Inside Man

INSIDE MAN wants to be a heist picture, a police procedural, and a (local) political thriller all at the same time. It succeeds through a combination of excellent performances; fine photography; and smooth, measured pacing.

I didn't see this as a propulsive thriller so much as a study in contrasting characters, and I enjoyed watching most of those characters muddle through a confusing situation as best they could. Why? Probably because Lee was astute enough to cast excellent, credible, and likeable actors in his leading and major supporting roles. I mean, who doesn't enjoy watching Jodie Foster kick ass; Denzel Washington stick it to the Man; Clive Owen be cool; and Christopher Plummer, Willem Dafoe, and Chiwetel Ejiofor do just about anything?

Additionally, INSIDE MAN features a number of shots that are just plain fun to look at. Watch Denzel come through the door of his shabby detective's apartment and bemoan the fact that they never made a follow-up to DEVIL IN A BLUE DRESS. Watch the early moments of the heist unfold and consider how fun it is to see modern sensibilities applied to this timeworn genre. Watch the variations in color and film stock (or digital reprocessing, as the case may be) and enjoy the fun Lee can have when he sets out to generate Product with a capital P.

Finally, the pacing. Folks here argue that nothing much happens in the second act, but I don't see that. The act gives us time to enjoy these characters and enjoy the turns in the situation. It builds tension as we try to deduce the plot behind the plot, and it dribbles out the reveals often enough to keep us involved. This movie doesn't move at a breakneck pace, but it moves at the right pace. I felt like I got my entertainment dollar's worth.

INSIDE MAN may be slick American filmmaking, but it's an excellent example of slick American filmmaking. I enjoyed every minute of it.

The Toxic Avenger

I hated the first act of THE TOXIC AVENGER like I hate red tide. Its actors delivered ghastly performances of ridiculous characters, the story had no soul, and the general quality was so horrible that it left me wondering how this thing even reached cult status. But THE TOXIC AVENGER grows on you - kinda like a fungus. It's so ridiculous, so over-the-top, and so doggone earnest that you can't help but warm to it.

Here's the deal. THE TOXIC AVENGER follows the standard superhero template. Its first act, in which it sets up its villains' evil and its heroe's haplessness spends so much time being painful that offers nothing but grind. Once Toxie actually shows up, however, the movie kicks into high-camp fun, with the industrial-age hero performing wonders like ripping off a villains arm and beating him with it, wooing a pathetic blind girl, and helping old ladies cross the street. Once the Big Bad gets wind of Toxie and puts his evil plan in place in act three, you can't help but root for the offbeat hero and hope he gives that villain a good arm-beating.

THE TOXIC AVENGER is gory, cheap, and strangely sweet. Though it starts out pretty roughly, hang in there: the movie does get under your skin. Like scabies.

Kung Fu Hustle

I didn't care for KUNG FU HUSTLE.

The movie can't quite find its tone: one minute it's a shot-in-the-back gangster movie, and the next it's a Warner Brothers cartoon. Its stunt work is overshadowed by its gratuitous CGI, the love interest didn't work, and the story didn't hang together.

While I did like the film's music, feeling that it worked perfectly with the action onscreen, overall the picture feels like Stephen Chow just cobbled together some cool sequences, then tried to work them into a movie. What a disappointment.

M

M scared the hell out of me in two different ways.

The first is in its portrayal of Franz Becker and his crimes. Becker, brilliantly played by Peter Lorre, is cinema's first serial killer. Where some films might drench such a character in Kensington Gore, M does something much, much worse: it forces us to use our imaginations, replacing screams and shrieking music with forlorn shots of an empty placesetting, an empty staircase, and a gradually panicking mother calling, "Elsie! Elsie!" Additionally, M makes effective (and probably groundbreaking) use of Grieg's "Peer Gint Suite", which Becker compulsively whistles when he's on the hunt. I'll never hear that tune the same way again.

The second is SPOILERIFIC, so skip this paragraph if you want to remain SPOILER free. When Becker's dragged before the underworld's kangaroo court, the top criminal and commander of the proceedings makes a compelling speech in which he argues that, rather than be turned over to the police and (almost certainly) confined to an asylum, Becker should be killed on the spot. As he really gets into his speech, his voice rises and takes on the strident rythms of the polished public speaker. We realize that this character (who is wearing a leather overcoat) is arguing for the execution of the insane, and the crowd is with him. We remember that the movie was made in 1931, when the Nazi party was really gathering steam, and we wonder what impact this film had on their policies.

Ok, THE SPOILERS ARE OVER. It's safe now. Technically, the movie is just plain brilliant. It doesn't feel like a film that's being made by people who are still figuring out sound technology. Rather, it feels like a masterpiece. There's just the right mix of music, dialogue, and silence; there's a tracking shot that hadn't been equalled until 'Goodfellas'; there's mirror and window-reflection photography that's just plain stunning; and there's a narrative that will have you on the edge of your seat from beginning to end.

What a great movie.

Jersey Girl

I liked JERSEY GIRL.

I shouldn't have. In fact, I should have hated it on principle. As near as I can tell, movies are made by some of the most ambitious, industrious, focused people on earth. In a business as cutthroat as the film industry, it takes extraordinary dedication to rise to the top. That's why it irks me when films say, "Hey, settle for second best - it's ok. The important thing is spending time with your family." Much as I may agree with the message, the fact that the messengers are a bunch of 14-hr-day espresso junkies strikes me as hypocritical, at best.

Ok, rant over. Back to the movie. Kevin Smith writes movies that are huge with the college demographic. He's big on drug and sex jokes, and he has a flair for the ridiculous. With 'Jersey Girl', he turns his back on that demographic, writing a story that comes from where he is today: a young father trying to juggle the competing demands of work and family. JERSEY GIRL is a more mature piece (well, it has fewer dick and fart jokes), and it's generally successful. Sure, it has some glaring flaws, such as George Carlin's entire performance, an extended rehash of the old "diapers are nasty" comedy formula, and a soundtrack that interferes with the film, rather than reinforce it. Nevertheless, it has a certain sweetness to it, Smith's dialogue is always a pleasure to hear, and it manages to erase the bad taste Liv Tyler has left in my mouth ever since ONE NIGHT AT MCCOOL'S. JERSEY GIRL may not have worked with the college demographic, but it worked for me.

The Upside of Anger

If I wanted to spend my time watching people drink too much and make uncomfortable scenes, I'd go home for Christmas.

Lost in La Mancha

Watching 'Lost in La Mancha' is not a pleasant way to spend an hour and a half.

Well, I guess it could be pleasant, if you enjoy seeing dreams, hopes, trust, and bonhomie whither and turn to despair and hopelessness before an onslaught of bad luck, bad planning, and bad blood.

The film, a documentary that probably started out as a simple "making of" piece, chronicles director Terry Gilliam's effort to get his version of Don Quixote on screen. The film opens with Gilliam energized, excited, and ready to begin production. Then things start going wrong, and wrong, and wrong, until the viewer begins to suspect that God Himself doesn't want this movie to happen.

Is it interesting? Yes. Is it engaging? Kind of, in a car-wreck sort of way. Is it a good use of your time? Hard to say: do you like watching people suffer?

Cemetery Man

CEMETERY MAN had a stellar premise, but it doesn't deliver.

The movie takes an inherently fun story about a cemetery watchman who's duties including rekilling and reburying the reanimated dead and tries to infuse it with so much existential angst it winds up burying itself. How do you suck the life out of a movie featuring a troop of zombie boy scouts and a carnivorous flying head? You do it by saddling it with head-scratchingly repulsive supporting castmembers, brooding ponderings on the nature of life, and a degree of carnage that's so far from fun that you cease to care about the well-being of critical members of the cast.

If you're looking for a movie that knows how to have some fun with the zombie genre, see SHAUN OF THE DEAD again. That picture never forgets what it's about.

The Conversation

Much has been written about the logic of THE CONVERSATION, about its perspectives and its relationship with its own filmed reality. If you're interested in that kind of analysis, Google is a wonderful thing. I'm interested in how the movie feels.

THE CONVERSATION, set in San Francisco, is a wonderfully noir thriller with a hero unlike anything from Hammet's typewriter. Gene Hackman plays Harry Caul, a surveillance expert who suffers from insecurity, indecisiveness, and, crucially, inability to act at the key moment. Caul has recorded a conversation whose implications, he believes, may lead to murder. Since this is noir, his bumbling investigation leads him from clue to betrayal to doubt to clue to betrayal to doubt to, well, it's Chinatown, Jake.

The great thing about this film is its sense of the slow burn. This movie doesn't feature intimidating albinos, digital countdowns, or waving guns. Rather, it features a man who feels doors slowly being shut around him, villains who hold corporate positions, friends who can't be trusted, and more questions than answers. It's the kind of movie that builds dread and desperation in equal measure. By the time it gets to its devastating closing shot, we feel as lost as Caul.

Francis Ford Coppola has made some brilliant pictures in his time. THE CONVERSATION is right up there with them. I enthusiastically recommend it.

Abbot and Costello Meet Frankenstein

While ABBOT AND COSTELLO MEET FRANKENSTEIN has some clever lines for the grownups (Chaney: "You don't understand! When the full moon rises, I turn into a wolf!" Costello: "You and forty million other guys.") and some effective physical comedy for the kids (the bits in the House of Horrors and the Landing), it's a singularly unambitious picture that cheapens Universal's classic monsters.

I understand why Karloff passed on the chance to reprise his role as the Monster in this feature. This movie takes Universal's monsters and makes a mockery of them, reducing any sense of pathos or horror they may once have had and mining them for cheap laughs. One can almost see the paychecks dangling offscreen whenever Chaney's Wolfman and/or Lugosi's Dracula are around, and one has to wonder what went through their minds as they enacted their climactic battle.

Nevertheless, my 6-year-old liked it, and the grownups did chuckle now and again. When you fire up ABBOT AND COSTELLO MEET FRANKENSTEIN, rest assured that you're going to get what you expect.

Bad Education

I respect BAD EDUCATION's technical excellence, but the movie just didn't capture my imagination.

I can't put my finger on why, exactly. I've enjoyed Almodovar's other works, I recognized that the movie had a good premise and good actors, but I just plain couldn't get into it.

Ah, well.

Zathura: A Space Adventure

I flat-out loved ZATHURA.

ZATHURA is basically a remake of JUMANJI, this time with a Space Mountain (as opposed to Jungle Cruise) flavor. I didn't much care for JUMANJI, feeling that the earlier film's sense of danger outweighed its sense of fun. ZATHURA, on the other hand, gets the mix just right, putting its characters in real danger while flipping the audience a wink and letting us know everything's going to be ok.

Jon Favreau, the movie's director, made a wise choice in minimizing his use of CGI in favor of practical effects. When the house in which the film takes place rocks, rolls, get harpooned, and generally suffers, it's a genuine house up on a gimbal that takes all that punishment. The use of practical effects gives them film a solidity and reality that all the "touchdown" shots in the world can't match. Additionally, that reliance on practical magic makes the computer magic all the more breathtaking when Favreau does pull out all the stops.

Part coming of age story, part Boys' Own Adventure, ZATHURA kept three generations of my family spellbound for a good hour and a half. What more could you ask for?

Tristram Shandy: A Cock and Bull Story

I saw this one in the wee hours last night. I respected it more than I enjoyed it.

Don't get me wrong. The film has plenty of amusing moments, and I grinned more than once, but it worked more as a thought experiment than as a narrative comic film. The movie itself weaves into and out of the making of an adaptation of TRISTRAM SHANDY, sharing more in common with DAY FOR NIGHT than any period drama. The film helpfully informs us that TRISTAM SHANDY: A COCK AND BULL STORY was a postmodern novel in a time before the invention of modernism. Further, it makes it clear that very few people involved in the making of the movie have actually gone to the trouble of reading the book. That's amusing as far as it goes, but I think the film still requires a certain familiarity with the subject novel in order to get all of its gags and its insights.

If you're an anglophile, you may very well love this movie. If you have an abiding passion for postmodern literature and film, you may very well love this movie. If you respect and encourage experimentation, you'll respect this movie. And respect is good enough for me.

Dirty Pretty Things

Chiwetel Ejiofor is on his way to becoming a major star. I first noticed him in MELINDA AND MELINDA, where he was easily the most magnetic actor in the film. He played a fine villain in the disappointing SERENITY, and he was extraordinary in DIRTY PRETTY THINGS, which I've just gotten around to seeing. INSIDE MAN is in my queue, and I look forward to seeing him there.

Ejiofor isn't alone in DIRTY PRETTY THINGS, of course. Audrey Tatou plays a character unlike any other I've seen her inhabit - a scared but tough Turkish immigrant trying to make her way in a cold, hostile London.

The movie itself is your standard thriller of conscience - a man is forced to choose between his principles and his desire to do right by those about whom he cares. What sets it apart is its setting, the world of London's illegal immigrant community, and its players, notably Ejiofor and Tatou. Ejiofor is both magnetic and unpredictable, and I'm not surprised that he's gotten more work. I can't wait to see what he does next.

New Police Story

NEW POLICE STORY features all the hallmarks of one of Jackie's Hong Kong pictures. It has ridiculously dangerous stunts, ridiculously beautiful women, and ridiculously ridiculous villains. This is stuff is vintage Jackie the Stuntman stuff - Jackie the Joker is nowhere to be found.

Here's the setup: Jackie's the HKPD's hotshot cop, instructing everything from weapons to martial arts. He leads a crack squad into a bloodbath orchestrated by previously mentioned ridiculous villains, then loses his confidence and descends into alcoholism. Of course, the ridiculous villains are still out there, and eventually Jackie's gonna have to get back on the horse.

NPS surprised me with its depiction of alcoholism. Hey, this is the Drunken Master we're talking about, right? Here, Jackie plays his despair and self-loathing absolutely straight, showing that while a young drunk can be cute, an older drunk is just sad. The guy has some moments of real pathos here, and I bought them; much to my own surprise.

OK, so there isn't much doubt that Jackie will pull himself together and take on the ridiculous villains. What about the stunts? Well, stand by to be dazzled. Though he's clearly using wires now, Jackie's fight choreography and execution are dazzling as always. Additionally, look out for a slide down a burning rope and the first time you've probably ever seen stuntmen ride bikes, rollerblade, or run(!) down the side of a skyscraper. This movie had enough "Wow!" moments to merit repeated replays for family members, nearby friends, and stray dogs.

Of course, it wouldn't be Jackie without ridiculously beautiful -and increasingly age-inappropriate- women. Charlie Yeung, twenty years his junior, plays Chan's fiancee without so much as a nod toward the age difference. Her performance is average, at best, but she sure looks nice.

Finally, there are the ridiculous villains. Seriously, what is it with Chan's Hong Kong ouvre? His villains are all either Australian or Chinese guys with dyed hair and seemingly limitless flows of cash. In this iteration, they happen to be a gang of -get this- XTreme Gamers who rob banks and kills cops for fun. I knew Poochy would turn out to be a malevolent force in the minds of the young. These villains have paper-thin motivations, but they're quite good at things like rollerblading and bicycling, which gives Chan and his choreographers some fun stunt-creation options.

And that's what it's all about, really: finding neat stunts and structuring a movie around them. NEW POLICE STORY does just that, and it does it well. I recommend it to any fan of Jackie's work.

Wallace & Gromit: Curse of the Were-Rabbit

I saw first saw WALLACE & GROMIT: CURSE OF THE WERE-RABBIT on a flight out of London. It came about 13 hours into a 24-hour journey, so I was a little punchy, but that's ok. The picture was consistently entertaining, raising chuckle after chuckle. It never quite got me up to full-scale laughter (no airplane movie has done that since GALAXY QUEST), but it wasn't a bad way to spend an hour and a half. Seeing as how the other option was CHRISTMAS WITH THE CRANKS, I didn't complain.

My older boy discovered WALLACE & GROMIT: CURSE OF THE WERE-RABBIT last week. Since then, I've seen the movie, or parts thereof, uncounted times. Here's what I've learned: this is a great movie. There's a joke or two or three in every frame, with something pitched at nearly every age group.

Perhaps W&G's greatest achievement is its ability to get the horror-comedy mix just right. The scary parts are just scary enough to give kids a thrill, while never going too far. The comedy ranges from sly to broad and never lets up, and the whole affair has a kind heart and a gentle touch.

What a delight.

His Girl Friday

While viewing HIS GIRL FRIDAY, I had forgotten that it was an adaptation of a play. I'm glad I remembered, because I now know that my fervent wish to see this show performed onstage stands a good chance of being fulfilled.

This is the kind of movie that makes you want run out and buy the screenplay so you can savor every line. It's the kind of movie that has such a great story, such wonderful characters, and such excellent dialogue that you want to see how other productions might handle the material. You may suspect that you'll never again see it done as well as Grant, Russell, Bellamy, and Hawks, but you don't mind - this script is just that much fun.

Grant, as one of the biggest movie stars of his century, gets most of the notice in this production. His editor is charismatic, charming, potentially sociopathic, and an absolute riot. But Rosalind Russell's portrayal of Hildy Johnson -well, it's revelatory. Russell dominates every scene she's in, delivering a hurricane of a performance that combines sly wit with calulated manipulation with raw human power. This is, quite simply, one of the best performances ever committed to film.
Ralph Bellamy plays a wonderful Baxter, bringing the kind of hapless innocence to the proceedings that makes us root for him even though we know he never has chance.

Howard Hawks, of course, does what Howard Hawks does: get top-notch work out of top-notch actors, directing with a sure hand and delivering pure cinema gold. What else would you expect from the guy who made BALL OF FIRE, RIO BRAVO, and GENTLEMEN PREFER BLONDES?

The more I think about this movie, the more I like it. Now, if I can just find a production of THE FRONT PAGE in my town ...

Constantine

CONSTANTINE is internally inconsistent, theologically unsound, and utterly ridiculous. Nevertheless, it's trying so hard to entertain you that you can't help but like it. Case in point: in every thriller, there comes a moment when the hero's had all he can stands, and he can't stands no more. This moment usually involves the hero's arming up, looking resolute, and saying something along the lines of, "Let's get 'em!" When Keanu Reeves's John Constantine has this moment, he whips out this weapon that's a cross between a shotgun, a revolver, and a giant crucifix, all done in solid gold. While I doubt that laughter was the intended effect, you can't deny the earnestness of a production that conceived, created, and shot a giant golden crucifix-shotgun-revolver.

Go in expecting a cheesy good time, and you won't be disappointed.

Papillon

I can tell you the exact moment I went from liking PAPILLON to loving it.

Jerry Goldsmith's score is doing the things a score is supposed to do: underlining and enriching the story unfolding onscreen. Then there's this scene, a chase scene, in a forbidding jungle. Goldsmith goes absolutely bananas, giving us a postmodernist piece that sounded more like it came from the pen of Donald Erb than a mainstream film composer. The music is absolutely effective, it takes the viewer completely by surprise, and it's indicative of the skill and care that went into every facet of this picture.

PAPILLON is a long film, clocking in at 2.5 hours, but it races by. Not a moment onscreen feels wasted, and it strikes a wonderful balance between action sequences and character moments. What a great movie!

A Face in the Crowd

Elia Kazan's A FACE IN THE CROWD tells the story of Lonesome Rhodes (Andy Griffith), a drunk and drifter from the rural South. Early in the film, he's plucked from obscurity by an ambitious young radiowoman (Patricia Neal, in an extraordinary performance), and his unique combination of charisma and bull$#!^ eventually make him a nationwide success. It's a solid setup for a movie, and it sports great supporting performances from Neal, Walter Matthau as an increasingly disillusioned writer, and Anthony Franciosa as a hustler with his eye out for the main chance. Unfortunately, the setup doesn't pay off in a satisfying way.

I recently argued about the nature of screenwriting with a dear friend (Come on over to my place, where the fun never ends!). He posited that the first thing the screenwriter needs to do is outline the themes he wants to address, then create characters who embody those themes.

"The good screenwriter will give those characters enough hooks to make them interesting," he said, "to give them the feel of real people."

I argued that such an approach to screenwriting leads to characters that are little more than wind-up toys. Real characters, like real people, go places you don't expect them to go; they develop into complete personalities that are much more than the personification of themes or ideas. A FACE IN THE CROWD strikes me as an example of my friend's theory of screenwriting. Every character here is the embodiment of something: ambition, selfishness, conscience, greed, naivete, or what have you, and not a single one of them feels like an actual human being. Add to this Griffith's braying, scenery-chewing performance, and you get a movie that leaves audiences watching the clock.
A FACE IN THE CROWD is sold as an overlooked masterpiece. Well, it was "over" a lot of things: overwritten, overacted, and overwrought. Overlooked? No, I think it's just where it should be.