From Paris with Love

OPENING: 02/05/2010

STUDIO: Lionsgate

RUN TIME: 92 min

ACCOMPLICES:
Trailer, Official Site

The Charge
Two agents. One city. No merci.

Opening Statement
Following up the surprise box office success of the Liam Neeson vehicle Taken, director Pierre Morel and producer Luc Besson return with the John Travolta actioner From Paris with Love. Alas, it ranks as one of the lesser achievements of almost everyone involved.

Facts of the Case
James Reece (Jonathan Rhys Meyers, Match Point) is an intelligent and talented employee of the US Ambassador to France. However, he would love nothing more than to receive a promotion to Special Ops. One day, he finally gets his chance. If he can spend a day with top-dog CIA Agent Charlie Wax (John Travolta, Get Shorty) and earn Wax’s approval, he’ll move up in the ranks. That task proves to be a lot more challenging than Reece initially expected, as he’s forced into one violent and deadly situation after another by the psychotic-yet-masterful Wax. Will he survive the day?

The Evidence
From Paris with Love is cinematic junk food. Not that there’s anything wrong with that; I enjoy a bit of cheese every now and then. However, this experience offers so little in the way of entertainment all that’s left to contemplate is the film’s sheer lack of brains. Borrowing the rampant xenophobia of Taken and melding it with the plot of Training Day (minus the realization that the corrupt, crazy, violent guy needs to be taken down), it somehow manages to avoid the positive qualities of both films.

I can only wonder what inspires Pierre Morel to make films in which vengeful Americans plow down nameless victims of every other race and ethnicity without being subjected to any form of guilt or criticism. I was able to tolerate this in Taken, as Liam Neeson’s intensely focused performance overwhelmed any concerns of political correctness (read: if you kidnap Liam Neeson’s daughter, you gonna die). In From Paris with Love, the killings don’t seem motivated by righteous rage so much as a general love of making foreigner’s heads explode. There’s definitely an icky aftertaste, as this "all foreigners are evil… no, seriously, EVERY SINGLE ONE," mentality is pushed so far the film nearly enters the realm of comedy. Nearly.

Morel’s film might have actually reached that minor goal, if it had taken a cue from Travolta’s performance. The actor treats this material precisely as it should be treated: as a ridiculous piece of rubbish that provides a perfectly good opportunity to overact without consequence. Travolta turns his ham-o-meter up to 11 and lets loose, doing an even wilder version of the hyper-acting he did in The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3. It’s not exactly his best work, but it’s certainly entertaining to watch (particularly when Travolta cheerfully nods at Pulp Fiction with his hearty declaration of love for the Royale with Cheese).

The rest of the film: not so entertaining. Every other element of From Paris with Love takes itself so seriously. This becomes truly agonizing at times; never moreso than a sequence near the end which attempts to create an emotional moment, but instead displays the silliest scene I’ve witnessed since that bit in Echelon Conspiracy where Shane West shuts down an evil computer by passionately reading portions of the U.S. Constitution. The action here is typical and tiresome, save for a mildly inventive moment when Rhys Meyers attempts to avoid a never-ending series of falling bodies as he follows Wax up a spiral staircase.

Closing Statement
While From Paris with Love never quite manages to become "I-want-to-gouge-my-eyes-out" unwatchable, it’s recycled at best and repugnant at worst. If you’re just curious to see Travolta at his absolutely goofiest, consider waiting until the movie turns up on cable rather than wasting your hard-earned money on a theater ticket.

The Verdict
4/10

The Book Of Eli

OPENING: 01/15/2010

STUDIO: Warner Bros.

RUN TIME: 118 min

ACCOMPLICES:
Trailer, Official Site

The Charge
Some will kill to have it. He will kill to protect it.

Opening Statement
The Book of Eli delivers an excellent entry into the post-apocalyptic genre, with amazing action and great performances.

Facts of the Case
In a post-apocalyptic America, Eli (Denzel Washington, The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3 is following a divine calling to deliver a sacred book to an unknown destination. During his 30 year journey, he has protected the book against thieves, murderers, and gangs, knowing it has the power to save civilization from itself.

The Evidence
In the span of a year, at least three apocalyptic films have been released to theaters. 2012 gave us the mindless summer blockbuster we sometimes need for a laugh. The Road presented a bleak, post-apocalyptic America, leaving us depressed. But The Book Of Eli offers us hope in a world of emptiness.

Set 30 years after a war termed the "Big Flash," America is a wasteland of rubble, much the crumbling America we see in The Road. That film was presented in mostly grays and blues, while The Book Of Eli was processed using a palette of sepia tones. This could be related to the season presented in each film, but probably more so with the feeling their directors were trying to convey. The father and son in The Road were trying to reach a place the father knew might not bring a better future. Eli, on the other hand, is following a path bigger than himself, providing an internal peace throughout the journey, and a tone for the picture. Although the world is rampant with crime, Eli is dead set on getting the book where it needs to be, by following direction from a higher power.

Depending on the film, I find Denzel Washington’s acting to be hit or miss. He severely overacted in Training Day, but gave a great performance in American Gangster. Quiet and subdued, Washington does an excellent job with Eli, playing the part of a peaceful, yet dangerous man with perfect reservation, only showing intense emotion when the scene calls for it.

One of the better actors of his generation, Gary Oldman plays the antagonist, Carnegie, in his usual superb fashion. He nails the role of ruthless man with sympathy for no one who will stop at nothing to find the book. Knowing it contains much power, Carnegie’s goal is to use the book as a tool for getting the masses to follow him. Oldman gives us a man who is not as confident as his followers might think, but is powerful because he’s smarter than those who follow him. When Carnegie meets our hero (a man who cannot be persuaded), he is weakened by realizing that only through force can he obtain what he needs from Eli.

Based on a graphic novel, The Book of Eli was directed by the Hughes Brothers (Menace II Society, Dead Presidents). I was glad to see they chose to present fight sequences in real time and not with a constant barrage of slow motion shots. Fights are quick, intense and to the point. Slow motion shots can be very effective, but when the majority of a scene is built using those shots, the effect wears off quickly. Limbs are removed so quickly by Eli’s two foot knife it will take a second viewing to catch all the lightning fast strikes (including several decapitations).

The Hughes Brothers present a character in Eli whose life has a mission. It doesn’t take long until we figure out what the book is, and see Eli as something more than human. There is a clear peace to him and others see it as well. Any time Eli comes into contact with a male, they immediately sense something different about him and are angered that he obtains something they do not. Females, on the other hand, feel safe with him, as if for the first time in their lives. One scene depicts the rescue of Solara (Mila Kunis, Family Guy) from a gang whose only intent was rape. Afterwards, walking alongside Eli, she breaks down in tears because she feels unworthy being in the presence of such goodness. This was one of the most powerful scenes in the film, and no, I didn’t tear up. I just had something in my eye. The relationship between Solara and Eli is a stark contrast to the relationship depicted in The Road. Solara, cared for by Eli, is now living in freedom, whereas the boy lives in total fear, even while under the protection of his father.

The Book Of Eli’s most questionable aspect is the ending, which I definitely did not see coming. Without giving anything away, it will make you think through everything you just saw. Honestly, I’m not sure the ending worked because it made me wonder how plausible most of the previous scenes were. In the same way, my biggest grievance with The Road was the ending, which seemed inconsistent with the rest of the picture. In that film, director John Hillcoat presents a completely hopeless and fearful world, only to have kind people appear out of nowhere in the end. However, I sensed throughout The Book of Eli that we would receive some important revelation and my mind was trying to piece together what that might be. Unfortunately, the reveal wasn’t as grand or profound as I had imagined. Still, the twist did have a wow factor, and I guess that counts for something.

Closing Statement
The Book Of Eli may bother you if need the film to be totally believable, but like The Road, the performances and storyline are more than strong enough to warrant a positive ruling, even if the conclusion is clumsy or a little hard to swallow. In the end (pun intended), both are welcome additions to the post-apocalyptic genre.

The Verdict
8/10

The Girl on the Train

OPENING: Limited Release

STUDIO: Strand Releasing

RUN TIME: 105 min

ACCOMPLICES:
Trailer, Official Site

The Charge
A shocking story with one catch. It wasn’t true.

Opening Statement
The Girl on the Train is a dramatic French film that will keep patrons entertained for a little while. However, the manner in which writer/director André Téchiné (Wild Reeds) ties up his loose ends is so irresponsibly poor, most viewers will leave the theater with a feeling of disappointment.

Facts of the Case
Jeanne Fabre (Émilie Duquenne, Brotherhood of the Wolf) is a radiant, rollerblading redhead who has no job, but at the same doesn’t have a care in the world. She spends the majority of her days skating the streets of Paris, all the while telling her mother Louise (Catherine Deneuve, Persepolis) about imaginary job interviews she doesn’t go on. One day skating, she meets a wrestler named Franck (Nicolas Duvauchelle, Eager Bodies) who has dishonesty problems of his own to deal with. The two move in together, but Franck’s deceitfulness eventually comes to a boil, and is too much for Jeanne to shoulder. She takes out her frustration by concocting a phony tale about being the victim of an Anti-Semitic attack while riding on the metro, which captures the entire country’s attention. When Jeanne’s mother brings her former lover and lawyer Samuel Bleistein (Michel Blanc, The Favour, the Watch and the Very Big Fish) into the picture to try and get to the bottom of exactly what happened, things spiral out of control, and Jeanne struggles to find a way to make everything in her world cheerful and untroubled again.

The Evidence
Though The Girl on the Train will ultimately let a lot of people down once the credits hit the screen, fear not. There are some pretty good reasons to see this movie. For starters, Émilie Duquenne delivers a great performance as Jeanne, from her sunny, jovial personality in the beginning of the film, to her more closed, introverted character after she lies about her attack (not to mention how stupendous she looks the entire time!) Another noteworthy performance belongs to Catherine Deneuve, who plays a widow with a freeloading daughter exceptionally well, capturing all the emotions and feelings of a woman whose life hasn’t gone according to plan.

Another reason to head out and see this movie is your chance to see the beautiful city of Paris. Though the majority of the film is shot during the daytime, the City of Light is a spectacle to behold and really makes you compare and contrast what we have here in the United States. Aside from a couple of English-sung tracks that Jeanne listens to on her headphones, The Girl on the Train is entirely in French, though the subtitles won’t throw you off at all. The only time things get a little puzzling is during a Webcam/Instant Message chat between Jeanne and Franck (why are they IM-ing one another while using Webcam’s at the same time anyway?!) It’s difficult to determine which individual is saying what, but certainly not enough to not understand the plot.

One deliberate aspect audiences will not be bowled over by is the focus of the film, which is totally lacking and completely frustrating. André Téchiné spends the first half building up the relationship between Jeanne and Franck, making us wonder, "OK, where is this going to go?" only to end it rather quickly and start up an entirely new storyline zeroing in on Jeanne causing a countrywide maelstrom over her fictitious attack. Like before, Téchiné builds this storyline up to the final minutes of the movie, failing to resolve it well at all. The final result is completely unexciting, unmoving, and guaranteed to leave a lot of viewers scratching their heads.

This complete lack of a focus makes The Girl on the Train feel like it could be two different stories told about two completely different people. One girl has a relationship with a guy that doesn’t wind up working out, and another feels so love-starved she cuts her face open and tells the country she was attacked because of her suspected Jewish-heritage. I’m all for multiple storylines in movies, but seriously, these two come together in such a shallow way, it makes you wonder why anyone would even bother. When all is said and done, the loose ends are too much to stomach, and all the film’s potential is cancelled out by its gigantic letdowns.

Closing Statement
The Girl on the Train isn’t the worst film you can blow your money on, but if you’re looking for a more satisfying purchase, you’re better off hanging onto your cash and splurging it elsewhere.

The Verdict
6/10

Edge of Darkness

OPENING: 01/29/2009

STUDIO: Warner Bros.

RUN TIME: 117 min

ACCOMPLICES:
Trailer, Official Site

The Charge
Few escape justice. None escape vengeance.

Opening Statement
Mel Gibson hasn’t starred in a feature film since 2002, appearing in the war tale We Were Soldiers and M. Night Shyamalan’s alien invasion flick Signs. Since then, he’s been involved in one controversy after another, from the stir surrounding his ultra-violent The Passion of the Christ to the now infamous 2006 drunken, racist tirade. His return to acting world is accompanied by much personal baggage, which moviegoers may or may not be ready to dismiss. That being said, Mel’s new film Edge of Darkness deserves to be judged on its own merits, and in that sense it’s a respectable thriller boasting a solid lead performance.

Facts of the Case
Gibson plays Detective Thomas Craven, a member of the Boston Police Department, whose daughter Emma (Bojana Novakovic, Drag Me to Hell) comes home for a visit. Sadly, that visit is cut tragically short when Emma is gunned down in front of her father’s eyes during a drive-by shooting. The grief-stricken detective quickly determines to find out who is responsible, and begins an investigation which leads him into a dark and dangerous world of unethical politics and corporate conspiracy. Craven doesn’t know who killed his daughter, but he’s going to find out and they’re going to pay.


The Evidence
The plot may sound simple, and it is, but the film takes a somewhat different approach than you might expect. The trailers have attempted to portray Edge of Darkness as this year’s Taken — a surprise 2009 mega-hit — but it’s a much different sort of beast. Yes, this is a revenge thriller about a father attempting to hurt those who messed with his daughter, but the film is hardly a non-stop action fest. Instead, it’s a moody, slow-burning drama that gives its characters room to breathe and explore their feelings between the expected moments of punching and shooting.

The film is helmed by Martin Campbell, a director with an inconsistent career, capable of making terrific action flicks when he’s on his game. Edge of Darkness benefits from his knack for exciting sequences (there are several brief but tremendously effective moments of violence), but this is largely quieter territory. The film’s best moments are thoughtful scenes in which characters sit down and carefully explore the current scenario. Most have a tendency to speak in guarded code, hinting at much without ever really saying anything explicitly. Even Craven’s angry threats tend to be shrouded in metaphor; in one of the more iconic moments, a terse Gibson informs one character that, “You need to decide whether you’re hanging on the cross or banging in the nails.”

I’m particularly fond of the exchanges shared between Craven and Jedburgh (Ray Winstone, Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull). The latter plays one of those mysterious people with a knack for sneaking up behind you at the most unexpected moments. The details of what Jedburgh does and who he works for are somewhat non-specific, but we’re fairly certain that he and his employers are both dangerous. Jedburgh is not just a hired gun, but also a philosophical man and someone who appreciates the gravity of playing with the fate of other human beings. He may or may not be interested in killing Craven, but if he does he is not going to take that task lightly. There are two scenes in particular which add depth to the character: one in which we discover something about him that we didn’t know before, and another in which that discovery informs the most important decision he makes in the film.

Winstone’s superbly nuanced performance is perhaps the highlight of the film, acting-wise, but Gibson’s impressively weary turn isn’t far behind. Looking a little older and a lot more tired, Gibson’s acting is as good as it ever was, maybe better. His Boston accent sounded awkward in the trailers, but here it becomes fairly convincing. Grief and anger are two notes Gibson plays well, and this role offers him a potent mixture of both. Meanwhile, Danny Huston (X-Men Origins: Wolverine) continues to demonstrate his knack for playing sleazy villains, creating a character just begging to receive some nasty comeuppance.

I want to make note of Howard Shore’s score, which does a nice job of setting the grim, sad tone of the film and maintaining it throughout. This is subtly compelling stuff, with one terrific cue towards the end which underscores the violent climax as if it were a Shakespearean drama. It’s a bold choice that stands out sharply and might provoke laughter from some, but nearly inspired applause from yours truly.

Edge of Darkness is far from flawless. The plot is fairly conventional, and… well, frankly predictable. There are a handful of awkward moments which just don’t work as well as they ought to, and a scene where Mel discovers a piece of evidence that seems awfully contrived. I also have slightly mixed feelings about the somewhat touching but often hokey scenes in which Craven engages in hallucinatory conversations with his dead daughter.

Closing Statement
Problems aside, Edge of Darkness is an absorbing film with a refreshing amount of substance to go along with its more ordinary cinematic virtues. As for Mr. Gibson, as long as his work remains on this level, I’ll be happy to see him up on the big screen again.

The Verdict
7/10

Crazy Heart

OPENING: Limited Release

STUDIO: Fox Searchlight

RUN TIME: 112 min

ACCOMPLICES:
Trailer, Official Site

The Charge
The harder the life, the sweeter the song.

Opening Statement
Crazy Heart is a simple, straightforward story without a lot of surprises. It’s the sort of story we’ve seen before, but told in such a tender and thoughtful manner it somehow manages to completely transcend the conventions of its structure.

Facts of the Case
Jeff Bridges (The Big Lebowski) plays Bad Blake, a 57-year-old country singer whose glory days are far behind him. Once upon a time, Bad was a pretty big star, but alcoholism and poor decision-making have left him in a rough state. These days, he does what he can to get by, playing unimpressive venues like bars and bowling alleys. One day, a reporter named Jean Craddock (Maggie Gyllenhaal, Stranger Than Fiction) drops by Bad’s hotel room to conduct an interview. The two hit it off and Maggie ends up spending the night. She thinks it’s just a one-night stand, but Bad finds himself emotionally attached. He wants to get to know Maggie better, and spend time getting to know her 4-year-old son. Maggie likes Bad, but knows he’s a mess and might be beyond redemption. Meanwhile, Bad’s ultra-popular protege, Tommy Sweet (Colin Farrell, In Bruges), attempts to help his old mentor re-enter the music world.

The Evidence
Bad Blake may be a fictional character, but his story certainly has more than a ring of truth to it. Plenty of celebrities have been in Bad’s shoes. Once famous, they wasted opportunities in the spotlight and will take whatever they can to cover the rent and their addiction of choice. Bad is the sort of guy country music singers tend to sing about: his wife done left, he ain’t got many friends, just a beat-up truck and a near-empty bottle. There are more than a few echoes of The Wrestler’s "Randy the Ram" in Bad.

In that film, Mickey Rourke played a character which seemed a logical choice for the actor. To a degree, Randy was a variation on Rourke’s own life. In Crazy Heart, Jeff Bridges turns in a performance every bit as moving and convincing, though I imagine there’s very little of the real-life Bridges to be found in this character. I’m glad Jeff is finally getting some attention for his performance, because he has been a tremendously under-appreciated actor over the course of his career. Jeff has a way of fully inhabiting the characters he plays, and within the first few minutes of Crazy Heart we completely forget that he was Starman, The Dude, and Obadiah Stane. I stopped seeing the actor and started seeing Bad Blake. It’s not a flashy performance. Jeff doesn’t have any of those award-bait moments in which he shouts out an impassioned monologue. He just makes creating a fully-realized, lived-in character seem deceptively easy.

The screenplay, written by director Scott Cooper (based on the novel by Thomas Cobb), is similarly impressive in an understated way, quietly slipping in sincere and truthful dialogue. The lines are so natural and underplayed, it may take a while to realize just how truly magnificent they are. There’s a moment when Jean asks Bad what he wants to talk about in the interview. "I want to talk about how bad you make this room look," he sighs wearily. These exchanges were undoubtedly constructed with precision and care, but the ensemble makes all of them feel organic.

Speaking of which, praise deserves to be showered on the supporting cast. Maggie Gyllenhaal is one of the most reliably engaging actresses of her generation, nailing the complicated blend of protectiveness she feels for her son and affection she feels towards Bad. Her quiet moments with Bridges are some of the strongest scenes in the film. Robert Duvall (who starred in the very similar Tender Mercies back in 1983) is excellent as one of Bad’s few remaining friends, while Colin Farrell proves surprisingly convincing as a country megastar who has a very complicated relationship with Bad. The protege has eclipsed the mentor, and Farrell successfully captures the awkward sense of guilt that comes with it.

I’m not really a fan of country music, but the songs in Crazy Heart (written by T. Bone Burnett and Stephen Bruton) are nothing short of excellent. They’re as quietly profound as the screenplay, offering genuinely affecting lyrics and memorably bittersweet melodies. The music ebbs and flows through the film, wrapping itself around the story and deeply enriching it. I expect a higher percentage of the audience will sit through the credits than usual, just to hear some of these tunes again. Bridges and Farrell both perform their numbers and do a genuinely impressive job, vastly better than the majority of what’s passing for country music these days.

Closing Statement
Crazy Heart is one of the great films of 2009, a quiet, beautiful story featuring a genuinely remarkable performance and excellent music. If you fail to see it, you are robbing yourself of a tremendously rewarding experience. Highly recommended.

The Verdict
10/10

That Evening Sun

OPENING: Limited Release

STUDIO: Dogwood Ent.

RUN TIME: 110 min

ACCOMPLICES:
Trailer, Official Site

The Charge
I worked too hard. And too long. I ain’t going down without a fight.

Opening Statement
Director Scott Teems delivers is a powerful film with an Oscar worthy performance by Hal Holbrook. In fact, this could be the performance of Holbrook’s career.

Facts of the Case
Abner Meecham (Holbrook, Evening Shade) flees the nursing home and returns to his farm in Tennessee, only to find that his son has rented it to former enemy Lonzo Choat (Ray McKinnon, The Blind Side) and his family. Abner is determined to live in his house again, though Lonzo sees things differently. Now a burden to both his son and the tenants on his farm, Abner fights for the only thing he has left — his dignity.

The Evidence
First and foremost, it must be said that Hal Holbrook arguably gives his finest performance to date. This is saying a great deal for an 85 year old actor who appeared in such classics as All the President’s Men, Wall Street, and the delightfully chilling Creepshow. From the execution of dialogue to the subtle expressions on his wrinkled face, Holbrook gives a depth to Abner that few actors could have accomplished. He is a man struggling to find his value in society, a feeling many men of that age face. Does he have worth or is he simply a burden? In his seemingly unimportant life, this is a question Abner faces each day. Holbrook conveys Abner’s emotions naturally, without force or contrivance, and his timing is impeccable. It would seem this is a role Holbrook was meant to play, and the film is worth seeing simply for his performance.

As the film’s antagonist, Lonzo Choat, Ray McKinnon brings to life the epitome of a white trash neighbor, rubbing us wrong way even before we see his face. The way Lonzo drives up to the house in his noisy, rusted truck is enough to make us not like him. And because Lonzo is every bit as stubborn as Abner, every scene is boiling with conflict. McKinnon gives us a character we can’t help but hate. However, on some small level, I did feel pity for him. Lonzo is trash and he knows it. No matter how hard he wants to be something else, he is trapped, unable to overcome his own personality flaws.

This is a screenplay rich with symbolism and depth. Abner is fighting to keep his house, an externalization of his grander struggle for value in a world that has little use for the elderly. Lonzo’s fight is equally symbolic. By giving up the house, he would be admitting he is what people see him as — white trash. Neither character will give an inch to the other, as that would reflect on who they are.

Writer/Director Scott Teems gives us an exceptional feature-length directorial debut. He takes time with shots, exploring the nature of a man (Abner) simply trying to take in the life he has left. We see close-ups of everyday things in life, like flowers and hornets, from the viewpoint of a person who might not have much longer to see them. In an age where action films rarely take thirty seconds to breath, That Evening Sun is a welcome alternative. Ironically, the film was shot in a remarkable twenty-two days, something one would never suspect from such a leisurely film.

Closing Statement
With performances that are second to none, That Evening Sun is one of the better films I’ve seen this year. I highly recommend seeking out this indie gem.

The Verdict
9/10

Michael Jackson’s This Is It

OPENING: 10/28/2009

STUDIO: Columbia Pictures

RUN TIME: 111 min

ACCOMPLICES:
Trailer, Official Site

The Charge
Like You’ve Never Seen Him Before

Opening Statement
This is the unintentional swan song by Michael Jackson that showed his pure musical genius and left me wanting more.

Facts of the Case
This Is It is the rehearsal footage for what would have been Michael Jackson’s 2009 summer tour. Director Kenny Ortega constructs a vision of what the concert would have been like, were it not for Jackson’s untimely death in early 2009. The film starts with the process of auditioning the dancing team for the tour and quickly moves right into the music. The 111 minute run time takes us through a good portion of the songs that would have been played, everything from a Jackson 5 medley to twenty-five years of solo career hits.

The Evidence
Kenny Ortega gives us a rare and truly fascinating glimpse into a musical wonder, creating a spectacular concert event. His goal was clear and intentional: to show Michael Jackson working on his music. Hours upon hours of rehearsal footage were sifted through, to assemble a presentation of all the greats — “Thriller,” “Beat It,” “Jam,” and more — and witness the stage show surrounding each.

Nowhere else have we seen Michael Jackson working out vocal parts or choreographing routines to this extent, and I found his work ethic absolutely fascinating. Michael knew exactly what he wanted his music to look and sound like, as he had every measure envisioned in his mind, his ear completely tuned to everything going on with the band. If he wanted a cymbal hit at a certain point and didn’t get it, he would make sure to let the drummer know (in a loving way) what he needed.

This Is It does little delving into Michael’s personal life, as anyone with a TV knows the media circus that surrounded most of his life. The only glimpse is drawn from the way people act around him. It’s clear the producer and much of the talent realize they are working with a sensitive individual. Much attention is paid to the way Michael is addressed and treated, and most people are reserved so as not to upset him in any way. They also fully realize he is running the show and will eventually get everything how he wants it. Michael may have been a drama queen, but when anyone possesses such a valuable talent, he or she is allowed to be.

The film has several high points, one of which is watching Michael practice “Human Nature” a cappella. His voice was so pure and unique that those brief minutes show just how much control and understanding he had of his instrument. Michael knew exactly what his voice was capable of and how to use it flawlessly. Another high point revolves around the song “Thriller” and the extravagant 3D presentation the audience would have seen, with Ortega showing us the creation of a cemetery and zombie sequence that was to have played in the background. Michael understood concert experience was as important as the music, and this would have been amazing to see live.

Unfortunately, the low point of the film is “Earth Song,” a heavy handed display of how we are destroying our planet. Here we would have been shown a film of a little girl walking in the forest, at one with the creatures and totally at peace. Suddenly, a row of bulldozers come into view plowing down trees and endangering the little girl. This almost rivals Avatar, in its ability to nauseate with over the top imagery and cornball storytelling. Thankfully, this sequence lasted maybe seven minutes, whereas Cameron’s film dragged for a grueling two and a half hours more. I wasn’t the only one bored, though. Several families chose this point to exit the theater, as even their kids became exceptionally restless.

With only one misstep in the film, I couldn’t help but feel a tinge of sadness for the loss of Michael Jackson, when the credits were finished. Although his life had plenty of questionable aspects, he was an unquestionable genius at his craft. I’m sure, at some point, a record company will release lost tracks by the King of Pop to make an easy buck. But for now, This Is It.

Closing Statement
For those interested in seeing the processes of a musical perfectionist, I can’t recommend This Is It highly enough. Ortega does Michael Jackson a great service, by giving the public a glimpse of Michael doing what he loved to do in his final days.

The Verdict
8/10

The Lovely Bones

OPENING: 01/15/2010

STUDIO: DreamWorks

RUN TIME: 135 min

ACCOMPLICES:
Trailer, Official Site

The Charge
The story of a life and everything that came after…

Opening Statement
Once just a little-known cult film director, Peter Jackson catapulted himself into position as one of the most-lauded modern filmmakers with his masterful Lord of the Rings trilogy and epic remake of King Kong, capturing the attention of critics and audiences alike. So it’s no surprise his adaptation of Alice Sebold’s much-loved novel The Lovely Bones was hotly anticipated. How does Jackson fare stepping into less bombastic cinematic territory? Not very well, I’m afraid.

Facts of the Case
Set in the early 1970s, the story centers on 14-year-old girl Susie Salmon (Saoirse Ronan, Atonement), an ordinary girl living an ordinary life. Susie enjoys taking photographs with the camera she received as a birthday gift from her parents, has a desperate crush on a boy named Ray (Reece Ritchie, 10,000 BC), and generally loves life. Alas, Susie’s time on this earth is cut tragically short when she is brutally raped and murdered by George Harvey (Stanley Tucci, Blind Date (2007)), a quiet neighbor who lives down the street. George did a good job of covering up any evidence of the crime, leaving the Salmon family suffering from both the loss of their daughter and an inability to reach some sort of closure. This is only the beginning of their story.

The film follows Susie into the afterlife; not heaven, but what is referred to as the "In-Between," where she must confront a variety of personal issues before moving on. Meanwhile, Susie’s father Jack (Mark Wahlberg, The Happening) obsessively attempts to solve his daughter’s disappearance, while her mother (Rachel Weisz, The Constant Gardener) moves away to deal with the grief. Even with Susie making several mysterious attempts to reach out to her family from beyond, will the Salmons (living or deceased) ever truly find peace?

The Evidence
Here’s the thing: when you’re making a movie that involves the rape and murder of a teenage girl, you have automatically indebted your film to its audience. Such a horrible occurrence plays sharply on the emotions of every viewer, and it’s up to the filmmakers to demonstrate the film is both worthy and mature enough to deal with the subject matter responsibly and appropriately. If they succeed, they present a strong and powerful story. If not, they run the risk of delivering a genuinely repulsive experience. Peter Jackson’s The Lovely Bones falls into the latter, offering up a bewildering concoction of elements that are by turns exasperating and infuriating.

The Lovely Bones is essentially a fusion of standard-issue murder mystery and super-cheesy paranormal melodrama. Let’s tackle the murder mystery first. It’s remarkable just how mundane and unconvincing the scenes in which Jack attempts to discover what happened to his daughter are. I think a small portion of the blame lies on the performance of Mark Wahlberg, who never quite manages to sell his portrayal of the grieving father. Another portion rests on the screenplay, which makes every member of the Salmon family (aside from Susie) terribly one-dimensional. Wahlberg doesn’t seem to have been given any direction other than, "Look disturbed and somewhat frantic," in every scene, and there’s only so much he can do with that. Speaking of direction, the largest portion of blame lies with director Peter Jackson, whose helming of the mystery sequences falls surprisingly flat. An average episode of Law & Order generates more suspense. Stanley Tucci’s genuinely creepy performance goes a little way towards creating some measure of tension, but that’s a small consolation.

Saoirse (Ser-sha) Ronan spends most of her performance gawking in wonder at Jackson’s RoseArt screensaver fantasy world, which is a much less involving version of heaven offered up in Vincent Ward’s What Dreams May Come. The scenes certainly look expensive, but there’s an odd poverty of imagination behind their construction. Moments that should have taken our breath away instead seem all too ordinary. This is only made worse by Susie’s strange journey. Unsure of where she’s going until she gets there, the ultimate destination is so cornball the audience gets the sinking feeling we just wasted more than 10 bucks and two hours of our time. That is when you realize just how nauseating this movie truly is: cornball happy endings maybe okay in my book, but not when you’re using the rape and murder of a child as a springboard to get there.

The film is rated PG-13 and thus can only go so far in its portrayal of the violent event that triggers the story. In fact, the film goes out of its way to be as vague and non-specific as possible, turning the rape and murder into a mystically unhappy dream sequence. It’s tastefully done, but so purposeless and vague it robs the moment of its required intensity. I’m not saying more should have been shown, but rather the imagery displayed should have packed a stronger punch.

Frankly, The Lovely Bones had started to grate on me well before that scene arrived, thanks to the poorly-written and incredibly obnoxious narration Ronan provides. Early in the film, there’s a sequence where Susie is sitting in the mall, informing us that she is being spied on by her murderer. The camera cuts to images of an ominous-looking man who keeps looking at Susie. I forget his name at the moment, so let’s call him Mr. Smith. Susie says, "By the way, it’s not Mr. Smith who was watching me. Mr. Smith never hurt anyone in his entire life. His daughter died of leukemia a year and a half after I did." What condescending crap! So you set up a suspicious red herring just so you can tell the audience their suspicions are wrong? Then, adding insult to injury, you try to make us feel guilty about suspecting him because his daughter is dying of leukemia? The guy’s not even a character in the film. We never see or hear from him again. So why is that fact relevant? Rarely have I felt such an urge to show a movie screen one of my fingers.

I also have an issue with Susan Sarandon’s character, who does not belong in this film. Look, Sarandon is an excellent actress and does a good job with the role. However, the last thing The Lovely Bones needs is a wacky, chain-smoking, alcoholic grandma to provide us with a few chuckles. Hey everybody, forget about that whole rape thing for a few minutes. Look at Grandma being all crazy! I could continue to list my complaints, from Brian Eno’s anachronistic score to the manner in which the film completely wastes the talented Rachel Weisz, but there’s no point in beating a dead horse.

Closing Statement
I wouldn’t say The Lovely Bones offended me, but it certainly pissed me off. Not just because the movie is bad, but because the talent involved is capable of so much better. This should have been one of the year’s strongest films. Instead, it’s one of the worst.

The Verdict
3/10

Bad Lieutenant: Port Of Call New Orleans

OPENING: 11/20/2009

STUDIO: First Look

RUN TIME: 122 min

ACCOMPLICES:
Trailer, Official Site

The Charge
The only criminal he can’t catch is himself.

Opening Statement
What happens when you mix eccentric director Werner Herzog (Grizzly Man) with eccentric actor Nicholas Cage (Adaptation)? The most eccentric movie of the year, that’s what, featuring an alligator’s point of view, close-ups of imaginary iguanas, and a break dancing spirit. Sounds weird, doesn’t it? Indeed, it is, but it’s also one of 2009’s best films.

Facts of the Case
In New Orleans, Terence McDonagh (Cage) permanently injures his back while saving a prisoner from Hurricane Katrina’s flood waters. As result of his bravery, McDonagh is promoted to the rank of Lieutenant, but his chronic back pain has resulted in an addiction to painkillers and other narcotics. He’s also a compulsive and unsuccessful gambler. Under these conditions, McDonagh must try to pull himself together long enough to solve a multiple homicide perpetrated by a drug dealer (Xzibit, Gridiron Gang) and, in the process, steal as much cocaine and other drugs as he can get his hands.

The Evidence
There are a lot of strange moments in Bad Lieutenant: Port Of Call – New Orleans. Some are so odd it would be easy to dismiss the film as a semi-coherent gritty police procedural composed of a bunch of loosely connected scenes. However, if you can keep your nerve and maintain attention, you will reap the rewards of this tight, symmetrically structured and darkly comedic piece.

Moral decay and regeneration are the themes here, making post-Katrina New Orleans an ideal backdrop for the action. McDonagh, like the city itself, is devastated and trying mightily to keep himself from being washed away into oblivion. This is no easy task and McDonagh’s hunched back reveals a heavy burden that is always threatening to crush him. Further, he receives little support from those around him, such as his hooker and fellow drug addict girlfriend (Eva Mendes, The Spirit), corrupt partner (Val Kilmer, Heat), alcoholic father (Tom Bower, Crazy Heart), and bookie (Brad Dourif, Bride Of Chucky). As a result, McDonagh is pursuing criminals, trying to avoid an internal affairs investigation, and indulging his vices, all with equal vigor.

While McDonagh struggles, Cage does not. This is his movie and his performance is a manic one that exponentially increases in intensity as the story unfolds. As his character becomes more unhinged, Cage turns it up; his accent becomes more pronounced, his shoulders more stooped, and his eyes bulging out of his head. Yes, it’s over-the-top, but completely necessary and pitch perfect. Never more so than when a frenzied McDonagh terrorizes a couple of frail grandmothers at an old age home, barking “You’re the f—in’ reason this country’s going down the drain!” It’s brilliantly loopy.

While the film is filled with such crazed humor, it’s never gratuitous. Even when things threaten to spin completely out of control near the conclusion, Herzog balances the elements strongly, keeping the work from careening too far off the road.

There are two keys to maintaining this controlled disequilibrium. First, the story makes clear that while McDonagh is very troubled, he remains a dedicated and very good cop. Second is the film’s symmetric structure. Port Of Call – New Orleans begins and ends with a trio of scenes involving water, a promotion ceremony, and a shakedown outside a club. More specifically, the film starts with two men against dangerous flood waters and concludes with the same two men sitting in front of a fish tank at an aquarium with the water kept safely at bay behind glass — although, it is possible that the protective barrier could break one day. There is a poetry and symbolism to these scenes and others that shape the movie into a coherent and meaningful whole.

Closing Statement
In lesser hands Bad Lieutenant: Port Of Call – New Orleans would either be a confusing, forgettable mess, or a tedious, by-the-numbers crime drama. Luckily, thanks to Herzog and Cage, what has been produced is a unique and extremely entertaining film that is by turns playful and serious.

The Verdict
9/10

Leap Year

OPENING: 01/0/2010

STUDIO: Universal

RUN TIME: 97 min

ACCOMPLICES:
Trailer, Official Site

The Charge
Anna planned to propose to her boyfriend on February 29th. This is not her boyfriend.

Opening Statement
Amy Adams has come a long way since her debut as a candy stripe nurse in Steven Spielberg’s Catch Me If You Can. Since then, she has garnered Oscar nominations for Junebug and Doubt, and a humongous splash with Enchanted, one of the best Disney films in years. I’ve loved her spunk and radiance in practically every movie she’s been in… until now.

Facts of the Case
Anna (Adams) is an upper-class, spoiled twit from Boston who can’t wait to marry her hunky boyfriend Jeremy (Adam Scott, The Aviator). Impatient for him to propose himself, she decides to meet him in Dublin on February 29th and ask him herself. However, inclement weather strands Anna being in a coastal village and she’s forced to spend time with a scruffy innkeeper named Declan (Matthew Goode, A Single Man) while on the way to Dublin. You can fill in the rest.

The Evidence
Now, before you get all up-in-arms about how I’m a guy, this is a “chick flick,” and I’m not the target audience, I love romantic comedies. It’s a safe, easy-to-enjoy genre, even if it follows a well-established paradigm. Romcoms are largely dependent upon their stars and the chemistry between them to elevate the material above a level of ordinariness. Some of my favorites include When Harry Met Sally… , Groundhog Day, and 50 First Dates. Not only did the stars of those films play off each other exceptionally well, but they also worked overtime to appeal to both genders.

However, I’ve become extremely nervous about the state of desperation the romcom is experiencing. Last year, all the major entries had to depend on the same tired material, meet-cute cliches, and predictable motions to fuel their tank of love. In fact, I’m surprised at how unpleasant and mean-spirited many of them were (The Ugly Truth, All About Steve). Even The Proposal, despite being agreeable and well-acted, surrendered to the obvious far too often. Add to the mix two other duds with a hefty amount of star power — Ghosts Of Girlfriends Past, Love Happens — and the level of contempt has risen to an all-time high.

Now, we kick off 2010 with Leap Year, which does nothing but shamelessly rip-off the immortal It Happened One Night (1934). It doesn’t even feel like they’re trying to do anything fresh or original here. Then again, the warning bells began to ring during the opening credits, when I realized this was written by Harry Elfont & Deborah Kaplan, the duo behind Can’t Hardly Wait (an atrocious rip-off of American Graffiti), the stinker Josie And The Pussycats, and the putrid Surviving Christmas. Here they have sunk to the lowest level by going after the granddaddy of romantic comedies, transplanting it into the 21st century and changing little aside from the setting.

Let’s ensure we have all the ingredients for this 75-year-old recipe, shall we? Girl traipses off to be with her boyfriend? Check. Girl runs into guy who’s handsome but despises her shallowness and materialistic outlook? Check. One person thinks there is a substantial amount of money due or owed to them? Check. Guy and girl pretend to be married? Check. Both are forced to share a room together? Check. Guy stands up for her when her disgust is almost irreversible? Check. Despite their differences, both find themselves attracted to one another but don’t consummate their feelings until the end? Congratulations! That and five bucks will get you a pack a fags, mate!

Thanks to the lack of any real humor or character insight, Leap Year doesn’t even come off as a harmless clone. All we really know about Anna is she wants to marry her boyfriend and take care of her expensive suitcase. All we really know about Declan is that he wants financial compensation for Anna’s stupidity. Their dislike for each other is simplified to the most basic of insults, and their conversations are so uninteresting they induce more yawns than smiles. The lame physical gags misfire left and right. And, worst of all, Leap Year gets so routine and clichéd by the midway point, all hope for recovery goes down the drain.

The only thing that kept my attention was Adams, who is wasted beyond comprehension. Here’s an actress so bright and lovely even she can’t do anything to save the picture. At times, I could even sense a feeling of impatience and lack of initiative on her part. As for Matthew Goode, he at least tries to make it work, but the dialogue reduces his character to being an unlikable, sarcastic bastard. Plus, as handsome as he is, he’s no Clark Gable. The wonderful John Lithgow is given absolutely nothing to do as Adam’s dad and director Anand Tucker fails to inject any spontaneity or semblance of reality into this witless, moldy script.

Leap Year’s only asset is Newton Thomas Sigel’s breathtaking cinematography, which richly captures Ireland’s seashores and green valleys with unparalleled splendor. Still, his frosting does little to improve the taste of this poorly-baked January loaf.

Closing Statement
This is the first black mark on Adams’ record and the court demands to see no more. She’s capable of far better. As for the remaining comedies of 2010, we hope they have something more to offer than pretty faces on a poster.

The Verdict
2/10