The Lego Movie

The Lego Movie is clever, visually pleasing, and flat-out hilarious. My wife and I have been quoting it back and forth to each other for weeks.

The film begins as a relatively straightforward action-adventure, albeit with a Lego twist. The cleverness comes from two sources: the gags, which seem mostly to consist of taking down mainstream culture in general (a bold move for a mainstream film) and Batman in particular, and the structure. I particularly enjoyed all the digs at the Caped Crusader, whom I've always found to be a ridiculous character better suited to Adam West than Christian Bale. It's difficult to praise the film's structure without getting into spoiler territory, but suffice it to say that the movie takes everything you know about how these movies go, inverts it, then twists it sideways. It works, it's seamless, and it's wonderfully creative. I loved it.

Visually, The Lego Movie looks great. In fact, I've never seen a film animated quite like this one. It looks like a computer rendering of stop-motion animation using actual, used Legos, some of which appear to have been scavenged from one of the piles on my kids' bedroom floor. Some light research tells me that filmmakers Phil Lord and Chris Miller (of the hilarious 21 Jump Street and good-enough Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs) employed a computer program that modeled how actual bricks to fit together to ensure that most everything shown onscreen can actually be built. The effect? A palpable sense of wonder.

Finally, The Lego Movie is hilarious. Now, I'm an easy laugh – when my wife and I used to frequent comedy clubs, we'd always get seated right up front because laughter's infectious. That said, I laughed out loud throughout this film. From little gags like Abraham's Lincoln's unique mode of transportation to Will Arnett's 90-minute Batman parody, this picture scores again and again and again.

In short, everything about The Lego Movie is awesome. I can't wait for Lord & Miller's next picture.

The Raid: Redemption

The Raid: Redemption is a martial arts movie whittled down to its barest elements. It has a paper-thin plot, absolutely no character development, and remarkably simple costume and set designs. If this film were stripped any more, it would just be a bunch of guys in sweats doing stunts on a bare stage.

That said, what stunts! Yayan Ruhian, a Javanese martial artist (above, right), serves as the action choreographer and plays the role of the villain's enforcer. In the film's climactic fight, two heroes battle Ruhian in an intricately choreographed, precisely performed match that's as beautiful an exhibition as the genre has to offer.

Some cautions: if you aren't a martial arts fan, The Raid: Redemption has little to recommend it. If you've seen Dredd, you've already experienced an outstanding execution of a similar premise. If you love films about redemption, this film has none. If witty dialogue, careful observation, and subtle performance are your bag, look elsewhere.

But if dance movies with fake blood are your thing, The Raid: Redemption offers great routines and blood by the pixelful.  You won't want to miss it.

Jack Reacher

Jack Reacher is a solid procedural with a strong lead, great supporting work, and the best car chase I've seen in recent memory.

I started out disliking this movie. It begins with a sniper picking off random innocents out enjoying the day in downtown Pittsburgh. It's a powerful scene, alternating between the sniper's cool professionalism and the panicked flight of people unlucky enough to find themselves in his kill zone. See, I lived in DC during the Sniper Autumn of 2002. I recall unpacking boxes in my new home as a police chopper orbited overhead a crime scene just a mile away, where the sniper had shot some poor lady for the crime of vacuuming her car at a local service station. And here was Jack Reacher, mining such a scenario for a Tom Cruise thriller. To heck with that.

But I plowed ahead, mostly because a friend and fellow film buff had endorsed the film. Just a few minutes later, the great character actor Richard Jenkins showed up as the DA set to prosecute the case, and I knew everything was gonna be ok. As a general rule, Richard Jenkins does not make bad movies.

[Digression]Richard Jenkins is such a wonderful actor. If you haven't yet done so, you really owe it to yourself to queue up TheVisitor. He can do so much, create such complete characters with just body language and the way he sets his eyes, that watching him is like watching a master's class in understated perfection. You also should see The Cabin in the Woods, in which Jenkins plays a crucial supporting role. This guy is, as my kids would say, awesomesauce.[/Digression]

Soon, Tom Cruise shows up as the kind of guy my teenaged boy thinks everyone in the Army must be: he's a retired Army cop who just happens to be a sniper, a black belt, a knife fighter, a combat driver, and an an all-around invincible dude with a great plastic surgeon, a personal trainer, and an HGH prescription. Since most of us only have enough time in our lives to get really good at one or two things, Cruise's character is basically Fantasyland. But hey, it's Tom Cruise: say what you want about the man's personal life, he's an incredibly magnetic screen presence. In the film, Tom smells a rat: the case against the accused, an ex-Army sniper with whom our hero has history, looks a little too pat. There must be more to the story.

And we're off, with Tom running and driving and shooting and fighting and Sherlocking his way through about two hours of big-budget pablum – he even gets a noirish monologue about halfway through that would've done Robert Mitchum proud. Jenkins shares supporting credit with a major icon of American cinema whose name I'll withhold because his appearance came as such a pleasant surprise, and both gentlemen class things up wonderfully. The aforementioned car chase, featuring a classic muscle car against a modern speedster, is exciting and inventive and a great deal of fun.

In short, Jack Reacher is pure entertainment – so much so that I forgot my initial revulsion and enjoyed the ride for popcorn-muncher it was. If you like guns and cars and watching some dude the size of a hobbit beat up 6'5” bodybuilders, Jack Reacher makes for an interesting proposition. Toss in Richard Jenkins being quietly awesome, and I don't see how you can pass it up.

Flight

Flight is a movie about an alcoholic's journey to rock bottom. I'm fortunate, in that my family doesn't have a genetic predisposition to alcoholism. Consequently, I haven't been exposed to the disease in a personal way. I'm not qualified to speak to the film's realism, or lack thereof, in its depiction of the affliction.

I am, however, a professional airline pilot. While I don't go to the movies looking to nitpick, I feared that I wouldn't be able to help doing so while watching this film's depiction of my job. Well, the people behind Flight did their homework. The movie has the “getting to know you” chitchat of a couple of pilots flying together for the first time. It gets little things like radio calls right. Once the mishap that propels the film's story gets underway, the plane behaves in mechanically and physically appropriate ways. The plane reacts to pilot inputs as one would expect. Even the instrument panels look right.

The film gets other parts of my job right: it films in hotels many airline pilots would recognize. It has union reps and lawyers and NTSB people doing all the things I've been trained to expect them to do in the wake of a mishap. Its protagonist occupies an economic rung that's about right for someone in his position. In other words, the Flight crew expends an enormous amount of effort on accurately portraying my world.
That effort pays off because it helps me suspend my disbelief in the face of its story-critical whopper: that a professional airline pilot could function as a hard core, career alcoholic and drug abuser without (a) it affecting his stick & rudder skills, and (b) not having anyone on his flight crew call him on it. I'm here to tell you: if I were ever to fly with the senior line check airman at my airline and smell alcohol on him when he climbs into the cockpit, I would not go flying with that person on that day. In fact, my union has given me specific, scenario-based training on what to do; and that training makes sense to me. I've been in this game for a few years now, and I have yet to have to use that training. But I would not hesitate to do so, because it's my life and the lives of everyone in that plane on the line if I don't.

Ok, I'm sure all this inside baseball stuff fascinates you, but what you really want to know is whether Flight is a good movie. It is, for a couple of reasons. First, Robert Zemeckis knows how to direct a film. The initial mishap sequence is a masterpiece, the film keeps up a steady and brisk pace, and the musical cues aren't overdone. Second, Denzel Washington knows how to carry a film. His performance feels note-perfect, taking us through his descent while keeping us on his side, and even managing to make us complicit in some of his questionable choices.

All my buddies at work have seen Flight, except for those who just can't accept the movie's premise. Everyone agrees that it's technically extraordinary. I think you'll agree that it's also a fine, fine movie.

Daleks - Invasion Earth 2150 AD

Daleks – Invasion Earth 2150 AD is the second of two mid-sixties British films based on the long-running television series 'Doctor Who.' While today's 'Doctor Who' follows the contemporary norm of mostly self-contained stories loosely tied into season-long arcs, the '60s version consisted of 6 episode serials. Daleks – Invasion Earth 2150 AD is a loose adaptation of one of these serials, a six-parter from 1964 entitled “The Dalek Invasion of Earth.” Why a loose adaptation? This film, while a licensed 'Doctor Who' property, was never meant to be part of the series' canon. It deviates from the show's bible in some significant ways and pretty much does its own thing.

How does it deviate? Most importantly, it changes its protagonist. In the early series, William Hartnell's Doctor was a brilliant, irresponsible, and sometimes cowardly alien fugitive who had stolen a space/time machine and run off to see the universe with his teenaged granddaughter. In the film, Peter Cushing's protagonist calls himself Dr. Who. He's a brilliant and benign human scientist who has created a space/time machine and is using it to show his adult niece and ten(ish) year old granddaughter around history.

This Doctor Who is meant for 75-105 minute feature films, not long-form drama. This is fine, of course. The real question is how well it works.

To properly answer this question, I think the viewer must keep in mind what the film is trying to accomplish. It's a low-budget British action movie for children who like 'Doctor Who.'

To that end, Daleks – Invasion Earth 2150 AD does a perfectly respectable job of giving its audience heroic resistance fighters, despicable Dalek aliens, laser guns, and a nice Saturday afternoon's worth of spectacle. Peter Cushing is always wonderful, Bernard Cribbins (who would, in later life, become a series regular) makes a solid hero, the story rocks along pleasantly, and everyone goes home happy. Daleks – Invasion Earth 2150 AD is, in its own way, a fine example of its time, place, and genre. I enjoyed it for what it was.

Arbitrage; 42

Arbitrage

In Arbitrage, Richard Gere plays an SOB who lies, cheats, defrauds, and worse. Because he's Richard Gere, we root for him anyway.

Here's a film that practically defines star power and what it brings to a movie. Gere is so charismatic that even though we know he's (if not evil, then definitely) not good, we hope he's able to elude all the people out to get him by the dawn of the third act. We actually buy into his BS, and we sigh with relief when he evades one trap, only to grip our armrests when it appears he's about to walk into another. The film maintains the illusion with the help of outstanding supporting performances from Susan Sarandon, Tim Roth, Reg E. Cathey (of 'The Wire'), and Brit Marling (of the remarkable Another Earth).

I'm not usually a fan of rooting for the bad guy, but Arbitrage won me over. This is a fine film.

42

42 is a warmly lit, rousingly scored, respectful and loving hagiography of a great American. It features a female lead (Nichole Beharie, as Mrs. Robinson) so beautiful that two of my kids fell in love with her at first sight. Its lead, Chadwick Boseman as Jackie Robinson, radiates strength, courage, and athleticism. Its supporting cast, including a fine Harrison Ford as Dodgers owner Branch Rickey and personal favorite Alan Tudyk [NOTE: If you haven't seen Tucker& Dale vs. Evil by now, you are bad at being a movie buff.] as a villain, sell its world. That said, 42 is a journeyman film.


How do I mean? I mean it's a perfectly competent sports hagiography. Its protagonist, Jackie Robinson, appears to have no flaws. It evokes its era (mid-'40s) with attention to detail and an eye for perfect costuming. It's structured well, it tells an important story, and it moves right along. I liked it. But it isn't great. Its sets don't look inhabited. Its heroes are treated too reverently, its villains allowed no nuance. It just feels like product.

But hey, it's a good product. It tells an important story, and it told it well enough to keep my kids engaged 'til the end. That's a win in my book.

Man of Steel

Man of Steel is a solid 90 minutes of story crammed into 144 minutes of running time. The film begins with a half hour - long prologue telling us just why Ma and Pa El put baby Kal in a spaceship and sent him to Earth (Hey, comparative religion nerds: look up “El” on Wikipedia!), and why General Zod is gonna come and get him. This could've been handled with a three-minute montage.

Fast forward to Kansas, which is populated by jerks, bullies, and fat people. Oh, and the improbably attractive Ma & Pa Kent (Kevin Costner and Diane Lane), who teach Baby Kal, now named Clark, that America is full of jerks and bullies, and that he'd better keep his head down.

Now, I know that each storyteller gets to tell the story he wants, but a Superman who wasn't raised on Truth, Justice, and The American Way is just some bodybuilder in blue long johns.

Back to the story: Clark grows up into Henry Cavill and decides to be in a Christopher Nolan movie, one loaded with deep blues, blacks, and grays (with one exception: the caressing, golden light that seems to envelop him whenever he turns his head). He's afraid of intolerant Americans, so he keeps his head down. But look out: here comes Lois Lane (Amy Adams, lit and photographed by people who don't seem to like her), and she's about to blow his cover!

Great. By now, we're an hour and a half into this movie, nothing interesting is happening, and Superman's still just some bodybuilder shopping for blue long johns.

Eventually, Zod shows up and things get interesting. He brings lots of minions, and Superman fights them all, one by one. This is still an ugly movie with a blue and grey palette, but the super-fights between (our hero? I guess. The movie is named after him and there's all that golden lighting.) Kal and the evil Kryptonians do a wonderful job of showing us what single combat between super-beings might look like. They're incredibly fast. They pack walloping punches. When they throw things, those things have weight and do damage. No kidding – these sequences are spectacular, and they raise the film from two to three stars in my estimation.

And then it ends in a surprising twist on the standard “Hero spares villain, but villain tries one last trick that backfires and kills him, thus satisfying audience bloodlust while leaving heroic consciences unsullied.” It shocked my kids, showed some bravery on the part of the production team, and worked.

But a solid last hour in a two-and-a-half hour movie doesn't cut it. Man of Steel is too long, too ugly, and too dour to make for a good Superman movie. I loved those big fights, but I'm still disappointed.

Pacific Rim; To Rome with Love

Pacific Rim

I'm a big fan of Guillermo del Toro's, and I'll see nearly any movie with Ron Perlman in it on general principle. Seriously – Pan's Labyrinth ranks among the best movies I've ever seen, and you just have to check out this Facebook page about Ron Perlman donning the Hellboy makeup to make a little kid's day.

That said, I found Pacific Rim to be a below-average film in del Toro's ouvre. Yes, it features cool monsters, cool giant robot—thingies to fight the monsters, and Idris Elba selling the heck out of a poorly written motivational speech. But the script needed a few more passes. The hero's journey was simplistic, the story routine, and the whole thing lacked depth.

Nevertheless, Pacific Rim gave a great filmmaker the chance to play with some really neat toys and included a Ron Perlman supporting role that just made the movie. All that, and my boys dug it. At the end of the day, that'll do.

To Rome with Love

I'm a Woody Allen fan. Here's someone who makes films that reflect his vision, as opposed to lowest-common-denominator pablum. Often, as was the case with Midnight in Paris, this results in magic. Sometimes, as with To Rome with Love, it results in a middling effort that, while reasonably entertaining, doesn't hit the sweet spot.

Why not? Well, the film's interlocking stories aren't particularly interesting. When I was with one set of characters, I didn't feel any particular need to get to the next set. In fact, each transition had me thinking, “Ok, who are these people? Why should I care about them again?” With two exceptions, I found that I couldn't find reasons to care. The first exception came in the form of Penelope Cruz, whom I'd watch doing the dishes for two hours. The second came in the form of Judy Davis, the most interesting character in the movie. She plays Woody Allen's long suffering wife with wit, style, and all the best lines. Come to think of it, I'd much rather have seen Judy's Adventures in Rome than the movie I got.

At least the film works as a travelogue. Rome is a city every bit as wonderful as it's cracked up to be, and Cinematographer Darius Khondji does it justice. I just wish that great work had been in service to a better movie.

Oz the Great and Powerful

You could play a game during Oz the Great and Powerful called “How baked is James Franco right now?” I swear to God, the guy looks like he's flying high for a good half of the movie's running time.

So, what's it about? Well, Franco plays a low-end carnival magician who doesn't realize he's past his peak attractiveness. When Michelle Williams basically offers to marry him, he's too stupid to realize that there is no better deal around the corner and sends her on her way. So it's about an idiot.

When a tornado hits the carnival and the idiot gets transported to Oz, Mila Kunis basically offers to marry him. Not realizing that God has given him a second chance to settle down with an A-teamer even though he's a few years past his sell-by date, the idiot temporizes. Then, because he's pretty much the luckiest idiot ever, Rachel Weisz puts the moves on him. Ok, so the idiot wasn't an idiot after all: Rachel Weisz was the better deal around the corner. Guess how he responds?

Yep. He's an idiot.

Or not – you'll have to see the movie and decide for yourself. While doing so, enjoy Sam Raimi's unique directorial style (Really, you should see Drag Me to Hell.  Not enough people did.) the pretty colors, the fine supporting work, the expert animation, and playing “How baked is James Franco right now.” If you approach Oz the Great and Powerful in the right frame of mind, you'll have an idiotic good time.

3 Idiots

3 Idiots is a Bollywood comedy about three classmates at a prestigious engineering college. It's also a lot of fun. Madhavan (left, above) is the would-be amateur photographer taking the safe path of an engineering degree instead of following his passion. Sharman Joshi (right) lives in fear: fear of failure, fear of letting down his family, fear in general. Aamir Khan (center) is basically the Buddha, a brilliant visionary who leads his friends (and the beautiful Karina Kapoor, daughter of the hated Dean, Boman Irana) through four years of hijinks, exams, sticking it to The Man, and enlightenment.

This is a Bollywood movie, so it's two hours and 44 minutes long and has five or six acts. In addition to laughs, it offers lavish musical numbers, an impressive flood sequence, pathos, and heaps of beautiful Indian scenery. It's performed and scored broadly, with literal bells and whistles underlying the gags and one-liners, plenty of eye rolling, and never so much as a hint that all this stuff could possibly be happening in the real world.

Perhaps its best feature, however, is its sense of goodwill. Here's a movie that'll try just about anything in the name of entertainment, and it tries so gosh-darned hard that we in the audience can't help but tap our feet, chuckle along, and even shed a tear or two. Just thinking about it makes me feel like all is well, and it's hard to ask for much more than that.

A Christmas Carol & The Ox-Bow Incident

A Christmas Carol

This Christmas Eve, the Ellermann family sat down for the animated Disney version of A Christmas Carol, starring Jim Carrey and Gary Oldman. The film uses the same uncanny valley – courting mocap animation technology as The Polar Express, though a few more years of sophistication have made this outing easier to swallow.

The film itself is a faithful adaptation of the novel, and it doesn't stint on the book's horrific elements. A Christmas Carol isn't a saccharine story, but the tale of a man who's shown the incredible damage he's wreaked upon those around him, as well as the consequences of that damage. By turns sad and scary, it earns its resolution. When Scrooge finally sees the light, we revel with him because the film has shown us just how dark his soul had become.

This version of A Christmas Carol is a winner.

The Ox-Bow Incident

Because I have poor judgment, I fired up The Ox-Bow Incident to kick off my Christmas vacation. Och, what a depressing film.

Here's the setup: Henry Fonda and Harry Morgan are just in from the range, drinking whiskey in a dusty saloon and looking for fun in a Western village with precious little of it on offer. When an angry cowhand rides up with a tale of murder and rustlin', the people of the village whip themselves up into a lynching frenzy which they call a posse. Afraid suspicion might shift to themselves, Fonda and Morgan join up against their own misgivings. All well and good, until the group finds some likely suspects. Then we're in a morality play.

And some play it is. The film, screened in 1943, feels like an angry postwar drama, full of cynicism and hard judgments of hard people. Fonda and Morgan make for fascinating protagonists, men we wouldn't consider entirely good, yet just good enough to sense how things are going and to feel repulsed by it.

This is not light stuff, and The Ox-Bow Incident treats it seriously. I appreciated its mature approach to the subject matter, its challenging position, and its resolution. I just wouldn't choose it as a film to usher in Holiday cheer.

Short Takes: December 20th, 2013

Monsters University

I loved Monsters University.  It's delightful, funny, beautiful to look at, and heartwarming. It captivated my family, which ranges in age from 7 to 45, and it's the first prequel I've seen in a very long time that doesn't feel like it's just putting the pieces in place for the movie that inspired it.

The Iron Lady

This just in: Meryl Streep is really good at acting. I spent the 90 or so minutes of The Iron Lady feeling like Margaret Thatcher was in the room with me.

Unfortunately, it seemed like she was there only to show me a "greatest hits” reel of her life. The Iron Lady skips along Thatcher's biography like it's in a hurry to get to the end, when I'd have appreciated a deeper examination of one particularly illuminating period of her life. The Iron Lady and the Miner's Strike, for example, or The Iron Lady and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. As it was, The Iron Lady gave me a sense of who Thatcher was, but it really didn't tell me how she ticked. That's a film I'd have found much more engrossing.

The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance

The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance is a perfect movie. It's well-shot, elegantly constructed, finely performed, and satisfying on every level.

It's so well shot that it'd benefit from a scene-by-scene analysis of its use of framing, lighting, and depth of field to tell its story and illuminate its characters. It's so elegantly constructed that every element of the script fits together like an elegant watch. It's so finely performed that you'll believe in the heroes right down to your boots, and you'll come away hating Lee Marvin so much that you'll actually have trouble rooting for him in films where he's the hero. The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance works, and it works in every way. If you love movies, you need to see this one.

Looper

Looper is basically The Terminator, with Bruce Willis playing the T-1000, Joseph Gordon-Levitt as Kyle Reese, and the wonderful Emily Blunt as Sarah Connor. Looper's twist is that the T-1000 is a later version of Reese.

I'm ok with that. It's a good formula, and Looper executes it well. Bruce Willis is as convincing an action star as ever, the multitalented Gordon-Levitt excels at putting a human face on the most despicable of characters, and I don't think Emily Blunt has ever been bad in anything. Rian Johnson's writing is clever as always, and Looper is a good time at the movies.

Recently Seen: 1 NOV 13

STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS

Ugh, what a joyless slog.  Benedict Cumberbatch plays a military genius who doesn’t know that complex plans almost always fail.  Chris Pine plays a Skipper who really needs to get Division Officer and Department Head jobs under his belt so he can learn (a) how a ship actually runs, and (b) how to lead a vessel that’s part of a larger organization.  Zachary Quinto does a fine Spock and the rest of the actors do what they can with what they’re given, but they aren’t given much.

Lost, this time around, is the joy of Star Trek.  The real shame, however, is that the film doesn’t trade that joy for proper, meaty darkness, but for a by-the-numbers “things get really bad, and then – fistfight!” actioner.

This puts me in a strange place as a fan.  I was all set to hate the first film of the rebooted series, but wound up loving it.  I was all set to love the second, but wound up hating it.  Will NuTrek truly subvert Trek canon and make the odd-numbered movies the good ones?

ZERO DARK THIRTY

Solid spy picture built on, y’know, actual spying.  We all know the ending, yet this film imbued it with real tension.  Worth the rental.

DREDD

Well, I’ve seen two Karl Urban movies over the last few months.  I’m glad one of them was good.  Dredd was way more fun than I expected.  Urban does great work acting through, vice around, the mask.  Olivia Thirlby sells her role as the rookie, and cable favorites Lena Headey (Game of Thrones) and Wood Harris (The Wire) create outstanding villains.  The movie rocks right along, and it shows that “grimngritty” doesn’t have to be dull.

Dredd deserved to be a hit.

END OF WATCH  (Mild spoilers.  If you’re spoilerphobic, just take my word for it and see this film.)

End of Watch is a great movie.  A buddy cop movie in which the cops start out as buddies (instead of making us sit through the tedium of watching them bond), End of Watch sells us by making the two leads people we enjoy spending time with.  Because the film gives the audience time to get to know these people and begin to bond with them as only movie audiences can, we find ourselves that much more invested as their lives get progressively more difficult.

My favorite thing about this movie?  I kept waiting for the twist in which the Lieutenant was actually on the take or somebody doublecrossed the hero cops or the rot in the system got exposed.  When that twist didn’t come (hey, I warned you about spoilers), End of Watch left us with basically good people doing a hard job in a dangerous place.  That, friends, is a recipe for great drama.

MODERN TIMES

Hey, if you haven’t seen Modern Times, you need to get on that right away.  Perhaps Charlie Chaplin’s greatest film, Modern Times is timelessly funny and ever-relevant.

When we talk about classic films, the kinds of movies people will still be watching three and four hundred years from now, Modern Times absolutely makes that list.  It’s funny, it’s brilliant, and it’s serious.  See this film.

PARA NORMAN

My family loved this movie.  My wife loved this movie.  I was distracted that evening, so couldn’t really get into it.  I’m adding the movie here for my own tracking purposes.

THE LORAX

If there’s one thing I love, it’s being preached at by some multibillion entertainment company.  I particularly love it when that company is preaching against the evils of capitalism.  Preach it, oh Universal Pictures!  Paint the capitalist villains as Southerners and West Virginians, because surely “those kind of people” must seem very backward to the decisionmakers in Universal City!  Give me all $70 million of your production budget’s worth of “profit is evil” goodness!

Or, on second thought, take a hike.

Recently Seen - 8SEP2013

Don't Stop Believin': Everyman's Journey

This documentary tells the story of Arnel Pineda, a small-time Manila singer who lands the job of frontman for arena-rock band Journey.  It's basically a feel-good movie about a good guy whose wildest dreams come true, but it doesn't hesitate to show that Pineda's success doesn't just happen: before being plucked from obscurity, he sang for decades in various tribute bands on the international circuit, honing his craft so he was ready when the big call came.  Vanessa and I both loved it, and it has motivated me to listen to Journey's recent releases with Pineda at lead vocals.  I'll tell you what - these records are good!  Particularly recommended for Journey fans and people who spend a lot of time in cover-band bars in Bahrain.
 
We Have a Pope

What if the cardinal who is elected Pope realizes, just a little too late, that he isn't the man for the job?  Nanni Moretti (of the utterly fantastic The Son's Room) worked this scenario with We Have a Pope a couple of years before Pope Benedict's retirement, and he came up with a story a little sad, a little funny, and altogether convincing.  While not as powerful as The Son's Room, We Have a Pope is a successful film.

Chronicle

Three teenaged boys get superpowers and deal with them like the irresponsible kids they are.  Except, that is, for the depressed victim of bullies both young and old.  He behaves in ways completely unpredictable, and of which Peter Parker would not approve.  This makes Chronicle a depressing, heart-rending story of a boy who has grown so used to being a victim that he makes one of himself.  While Chronicle competently tells the story it sets out to share, I don't think I need ever see it again.  The world can be depressing enough as it is.

Les Miserables

Russell Crowe is sub-community-theater bad in the role of Inspector Javert, like "Hit pause and let me sing this number just to wash out the bad taste" bad.  Jackman is uneven.  Eddie Redmayne and Samantha Barks, as Marius and Eponine, steal the show.  The aesthetic is, well, miserable.  I should've taken my wife's advice and passed on the whole thing.

Shaolin Soccer

An idealistic young monk harnesses the power of Shaolin Kung Fu to form a soccer team and defeat Team Evil.  If you aren't hooked by that description alone, there's something wrong with you.

Follow Me, Boys!

This Disney story, of which Mr. Holland's Opus is basically a remake, puts Fred MacMurray in the role of Boy Scout leader who puts off his dream of becoming a lawyer to focus his time on running a Scout troop and basically being a good guy.  Notable for a fun performance from Lillian Gish, the pleasure of watching MacMurray (who can play evil about as well as anyone - see Double Indemnity) go 100% wholesome, and a terrific performance from a very young Kurt Russell.  Yes, Follow Me, Boys! has some structural problems, but as a Scout troop committee chairman, I'm a sucker for the subject matter.

Short Takes

Headhunters

This Norwegian thriller pits an full-time corporate recruiter and part-time art thief against a very angry and implacable would-be victim, Game of Thrones' Nikolaj Coster-Waldau.  It's taught, surprising, and altogether effective - this movie literally had me on the edge of my seat.

The Dictator

There's a comic bit in Sacha Baron Cohen's The Dictator involving a severed head, a henchman with rather vague loyalties, and remarkably bad taste.  A masterpiece of timing, the bit took me from incredulous disgust to full-throated laughter to intellectual admiration, all in the stretch of about five minutes.  If I lost you at "severed head," so will the movie.  If I piqued your interest, invest ten minutes: that's all you need to decide whether this film is for you.

Moonrise Kingdom

This seems like the film for which the word "charming" was invented.  Moonrise Kingdom is about basically good people trying to behave basically well, and I found myself rooting for everyone.  The production design is pleasingly eye-catching, the locales beautiful (this one was filmed near my current home in Newport, RI), and the story engaging.  I loved it.

The Expendables 2

The Expendables 2: better than the first, with better action choreography and a more comprehensible sense of the battlespace. Filled with 'splosions, gunfire, and bad jokes, this movie won me over when it devoted a good five minutes to what was essentially one long Chuck Norris joke, punctuated by Chuck Norris telling an actual Chuck Norris joke.

Recently Seen - 4JUL13

I expect to return to writing more thorough reviews when I go back to the airline in the spring.  'Til then, here's another brief rundown of what I've been watching.

Iron Man 3

Much better than the series' second installment, Iron Man 3 features clever dialogue and unexpectedly wonderful turn by Ben Kingsley, whom I thought was taking an easy paycheck until I actually saw the film.

Lockout

Guy Pearce as Kurt Russell in Escape from Space.  That's actually pretty high praise.

Life of Pi

The best movie I've seen in some time, Life of Pi manages not only to film an unfilmable novel, but to create something magical of its own.  I wish I'd seen this one on the big screen in 3D.

Hour of the Gun

A fine telling of the Wyatt Earp Story.  Picking up moments before the gunfight at the OK Corral, it offers James Garner and Jason Robards as as fine a Wyatt & Doc as you'll ever see.

Jazz on a Summer's Day

I live in Newport.  I love jazz.  I fell asleep during this film.

World War Z

Despite a few extraordinary sequences, this film suffers from inexplicably slow pacing.  Recommended only for zombie completists.

The Visitor

A fine, carefully crafted film featuring a remarkable performance from star Richard Jenkins.  Well worth your time.

Recently Seen - 30APR13

Folks, I doubt I'll have any time for recreational writing for about another year or so.  Nevertheless, for my own records, here's what I've been watching:

Biutiful

Just two hours of agonizing pain.  This movie was recommended to me by a dear friend whom I think must be mad at me for some reason.

Despicable Me

Everyone in my family loved this movie but me.  I just couldn't find a reason to care about the protagonist.

Brave

A beautiful, entertaining, tear-jerking success.  If my younger kids didn't find the bear so terrifying, I'd purchase the Blu-Ray.

The Woman in Black

A competent ghost story with an unsatisfying ending, The Woman in Black really knows how to deliver the atmosphere.

Henry Rollins: Live at Luna Park

I've discovered that I like the idea of Henry Rollins more than I actually like watching Henry Rollins.

The Trip

Steve Coogan and Rob Brydon drive around Northern England and give each other a hard time. My wife and I both laughed merrily throughout this movie while simultaneously enjoying its underlying pathos.  A gem.

The Pace is Slowing

Constant reader,

This blog's pace is going to slow down for a year or so. I've landed a full-ride scholarship to go back to grad school; grad students do not have as much time to see, consider, and write about movies as do airline pilots.

If you enjoy reading my thoughts on film, I invite you to like the Netflix Junkie Facebook page. Through it, I'll let you know when I've had a moment to jot something down.

Thank you, and have a great day.

--Alex

BTW, Premium Rush is a solid action thriller with a likeable protagonist, an interesting milieu, and terrific stuntwork.  It's worth a rental!

Recently Seen

Diary of a Wimpy Kid: Dog Days continues in the successful vein of the very good Diary of a Wimpy Kid.  Greg Heffley continues to try to make a go of adolescent life, though he struggles with concepts like honesty and selflessness that seem, to him, to come naturally to everyone else.  His is the struggle of ego and id translated for the pre-teen set.  Oh, and this is very important: made laugh-out-loud funny.

Microcosmos delivers a mesmerizing documentary about icky bugs.  Showing life on their scale with no narration and a wonderful score, the film just us the majesty of an animal kingdom right beneath our feet.  At least, it tries to.  While I admired the effort, I just couldn't get past the fact that bugs are icky.

The Crimson Rivers gives us Jean Reno and Vincent Cassel in a buddy cop murder mystery.  Reno's the famous detective brought in from Paris to solve a particularly gruesome murder, which Cassel's the impetuous young chief from a nearby ville.  Can this mismatched pair catch the killer and, perhaps, become friends?  Well, naturally, but it's the execution that matters.  Reno and Cassel are both fun to watch, there are some well-done fistfights, and I didn't see the twist coming.

Coriolanus

You don't see Coriolanus at many Shakespeare repertory theaters. It's a tough play about a hard man, the fickle masses, and one woman's insatiable drive for glory in a culture that will allow her to achieve it only through the men she controls.

Caius Martius is a patrician and a General of the Roman Republic. At home in the (relative) meritocracy of the Roman Army and a formidable battler, he wins a great victory over the hated Volscians at the Battle of Coriolae. Lauded in Rome and awarded the honorific "Coriolanus," his family sees this as his moment to stand for Consul.  But he can't do the things that politicians do. He can't pretend to be one of the people, whom he sees as a fickle, unwashed mass - there to be led or bullied. He has so completely absorbed the martial virtues that he can't stand to trumpet his victories or show his battle scars for the approval of the citizenry. In short, he's unfit to be Consul. When the entrenched politicians who see him as a threat perceive this, they mercilessly destroy his political career. The rest, well, it's tragedy for some and triumph for others. But it isn't nice and it isn't funny and it isn't pretty - not the stuff to pull in the fickle, unwashed masses who only turn up for yet another production of A Midsummer Night's Dream.

So bravo to Ralph Fiennes for tackling one of the more challenging plays in this, his directorial debut. Taking a page from the theatrical tradition of transposing Shakespeare's plays to any number of historical and cultural settings, he sets his Coriolanus in the Balkans of not so very long ago. He casts 300's Gerard Butler as the Volscian leader, the omnipresent (and best-ever Hannibal Lecter) Brian Cox as Senator and family friend Menenius, James Nesbitt (delightful in the BBC's Jekyll and a standout in the first Hobbit movie) as an enemy politician, and the ubiquitous Jessica Chastain (who took my breath away in Tree of Life) as his wife. Most critically and successfully of all, he landed Vanessa Redgrave to play Volumnia, his mother and a woman so hungry for glory that she'll chew through every man in her family to get it and call it love.

Redgrave is Coriolanus's secret weapon, delivering the definitive performance of the role in modern film. In a cast filled with actors varying from promising to respectable to noted to outstanding, Redgrave is great. By "great," I mean Great. Her Volumnia is a masterpiece of ambition and calculation, Roman virtue and matronly control. And, yes, even of love. Fiennes, to his credit, lets her run. He demonstrates the self-confidence to embrace a performance that outshines his own very good one and, in the process, creates something magical.

Is Coriolanus perfect? Nothing is. The film's battles and knife fights are incomprehensible and could have benefitted from the touch of an editor with more experience in the action genre (An IMdB search tells me that editor Nicolas Gaster did the outstanding Moon and the indulgent MirrorMask, among many other credits stretching back to 1977, but he appears to have no major action credits to his name.). But that's about the only glove I can lay on it. When that's all I've got, you're doing ok.

I've always respected Ralph Fiennes as an actor. With Coriolanus, he debuts as a director and interpreter of Shakespeare worthy of note. I look forward to his next effort.