Flight Movie Review
Cousin Nora reporting in for movie review #2—and also a theatre review for San Francisco Bay Area local folks. Last Wednesday, I went to see Flight at the New Parkway Theatre in Oakland with my friend Sr. Mary (yes, I hang out with nuns, especially hilarious and cool ones, like Mary, aka, “Sista”). Seeing this particular movie probably wasn’t such a great idea for Sr. Mary, since she was flying to Chicago the next day, but we both left the theater in awe of Denzel Washington and the recurring statement was, “That was a good movie.” So here are some thoughts about the movie and about the New Parkway, a “living room” theater complete with couches, food, and booze.
About the movie: Wow, Denzel rocked my world. I’ve never been one of those people who’ve thought Denzel super hot; now, I know this might surprise those of you who know me, but it’s true. But this movie converted me to a true Denzel fan. I’ve always appreciated his acting talents and especially enjoyed him in “Man on Fire,” partially because he protected Dakota Fanning, who looks like my niece. Anyhow, Denzel in Flight was monumental. The opening scene captures the movie very nicely: Denzel and hot chick wake up in an anonymous hotel room to a phone call from Denzel’s ex-wife, who’s asking for money. An otherwise cranky and clearly hung-over Denzel ogles his date’s assets (wink) as he argues with the ex-wife. You can see from the paraphernalia strewn about the room that Denzel and friend have had a wild night and, at this point, I wondered whether the chick was a prostitute. You can hear from the phone conversation that Denzel’s an airline pilot who’s about the take the wheel (joystick?) on a morning flight. Yikes. The next shot is of Denzel, cleaned up and looking like the movie star he is, as he walks down the hotel hallway in his pilot uniform. And so begins our ascent…and descent. Keeping the seat belt on for the entire performance is key. White knuckles will also ensue. (note-I stuck in the Airplane image from our collection of Funny T-Shirts. Sorry, I couldn’t resist-Dave)
If you have a fear of flying, don’t see this movie, unless your therapist recommends it as a way to deal with this fear. It’s no spoiler to tell you that, within the first 15 minutes of the movie, there’s a big ‘ol crash – and you’re privy to what happens in the cockpit and in the passenger area when a big ‘ol crash happens. Again, keeping on your seat belt is key. At this point, Sr. Mary and I brace in our crash positions, abandoning any thoughts of enjoying the Parkway’s food and beverage service until we land safely.
Basically, what happens is that the beginning of the movie sets up the fact that Denzel (just shorter to type than Washington) is a one-in-a-million pilot who’s also a raging alcoholic. I’m not giving anything away: The rest of the movie consists of watching Denzel self-destruct over and over again. Every time he reached for another drink, audience members audibly gasped. It was painful to watch. He meets a chick in the hospital who turns out to be a heroin addict and you think, “Oh, man, that’s exactly the wrong person for him to hook up with,” but she actually ends up being the sensible one. Denzel also has an old friend and a lawyer who figure out how they might get him out of the charges…and then there’s John Goodman, who’s more of an addiction accomplice. Goodman’s performance—especially the scene at the end of the movie—is classic, albeit a bit much. But it’s entertaining, for sure.
The whole movie leads up to the crucial episode where Denzel faces the investigatory board at the hearing that will determine his fate. I won’t spoil the ending, but I’ll say this: Denzel is absolutely brilliant throughout the movie. The way he’s able to portray the pilot is nothing less than genius. You feel sorry for him, but you also don’t because the dude has everything and throws it away because he’s too stubborn to sit through an AA meeting. I wanted him to go to prison and sober up. But he seems to think he can kick the habit on his own, but, wow, he’s a mess! The character rang true and had me thinking deep about addicts I’ve known, people who could be intelligent and successful and charming, but were no match for their addictions. This portrayal was painfully authentic and, even if the movie sucked, which it didn’t, it’d be worth it just to see Denzel act. In fact, I’m thinking I might go see it again, something I rarely do because there are always so many movies I want to see. Like in Man on Fire, Denzel’s character is haunting in that he’s simultaneously strong—make it downright bad-ass—but he’s also a hot mess. He’s like real people we all know—maybe even ourselves, to get deep about it. Like I said, this movie converted me into a Denzel fan and I might go back and see some other films just to watch him.
The ending does the performance justice and was well-written. I won’t spoil anything, so just go see it and let me know what you think. Watching that movie made me wonder: Would Denzel been a worse, better, or same pilot if he weren’t loaded? What do you think?
Now, for Bay Area folks, here are my thoughts on the New Parkway: It’s no surprise that it’s great. The Wednesday 2-for-1 special got Sr. Mary and me in the door for $6 total. But first, we had to find the door, which proved a challenge. The theatre is on 24th between Telegraph and Broadway (the Downtown YMCA’s on Broadway at that corner). We knew the theater was on that block, we both know Oakland very well, and yet we drove right past it. We discovered that there’s no sign on the outside of the building and, at night, it was hard to see that the building had spray-painted signage. We scored on a pretty good parking spot, but give yourself some time as parking in that area’s a bit scarce during times when the Y is open. Also, it’s pretty much a dark alley, so don’t leave anything in your car and bring a buddy with you. As for the theatre itself, there was good and bad: The interior signage was also not great, so we wandered into theater 2 thinking it was theater 1. Theater 2 seriously rocked. There were sets of living room arrangements around a big, square room with lots of comfy and retro-fun coaches, settees, and chairs. Some of the arrangements had shelving and all had tables for food and beverages. So we sat down and waited for our food.
The set-up is like the old Parkway, where you order food at the counter and they bring it to you, which is great because you don’t have to schlep your stuff yourself when you’re finding a seat. Anyhow, we sat down on this very groovy red sofa and waited for our stuff, marveling at the décor and set-up. We noted that we were the only people in the theater, but didn’t think much of it. Then our food came and the theater guy told us we were in the wrong theatre. See? Bad signage. So we went to theater 1, which wasn’t nearly as cool or well set up as theater 2. Theater 1 had two levels: The downstairs was set up with dining tables and chairs, with a row of movie theaters on the back of one wall. This room didn’t feel cozy or comfy and, if you were sitting there for the movie, you’d have to look up at the screen. We went upstairs, where the seating consisted mostly of big cushy office chairs with side tables. There were three tiers of seating and we opted for the furthest one back, soon discovering that a railing would block our views of the screen. So we moved down to the second tier, which had a better view, but the screen was below us. I thought this would be annoying, but it wasn’t, maybe because the movie was riveting from early on. The key for theater 1 would be to get there early to get the best seats.
All in all, the décor was funky and chic, just as you’d expect from this venue. The food was really good! I had a “Seinfeldian” salad, which wasn’t what I’d expected (I’m a salad connoisseur), but it was delicious with romaine, bleu cheese, cranberries (or some other dried fruit sweetness), carmelized walnuts, and balsamic. The portion was good and I think it was $7. Sr. Mary had two slices of pizza, one cheese and one with chicken apple sausage and something else I forget. She said they were both good, but the cheese was best. Again, the portions were generous and two slices were around $6 total. We didn’t order drinks—although beer and wine are available—but they had water with lemon available, which was nice. The crowd was fairly typical Oakland and the theater was actually pretty full on the top level. Like the old Parkway, before previews rolled, a staff member came out and greeted the audience, telling us about upcoming events. There weren’t any filmed announcements like the old owner/manager used to do. All in all, the New Parkway’s a great addition to downtown and I’ll definitely go back as often as possible.
Okay, thanks for listening and let me know what you think about Flight! I promised you my dating tips and haven’t forgotten, but wanted to write about this movie before I forgot details and impressions. Over and out for now.
Nora
This is 40? Um, not so much…
Hi there, this is cousin Nora, signing on for my first movie review. It might be a little rambly, but hopefully you’ll enjoy my perspective. When I chose to see “This is 40,” I did so to avoid more overtly depressing flicks like Django and Les Mis. After a Christmas/New Year’s vacation without any sunshine, I needed to laugh and not think about slavery or oppression, two topics I deal with everyday at work (literally and figuratively, but I’ll refrain from the digression for now…) Anyhow, “This is 40” had its funny moments and great one-liners, but, holy crap, if that were my life at 40, I would’ve shaved my head, packed my s***and headed to Tibet. I couldn’t put my finger on what was so jarring about this movie and why it was taking up so much brainspace after I’d seen it – and it wasn’t that, “Wow, that was provocative” kind of brain space, but more of a “wtf” kind of brainspace. Then my B, Alexis, saw the movie and she summed it up nicely in two words: “Annoying and disheartening.”
Where to begin: The plot. There wasn’t one. This is 40 was a “slice of life” deal that looked at the lives of “Pete” and “Debbie,” who you would know from “Knocked Up,” if you’d seen that. In “Knocked Up,” Paul Rudd and Leslie Mann played Katherine Heigl’s sister and brother-in-law. In small doses, Pete and Debbie’s constant bickering and vitriol was hilarious, but a whole 2 hours of hate and bitterness kinda sucked. Why? Cuz it’s rarely that simple: A couple who hate each other usually do so in much more subtle ways. The characters of Pete and Debbie were constantly bitching at one another and their relationship didn’t show any depth. Every once in a while, they’d have episodes where they professed their love for one another, but that fell flat because, for most of the movie, they were just being complete assholes to one each other.
There was a funny scene where they escaped their two kids – brilliantly played by Judd Apatow’s own little girls. On a sidenote, the little girls were constantly bickering and mean to each other, with only a rare instance of sibling love. 
Anyhow, while at a posh hotel, Pete and Debbie eat some pot cookies and have a party for two (with the room service waiter looking on as they order tray after tray of desserts). But that was just about the only scene where they seemed to like each other at all, so, overall, the relationship came off as shallow. You’re left wondering why these two didn’t get divorced years ago. (Loved & Lost image courtesy of the Funny T Shirt category)
And, speaking of shallow, since this is the nerd blog, I’ll say that, as a nerd, I would be very happy to see this movie because it shows how tiresome and ridiculous the LA/So. Cal. lifestyle can be. Pete and Debbie emBODY that dream: They drive (probably lease) $100k in cars, live in a beautiful home, work out regularly, and look, well, like people from movies. But, just below the surface, you find that both are miserable. In one scene, Debbie confronts her daughter’s classmate, a kid who has a crush on the daughter and, therefore, teases the daughter. The kid even puts the daughter in the “not” category of his “hot or not” list (the ultimate insult for an LA kid, obviously). The kid’s mother ends up being Melissa McCarthy, who gives a brilliant performance when she, Pete, and Debbie are summoned to the principal’s office. In this scene, McCarthy’s character provides commentary on superficiality and she’s funny as hell. Other highlights include the adorable Jason Segal as the unlikely trainer and hot Megan Fox in her underwear/bikini. Also, John Lithgow and Albert Brooks as Debbie and Pete’s dads were interesting, but, again, there was a cringe factor. Which brings me to my main point: This movie didn’t know what it wanted to be when it grew up. Was it a lighthearted comedy? Not so much. Was it a serious look at relationships? Nope, because, like I said, the relationship seemed to consist solely on bitter back-and-forths. And the relationships between other family members (the daughters, Pete and his dad, Debbie and her dad) were also bizarre and under-developed.
So, now that I’ve seen this movie, would I recommend it? Hm. That’s a tough one. It did have some clever writing and I laughed a lot. The acting was fine, which led to a pretty big cringe factor. So here’s the deal: If you’re in a low point in your love life, like maybe you’re on a “guyatus” or a “shebattical” and have just endured a rough holiday season, this might be a good movie for you. It’ll make you grateful to be single. If you’re happily married or in a good relationship, it’ll make you appreciate your partner for their genuine spirit and overall kindness, even if they don’t look like a movie star or drive a BMW. If you’re in a relationship that resembles that of Pete and Debbie, seeing this movie with your “Debbie” or “Pete” might provide a means to finally deal with your misery. But, all in all, this movie didn’t really know what it wanted to be: Was it goofy, funny, and sweet like Knocked Up? No. Was it serious and soul-searching? It was set in LA, so the answer’s obviously no. But it was a weird combo of the two, which made it uncomfortable and awkward. If I were to choose again, I’d skip this movie and just go for Django or Les Mis. With those choices, at least I know what I’m getting into…overall, I give “This is 40” a C+, the C for a movie that’s just sort of “meh” and the plus for good acting and, at times, clever dialogue. And there you have it. Thanks for “listening.”
Les Misérables Review
I need to get a note from my doctor excusing me from writing this review.
This is the worst kind of review for me to write, if only because it is so out of my realm of experience that I might as well throw a dictionary into a tree shredder and publish whatever comes out the other end. It’s like asking a nuclear physicist to perform brain surgery; he or she may be highly intelligent and well trained in their own field of expertize but at the end of the task all you are left is a big gooey mess and a souvenir skull.
I also hate writing these because they always end up showing the world what an uncultured oaf I secretly am. I am sure I will get a lot of feedback similar to what I got for my review of Tree of Life when I called it a disjointed mass of editing room scraps masquerading as pretentious self indulgent pseudo art (I still stand by that, incidentally. If any of you are screaming Tree of Life fans let me tell you that Terrence Malick masturbated all over your face and you not only didn’t realize it but thanked him for it).
The problem stems from the fact that I am not really a fan of theater. If I am going to sit for two or more hours watching a story why would I not want to go see something with production values and all the bad bits edited out? It seems to me the only reason you would want to see something performed live is because you are hoping to see someone really screw up (kind of like how all Nascar fans secretly hope to see someone killed in a horrible car crash right in front of them). I know they are supposed to be a cornerstone of our culture (well, upper class culture) but unless your kid is in the show I don’t see a real reason to attend (and there is the proof of my cultural oafishness. Feel free to start hate spamming me now, so I can get right on ignoring you. Lincoln image courtesy of the Funny T-Shirt category).
Not to say that this movie is a play. It is a full grown film, with high production values and multiple takes for each scene. It is in fact very pretty and generally well produced. However, I never fell in love with the story as a play and have very little interest in seeing an entire script sung out loud. I don’t mind a musical when the periodic songs are used to enhance the story (Dr. Horrible, for example. I love that show). But this movie has every line of more than three words padded out into a complete musical number to the point I felt like I was drowning in lyrics and struggling for the faintest breath of expository dialog. The phrase “too much of a good thing” plays out well at this point.
The real victim of all the musical numbers is the film pacing. In a normal movie, establishing that the innkeeper and his wife are crooks would be accomplished with a couple of quick pickpocketing or ripping off scenes. Instead we are given an extended duet that keeps showing them doing the same thing over and over again in order to keep the screen moving long enough for the song to play out. It doesn’t help that most of the songs were variations on three basic songs, and if I have to listen to that Red and Black song one more time my head will literally explode.
There were parts I enjoyed, and I won’t be all black holes. I just feel like had there been a little more discrimination in the song selection and a willingness to space them out with dialog the movie would have moved a lot better and made each song have much more impact and relevance. Having Javert sing about his reasons for suicide lost a lot of meaning after listening to everyone else sing about every bowel movement and raincloud that passed overhead.
One last personal note before I get into the meat of the film. One of the actual reasons I had for seeing this film is I have had a long time love of Anne Hathaway (in spite of One Day but recently greatly enhanced by her portrayal of Sylina Kyle in the Dark Knight Rises). If you are reading this Anne I’d like to take you to dinner at the best taco truck you have ever tasted. However, in this film she is purposely made to look as ugly as possible and then dies about 40 minutes in. I totally felt ripped off, especially given that she is featured in about 80% of the screen time for all the trailers. I suppose if I had been more familiar with the story I would not have been so surprised (or bitter) but there it is.
Anyway, the story. Jean Valjean (Hugh Jackman-X-Men, Real Steel, Rise of the Guardians) is a man convicted of stealing a loaf of bread and spends 19 years at hard labor. He is paroled but due to his status is destitute and starving. Inspector Javert (Russell Crowe-L.A. Confidential, Gladiator, A Beautiful Mind) is on him from the moment he is released. A priest gives him the means he needs to reinvent himself and he skips on parole and takes on the identity of a well-to-do businessman. Years later Javert comes to his office and sort of recognizes him. Meanwhile single mother Fantine (Anne Hathaway-the Devil Wears Prada, the Dark Knight Rises, One Day) is fired from Valjeans factory for something (?) and has to become a prostitute in order to keep her young daughter alive. Her daughter Cosette (Isabella Allen when young, Amanda Seyfried as a teenager) lives with two horrible innkeepers. Fantine is discovered by Valjean who realizes he is responsible for her downfall. She dies of something (?) and Valjean vows to take care of Cosette. However, Javert is after him so he has to escape to the other side of Paris (can someone please tell me why he didn’t just leave town the first time he got away from Javert?) and change his name again. Skip ahead again and the two of them live together in Paris while the post Revolution revolts are going on. A young revolutionary named Marius (Eddie Redmayne-Black Death, the Other Boleyn Girl, My Week with Marilyn) sees her and they fall in love.
You know, when I was watching the film I was having to pay so much attention to the singing I failed to realized what a convoluted mess the story really is. Tolkien would struggle to follow this. Anyway, the minor revolution happens. Guys die. More singing surfaces. Marius and Valjean go swimming in raw sewage with open bullet wounds (sepsis, anyone?). Javert fails in his duty and jumps off a bridge. For the most part the movie lives up to it’s name as almost everyone in it ends up dead or unhappy in some way or another.
The stars. Very pretty movie, with lots of cool images. One star. Excellent work on the costumes and period pieces. One star. There were a couple songs that actually struck my cold, flinty heart (Marius singing about his dead friends at the end in particular). One star. From what I could discern through the fog of music I actually like most of the characters, Javert and Valjean in particular. One star. Good acting all around, if you can be said to be acting when what you are really doing is physically emoting while singing. One star. In the A for effort category I will say I was impressed by all the actors being able to sing, and for the director insisting on each song being sung in scene and not recorded post production. Russell Crowe was the weakest of the singers but even he managed to pull it off. While not my cup of tea, I have an appreciation for the work put in there. Plus I sing like a dying cow. Two stars. Grand total: seven stars.
The black holes. I’m not hitting them for the fact that it was a musical. I will hit them however for the insistence of using music in many scenes that could have been accomplished via dialog or even camera work in a matter of seconds. One black hole. This is probably the end result of adopting a play to a movie while trying to keep the play feel, but the pacing was glacier-like. The film runs 157 minutes and you will feel every one of them, mostly in your ass. One black hole. They did that period thing that bugs the hell out of me with the accents. The film is set in France, but every character has an American accent except for a few minor ones who for some inexplicably reason are British (including one ragamuffin who sounded Cockney). Of course, they insist on calling everyone Monsieur or Mademoiselle, and when they do so have a flawless French accent. Just pick one and roll with it IMO. One black hole. I feel like featuring Anne Hathaway so prominently in the trailers only to have her shuffle off the mortal coil 1/4 of the way into the film is just false advertizing. One black hole. Total: four black holes.
A grand total of three stars. However, my scoring is truly irrelevant. I’m not going to bother to recommend or unrecommended this film as I know you have all already decided if you are going to see it or not. If you lack a Y chromosome or are a fan of musical theater you probably have already seen it or plan to see it soon, and if you are not you probably won’t bother. Date movie? Abso-freaking-lutely. If sitting through this epic with a girl doesn’t get you laid you might as well become a monk because you are the least attractive man on the planet (on a side note, does anyone know of any good monasteries that are taking applications? I ask from a purely hypothetical point of view, and not at all because I saw this movie with a girl and didn’t get any). Bathroom break? The weird thing about this film is you kind of really have to pay attention to the singing in order to know what is going on, so I’d say try to hold it. However, if you need an exact point to relieve yourself any time they start singing the “Red and Black” song is pretty good. It goes on forever, is repeated ad nauseum, is towards the last 1/3rd of the film, and doesn’t really tell you much.
Thanks for reading. If you have comments on this film or my review of it feel free to post them here (even “Dave you are an idiot” comments will get approved as long as you don’t cuss). If you have off topic questions or suggestions (or happen to be Anne Hathaway taking me up on my taco truck offer) you can email me at [email protected]. Follow me on Twitter @Nerdkungfu (I really only post my reviews and the occasional new t-shirt there). Talk to you soon.
Dave
Red Dawn Review
Red Dumb.
I can’t say this film wasn’t competently made. If it were an original film I would probably have a lot of positive things to say about it. It is exciting and chock full of hot young kids. I could definitely find some black holes in it, but as a stand alone film it was kind of fun.
The problem I am having is it is a poor remake of a movie that wasn’t that great to begin with. The original Red Dawn was at best jingoistic masturbation material for uber patriotic gun nuts. Back in the glory days of 1984 Russian invasion was a legitimate concern and most of America was ready to prove their loyalty by watching this film. This new incarnation is pretty much exactly the same, but the fear of invasion by North Korea (Population 24,589,122. California alone has 37,691,912 and supposedly the Koreans take over the entire West Coast) is laughable. Sure, they wrote in some uber weapon but given there are 9 guns in the US for every 10 citizens that means California alone has 30 armed citizens for every one of North Korea’s 1,106,000 soldiers. This is the same problem faced by writers of Superman stories; he is so powerful that no villains ever measure up.
What’s funny is the original story was supposed to be China invading, which is something I would more readily believe. However, given that a massive amount of movie revenue comes from China and there is no way the censor there would approve a film showing Chinese soldiers being gunned down by the Acne Brigade, they made the financially sound yet intellectually stupid decision to go with the Koreans (with some help from the Russians).
No, it’s not the rediculousness of the invading country that has me bothered in this remake. It’s the fact that they softened the hell out of this film in the ongoing campaign to cat-ify (feel free to substitute any synonym for “cat” that you think might work in that last sentence) our population. As I walked out of the theater I thought back to the 1984 film and realized the one thing they did brilliantly was show the degeneration of typical American kids into savage, brutal freedom fighters. In that movie they count coup, execute prisoners, and in time become almost animals in their thirst for Russian blood. There is a particularly brutal scene where one of their own team is forced to swallow a tracking device and the local psychopath executes him without a moments hesitation. In the end they are more or less slaughtered to the last man while letting a couple escape.
Nope. None of that here. There are a few red shirts who die, but for the most part with a little really dumb training sequences these kids are ready to not only beat the hell out of more than their weight in professional soldiers but do it while holding the moral high ground. SPOILER ALERT: the transponder being swallowed is replaced by one implanted via a knife or something and once they figure it out the guy they implanted it into is just left behind to make his last stand. There is no brutal scene with any kind of moral grey zone, and at the end of the movie instead of showing the harsh last stand of the guerrilla fighters the Wolverines turn into some kind of super force equipped with Mad Max style cars that attack the North Koreans at will and destroy all in their path. There was one scene where one of the fighters had his own collaborator father in his sites which could have been brilliant, but instead they do nothing.
During the course of all the remake reviews I have done I have come to the conclusion that there are two kinds. There is the reboot where they take the original idea, rewrite it with interesting new concepts, and in the end come out with something that actually enhances, adds to, or exceeds the original. Dredd is the best recent example of this rarity. The other type is where they take the original script, modernize it a little, soften things up to keep from bruising the delicate psyches and sensibilities of the fragile audience, cast whoever the latest teen heart throb is to play main character, and ultimate do nothing but waste a lot of time and oxygen. Footloose is the penultimate example of this dross, and Red Dawn is another.
The story. Sigh. Just go rent Red Dawn and watch it while completely encased in muslin and bubble wrap. It’s pretty much Red Dawn Lite. The kids are prettier, less of them die, and they don’t turn into psychopathic killers. The North Koreans don’t managed to ambush and slaughter them with Hind helicopters. Instead of a rescued American pilot to give them guidance they have a team of Marines sent in to make contact with them. Oh, that reminds me. Instead of having them portrayed as struggling to survive while hurting the enemy as much as possible let’s give them a MacGuffin that will save all of America once they capture it. I have railed against this before but I have to say again: sometimes it’s OK to have a story that doesn’t hinge on saving the entirety of the universe.
The stars. Overall fairly exciting and fun, if you don’t want to think about it too much. If you have never seen the original you might quite enjoy it. Two stars. Chris Helmsworth was pretty good. I think he is actually a decent actor. One star. Some of the action wasn’t over the top. One star. Total: four stars.
The black holes. Remaking a mediocre movie and taking out all the elements that actually made it intriguing. One black hole. These kids go from high school losers to the A Team in like two minutes of half assed training. One black hole. I am so sick of MacGuffin based movie plots. One black hole. 
I know this is totally petty, but with the exception of the Kalashnikovs carried by pretty much everyone all the weapons and vehicles were clearly American. At one point one of the guys asks to borrow one of the other guys SAW (as in M249 Squad Automatic Weapon, a support weapon used by the American army and Marine Corps. AK-47 image courtesy of the Funny T Shirt category). One black hole. In an effort to pay tribute to the Hollywood God of Stereotypes it is the black guy who has to sacrifice himself for the greater good of the team. One black hole. With the exception of Chris Helmsworth, his brother, and the black guy I swear I couldn’t tell any of the other characters apart. They were to a man and woman good looking young white people who looked and sounded exactly the same in spite of having some different back stories. Also, a good friend of mine from Washington was quick to point out that no one up there looks as good as those people did. It was like a big Ambercrombie and Fitch ad with guns. One black hole. Speaking of back stories, they inserted a few sub plots that really went no where, like the appearance of Russian Spetnatz and so on. One black hole. And finally, one more big black hole for basing a movie on a laughable premise and avoiding the only good premise in the pursuit of a buck. Total: eight black holes.
A total of four black holes. Meh. Worth seeing? I suppose if you don’t want to see anything of real value and are OK with remakes. The action is fun and if you are of a super patriotic bent you will probably need to change your pants after having all your violent pro-America fantasies shown on the screen. Honestly, you won’t feel like you wasted your time or money. You just won’t have gained much from it. Date movie? Hell no. Bathroom break? The whole training montage felt like a big fat waste of time, but that is pretty early in the film. Any of the non shooting scenes can be missed, but if I were to pick a scene I would go with the one where the three man American team is meeting with the Wolverines. I honestly think the last part of the movie would be better if you didn’t know what the magical device they are going for is.
Thanks for reading. Follow me on Twitter for the one Tweet a day I am averaging @NerdKungFu. If you have comments on this review or the movie please post them here, and if you have any off topic suggestions or questions feel free to email me at [email protected]. I just saw the Life of Pi and will review it tomorrow. As a preview, I have to say it is pretty amazing. Also, some good friends of mine (and die hard Star Trek fans BTW) are trying to get some money together for a sci fi film project. If you are feeling generous please visit their KickStart Campaign and do what you can. I promise that if they get the film done I will watch and review it for you. Thank you all for your support, and I hope you had a great Thanksgiving!
Dave
Head Nerd
Wreck It Ralph Review
Rock It, Ralph!
A few months ago when I reviewed the movie Brave I sort of lamented the purchase of Pixar by Disney. My perception based on that film was that the vanilla Disney wholesomeness that is the death of so many films for anyone with body hair would infect Pixar like a retrovirus and basically turn them into a Disney clone. I made the comparison of a marriage wherein one of the two people has their personality subsumed by the other, creating a two headed couple monster based on the dominant personality.
However, after seeing this film I have to rescind that statement. It now appears that like the couple who actually morphs into androgynous versions of each other, Disney and Pixar are exchanging critical parts of their personalities (and possibly DNA) in order to become the same type of company with two different offices. I shall refer to them as Dixar, mainly because that name amuses me.
While it is true that Pixar becoming more Disney-like is a tremendous step down in the quality of the films they produce, Disney drinking the Pixar punch is a gigantic, rocket assisted step up to a new superior plane of existence. Wreck It Ralph is fun, exciting, clever, funny, and extremely appropriate for adults as well as most kids. The first sign that this movie might not suck came as I walked up to the theater and noticed the marquee. “Whaaaaat?” I thought. “A Disney cartoon movie that is rated PG? Has the world suddenly stopped spinning on its axis?” 
However, in spite of my sudden belief in the incoming Rapture (image courtesy of the the Funny T Shirt category) the movie was truly rated PG. Granted, on the G side of the PG rating (as in your kid would have to be the biggest wuss (I’m sorry, sensitive child) since Tommy and Annika from Pippi Longstocking to be upset by this. That might be the most obscure and geeky reference I have used to date, BTW) but PG nevertheless.
This movie does what every kids movie needs to do in order to not suck and that is make it entertaining for the kids while inserting enough adult humor and situations to keep dad from drinking himself into a temporary coma to escape the boredom (what was going to see a movie like for you as a kid, Dave?). There are actually some really funny and subtle jokes that will only be perceived by adults, such as the “random” extra security screening of Ralph as he tries to exit a game, and the Bad-anon meeting for Bad Guy support.
As is my policy for kids movies I will not break it down and assign specific stars and black holes. Such things are wasted and distracting, when really the only questions anyone should have are “Will my kid sit quietly for two hours and enjoy it?” and “Will I end up a diabetic and brain damaged from having to absorb too much sweetness and lame pap in one film?” The answers are respectively yes and no.
The story is of Ralph (voiced by John C Reilly-Step Brothers, the Gangs of New York, The Aviator), a Donkey Kong-esque video game villain who for the last 30 years has been climbing up a building to destroy it, only to be foiled by his nemesis Fix It Felix, Jr (Jack McBrayer-30 Rock, Despicable Me, Forgetting Sarah Marshall). He is tired of being a bad guy, feared and hated by everyone, and forced to sleep in a garbage dump. He goes off on a quest to win a medal and ends up doing so in a different game, Hero’s Duty. While there he accidentally transports one of the villain bugs to Sugar Rush, a cute candy based racing game. There, while looking for his medal he meets Vanellope (Sarah Silverman-the School of Rock, There’s Something about Mary, Heartbreakers), a cute racer who is a glitch in the game. The commanding officer (Jane Lynch-Glee, Talladega Nights, the 40 Year Old Virgin) from Hero’s Duty comes looking for the bug. Vanellope recruits Ralph to help her race against King Candy (Allen Tudyck-Firefly, Tucker & Dale Versus Evil, I, Robot).
I don’t want to get too deep into the story. It is cool and fun, with a couple of very well set up twists and a really good ending. Excellent writing overall. I hate sounding like the kind of wimp I was railing against earlier, but I honestly came close to tearing up at one point. Naturally I ramped up my machismo to keep that in check and on the way home fought some guys and broke some beer bottles on my head make up for it, but if you weren’t the natural font of testosterone that I am you might really feel an emotional connection. Of course, this being a Disney movie (sorry, I meant Dixar) they had to shoehorn in yet another princess, but overall I enjoyed the hell out of this film.
Should you see it? If you have kids then absolutely. If you liked Toy Story then I think this will appeal to you as well. Date movie? Absofreakinglutely. This could possibly be the best date movie of the entire year. I was having drinks with a girl before going to this thing and now I’m kicking myself for not asking her along, but it was a first time meeting deal and you can never tell what the best move on that is. Also, she said she doesn’t see a lot of movies (Incidentally, she is pretty spectacular. I sincerely hope to see her again. Of course, if it doesn’t work out I’m sure my next rom-com review will be that much more sour and bitter). Bathroom break? I don’t really know. Each scene is really cool in its own way, and are all kind of integral to the story. It’s only 101 minutes, so I would say hold it. If you really can’t I think the bar scene in the Tapper video game could be missed. I wouldn’t miss it however.
Thanks for reading. Skyfall review tomorrow for sure. I can’t tell if I’m excited or dreading it. Follow me on Twitter @NerdKungFu. Feel free to post any comments on this film or my review here. If you have an off topic question or suggestion feel free to email me at [email protected]. Have a great day. Talk to you soon.
Dave
Seven Pychopaths Review
A fun movie, filled with dark humor, quirky characters, and misogamy.
I am not really a fan of misogamy, but almost every other aspect of this movie kind of rocked from me. 
Weird story, dangerous, psychotic characters, and some of my favorite actors, including the great Christopher Walken (Fear the Walken image courtesy of the Funny T Shirt category). The misogamy takes the form of every female character having less than three minutes on screen and most of them dying in brutal ways, but I don’t honestly think that was the filmmakers intention.
Oh, on a less generous day I might say the story wandered back and forth a bit and kind of lacked focus, but a movie called Seven Psychopaths that is about seven psychopaths can be forgiven for dropping story in favor of more character development. The characters are all laid out and presented very well, with what I consider enough time spent on each to give the audience an understanding of their individual nuances. This film is definitely a character study, with each of the seven being different shades of guys you never want to ever mess with. While I am of course a Walken fan I have to give mass recognition to Woody Harrelson as the scariest nut job since Natural Born Killers.
The story is of Marty (Colin Farrell-Total Recall, In Bruges, Fright Night), a struggling (sort of. He sure has a nice apartment and hot girlfriend for a struggling writer. Most of the struggling writers I knew in LA were lucky if they had a clean dumper to sleep in) writer who is working on writing a script about seven psychopaths and killing his liver with alcohol. He is friends with one psychopaths Billy (Sam Rockwell-Iron Man 2, Napoleon Dynomite, Cowboys and Aliens) who makes a living by kidnapping dogs and then returning them once a reward is posted. He is assisted by Hans (Christopher Walken-True Romance, Joe Dirt, Things to do in Denver when you are Dead), who’s wife is in the hospital. They both have secrets that are revealed during the film, and in order to help Marty Billy starts telling him stories about psychopaths he has met or heard of, including the Jack of Diamonds killer who only kills mafia guys.
Billy and Hans make the mistake of kidnapping a dog belonging to local gang kingpin Charlie (Woody Harrelson-Friends with Benefits, Zombieland, No Country for Old Men), who is a violent sociopath who cares for not a thing in the world except his precious dog. He starts on a rampage across LA to find his dog. Other characters are introduced, including some convoluted back and side stories. The fourth wall gets beaten on pretty heavily (it is strongly implied that the script Marty is working on is actually the script for the movie we are watching, and some of the characters may or may not have been fictional from the protagonists point of view. At one point Hans even says “You don’t know how to write female characters” in reference to all the misogamy) but in a good way. I don’t want to get too much deeper into this film as it is full of potential spoilers.
The stars. I love a movie that treats characters as the reason for existing, rather than the necessary horses needed to pull the film plow. Two stars. Most of the characters were each in their own way intriguing and interesting. One star. Woody Harrelson was particularly good. One star. So was Christopher Walken. One star. Filming was admirable, and pacing quite good. One star. Dark humor is always fun for me, and really lacking in movies these days. One star. In general a good, fun movie. Two stars. Total: nine stars.
The black holes. The story kind of lacked focus. It wandered from set piece vignette to set piece vignette, and we got to the third act without really understanding a lot of the motivation behind it. Consequently the ending was kind of flaccid. One black hole. There was one character who did not add a lot from the film and was really like watching a mini film outside of the story. He later came to play an expository role towards the end but honestly that could have been done with any of the characters involved in the story. One black hole. I’ll give one for the misogamy just because I have enough friends who will give me crap if I don’t. I don’t think it was a critical element of the film but once I notice it I kept coming back to it. One black hole. Total: three black holes.
A grand total of six stars, a very good score for me. Should you see it? Yes, in my opinion. I think most people will find at least one character that holds interest. If you like psychology, good drama, and plot twists for sure. If all you want is guns and explosions this film is actually kind of light in those. Date movie? Maybe. I’m not really sure how this one would play out. Could go either way, and therefore I would not recommend it based on the principle of “if it doesn’t help your cause, get rid of it”. However, if your date is into characters she might enjoy it. Bathroom break? At 110 minutes you might need one, but I am struggling to figure out where to do it. Maybe the scene where Marty, Billy, and Hans are all camping out in the desert. You definitely don’t want to miss any of the Charlie scenes.
Thanks for reading. Follow me on Twitter @Nerdkungfu. Post any comments on this film or my review here, and if you have any off topic questions or suggestion feel free to email me at [email protected]. Lots more to see this week, so hopefully I’ll have something for you soon.
By the way, I got a note from casting director looking to do a reality TV show where they take low manliness men and send them to Man Camp or something. It has been a while since I did any of my Nerd Dating Advice columns but I can highly recommend machismo as a means of attracting women. If you or someone you know struggles with confidence, can’t seem to talk sports, likes drinks with fruit and umbrellas, and is just a little too much in touch with his feminine side consider it. I would go in myself but I’m afraid all my massive machismo in that room might spontaneously form cold fusion and cause a quantum singularity that would rip our planet apart, so for the sake of the human race will refrain. However, it seems like it could be fun and who knows? Maybe it will change your life or at least get you some notoriety you can exploit to hook up with reality TV groupies.
Talk to you all soon.
Dave
Looper Review
Sooper.
I feel like I have somehow shifted into an alternative Bizarro world where the majority of movies are actually decent and not the intellectual equivalent of blunt trauma to the head. This is the third movie in a row I have watched and thoroughly enjoyed. It actually scares me, in the sense that I feel like we are somehow headed to cinema Armageddon, where the all time worst movie in the history of the world will be released and completely destroy society.
Of course, Jack and Jill has already been released and we survived that, so how bad could it be?
Anyway, Looper. I have said many times that time travel as a plot device is the potty training seat of movie making: there to help a toddler to not soil him or herself and learn to use a toilet like an adult. Whenever a fully grown adult wants to use the training seat it is pathetic and creepy. However, I am going to amend that statement and say that while time travel as a plot device is weak, time travel as a main storyline can be good as long as it is treated properly.
Oh, this film suffers from any of the normal time travel bugaboos. If you think too much about it the paradoxes will hurt your brain, and the fundamental Laws of Thermodynamics are bent over a pinball machine and raped. However, if time travel were feasible then the way it was treated in this film could potentially work without straining your suspension of disbelief to badly (unlike MIB3). It should be obvious to any reader of science fiction that the writer of this film subscribes to the “flowing river of time” theory of time travel rather than the “butterfly effect” theory. In other words, the flow of time has the means and inclination to correct itself and more or less remain on track when hit with minor events but a strong enough event (killing a man in the past, inventing something from the future, etc) will cause the flow of time to completely shift over into something new. Changes are shown for individuals, but the major events and even the individuals are not really affected. This really is the only way to approach a movie like this, although in truth I think the butterfly effect has a lot more credibility (dinosaur image courtesy of the Funny T Shirt category).
However, if you can buy into time travel and are happy with it than this movie is an exceptionally well made and entertaining film. Acting was great from both Bruce Willis and Joseph Gordon-Levitt, story was well thought out and complicated enough to hold your attention without being brain strainingly convoluted, and the action was both cool and believable. Overall a great film. Just don’t let your mind wander down the dark paths towards annoying questions like “Why did they need to transport the victims back in time live? Couldn’t they have just transported a corpse? Why couldn’t they have transported them into the heart of an active volcano, or the bottom of the ocean, or the earths core?” Also it wouldn’t be a science fiction movie review from me if I did not point out how bad the science really is. The main issue I spotted here was the idea of being able to send someone back in time yet have them land on the planet Earth at all. There is no known central point in the galaxy and everything’s movement is all based on relative positioning. If you try to send someone back in time 70 years our planet will have traveled billions, if not trillions of miles in that time period and your guy should be on the other side of the universe (which would actually neatly solve your problem with regards to getting rid of a body for you).
I told myself I wouldn’t do this, but since I have started I can’t help but point out another major plot flaw here. If they can send a guy back in time why would they use the machine just for getting rid of inconvenient people? Why not send a guy back to win the lottery six times in a row and start a massive business empire based on futuristic technology? If you timed it to arrive the day after you were born you could make sure your youthful self lived a massive life of luxury and have things good forever.
Anyway, the story. Joe (Joseph Gordon-Levitt-Inception, 50/50, the Dark Knight Rises) is a Looper, a hit man in a dystopic near future who’s job is to wait at predetermined points for victims from 30 years further to appear and execute them. He and his friends live lives of luxury but are called Loopers because at some point at the end of 30 years they will have to execute themselves to avoid being caught time traveling (I know, I know. It is a less annoying concept when you see the film). Joe’s friend Seth (Paul Dano-There Will be Blood, Knight and Day, Little Miss Sunshine) let’s his future self get away and gets to demonstrate what happens when someone doesn’t close the loop. Joe ends up meeting his future self Older Joe (Bruce Willis-Die Hard, Fifth Element, Pulp Fiction) who manages to get away from him. Now it is a race to catch and kill his future self before the guy in charge catches him and starts cutting off body parts in order to make Older Joe come back in. Older Joe has his own agenda relating to killing a crimelord as a young child before he can become he terror of the future.
Honestly, I don’t want to get too much deeper into the story as I think it really good and you should all see it. The chance of throwing out an accidental spoiler is high. There are some cool twists. There are some great gun fights. Nothing gets blown up in the name of stupid cinematic. The movie ends super cool.
The stars. The story was great. Two stars. Exceptionally well acted by both Willis and Gordon-Levitt. Two stars. Great supporting cast, including a couple hot girls and the main bad guy. There’s also one little kid (Pierce Gagnon-the Crazies, One Tree Hill, the Way Home) who nails it for a ten year old kid. Remarkable. One star. A slight flavoring of a little rated R nudity. One star. A lot of story is delivered with remarkable efficiency. We are treated to a complex story with a minimum of wasted scenes. One star. The ending is really cool. One star. The director managed to avoid the sci fi trap of over explaining everything. One star. Overall a really fun movie. Two stars. Total: eleven stars.
The black holes. While I enjoyed the hell out of this film, there are any number of what I might on a crappier day call massive time travel related plot holes. One black hole. They movie kept showing the police doing…something? I couldn’t figure out if they were working for the bad guy or working against him. One black hole. Total: two black holes.
A grand total of nine stars, and yet another recommendation that you go see this film. I really had fun with it, and I think you will too. Date movie? Maybe. The romance was a little tertiary, but both young and old Joe is what women tell me is hot so I guess it might get your date in the right mood. Of course if you compare unfavorable this could bite you on the ass. Bathroom break? The movie is pretty good in it’s entity, but if you have to go I would say the scene where young Joe wakes up chained to a cot in the barn of the hot chicks farm. Not a lot going on there that you can’t pick up later on.
Thanks for reading. Sorry I haven’t been writing all weekend, but I did a really crummy event (somehow the organizers thought doubling the ticket price was the way to increase attendance). It was a huge waste of time and I lost money. I am a little bitter about it, which means every minute I spend folding and sorting the t-shirts from the show is another hot coal you know where. 
However, the one positive thing from the weekend is I got to spend some time with one of my favorite show celebs, the lovely Ms. Maxine Wasa. She has starred in a number of films most notably My Stepmother is an Alien and is now a scream queen, starring in any number of independent, cool horror films. She has also been recently cast in a biker reality show with mans man Chuck Zito. More importantly, however, she is cool and fun to talk to (not to mention very easy on the eyes). She asked me to mention that she will be participating in the Rock the Walk event in Los Angeles, a benefit concert for AIDS research. If you are going to be in LA next weekend be sure to stop by and check it out. If you see Max tell her I said hi.
Dave
Branded Move Review
The weirdness on this film goes to 11.
So does the pretentiousness, tonelessness, and overall lack of story. (Spinal Tap image comes from the Funny T Shirt category, by the way)
This film was really not what I expected. From the couple of trailers I saw and the one poster I thought I was going to see a remake of They Live with the aliens replaced by corporate automatons. Instead, this movie wheezes from one story tone to another like a broken Slinky struggling to make it down a flight of stairs.
I can honestly say I don’t know what kind of movie this is supposed to be. The ad blurb describe it as a sci fi action/drama/mystery set in a dystopic future but honestly you could see this more as a psychotic breakdown on the part of the main character. It shift gears frequently and plays like five different directors shot completely different films using the same actors and tried to edit them all into one incoherent mess. There is the evil powers controlling our minds through advertising (They Live), the rejection of materialism (Fight Club), the possible psychotic breakdown that just might be for real (Brazil), the evil supermind controlling things from across the world (any good James Bond), a weird unintentional spy movie sub plot (the Man Who Knew Too Little) and the religious/science fiction epiphany that changes everything (Phenomenon, mixed in with a little of the Gods are Crazy), all wrapped up with a bow made of old Simpsons episodes.
On the other hand, at least the title actually has something to do with the movie. The film is about the evils of marketing and brand recognition, and is titled Branded. Kudos. On the other other hand, the poster shows the main character with an axe in one hand and a gun in the other, sort of implying some kind of zombie apocalypse survival/horror story. However, I can tell you the axe plays a very minor part in the story and at no time does anyone use or carry a gun.
The story. Young Misha as a child gets struck by lightning sent down by a giant space cow (no joke) and is given super human marketing powers. As an adult Misha (Ed Stoppard-the Pianist, Joy Division (not the band, as far as I can tell), the Little Vampire) is a marketing genius in the capitalist wonderland of Moscow. He is responsible for bringing any number of major Western brands cleverly renamed in order to not get sued by the real companies. His boss (Jeffrey Tambor, if you can believe it. Arrested Development, There’s Something About Mary, the Hangover) treats him like crap and is also some kind of spy(?). Misha starts hooking up with the bosses niece (Leelee Sobieski-Joy Ride, the Glass House, Joan of Arc). Meanwhile cut to a Polynesian island where Max Von Sydow (Shutter Island, the Exorcist, Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close) is the reining King of Marketing. He has been approached by the fast food industry to help them regain lost market share due to everyone not wanting to eat garbage anymore.
He cooks up a scheme to redefine the nature of beauty, making fat the new gorgeous. He creates an extreme makeover show in Russia where a fat girl is going to be surgically altered into a skinny hotty. Misha and Abby (the niece and love interest) produce the show, but when the girl goes into a coma a huge backlash hits them both while accomplishing Max’s goal. Abby goes back to America while Misha moves out to the countryside to be a shepherd.
If this description seems long it’s because that’s how the story progresses. While in the country Misha has a vision and does a ritual sacrifice of a cow (that’s where the axe comes in) and gains the powers to see giant balloon art creatures coming out of people. Abby is back and brings him to Moscow, where he discovers the animals are the actual souls of brands. Big ones hang out at the stores selling the stuff while little ones manifest themselves in humans as desire to eat the burger or buy the computer or whatever. He now sees all marketing as evil and figures out how to destroy them by training the creatures through (mostly illegal) advertizing campaigns. Eventually he causes a rebellion against all advertizing and it is all outlawed.
Honestly, that’s the abridged version. There must have been 60 minutes of sub plot and pointless character development leading up to the first sign of alien creatures. The movie drags on and on, but what is weird is while you are never really engaged you are also never really bored. I found myself sitting in my seat with an interest in what the writer was going to cook up. There were at least three different points that the movie could have reasonably ended but instead opted to continue for another 10 minutes and each time I found myself wondering what was going to happen next.
The stars. I will give massive props for actually coming out with an original movie that does not conform to one of the Hollywood safe genres (although they cheesed out the ending IMO). Three stars. I kind of liked Misha’s character at times. One star. The cynical Max Von Sydow was great. One star. In spite of all the issues, once you start watching it you are OK to sit in your seat for the entire 105 minutes. One stars. Total: six stars.
The black holes. The movie cries out for a specific tone. Two black holes. Paced like watching old people have intercourse while driving. One black hole. The overall message was painfully prosaic. Advertizing is bad? Sounds like a paper written by a first year sociology major. Two black holes. A number of completely pointless sub plots that did nothing but pad out the run time. Also the entire Max Von Sydow vignette looked and sounded like an entirely different movie. One black hole. The ending was complete wishful thinking. One black hole. Rated R for no apparent reason. I found out that your movie can get an R rating if it has too much advertizing in it, which is ironic. However, once you know that is going to happen for the love of keeping my interest go back and shoot some nudity. One black hole. Acting shifted gears as much as the tone of the film. One black hole. There was a painful voice over monologue that showed up to periodically pull you out of the movie immersion that later turned out to be the only real laugh in the film. One black hole. At the end of the film I walked out with a massive “WTF?” headache. One black hole. Total: eleven black holes.
A grand total of five black holes. Honestly, there isn’t a lot here to pull you into the theater. However, I find myself secretly loving this film for what it represents: a chance to make a low budget artsy film and have it look about as good as any high budget film. Sure, the CGI looked like a balloon artist dropped too much acid, but it was acceptable (at least as good as the demon from the end of the Season of the Witch). Camera work and editing was also acceptable. I couldn’t find out what the budget was on this film (searching for “Branded” and “Budget” will get you so much marketing garbage on Google your CPU will melt down. Some days I hate the Interlink) but it couldn’t have even been a million. With this film I see the potential for guys with a great idea, a couple decent cameras, and some good editing software to make an awesome movie that could be shown on the same screen as the Avengers. As Hollywood keeps pumping out the same remake garbage like a sewer pipe running in reverse I foresee a future wherein talented writers and directors in Boise produce the next Citizen Kane.
Is it worth seeing at all? I supposed, if you like surrealism and don’t mind grinding through excess junk. If you are so inclined see it in a theater as some of the CGI would look lame on a smaller screen. Also, let’s do what we can to support independent filmmakers. Date movie? Not unless you are trying to get her to stop calling you. Bathroom break? Pretty much anywhere, but if you want a specific time close to the middle of the movie I would say the scene that starts off with Abby finding Misha as a shepherd is a great place to drop a deuce, flirt with the concession girl, and stick your head in another theater to watch five minutes of a different film.
Thanks for reading. Lot’s of stuff coming out this weekend. I am definitely going to see End of Watch and Judge Dredd so look for those reviews soon. Follow me on Twitter @Nerdkungfu. If you have comments on this film or review feel free to post them here. If you have off topic questions or suggestions feel free to email me at [email protected]. Talk to you soon.
Dave
Lawless Movie Review
Pretty damned good.
I consider it a waste of potential when a movie with a title so easy to twist into funny jokes like “pointless” or “scriptless” makes the cardinal sin of being fairly decent. It’s like having the most fertile soil on the planet but all you have to plant are lima beans.
Ironically, one of the few black holes I am about to award to this movie has to do with the title of the film. There is an ugly trend going on these days in movie titles where the title has little to nothing to do with the actual content of the film. Usually it falls into the “one word” title of the film. Brave wasn’t really about bravery or being brave, Abduction had nothing to do with abduction (or movie making apparently), and Drive actually had little to do with driving. Not to say the movies didn’t feature bravery or driving (there was no actual abducting in Abduction. It still grinds my gears) but in no way was the title describing a critical plot point.
So it is with Lawless. Technically the main characters are lawbreakers, but they seem to do so with the active consent of the local law enforcement. They are not rampaging hooligans with complete disregard for society and order, which is what the title had me thinking the movie was going to be. In their own way they were decent humans with a respect for their community who happened to think prohibition was a dumb law. I think this is another example of movie making by committee. No one could think of a good title for this project and Lawless was at the top of a list of 25 suggestions from the assorted producers and crew.
Not to say this movie sucked. Like the vast majority of movies it had its flaws, but the story was solid and most of the acting at least respectible. Even Shia LaBeouf (Transformers) managed to not annoy me and seemed appropriate for his role, but since his role was that of a wimpy loser with delusions of grandeur and a less generous review might describe him with exactly those words in all his roles that might just be a case of really good (or really lucky) casting. Tom Hardy (Warrior, Layer Cake, Batman Rises, Inception) was really amazing and has cemented himself into the pole position of actors I will always try to see regardless of the movie genre. Everyone else delivered a very respectable job, especially Guy Pearce (Hurt Locker, LA Confidential, Memento) as the fastidious villain.
The only real story issue comes from the denouement. The first 85 minutes come across as an awesome Godfather/There Will Be Blood crime syndicate long story, which seemed appropriate for the level of quality acting and direction. Then it kind of falls apart in the last 30 minutes and reforms itself into Red Dawn/Commando. Again, not in a bad way. It just shifted gears headed into Act III and left me with a completely different taste as I looked for my car.
The movie is set in the 30’s and details the adventures of the infamous Bondurant boys, real life bootleggers in Franklin County Virginia. The leader is Forest (Tom Hardy), who manages to communicate more meaning and emotion in a grunt and three words of hillbilly accent than most actors can with an extended soliloquy. The middle brother is Howard (Jason Clarke-Public Enemies, Death Race, Rabbit-Proof Fence), a psychotic hot head who acts at the gangs enforcer. The youngest brother is Jack (Shia LeBeouf), who is the wimpy sidekick who dreams of being bigger and is also the narrator and technically the protagonist. The three brothers believe they are indestructible and more or less prove it throughout the movie. They are doing fine as moonshiners until a new lawman (Guy Pearce) appears and is trying to gouge them for more money. (Drink image courtesy of the Funny T-Shirt category)
That’s almost the entirety of the story. If you have seen There Will Be Blood you can pretty much figure out what is going on. Jack is in love with a preachers’ daughter (Mia Wasikowska-Alice in Wonderland, Jayne Eyre, the Kids are All Right) and has a nice sub plot that manages to enhance the main story without hijacking it. A city girl from Chicago (Jessica Chastain-Tree of Life, the Help, Take Shelter) shows up and gets a job at the Bondurant gas station and has a romance with Forest. The story progresses in a series of developmental vignettes until the ending, when it all comes crashing together. Guys get shot, throats cut, and otherwise killed. After a great movie I found the ending to be more than a little flaccid.
The stars. Great, interesting story. Two stars. Excellent acting all around, with special props to Tom Hardy. Two stars. Based on real life American characters. One star. Some entirely gratuitous, unnecessary, and highly appreciated nudity including Jessica Chastain (after Tree of Life I figure she owes me something). Finally a director who gets that if you are going to eat an R rating anyway you might as well go to the hilt. One star. The atmosphere had a very strong 30’s feel to it, and the camera work and direction spot on. One star. Overall a very entertaining movie. Two stars. Total: nine stars.
The black holes. The whole title thing I started off this blog bitching about. One black hole. The shifting of story tone towards the end. One black hole. Pacing seemed a little erratic. Fast-slow-fast-slow. One black hole. I found the ending to be weak. One black hole. Total: four black holes.
A grand total of five stars and my recommendation that you go see this film. If you like crime and/or Americana this will really work for you. There is nothing in the camera work that demands a large screen, but if you like to see good movies do well support it by going to a theater. You won’t miss much doing it at home however. Date movie? I’m going to say sure, but not a first or second date. The violence is not so horrible that it will turn her off, and she might really appreciate the acting. However, it won’t ecourage her to like you more. I see this as a great compromise movie. It has elements both of you should like. That being said try to see it after you have actually formed some kind of attachment to her. Bathroom break? Nothing really stands out, to be honest. If I had to pick a scene you could live without I would say when Jack and Cricket take off in the truck by themselves to deliver moonshine. The driving scene has a little bit of interesting stuff but nothing that you will need to appreciate the film.
Thanks for reading. I’ll try to see Possession tonight and review it tomorrow. Looks like a creepy one. Follow me on Twitter @Nerdkungfu. If you have comments or thoughts on this review or movie feel free to post them here. If you have off topic questions or suggestions feel free to email me at [email protected]. Talk to you soon.
Dave
Total Recall Review
Kind of worth recalling.
Total Recall does something I haven’t really seen a remake do yet: in spite of being pretty much the same story as the Schwarzenegger 1990 film (with some fairly big differences that don’t really have any bearing on the story), with a lot of the scenes shot almost identical in form and structure, and with exactly the same betrayals and major plot points, it manages to deliver an entirely different feeling and yet still enjoyable film experience.
It all boils down to style. Arnold is the king of camp, over the top action (just look at his clips from from the upcoming Expendables 2) and left an indelible comic mark all over the film. The writers of the original Total Recall seemed to have understood this and wrote to his strengths. The remake lacks all that campy humor (and while there is humor to be had here it is almost all exclusively call backs to the 1990 film) but makes up for more action and to be honest a more compelling and believable protagonist. What does that mean in terms of your viewing pleasure? If you want camp go rewatch 1990. If you are happy with a decent action film (albeit a little shallow) than you will enjoy this film.
Of course, like most movies that come out these days this film is rife with problems, and being a bitter soul I will enjoy listing them in detail. For one thing the director (Len Wiseman-the entire Underworld series) must have been blackmailed by the art director and CGI company because every shot is packed full of everything possible in a futuristic movie to the point of absolute distraction. It’s like if Godzilla ate an entire flea market and then vomited it all over the sets from Bladerunner. There is so many people, dystopic futuristic slums, and gigantic moving Hellraiser puzzle boxes that I often found myself trying to discern the character or action point I was supposed to be paying attention to. This problem was aggravated by the directors obvious love of thin, waifish brunette females (just like in another series he has done) as the evil bitch and helpful sidekick looked like sisters and were nigh impossible to tell apart, especially when they were wearing almost the same outfits. A red scarf or green t-shirt might have gone a long way.
I can also say that while was impressed by Colin Farrell (Phone Booth, Alexander, the New World) as Douglas Quaid/Houser, I felt most of the supporting characters were a little tepid and two dimensional. I don’t think this was a reflection on the acting so much as mediocre writing. Even the great Bryan Cranston (Drive, Breaking Bad, Red Tails) as President Cohaagan was cartoonishly over the top. He would have fit right in with the Arnold version, but felt disjointed and out of place here.
Finally, this film still suffers from the same issues that plagued the 1990 version in that the whole movie is based around an evil plot so complex and prone to miserable failure that it makes calculating the square root of -1 and the last digit of pi look simply by comparison. What if one of the 14,000,000 guys trying to kill the main guy accidentally succeeded? Was the final goal such a huge priority for the organization that they risked the life and sanity of the greatest operatives of all time, not to mention dedicating what must have been thousands of man hours to accomplish it? Plus a bunch of security guys who got scragged. Aren’t there like 83 less dangerous, complicated, or expensive ways to accomplish the goal? While the camp humor element behind the 1990 version masked this issue nicely, this movies secret desire to take itself seriously makes these questions much more prevalent and distracting. (Get Real image courtesy of the Funny T Shirt category)
The story. This is another film where I can say rent the original and you more or less know it. There are a few spoilers coming when I talk about the story differences so SPOILER ALERT. Substitute the chemically desolate surface of the Australia for Mars. Great Britain is now Earth, and instead of a rocket to Mars there is now a super subway called The Fall that goes through the center of the Earth (I’m not going to black hole them for this, but the science behind this is pretty stupid. The core of the Earth is estimated to be 9,800 degrees Fahrenheit, and that plus the pressure would crush any attempt to do what they did here. Unless they have some kind of force field (and there was no other evidence of force fields anywhere else in the film) I sincerely doubt they would have any material on the planet that would survive this. On the other hand, if they did have some kind of force field they would have had pretty much unlimited power in the form of geothermal energy). Great Britain is the elite of modern society, and the unwashed masses all live in Australia. Other than that the movie pretty much plays out exactly the same. Douglas Quaid is a lowly factory worker who goes to Rekall and has a false memory of being a spy implanted. The process awakens his real memory of being a spy. His life is a huge fabrication, his wife spends most of the movie trying to kill him, and they even repeat the scene where his former best friend tries to convince him that the whole thing is just a figment of his fractured mind.
The stars. If you take this film as a stand alone film and don’t get wrapped up in comparing it to the original it’s actually pretty fun. Two stars. I liked Colin Farrell as Douglas Quaid. One star. I always like Bill Nighy (Harry Potter and the Deadly Hollows Pt 1, The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel, Hot Fuzz) and Bryan Cranston is fun to watch even when I find his character kind of dumb. One star. The two females (Kate Beckensale-Underworld, Contraband, the Aviator and Jessica Biel-the Texas Chainsaw Massacre, 7th Heaven, the Illusionist) were in a serious contest to see which was easier on the eyes (Jessica Biel won in my opinion, but it was a close thing). Lots of inside call backs to the original Total Recall, including an extremely brief but highly appreciated appearance of the three breasted whore. One star. I happen to like dystopic future visions. It much more looks like what I think we will be living in. One star. The battle droids, while obviously shoved into the film in order to maintain the PG13 rating, were all pretty cool. One star. Pacing was actually really good and tight. One star. Total: nine stars.
The black holes. The jumbled up nature of the scenes and the similarity of some of the characters made a lot of the action actually hard to follow. A lot of the camera work looked like it was done just to be impressive without actually having a specific point it was trying to deliver. One black hole. This film labored under the curse of PG13 in a big way. Robots were all horrible dismembered while humans had the gentle grace to die bloodlessly from bullet impacts the left no passage. One black hole. While Douglas Quaid was pretty cool, a lot of the other characters were little more than talking plot devices. One black hole. The complexity of the evil plot was the one part that did not survive the transition from 1990 to 2012. One black hole. One of the coolest things about the 1990 film is they really left the question of the actual reality up in the air, and while they tried to do that here in the beginning there was a scene that kind of hurt that idea a lot. One black hole. Total: five black holes.
A grand total of four stars. Not bad, and to be honest much more than I expected from a classic movie remake. If you are a fan of sci fi action I can definitely recommend this one for you, and the screen is so jumbled up I think you need a large screen just to sort out what is going on. It looks like they did not bother with 3D, which I think was the right move. Just too much going on for you to track. Date movie? Probably not. Very geeky, very guy movie with the added problem of showing her a story where the entire romance is a false construct based on massive lies. Not exactly the thing to put her in an amorous mood. Bathroom break? I am having a hard time with this. The pacing of this film kind of makes it hard to identify a less worthwhile portion. There is some filler from the first act but you shouldn’t need the bathroom there. I guess if you have seen the 1990 version you could skip the scene where the protagonists best friend tries to convince him the whole thing is a mental fabrication. It plays out pretty much exactly like it did with Arnold.
Thanks for reading. I apologize for not seeing Step Up Revolution on Tuesday and writing a really bitter review for it, but I just couldn’t motivate myself to get out of the house for that. I will try to see it or something else this weekend. I have the big Star Trek show coming up next week and am kind of scrambling to get that done, but once that is complete I will focus on more movie reviews. Follow me on Twitter @Nerdkungfu. If you have a comment on this movie or review feel free to leave it here. If you have an off topic question or suggestion feel free to email me at [email protected]. Talk to you soon.
Dave
