So he is conflicted; whom does he side with, can he mediate a peaceful solution? This being a very big budget film (one of the, if not the most expensive movies ever made, over $230 million) mayhem and gunplay are guaranteed.
James Cameron, the writer/director, worked for many years on this film. The plot elements (love, war, peace, exploitation of nature, heroic men and women, the idea of the alien) have been addressed by him in past films (and by those of other filmmakers). The true eye-openers here are the film techniques and methods expanded upon and/or developed by Cameron (3D, performance-capture, Fusion Camera System) during its long gestation period. And the wait is worth it. In that regard, kudos to Mauro Fiore, director of photography; editing by Cameron, John Refoua and Stephen Rivkin; visual effects superviser, Joe Letteri; and production designers Rick Carter and Robert Stromberg. The movie may miss being one of the best overall, but start to finish it sure as heck is a delight to look at.
Avatar – Story mildly filling. First and foremost, a feast for the eyes. Review by Charles Zio
| IT'S COMPLICATED R for some drug content and sexuality. Comedy and Romance 118 minutes
3½ stars |
Ah, to be middle aged women in writer/director Nancy Meyers’ world. They are pretty, successful, have money, and are self-actualized. This is not necessarily a bad thing, only not way out there, either. It’s Complicated, isn’t. But it can be amusing, and there are two scenes that are really very funny. So if you don’t take the movie too seriously, like a college thesis on baby boomer mentality, you can have a good time.
The always watch able Meryl Streep plays Jane, divorced ten years and owning and running her own bakery. Her ex, Jake, is a lawyer played by Alec Baldwin who married his lover, Agness, played by Lake Bell. Jane has feelings about this. Well, who wouldn’t as she has to have contact with the younger woman at times and act appropriately mature about the whole thing, too?
It seems Jake and Agness are trying to have a child even as Agness’ son by another man lives with them. Jake is beginning to feel trapped, as he might have with Jane and their three young children. Do men ever grow up? Some do, like the architect Adam who is remodeling Jane’s kitchen, played by Steve Martin. He’s recently divorced himself and wounded by it, but is attracted to Jane, and she to him, except...that’s right, Jake is after Jane again.
This unfinished business with Jake leaves Jane befuddled, but sexually alive. Meanwhile, scenes of middle-aged men and their younger wives at fertility clinics are wonderfully incisive. Ms. Meyers pokes not so gentle fun at these men. Jake questions if he wants to start over raising a child at 58. What is he thinking? The folly of that makes mockery of men who think they will live forever, if only their wives and children are young enough they can fool Mother Nature.
Jane and Jake’s three children are rather bland, but the soon-to-be son-in-law, played by John Krasinski, provides comic relief with his takes. He is the outsider watching this once married couple relive old feelings. In fact, this sleeping together after divorce is a well known phenomenon.
The three leads: Meryl Streep, Alex Baldwin, and Steve Martin are pros. They bring personality to their parts. Though I have to admit, Alex Baldwin’s lack of ego in showing his overweight body made me sad. It’s funny as a type, but that can’t be healthy.
Can you get the magic back, especially after so long? It’s Complicated makes it fun to watch, but maybe with a caveat, don’t try this at home. Review by Ann Marie Oliva
| UP IN THE AIR Rated R for language and some sexual content. Comedy/Drama/Adaptation 109 minutes
4½ stars |
It is recognized the two most dangerous phases of a plane flight are takeoff and landing. While Ryan Bingham, a champion air miles accumulator, has long since launched his life on a preferred path, he has yet to consider, let alone approach, a satisfactory landing. In the course of Up In The Air, a low key/humorous/heartfelt movie, Bingham will travel from supreme confidence to regretful doubt.
Who better to play Ryan Bingham than George Clooney, an actor with sufficient good guy charm to even cancel out his character’s sometimes callous and/or misguided comments? Not easy to do when Bingham is a professional hatchet man, his company’s business being the terminating of employees for cowardly executives. In pursuit of his job, Ryan flies incessantly and loves it. Movement is life, he believes, and slow movement is the route to a quicker death. He’s at home in airports, comfortable with rental cars, knows the “best of” in every city, and content in hotel rooms. His philosophy, as espoused in a lecture he delivers, is to first eliminate things (his rarely visited apartment is bare and cold). All he needs fits easily in a travel-on-wheels suitcase. Secondly, to let go of people (all of them, family, friends, etc.) in favor of passing, available encounters. In every way, Ryan has no attachments, ties, or commitments. Free as the proverbial bird. That’s his way and he hasn’t any intention of altering his life.
But change is introduced by Craig Gregory (Jason Bateman, effective as the stone-hearted boss) in the person of Natalie Kenner (Anna Kendrick, terrific) a feisty, controlled, ultra confident young woman with an efficiency plan – move the firing process to the home office via computer. Ryan is horrified since doing so would ground him. In Omaha. After skillfully challenging Natalie before Craig he is forced to take Natalie on the road with him and it is during this multi-stop trip Ryan begins to question his previously constructed and, he believes, happy life.
To begin, the flow of overhead shots of city after city, even though punctuated by thick, white clouds, is literally distancing, life viewed from the outside. The hotel rooms, lobbies, terminals, and so on, are impersonal, no matter how crowded. In terms of human connection, its transitory, demonstrated by Ryan’s hookup with Alex (Vera Farmiga, on key throughout) his match in terms of superficial savoring of elite travel/good life perks and physically satisfying, temporary hookups. And though he presents his firing strategies as intended to smoothly expedite the process it’s evident he’s ignoring his genuine and sincere concern for those he deals with, brought home watching Natalie’s efforts (and reactions) to terminating those angry and, especially, variously bereaved. (The issue of downsizing in this very troubled economy is a subtext with strong weight and significance within the film and additionally on its own.) Lastly, there is the matter of Ryan’s facing his long avoided family, sisters and a future brother-in-law (Melanie Lynskey, Amy Morgan, Danny McBride, each fine), and his admitting to Alex he doesn’t want to be, again, the single guy at the wedding.
Up In the Air boasts an excellent script by Jason Reitman and Sheldon Turner (based on Walter Kirn’s novel) that is clever and concise and even if it ends a bit too neatly, it’s never silly or less than thoughtful. Reitman also directs and he does an outstanding job overall and in every other respect assisted by his able crew – Eric Steelberg, photography (the overhead shots are top notch), Dana E. Glauberman (editing), Rolfe Kent (production design) – and he elicits top rate performances from all, in particular George Clooney, Vera Farmiga, and Anna Kendrick. It’s a pleasure to watch a movie that’s consistently entertaining, doesn’t run too long, and leaves a viewer thinking (for one, how the worst pitfalls in life may be the ones we create for ourselves). By the way, stay a bit into the closing credits to learn something of the title song.
Up In The Air – A topnotch flight from start to finish. Review by Charles Zio
| THE ROAD Rated R for some violence, disturbing images and language. Drama/Sci-Fi/Adapation/Action 113 minutes
4 stars |
Of all the movies about an apocalypse, or a post-apocalyptic world, The Road has to be one of the most devastating. Based on Cormac McCarthy’s 2007 Pulitzer Prize-winning fiction novel, the film adaptation is unrelenting in its portrayal of a world so desolate there are no plants or animals, and few people left alive.
Some unknown catastrophic event takes place as a young couple, simply named Man (Viggo Mortensen) and Woman (Charlize Theron, very good in a small part), are about to have a baby. There are painful flashbacks of the happy couple, which the Man tries unsuccessfully to get out of his mind. When it is obvious that the Man and his son, the Boy (Kodi Smit-McPhee), must leave their house or die, the Man chooses life. They set out on the road, hoping to get to the coast, thinking the sea may provide some sustenance.
McCarthy’s vision of humanity in general is not very heartening as marauding groups of men with weapons cannibalize anyone without protection. But, the Man, is one of the “good guys” as he explains to the Boy, and they must carry the “fire” (humanity?) inside. Viggo Mortensen’s performance is extraordinary. He conveys the love of a parent, who is willing to sacrifice anything for his child’s life, without maudlin overacting. He and Kodi Smit-McPhee, who is also excellent, have a believable rapport. Their performances, on a journey you’d rather not take, draw you in to the terrible nightmare of a dying world, and keep you watching.
Women don’t have a long life if they are out there alone. It’s alluded to that they are raped and eaten as are any children they have with them. In McCarthy’s world, the weak are preyed on by those with the power, namely Men, who will survive at any cost.
Not only are people starving, but everyone is filthy from having no way to keep clean. The road is dangerous and they meet their quota of savage types as well as those who will die soon. Robert Duvall is an Old Man, who provides the viewer with some existential philosophy, as well as showing tough choices of the Man. If he stops to help the weak, it will slow them down and might even cause their deaths. He must be ruthless in moving on.
The stark grey and brown palette provided by cinematographer Javier Aguirresarobe is well done, as is the art Direction by Gershon Ginsburg, the set decoration by Robert Greenfield, and the costume design by Margot Wilson.
The Road is probably is as bad as it could be, and that realism, and realization will make this a difficult movie for some to watch. There is no tra la happy ending, but McCarthy does give some hope, which in this desperate, dying world is everything.
Review by Ann Marie Oliva
| INVICTUS Rated PG-13 for brief strong language. Drama 134 minutes
4 stars |
It is Oscar season so Clint Eastwood has a movie being released this weekend called Invictus. And yes, it is Oscar-worthy with good performances by Morgan Freeman as Nelson Mandela, and Matt Damon as Francois Pienaar, captain of the 1995 South African rugby team. Speaking of rugby, I still don’t understand it, except it has got to be one of the most grueling and aggressive sports ever. No gear for these guys, they just go out and pummel each other.
After decades of imprisonment, Nelson Mandela is freed and becomes president of South Africa. He knows that apartheid has taken a terrible toll on everyone and wants to unite the country. How is he going to do this; how is he going to find a cause? It’s quite ingenious that he selects rugby. The team is hated by Black South Africans as another symbol of their oppresion (and there is only one Black man on the team), but if he can bring the country together behind them it will be healing for all.
What the film shows so clearly is President Mandela’s humanity. Instead of being bitter for all the years he lost in a tiny prison cell, he is the most magnanimous of men, asking his people to start fresh and move on. “Forgiveness starts now.” The film does not exploit the racial divide by showing scenes of terrible injustices suffered by Blacks, but I think, on balance, a bit more of that would have helped explain the distrust and anger between them.
The rugby team is struggling, but Mandela (Morgan Freeman giving a dignified performance), and Francois Pienaar (Matt Damon, doing a good job bulked up and with a nose prosthesis), meet. Francois is stunned that Mandela requests that he lead his team to victory to help bring the country together. He tries to inspire his men the way Mandela inspires him. Mandela even gives him a copy of the poem, “Invictus” by William Ernest Henley, which Mandela probably read many a time in his dark cell. It’s a poem about holding on to your soul when all else is against you.
As mentioned Mr. Freeman and Mr. Damon do a nice acting turn with all the cast good in their parts, especially Tony Kgoroge. The cinematography by Tom Stern is excellent, including the rugby sequences. The music by Kyle Eastwood and Michael Stevens is also well done as is the editing by Joel Cox and Gary Roach.
If you don’t know the outcome of that World Cup there will be suspense in the outcome, and it’s probably best to see it that way, but ultimately it doesn’t matter. This is an inspirational, if somewhat sentimentalized, true story that will leave you admiring the wisdom of Mandela. Review by Ann Marie Oliva
AND THE FROG |
THE PRINCESS AND THE FROG Rated PG-13 for brief strong language. Drama 134 minutes
4 stars |
I applaud Disney for new imaginings of an old fairy tale, and for a spunky heroine of color. This variation on the Princess and the Frog has enough talking animals and magic to satisfy older movie goers, while enough of an edge for the younger ones whose remembrances of Disney heroes and heroines is more recent.
This newer version of the story takes place in Jazz Age New Orleans, and this adds a spicy flavor as there is much about food and cooking in the movie. Tiana (voiced perfectly by Anika Noni Rose) is the daughter of a dressmaker named Eudora (Oprah Winfrey) who makes the clothes of a rich little girl named Charlotte (Jennifer Cody). The girls grow up together. While Charlotte wants to marry a prince, Tiana’s dream is more down to earth. She wants to open a restaurant, a dream she shared with her beloved father James (Terrence Howard).
When they are young woman, Charlotte lives a life of luxury provided by her rich daddy (John Goodman), while Tiana works two jobs to save money to open the restaurant. But news comes that a prince (from a made up country) is visiting. Charlotte squeals while Tiana takes it in stride.
But of course, there are complications. Prince Nuveen (voiced by Bruno Campos, is of some undetermined origin, which doesn’t bother me as it does others because he has to be a prince for the story to make sense), has been cut off by his parents. He is spoiled and lazy and when a voodoo doctor (Keith David) turns him into a frog he comes across Tiana dressed for the masquerade party as a princess. The kiss turns her into a frog rather than turning him back into the prince because she’s not a princess. This fact is important later on, but in the meantime, the two stay together for protection and to find a way to turn back into humans. As in many Disney movies the humans are not as wise as the bugs and animals they come across.
The music is serviceable, though not very memorable. The animation, however, is top notch. The story hangs together and makes sense, though it’s heavy on the preaching about working hard to attain your dreams. The original story is credited to Roy Clements who directed with John Musker. Best of all, Tiana is a character for all girls to admire, and that is long overdue. Review by Ann Marie Oliva
| A SINGLE MAN Rated R Drama 99 minutes
4 stars |
Colin Firth gives a wonderful, heartfelt performance in A Single Man. It’s not easy for any actor to hold an audience’s attention for an entire film when he’s in almost every scene and on the screen constantly. Given that he is playing a gay man in the 1960s, it’s even more remarkable.
Mr. Firth plays George, a nice-looking but not exceptional man, who loses his younger partner Jim (Matthew Goode) when he dies in a car accident while visiting family. He finds out in an impersonal phone call from Jim’s cousin, who says Jim’s mother would be upset if she knew he was calling George. The funeral is only for family. The movie follows George during the course of a day. The pace is deliberately slow as the pain and grief become unbearable for George and he plans suicide.
Tom Ford directs with sensitivity from a screenplay he collaborated on with David Scearce adapting the novel by Christopher Isherwood. The film shows flashbacks of how George (who is English) and Jim first met, and their happy fourteen years together in their “glass house.”
George is a college professor who can’t find any reason to go on with his life which revolved around Jim, the love of his life. He has a good friend named Charley (Julianne Moore) who is needy, and a young student named Kenny (Nicholas Hoult, the young actor from About a Boy, grown up and delivering a touching performance), yet nothing can replace Jim.
The recreation of the ‘60s isn't forced. Art direction by Ian Phillips, set decoration by Amy Wells, and costume design by Arianne Phillips create a Los Angeles that feels authentic. Original Music by Abel Korzeniowski adds to the atmospherics.
If you’ve ever known a deep loss, you will understand George’s grief. Every moment feels like an hour with only sleep bringing relief, at least temporarily. As life goes on around George it seems to move in slow motion mocking his attempts to move on. Mr. Firth does an outstanding job making us care about this lonely man. Review by Ann Marie Oliva
| EVERYBODY'S FINE Rated PG-13 for thematic elements and brief strong language. Drama/Comedy/Adventure 100 minutes
3½ stars |
We know fathers like Frank (Robert De Niro). They are hard-working blue collar workers. They push themselves to provide for their families, and they push their kids because they want them to succeed more than they did. What they are missing is being able to perceive their children’s needs, and the ability to understand that their kids are not carbon copies of themselves, especially when they grow up.
Frank, lonely and depressed since his wife died eight months, is expecting his four children home for a visit. When they all back out at the last minute, Frank decides to visit them despite a respiratory condition from his lifelong work of coating telephone wire. This is one of the symbolic ironies. Frank made it possible for people to communicate constantly, but is unable to talk honestly with his own family.
First he visits his son David in New York City where he is an artist, but is not able to make contact. This becomes a pressing issue: where is David? Next he visits daughter Amy (Kate Beckinsale) at her large home in Chicago. He sees his grandson Jack (Lucian Maisel, natural), and enjoys grandfatherly give and take with him, but is told he has to leave the next day because everyone is traveling/busy. The audience picks up clues along with Frank, which are not very subtle, yet the empathy is building for this lost man whose children lie to him, and push him away. Next he goes to Denver to see his son Robert (Sam Rockwell) who he thought was a conductor, but actually plays the drum in the orchestra. The scenes with Robert are a bit more uncomfortable as he confronts Frank about not being proud of how he turned out. He, too, says he’s traveling the next day. (There is an edgy scene in a train station that highlights Frank’s vulnerability.) Finally, he visits Rosie (Drew Barrymore) in Las Vegas, and decides to leave himself on a plane the next day when he realizes she has some unresolved ongoing issues.
One of the conceits of the movie is that when Frank looks at his children, he sometimes sees them as the children they were, rather than the adults they have become. Because of missed opportunities, he would like to go back and redo some of the past, but unfortunately, that’s impossible. So, he tries to reconnect with them. The pace of the movie is a bit too slow and deliberate, and sentiment and contrivances occasionally overshadow the action. Yet, it’s also sadly affecting.
The cast is excellent with all the major actors nicely underplaying their parts. De Niro is very good, displaying none of the mannerisms or tics that he’s used over the course of a long and varied career. It’s not difficult to see that this is a remake of an Italian story where family is primary even if relationships are tense and combative, and the mother is the heart of the house. When the wife and mother goes first, what happens to the father? If he can’t change and grow, he will be lonelier than ever. Yet, there is hope... Review by Ann Marie Oliva
| THE MESSENGERA Rated R for language and some sexual content/nudity. Drama/War/Romance 104 minutes
4 stars |
People have different reactions to trauma and death, but war and all its horror forces reactions. No matter how hard people try to keep in control, their emotions will eventually give way to the damage and pain. The Messenger shows how close to the surface explosive bitterness and resentment can be when faced with traumatic loss. The movie is devastating in its truth telling about what really happens when people are confronted with the unimaginable.
Staff Sergeant Will Montgomery (Ben Foster) has returned from Iraq as a hero (with a medal), after a horrific incident. He’s recovering from his injuries, but his inability to tell his longtime girlfriend Kelly (Jena Malone) what he’s been through alienates them and causes a break up. He has three months left when the Army assigns him to Casualty Notification, meaning telling next of kin the bad news about their loved ones. He is paired with Captain Tony Stone (Woody Harrelson), a lifer who takes the job seriously enough to follow procedure to the letter. Stone counsels Will to follow the rules for everyone’s sake, but Montgomery struggles with families’ reactions to the news.
Some of the most difficult scenes to watch are the notifications themselves: crying, wailing, anger, heartbreak start to wear on Montgomery who is still freshly wounded from his own experience. He tries to remain distant like Stone, but is unable to, especially with a widow named Olivia Pitterson (Samantha Morton) who they have delivered the bad news to recently. He wants to make something right that can never be fixed, and their relationship has fits and starts, has some touching moments, but doesn’t entirely work.
Since Stone is on the wagon (for his alcoholism), the audience gets hints that behind the bravado and the womanizing there is a tortured soul. When Stone and Montgomery clash there is a bonding that takes place afterward and each is revealed to the other.
Ben Foster gives an excellent performance and works well with Woody Harrelson who has played similar characters, but brings his best to the part. Steve Buscemi does a nice job with the small part of a father who loses his son. This is a moving and thoughtful movie that explores the damages of war: immediately, and for years afterward. The healthiest learn to heal or at least move on; others relive the trauma in a never ending cycle of avoidance, shame and regret. Review by Ann Marie Oliva
| BROTHERS Rated R for language and some disturbing violent content. Drama/Thriller 110 minutes
3 stars |
The word “brother” (in the title, in describing family kinship, and most dramatically in a highly charged climax) does not contain the power alone to make said relationship believable on the screen despite the best efforts of two fine actors. Though the outlines of the story (troubled family dynamics) are familiar, the twists and turns are not always predictable. As a result, though it’s not enough to satisfy, the movie is only half disappointing.
Sam Cahill (Tobey Maguire) is the older, responsible, stick-to-it sibling who has risen to the rank of Marine captain as opposed to Tommy (Jake Gyllenhaal), his ne’er do well, quick tempered, jail alumnus brother. Both actors (two of the finest and deserving of more and weightier parts) give fine, shaded performances but they are unable to overcome a story (written by David Benioff, based on a Danish original by Susanne Bier and Anders Thomas Jensen) that states a connection between them that is belied by their character’s completely opposite natures. For example, in their youth, how close would Sam (high school star quarterback) have been with Tommy (trouble making, cigarette and drug smoker)? Sure, they shared a hard nosed, stern taskmaster, military father, Hank (Sam Shepard, mostly one-note) but, once again, their reaction was completely different. Sam followed in his father’s military footsteps and tried to forge a relationship (even if formal) while Tommy rebelled, broke the law (the exact nature a bit vague), and even still is quick to rise to his father’s verbal baiting. Another major difference – Tommy is single while Sam is married to his high school sweetheart Grace (Natalie Portman, walking through a shallow role) and the father of two daughters.
Interestingly, their young sisters somewhat echo the brothers. Isabel (Bailee Madison, who can cry quite convincingly at the drop of a hat) is the brighter, responsible one while Maggie (Taylor Geare, adorable) is the charmer. But the interplay between these two comes across as real, genuine, and believable. Throughout, they are a pleasure whenever on the screen.
But even a non-idyllic life must be disrupted to supply a plot. And so, Sam is shipped out for another tour in Afghanistan. While he’s away, Tommy straightens out. Why? Who knows? But he becomes skilled in the home improvement business (even his father wonders how) and turns into a dream uncle to his nieces. Meanwhile, Sam’s helicopter is shot down and he, and Joe (Patrick Flueger, very good) a fellow marine he rescued, are captured and become prisoners of a brutal, fanatical rebel group. Deprivation, mind games, and torture follow (the latter is squirm inducing). Unfortunately, Sam’s family is told he has been killed. As they gradually adjust, Grace and Tommy find themselves attracted to one another, only to be told Sam has been rescued and is returning.
But the returning Sam has been severely damaged, psychologically, by his war experience and entertains a conviction that his wife and brother have been sexually involved. As he losses control, Sam becomes a greater and greater danger to himself and others, leading to violence and potential mayhem. The resolution is a letdown for its predictability.
Jim Sheridan has directed more effectively before and likely will again. The fault is in material that tells of a relationship instead of letting viewers gather the evidence for themselves. Here and there (but no spoilers will be given here) the expected does not happen (thank you). Among the effective minor performances special notice to Mare Winningham as Elsie, Sam and Tommy’s step mother, for her low key and touching sensitivity. A final observation to production designer Tony Fanning, and others engaged similarly – a less than tidy, messy home is realistic (good job) but at the same time it doesn’t make sense that it would also be spotless. Come to think of it, that’s the problem with the movie – in the end it’s too neat.
Brothers – Lackluster, like its trite title. Review by Charles Zio
| FANTASTIC MR. FOX Rated PG for action, smoking and slang humor. Adventure/Animation/Comedy 87 minutes
4 stars |
Charming and clever, Fantastic Mr. Fox doesn’t disappoint as is too often the case when filmmakers try to do something different by taking on animation. This stop motion comedy, written by director Wes Anderson with Noah Baumbach from the novel by Roald Dahl, is quite funny for children as well as grownups.
It seems that Mr. Fox (voiced by George Clooney) is a smart mouth, but especially wily fox, who is an expert chicken gatherer. One night as he and Mrs. Fox (Meryl Street) are on the prowl, they are caught by obnoxious humans. This caused the Mrs. to ask him to find a less scary way to make a living. He decides to be a newspaper reporter (what’s scarier than that right now?).
By this time they have a smart mouth son, Ash (voiced by Jason Schwartzman) who is a younger, smaller version of his father. Much of the story is about the son’s attempts to prove himself to his father who seems preoccupied with his own troubles. When Ash’s cousin, Kristofferson, comes to stay with them and is better at everything than Ash, he acts out even more. Worse, Mr. Fox irritatingly pays more attention to Kristofferson than to Ash.
After the Foxes rent a nice hallowed out tree and have a view of the humans and their business that are destroying their natural habitat, bit by bit, Fox vows revenge. The bravado of Mr. Fox will be recognized by many a human who seeks glory for its own sake. The baddies counter attack and the animals are on the run from the revenge filled farmers and businessmen who Mr. Fox has tricked.
Along the way many actors contribute to the fun: Bill Murray, Michael Gambon, Willem Defoe, Owen Wilson, Karen Duffy, Brian Cox, Adrien Brody, and even chef Mario Batali! It comes together as plan after plan of Mr. Fox fails, yet his group follows him, and of course he’s vindicated while learning a lesson, too.
The animation takes a little getting used (animals dressed up in clothes) to but is delightful once you do because it’s unusual, thanks Daniel Alderson and his animation department. Also key is the editing by Andrew Weisblum, the cinematography of Tristan Oliver, and the original music by Alexandre Desplat, and the quirky music chosen to complement the movie.
Children and adults will find something to laugh about in Fantastic Mr. Fox. Review by Ann Marie Oliva
| OLD DOGS Rated PG for some mild rude humor. Comedy/Familyy 88 minutes
2 stars |
This might have been called Old Tired Dogs because the comedy, such as it is, is the “old” part. It’s surprising with all the resources and talent that this movie isn’t better. Having said that, this kind of broad humor might appeal to children, especially since it focuses on father/child relationships, and the kids come out as winners. Yet, must we have adolescent bathroom jokes, drinking and lusting resulting in an unplanned pregnancy, and men hit in the groin with golf balls?
Dan (Robin Williams) and Charlie (John Travolta) are partners in a sports marketing firm and have done very well for themselves, except Dan can’t find love, and Charlie is a ladies man. After a sad divorce, Charlie convinces Dan to go to Miami to have fun. They drink too much and Dan finds Vicki (Kelly Preston) to party with, and her friend Jenna (Rita Wilson).
Years later, as they are in the middle of an important presentation to Japanese clients, Vicki calls and Dan finds out he fathered twins that night. Then the real hilarity begins as contrived reasons are created to throw father, friend and children together.
Much of what happens is silly, though there is an attempt to put it in a bigger context. Robin Williams tries too hard, and John Travolta’s character is a walking stereotype. Brought to you by the same folks who created Wild Hogs, Old Dogs is very much the same with broad, over-the-top humor that will not appeal to everyone. They have brought some talented people into the mix including: Matt Dillon, Justin Long, Bernie Mac, and even Ann-Margaret! Ella Bleu Travolta is a pretty little girl, and the other “twin” Conner Rayburn has a nice quality for a child actor. Yet, none of this helps a weak script.
Old Dogs is one of those family movies kids might get a kick out of, but adults shouldn’t expect much bark or bite. Review by Ann Marie Oliva
| NINJA ASSASSIN Rated R for strong bloody stylized violence throughout, and language. Action/Crime/Drama/Thriller 99 minutes
2 stars |
Two things are apparent from watching this movie: the actor playing Raizo, named Rain, has charisma, and yes, there CAN be too much blood/gore/violence in a movie. This is of a certain genre, that’s true, but even stylized violence can exceed its purpose.
There is actually an arc to this story of young orphans taken in by a maniacal leader who trains them (male and female) to become assassins for his own glorification and power. There are flashbacks of especially cruel treatment of young children, which always provides reasons, if not justification for the killing machines they turn out to be. Raizo, as a child and teenager (Yoon Sungwoong, Joon Lee) shows great promise as a ninja in tolerating the exhausting and painful training.
Raizo develops a long chaste relationship with one of the girls named Kiriko (Kylie Goldstein), which turns into something stronger as they become teenagers (Anna Sawai). She gives him the only kindness he has ever been shown so when she is punished for trying to escape, Raizo becomes an enemy to his former group. These are the most difficult scenes to watch as it’s supposed to create sympathy but is sickening child abuse.
These scenes are in flashback to help the audience understand that Raizo (Rain) is an exceptional ninja who trains constantly, and that he is the good guy who everyone is trying to kill.
You know what to expect from a martial arts movie, though here the damage is mostly done by swords and blades that quickly slice off hands, heads, legs and sever all manner of body parts. There are convoluted storylines about government breeches that are just excuses to have showdowns between ninjas and soldiers who are at a disadvantage even with machine guns against the ninjas. The young South Korean actor, Rain, has potential, but the excess violence and gore ironically takes away from, rather than adds to the story of revenge. Review by Ann Marie Oliva
NEW MOON |
THE TWILIGHT SAGA: NEW MOON Rated PG-13 for some violence and action. Drama/Fantasy/Horror Romance/Thriller 130 minutes
2 stars |
Bella mopes, Edward copes, Jacob hopes. This human/vampire/werewolf love triangle plays out very, very slowly, and at over two hours that’s not a good thing. Part of the problem is that almost every line is delivered with equal weight. When the actor is saying something mundane it is unnecessary to stress all words like they were written by Shakespeare, which in this movie they decidedly were not. Director Chris Weitz has some responsibility for this dialogue problem, too. It’s supposed to come off as other-worldly, but it ends up as melodramatic and annoying.
The Twilight Saga continues as the “extraordinary” love of human Bella Swan (Kristen Stewart), and vampire Edward Cullen (Robert Pattinson) moves on to the next phase. These two young actors have the staring into each other’s eyes part down pat, now if only they didn’t mistake gloominess for acting, there might be something more positive to talk about. Edward decides to leave Bella in her senior year of high school as she is pressuring him to turn her into a vampire. It’s never really explained until later, but of course, you know they still love each other. He appears to her whenever she’s in danger. This gives Bella an excuse to force Edward to show up, at least in a shadowy haze.
As Bella slips close to catatonia, her friend Jacob becomes her companion and protector in Edward’s place. Jacob is played by Taylor Lautner who is actually an okay actor and steals what there is to steal of the movie from Ms. Stewart and especially Mr. Pattinson. Where Edward seems effete and whiny, Jacob is muscular and dynamic, and gets to turn into one of those big, cool, scary werewolves, though the CGI is not the best ever seen.
There is a distracting though welcome subplot about the Volturi, the vampire elite, who make life and death decisions about their kind. The leader, Aro, is played by Michael Sheen, another actual actor. The scenes even include Dakota Fanning as the sadistic vampire Jane.
Apparently, you can make up your own rules about vampires, werewolves etc., and have a great old time as book author Stephenie Meyer has, but only if you can hook people on your “vision.” It’s easy to see why pre-teens would go for this story. Bella has the true everlasting love young girls dream about without pressure for sex, though you have to watch out for those fangs. Edward is a creature who is not like the stomach-turning vampires of old, but a semi-cute, if sickly-looking, boyfriend who is decent and makes no demands. There is also the fantasy of wanting to be cherished for oneself; believing you are unique and misunderstood, which leads to plenty of teenage angst.
This movie will undoubtedly make scads of money from its target audience, but it's not going to change minds either way. I just wonder what these same audience members will say about this in ten years, when they grow up. Review by Ann Marie Oliva
THE NOVEL PUSH BY SAPPHIRE |
PRECIOUS: BASED ON THE NOVEL PUSH BY SAPPHIRE Rated R for child abuse, including sexual assault and pervasive language. Drama/Adaptation 109 minutes
5 stars |
The value and survival of the human spirit is a tale, if told well, that cannot help but move and exhilarate. Precious Jones, the heroine, and surely she is, of this movie confronts odds so daunting as to be seemingly insurmountable. But endure she does to her credit, and to the satisfaction and approval of the viewer who shares every step of her rocky journey.
Claireece Precious Jones, played superbly throughout by Gabourey Sidibe, is a teenager with nothing going for her in Harlem in the late 1980’s. She’s in junior high yet unschooled in that, despite showing mathematical promise, she is illiterate and obviously a victim of social promotion (students moved along regardless of achievement). She’s overweight, lacks style or the means/knowledge to achieve it, is pregnant (at sixteen) with her second child and living, in a unkempt walk-up tenement totally under the sway of her abusive mother, Mary (Mo’Nique, splendidly powerful) who alternates between abusing her and treating her as a personal servant, as well as a reason for receiving welfare payments. The abuse itself is of every variety though not played for blatant visual sensationalism, more often it is suggested, off screen, and/or abbreviated but entailing the physical (thrown objects and beatings), psychological (Mary’s tirades are profanity laced and merciless) and especially sexual. The later, in fact, courtesy of the young girl's now absent father, the cause of her first and current pregnancies.
The only way Precious can survive (unable as she is to fight the actual abuses) is to take refuge in daydreams. In them, she is a coifed/make-up adorned/designer dressed model/actress/movie star strutting and posing amid flashing lights and eager fans as well as, in total contrast to her life, having a handsome, adoring boyfriend. But what hope is there for Precious?
Enter two women willing to help. At the welfare office, Precious starts meeting with Ms. Weiss (Mariah Carey, deglamorized and authentic) who takes an interest in her eliciting the ugly truth long unspoken. Meanwhile, more significantly, Precious is enrolled in an alterative school where a dedicated teacher, Ms. Rain (Paula Patton, believable in a role that could have been syrupy), encourages her students to write (thus hinting that the book “Push” will one day emerge). It is also in this class that Precious will meet and bond with a group of other troubled girls (however none as seriously as her). In addition, Ms. Rain takes Precious into her home (for good reason) and it’s a revelation of another world.
The excellent script by Geoffrey Fletcher based on the novel “Push” by Sapphire (as the movie is subtitled) has touches of humor and pathos and the latter half features moving, explosive, and uplifting moments all of which are orchestrated expertly by the director Lee Daniels, and kudos to him for a job excellent in every respect. His hand is assured and unobtrusive, letting the emotional story speak for itself (social and political aspects can be referenced should the viewer wish to do so). The photography of Andrew Dunn captures the stark/gritty/deadening/world, ably rendered by production designer Roshelle Berliner, around and through which Precious moves, while the editing of Joe Klotz moves the plot along smoothly and seamlessly integrates the fantasy sequences. This is not an easy movie. It’s rough and raw. But, truly, in the end that makes the victory all the sweeter, and valuable.
Precious – A gem. Review by Charles Zio
| THE BLIND SIDE Rated PG-13 for one scene involving brief violence, drug and sexual references. Drama/Sports 128 minutes
4 stars |
As with most sports movies, The Blind Side is not actually about sports, though that's part of it, but rather what makes a family. This true life story of Michael Oher is inspirational despite what cynics might say. Adapted from the book written by Michael Lewis by writer/director John Lee Hancock, it may be somewhat simplified but still leaves the audience with that feel-good feeling.
Michael (Quinton Aaron), the African-American teenager of a drug-abusing mother, (with multiple siblings), wanders the streets. He is admitted to a private Christian high school on a scholarship when the coach is awed by Michael’s large size and persuades the school to take him on. His grades are so bad from years of little attention that he can’t play football right away. Called Big Mike, he is seen one night in below freezing weather by Leigh Anne Tuohy (Sandra Bullock, who gives a very good performance) and family as they are leaving a basketball game. They invite him to spend the night and from there a relationship develops. It becomes heartbreakingly obvious just how tough life has been for him, but Leigh Anne fights off those who question the family's support of Michael.
This is not the story of an overnight accomplishment. It took years for Michael to even get up to C level school work, but it is quite amazing how everyone in the family: Leigh Anne’s husband Sean (Tim McGraw), their daughter Collins (Lily Collins), and son S.J. (Jae Head), welcomed and accepted him. Of course, they had the financial means to help him through some trying times, even hiring a private tutor, Miss Sue (Kathy Bates), to get him to a 2.5 GPA so that he could play college football. Yet, there are certainly reminders of prejudice, as well as the anger that wells up in young men with no future and little hope, that so often can lead to tragedy.
Other tension appears in the movie as the NCAA sends an interviewer to determine if the Tuohy family unreasonably influenced Michael to play football in Mississippi. When this is cleared he goes on to a successful college career at Ole Miss, and recently to the NFL.
There are funny scenes of Michael first learning to play football. As sometimes happens with extra large people, they hesitate to use their enormous size for fear of hurting others, but once Leigh Anne weighs in and explains the situation in her own particular style, Michael does just fine.
Not everyone has the means to help others as much as the Tuohy family helped Michael Oher, but isn't it wonderful that they did? Review by Ann Marie Oliva
| 2012 Rated PG-13 for intense, disaster sequences and some language. Action/Drama/Thriller 158 minutes
3 stars |
In 2012 the world ends in bangs, whimpers, and, finally, yawns. The bangs are courtesy of impressive special effects. The whimpers manifest in a number of teary-eyed, and clichéd, emotional moments. And the yawns result from an accumulation of daring escapes/near misses/disasters seconds away that accrue to the point of being preposterous. Cutting a half hour from the film might not have saved it from tedium, but it sure would have cut down on the repetition.
Okay, here’s the premise – the ancient Mayans, supported by a planetary alignment which occurs every 640,000 years accompanied by the largest and strongest solar flares ever recorded, will play havoc with normally harmless neutrinos and lead to the destruction of Earth on December 21, 2012. The evidence that such will happen is put forth by a government scientist, Adrian Helmsley (Chiwetel Ejiofor), who reports to Carl Anheuser (Oliver Platt) some sort of all powerful aide to President Thomas Wilson (Danny Glover). The leaders of the world’s governments hatch a plan for the escape of themselves and key members of humanity who are determined, you guessed it, by their willingness to pay an exorbitant fee for survival.
Accidentally learning of the planet’s imminent demise is Jackson Curtis (John Cusack), currently a limo driver for a thug Russian billionaire (and his two brat children), and the author of a book titled “Farewell Atlantis” wherein he posits the end of civilization along with the goodness of human nature (it wasn’t a best seller). Divorced from wife Kate (Amanda Peet), he is something of an absentee father to his son, Noah (Liam James) and Lilly (Morgan Lily) and envious of Kate’s new husband Gordon (Tom McCarthy), a plastic surgeon (that’s right, there’s a little bit of everything thrown into this stew). If there is anything fresh here (and there’s very little that is) it’s the fact Gordon is not the usual second husband villain. Still, Cusack has the star billing so it’s easy to figure Gordon’s survival odds.
After a stretch of exposition (the Earth will be destroyed, meet the characters, ominous temperature increases, minor quakes) and evidence from several years back that doom is approaching, the movie finally gets to 2012 and though the date appears to be off, the year is correct and natural disaster strikes. Name it and it hits – earthquakes, volcanoes, tsunamis – and they are massive enough to destroy civilization and almost all its inhabitants. Except, for those with passage on one of the “arks.” Eventually, Adrian, a believer in Jackson’s faith in humanity, speechifies and overcomes Anheuser’s government bureaucrat and rescues thousands. In the meantime, civilization everywhere is destroyed (there goes London, there goes France) including just about everyone.
There is no denying that the CGI is striking (Volker Engel and Marc Weigert). The acting, too, is commendable across the board but the performances are wasted amid a clichéd, predictable script, save for Woody Harrelson as an entertainingly crazed, yet astute, radio commentator. Penned by Roland Emmerich and Harald Kloser, the plot, unoriginal and generic, overly relies on cliff-hanger moments to the point of being laughable. How many times can a car barely avoid falling into emerging, enlarging, and deepening cracks? Or a plane narrowly escape towering buildings or mountains falling toward each other? As it becomes more difficult to buy into the absurdity of so many cumulative near misses, the emotional moments become harder to believe, wasting heartfelt moments that might have worked in a different context. Emmerich, as director, does manage to turn out a decent movie till the repetition begins to weary the viewer. Oh yeah, there’s a message, too, which seems to be that goodness will prevail and only the good survive (or deserve too). Comforting, but then, who knows what happens when the arks land in the newly created world?
2012 - Nature run rampant is a sight to behold. Rest of movie isn’t. Review by Charles Zio
| PIRATE RADIO Rated R for language, some sexual content including brief nudity. Comedy/Drama/Music UK/Germany/USA/France 135 minutes
3½ stars |
There are those who insist that the 1960s produced the best decade of popular music -- ever. When you see Pirate Radio it’s difficult to argue with that logic as the sound track is awe-inspiring. In fact, the music is a large part of why this movie works. Said to be loosely based on actual events, it was originally titled, The Boat That Rocks, about some outlaw DJs who broadcast their radio programs from a rickety boat in the North Atlantic Sea off the coast of Britain.
It’s all very anti-establishment as Quentin (Bill Nighy), the mastermind “captain” of this group of rebels decides to cross those with a strong aversion to the music. Represented by the smug government minister Dormandy (overplayed by Kenneth Branagh to the point of revulsion), and his assistant Twatt (Jack Davenport), you can’t help but root for the mangy group of radio jocks.
Quentin’s godson Carl (Tom Sturridge) is sent to the boat by his mother Charlotte (Emma Thompson), a free spirit, after he is expelled from school. You know he’s going to get quite an education from these guys. The little drama that plays out with his first crush named Marianne, and yearning to know who his father is, provides some semblance of a storyline. Though the cook is a lesbian, this is definitely a guy story with the girls only tangential to the goings on, but mainly, periodically brought on board for sexual relief.
Other eccentric characters add interest even though the audience doesn’t get to know them all that well. There are more then a few of them, and at times, especially in the beginning, it’s hard to keep track of who’s who. Over and over there are poignant scenes of everyday Britons looking for relief from drab jobs and lives. The music makes them feel alive, at least for a little while, so they tune into to hear the latest music from the boat. This is a movie that starts slowly, gets a bit confusing, but if you hang in there with it, it does have a payoff.
The most prominent characters are an American named The Count played by Philip Seymour Hoffman, always top notch, and the good-looking superstar, “king of the airwaves," Gavin (Rhys Ifans). There is some tension between the two as each wants to be top dog until a funny scene where both get what’s coming to them and peace and love reigns on their rusty piece of junk heaven. Other characters are played with varying success by: Nick Frost, Chris O’Dowd, Rhys Darby, Tom Wisdom, Ralph Brown, Katherine Parkinson, Ike Hamilton, Tom Brooke, and Talulah Riley.
Writer/director Richard Curtis has a somewhat messy, overly sentimental narrative going, but again and again, the music of The Kinks, The Who, Dusty Springfield, Jimi Hendrix, The Hollies, The Turtles, David Bowie, etc., saves the movie. Don’t miss the end credits. You’ll see many of those old far-out, artistic, psychedelic album covers. Review by Ann Marie Oliva
| A CHRISTMAS CAROL Rated PG for scary Sequences and images. Sci-Fi/Animation/ Adaptation/Holiday 95 minutes
3 stars |
The most intriguing thing about this Christmas Carol is the 3-D performance capture animation. Director Robert Zemeckis has made use of Jim Carrey’s talents as he plays multiple roles. In fact, most of the actors play more than one character. Yet Mr. Carrey is the undisputed star. To what end?
My problem is with the pacing and emphasis of Charles Dicken’s classic tale. This one is darker than would have been expected. It has a PG rating, but how frightening will this be for young children? Having seen many of the previous films, this one is scarier even though it’s animation.
It is also lacking in the wonder and enchantment of the holiday season. The visits by the ghosts are not magical, instead they are a let down. During the Ghost of Christmas Present, Scrooge has an epiphany about Tiny Tim, yet this is the first time we hear about or see him. There is no previous investment in the emotional heart tugs that come so suddenly. The movie is 95 minutes, but much time is spent on the Ghost of Christmas Yet to Come including a chase sequence with hellish horses pulling a carriage along to get at Scrooge as he’s bounced and thrown around.
Colin Firth and Gary Oldman as well as several other accomplished actors are used in minor roles that don’t allow their talents to be shown off in the best light. There was also some giggling as the audience recognized them, though their characters seemed silly rather than convincing at times.
After Scrooge’s night of ghostly visits there is no sense of joy like there is in other versions. That’s a real disappointment because it should leave the audience feeling relieved and happy. I’m not sure why this movie is so emotionally flat. Animated films can be very moving, such as this year’s UP. It can be done, but A Christmas Carol doesn’t touch any real nerves, and that’s too bad. It may be technically proficient, but it has no heart. Review by Ann Marie Oliva
STARE AT GOATS |
THE MEN WHO STARE AT GOATS Rated R for language, some drug content and brief nudity. Comedy/Adaptation/War 93 minutes
3½ stars |
You get a clue from the title. This absurdist comedy is going to throw sometimes outrageous, always off-beat scenes at the viewer. It’s on the better side of average, a light ditty that doesn’t take itself too seriously, yet allows the actors to play broad characters.
Based on the book by Jon Ronson with a screenplay by Peter Straughan, we’re told from the start that more of the story is true than we would believe. So sit back and enjoy without thinking too much about what makes sense in reality. This is a bizarro world of freakish contrivances.
A reporter named Bob Wilton (Ewan McGregor, reliable) has his life start falling apart when his wife leaves him for his editor. To prove to her (but mostly to himself) that he’s not a wimp, he goes off to the Middle East in search of a story. He comes across Lyn Cassady (George Clooney, as far out as he likes to go) who is heading into Iraq with Bob along for the ride.
What comes next is a series of flashbacks shown in between Bob and Lyn’s desert adventures. It seems the Army, at one time, created a unit to train recruits to be psychic spies, or Jedi warriors (a reference and a not so inside joke referring to Ewan McGregor), run by one Colonel Bill Django (Jeff Bridges, a perfect fit), who is one crazy guy. Lyn becomes his star pupil but, of course, there is one jealous spoiler named Larry Hooper (Kevin Spacey, who could phone this role in by now).
The movie tends to meander. Even towards the end, it doesn’t quite come together with any definite resolve, though Lyn and Bill exact a revenge of sorts that's not as upbeat as it may have seemed on the page. That’s beside the point. There are some very funny moments, some less so, but I’ve sat through a lot worse than The Men Who Stare at Goats. It’s light, and it’s fun, except maybe for the goats. Review by Ann Marie Oliva
| THE FOURTH KIND Rated PG-13 for violent/ disturbing images, some terror, thematic elements and brief sexuality. Thriller 98 minutes
2 stars |
We’re told that there are different kinds of alien encounters. The fourth kind is alien abduction. Your view of this movie depends on whether you believe the abduction story or not. It's going to be tough.
Writer/director Olatunde Osunsanmi seems earnest in his telling of psychologist Abbey Tyler’s story of her brush with the Others. But it’s a strange mix of actual tapes and actors reliving the events, often on split screen. Why was it produced this way? Is it a documentary or a mystery thriller?
Milla Jovovich plays Dr. Tyler, sometimes with a flat affect, semi-hysterical in her recounting of what happened to several of her patients as well as herself. First the owl appears. Huh? Sure, it’s scary, if your imagination allows you to go there, but the audience is constantly jerked back to reality by the "actual" tapes. Yet, it’s too convenient that the tapes become distorted at crucial moments, such as when the aliens take over the humans’ bodies.
Nome, Alaska is the setting and the cold, isolated landscape provides more than a hint of terror. If it weren’t for several tragedys that occur during the course of the story, it might easily be written off, but death and disability are no laughing matters.
This strange hybrid leaves you uneasy, but perhaps more disturbed about human behavior than supposed alien abductions. Review by Ann Marie Oliva
| FERMAT'S ROOM Not Rated (DVD) Suspense/Horror/Thriller Foreign Film - Spain 90 minutes
4½ stars |
Good mysteries are always welcome, and this is an intelligent one. That is, it’s not only smart in its elements/set up/solution but the characters themselves are brainy, and their intellect is an integral part of the plot and action. The viewer should not get the idea the movie is stuffy (though it certainly is for the trapped participants on screen). It is an intriguing and entertaining puzzle and in no way limited by its Spanish subtitles (which are, gratefully, all easily readable).
As with any well-made mystery, the beginning of the story is key. That’s where the clues are planted that form the basis of the solution to follow. Nothing is extraneous as the pieces of the riddle are being put forth. (Note: Characters will hereafter be identified, as in the film, by the pseudonyms of noted mathematicians from the past given them by the mastermind of their ordeal.) Galois (Alejo Sauras) is a young, handsome, rock star in his field (with groupies even) who plans to demonstrate Goldbach’s Conjecture (formulated 250 years ago but never proved) when his dorm room is ransacked. Next to appear (four months later the title reads) is Hilbert (Lluis Homar), a middle aged, proud, patronizing math expert who reveals an invitation from a man named Fermat to a gathering of excellent minds contingent on supplying an answer to the order of a sequence of numbers within ten days. Stumped for an answer is Pascal (Santi Millan), a down-to-earth, common sense inventor, who reaches the solution offhandedly who happily follows the directions on his acceptance letter (no cell phone, no ID) and drives off to an empty, sandy riverside. There he meets Oliva (Elena Ballesteros), cynical, tough, dismissive and as adept with numbers as the men. Off they go, first across the river in a canoe, then into a car set with a PDA that leads them to an abandoned grain store, and into an elegantly decorated and furnished room. Then the anticipated Fermat (Federico Luppi) arrives only to shortly leave to attend his daughter in the hospital.
And then, the games begin, through enigmas. The PDA becomes an exam giver, presenting the four individuals with test questions and time limits. The first, about determining the contents of mislabeled sweets cartons, initially involves a discussion between Galois, Oliva, and Hilbert. The answer is supplied with irritation by Pascal who points out the group has been locked in and late/incorrect answers will result in the walls (each of them) moving together by virtue of unstoppable hydraulic presses. More enigmas arrive, the room grows smaller, furniture is smashed, escape is impossible, and it’s discovered the ages of the inhabitants exactly match those of their namesakes when they died.
What the heck is going on? Who is behind this death trap? Most especially, why? This being a mystery, nothing is ever at it seems. Satisfyingly, the outcome is not simple, obvious, or tedious. Each solution turns out to merely supply another layer of information until the logical and agreeable conclusion. And don’t be put off by the impossibility, for the vast majority of us viewers, to answer the enigmas since there’s little chance of our matching the quickness and mathematical aptitude of the protagonists. Just hearing the solutions alone is impressive fun.
Critical to the success of this movie is the fine acting by each of the principals (in appearance order, Galois, Homar, Millan, Ballesteros, Luppi). They’re convincing and believable throughout and play off each other convincingly. An example of ensemble acting at its best. Credit for the sharp/clever/challenging script is shared by Luis Piedrahita and Rodrigo Sopena. How refreshing when a movie respects the viewer’s intelligence. Further credit accrues to the writers for their direction in which all the filmic elements are in service to the telling of their story (it’s no easy task keeping the necessary objectivity when shooting your own work, as many failures attest). Aside from one thread straining credulity a bit, Piedrahita and Sopena deserve a round of applause. The picture begins with the following dialogue: “Do you know what prime numbers are? Because if you don’t, you should just leave now.” Don’t believe it for a minute. Stay and savor.
Fermat’s Room – Adds up to a worthy, entertaining brainteaser. Review by Charles Zio
| ASTRO BOY Rated PG for some action and peril and brief mild language. Action/Sci-Fi/Fantasy Animation/Adaptation 104 minutes
3½ stars |
Set sometime in the distant future, Toby (voiced by Freddie Highmore) is a genius like his scientist father, Dr. Tenma (Nicholas Cage) doing calculations beyond even the adults around him. That they live in the sky on the floating island of Metro City with a trash covered earth below is somewhat disconcerting. It seems we in the present are being continually scolded in most of our futuristic reincarnations.
Toby is inquisitive and wants to participate in his father’s experiments, meant for the public good. This doesn’t suit the evil General Stone (Donald Sutherland) who wants all the power created for himself. This goes terribly wrong and Toby dies early on in the movie. In his grief, Toby’s father reconstructs him as a robot with all of Toby’s memories, but then rejects him as not being “real.” Yet, Toby has unbelievable powers that have General Stone and soldier robots after him. He barely escapes to the earth below.
Since Metro City is run by robots who then get discarded to the trash heap below, Toby must find another family. At first he thinks it’s deserted but the children who find him think he’s a child, and rename him Astro Boy because they think it’s cool, and life is OK for a short time. But the man who takes in the orphan kids has them find robots to use for ulterior purposes.
Other actors who lend their voices to characters include: Kristin Bell, Samuel L. Jackson, Charlize Theron, Bill Nighy, Eugene Levy, and Nathan Lane among others. The parts are all well done.
Astro Boy is not an animation hero that all audiences will be familiar with and it’s said to be different from the original, but then this is not the same point in time either. As a stand alone movie, it seems odd at various points but is affecting with themes of belonging and family loyalty that apply to any time, including the future. It’s fast-paced and some of the animation is impressive. It kept the attention of the kids in the audience who seemed to accept it and there was applause afterwards. Review by Ann Marie Oliva
| AMELIA PG for some sensuality, language, thematic elements and smoking. Biography/Drama 111 minutes
2 stars |
There are moments in Amelia when you feel what must have been the exhilaration of flying when it was much more precarious than it is now, but they are far too few. Mostly it’s a conventionally told story of an unconventional heroine of the 1930s. The production values and look of the film are very good, especially the costumes, but after almost two hours it’s difficult to say what Amelia Earhart was all about. Hilary Swank does resemble Ms. Earhart, but close-ups of her wide smile do not make up for a lack of character development.
What’s worse is that she and Richard Gere, who plays her husband and biggest supporter, George Putnam, have little chemistry. They both strive, but you can almost see the strain to manufacture some passion between them. She does better with Ewan MacGregor who plays Gene Vidal, her lover, but their relationship only takes up a few scenes. (One interesting side note is that Amelia was close to Gene’s son, who would grow up to be the writer Gore Vidal.)
We see the child Amelia watching a plane pass over her in childhood, suggesting that she wants to be free of her Kansas roots. But the only comment she makes about her father suggests the reason she was so determined to be her own person. She becomes more and more single-minded about breaking records. She makes the first solo flight across the Atlantic by a woman that makes her the most famous woman in America. A running gag is that she seems to not land where she is supposed to and that, at least, is some comic relief. When she decides to go around the world in 1937, Amelia is determined to try knowing the odds are great against achieving success. What compelled her?
The movie does try to point out her support of women’s rights, yet also honestly shows her compromises when she has to hawk products to make money to fly. Ah, the price of fame.
There are many missed opportunities by director Mira Nair to make this an involving movie, especially with a subject like Amelia Earhart and with actors of this caliber. Instead, what we get is best described by a word that didn’t exist in the 1930s; the movie is strictly dullsville. Review by Ann Marie Oliva
THE VAMPIRE'S ASSISTANT |
CIRQUE DU FREAK: THE VAMPIRE'S ASSISTANT Rated PG-13 for sequences of intense supernatural violence and action, disturbing images, thematic elements and some language. Action/Adventure/Comedy Fantasy/Horror/Thriller 108 minutes
3 stars |
Here’s a variation on the tone of the current, and continuing, filmic (movie and television) vampire glut – Cozy. Based on a gothic comic series, Cirque du Freak offers two best friends who lose their human nature and end up as key players in a coming vampire war. But for those in the target audience (young adults), the chills are more tame than terrifying as signaled by the amusingly spooky animated title credits. While the movie addresses larger issues, the approach is not heavy handed enough to annoy. Another descriptive word that comes to mind for the film is Pleasant.
Darren (Chris Massoglia) and Steve (Josh Hutcherson), high school teens, have been best friends since second grade (the former the good boy, the later impish, and both give fine performances). One night they attend a performance of the Cirque du Freak (which claims to have been on the road for 500 years). Hosted by aptly named Mr. Tall (Ken Watanabe) the show features Evra the Snake Boy (Patrick Fugit), the psychic (though she can’t remember her prophecies) bearded lady Madame Truska (Salma Hayek), the double-stomached Rhamus Twobellies (Frankie Faison), and Alexander Ribs (Orlando Jones), a man lacking a middle. The star of the show, however, is Crepsley (John C. Reilly, an actor always equal to, if not surpassing, his role) who fascinates both boys – Steve because he recognizes him from books as a renowned vampire and Darren because of his large, brilliantly colored, dangerously poisonous spider Octa (spiders being his obsession). Separately, in short order, Steve’s appeal to become a vampire is rejected (bad blood, ho, ho) and Darren steals the spider and brings it to school (huh?) where it escapes and ultimately bites Steve who goes into a coma.
Darren goes to Crepsley and asks for his help. The old vampire (two hundred plus) makes a deal. He will save the best friend if Darren is willing to become a half vampire. It must be interjected that each vampire tale has its own mythology. In this case, a major weapon of the species are the enlarged, cutting fingernails and a half vampire (who can function in the light) is created by exchanging blood through pierced fingertips. To save his friend, Darren submits and, after a staged death, is rescued (actually dug up) by Crepsley.
And not a moment too soon as Darren is threatened by the rotund Mr. Tiny (Michael Cerveris, a dandily repulsive villain) who is intent on controlling the world by reigniting the war between the Vampires (who drink only enough blood to survive while not extinguishing their donors) and the Vampaneze (violent, blood mad killers) as exemplified by the henchman Murlaugh (Ray Stevenson, dauntingly intimidating). To protect his assistant, Crepsley takes him to live among the denizens of the Cirque du Freak which soon enough becomes like a family including, naturally, a love interest, Rebecca (Jessica Carlson, sweet and appealing).
Of course, Mr. Tiny is not easily put off. He has Steve converted to a vampire (of the Vampaneze sort) but seems to want Darren also. Note that a certain amount of information is withheld, like precisely what he has planned, whether Darren and Steve will rekindle their friendship, what part might the Freaks play in the future? Such questions are left for the sequel, indicated by Crepsley’s ally Gavner Purl (Wilem Dafoe, terrific) who arrives to gather his friend and the newly minted/fighting hardened/assistant for the battle to come (assuming the box office so merits).
The script of Cirque du Freak was adapted by Paul Weitz and Brian Helgeland who succeed in mixing moods (the threatening and horrific and the easy going meaningful and sentimental moments). Paul Weitz further acts as director and his touch is controlled and skilled. Although it’s not a classic of its kind, accepted on its own terms (tame and even the violence visually lacks blood), its amiable enough.
Cirque du Freak – Nothing freaky, in any way, about it. Likable. Review by Charles Zio
| WHERE THE WILD THINGS ARE Rated PG for mild thematic elements, some adventure action and brief language. Adventure/Drama/Fantasy/Family 101 minutes
3 stars |
Original and imaginative children’s books don’t necessarily translate into exhilarating films. Maurice Sendak’s classic Where The Wild Things Are, from a screenplay by Spike Jonze and Dave Eggers, and directed by the talented Mr. Jonze, is a case in point. Since the book is ten sentences and less than 350 words it must have been quite an undertaking expanding it to a full-length movie. Although it is heartfelt, the result is the dark dreamlike journey of Max (Max Records, completely natural), a lonely and unhappy boy who desperately wants attention from his teenage sister and distracted mother (Catherine Keener). As with many adaptations, this one may leave the audience feeling let down.
It opens well enough. Max is a rambunctious kid who is in emotional turmoil. There are hints: no father around, self-centered teenage sister, working single mother. The evening his mother has her boyfriend over, Max wears a wolf suit and standing on the kitchen counter screams at her saying, “Feed me, woman!” No surprise, the frustrated mom reprimands him and he runs away with her chasing after him.
This is when Max takes a boat to the land of the Wild Things. He first spots them at night destroying huts and burning wood. Max makes himself known and talks his way into being their king. (Aside from being mopey and depressed, they’re none too bright.) The leader is Carol (voiced by James Gandolfini), and the others are: Alexander (Paul Dano), Judith (Catherine O'Hara), Ira (Forest Whitaker), The Bull (Michael Berry Jr.), Douglas (Chris Cooper), and K.W. (Lauren Ambrose). Each represents an aspect of Max himself.
You may also see Max’s domestic drama replayed with Carol (why a girl’s name?), as the angry, out-of-control father, and K.W., the trapped, stifled mother desperate to get away from him. There is so much talking, more dialogue than action and it seems to turn into psychodrama rather than an adventure, but hey, this is Max’s story from his point of view. Yet it seems hollow when Max shouts, “Let the wild rumpus start!” It never does get wild, though there are some delightful moments like when they all jump on top of each other in a Thing pile. It’s true that children of divorce may have miseries their parents are not aware of, often because parents are struggling with agonies of their own. So where does a volatile child like Max put all that emotion?
Yet, the visuals are beautiful thanks to the artistic sensibilities of Spike Jonze and the cinematography of Lance Acord. The palette and landscapes are done to perfection. Even the monsters, seen first at night by the glowing fire, are so well done that you can be drawn in by them and accept them as real creatures.
Where The Wild Things Are will not leave you laughing. It is not a joyous experience; but there are those who may appreciate what the filmmakers are trying to express. Childhood is not always happy and carefree; kids can be easily hurt. Parents are imperfect and make mistakes. People do the best they can, and create their own kind of monsters. Review by Ann Marie Oliva
| LAW ABIDING CITIZEN Rated R for strong bloody brutal violence and torture, a scene of rape and pervasive language. Thriller 122 minutes
3½ stars |
Although some of the sequences of Law Abiding Citizen are quite implausible, it’s still a taut drama that had everyone in the theatre paying attention until the final moments of the movie.
No time is wasted as the opening tranquil domestic scene is interrupted by a hellish home invasion that results in the death of a wife and daughter. The husband and father, Clyde Shelton (Gerard Butler doing a credible job here), is distraught and overwhelmed with disbelief that the criminal justice system allows one attacker (the worst one) to testify against the other and get off with a fairly light sentence. The other gets the death penalty.
The prosecutor who handles the case, Nick Rice (Jamie Foxx, believable and charismatic), makes the deal and mostly dismisses Clyde’s pleas to do more. It’s only years later when Nick is father of a daughter himself that he begins to realize the depth of Clyde’s tragedy. By this time ten years has passed. When one of the killers is executed, there has been tampering and he dies a painful death. Then the other criminal is killed in a most brutal way. There is no surprise or coyness in the movie about who has done this.
Clyde admits to the murders and makes demands before he will confess. The plot is constructed so that it’s only later when we find out the reasons for Clyde’s demands. Nick is kept in a constant state of fear, and sometimes panic, as people involved with the old case begin to die. Clyde’s revenge reveals more than a distraught family man, and Nick, who is unlikable for his callous attitude years ago, has developed some humanity and empathy.
The production values are very good, and stunts are well executed. Yes, it is unnecessarily violent at times, yet this thriller is gripping, and keeps you wondering how it will all be sorted out until the last minute. Review by Ann Marie Oliva
| PARANORMAL ACTIVITY Rated R for language. Horror/Thriller 86 minutes
1½ stars |
The horror in Paranormal Activity occurs prior to the film – when one pays for admittance. Because it sure isn’t worth it. Though it follows the example of The Blair Witch Project of years ago (low budget, supposedly true events, internet promoted), that movie had some thrills and chills while this one offers, at most, maybe a shiver or two (and those just barely). Worse, this movie isn’t even bad enough to be laughable.
The plot (such as it is) – Starting with a title card informing the viewer that what follows is being presented with the permission of the families, the conceit of the movie being a record of actual events is furthered by using the actors actual names, Katie (Featherston) and Micah (Sloat). Katie, a pretty college student (majoring in English, a fact which contributes nothing), has been haunted by a recurring presence since she was eight-years-old. Now living in a house with her day trader boyfriend Micah, the entity has once again begun to intrude on Katie’s life. Looking for answers (what took her so long?), she consults a psychic (Mark Frederichs) who informs her she’s being pursued not by a ghost, but by a demon. He can’t help her (then or later, surprise) and recommends someone who can. That guy, after Katie finally contacts him (long after she should have), is away (conveniently) so is of no help. There are two other roles. Katie’s girlfriend Amber (Armstrong), a cameo of no use whatever, and a girl (Ashley Palmer) on an internet site who had a similar experience to Katie’s before she died (ooh, scary omen).
The film allegedly presents, courtesy of Micah’s video equipment, the escalating progression of activities of the evil being after Katie. The evidence? Thudding sounds, footsteps, foot prints via, believe it or not, white powder (it seems demons are not light on their feet), door closings and openings, lights on and off, and other assorted standard devices (even a swinging overhead light fixture).
For her part, Katie spends her days scolding or yelling at Micah to stop filming her (as if he is a paparazzi) and her nights scared of noises and hauntings. Micah is stubbornly determined to contact and/or defeat the entity on his own (his obtuseness only matched by his total lack of judgment). As to the presence, it announces its nightly appearances with ominous sound effects, shadows, and possession of Katie. This later takes the form of her standing for inordinate amounts of time in a trance staring at Micah’s sleeping self. Amazingly, no matter the signs that over the course of weeks something is rotten in their house, the threatened couple (without Ambien or a Sleep Number Bed) slumber peacefully. Until they awaken, Katie with a scream, Micah charging bravely out of the bedroom.
The triple threat creator (writer, director, editor) of this weak, illogical, unconvincing, far from scary movie is Oren Peli. At least he didn’t spend much ($10,000 it’s said and it looks it) so the movie isn’t a crime in that sense. And the poor actors never had a chance. They’re better than expected which, with this material, isn’t much of a challenge. By the time of the big wingding ending viewers may be screaming. But it will be for their money back.
Paranormal Activity – Plainly, and simply, awful. Review by Charles Zio
| AN EDUCATION PG-13 for mature thematic material involving sexual content and for smoking. Drama/Adaptation 100 minutes
3½ stars |
Two excellent performances (in particular that of the heroine), and several fine ones, almost rescue this tale of a precocious schoolgirl seduced by a worldly older man. If only it weren’t so familiar. On the other hand, it’s a pleasant enough go round, even with an old style triumphant ending.
Jenny (Carey Mulligan in a breakout performance, in her early twenties but ably playing a teen) is the way too-smart-for-her-own-good schoolgirl yearning for more. Her father, Jack (Alfred Molina), is intent on her going to Oxford. Neither her submissive, stay-at-home mother, Marjorie (Cara Seymour), nor a wise, kindly teacher, Miss Stubbs (Olivia Williams), and certainly not the rigid headmistress (Emma Thompson) provide role models. As for Graham (Matthew Beard), an earnest fellow musician with a prominent crush, he seems childishly younger than the object of his affections. Jenny’s private world is like the larger one in which she lives (a London suburb in 1961) – staid, class-ridden, bigoted, conservative. In fact, metaphorically, Jenny anticipates, and gets a jump on, the coming “60s” explosions (social/sexual/political).
Jenny’s fuse, and muse, is David (Peter Sarsgaard, effortlessly letter perfect). He is older, charming, sophisticated, in short, an avenue to the wider world that Jenny dreams of. How can that staid old school of hers compete with Art, Music, Drinking, Dancing, Smoking, Gifts? And, of course, Sex. Though unashamedly willing, Jenny insists on waiting till she is seventeen before losing her virginity. And David, her sensitive, caring savior is willing to wait. Gosh. Ain’t he perfect?
At first, yeah. Along with David’s buddy/business partner Danny (Dominic Cooper) and his girlfriend Helen (Rosamund Pike), life is a whirl of good times. And the trip to Paris! Talk about romantic. Still, as ace student Jenny would know from Wordsworth (her intention was to “read English” in college) “things are not always what they seem.” As becomes evident with Danny, Helen, and Jack and Marjorie. Most of all with David. The cad. None of which exonerates Jenny. She’s going to learn her lesson (actually several) leading ultimately to an older but wiser woman.
Based on a memoir by Lynn Barber, the movie’s script has been penned by Nick Hornby and he’s done an admirable job of keeping it entertaining considering that most viewers will have already come across some sort of similar, big, bad wolf cautionary tale. Director Lone Scherfig keeps the story moving and varied and interesting right up till the too obvious and telescoped ending. Still, there is an unsettling aspect to this well-acted, skillfully directed, and nicely produced movie - the reality of the exploitation of young girls. It is hoped that someday movies of this sort will have become obsolete and incomprehensible because of spotlighting a rare phenomena.
An Education – Average, but well acted. Review by Charles Zio
FROM YOUR FOLLOWERS |
LORD, SAVE US FROM YOUR FOLLOWERS Rated PG-13 for thematic elements and strong lanugage. 100 minutes
4 stars |
This entertaining and insightful documentary explores the current "collision of faith and culture" in American society. It delightfully mixes interviews of ordinary citizens, politicians, and scholars with media clips of famous voices, sometimes using cartoon figures, plus journalistic reporting and even a mock TV game show, Culture Wars, based on The Family Feud.
Dan Merchant is even better than Michael Moore at challenging people on different sides of an issue, with a seductive sense of humor as an interviewer, while also letting himself be challenged. He thus encourages the movie audience to rethink their assumptions and political positions. As an Evangelical Christian, he reflects on the worldview he received as a child. Though he maintains a loyalty to his Church, he critiques his fellow followers' frequent politics of hatred toward certain enemies as devilish—and makes that paradox into a journey of self and other discovery.
As well as giving a personal and historical context for this "culture wars" problem, Merchant creates various stunts to explore it, even making friends with various people on the other side (such as a gay man cross-dressing as a "nun" in San Francisco). He travels the country wearing a silly suit with many Christian and anti-Christian badges and bumper stickers, to get ordinary people to talk with him on camera. He makes them, and the movie audience, think in new ways about basic ideas. What are Christians? What is the Church?
Merchant gives a cartoonish, yet perceptive illustration of the "splintered" Christian Church, and thus the modern Body of Christ, as a Frankenstein's monster, swatting at enemy ideas and groups, like a paranoid King Kong at airplanes. The film also explores significant sites of the culture wars, showing how Christian animosity toward political opponents (or theirs against Christians) is, ironically, the antithesis to Christ's teachings about loving one's neighbor (and to liberal ideals of tolerance). Merchant offers key comical quips from Bill Maher and Jon Stewart, plus his own interview with Sen. Al Franken, to show the wisdom of the other side. With its mock game show, Culture Wars, the films shows that liberals sometimes know more about Christian ideas than the Christian contestants know about Darwinism or even their own political positions. Merchant even sets up a confession booth at a gay pride event in Portland, personally apologizing for the harm done by Christians through their political media, while learning more about the sufferings of those his Church has demonized.
The ideological journey that this filmmaker displays makes him an inspiring figure, like others he lauds (Nelson Mandela, John Paul II, Bono, and Rick Warren) for reaching beyond political divides toward a common cause of reconciliation and helping the poor. But Merchant is a creative entertainer, too, as well as a sensitive interviewer. The film may disturb some, or carry on too long at the end with its examples of Christ-like social work. Yet, it works as a new kind of fun, thoughtful, and emotional documentary. All "Christians" should see it and so should liberals who cringe at that term, as an enjoyable antidote to the hate media that endangers us all. Review by Mark Pizzato
| COUPLES RETREAT Rated PG-13 for sexual content and language. Comedy 107 minutes
2 stars |
Although Couples Retreat makes fun of the whole new-age therapies movement, and provides a few laughs along the way, it also trivializes it because in the end it seems like all you need is a vacation in a beautiful, luxurious setting.
A couple, Jason and Cynthia (Jason Bateman and Kristen Bell), haven’t been able to conceive a child and want to go to a resort that caters to couples needing help with their emotional problems, since they are contemplating a divorce. They have to convince three other couples to go with them to get a special discount: Joey and Lucy (Jon Favreau and Kristin Davis), Shane and his young girlfriend (Faison Love and Kali Hawk), and Dave and Ronnie (Vince Vaughn and Malin Akerman).
The production values are very good. It must have been fun to make, too, yet sitting through it gets tedious no matter how good the scenery. It’s not a mystery in the slightest what’s going to happen or how it will end.
The cast of great-looking people run around in tight clothes or very little at all. Vince Vaughn and Jon Favreau wrote the script (with Dana Fox) so I suppose they think they were going against type when they make Mr. Vaughn the family man, and Mr. Favreau an obnoxious wandering-eyed husband. News flash; it doesn’t matter. There’s nothing fresh about any of it. So even though Peter Billingsley did an admirable job directing there is ultimately little help from the script. How many times have we heard, “It’s all about the words,” and how many times do filmmakers ignore it?
I have to say, though, the audience I saw the movie with laughed more than I expected. And the cast does try mightily, in some cases they do make the most of their parts. I hope they enjoyed making this movie. Review by Ann Marie Oliva
| ZOMBIELAND Rated R for Horror/violence/gore and language. 87 minutes
4 stars |
It’s sick, it’s twisted, it’s full of blood-soaked gory undead, it’s---hilarious. Zombieland is a hoot. Too many serious zombie and vampire movies are getting tiresome so it’s a welcome diversion for those who get the joke.
A virus has spread and zombies are everywhere ravaging everything in their path. Only a few unscathed people are left like Columbus (Jesse Eisenberg). All characters are named after the place they’re from so that they don’t get too close to each other. Columbus narrates the movie including his special “list of rules” like “don’t be a hero” or “don’t trust bathrooms.” On his travels he meets Tallahassee, Woody Harrelson, having scads of fun as a Twinkie-loving, zombie-killing machine if ever there was one. They in turn meet two sisters, Wichita and Little Rock (Emma Stone and Abigail Breslin) determined to survive by not trusting anyone.
The sisters are going West despite the fact that it’s the most zombie-infested area of the country. Wichita wants little sis to experience an amusement area since she’s been robbed of her childhood. The four make an uneasy truce and travel on. There is one especially funny sequence that includes a comedian whose reputation may well be revived by his part in this movie.
The clever thing about the movie is that it doesn’t take itself seriously at all; it just mocks the whole zombie genre, and lets the audience in on the joke. I wonder how the actors kept from laughing with all those “zombies” stalking them and trying to bite into them.
The casting is well done. Jesse Eisenberg is the hapless college student who starts on his journey to find out about his parents after his gorgeous neighbor succumbs to zombiedom and he must kill his dream girl or be killed. Woody Harrelson has played this character before, but that doesn’t detract from his delivery. Emma Stone plays independent pretty girl well, and she’s believable as the big sister. Abigail Beslin is on target as always. Together the four make a good team as escapees and actors.
The special effects could turn your stomach except that the movie is so smart about making the zombies comical even when eating each other’s guts. The zombies are actually none too smart, either, which helps. The audience is more likely to groan than retch, but those with sensitive stomachs should take note of the bloody violence. Mention has been made of Shaun of the Dead, and there are similarities, but it’s been a long time since I’ve laughed out loud at something so silly and perverse. And it felt really good. Review by Ann Marie Oliva
| WHIP IT Rated PG-13 for sexual content including crude dialogue, language and drug material. Comedy/Drama 111 minutes
4 stars |
Yes, it’s another coming of age movie, but engaging and well done by first time director Drew Barrymore. She acquits herself soundly with this sentimental ditty about a girl from a speck of a Texas town outside Austin. Shauna Cross wrote the script based on her own novel, Derby Girl, and managed to cull the important material and substance for the movie.
Bliss Cavendar is played by Ellen Page who shows that Juno was no fluke. She’s still appealing, even without the self-conscious hip dialogue of her break-out role. Bliss has been dragged around the beauty circuit by her mail-carrier mother, Brooke, played excellently by Marcia Gay Harden. She has a father (Daniel Stern) surrounded by females (there is also a little sister), who is a sports nut and no way to share it.
There is also the best friend, Pash, played to perfection by Alia Shawkat (look out for this actor), who is her partner in teenage trickery. The two work at a diner and plan their desperate moves to get out of the small town.
Bliss only does the beauty pageants to please her mother, who wants her to excel where she didn’t; it’s the classic, “I want something better for you.” But Bliss finds roller derby and through a series of scenes finds the one thing she loves and wants to do on her own. The roller derby girls are gritty though one suspects not as much as in real life, yet she finds belonging and success in a place she never suspected. She becomes Babe Ruthless, one of the Hurl Scouts.
The acting is good with Kristin Wiig, Jimmy Fallon, Carlo Alban, Andrew Wilson, Eve, Zoe Bell, and especially Juliette Lewis as the bad girl rival, adding to the mix. There is also time for Bliss’ first grown-up romance with a rock singer played by Landon Pigg.
Yet, like Field of Dreams was not really a sports movie, but one about a man’s relationship with his father, Whip It is about the relationship between mother and daughter when the daughter begins to assert herself and grow up. That part of the film is touchingly real. Review by Ann Marie Oliva
| A SERIOUS MAN Rated R for language, some sexuality/nudity and brief violence. Comedy/Drama 105 minutes
3 stars |
Some movies are so rooted in their time/place/subculture that they are primarily, and strongly of interest to those possessing, to a greater or lesser degree, a personal connection or identification to the material. In this instance, Jewish residents of 1960s suburban Minnesota. On the other hand, for those unfamiliar with the milieu, the view can be interesting, informative, and/or entertaining. If, that is, the material steps up to an identifiable universality. Though Joel and Ethan Coen (joint writers/producers/directors) skillfully recapture their remembered youthful world, it is more an observed case study than a shared memory.
Setting up the mystery and grief to come, the movie opens in the distant past, in a snowstorm, in a small Yiddish-speaking village, where a husband and wife argue over the man’s rescuer whom the wife insists is a dybbuk (in folklore, the wandering soul of a dead man). In seeming contrast, the scene moves to summery, sunny Minnesota and the mundane professional and private life of Larry Gopnik (Michael Stuhlbarg in a fully realized performance). The catch, as illustrated in the earlier spousal debate about what is real and what is not, is that virtually nothing is what it appears to be. Larry’s son Danny (Aaron Wolff, nice job) is not just a pot-smoking, rebellious, doesn’t-give-a-damn kid ignoring his bar mitzvah studies. He cares enough to listen to a record and practice pronunciation for his upcoming ceremony. His sister, Sarah (Jessica McManus, a believable, whiny sibling), seems a vain, looking-for-trouble teenage girl (her hang out is a place called The Hole) and yet, though she squabbles with her brother, she never rats him out or seems to disobey her parents. Larry is a mathematics professor, mathematics being a definite, no exceptions subject, as easy as 2+2, right, except he teaches an advanced course involving incredibly complicated formulas. In a stereotypical switch, among the uncomprehending (including bored classes and most of us in the audience) is a South Korean student, Clive (David Kang, amusingly, deliberately obtuse) whose attempt to bribe him out of a failing grade is a recurring headache for Larry.
Even worse, Larry’s brother Arthur (Richard Kind, nice job) floats around seemingly useless and yet he develops a foolproof gambling technique. And then there is the missus, Judith (Sari Lemnick, top notch) who comes across as controlled but isn’t as she pursues a divorce to pursue a relationship with the widower Sy Ableman (Fred Melamed, stealing his every scene). It is Judith’s rejection that drives Larry to seek rabbinical counseling. And here is the ultimate contrast between the imagined and the real as the expectation of wisdom and consolation by the holy men instead yields empty advice and no comfort. On the occasions when emotion does get the better of the long suffering, enduring Larry, the response of others is tolerance and weary patience rather than caring or empathy.
Or maybe Larry is the descendant of the first glimpsed husband, being punished, through example, for not believing that evil exists in the world for he is surely beset by grief (in every sense) on all sides. Talk about a guy for whom nothing goes right, with him every good turn seems to quickly go south.
Then again, perhaps the point is that life is a cosmic joke in which virtue is rarely rewarded and suffering is unfairly reserved for the worthy while the bullies (Larry’s yard appropriating neighbor), the greedy (smarmy lawyers), and the immoral (the naked wife with absent husband next door) are never called to account.
Still the movie has it’s strong points as it exposes the underlying sadness of what many may consider the exuberant 60s (Jefferson Airplane’s “Somebody to Love,” prominently featured, actually echoes the loneliness of most of the characters), the reference to “F Troop,” a comedic take on the military (granted from the old West) which openly ignores the unmentioned Vietnam War tearing the country apart (though the hunting neighbor is an allusion, also to anti-semitism), and the dunning by the Columbia Record Club (illustrating that life happens, relentlessly, whether requested or not and that the piper must be paid sooner or later.
In short, there’s a lot to think about. Unfortunately, after sitting through the slowly paced, weak energy, low impact events, it’s more likely a viewer will want to forget the whole thing.
A Serious Man – The problem is in the title. It’s way too Serious. Review by Charles Zio
OF LYING |
THE INVENTION OF LYING Rated PG-13 for language including some sexual material and a drug reference. Comedy 100 minutes
3 stars |
There are different kinds of lies. One type exploited in the beginning of this movie is the in-your-face type. People in an alternate universe don’t know how to lie so they are honest to the brutal end resulting in rudeness and hurt feelings. The setting is exactly like our world except for the lying so it seems more than a bit odd.
The movie also lacks energy and spice. I suppose that’s one of the points being made; with absolute truth the world is a dull place. Unfortunately, that only detracts from the film. The comedy is so understated as to be dreary.
Ricky Gervais who plays the forlorn sad sack Mark Bellison (with his British accent and all) is likable and sympathetic enough. His character is always being dumped on, mostly because of his looks. He dates Anna (Jennifer Garner) who is more concerned about her genes than any kind of loving connection. He gets fired and his secretary Shelley, played by Tina Fey in one of her least attractive turns, says some pretty nasty stuff followed by Rob Lowe’s Brad Kessler who is even worse. There are also some cameos with people like Philip Seymour Hoffman, Christopher Guest, and Jason Bateman. Why?
The turning point comes when Mark’s synapses jump and he discovers---he can lie. But of course, Mark uses this ability for the good by being deceitful to protect people’s feelings. Though, he’s not above using it to his advantage to become rich. Yet, that doesn’t bring happiness either because he’s still the same pudgy guy living in a world of superficiality. Most of these people are as much of a turn-off as those who lie indiscriminately to inflict pain in our less than perfect world.
Writer/directors Gervais and Matthew Robinson must have had very specific ideas in mind, but many points elude the audience. The film was shot in Massachusetts and the landscape shots captured by cinematographer Tim Suhrstedt are nice-looking.
You can guess where this is all going early on. The philosophical questions it raises can be enticing, but the truth is, sorry to say, this movie doesn’t work well. No lie. Review by Ann Marie Oliva
A LOVE STORY |
CAPITALISM: A LOVE STORY Rated R for some language. Documentary 120 minutes
3½ stars |
Attendance at this movie will depend on political ideology. Since the filmmaker is Michael Moore no guesswork will be required as to whether it will be mostly enjoyable and supportive of one’s view or found to be distasteful propaganda. Although it’s partisan, and not always balanced, its take on recent history leading up to, and the aftermath of, the recent financial debacle, makes a strong case that the “little people” are being batted about for the profit of the rich.
The joke in the title is that there is not a word of affection, let alone “love,” uttered on behalf of capitalism. At least, as it now exists. After a brief reflection on the faults of imperial Rome (by now haven’t most of us heard the comparisons of the recent decades of America and the downfall of that ancient empire), the screen switches to one of the cold, heartless home evictions that have become too often a part of present day life. Though the setting is rural (a home on a farm that had long been in the family), scenes will follow of devastated, littered, boarded, ruined houses in emptied city neighborhoods. But, not everyone is bothered by this happenstance, as typified by the guy from “Condo Vultures” who caters, as he himself admits, to the bottom feeders looking to make a profit from the pain and loss of others. How is it possible not to be angered by such a situation?
By contrast, Moore presents personal and archival film of the golden days, post war and after, when good paying jobs awaited, women didn’t need to work if they didn’t care to, children were indulged, and the American dream was not only possible, but pretty much available for the asking. Leaving aside the fact whether this ideal was or was not widespread, we get one of Moore’s generalized, sweeping, inferential claims that, of course, America was on top of the world because we had, in the course of winning the war, destroyed the industrial base of Germany and Japan so we had no competition. Here’s another, that capitalism led to the failed aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Another, unions are uniformly heroic. Wait, this is all too simple. The trouble is that by being so biased, Moore hurts his own case. As a wit once remarked, “the truth is rarely pure and never simple.”
Moore, though, makes his stand on the left. While President Carter warns Americans of the error of their ways (in a speech where he chides about the primacy of acquisition over deeds), Reagan and Bush (who seem to offer unending opportunities for buffoonery) are presented as figureheads skillfully manipulated by Wall Street. They are not alone as the list of the guilty includes Senator Dodd, in particular, and Congressional leaders. And, in the forefront, are the minions (Summers, Paulson, etc.) of the biggest arch villain of all – Goldman Sachs. And it’s hard to disagree that the American public hasn’t been taken to the cleaners.
What to do? Moore advocates rebellion, whether refusing to be forced from a foreclosed home, employees leaving a factory who have been sacked without their rightful pay and benefits, and, grandest of all, the power of the vote (which is what corporations fear most of all, because they are totally outnumbered). And again Moore dilutes his message by hailing the “change” election of President Obama while, however, not mentioning that his secretary of the treasurer is Timothy Geitner who, earlier in the film is indicted as an incompetent pawn of Wall Street corruption.
Overall, Michael, you don’t need to stack the deck. The facts are damning enough. Maybe, too, your movie came too soon. After all, we still don’t know how it will all play out.
Capitalism: A Love Story – Surprise, the rich get rich, and the poor get poorer. Review by Charles Zio
| FAME Rated PG-13 for thematic material including teen drinking, a sexual situation and language. Drama/Musical Performance/Remake 107 minutes
3 stars |
Where’s the energy? In this new version of Fame there’s some in the occasional song or dance sequences. As for the rest, it consists of teenage soap opera that’s scarcely lively, original, or engrossing. As is often the case, the original movie is still the champ.
The setting here is a Performing Arts High School manned by a faculty consisting of familiar faces who themselves have excelled at their craft, such as Bebe Neuwirth, Kelsey Grammer, Megan Mullally (who gets to sing a song), Debbie Allen (a reminder of the superior forerunner), and Charles S. Dutton (a fine actor almost salvaging his role as the teacher most engaged in lecturing his students for their own good). The aspiring young talents are introduced during their auditions for admission and while they are all talented, they are also one-dimensional.
Thus, to name a few, Jenny, the inhibited actress (Kay Panabaker), her eventual boyfriend Marco (Asher Book) who is effortlessly relaxed and gifted, Malik (Collins Pennie) an angry actor/rapper, Neil (Paul Iacono) an eccentric filmmaker, Alice (Kherington Payne), a wealthy, snobbish dancer, and Denise (Naturi Naughton), a pianist with a belter’s voice.
Two thoughts occur as the movie drones on. First, unfortunately, these kids do not emulate their older peers (their film teachers) in terms of being believably natural. While they are playing their parts well, it’s hard to forget that they are, in fact, playing parts. Second, the school and its demands scarcely seem taxing, though there is an opening day welcome about how difficult it will be. On the contrary, everyone seems to have plenty of time to pursue whatever (creatively or personally).
The unspoken reality is that, in actuality, it will be a very rare few who will attain their dream of being performers. This caution is uttered briefly by Ms. Rowan (Mullally) and perhaps reflected by a subway singer (a former student?) although, absurdly, there is only one student, Kevin (Paul McGill), who is clearly spotlighted as a failure (and back home he will go). What will happen to the rest is open to conjecture (certainly the viewer hopes none will emulate the single successful graduate seen, a step-into-my-trailer male lech).
Director Kenny Tancharoen first directorial effort is strong in short bursts, specifically those moments, such as the cafeteria number, wherein he can draw upon his choreographic expertise. But the film fails to sustain the viewer’s interest, partly because the characters lack dimension but also because the story is less the tale of a group of students struggling alone and in tandem to define themselves and support each other on the road to individual and creative maturity, than an amalgam of clichéd teenage crises. The latter is too bad as writer Allison Burnett had Christopher Gore’s excellent original at hand. Then again, those unfamiliar with the 1980 movie might find this new version fresh and compatible with contemporary tastes. But for those who know it, the oldie but goodie remains the high octane, exciting, musically charged champion, and still the one to remember.
Fame – Last forever? Forget it. Review by Charles Zio
| PANDORUM Rated R for strong horror violence and language. Sci-Fi/Action/Adventure Thriller/Fantasy 108 minutes
3½ stars |
It’s not that Pandorum is original; it will remind you of many sci-fi movies you’ve seen, but there’s something interesting about it. The film opens in deep space as a crewman named Bower (Ben Foster) wakes from a long sleep. He doesn’t remember much about the mission. All the audience knows is that earth became overcrowded and the ship was launched, presumably to find other places as accommodating. Yet, it’s not clear what’s going on. Admittedly, it takes a while to find out. Pandorum is not the name of the spaceship but a type of space madness.
In the meantime, Bower heads out on the ship to find some answers as Payton (Dennis Quaid), his superior, stays behind in the control room area. Bower runs into random others running around, but also what seems to be a cannibalistic half monster/half human species who are super strong and only want to eat everyone in sight.
Bower finds Manh (Cung Le) who he can’t understand but is a fearless fighter and the two stay together for protection. He also finds Nadia (Antje Traue), another crew person from a different time. She has managed to survive but is distrustful of Bower until the three try to make their way back to Payton. The action is fast and provides tension as it’s one thing after another for the group. Ben Foster does a good job with the lead here and Cung Le, Antje Traue, and Dennis Quaid are a good supporting cast.
The look of the spaceship is dark and foreboding as are most spaceships in the future, and by the time the explanation comes, you may be a bit worn out with all the escapes and semi-escapes. If you are inclined towards the sci-fi genre you may find it worth a look. Suffice it to say, the future’s not looking to great for us earthlings, but then there is always hope. Yes, there is that. Review by Ann Marie Oliva
| THE INFORMANT! Rated R for language. Comedy/Adaptation/Crime 108 minutes
4 stars |
The Informant! is sly and clever. You think you’re watching one thing happening, and then it turns into something else. It’s best to go not knowing too much about the plot to begin with: you’ll enjoy it that much more. Although the pacing in the first half of the film is a bit slow to get to the point, when the revelation comes, it is, yes, funny! I don’t mean ha ha funny, I mean head-shaking funny.
Based on the book by journalist Kurt Eichenwald, the film tells the story of Mark Whitacre, an executive who worked for Archer Daniels Midland (ADM) in Decatur, Illinois. Matt Damon, pudgy and more than slightly off center plays Whitacre in a role as different from Jason Bourne as it could be. It’s impressive.
Whitacre decides he doesn’t like what’s going on in the corporation and becomes an informant for FBI Special Agent Brian Shepard (Scott Bakula making the most of his part). Mark seems to be squeaky clean, a scientist who made it to Vice President of the agri-business on his smarts. He can tell you all about how corn is converted and used in various products, and lysine and other chemicals. Yet, the real story is about greed, price-fixing, and corporate corruption. He has a supportive wife and children, a huge house with cars overflowing a garage. Why would he decide to turn on his employers? Agent Shepard buys into his explanations and carries a photo of Mark and his family to remind him that they are “real people.”
Director Steven Soderbergh and screenwriter Scott Z. Burns have put it all in a wonderfully dark comic context whose subtlety enhances the story all the more. As the revelations being to emerge, the audience I saw this with was enjoying it, even while groaning in delight. Mark Whitacre is not what he appears to be at first glance, with his free-form narration about whatever occurs to him at the moment he’s speaking. Both Mr. Soderbergh and Mr. Damon deserve credit for that.
The acting is good across the board with quite a few comics showing up in roles large and small as if to emphasize the nature of the film. They are kept in check and that much funnier because of it. The original music by Marvin Hamlisch is supposed to add to the atmospherics, yet it’s more like 70s than 90s when the story takes place, and rather distracting at times. Another emphasis is made by the graphics which look like their right out of that old comedy show Laugh-In.
Not everyone may appreciate this brand of humor, but it’s original, and there’s plenty there to chew on and laugh about. Review by Ann Marie Oliva
CHANCE OF MEATBALLS |
CLOUDY WITH A CHANCE OF MEATBALLS Rated PG for brief mild language. Family/Animation/Adaptation 81 minutes
4 stars |
This movie takes a childhood fantasy, about all the tasty things you’d ever want to eat, and has it falling from the sky. Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs is adapted from a 1970s children’s book written by Judi Barrett and illustrated by Ron Barrett. The animation and story are fun, though sometimes heavy-handed with lessons about, what else, being different? It will probably appeal more to younger children, but it's enjoyable enough to keep parents smiling at its antics.
It seems a young boy, Flint Lockwood (young version voiced by Max Neuwirth, adult Flint by Bill Hader), wants to be a great inventor. Only his mother understands him (including his spray on shoes), but his laconic father Tim (James Caan) is skeptical. He wants his grown son to stop playing around and get a job! Part of the problem is Flint lives on an island where the main industry and diet is sardines until the town decides they’re gross. The factory shuts down and the people are left with eating the leftover tins of sardines and trying to develop a kind of “sardineland” for fun and profit.
But the real fun comes when through a series of admittedly convoluted events; Flint accidentally sends his converter machine into the sky. It converts water into whatever food you program. The first clue? Mustard drops like rain, then full cheeseburgers fall all over town delighting everyone after a steady diet of sardines.
The silliness continues and for a while everyone is thrilled with the food raining down on the town. But, of course, there are bumps along the way and for a guy who was made fun of growing up, Flint doesn’t listen to his father’s advice and believes too much of his own press (where have we seen that before?). A weathergirl, Sam (Anna Faris) who hides her braininess to get attention supports and likes Flint, and the story becomes worldwide news. But the food, and the mayor, get out of control and Flint has to find the courage to save the day.
The movie is imaginative, the animation delightful, and the voice actors all do a good job. Directors Phil Lord and Chris Miller also wrote the script and a pat on the back to them for that, even if the movie seems a bit stretched toward the end.
The true test of a kid’s movie is what the young audience thinks. As I was leaving I asked a boy sitting near me what he thought. He told me he liked it--at least three times. You can’t fake that kind of enthusiasm. Review by Ann Marie Oliva
| THE SEPTEMBER ISSUE Rated PG-13 for brief strong language. Documentary/Bio Pic 88 minutes
4 stars |
The September Issue is about the world of high fashion; one that I know very little about. Yet, I found the movie intriguing and absorbing throughout. The documentary deals with putting together the most important yearly issue of Vogue Magazine—-the one that sets the standard of fashion for the upcoming season.
Those who have seen The Devil Wears Prada, or have heard about fashion maven Anna Wintour, will not be disappointed in her persona as presented here. She is no ordinary ice princess. No, she is the Ice Queen. So in control is she that she never has to raise her voice amid all the loud talking and shouting back and forth as people scramble around her. I say, so what? She is the boss for a reason, mainly her unfailing taste. The truth is that someone has to make the hard decisions, someone has to risk being unpopular, and sometimes, someone has to be lonely at the top. Though Ms. Wintour is never going to be the soft cuddly type, she has presence, authority, and the respect of her colleagues. If some chose to demonize her for being good at what she does, without apologies, they need to stop whining. This only points to more evidence that women are still judged more harshly then men when they are in charge. But after seeing this film, I came away with admiration for Ms. Wintour and say in the most polite way—-you go girl.
Another reason for the success of Vogue is Ms. Wintour’s likeable creative director Grace Coddington. Grace is quite a counterpoint to her boss. She has flaming red hair that always looks like it’s about to fly off her head. Once a model, Ms. Coddington was in an accident that ended that career and started her on the path she’s on now. She is surprisingly plump, earthy, almost always dresses in black (which seems to be the uniform color of garment workers), and unadorned. Where Ms. Wintour is circumspect about her opinions, Ms. Coddington is right out front with hers. Her emotions sometimes get the best of her, especially when she has been denied what she wants by Ms. Wintour. Yet, I have to say that when a decision was made in the film, I agreed with the Ms. Wintour’s choices.
As to the fashion, I finally understand it better (especially after several seasons of watching Project Runway). The same way a painter is passionate about her/his painting, fashionistas are wild about their clothes. The models are their canvas; the clothes, their paints. Haute couture is not meant for the masses, it’s meant to push limits and show creativity. After all, how many six feet tall, 110 pound teenagers are there running around. High fashion does make its way down the chain until the clothes are adapted over and over into styles for us “regular” women.
You can enjoy the flights of fancy you see on the runways for what they are, while appreciating the craftsmanship of the people who work so hard to bring their visions to reality. Review by Ann Marie Oliva
| 9 PG-13 for violence and scary images. Animation/Adventure/Fantasy 79 minutes
3 stars |
The best and most original element of 9 is the animation. The story is familiar. A scientist creates a powerful machine to help mankind, but because it can’t distinguish what is its exact reason for existence, it ultimately destroys the civilization it is meant to save.
The only thing left in the post-apocalyptic world are cute little burlap creatures with large eyes. Those eyes give them a look of childlike innocence and draws the viewer in, yet after the first thirty minutes or so, you’ve got all the information about them you’re ever going to have. They don’t develop beyond the characteristics they have from the beginning. They are numbered, on their backs, and that’s how they are known. 9, the hero, is the most daring of the little beings. He challenges the others and takes chances to save some of his kind from “death” as they know it.
The world after the apocalypse has a dark and foreboding look with monster machines that have the appearance of skeletal dinosaurs sent out to destroy anything that moves. It’s violent for animation and could be scary for younger children. Yet, the animation keeps your attention because it turns into an adventure movie with narrow escapes. The problem is that it seems to end several times.
The director, Shane Acker, did this first as an eleven minute short film. It received all kinds of attention and so, Hollywood being what it is, if something is good, more has to be better, right? That’s a matter of opinion and taste. 79 minutes seems too long, though at eleven minutes I could see why some might want think it could be extended. It comes down to the story, though. There have been so many “destroyed earth” movies lately that it’s difficult to keep it fresh, even in animation.
If you think of outstanding animated films, they still have a great story supporting the visuals. Audiences are too sophisticated to accept less, though for some, technique may suffice. Review by Ann Marie Oliva
BASTERDS |
INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS Rated R for strong Violence, language and brief sexuality. Drama/War 153 minutes
3 stars |
I’ll give Quentin Tarantino his props. Whatever director Tarantino does, it’s going to be done in a big way. And that's exactly the problem with Inglourious Basterds: too much, too long, too big. Somewhere in the midst of two and a half hours of movie making is an excellent film, but apparently nobody suggests anything to Tarantino and he insists on doing it his way. Yet adaptability, as Darwin told us, not strength, is what secures survival.
Some of the movie works, some of it doesn’t. It’s a split decision. The good: many of the actors, photography, high production values, wonderful camera angles and shots, some of the dialogue, tension, suspense. The bad: the length, a story with too much going on, not being able to invest in the characters, shifting tone and moods, some of the dialogue, scenes that seem endless. It’s not even that there is opposition to fantasy about World War II, or that all films made of that era have to be overly reverent. (It’s set up with five chapters as though the audience is being told a fairy tale.) It’s that the end result is a letdown.
I will say that there is something satisfying about seeing Jewish-American soldiers in roles as World War II “heroes.” But, are those scenes of scalping Nazis and killing Nazis with a baseball bat really necessary? Tarantino’s famous, almost obsessive, taste for violence no doubt? And Brad Pitt as a Jewish Apache? He does an okay acting job, but even with top star billing he’s in maybe than half the movie. He plays Lt. Aldo Raine who leads the soldiers, known as “Basterds” into France with the sole purpose of killing as many Nazis as possible. Yet, we find out little about them. Their handiwork begins to effect the morale of the German soldiers and we get some scenes of a frustrated Hitler (Martin Wuttke) being his usual psychotic self.
The movie opens with a long sequence of Christoph Waltz, the actor whose performance dominates the movie, as Nazi Col. Hans Landa. He arrives at the farm house of a man who is questioned about hiding Jews. Col. Landa is a polite and polished mastermind/killer known for being the "Jew Hunter," all the more frightening for his urbane charm. Shosanna Dreyfus (Mélanie Laurent in a serious performance that transcends the material), manages to escape the carnage and shows up later as the young owner of a movie theatre who captures the eye of Nazi soldier/war hero Fredrick Zoller (Daniel Brühl very good as a reluctant killer who would rather be a lover).
There is a scene in England with Mike Meyers and Rod Taylor as Winston Churchill. These random scenes are agreeable if not absolutely necessary. The story marches along as the Basterds make contact with a famous actress, Bridget von Hammersmark (Diane Kruger), which brings on an unexpected burst of blood and brutality. Shosanna is boxed into having a premiere of the movie about Zoller’s heroics. The Basterds show up with the actress and finally, finally everyone is there for the finale as the stories all merge. Then comes an ending that is a disappointment.
Tarantino knows how to get good performances from the actors, and his eye for detail and explosive violence is still sharp, but makes this seem like a hollow exercise rather than an epic. More focus was needed. I get irony, satire, metaphor, fantasy, but either my sense of humor is not quite what it used to be, or this movie is not fun or very funny. Review by Ann Marie Oliva
| DISTRICT 9 Rated R for bloody violence, and pervasive language Sci-Fi/Fantasy 113 minutes
4½ stars |
District 9 is a thoughtful movie that can be enjoyed on one or more levels, depending on the viewer’s inclination. It’s a straightforward science fiction tale, a homage to past sci-fi movies (only a few named herein), an actioner (near its close), a political allegory, something of an odd couple and/or buddy film, etc., and what’s most impressive is that it all works. For those seeking simultaneously thoughtful and entertaining fare, this is it.
At the outset, presented via pseudo documentary footage and expert and layman testimony we are shown/told that several decades ago a huge alien spacecraft came to hover over Johannsburg, South Africa. Resembling an enormous, ominous mechanical cloud that seems to have broken down (the homages begin-ET, Close Encounters), the ship is eventually boarded and many thousands of malnourished aliens discovered and brought down to earth for humanitarian reasons. The good will wears thin, not only because they are insect and crustacheon-like (thus derogatorily referred to as “prawns”), but, their culture is strange (in every way) to the society in which they find themselves (they not only eat cat food but respond to it like a drug). Trouble ensues and the aliens are exiled to District 9, a sprawling/dirty/shack-laden/fenced-in compound where, inside and out, contact between prawns and humans is forbidden. Needless to say, the allusion to racism is unavoidable, the more so as the film is located in South Africa with its history of apartheid.
Decades in, the M.N.U. (Multi-National United), appearing to be a cross between social services organization and business enterprise, determines the aliens should be relocated to a new camp, much further out from the city of course, and begins a process of forcing the prawns to sign documents agreeing to their eviction. Overseeing this action is a near buffoon, Wikus van der Meerwe (Sharlto Copley, perfect casting) the son-in-law of the M.N.U. boss, Piet Smit (Louis Minnaar, a suitable snake) with, as will eventually be discovered, evil intent. As Wikus roams District 9, being videotaped and revealing himself amusingly as a man nowhere as clever and worldly as he thinks, he runs into a prawn-of-a-different-sort, Christopher Johnson (Jason Cope, all the more impressive as he relays thought and feeling while hidden behind a leathery, snakish-wagging snout) who is aware the eviction is illegal. Fact is, Christopher has been working for twenty years to rescue his people and is on the verge of success having amassed a particular fluid. Unfortunately, Wikus finds it and accidentally sprays himself. It’s not too hard to figure out why this is very bad news for him (guess the Sci-Fi film, hint-Buzz), among which is his pursuit by a rabid killer mercenary Koobus (David James, capably despicable).
By the way, there is violence and near the end a good number of explosions and flying drops of blood but most viewers have seen far worse. Of note is the effective, while not repulsive, makeup and able special effects. As opposed to many science fiction and/or action films, there’s food for thought when one leaves the movie, even if it might be an amalgam of films that came before (okay, I’ll mention one more, aptly, Alien, see the climax). To be highly commended is the director Neill Blomkamp, starting with the script he coauthored with Terri Tatchell. He does a topnotch job all the way. Pats on the back to director of photography Trent Opaloch for capturing the look of video documentaries, newsreels, and the atmospheric institutional interiors and degrading chaos of District 9, to the distinctive production designs by Philip Ivey, and the quick, clean editing of Julian Clarke. How smart is this movie? Consider that the aliens, while initially not great to look at and perhaps easy to disdain, eventually become sympathetic, so much so you wish you knew, and could call them, by their rightful self-identification, and not the insulting, and now unjustified “prawn.”
District 9 – Forget location, this movie is in the Winner’s Circle. Review by Charles Zio
| JULIE & JULIA Rated PG-13 for brief strong language and some sensuality. Biography/Drama 123 minutes
3½ stars |
The saying goes that some people live to eat, while others eat to live. Those in the second category may not appreciate this movie quite so much. But how I wish my Aunt Aurelia was here to see this movie! Auntie loved Julia Child and used the book, Mastering the Art of French Cooking, as her bible. She was a fantastic cook all on her own though, yet she did quote Julia Child and told snippets about her life just like Julie does in the movie.
Interweaving the story of Julia Child in Paris, France with her husband Paul (Stanley Tucci), after World War II, and Julie Powell writing her blog about cooking every dish in Julia Child’s book over a one-year period mostly works. Interestingly, the modern day story is not nearly as engaging as the post-war story. For one thing, Julia Child is a much more compelling personality. She is certainly a singular woman and cook. It helps enormously in the movie that she is played by Meryl Streep. This is not an impersonation. It’s almost eerie the way she inhabits the role. The only issue is that in trying to make her appear 6’2” it’s distractingly obvious that camera tricks are being used.
Amy Adams gives us a Julie who is not hard to understand, but the difficulty is that she’s not all that endearing. You can identify with her wanting to be successful, and you cheer when she finally succeeds as a writer, but her personality is not congenial like Julia’s. The segments of Julie cooking, enduring an unfulfilling job, (hey try not having one at all!) fighting with her husband Eric (Chris Messina), and having melt-downs begins to get tedious, especially as the movie is just over two hours long. Yep, she is self-absorbed, and though you root for her, you root much more for Julia and Paul, the devoted, fun-loving and lovable couple.
Stanley Tucci and Meryl Streep have an excellent rapport as the older husband/wife team. Chris Messina, who plays Eric, does an admirable job, too, as the supportive, put-upon husband, who loves the food but resents being second behind the pots and pans.
The look of Paris is romanticized, the way director Nora Ephron often shoots her movies. It has a golden glow that makes it look very appealing. She draws strong performances from the actors. Eat before you go to the movie as the food looks wonderful, and knowing it is delicious makes it all the more appetizing.
Whether you are able to become immersed in this kind of movie is another question. I found it delightful for the most part, (but too long), but that’s because it brought back memories of an aunt who loved food the way Julia Child did, and prepared meals lovingly for her family. Some others may wonder what all the fuss is about. Review by Ann Marie Oliva
| 500 DAYS OF SUMMER Rated PG-13 for sexual material and language. Comedy/Drama/Romance 95 minutes
4 stars |
A sweet but naïve guy named Tom Hansen (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) falls for the quirky new girl in his office named Summer Finn (Zooey Deschanel). She dates him rather unenthusiastically but we’re told upfront this is not a love story. Meaning they don’t end up together. Nothing really momentous happens except from Tom’s point of view. Translation: it’s more like real life than most of the stupid, inane romantic comedy scripts that try to pass off exceptionally good-looking people acting silly in weak movies.
The nice thing about 500 Days of Summer is the way it’s presented in a non-linear, imaginative, risk-taking manner (even a group dance to a Hall & Oates song) so that the audience can absorb it, understand it, and think, “Yeah, I know the feeling.” It’s closer to how your mind actually works as you try to make sense of a bad experience. What did he/she mean by that? He/She did this, so it must mean that. You can talk yourself into a lot when you’re in love with someone--most of it not helpful.
Tom is an underachiever. He’s an architect working at a greeting card company. The job is not challenging for a bright guy like him so he coasts along in the job and his life until Summer shows up. It’s clear she’s the kind of girl Tom thinks he can never have, the unattainable women every sensitive man thinks is his dream girl. That makes him want her all the more. He sees her through the filter of infatuation, beauty and sex, which have certainly led more men to bad choices than can be counted.
For her part, Summer just wants to be friends, although sex is part of the deal, leading Tom, of course, to get the wrong impression. Since it’s Tom’s story Summer seems detached, but she does try to clue Tom in. There are many small ways one person tries to tell another—this is temporary, honey, until something better comes along. I like you, but I don’t love you. She doesn’t want to hurt him but it’s inevitable. The ironic thing is that for Tom to mature and find real love, he needs this experience with Summer. So really, the 500 days, as painful as they are for him, are not for nothing.
I wasn’t sure what the chemistry would be between the actors, but Joseph Gordon-Levitt is one of those likeable, natural type actors who is a pleasure to watch. I believe it when his Tom is genuinely enthralled with Ms. Deschanel’s Summer. She has cornered the market on quirky young women and she’s fine at it, but it would be good to see her stretching herself in other parts, too.
Credit also goes to writers Scott Neustadter and Michael H. Weber for an inventive script, and to director Marc Webb for putting it all together. 500 Days of Summer is a movie worth seeing. Review by Ann Marie Oliva
| JENNIFER'S BODY Rated R for sexuality, bloody violence, language and brief drug use. Sci-Fi/Fantasy/Thriller 102 minutes
2½ stars |
Half a horror movie and half a commentary on high school social life, Jennifer’s Body never fully commits and, as a result, neither does the viewer. Megan Fox (deservedly the current “It Girl”) is a welcome sight but she and the movie are ill served by what often comes across as a photo shoot, instead of a coherent, unified, entertaining whole. If only the filmmakers had had the courage of their convictions.
The aforementioned Megan Fox plays Jennifer, the epitome of high school female physical perfection, a fact emphasized by an adoring camera that can’t get enough of her face and figure (even in her supposedly bedraggled states there is something compelling). Jennifer is well aware her beauty positions her atop the social scale and she wields the power (and manipulation) it affords with the ease of those who consider themselves unquestionably entitled. Let it be said that Fox shows acting chops as the selfish, spoiled, and yet envious class princess. Her jealously, interestingly, is flamed by her best friend in the world since childhood, Needy (Amanda Seyfried, in every respect a good performance) who has a nice guy boyfriend, Chip (Johnny Simmons, believably natural). The dynamics between the manipulative, determined Jennifer and the smart, independent Needy (her nickname is no accident) are complex given the various levels of their somewhat sisterly, social, and (hinted and explicitly demonstrated) sexual interactions. Where this focus on the realities of high school culture, as played out between devoted girlfriends, might have led remains unknown because, all too soon, in came the horror.
Courtesy of a struggling independent band, called Low Shoulder (why not?), led by Nikolai (Adam Brody, unfortunately lacking menace), Jennifer becomes a blood sucking, flesh-eating monster who blooms as a cannibal but pales when denied her preferred diet. No need to worry about chills or frights – it’s all predictable. Let’s face it, the current abundance of vampires (and other undead or alien beings) in print/tv/movies make achieving a jolt difficult. For that reason, drawing out the kill, as it were, bores rather than causes one to spill the popcorn.
The script by Diablo Cody has humor, sass, and pithy observations that work best on the high school side. The horror muddies the water (pun intended, the action takes place in Devil’s Kettle, Minnesota, after an aptly named waterfall) with its botched attempt at a societal revenge motif. That is, while a girl destroyed by boys turning the table to punish other males is presented as valid, why does she only savage good guys (even the jock she takes out is sensitive as he has previously been seen crying for a lost buddy)?
But then, in the end, to say more would be a spoiler (and there’s more than one attempt at a surprise at the close). The director is Karyn Kusama. She, and Diablo, tried to be different by melding two genres. Sometimes it works. And sometimes, like here, it sure don’t.
Jennifer’s Body – Megan’s Hot. The movie, NOT. Review by Charles Zio
STEVE |
ALL ABOUT STEVE Rated PG-13 for sexual content including innuendos. Comedy 98 minutes
1½ stars |
The pickings must be slim in screenplayland for Sandra Bullock. Why else would she choose this dud of a movie (as a producer)? I say this with all the admiration I can muster because I think Ms. Bullock is capable of so much more. Yet, it must be difficult for her at this stage in her career. No longer the ingénue (though she looks great), she needs to find the kind of movies that show her talent to its best advantage. The opposite happens here.
Ms. Bullock plays Mary Horowitz, a ditzy crossword puzzle creator, curiously always wearing ugly, shiny red boots. She is supposed to be super intelligent but instead of being endearing, Mary is a motor mouth whose social skills are practically non-existent. To say the character is annoying is like saying water is wet; and just as funny. She lives in Sacramento with her parents, (Howard Hesseman wasted in the part, and Beth Grant) who set her up on a blind date.
That guy turns out to be Steve, played by good looking man-of-the-moment Bradley Cooper who is in danger of wearing out his welcome with this inane comedy. Mary goes gaga over Steve, immediately jumps him in his car in an embarrassing scene that the movie never recovers from, and so begins the chase. When she turns in her latest crossword puzzle, titled All About Steve, she gets fired and this is her excuse to follow Steve, a TV cameraman, on location.
The story is completely formulaic so you can guess that Mary does something to redeem herself by the end that makes the movie a bit more affecting, but by that time, who cares? The production values are good, but the screenplay and direction leave little room for the actors to do much but make faces and look mortified. Thomas Hayden Church and Ken Jeong don’t have much to work with and so don’t add much. Both have been effective—-in other films.
I wanted to find something to like about this movie, but it is its own worst enemy. Review by Ann Marie Oliva
| GAMER Rated R for frenetic sequences of strong brutal violence throughout, sexual content, nudity and language. Action/Adventure/Thriller 105 minutes
2 stars |
Beginning with an extended battle scene (replete with big guns and bloody body parts being strewn amid an industrial urban desolation), Gamer almost immediately plunges into murky baloney. This seeming cautionary tale of the dangers of a future of unfettered reality shows, mind control, and unbridled hedonism fails to arouse any emotion, or interest, aside from a nod to its rabid CGI battles and manic editing. As for original ideas, the viewer will have plenty of time for them as this movie wends its way to a predictable victory for the good guy.
The hero is Gerard Butler who's been better before but here gives a performance so wooden as to qualify as an animated piece of furniture. Alias Kable, he's an unhappy/unkempt/tough guy who, along with his fellow murderous convicts, needs to win 30 set up gun battles to gain his freedom via a reality show called Slasher. That he is very close to winning release is a sham as no one has ever been freed. The fact is players (called Avatar?) are directed (by virtue of some brain cell replacement mumbo jumbo) by wealthy controllers who have purchased the right to direct their words and actions, such as Battle's cyber master, 17 year old Simon (Logan Lerman, a believably smart brat). The mastermind of this worldwide Slasher phenomenon is Ken Castle (Michael C. Hall, a fine actor giving his villain more credibility than merited) a billionaire television mogul (and mad scientist) whose first creation was another reality show, Society, featuring rampant sexual activities. Among the members of that troupe is Angie (Amber Valletta, boringly numb), conveniently Kable's wife, under sway of a grotesquely drooling sleaze. Still, it is for her and their young daughter Delta (in the physical possession of bad guy Castle, of course) that he pines and finally escapes the game with the assistance of "Humanz," the mandatory rebel group fighting for human dignity and liberty (sadly Alison Lohman, Terry Crews, and Ludacris). In the Hey-Look-Who's-In-This-Movie-In-A-Role-of-No-Consequence-Whatever are Kyra Segdewick as a feisty newscaster and John Leguizano as a murmuring convict. Here's hoping they had fun.
How absurd is Gamer? Consider that after intense CGI battles, a wild escape, some deprogramming, etc, Kabel (showered, shaved, and cleanly attired) casually strolls, totally unarmed, into Castle's Fortress. It gets better. Castle, now backed by a line of hefty henchmen, proceeds to lip synch, with puppet motions, Sammy Davis Jr.'s version of "I've Got You Under My Skin." (If Mr. Hall, in his skilled rendering of that television character Dexter ever requires motivation for that man's murderous serial killing, the actor only need to recall this scene.) The picture continues, but it's a wonder why.
The script and direction for Gamer are shared by Mark Neveldine and Brian Taylor. Too bad one of them didn't call a time out.
Gamer - A Loser! Review by Charles Zio
| EXTRACT Rated R for language, sexual references and some drug use. Comedy 91 minutes
2½ stars |
There are moments of humor and promise in Extract, but they are brief and quickly pass. What’s left are long stretches of anticipation too slowly descending into tedium. On the other had, no one ever said work place comedies were easy.
Joel (Jason Bateman, a reliably good actor) is a man in a funk. The founder and owner of Reynolds Extract, a food additive company, he oversees a ragtag factory floor, assisted by Brian (J.K. Simmons, the epitome of management disregard) of petulants/incompetents/recent immigrants. One day, a series of freak workshop accidents disables testicularly speaking) an employee, Step (Clifton Collins Jr., not bright yet sympathetic) who only aspires to floor manager. That is until he comes under the sway of Cindy (Mila Kunis, nicely balancing sweetness and larceny) accurately described by Joel as a drifting convict, who convinces him to sue beyond the insurance settlement he is due via a televising ambulance-chasing lawyer named Joe Adler (terrifically played by Gene Simmons who steals his every scene). This move by Step threatens to bankrupt the company just as a possible, lucrative sale of the company has arisen.
In the meantime, at home, Joel has another problem. He and his wife, Suzie (Kristin Wigg, unbeatable at dry delivery) have drifted apart, especially in the carnal relations (her sweat pants donned at 8:00 pm being the unassailable modern equivalent of a chastity belt). Joel shares his ongoing grief in this area with this bartender buddy Dean (Ben Affleck, convincingly spacey) who is a fount of bad advice, among them a suggestion to hire a gigolo, Dean (Dustin Milligan, humorously dim), who becomes yet another headache for Joel. And then there is the annoying/relentless/boring neighbor Nathan (David Koechner, spot on).
To his credit, there are no loose ends in the script by Mike Judge, but the plot plays out unsurprisingly and for that reason it seems to run twice as long as it actually does. Also directing, Mike Judge has a sure hand with his actors and tech staff. All in all, there’s scant amusement and way too few laughs. Which doesn’t make for much of a comedy.
Extract – A labor to sit through. Review by Charles Zio
WOODSTOCK |
TAKING WOODSTOCK Rated R for graphic nudity, some sexual content, drug use and language. Drama/Musical/Adaptation 120 minutes
2½ stars |
It was probably inevitable that on its 40th anniversary someone would present a Behind The Scenes of Woodstock. Unfortunately, this version is swallowed up in a familiar Lifetime movie format. (Everybody! Dysfunctional family with unhappy, misunderstood child.) While there is mention and enjoyable illustration of the various political/social/culture significances of the Festival, time and again they are pushed aside to focus on the less interesting parent-offspring melodrama. As a result, with the addition of a string of would-be endings, the movie often seems as if it’s going to run as long as Woodstock itself, but far, far from as entertainingly.
To cut to the chase (which the movie never does), the Catskills, once a Jewish vacation haven, is now on hard times, including the shabby motel owned by the parents of Elliot Teichberg (Demetri Martin, who has the surface blandness and unhappiness down pat, but fails to relay any depths, shallow or deep). Though he is California dreaming, Elliot is unable to escape his fierce mother Sonia (Imelda Staunton, a firecracker of energy) or even his weak father Jake (Henry Goodman, effectively low key). Hearing of the trouble a music festival is having with other communities (originally scheduled for Woodstock, the name stuck), he gets in touch and works with one of the organizers, Michael Lang (Jonthan Groff, so spacey/spiritual he’s mostly a cliché), to bring the show to his humble town. Other characters drifting about are a burned out Vietnam veteran, Billy (Emile Hirsch, good performance but belongs in a different movie), the owner of the farm field where the event was held, Max Yasgur (Eugene Levy, relaxed and believably natural), and a cross-dressing, security man, Vilma (Liev Schreiber, always spot on and someone please give this guy the kind of first rate part he deserves).
Needless to say, near chaos ensues (due in part to traffic, rain, and mud). The Teichberg motel becomes a center of activity (and a cash cow in the bargain) and the area is inundated with free spirits of every description. The rest is history. After three days of peace, love, drugs, and incredible music – a legend was born (its meaning open to individual interpretation). In the meantime, Elliot and his parents are working toward a resolution of their very, seen-it-all-before, predictable family problems.
Message to director Ang Lee and James Schamus who adapted Elliot Tiber’s book – the Festival is the story. It would be hard to top it. As this movie amply proves.
Taking Woodstock – The event will live on. This movie won’t. Review by Charles Zio
| ADAM Rated PG-13 for thematic material, sexual content and language. Comedy/Drama/Romance 99 minutes
4 stars |
Films about mental disturbances are not an easy sell. This one about Asperger’s Syndrome, a high-functioning form of autism is well made, though not maudlin. If you don’t know about Asperger’s you will learn that an individual with this syndrome is not good at processing information or picking up cues in social situations.
Adam Raki, played excellently by Hugh Dancy, is a good-looking guy who has just lost his father and lives alone in a large apartment in Manhattan. When an attractive neighbor, Beth Buchwald (Rose Byrne, well cast), moves in she and Adam seem to click after some awkward fits and starts. Beth is a teacher who is recently out of a bad relationship, and an only child very much tied to her parents, Marty and Rebecca Buchwald (a suitably smarmy Peter Gallagher and a luminous Amy Irving).
As Adam and Beth try to navigate a possible romance, a clever subplot about her parents shakes her world and puts a strain on Adam’s ability to deal with stress and reality.
Adam does look at the world differently, but he’s not made to look like a saint or an idiot savant, though he’s intelligent enough to focus on the topic of space. He’s a man with failings and strengths, and a problem that adds extra difficulty to an already complicated life situation. He even has a sense of humor. Some elements are a bit too convenient, and he is probably the highest of high functioning people with this syndrome.
Beth’s character is also given dimension and has issues of her own so that neither character is seen as a villain, but rather as two people who try to have a relationship, yet like the rest of us have baggage they must carry into it.
The acting is good across the board. Of note is the original music by Christopher Lennertz which adds to the overall mood of the movie, and the cinematography by Seamus Tierney. Writer/director Max Mayer has made a little gem of a movie. Review by Ann Marie Oliva
| THE COVE Rated PG-13 for disturbing content. Documentary 92 minutes
4 stars |
This documentary, filmed mostly in Taiji, Japan, is full of ironies. The seaside town is full of images of swimming, happy dolphins on cars, boats and buildings, yet the fisherman of Taiji are caught on film slaughtering hundreds of them.
Another irony is that years ago in the 1960s Rick O’Barry caught and trained five dolphins for the popular Flipper television series. He turned into an activist after he realized how intelligent and sensitive they actually are and has spent the better part of 40 years trying to pay penance for having popularized their capture in the first place. Dolphins are now used around the world at sea world type shows making big money for their owners.
What’s presented in the documentary is a group of people who want to show what cost to the dolphins and the human world is as they are sold into captivity or killed if not useful.
The Japanese fishermen claim this is how they make a living and they are following tradition. They are extremely hostile to Americans trying to find out the truth and Rick O’Barry in particular.
What follows is a kind of reconnaissance mission devised and followed through by the group including O’Barry, director Louie Psihoyos, divers, photographers, and others who are determined to catch the fisherman driving the dolphins into the cove, picking out the young females, then slaughtering the rest.
There is little cooperation from the international community as Japan defends its fisherman. Those who protest face ridicule. A subplot about the dolphin meat used as food in Japan and the extraordinary amount of mercury it contains is also chilling.
The climax is emotional and moving as the life of these beings are taken in a most cruel way. That’s another irony as the beautiful town and cove is used as a killing field. It’s enough to wake up anyone who is complacent about what’s happening to the oceans of the world and the sea life that is being lost at an astonishing rate. What do we owe to future generations and to each other in helping to preserve the planet's health? Review by Ann Marie Oliva
| SHORTS Rated PG for mild action and some rude humor. Family/Comedy 89 minutes
1½ stars |
Here is yet another movie by a writer/director, in this case Robert Rodriguez. And is yet another disappointment from one of those rare filmmakers who apparently get to make all the decisions and then live with the consequences. This movie is silly even by kids’ standards as evidenced by the fact that there was one meager, unenthusiastic applause at the end of the movie. If kids aren’t doing more than that it’s a giveaway about what they’ve just seen.
The story is told in a non-linear manner, but it’s easy to follow. The problem is mostly not the young actors, but the way director Rodriguez has everyone else over-acting, especially the adult actors who have a harder time getting away with it. The cast has some admirable people (who normally turn in good performances) like: William H. Macy, James Spader, Jon Cryer, Leslie Mann, and Kat Dennings.
The story is not exactly an original one about a student who is bullied at school named Toe Thompson (Jimmy Bennett, one of the better things about the movie) who can’t seem to escape the taunting bullies especially one named Helvetica Black (Jolie Vanier, looking like and giving what seems to be a good imitation of a young Christina Ricci in The Adams Family). Toe’s parents work for her father, the dictatorial Mr. Black (Spader). Meantime, a magic wishing rock is found and the hilarity, well, it doesn’t ensue as the rock gets passed around and stolen and taken back over and over by one resident after another of the town.
There are jokes about bodily functions and fluids and some mediocre special effects that seem thrown in so that something seems to happen in this juvenile farce. The real wonder is how Mr. Rodriguez got all this talent to be in this inane movie. Review by Ann Marie Oliva
LIVE HARD. SELL HARD. |
THE GOODS: LIVE HARD. SELL HARD. Rated R for sexual content, nudity, pervasive language and some drug material. Comedy 89 minutes
1½ stars |
Despite the high octane energy of Jeremy Piven, this used car comedy races around going nowhere. If you’ve seen Mr. Piven in Entourage you know that he’s capable of good work, but this discount movie is beneath his talent.
Don Ready (Jeremy Piven) is hired by a car dealership to try to prevent bankruptcy over a Fourth of July weekend. Such is Ready and team’s reputation that they guarantee success. There’s lots of whooping about how to sell, but it only makes used car salesmen look sleazier. Other members of the team include Jibby Newsome (Ving Rhames), Brent Gage (David Koechner), and Babs Merrick (Kathryn Hahn). Ben Selleck (James Brolin), who hired Ready and team is married with a family, but there are ongoing, trite jokes about his affection for Brent.
When it comes to cars you can understand the hard sell part, but the script has the same type of hard edge that makes you groan. That may be why the story is so forgettable once you leave the theater. Yes, there are partially naked women, characters groping each other, a car buying public made to look like an out of control mob, not very bright consumers just looking for bargains, and even some angels thrown in.
Will Ferrell, Alan Thicke, Ed Helms, Wendy Malick, Craig Robinson, Ken Jeong, and others try to add their comedic touches, but the script by Andy Stock and Rick Stempson doesn’t leave much room for genuine laughs or originality. Instead the movie is raunchy and crude in all the expected ways.
You can understand what director Neal Brennan is going for here, and I’m guessing that’s exactly why The Goods is planted in the middle of August. There’s little thought involved, though it tries to make points about lifestyle choices. If you’re looking to pass the time, this may be for you. It’s a late summer movie, but I’m trying to make it to September. Review by Ann Marie Oliva
TRAVELER'S WIFE |
THE TIME
TRAVELER'S WIFE Rated PG-13 for thematic elements, brief disturbing images,nudity, sexuality. Drama/Romance/Adaptation 108 minutes
3 stars |
It’s often difficult to transform popular novels from books into movies. The results tend to be fair to middling. Far too often, they're disappointing. (An obvious exception is the Harry Potter series.) The competition with imagination is hard to win. After all, in one’s mind, the reader is in control of all the elements. But when they are transferred to the screen they, in effect, become others' visions that you accept or not. So many readers who love this time traveling book by Audrey Niffenegger couldn’t wait to see it on film.
Clare Abshire (Rachel McAdams), the wife of the title, falls for Henry DeTamble (Eric Bana), a man who can’t control his trips through time and space. She’s six; he’s in his thirties, when she first encounters him naked in a field near her house. His clothes, unfortunately, don’t travel with him. In the book if you accept the premise, this doesn’t seem like much of an issue, but seeing it on screen, I began to wonder and found myself starting to get caught up in the details rather than being invested in the relationship between Clare and Henry.
The actors certainly try hard, but in truth the chemistry between Ms. McAdams and Eric Bana seems forced. I certainly pictured Henry as a more passionate man, which maybe is not as natural for Mr. Bana who seems a less demonstrative sort.
Something vital seems off; the tone for one thing. It’s heavy and plodding. Even though we know that his travels are increasingly complex because he has more places to travel to and from, it causes the joy and strength of their love to be minimized. What really may be missing and can’t be made up is Ms. Niffenegger’s prose that draws in the reader. Film dialogue obviously can’t replace all the narration, information, and description in the book.
The family relationships, though, are touching. Henry loses his mother as a very young boy and mourns her for the rest of his life even though he sees her from time to time in his travels. His father (Arliss Howard) also never gets over losing her, and seems to implicate Henry in the accident that took her life. Clare wants a child desperately but Henry’s genetic disease causes miscarriage after miscarriage. Even their friend Gomez, played by Ron Livingston, knows friendship with the DeTambles means grievous loss, but stands by them anyway.
It may be that the themes and ideas in the novel are more inspiring in the abstract than in a movie that doesn’t have equal power to move an audience. Review by Ann Marie Oliva
| A PERFECT GETAWAY Rated R for graphic violence, language including sexual references and some drug use. Horror/Thriller 97 minutes
2½ stars |
What can you say about a movie that drags throughout the first half and then doubles back on itself? The premise that begins the movie is adequate and has potential, but the story is thin and then becomes more and more unbelievable. Yet, this is a movie that is supposed to provide atmosphere and mood more than reason.
A couple in Hawaii on their honeymoon, Cliff (Steve Zahn) and Cydney (Milla Jovovich,) want to do all the fun, adventurous things, but soon learn that another honeymooning couple has been killed by a man and woman. Who are these mysterious people, and why are they killing newlyweds? They come across another man and woman who seem like druggies and perfect candidates as the killers so to get some protection they tag along with two lovers backpacking to a remote beach, Nick (Timothy Olyphant) and Gina (Kiele Sanchez).
Cliff and Cydney are afraid of just about everything because they don’t know the area and are dependent on Nick, an Iraqi veteran who calls himself an American Jedi, and Gina, who tells the scared couple that Nick is “hard to kill.” Gina worked at a butcher shop and shows she skin a goat when Nick finds one. Good knife work there, girl.
The setup, as they make their way to the beach, and meet various others hiking seems to take forever, unlike the trailer which has many quick cuts that make you think the action and story is going to be fast. Unfortunately, it’s not to be. We are treated to many meaningful looks between Cliff and Cydney, dialogue meant to throw you off, hints, and yes, “red herrings” which is actually mentioned because Cliff is a screenwriter.
Hawaii is beautiful, but the landscapes are nothing out of the ordinary. The movie is peopled, though, with good-looking actors who can act. Actually, they tend to rise above the material from writer/director David Twohy who knows how to create suspense, but suspense is not enough here. Steve Zahn and Timothy Olyphant provide a good counterpoint as the two guys not quite sure of each other, especially Zahn who plays milquetoast characters really well. The women appear to bond more, as women might do, through conversations about their past. Both Milla Jovovich and Kiele Sanchez are strikingly pretty, and can hold their own with the guys. The four together are a strong ensemble.
But everything hinges on one big discovery by one of them, and it was so fast and unclear enough that person next to me said, “What just happened?” Then the action picks up as they all fight for survival. Actually, it’s disappointing because it doesn’t seem earned. Review by Ann Marie Oliva