A Movie Review: The Guard (2011)

The Guard (2011)
Director - John Michael McDonagh
96 Min; R
Cast

Sergeant Gerry Boyle - Brendan Gleeson

FBI agent Wendell Everett - Don Cheadle

Cornell - Mark Strong

Seeing a movie with Brendan Gleeson is an awesome experience.  His presence alone makes a film better.  It doesn't necessarily make the film a good film just because he is there, but it helps.  If you like to watch the way certain actors do their job, this is one hell of a guy to watch.  You really see him manipulate his mannerisms and speech to fit the moment perfectly and that is something not many actors do nearly as well. 

In this film Gleeson (Sergeant Gerry Boyle) is a local policeman in a small, Irish town who finds himself investigating a few murders and an imminent cocaine deal worth 500 million dollars.  He doesn't care at all about the drug deal, but an FBI agent (Don Cheadle) arrives to make sure the local force cooperates with the investigation. They are looking for 3 men who are supposedly in the area and the masterminds behind the cocaine movement.

That's pretty much all of the plot I need to give you.  Watch the trailer below if you want to see a little more, plus it will help orientate you to the type of film and dialogue that is present throughout.  I'm not sure everyone can enjoy a movie with thick accents and cultural differences, but for those of you who can I think you'll love this film.

The director is the brother of Martin McDonagh, who directed one of my favorite films In Bruges, also with Brendan Gleeson.  I'm not going to try and compare the two as directors or the two movies, but this one is pretty good.  I would almost call this a comedy with noir tendencies, but it isn't quite that and shouldn't be compartmentalized. Gleeson is just awesome as a 'don't give a shit' policeman who drinks, does drugs, hires hookers, and gets the job done.  Cheadle as the FBI agent is nothing special and his role is seemingly there just so that Gleeson can make racial jokes - but some of them are really funny and the chemistry between he two is solid.

Aside from the plot and the acting, the star of the film is the cinematography.  Barren Irish sea-scapes can make for some wonderful shots and the decision to film many scenes in the evening and dead of night leads to some pretty incredible shots.  This isn't the best film of the year but it is damn good.  I laughed out loud quite a bit and also admired the film for taking a chance.  This is not formulaic at all and that is about the best compliment I can give.

**** out of 5

DVD pick of the week: Big Fish (2003)

Big Fish (2003)
Director - Tim Burton
125 min; PG-13

Director Tim Burton used all of his creativity to bring to life the stories of a dying man who has told them so often to everyone around him that he may actually believe they are true, fantastical or not. Ewan McGregor is pitch perfect with a wonderful supporting cast who take a lifetime of tall tales and leave us wondering just what is and is not a big fish story.

People often tell me they just want to watch a movie to be entertained and they don't want to have to think too much.  While I will never understand that point of view, I can safely say that this is a film you will enjoy for all of the visuals as well as the storylines, even if you have to (gasp!) pay a little attention.

I can't wait to watch this again and again.

6 recently viewed Netflix movies

I'm hitting home runs with Netflix lately - lots of good ones seen for the first time and some for seconds

Oldboy (2003)
Oldeuboi

You'll never forget the name Oh Dae-Su after watching him turn made and seek revenge after years of imprisonment for reasons he can't understand.  Brilliantly violent with an amazing story, make sure to ONLY see this in the original Korean language with subtitles and NOT the dubbed version - night and day difference.

***** out of 5

The Thin Red Line (1998)

Famed director Terrence Malick created one of the best movies not widely seen in the late 90s.  In just about the greatest travesty of a category, the 1998 Oscar for Best Picture went to Shakespeare in Love when it could or should have gone to any of the other contenders (The Thin Red Line; Saving Private Ryan; Elizabeth; Life is Beautiful).  I enjoy Saving Private Ryan, like many, but the Thin Red Line really is a much better film in every aspect except it doesn't have Tom Hanks and Matt Damon to draw in the crowds.  What it does have is Nick Nolte and an amazingly long cast full of credentials taking part in war where things are portrayed in a very real way.  It is long and at times can feel drawn out but does so in a way that makes the viewer feel what these soldiers feel.  Just a top film.

***** out of 5

Children of Men (2006)

In 2027 a strange thing has happened on earth - women can no longer get pregnant.  Obviously this will lead to disaster, so it is quite surprising when a small band of rebels are discovered to be transporting a pregnant girl to scientists who will hopefully be able to solve a problem that will eventually lead to the extinction of mankind.  Clive Owen is a very strong lead and the supporting cast is fine as well.  Not an outstanding movie but a very good one worth seeing.

**** out of 5

Glengarry Glen Ross (1992)

The leads! The leads! That's what this movie all about, sort of, and if you're a sales person you need to move this movie to the top of your to-see list.  An outstanding cast with more than one award worthy performance and several memorable and quotable lines make this a compelling drama with a lot of comedic dialogue.  Kevin Spacey as a slimy and spineless boss is juxtaposed perfectly with the brash and seasoned salesmen played by Jack Lemmon, Ed Harris, Alan Arkin, and Al Pacino.  Of course the speech by Alec Baldwin is one of the most famous speeches ever given on film, so if nothing else, see it for that alone.

***** out of 5

Big Fish (2003)

Director Tim Burton used all of his creativity to bring to life the stories of a dying man who has told them so often to everyone around him that he may actually believe they are true, fantastical or not.  Ewan McGregor is pitch perfect with a wonderful supporting cast who take a lifetime of tall tales and  leave us wondering just what is and is not a big fish story.  I can't wait to watch this again and again.

***** out of 5

The French Connection (1971)

Before he made his masterpiece, The Exorcist, in 1973, director William Friedkin made another masterpiece that just happened to win Best Picture as well as giving Gene Hackman a statue for Best Actor with his portrayal of "Popeye" Doyle, a NY narcotics detective who, along with his partner, the great Roy Sheider, seek to bring down a drug king from a foreign land, Alain Charnier (Fernando Rey).  Pacing and the score are key components to this film which may feel a little outdated today if you're seeing it for the first time, but a film like this is so rare that you must give it a chance, if for nothing else because it contains what an actual master car-chase scene should look like.

***** out of 5

My DVD pick of the week: In Bruges (2008)

Every so often I'm going to send out a movie selection from the past that I think is brilliant.  I hope you all see it and enjoy it. 

In Bruges is one of my top 20 favorite films from the 2000s - here is what I wrote a year ago:

In Bruges (2008) In a widely over-looked film when it was released we are given a gem of a movie that brilliantly weaves noir-comedy and ultra-serious issues seamlessly. Colin Farrell and Brendan Gleeson complement each other perfectly as hit-men who are heading in different life directions, each thrown together for an indeterminate amount of time in the postcard-picturesque city of Bruges as their employer (Ralph Fiennes) decides how to handle the delicate decision (both professional and moral) that a bundled hit has put them all in. With side-busting humor on the darkest level it may not be a film for everyone, but it certainly captures a different feel for how to tell a movie about a not-too-uncommon Hollywood theme of hit-men and the difficult situations they always seem to find themselves. Witty dialogue keeps the slow-ish pace of the film on track and the comical ending turned tragedy leaves you with a deep appreciation for the people who worked on the entire production.



I have posted my original review below along with a link to a wonderful write up about the film which you should read if you've seen the film and should wait to read if you haven't seen the film.  This write up makes me want to see the film immediately for a 5th time! So much insight.

http://blogs.suntimes.com/foreignc/2011/07/somewhere-between-heaven-and-hell.html



In Bruges (2008)
Director - Martin McDonagh
Writer - Martin McDonagh
Cast
Colin Farrell – Ray
Brendan Gleeson – Ken
Ralph Fiennes – Harry Waters

Ray: Do you think this is good?
Ken: Do I think what's good?
Ray: You know, going around in a boat, looking at stuff?
Ken: Yes, I do. It's called sight-seeing.

The beauty of Bruges, the city in Belgium, is that it is “the most well-preserved medieval city in the whole of Belgium”, according to Ken (Brendan Gleeson) as he flips through his touristy books and maps. Ray (Colin Farrell) responds with the memorable line, “Ken, I grew up in Dublin. I love Dublin. If I grew up on a farm, and was retarded, Bruges might impress me but I didn't, so it doesn't.”

This aptly sums up the two distinct personalities of Ken and Ray, two hit-men hired to do a job that did not go according to plan. The two men are sent to the picturesque city of Bruges to wait for further instructions from their boss, Harry Waters, played wonderfully by (Ralph Fiennes). How much time they will have to wait is unknown (though 2 weeks in the same hotel room is probably a good guess) and so the two men proceed to pass the time in various ways and varying degrees of strangeness.

Director Martin McDonagh presents to us a complex film that, on the surface, you might think a fairly typical Hollywood plot. There is murder, drugs, sex, dark comedy, on-location shooting – all things you can find in any big-budget action flick. What In Bruges manages to do is to take all those components and weave them into a story about the human condition, a story told to us through the viewpoint of multiple and distinct characters, each with a set of ideals and thoughts and beliefs that may not agree with each other, but ultimately are strong enough to guide in each of the character’s convictions.

I found myself playing the role of tourist while watching this film, imagining myself climbing the towers or slowly coasting around canal corners. The scenery is breathtaking, no doubt, but it is the character driven film that makes this such a special project. Multiple supporting roles lend so much to the film that it takes some of the burden off the main two characters and allows us to remember that this is a real city with real people living real lives, even if we only get to see a glimpse of the not-so-proper ways of living.

Without giving away too much, for I found that knowing very little going in made this a special experience, it should be noted that whether you feel this is the story of Ken or of Ray, we are privy to so much from each that it ultimately doesn’t matter. Each has and will make his own decisions and accept the consequences, whatever they may be. Ultimately it is a story of convictions for these characters – What can you live with? And what is too much to carry?

This film received multiple award nominations and rightfully so. I was taken in by Gleeson’s portrayal of an introspective, mature hit-man, just as much as I was thrilled to see Farrell pull off a much more complex character than he is used to doing. Along with an American dwarf actor and local drug-selling beauty, In Bruges managed to pull off that rare ability to make me watch no less than 3 times since its release, with an emphasis on hardly being able to wait to go back for a 4th viewing.

5/5

2 Movie Reviews: Another Earth (2011) and Captain America (2011)

Another Earth (2011)
Director - Mike Cahill
PG-13; 92 Min
Cast
Brit Marling - Rhoda
William Mapother - John

Another Earth, winner of the 2011 Sundance Film Festival's Alfred P. Sloan Feature Film Prize, brought more than a few looks from moviegoers who often expect that prize to go to a film that deals primarily with themes of science and the like, and though this film clearly does involve some science-fiction, it is actually a very well put together drama about two people who are connected through tragedy.  The science, though integral, takes a back seat, and it is for this reason that I hope people do not venture into this film with misconceptions of what they are about to see - there are no aliens flying in from the other earth to shoot at us - there are a lot of slow moving scenes with great build up between two regular people with regular problems who just happen to live in a time when another earth is visible in the sky.

I'm just going to come out and say that this is one of the best films I've seen this year.  I loved almost every aspect from the casting to the story to the way it was shot on a shoestring budget.  I absolutely hated one part of the story, but I;m able to overlook the total cop out for the greater good of the film and will not even raise my issues with it in this review.  I am actually reminded quite a bit of a wonderful British film from a few years ago - Fish Tank - in which the female lead (a young girl) is shot in a gritty, dark, realistic way as she walks to and from locations, almost begging us to spend time wondering what she is thinking as her life spirals out of control.

In this movie we are privy to the life of Rhoda, a promising 17 year old girl who finds herself accepted to a prestigious science program at MIT.  After a night of celebrating and heavy drinking, Rhoda finds herself driving home alone when the news on the radio changes the world at large and her personal world.  Hearing the news and looking into the sky she sees the distinct outline of what appears to be another earth in the night sky, next to the moon.  At the exact same time a promising college professor and composer, John, is at a red light with his wife and young child also listening to the news.  When Rhoda's car smashes into theirs, killing the wife and child and sending John into a coma, both of their lives are forever connected by both tragedy and earth shattering revelation.

What transpires over the course of the film is the aftermath of Rhoda's 4 years of jail time - a wonderfully written part of the story in which we don't see a single second of her life behind bars, just her getting out and starting to deal with the reality of her situation.  John has become an alcoholic and sits alone depressed.  Through a series of events these two become connected once again and that is what this story is all about.

Except for that pesky earth int he sky.  What the hell is going on there?  The discovery of a second planet just like ours and close by is a constant background theme.  It is not discussed in to much depth, but enough for intriguing theories and possibilities to be heard on the news.  Will we try to make contact? Will we try to visit? What kind of hopes and possibilities are out there?

I loved this film.  And yes, it has a creepy factor to it that you have to get over.  This is about people with problems and possibly a second chance.  It is also about another earth, and it's up there, and it's going to change everything.

**** and 1/2 out of 5

Captain America: The First Avenger (2011)
Director - Joe Johnston
PG-13; 124 Min

Meh.  Just another in an endless line of comic book genre films that I simply lack the emotional depths to enjoy.  Things blow up and people shoot at things with ray gun things and shields fly around and strike things and more people get shot by ray guns and a guy's head turns all red and he is evil and the scrawny kid who can't bench 50 pounds becomes the greatest superhero in the world during the war against Nazis or something. 

I'm angry because I was told that this one had a great story line and a great director and I actually really enjoyed the first 30 minutes - a lot - and was into the story.  And then, like so many before, it becomes 60 straight minutes of cgi gun fire and a lot of running around. 

It isn't the worst and it isn't the best, but I sort of almost fell asleep at one point.

It makes no difference what I write - just see it if you like these kind of movies. Don't, if you don't.

** out of 5

A Movie Review: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - Part 2 (2011)

Note: No spoilers in this review

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2 (2011)
Director - David Yates
130 Min; PG-13
Based on the novel by J.K. Rowling
Cast
Harry Potter - Daniel Radcliffe
Ron Weasley - Rupert Grint
Hermione Granger - Emma Watson
Professor Severus Snape - Alan Rickman
Lord Voldemort - Ralph Fiennes

The Harry Potter films have come to an end and, much like when the novels concluded, there will certainly be a void for many devoted fans who openly or secretly wish there would be just one more magical tale of wizardry around which they may wrap their imaginations.  Fortunately for us all we were given a decent send off with the second part of the Deathly Hallows adaptation and in the end it is all we can ask for from a decade long series of films which would always fight an uphill battle to live up to the highest of expectations from those who so dearly love the words from which the visuals took form.  The epic conclusion to the story of The Boy Who Lived remains mainly faithful to the original storytelling and audiences are treated to the proper amount of cathartic moments.  There are wonderful special effects with bright colored lightning bolts from magical wands, reappearances of characters from past movies, and finally the full back story to the most controversial figure in the Harry Potter world - Severus Snape.  Can you really ask for more?

The story of how Harry Potter came to be is actually quite amazing and I urge you to read about Rowling's efforts to conceive, write, and ultimately publish what has become and will surely stay as one of the all time greatest selling series in literature and as a movie franchise.  Here are the release dates of the novels in case you didn't know:

1.Harry Potter and the Philosopher's (Sorcerer's) Stone released June 26th, 1997
2.Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets released July 2nd, 1998
3.Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban released July 8th, 1999
4.Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire released July 8th, 2000
5.Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix released June 21st, 2003
6.Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince released July 16th, 2005
7.Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows released July 21st, 2007

The films overlapped the development of the series, with release dates as follows:

Philosopher's stone: 16th November 2001
Chamber of Secrets: 15th November 2002
Prisoner of Azkaban: United Kingdom - 31st May 2004 United States - 4th June 2004
Goblet of Fire: 18th November 2005
Order of the Phoenix: United Kingdom - 12th July 2007 United States - 11th July 2007
Half-Blood Prince: 15th July 2009
Deathly Hallows: Part 1: 19th November 2010
Deathly Hallows: Part 2: 15th July 2011

In all likelihood the Harry potter series has had some effect on your life, whether you enjoyed the novels personally, read the novels with your children, or simply enjoyed the films.  If you paid no attention to the books or the movies, well, you missed out on something wonderful. 

In the final installment of the film series we follow Harry, Ron and Hermione as they work tirelessly to track down and destroy the remaining horcruxes containing pieces of Voldemort's soul.  What begins at a somewhat slow pace speeds up soon enough leading to the ultimate battle of good and evil at Hogwarts, an ongoing scene that takes up most of the film.  I was pleased with the amount of time spent focusing on Harry and Voledmort juxtaposed with the large scale battle going on around them, as well as the time taken to include many notable side characters and of course the story of Snape.  It should also be noted that, like the books, the films do not shy away from death, an important theme throughout the novels, and in this film many people do die.  Like the last film it is a darker piece that fits the situation.  Gone are the innocent days of potions blowing up in little kid faces and students discovering how to sneak out for a brew.  In the wizarding world there is a whole lot of serious business going on.

I loved all the Harry Potter novels but have not loved all the films.  I think most are decent and I will watch them again and again over time, but in the ranking of the films I would say this final installment ranks near the top.  Perhaps it has a lot to do with it all coming to a close, but I found the tone to be perfect in this film, and though the films will never live up to the great imagination of Rowling put in to words, I think they held their own in a way that allowed a generation of people young and old to allow themselves to be taken over for a decade+ of the story of the Boy Who Lived.

**** out of 5

All kinds of recently viewed random Netflix movies

L'annulaire (2005)
aka The Ring Finger
Subtitled: French

Olga Kurylenko in one of her first performances is exquisitely erotic in a very French-esqu film that revolves around a loose plot and expects the viewer to become emotionally involved in the film through our senses, not so much our intelligence.  Finding herself in need of a job, Iris accepts a receptionist position with a strange doctor who helps people move past personal issues by bottling and preserving them in his lab.

*** out of 5

The Last Station (2009)

Christopher Plummer and Helen Mirren give wonderful portrayals of the end years of Leo and Sofya Tolstoy in this historical drama that centers on philosophical and political discussion relating to Tolstoy's beliefs and to his final will and testament.  Some pacing issues but overall a great watch, as are most films with Paul Giamatti taking a role.

**** out of 5

Rescue Dawn (2006)

Werner Herzog directs Christian Bale in a Vietnam-era piece about captured soldiers in Laos.  The film brings good performances and creates nice suspense, but a little too much Christian Bale if you know what I mean?  Overall a good watch.

*** and 1/2 out of 5

Team America: World Police (2004)
I know I should have seen it by now but I continually feel like I've missed a lot of good ones this decade.  You would think the fact that I've been told one of the greatest sex scenes ever filmed takes place between puppets would have been enough for me to jump on this one, but I'm glad I finally got around to it anyway.  South Park creators take puppets to a new level of American pride and bad taste that works so well I finally found a comedy to laugh out loud to for the first time in a long time.  The appearance of Kim Jong Il is one of the best things in all of film.

***** out of 5

True Romance (1993)

An outstanding cast helps make this film so much fun to watch (I hadn't seen it in many many years) and nobody can forget the awesome scene with Dennis Hopper.  On the run and being hunted down in a series of drug related incidents, Christian Slater and Patricia Arquette have lightning chemistry and the all star supporting cast is a who's who: Dennis Hopper, Val Kilmer, Gary Oldman, Brad Pitt, Christopher Walken, Samuel L Jackson, Michael Rapaport, James Gandolfini and more.

***** out of 5

The Player (1992)

Again a film I hadn't seen in a long time and another with a pretty great cast.  Tim Robbins is directed by Robert Altman in this film loaded with Hollywood inside jokes but with a pretty dramatic tone.  Griffin Mill is a studio exec who is blackmailed, seemingly by a writer he rejected, and a series of events unfold.

**** out of 5

Stranger Than Fiction (2006)

In a completely different type of role for Will Ferrell, he takes on the character of an IRS agent who awakens one day to find his life being narrated in his own head, but by who? and why?  Ferrell would play a similar type of character in 2011s Everything Must Go, a film I enjoyed but not as much as this one.  Maggie Gyllenhaal is good here and the offbeat nature of the film hold up well throughout.

**** out of 5

Days of Heaven (1978)

Terrence Malick directed this beautifully shot film with Richard Gere and Sam Shepard that tells the tale of a few drifters who attempt to scheme up a plot to inherit a lot of money.  Words and plot do little justice to this film as it is very much one for the senses - visually striking with few and far between lines of dialogue, it is in the change of lighting, pacing, and the viewer's internal awareness of the film that it flourishes.

***** out of 5

2 movie reviews: Midnight in Paris and The Tree of Life

I haven't been in much of a movie review writing feeling the past few months and I know I haven't put a lot of effort into recent work and I don't particularly feel like writing anything right now, but I do want to put down some brief thoughts on 2 recently seen films because I think they are both important and wonderful in different ways and I think both of these will be talked about for a long time.  It is also awesome to find 2 great films out in June, usually a month reserved for 100% CGI films.

Midnight in Paris (2011)
Director - Woody Allen
PG-13; 100 Min
Cast
Owen Wilson - Gil
Rachel McAdams - Inez
Michael Sheen - Paul
Marion Cotillard - Adriana
(Many more)

I went into this one with almost zero knowledge other than one quick trailer I saw a while ago and I hope that is how you go into it as well.  With that in mind I've decided to not write anything specific so as not to spoil anything for those of you who choose not to read or watch things ahead of time.  What I will say is that this film has a whimsical and magical feel you don't get too often with films, especially the big-box money machine films of Hollywood.  And yet it accomplishes so much not with a smaller, less known cast and crew, but with Woody Allen directing a fleet of stars who all bring wonderful moments. 

At the heart of the film is Gil (Owen Wilson) who is a successful Hollywood writer but only does it for the money and is a bit disgusted with himself for never giving a real effort at writing a novel.  He fondly remembers his student days in Paris and wishes he had just stayed and let life take course.  He is on a trip to Paris with his fiancee Inez (Rachel McAdams - the most beautiful, charming, perfect woman in the world) where he is finally working on his novel and starting to see that his life is in a rut and he begins to long for a different age - Paris in the 1920s - where all was right with the world and the giants of literature and art would congregate and lead the way with thoughts and ideas.

So Gil goes walking alone one evening just to clear his head and from there the story really takes form in a way that nothing recent has done.  I am not a very knowledgable Woody Allen person, but I have liked most of what I have seen, including Annie Hall, Manhattan and, more recently, Vicki Cristina Barcelona. I think Allen is amazing at capturing the ambiance of his locations and of his characters' state of mind and in this film everything is perfect.  I'm going to give it a few months but I can't wait to go back and re-watch this one with a clear mind.  It was a really fun ride and Michael Sheen turns out one of the best supporting roles in a long time as Paul, an arrogant know-it-all who has something to say about everything - hie scenes turn out to be some of the most memorable of the entire film.

***** out of 5

The Tree of Life (2011)
Director - Terrence Malick
PG-13; 138 Min
Cast
Brad Pitt - Mr. O'Brien
Sean Penn - Jack
Jessica Chastain - Mrs. O'Brien
Hunter McCracken - Young Jack

To say I don't quite know how to write about this film is a major understatement.  How do I even attempt to describe what can only be seen as an attempt to visually represent what it is to be human?  I'm not trying to transcend director Terrence Malick or this movie to some throne or say nothing like it has ever been done, but it truly is an amazing achievement that should leave you with a lot of thinking and a lot of questions you can't possibly answer.  I like movies that challenge me to think.

This film is clearly not going to be liked by a large population of people - it just isn't a 'normal' film and for people who don't enjoy non-tradtional movies it will probably be unwatchable.  There is a loose plot but when you get down to it there really isn't a plot at all.  The plot is existence itself. The focus is mainly on children yet there is a grown up world with prominence.  Part of this existence is the O'Brien family in 1950s America and part of this existence is a grown up O'Brien boy in present day and the other parts encompass everything that has ever happened throughout all of time.  How's that for ambitous?

This movie is all about emotions.  How we think about ourselves and our own being and how we interpret watching a movie about these emotions and how we process and revel in the enjoyment of the process.  Sitting back and throwing down popcorn isn't going to get you through the 20+ minute stretch with almost no dialogue as we view the entire history of time in a way that really makes us ponder, well, everything.  This is one of those magical movies that only grows better with perspective.  Leaving the theater I'm not sure how I felt, but I know that a day later I feel exactly what I just wrote.

***** out of 5

The American President #10: John Tyler

Please feel free to add anything you want about John Tyler!
- Born March 29, 1790 at Greenway Plantation in Virginia; Died January 18, 1862 in Richmond, Virginia

- One term President April 4, 1841- March 4, 1845 (took office upon death of William Henry Harrison)
-Whig Party
-Vice-President: None

-Nickname: Accidental President
-Religion: Episcopalian
-Profession: Lawyer
- Governor of Virginia: 1825-1827; US Senator: 1827-1836; Vice-President: March-April 1841

According to article 2, Section 6 of the Constitution the wording leaves the potential for some doubt as to whether the VP should automatically be sworn in to office upon the death of the President.  Tyler believed it was clear cut and that he would assume all duties and perks of the office, while others viewed him as just a rubber stamp until a new President was elected.  It was eventually accepted that the VP would in fact become President upon removal of the current President.

Leader of the Whig Party - Henry Clay - would soon cause problems.  Clay pushed to reinstate the Bank of the United States and Tyler vetoed.  This caused a public break and Tyler would leave the Whig party.  He was now a President without a party, which left him open to congressional action. Tyler narrowly escaped a vote to impeach him in 1843.

Tyler worked hard for the annexation of Texas and had to fight hard to make sure it was his legacy and not that of James Polk - entire books have been written on the subject. Using the slogan "Tyler and Texas" he was able to get the law passed just 3 days before he left office, though Texas did not accept nor become a state until several months later during th Polk presidency.

Tyler was the first to marry while in office, to a woman 30 years younger than him, and it was not received well by the public nor his family. 

Tyler joined the Confederacy during the Civil War and became the only President who later became sworn enemy of the US

- Tyler was father to 15 children, the most by any President in history
- Tyler did not give an inaugural address
- Tyler's wife began the practice of playing Hail to the Chief to signal arrival at state functions
-9/11/1841: Tyler's entire cabinet (except Daniel Webster) resigns in protest
- 3/3/1842: MA passes chiuld labor law of 10 hours per day maximum
- 5/24/1844: Samuel F.B. Morse sends the first telegraphic message "What hath God wrought" between Washington DC and Baltimore

A Movie Review: Everything Must Go (2011)

Everything Must Go (2011)
Director - Dan Rush
97 Min; R
Cast
Will Farrell - Nick Halsey
Rebecca Hall - Samantha
Christopher Jordan Wallace - Kenny

Everything Must Go is a 97 minute film based on a short story by Raymond Carver (Why Must We Dance?) that is less than 10 pages in length, so it is only fair for us to assume that there will not be a lot of action sequences, or sequences with a lot happening for that matter, in the movie.  What we do end up seeing is Will Ferrell showing off his serious side, a la Adam Sandler in Punch Drunk Love (It's the first example that pops into my mind.) In each film the goofball scene stealer actor turns to a darker, emotional side of themselves in order to give us a performance we didn't ask for, but are fortunate we received. 

There isn't much I could spoil in this review, since the film is basically told in 3 simple acts over the span of about a week and we really only come to know 3 characters in depth and 2 others as some back story.  Nick has lost his job of many years after another incident involving his drinking problems.  We learn that his wife wants a divorce and Nick learns the hard way that his time is up.  He arrives at home to find everything he owns on the front lawn.  The ensuing partial mental breakdown can be summed up by saying that Nick spends many nights in his chair on the lawn drinking many beers and not doing much of anything else.  Nick doesn't want to face his situation, he simply wants things to be like they used to be.

A subplot develops with Kenny, a young neighborhood black kid who needs some guidance.  Nick figures he can pay Kenny to watch his stuff when he needs to run to get more beer, and eventually the two of them prepare for the inevitable yard sale that will clear everything from Nick's life.  The kid is played by Christopher Jordan Wallace (The son of Biggie Smalls for those of you paying attention) and he fits into the movie pretty well.  Samantha (Rebecca Hall from Vicki Cristina Barcelona and The Town) is the other subplot as a young, pregnant woman who moves next door and is awaiting news from her husband across country about when he will be coming.  She and Nick form a strained bond in the film as only movie bonds can be made.  I'm not so sure the two of them would ever say more than a congenial hello in passing in real life.

One problem for audiences who don't do their homework will be with Ferrell himself, since he does have a few humorous moments, but this is not a typical comedy for him.  If you don't know going in that this is a dark comedy of sorts you may find yourself put off within the first 10 minutes.  As long as you are able to separate Ferrell the screwball comedian from Ferrell the actor playing Nick Halsey in a Raymond Carver performance, you should do just fine to enjoy the ride for the most part.  Unfortunately the entire ride isn't always to enjoy.  The pacing of the film, brought on by the fact that the source material is so limited, leads to some long and drawn out sequences in which we ask ourselves if this really needed to be made into a feature length film.  This Carver story has been done before in the form of short films less than 20 minutes in length and I can see why.  Carver is a minimalist writer who never really liked to leave a reader with a sense that his characters redeemed themselves, instead we witness short bursts about people's lives, who they are and what they are in that moment - not always a good formula for movies.

I applaud the effort of first time film maker Dan Rush to make us feel compassion for Nick, but that isn't really the point of the story if you ask me, and as you move throughout the film you will undoubtedly find yourself wavering over your like or dislike of this person for various reasons.  In the end a lo of what this film is about is soul searching.  It isn't a feel good movie but it isn't a total downer either.  This is a film that walks the line of tugging our emotional thoughts in two directions and I don''t think it always works too well.  I'm not sold on recommending this film completely, but I will say that the type of person who will enjoy this film probably already knows they are the type of person who will enjoy this film.

*** and 1/2 out of 5

2 Very Brief Movie Reviews from 2011: Thor; No Strings Attached

Thor (2011) - in 3D
Director - Kenneth Branagh
PG-13; 115 min
Cast
Thor - Chris Hemsworth
Jane - Natalie Portman
Loki - Tom Hiddelston
Odin - Anthny Hopkins
Erik - Stellan Skarsgard

The movie begins with a scene that involves Natlie Portman on earth, in the desert, chasing strange weather patterns.  Then there is about 30 minutes of back story explaining who Thor is and what planet/solar system/bridged space place he is from and why we should care.  Then it goes back to Natalie Portman.  Then we get more back story about the Ice beings and their issues with Thor and his father the king Odin.  Somewhere in between we learn about Thor's brother Loki and what his role is, and back on earth we learn more about Erik (Stellan Skarsgard - a great actor, normally) and why he is there.  In between all of this we have the story of Thor being banished from his neck of the woods and into ours and why there is a crossover battle in the desert that involves a large machine thing and a small western-like town.  The 3D adds nothing and detracts fully.  The movie rides the razor's edge of being a children's cartoon with all the corny CGI and terrible dialogue.

Anyone who has read even a few of my movie reviews knows that this is not the type of film I normally care for (so yeah, take it for what it is), but putting that aside, this is still a terrible movie.  I tried to be 'entertained' for 2 hours and just enjoy my popcorn, but nothing about this film added up to anything good.

* out of 5

No Strings Attached (2011)
Director - Ivan Reitman
R; 108 Min
Cast
Natalie Portman - Emma
Ashton Kutcher - Adam
Kevin Kline - Alvin

Director Ivan Reitman's name is attached to a whole lot of decent and very good films from long ago (Meatballs, Stripes, Ghostbusters, Twins) but nothing much to note in recent years, unless you really loved the tv pilot for Cooking Lessons in 2004.  Ashton Kutcher and Natalie Portman are both bonified movie stars sure to bring in money, and true to form the film has more than tripled its 25,000,000 budget.  In this film the two stars have enough chemistry to make it enjoyable enough for two people to sit through on a Saturday evening at home and maybe laugh once or twice and not exactly want to light themselves on fire.  Nothing new is done here - a boy and a girl want to have sex but no relationship beyond that except one of them falls for the other and of course the other does too, and the in between is a bunch of friends telling them they are crazy for different reasons.  It's not a terrible movie, but it's really not very good either.  It is the exact definition of an average romantic comedy.

** and 1/2 out of 5

A Documentary Review: Cave of Forgotten Dreams (2011)

Cave of Forgotten Dreams (2011)
90 Min
Director and Narrator - Werner Herzog
Filmed in 3D


More than 30,000 years ago, our human ancestors entered the Chauvet Cave in southern France and, for reasons unknown but pondered about for millennia, they created cave paintings.  These are the oldest known paintings to exist.  The pictures depict magnificent animals, including lions, horses, rhinos, and extinct cave bears and panthers.  The soft cave floor is littered with bones (100% of them are from animals) including many well preserved skulls of the extinct cave bear which would have spent much time in such caves.  Beautiful patterns have emerged after thousands of years of slow dripping water and the ambiance is only enhanced by the drastic shift from large chambers with high ceilings to tight spaces with almost no room to move.  The cave was first explored in 1994 and due to the fact that it had been sealed by a long ago rock collapse, it was most likely the first time in over 20,000 years anyone had entered the cave.

Werner Herzog has a distinct style, and anyone who has seen some of his films will recognize immediately that this is a Herzog film.  As in a favorite film of mine, Grizzly Man, he uses wonderful shots of his subject spliced with entertaining interviews by key figures.  He expounds upon the bigger questions such as 'why' did people draw these and what could it have meant in a broader scheme of humanity.  Experts are interviewed in various fields of science and the humanities who all bring unique perspectives to the subject matter.  There are wonderful asides that touch on similar cave findings, such as bone fragments turned into flute-like instruments, signaling the importance of not just art but music to people throughout time.  Anecdotes about the history of the region including the large glaciers which covered the area before melting add a nice touch.

Herzog and his team were hindered greatly by the French government (justifiably) who would only allow filming under the most strict guidelines. Just a crew of 4, shooting for 4 hours per day, for just one week and they were only allowed a few small, battery run lights, all the while confined 100% of the time to a small, 2 foot wide walkway built throughout the cave which no one is allowed to leave for fear of tampering with the well preserved cave.  Herzog filmed in 3D which, for the first time in my life, I can say was absolutely the perfect solution to portraying the amazing cave in its entirety.  The paintings are made throughout the cave on contoured walls which, it would seem, were purposely put there so as to add to the dimensions and the storytelling of the paintings.  Herzog draws a wonderful parallel to what it must have looked like by torchlight 30,000 years ago.  There is even evidence that some of the paintings have etchings around them to create depth.  Several paintings are drawn with multiple legs and horns, clearly attempting to depict movement among the animals.  There is a unique piece of wall covered in red hand prints.  Interestingly, there is a distinct defect in the print of the little finger on one of the hands, and this hand can be traced to multiple red hand prints throughout the cave, meaning the team is able to trace the path of a single individual from so many thousands of years ago.

One of the most interesting aspects of the film comes from an area of the cave which cannot be fully seen from the walkway.  A partial view of one of only 2 paintings in the cave which depict some form of the human body.  It appears to be the lower body of a woman with the head of a bullish creature. Herzog is eventually allowed to place a camera on a long crane to get a better view.  It is not so much the shot of the painting that is astounding as is the questions that are raised by such figures.  What were our ancestors thinking when they drew these paintings of animals, and more specifically, when they drew this painting of half woman half beast?  What did they believe about the world and why were they so interested in recording visually what they saw around them?  This is a beautiful film and one enhanced largely via 3D technology.

***** out of 5

2 Brief and Lazy 2011 Movie Reviews: Source Code and Jane Eyre

Source Code (2011)
Director - Duncan Jones
PG-13; 93 Min
Cast
Jake Gyllenhaal - Colter Stevens
Michelle Monaghan - Christina Warren
Vera Farmiga - Colleen Goodwin

I liked this movie because it was 93 minutes long and understood it didn't have enough substance to go a minute longer.  Maybe I've seen way too many movies (I have) but I knew within a few minutes of the opening scenes pretty much everything that was going on and pretty much where it was headed, but none of that mattered because the film is fun and shot well and you never find yourself looking at the time.  That's all good enough for me with this one.  Gyllenhaal, Monaghan and Farmiga all work well together.  Not going to give away much of anything since you will figure it all out quickly, but the movie is basically a sci fi/real life hybrid that explores ideas of what the brain may be capable of accomplishing. I almost passed on this one but, like The Adjustment Bureau, I am glad that nothing else was out when I wanted to see a movie. I say see it and enjoy it.

*** and 1/2 out of 5

Jane Eyre (2011)
Director - Cary Fukunaga
PG-13; 120 Min
Cast
Mia-Wasikowska - Jane Eyre
Michael Fassbender - Rochester
Judie Dench - Mrs. Fairfax

There have been multiple film adaptations of Charlotte Bronte's novel depicting a young woman exposed to a harsh childhood who becomes a governess to a wealthy man with a dark secret.  I have seen none of them.  I did read the novel many years ago - forced by some teacher or professor -and I remember liking parts of it but not enough to recall the entire thing all these years later.  So, if you haven't read the novel, no worries, this movie works very well if you go in with no knowledge at all.  Mia Wasikowska is the glue of the film and she is wonderful, depicting plain Jane who is probably as close to a feminist as you can find hundreds of years ago.  Her acting is superb in this film and it needs to be for us to stay interested.  Michael Fassbender as the wealthy Rochester is also excellent.  You may not know his name but he has an incredible role in one of my favorite films of recent years, Fish Tank, and was also in Inglourius Basterds.  As Mrs. Fairfax, the caretaker of the mansion which Jane comes to live and work at, Judy Dench is very capable and reliable.  This is a period piece shot with great cinematography and costume design and, though it may not appeal to a large population of younger males, was a very rewarding viewing experience.

**** out of 5

2 Brief 2011 Movie Reviews: Water For Elephants and The Conspirator

Water For Elephants (2011)
Director - Francis Lawrence
PG-13; 122 Min
Cast
Reece Witherspoon - Marlena
Robert Pattinson - Jacob
Christoph Waltz - August

In 1931 America the depression and prohibition were in full force.  For some the way to stay employed was to travel the country by rail with the circus, and in the case of this film that circus was the struggling Benzini Brothers, direct but not very formiddable competetors of the great Ringling Brothers. There is a back story which frames the film in the same style of Titanic, but you can cast that aside and just enjoy the film for its story-telling and well acted performances.

I've never watched a Robert Pattinson film (I know who he is and what he has done and he was in a Harry Potter film so I guess I have seen him once) and I thought he did a pretty good job holding his own as the young vagabond Jacob finding his way in this circus against seasoned lead Witherspoon as Marlena, the lead attraction of the Benzini Brothers circus.  Marlena also happens to be the wife of August, the owner and operator of the circus and played wonderfully by Christopher Waltz in a very nice follow up to his mesmerizing performance in Inglourious Basterds.) All three actors work well together and Waltz really shows us how amazing he is at switching personalities on call, creating a somewhat likable figure at times who clearly isn't someone we would ever want to cross.

The film takes us along a ride as the circus struggles to make any money.  There is romantic tension between the three leads which ultimately drives the movie.  After Marlena is forced to find a new star act when her horse is injured, August brings in his new idea he is sure will save them all, a majestic elephant named Rosie.  Needing to learn the act quickly Marlena begins to train with Jacob as the defacto trainer due to his years of veterinarian studies.  The film leads up to a climactic ending and I was surprisingly very satisfied with the entire movie, shot with wonderful scope and told in a very moving manner.

**** out of 5

The Conspirator (2011)
Director - Robert Redford
PG-13; 122 Min
Cast
James McAvoy - Frederick Aiken
Robin Wright - Mary Surratt
Kevin Kline - Edwin Stanton
Tom Wilkinson - Reverdy Johnson
Evan Rachel Wood - Anna Surratt

Director Robert Redford once again gives us a film with all kinds of political implications which we probably find ourselves relating to current events, but which we don't necessarily like the way it is being told to us.  In the case of the Conspirator, we are asked to view the trial of a woman accused of conspiring to kill President Lincoln in what is clearly a kangaroo court setting, though the ultimate questions concerning guilt are never clear.

In 1865 near the end of the civil war, John Wilkes Booth and several co-conspirators met frequently at a boarding house run by Mary Surratt and inhabited by her son John and daughter Anna.  After the fateful night of the assassination the military higher ups feel it is in the nation's best interest to hold a speedy trial and resolution for the co-conspirators, as Booth perished in a barn fire when cornered.  Frederick Aiken, a young and unproven lawyer, is handed the task to defend Mary Surratt, though he believes from the outset that she is guilty just like everyone else. 

The film mainly takes place in the court room as we see several breaches of Constitutional law take place.  What saves the movie from becoming a bit too high minded is that we are never really aware of the guilt or non-guilt of Mary.  It is well known that her son is most likely guilty, but he has fled and without him to hang the government and the military are willing to put Mary on trial for the same crimes, whether she did it or not.  The film is interesting enough with the subject manner but I had trouble ever really relating to James McAvoy.  I was never really drawn into his character enough to care all the time.  As a fan of history in general the film was a success and I think people will enjoy it if they understand they are going to see a film with no explosions and a lot of dialogue.

*** and 1/2 out of 5

The American President #9: William Henry Harrison

Please feel free to add anything you want about William Henry Harrison!

-One-term President (Whig): March 4, 1841 - April 4, 1841 (Dies in office of pneumonia after just one month)
-Vice President: John Tyler
-Election of 1840: Electoral vote (Harrison 234; Van Buren 60); Popular vote (Harrison 1,274,624; Van Buren 1,127,781)

-Born Feb. 9, 1773 at Berkeley Plantation in Virginia
-Died April 4, 1841 in Washington D.C.

-Nickname: Old Tippecanoe - from his stand which resulted in the burning of Prophetstown

-Profession: Soldier; Military officer; Father of 10 children

-Harrison was the first President to die in office, served the shortest term (31 days), was oldest ever elected at age 68 until Reagan at age 69, and gave the longest inaugural address (1 hour and 40 minutes in freezing cold rain; 8,445 words)

-He became an American hero with his voctory at the Battle of the Thames on oct. 5, 1813, when, as General, he led 3,500 Americans against 700 British and 1,000 Indians led by Tecumseh.

-'The Curse' is attributed to Shawnee chief Tecumseh who is said to have put a curse on Harrison - with his death in office every President after him elected every 23 years would also die in office (Lincoln, Garfield, McKinley, Harding, Roosevelt, Kennedy - Ronald Reagan is credited with breaking the curse, though he came very close to being killed by John Hinckley, Jr)

-Not much else to go into... I mean, he dies after a month in office.

A Movie Review: Hanna (2011)

Hanna (2011)
Director - Joe Wright
PG-13; 111 Min
Cast
Saoirse Ronan - Hanna
Eric Bana - Erik
Cate Blanchett - Marissa


The simple title of the film Hanna aptly refers to the young teen who remains on screen for almost all of the 111 minute film.  Saoirse Ronan (you know her from Atonement and The Lovely Bones) is chillingly convincing as a girl raised by her father (Eric Bana) as far away from civilization as possible, somewhere near the Arctic Circle.  Having no other human interaction and definitely no TV, Hanna is taught to fend for herself, to hunt, to build, to fight, to think her way through anything.  She spends all of her time doing these things and learning everything she can from the books in their meager cabin.  She is pushed very hard by her father for a purpose we eventually discover, but are not quite sure of as the film begins.  Hanna is mentally and physically tough in ways teenagers just aren't, which works well in her world of snow and seclusion, but not necessarily so well when she eventually find herself in the real world.

I'm not a huge fan of being spoon fed plot details and I would actually be willing to claim that I have a sick need for finding films that make me think about what is happening, and what I like about much of this film is that it does unfold with a cloak of mystery.  Even if you guess a few of the details throughout you are not being hit over the head with what is happening.  Unfortunately there are about 3 staggering issues that come up which are never fully explained and I find no way of ever really getting a good answer as to how or why they happened, but I won't spoil this review with any of those - you'll most likely find them on your own.

The action in this film feels very appropriate, with very well shot chase scenes and some pretty intense violence at times, but then the director does something wonderful and he pulls back and takes a look at the human side of Hanna and lets her explore her new world.  After she seemingly completes a mission which sends her out of her only known frigid existence, Hanna stumbles upon a traveling family whom she, as best she can, befriends.  There are some interesting dynamics at work in these scenes when you take into account what we know about Hanna and the rest of the world and I found much of the shots during this part of the film to be done with great thoughtfulness.

As is the case with most action movies the last third of the film is filled a bit too much with some sequences I could have done without, and though I certainly won't give away any actual details of the ending, I would be remiss if I didn't point out that it let me down in a way I really wish it hadn't.  Otherwise this was a wonderful film for this time of the year with a nice cast which includes Cate Blanchett as an agent who is heavily mixed up in the reasons behind Erik and Hanna being who they are and she plays her role as a cold and calculating woman with a single minded approach, almost too emotionless.

**** out of 5

2 Brief 2011 Movie Reviews: The Adjustment Bureau; Kill the Irishman

The Adjustment Bureau (2011)
Director - George Nolfi
PG-13; 106 min
Cast
Matt Damon  - David Norris
Emily Blunt  - Elise
Anthony Mackie - Harry
Terence Stamp - Thompson

Do humans have free will, or are we all just puppets with pre-destined fates? This is the over-arching question and premise of The Adjustment Bureau, a film I am happy to say I found very well made with a story that flowed well and, as long as you can shrug off a few hard-to-believe-the-characters-would-actually-do-that moments, a film that posits some interesting scenarios but never pushes things on us which would make it too preachy or over-bearing.  Matt Damon and Emily Blunt have wonderful chemistry in a film where you absolutely must believe in the chemistry for anything to work, and a supporting cast of characters including Anthony Mackie and Terence Stamp who hold sci-fi/spiritual powers as they live and move among people, checking their architectural maps of our lives to give a nudge here and there to make sure we stay on the correct paths.  I thought lots of things were just right in this film, including the pitch, the cast, and the running time, making this one of the rare films I had very little interest in seeing but am very pleasantly surprised by how much I enjoyed it.

**** out of 5

Kill the Irishman (2011)
Director - Jonathan Hensleigh
R; 106 min
Cast
Ray Stevenson - Danny Greene
Vincent D'Onofrio  - John Nardi
Val Kilmer - Joe Manditski
Christopher Walken - Shondor Birns

With a gritty look and feel, Kill the Irishman brings us back to a time when Cleveland was in a mafia war surrounded by unions, and in the middle of it all was Danny Greene.  As is often the case in the crime world, a lower level thug can sometimes raise through the ranks to obtain power and prestige through sheer will, charisma, and some broken skulls.  Ray Stevenson does a good job for most of the film keeping us interested in the story of Danny Greene, though he does have a small habit of taking us in the direction of a made-for-tv-movie feel at times, which is really my main critique of the film, of course that is probably just as much to blame on some of the writing for certain scenes which just felt out of place.  A really nice supporting cast helps bring this story to life as we witness a film based on true events in Cleveland, OH in the 1970s that saw some thirty+ car bombings in one summer alone and is the basis for the eventual downfall of the heads of all the major crime families in New York.  It is nearly impossible to watch a film like this and not make some comparisons to the great and beloved mob movies we all know and I suppose I am having trouble grading this one because it never reaches any level of specialness for me, but overall it is well done and a great way to spend a few hours.

*** and 1/2 out of 5

An Unconventional Movie Review: Limitless (2011)

Inspired by my hilarious friend Justin over at http://gbottomboat.blogspot.com/ (check it out for laughs) I've decided to try a different approach to the following movie review. Since I really really care what people think of me, please feel free to let me know how I did.

Limitless (2011)
Director - Neil Burger
PG-13; 105 min
Cast
Bradley Cooper - Eddie Morra
Robert De Niro - Carl Van Loon
Abbie Cornish - Lindy

Bradley Cooper is not, I repeat NOT, a Social Network/Matrix hybrid figure in the film Limitless, as much as the above photo capture would lead you to believe.  He is still just a smirky actor with a charmed life fooling everyone (though not me, Bradley, not me) into thinking he is the wittiest, most handsome, beautiful lips and eyes and chest and... whatever.  He is a fraud.  But that's ok, I guess, since he serves a purpose, which is to be 'that guy' in a string a films that will make a profit and leave people remembering him as 'that guy' from 'that movie' about a hangover in Vegas who also was in a whole lot of movies that nobody can ever remember the names of, and somehow find themselves thinking he was ever in something decent (FYI - re-watch the Hangover sober and tell me with a straight face it isn't actually a pretty bad movie, I mean, really not that funny when you get past a few good scenes, like, unwatchable a second time actually, especially when the Chinese guy gets all naked and the cars start getting in crashes and things just aren't really funny at all and the scene with Mike Tyson goes on too long, etc, etc.) If Charlie Sheen is Winning in life then Bradley Cooper his the motherfucking' lottery.

For those of you (all of you, I'm guessing) who fall into the above category of not quite sure you know Cooper from anything other than the Vegas thing, Cooper has 'starred' in such hits as: I want to Marry Ryan Banks (2004/tv); Failure to Launch (2006 - not the star); Alias (TV - he liked Jennifer Garner a lot); Yes Man (2008 - not the star); New York, I Love You (2009 - great movie - do you remember it???); All About Steve (2009 - masterful, though I didn't see it either); Valentine's Day (2010).  Somewhere recently in there he was a dude at a bachelor party in Las Vegas in a movie that simply wasn't anywhere near as good as people give it credit for, remember it for, or saw sober (disclaimer - I cannot possibly know what you saw in The Hangover (2009) as a comedy if you were yourself en route to a massive hangover - you see what I did there?)

This is where I am obligated to sigh and say that I digress.

So I saw this movie and I knew what I was getting into, I mean, I saw the trailer and a few previews, etc, and it's not like I was expecting anything great, but I did get fooled into thinking it would be a decent time killer, and by decent I mean that more than 50% of the movie would be pretty good and a little less than 50% of the movie would be a letdown, and in that regard it was a letdown because it was about 45% likable and 55% terrible, and by terrible I don't mean incoherent, I mean PG-13 for a movie that should have been R and wasted lots of opportunities to show more naked girls, I mean, seriously dropped the ball, and then it gets all preachy and he chooses his ex-girlfriend almost immediately over getting all kinds of strange, and, and, and....  I mean, Bradley Cooper AND Robert 'Raging Bull' De Niro, together? Not sure my heart can take it.

I pulled up my big boy diapers and decided to fork over some hard earned cash to see if director Neil Burger could move me to a difference of opinion.  It was going to take a monumental effort and he definitely failed, though not as hard a fail as, say, The Warrior's Way (2010) (completely un-related to anything about this movie or cast) in which Kate Bosworth simply massacres a role that she was born for! (a wild west chick from a broken home seeking revenge and caught up in ninja warrior battles, obviously....brilliant!)

I still love Kate from Blue Crush (2002) in a surfer role that won my heart, almost, but then I remembered just how much I truly loved Rachel McAdams and all was right in the world. It also helped that Kate went all eating-disorder on herself and weighed like 71 pounds for a while. Kate still looked great walking out of my hotel room though.

Hi Kate

Hellllo Rachel

In all due respect to Abbie Cornish, who plays Cooper's on again/off again girlfriend in the movie, it astounds me that they wouldn't go with a much higher calibre of hotness for a guy who basically has the world open up to him and can get anything he seemingly wants, including a babbling Chinese woman in the hallway who hates him. The movie is set up with a premise that this guy can take a pill and access 100% of his brain power and all doors open up to him, and within a few days of realizing all his dreams he is back trying to convince his ex that he has changed... But not before he bangs the annoying Chinese girl in the hallway and takes a trip to some beach with a bunch of random people and at some point has sex with and possibly murders a model.  Ooook Abbie. Sure you're the love of his life at this point. Way to ruin a plot line.

Abbie Cornish - hot, but not 'limitless' hot

'limitless' hot acceptability would be, but not limited to:

Adriana Lima

Kathy Ireland from many years ago

Jenna Haze (this is the only photo on the entire internet I feel comfortable posting here, but trust me, she would be a 'limitless' type girl)

And so it is that these little clear pills make Cooper's character 'see' the world differently.  He writes his book that he has never been able to get to...he turns a little bit of stolen cash into millions playing the stock market because he figures out the system... and of curse he takes a job with a big time company headed by Robert De Niro in yet another phone it in role, this time as a successful businessman who hires Cooper to work out a big stock merger.

Let's pause here for a moment and come back to reality for just one second.  Cooper takes pills that make him superman.  He bangs two girls then begs his ex girlfriend to take him back.  He takes a JOB after making millions on his own. Then things get weird and the story goes on and on and on and at some point it's like, really? You're trying to make this a serious movie? And then a knife fight breaks out and people die and invincible rooms get broken into in a matter of minutes with a...wait for it....wait for it... chainsaw! and glass that should be bulletproof is shattered by bullets and clips that should hold maybe 20 shots unload for what seems like hours and people just don't die damn it and then they do and then the end comes and all I want to do is shake my head and wonder who the hell decided to wrap up the movie with a a page or two of back and forth dialogue that simply had to be written, produced, directed and cast by the great Michael Bay himself.

So dreamy and yet such a shitty shitty director

The movie scores a 'whatever' on the ranking scale I use to determine how to tell people what I think about a movie.  It's not great, it's not good, it's not horrible, it's not really that bad... it's a whole lot of 'whatever.'