5 very brief recaps of recent (ish) films: Hefner; A Single Man; Greenberg; Repo Men; Me and Orson Welles

Hugh Hefner: Playboy, Activist and Rebel (2010) - It's pretty much impossible for me to give anything but a favorable opinion of an entire documentary on the life of Hugh Hefner, but it does stop somewhere just above average. Some great footage of the early years of Playboy make this wonderful but overall it falls very short in examining fully what his life and Playboy really mean to society.

*** out of 5

A Single Man (2009) - Colin Firth is quite extraordinary in the role of a gay professor who has recently lost his partner and is now searching for meaning in his life. The entire look and feel of the film is superb and should not be missed.

**** and 1/2 out of 5

Greenberg (2010) - Ben Stiller turns out a pretty strong performance as the mentally unstable Greenberg, housesitting in LA for his successful brother. The film doesn't hold up in the long run but I applaud it for taking chances and if you like quirky offbeat themes and styles I suggest you give it a chance.

*** out of 5

Repo Men (2010) - An interesting and promising premise ultimately goes completely wrong. In a future-ish world if you don't pay for your organs as needed they are repo'ed by people like Jude Law and Forest Whitaker. Somewhere around 45 minutes into a decent movie a knife fight breaks out that seems to last for the remainder of the film.

** out of 5

Me and Orson Welles (2009) - Zac Efron as a young actor experiences what it is to be a part of stage history and in the process holds his own against a very very strong performance by Christian McKay as Orson Welles

**** and a 1/2 out of 5

A mini movie review: Easy A (2010)

Easy A (2010)

Director - Will Gluck
92 Min; PG-13
Cast
Emma Stone - Olive
Amanda Bynes - Marianne

Perhaps it has an awful lot to do with me not being a teenage girl, but this film with a very loose adaptation and interpretation of the Scarlet Letter is as close as it gets to me wanting to douse myself in lighter fluid and light up a nice fat cigar. Emma Stone, who was very good in Zombieland, is the only thing that makes this film remotely entertaining and I look forward to watching her career blossom (terrible film related pun) as she hopefully chooses meatier roles (see the last pun.)

Amanda Bynes is terrible in a role that was not written for her but merely for any blond girl with nice skin (so soft, right?) At 92 minutes you would think I could get through it, but about 60 minutes in I had had enough (well, at 20 minutes, but I gave it a shot) and I walked out of the theater packed with packs of teenagers laughing it up. See Mean Girls for a film that understands how to take the awkward teenage life and transform an outcast girl into something else. This film may have an audience with the younger crowd and if it makes a profit I give it credit, but even on a great day I don't know how you can enjoy this one.

1/2 * out of 5

A mini movie review: Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps (2010)

Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps (2010)

Director - Oliver Stone
133 Min; PG-13
Cast
Shia LaBeouf - Jake
Michael Douglas - Gordon Gekko
Josh Brolin - Bretton James
Carey Mulligan - Winnie Gekko
Frank Langella - Louis Zabel

My expectations for the sequel to an all time favorite had been relatively low ever since I heard the rumors of a follow up film with not just a cameo by the larger than life figure of Gordon Gekko (Michael Douglas) but a film built with him as a primary figure. When I found out Shia LaBeouf (Tansformers; Indiana Jones...Crystal Skull) was going to be the lead hot shot a la Charlie Sheen's character in the original I contemplated never even seeing it. Thankfully I can say with ease that the film more than holds up and you should have no reservations paying your $10.

I was able to put aside my severe dislike for LaBeouf and will give him credit for doing the best he could with the material given, thankfully gone are his nervous twitches and over-the-top reactions to every single scene in which he has ever previously been. Really strong supporting roles are everywhere in this film, not limited to just Douglas, as Carrie Mulligan (An Education)continues to excel at everything she touches and Josh Brolin just never seems to choose a poor role (That I've seen lately). For my money it is the smallest supporting role in the film that is the best and that is turned in by Frank Langella (Frost/Nixon) as an aging giant on Wall Street. Nobody acts like Langella anymore - strong and 100% in character.

The film follows the lives of a young trader and his relationship with an up and coming liberal website blogger who also happens to be the grown up daughter of the once great and powerful Gordon Gekko. His release from prison years ago and a run in with Jake produce a film about possible redemption mixed in with a modern day theme of Wall Street and the housing market crash. Overall a solid film with a lot to like, but a story that is simply too grand in scope. There is probably enough for 2 movies in this film and that makes it feel heavy, but all is forgiven when Carrie Mulligan does her thing and makes us all realize we are watching one of the next great actresses.

**** out of 5

A movie review: The Town (2010)

The Town (2010)

Director - Ben Affleck
125 min; R

Cast
Ben Affleck - Doug MacRay
Rebecca Hall - Claire
Jeremy Renner - James/Jem
Blake Lively - Krista
Chris Cooper - Stephen MacRay
Jon Hamm - FBI Agent Frawley
Pete Postlethwaite - The Florist

Keep your friends close and your enemies closer or, perhaps, keep your female bank teller hostage even closer after releasing her. That would be my mock tag line for the Ben Affleck directed The Town which runs for 125 minutes and tells the story of a local bank robbery gang in the Boston suburb of Charlestown, revealed at the opening to be the bank robbery capital. Filmed in a style I very much appreciate - overhead city views and point of view chase scenes to name a few - Ben Affleck has followed up his Gone Baby Gone direction leaving little doubt for his talents behind the camera. He has a clear command of the shot sequences and though I prefer the work of Gone to the Town in general, they each work in style. I wish I could give as much praise for his acting.

Affleck is Doug MacRay, a born and bred Charlestown boy who grew up with a pedigree of bank robbers and surroundings of people up to no good. He never had a chance is what we are led to believe. Some 30 years later or so Doug wants out. No more bank jobs. No more Charlestown. He wants to start over in life but there are a few, well more than just a few, issues holding him back. His incarcerated father Stephen (Chris Cooper) is serving life sentences nearby and his connections to the Florist (Pete Postlethwaite) run deep. The Florist is the mastermind of the bank jobs orchestrating everything from the friendly confines of a storefront window. Doug now works for him. His mother left them when Doug was just six. The brief scene with Cooper and Affleck is one of the best in the film and really shows just how a great actor can turn nominal material into something very powerful. Then there is James, or Jem as he is often called ("Aren't you just a gem?" he would hear as a child, mockingly), played by Jeremy Renner in a strong performance. Having done a stretch of 9 years in prison related to an incident with Doug he feels owed more bank jobs and Doug talking about leaving just isn't going to cut it. They are a team from the same neighborhood.

After Doug (Affleck) and his unit take down a bank score they bring along Claire (Rebecca Hall) as a hostage, only to release her shortly after. Jem worries that she is the only one who can identify them, since they concealed their faces and bodies well with scary masks, and Doug agrees to check her out since they know she lives nearby. In a surreal turn of events Doug and Claire begin a relationship. Is Doug just trying to cover himself or is he really trying to change his life? That is the main question of the film and it is the one thing Affleck is pretty bad at conveying. The ongoing relationship theme mixed with the bank heists and shots of town life do not always gel together in a cohesive fashion. Ultimately it is clear that Affleck cannot hold screen presence in this film against the rest of the cast. Though her role is limited in range, Hall is pretty good as a bank teller who moved into the town and is finding her way in life. Renner as Jem is a strong force on the screen and Blake Lively as the junkie townie Krista also gives a great performance. We are left with Affleck trying to carry this film on his shoulders and unable to do so, perhaps a little due to his acting and a little due to some plot issues, but together they have problems.

After seemingly opening up to each other as if they were life long soul mates after just a brief period of time, Claire tells Doug of her emotional trauma over being taken hostage a few days ago, how she felt, how terrified. Doug looks deadpan at her and musters "I'm sorry" with a puppy dog look. I almost laughed. It isn't long before the two of them are discussing dead siblings and deadbeat parents like they are discussing which restaurant to have their first date. Doug just doesn't seem to have any good scenes with women in this film. Every time he has dialogue with a female it comes across like a Lifetime movie.

I enjoyed the realistic style of the bank jobs in this film, the brutal force and scare tactics which seem to feel real. This isn't a caper movie with elaborate schemes - this is a group of guys knocking off banks and bank cars and taking the money in broad daylight and running. The chase scenes which were inevitable are ok and I loved the point of view style that switched throughout, but perhaps I am being a bit petty that is bothered me so much that they were able to hold an 80 mph chase scene through the streets of Charlestown and surrounding Boston and almost never see or run into another vehicle. Those familiar with this area as I am will surely laugh out loud at the absurdity of being able to maneuver a vehicle like that. Perhaps it was a Holiday and a Red Sox game was going on and there was mandatory street cleaning closings which caused the normally heavily congested streets to part like the red sea? But I digress.

My main complaint with the film is not the love story that falls short in scope and genuine feel (it does) but more so with the lack of time comprehension. At no point could I really tell whether one job was a day ago or a month ago, or if the Claire and Doug motif was progressing at a snails pace or taking place over the course of many months. It really was distracting to me to not know. I also disliked a lot the use of attempted comic relief throughout the film. Every 15-20 minutes there was a forced line of dialogue with an attempted wittiness that made about 1/4 of the audience let out a laugh. After shooting an armed guard amidst a very chaotic and tense robbery scene one of the masked robbers steps over the fallen man and says "You should have stayed in the van" and then runs off. Why is that needed? Would that EVER happen? It is all totally unnecessary to the film and its style. See the recently released Animal Kingdom for how to film a full length film about this material without the use of cheap tactics.

I definitely never felt the relationship between Claire and Doug was strong enough to warrant the all out ending that revolves around them. It simply never made it that far to be believable. The ball was also dropped with Jem's character and his strong dislike of Doug's continuing attachment with Claire. He makes some pretty strong remarks about what he would like to have happen to her but then it all sort of goes away. He is too tough and too stubborn to not follow through with some sort of action. There is an long scene that takes place at Fenway Park which just feels very forced, almost as if Affleck felt he would be vilified if he did not have something happen outside of Charlestown. It felt gimmicky to me in an otherwise pretty well done film. About 300,000 bullets fly and you can count on one hand the number of people hit by them. Again, I am nit-picking some items and mainly feel Affleck should have stuck to directing someone stronger in the role of Doug, because the film as a whole was enjoyable if you are willing to put aside plot holes and the entire premise of Doug and Claire's relationship. Is it a robber movie? Is it a love story? Is it a redemption story? I don't think it is all and I don't think it is one. Whether Doug finds what he is longing for and whether we as an audience even care about it if he does is up to you to decide.

*** and 1/2 out of 5

A movie review: Solitary Man (2010)

Note: This film came out earlier in the year and will probably not be showing at this time

Solitary Man (2010)

Director - Brian Koppelman

90 Min; R

Cast

Michael Douglas - Ben Kalmen

Susan Sarandon - Nancy Kalmen

Danny DeVito - Jimmy Merino

Jenna Fischer - Susan

Jessee Eisenberg - Daniel

Imogen Poots - Allyson

Mary Louise Parker - Jordan

The movie opens in a way that leaves no doubt as to what kind of film we are to see nor what kind of man Ben Kalmen (Michael Douglas) is likely to be. Walking alone to the background song Solitary Man (A very strong version by Johnny Cash, but clearly not as great as the original Neil Diamond version) we see where the director is going to take this figure. The title says a lot, but Douglas makes it his own. Solitary Man is not breaking any new ground with material, but it does a wonderful job at portraying what can and does happen to people who burn all their bridges and live with a self-destructive nature. I wasn't sure Michael Douglas would be the correct actor to pull this off, but I am happy to admit that I was wrong.

There is a lot going on for a film of only 90 minutes and I'd like to think that this should have been a 2 hour film. Some relationships feel perfectly fleshed out, yet I find myself wanting to have known a bit more about some of them. Maybe that is the sign of a good film though, leaving me wanting to know just a bit more without feeling anything was left out.

Ben Kalmen was a successful car salesmen - 'the most honest' in the business - and a pseudo-celebrity in his region. He had money, power and fame. What Ben's life was like up until this point is not really known and it is hard to decipher from the movie, but what is certain is that around this time Ben's doctor informs him that he has a heart murmur and needs more tests because it could be very serious.

Ben does not go back for more tests.

Over the course of the next 6 years Ben's life takes a downward turn. His family life falls apart and his relationship with his daughter (Jenna Fischer) and his grandson is on shaky ground. He has creepy tendencies towards his 18 year old step-daughter (Imogen Poots) and while accompanying her on a college interview he befriends a nerdy college kid Daniel (Jessee Eisenberg) and does his best to teach him how to meet girls. He is a revolving door of sex with nameless women in bars and off the street whom he does his very best to never learn anything about and to never see again.

What happened? Well, after learning of his potential impending death, Ben decided sort of lost perspective. He got involved in a shady car scam that left him in jail for a night and on all the front page papers. He paid a very very large sum of his own money to get out of real prison, but now he is struggling just to make ends meet. His old friend Jimmy (Danny DeVito) lets him work at his deli, lending advice on what it means to be faithful to a woman for 30 years and to be content with making 58k a year and living a decent life. That is not Ben's life.

Ultimately what makes this movie work is Douglas's ability to make Ben a real person. This is a person we all seem to know in life. He is out for himself, yet he is sort of guilty about it and tries to make amends with those around him. He has real problems, but he functions within society to an extent that allows him to get through the days. The ending to this movie is very satisfactory and I am not spoiling anything by revealing that it isn't some tidy neat package with a bow, which I was scared was coming with about 10 minutes left.

**** out of 5

A movie review: The American (2010)

The American (2010)

Director - Anton Corbijn
103 min; R
Cast
George Clooney - Jack/Edward
Thekla Reuten - Mathilde
Violante Placido - Clara
Paolo Bonacelli - Father Benedetto

George Clooney was a very good choice to play the lead character in The American. The often used term Cool, Calm, and Collected comes to mind when one sees him on screen moving through the shots in a well timed manner. In this film he is also able to convey a solitary individual, alone with his past, but at a cross roads of his life. The American in this film could have been a Brazilian, or a German, whatever, but it works well to use the backdrop of small, time-standing-still Italian cliff side villages and an American, in culture, for all that it entails.

The film is beautifully shot in drawn out scenes of Jack, a man who obviously knows how to kill and handle weapons, or Edward, a man who knows he should not confide in anyone for his own sake, yet can't help finding himself in the arms of a woman. Jack or Edward, he is both and he is neither, a man without a real life or clear past. He is simply a man who is at the end of a career and is looking to make a change.

In what is to be his last job, the American is tasked with hiding out in a small Italian town while he builds and pieces together a weapon for Mathilde, the woman who will carry out the task. Who is commissioning the mission, what the mission is, and why is never discussed, it simply is what these people do, and we watch as the entire scenario unfolds.

A local prostitute, Clara, begins to mean more than just sex, and though he knows that, as in the past, he should avoid such temptations he simply cannot help himself. He doesn't really want to be the man he has become.

The film opens and closes with two beautiful scenes that encapsulate this man's life of solitude. I loved the way this film was shot, but I give fair warning here that this film will not appeal to many people who are expecting or demand a more action packed thriller. This movie is deliberate in set up and nuance, not in fighting and chase scenes, of which there is little. I did not find it too much at any point to watch the story unfold, but I did find a few too many plot holes for my liking, mainly in undeveloped characters. The role of Father Benedetto in particular bothered me. The American begins a casual friendship with the priest while he carries out his mission, and I kept expecting this story line to take us somewhere....more, but it falls flat and I feel this was a missed opportunity. It did not bother me so much that the overall theme of the film has been done before, nor that parts of it felt very much expected. It is really the indescribable effect of the way this film is shot that makes it a good viewing, and I am fairly certain that Clooney had a lot to do with keeping us interested.

**** out of 5

A movie review: Machete (2010)

Machete (2010)

Directors - Robert Rodriguez and Ethan Maniquis
105 min; R
Cast
Danny Trejo - Machete
Robert De Niro - Sen. McLaughlin
Jessica Alba - Sartan
Steven Seagal - Torrez
Michelle Rodriguez - Luz
Jeff Fahey - Booth
Cheech Marin - Padr
Don Johnson - Lt. Stillman
Lindsay Lohan - April

The cast credits are long and inviting and the new film Machete does not disappoint if what you are out for a good time with a cheesy movie. In fact, this is one of the best bad movies I've seen in a long time and that is precisely the point.

A few things you will not find in this film: A believable story line; Solid acting; Great cinematography.

A few things you will find in this film: General awesomeness everywhere you look; Lindsay Lohan naked; Jessica Alba so close to naked you will strain your neck trying to see if it could possibly be true; Danny Trejo decapitating more people with a machete than you could ever think possible; Robert De Niro in an absolutely terrible role; Cheech Marin (need I say more?); and last, but not least, ever, Steven 'F-ing' Seagal.

Summing up the movie would seem to be no fun, but when you get to write a line like "Machete (Trejo) is an ex Mexican cop who finds himself in America illegally after his family is killed by a Mexican drug lord (Seagal) and offered money to kill a Texas senator (De Niro) who is platforming on tough illegal immigration laws, and along the way he kills about 300 people with every weapon he can find, including gardening tools, and just so happens to sleep with every smoking hot chick on the planet including Rodriguez, Alba and Lohan (along with her character's mother) all while trying to get revenge on DON JOHNSON's! character and asking the help of an old gun toting priest (Cheech!) all in the name of ultimately confronting the evil Mexican druglord Torrez (Did I already say Seagal?!) - well I hope you had as much fun reading it as I had writing it.

The film has been called a Mexploitation piece in the same vein of the old Blaxpoitation films, and it is well justified. The film is crude and vulgar and funny in all the right places. Do not go to this movie if you are uptight or not looking for a good time. Everyone else, definitely see it.

(I withhold any type of rating on a normal scale for this film. It is too awesome for that)

A movie review: The Last Exorcism (2010)

The Last Exorcism (2010)

Director - Daniel Stamm
87 Min; PG-13
Cast
Patrick Fabian - Cotton Marcus
Ashley Bell - Nell
Louis Herthum - Louis

The instinctive thought to compare films is never stronger than when the title of the film itself contains similar words to that of another, such as The Exorcist, and the problem with that is clouded judgment. The original Exorcist film is a brilliant study in slow build up terror, in shot-making, and character development. By the time the little girl's head is twisting you're feeling the need to convert, or at least go to confession a little more often. The Last Exorcism is not a continuation of that film, nor does it claim to be, but you sort of realize it is piggy-backing off the public perception. It is fairly easy for me to write this without clouded judgment, however, because this film does a good enough job of ruining itself without needing comparisons.

We realize very quickly that what we are watching is a documentary. We view the entire film through the lens of the camera from a crew member tasked with documenting what is to be the last exorcism performed by the legendary healer and preacher Cotton Marcus. Marcus is played by Patrick Fabian in a fantastic role. I was captivated from the opening moment by this performance and it is his back we have to ride on throughout, so putting plot points aside, the film holds up well thanks to this one act of brilliance.

We learn from Cotton himself that exorcisms are a sham. Groomed from childhood to be a preacher he spent his life making money off of people who paid him to give them what they want - the peace that the devil is out of their body. He lost his faith years ago but has been doing it for the money ever since. Now, with that news that a young child was killed by some do-it-yourself exorcism performers, he wants to set the record straight and show the world his tricks. Along with a crew of 2 he takes off to the bayou back swamps of Louisiana to meet with Louis, a man who claims his daughter Nell is possessed by a demon. Mysterious things have been happening at the farm, including the brutal butchering of animals at night, and Nell covered in blood with no memory of what has happened.

I really enjoyed the first half of this film. The documentary style set up worked well (note - it is shot in a bit of the shaky hand camera style which has never once bothered me, but if you are the type who will complain about it, just don't see it) and Patrick Fabian is so wonderfully convincing as a preacher who has lost his faith that I almost forgot I was in a horror genre. That changed with the second half of the film, where more thriller/suspense began to take place. A few cliched moments take place and before you know it you can't help asking yourself all the stupid questions like 'Why would they do that?' and 'Why not just call the police?' etc. etc. etc.

The ending of the film has been criticized greatly and there isn't much I can say to refute those criticisms. I don't think it was horrible, but it certainly felt contrived and patched together. At less than 90 minutes the film is actually quite watchable and even enjoyable for the most part, but as an overall movie it just doesn't hold up. I do strongly suggest you watch this on dvd or tv or whatever at some point, or even consider seeing it as a double feature matinee. Not the best movie about exorcism ever made, but clearly not the worst.

** and a half out of 5

A movie review: Scott Pilgrim vs. the World (2010)

Scott Pilgrim vs. the World (2010)

Director - Edgar Wright

112 min; PG-13

Cast

Michael Cera - Scott Pilgrim

Mary Elizabeth Winstead - Ramona Flowers

Ellen Wong - Knives Chau

Jason Schwartzman - Gideon

Once again I find myself trying to review a film that is based on a graphic novel and once again I find it very difficult to formulate my thoughts, since I have no interest in graphic novel reading, and thus I end up with only one point of view to form my opinions - is the movie any good? I won't do a run down of previous films based on graphic novels, but you can probably conjure up a decent list without giving it much thought. If you find yourself counting the list in your head and saying 'yeah, I generally like these kinds of movies' then I am fairly certain you will enjoy this one as well. If you are going through the list in your head and only seeing 2 or 3 and out of those you didn't like any, then I'm fairly certain you will detest this film.

I fall exactly in the middle.

Scott Pilgrim is not exactly a geek, dork, loser, or tool, but he sure seems like he should be. Played by Michael Cera it is nearly impossible to not want to lump this character into those categories. And yet he gets laid and is in a band and isn't really the dumped on guy throughout, so you have to sort of suspend your notions a bit to get by what you think this character should be. He's 22 and after a bad break up is now dating a high school girl, Knives Chau, though they haven't even exactly held hands yet. When Ramona Flowers enters the picture it is all over for Scott - he must have this cool punk chick. Unfortunately for Scott, like all women I've ever met, Ramona has a past, and the plot of the movie follows along as Scott must defeat Ramona's 7 exes in various battles.

So yeah, this isn't a conventional movie in that it uses word bursts on screen and weaves seemingly real life scenarios in with graphic novel-esque type fight scenes, but then again, it does feel a bit conventional. The story grabbed me early but left me feeling very unsatisfied buy the ending, and I left the theater feeling that perhaps the fight scenes simply got too bland after the first few. I mean, I know he has to defeat 7, so there need to be the fights, but how many times can I get a chuckle out of a henchman getting kicked in the face and turning into a pile of coins? For the crowd of gamers who see this film you will certainly find references throughout to many of the classic video games and I found it nostalgic for a hot second only - there just seemed to be room for a lot more creativity.

I liked the play between the characters of Scott and Knives and the random people around them. It was good chemistry. I never really felt that between Scott and Ramona. They just never seemed to be in sync. Ultimately I think this would have made a fantastic 45 minute short film, but when extended out to full feature it simply didn't have enough in the tank.

** and 1/2 out of 5

A movie review: Animal Kingdom (2010)

Animal Kingdom (2010)

Director - David Michod

113 Min; R

Cast

Ben Mendelsohn - Andrew 'Pope' Cody

Guy Pearce - Detective Leckie

James Frecheville - Joshua 'J' Cody

Jacki Weaver - Janine 'Smurf' Cody

The Australian film Animal Kingdom won the Sundance Film Festival Grand Jury Prize for Dramatic World Cinema in 2010 and it is easy to see why it received such high praise for artistic quality, but as a film it is greatly overshadowed by a few magnificent performances, and though I love the attempt at a unique style of storytelling and a gritty, 'real' feel, the story as a whole didn't capture me the way I had hoped for when I first saw the trailer.

It was definitely a risk for the director to shoot in such a realistic manner, portraying the Cody family in its normal everyday routine as they go about their business of planning crimes and carrying them out. They are past their prime, it seems, as bank robbery is just too difficult compared to the past, and one member of the family contemplates getting out and dabbling in the stock market. There isn't a lot of stylized scenery of the 'bad guys' getting together in a warehouse to plan their capers, rather we see them walking around the house, having a drink, snorting coke, discussing what is next. This criminal family is in a battle with a corrupt police force and the blurry line is often crossed as we discover nobody can be trusted.

The opening scenes include voice over by the character 'J', who explains to us what we are about to see - his mother having overdosed on heroin. As a general rule I detest voice over, especially at the start of the movie, and especially when the cinematic approach taken in this film simply didn't require it! I felt everything the character was saying and the emotion I was supposed to feel was evident from the surroundings, characters, etc. It was very much a moment of me wanting to scream 'show don't tell!' I also had problems with the performance of James Frecheville, portraying the young J who is thrown into the underworld of crime his family has been a part of (without him) for many years. Perhaps it was the director's choice, but his mono-emotional and over-passive style simply did not work for me, and just once I would have liked him to be a normal teenager.

The film rises well above average thanks to 3 special roles.

1. Jacki Weaver plays 'Smurf', the Oedipal grandmother of J and matriarchal figure of the entire family. Her performance oozes of creepiness and power. As the strong protector of 'her boys' she not only knows the shady business they deal in she is a major part, yet at the end of the day she likes to give a much too lingering kiss on the lips to each. I will remember her performance for a long time as the quintessential two-faced monster who at one moment will shower you will love and at another put a gun to your head.

2. Guy Pearce as Detective Leckie is nuanced and complex. At no point can you tell what his motivations are nor where his thoughts will lead him. At one moment he may be the cop looking to take down the family through a series of manipulative maneuvers, and at another he may in fact be the one we should fear. I have always loved this actor and this role just helps to solidify that stance.

3. Ben Mendelsohn seals this film. As Andrew 'Pope' Cody you will have trouble finding such a terrifying look at a psychopath. One moment he is the father figure to family and friends encouraging them to speak to him and tell him things, and the other he is a savage beast capable of murder or worse. He weaves back and forth throughout the film in subtle ways that will scare you to death when you realize people like this exist in the world.

The film is shot with one too many long, drawn out scenes with musical backgrounds - the kind that make many people say 'that was too artsy' - yet I respect the attempt and some of the scenes really aid the film. I find it hard to put a number to the film because it clearly will not appeal to everyone, yet some will find it fascinating as a film to dissect. I'm comfortable with my opinion.

**** out of 5

A movie review: Get Low (2010)

Get Low (2010)

Director - Aaron Schneider

103 min; PG-13

Cast

Robert Duvall - Felix Bush

Lucas Black - Buddy

Sissy Spacek - Mattie Darrow

Bill Murray - Frank Quinn

A very good reason for you to see the new film Get Low is that it will make you smile inside and out. I don't know if you need much more of a reason to want to see it, but if you do, see it because this is a fun performance to watch by Robert Duvall as a 1930s Tennessee hermit (Felix Bush) based very loosely off a real life character of similar folklore. I'm not sure any molds have been broken by this performance, but at his age it just feels good to see Duvall command an entire movie the way he does, really becoming this character and making it very difficult for you to take your eyes off of him, not that it is something you would do.

Yes Bill Murray is in this film, as a funeral home owner who accepts the strange request of Mr. Bush to throw a funeral party for him while he is still alive so that he may attend it himself, but this is in no way a Bill Murray movie. What I mean is, I think he does a pretty good job of showing a complex man played simply, but he really is a supporting character in the film, and at times he feels out of place in a 1930s small town setting. It doesn't detract for me though, and I like his performance as a man who is probably running from his own demons, but we never really know.

It is Lucas Black and Sissy Spacek who fill most of the screen time besides Duvall, and as Murray's funeral parlor assistant and the old hermit's long ago girl, the two do very good jobs at holding the story together at appropriate times and reminding us there is a world outside of that of Felix Bush.

There isn't a whole lot to tell about the movie, for it is actually quite simple, and I'll go ahead and leave it at that. It's not going to overwhelm you and maybe you won't be talking about it like something else you have seen, but I think the story of a man who falls so far and ultimately has the chance to rise again is timeless, and in the hands of a master such as Duvall it comes together very nicely in this film.

**** out of 5

A Documentary Review: The Tillman Story (2010)

The Tillman Story (2010)
aka "I'm Pat ___Tillman" - USA (working title)

Director - Amir Bar-Lev
94 min; R (language)

Narrator - Josh Brolin


Director Amir Bar-Lev spoke for approximately 15 minutes after his new film The Tillman Story came to a close during a rainy Sunday afternoon screening in New York. Had it been left up to him the title would have been quite different: I'm Pat Fucking Tillman. For obvious reasons this never reached the light of day, but those few words are so powerful and encapsulate such a large amount of what this film was made for that it would have been absolutely perfect.

I've been busy reading everything I can get my hands on about this film, the making of the film, actual letters and documents available online, and anything else that my mind wanders towards. This really is a fascinating story and even a full length documentary such as this can only cover so much and I really wish it could have uncovered even more. I suppose I am slightly confused as to what the actual aim of the film is, that is to say, was it created to shed new light on a subject that has been discussed in great detail over the years? or was it put together to tell the story of Pat? or of the Tillman family? or of a government conspiracy? etc.? I suppose that ultimately it works extraordinarily well on all levels, and though we never reach fulfilment on certain questions this is one hell of a springboard towards potential future uncovering - perhaps a follow up in 5-10 years would be a perfect complement.

The film is packed with perfectly placed footage and interviews that left me involuntarily teared up and at the same time I felt a deep, guttural anger towards those involved. I credit the director quite highly that I do not feel like he was setting up the audience for these moments as some sort of 'gotcha' moment, rather I felt very much that these moments are there as a reminder of truth, of what actually happened, and how it affects each person may be slightly different, but I'm willing to bet that there will be a common theme of emotion.

There is no way to give a 'basic' outline of what this film strives to cover, but in a sweeping attempt to bring unity to this review I will attempt a brief synopsis:

Pat Tillman, a standout football player at Arizona State University and eventual professional player for the Arizona Cardinals, walked away from a multi-million dollar contract in the aftermath of 9/11 and took up post in Afghanistan Along with his brother Kevin. He was very private about his reasons and never publicly spoke of his decision. During a second tour of duty Tillman, along with an Afghan friendly, were killed by what was initially said to be a heroic effort on Tillman's part during an ambush on his convoy.

Russell Baer was there when it all happened and he knew the truth, yet he was told to keep quiet, along with everyone who knew, while he quietly flew back to the US with Pat's brother Kevin and the coffin sitting between them. Subsequent information, due in large part to the efforts of the Tillman family, brought to light a likely cover-up by the US government and army in regard to the actual cause of death - 'friendly-fire' - Tillman had been killed by his own men. So why was there even a need for a cover up? Why not just report the facts? This film takes a hard look at the reasoning behind these questions, about why Tillman was treated as such a national hero, and why his family wanted the truth about their son to be known - that he was not a hero any more than the others he fought with, that he was a human being who made mistakes but always tried to do the right thing, and that he was not some poster-child to be broadcast across the country for some political agenda.

Rich Tillman, speaking at his brother Pat's funeral after listening to a line of people speak of Pat being 'home' and 'in a better place with God', simply cannot hold back his most pure feelings on the entire situation: "Pat isn't with God. He's fucking dead. He wasn't religious. So thank you for your thoughts, but he's fucking dead." The film holds no punches regarding the Tillman boys' use of the F-word, liberally, nor of Tillman's atheism, and his brother had simply had enough of what he viewed as other people projecting their views of his brother onto the world.

Pat's mother Marie (Dannie) worked tirelessly after obtaining some 3,000 documents from the military, much of it blacked out, to uncover discrepancies and truth. In a recent article she discusses some interesting items: (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mary-tillman/president-and-congress-sw_b_681919.html)

Pat's father Patrick Tillman's letters (only referenced in the film) to the army can be read in full here and I strongly recommend you do so to get a first hand view of what this man and his family was going through in their quest to uncover the truth - it is very powerful to feel the emotion yet composure: (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/08/12/pat-tillmans-father-to-ar_n_680128.html).

How deep is the cover up? Evidence exists and is suggested at in the film that not only was this a 'friendly-fire' death but potentially the unthinkable of a planned murder. It was known that Tillman was to have a meeting with noted anti-war writer Noam Chomsky regarding war crimes - a meeting that was to take place just 60 days from his death. As a well known face of the war and in the wake of the Jessica Lynch debacle and Abu Ghraib scandal, there is an entire case to be made for that tangent, but such details are not pressed in the film, and evidence of such an end to Tillman's life is not quite there (though an independent autopsy analysis found that 3 tightly packed bullet holes in Tillman's head strongly suggest that they took place as close as 10-30 yards away.)

"I'm Pat fucking Tillman. Why are you shooting at me!" These were the last words as evidenced by Bryan O' Neil who was there when Tillman was killed. He states in the movie he witnessed Pat's head completely shot to pieces in front of him, and that right up until the end Tillman was waving his arms at his own team below yelling "I'm Pat fucking Tillman. Why are you shooting at me!" over and over again.

Why were they shooting at him?

**** and 1/2 out of 5

A movie review: The Kids Are All Right (2010)

The Kids Are All Right (2010)

Director - Lisa Cholodenko
106 Min; R
Cast
Annette Bening - Nic
Julianne Moore - Jules
Mark Ruffalo - Paul
Mia Wasikowska - Joni
Josh Hutcherson - Laser

The Kids Are All Right is a really good film. It's probably going to appeal to an older crowd, in general, but I don't think it is stretching it to say that many generations of people can enjoy this one. In a time when the definition of 'family' is so wide and varied that nobody seems to know for certain what it even means anymore, this film takes a look a typically dysfunctional functioning family that is dealing with the everyday ups and downs, that is, until the arrival of a new piece in the puzzle - then things get messy.

Jules (Julianne Moore) and Nic (Annette Bening) are a loving lesbian couple, married for many years and raising two children together. Joni is the 18 year old child of Nic, played by Mia Wasikowska, and like her mother she is smart and in control. Laser is the 15 year old child of Jules, played by Josh Hutcherson, and like his mother he is a free spirit. Joni and Laser are actually half brother and sister, since their 'moms', as they call them, received sperm from the same donor. Joni is 18 and ready to leave for a good college, but Laser, 15, wants her to do one thing for him before she leaves: contact their father. Joni is hesitant but agrees, and so the two of them call and meet with their biological father, Paul (Mark Ruffalo). A little of both children can be seen in Paul, and though neither intended for it to happen, they begin a relationship with him that spills over to the 'moms' with mixed results.

I always felt that Annette Bening would have won the Oscar for Best Actress for her wonderful role in American Beauty, had it not been of course for Hilary Swank who was never going to lose after her performance in Boys Don't Cry. I think this film gives her as good a shot as any at walking away with the statue. I'm not certain why, but I can't seem to get away from Julianne Moore's breasts, having just seen Chloe and now this, both times bare-breasted, and though she is a fine actress, I'm not seeking that out. In this film she is flighty and light and caring and complicated, and she does a good job juxtaposed with Bening who is the stable and thinking adult in the relationship. The two of them play off each other nicely and we get the true feeling that they are in love but like many people they struggle to maintain balance.

Ruffalo as the father Paul is excellent. He is in his late 30s and still having one night stands as he pleases. He runs an organic restaurant and has never been married and has no kids of his own. He has never even seriously thought about it, until he meets Joni and Laser. His way of thinking has been changed and with it he brings change to the entire family. This is a comedy of sorts, and you will laugh somewhat, but it is really a light hearted drama and I don't think I've seen too many films in recent years that have really strived like this to be a portrayl of a typical (atypical) American family.

**** and a half out of 5

The American President #7: Andrew Jackson

Please feel free to add anything you want about Andrew Jackson

-

Two-term President: March 4, 1829-March 4, 1837

- Vice-President John C Calhoun and Martin van Buren

-Election of 1828: Electoral vote Jackson 178; John Quincy Adams 83 (popular vote 647,286 - 508,064)

-Election of 1832: Electoral vote Jackson 219; Henry Clay 49; otheer 18; Popular vote 687,502 - 530,189

-Born March 15, 1767 in Waxhaw region along North/South Carolina border

-Died June 8, 1845, at the Hermitage, Tennessee

-Nickname: Old Hickory - earned from his leadership during the war of 1812

-Presbyterian; Democrat; no higher education; Lawer and soldier

-Johnson had a tough life, his father died before he was born, and he was slashed on the face by a British officer when, as a boy, he refused to polish his boots. He would hold that grudge his entire life, saying everytime he shaved he was reminded how much he hated the British.

-Known for his quick temper, Jackson was involved in numerous 'duels' - some simple and just a little threatening, others with deadly consequences. Jackson killed one man in a duel after being shot first, and the bullet remained in him his entire life.

-In 1830 Congress passed the Indian Removal Act which basically said Indians from the Southeast would be moved to Oklahoma (we wanted the gold)

- Supreme Court Justice John Marshall wrote that Georgia had no authority to do this, in Worcester Vs. State of Georgia, but Georgia and President Jackson felt otherwise, thus the Trail Of Tears happened when nearly 25% of the Cherokee tribe died while marching to Oklahoma.

-Jackson was lucky to survive not one but two misfires from a would be assassain, Richard Lawrence - the man attempted to shoot Jackson from close range and both times misfired, with Jackson repeatedly belting him on the head with his cane until help arrived. Lawrence was declared legally insane and spent his entire life in an insane asylum.

-Jackson oversaw the end of the national bank, of which he thought was totally corrupt, but found tons of problems in doing so and creating many smaller regional banks.

-The battle of the Alamo happened on March 6, 1836, when troops under Mexican President General Santa Anna ended a 13 day siege. 189 defenders died including former Tennessee congressman Davey Crockett. Their deaths led to the rallying cries of 'remember the Alamo!' which ultimately led to the independence of Texas.

-sidenotes-

-National debt is 337,000
-26 states in the union
-Jackson is on the $20 bill
-1830 - Frenchman Barthelemy Thimmonier invents first practical sewing machine
-1830 - In pAris, revolutionaries depose Charles X and he is replaced by the duc d'Orleans
-1831 - US population is at 13 million, which outnumbers Britain
-1831 - Charles Darwin departs for the Galapogos Islands
-1832 - the last surviving signer of the Declaration of Independence dies (Charles Carroll of Maryland) at age 95
-1834 - Mt Vesuvias erupts
-1835- Alexis de Tocqueville publishes Democracy in America

A mini-movie review: The Runaways (2010)

The Runaways (2010)

Director - Floria Sigismondi
106 Min; R
Cast
Kristen Stewart - Joan Jett
Dakota Fanning - Cherie Curry
Michael Shannon - Kim Fowley


It would be difficult to find anybody over the age of 21 who hasn't heard the classic song I Love Rock and Roll, made famous in 1982 by Joan Jett. Not everyone knows, however, that her career began 7 years earlier as a teenager when she met rock producer Kim Fowley and together they formed the 'world's first all-girl rock band' - The Runaways. This film is a look at the band and their success and struggles, but it is not an entirely fleshed-out piece, and therein lies some of the problems which keep this film from crossing over to something really special.

Kristen Stewart nails her role as a young Joan Jett. I am not a rock historian, but I have seen and heard enough to know what a young Joan Jett was like, and Stewart is simply wonderful. She sings her own parts and has all the correct mannerisms. Dakota Fanning is brought in as Cherie Curry, the 15 year old 'jailbait' lead singer who seemingly has only one reason for being in the band (slimey producer Kim Fowley played by Michael Shannon wants her to makes guys want her.) Together with other members of the band they embark on a world of rock and roll and the obligatory sex and drugs. And there is a lot of sex and drugs. In the end Curry leaves the band mainly due to the lifestyle.

I leave out the other members of the cast intentionally, for this film focuses almost soley on Jett, Curry and Fowley, and it is too bad because I would have loved to see more of the group dynamic. The film is based on Currie's 1989 biography of the band and due to bad blood between some members, well, let's just say there is a long backstory you can look up to see why, but ultimately this is Curry's story as a young girl thrust into the limelight and the incredibly driven young Jett who wants to be a rock star. We only see Curry's backstory and homelife, never getting even a glimpse into the other member's worlds.

I liked this film a lot. The acting was very good and the story was entertaining, but it definitely lacked any teeth and completely leaves out so much possible story. A former member of the band Vicki Blue made a documentary called Edgeplay (on netflix instant) which I plan to see soon, that is basically a more direct piece about the days of the band (Jett refused to take part.) I admit that after seeing this film I am incredinly interested in learning more and plan to read up quite a bit, and I think you will find it interesting as well.

*** and a half out of 5

A movie review: Chloe (2010)

Chloe (2010)

Director - Atom Egoyan
96 min; R
Cast
Julianne Moore - Catherine
Liam Neeson - David
Amanda Seyfried - Chloe

It would be easy and conveinent for me to write that Chloe (2010) is a suspensul, erotic thriller that will keep you thinking while dually tantalizing your emotions, but I've never been one for taking the easy view. This film is simply a formulaic 'erotic-thriller' that happens to have a note-worthy cast, which is unfortunate because, combined, the 3 main actors all give very good performances. It is unusual for me to watch a film with solid acting and yet find the overall appeal to be, shall we say, unappealing, and not even the bare breasts of actress on actress could titilate me enough to recommend this film.

The entire story centers on Catherine (Julianne Moore) as a well-to-do gynecologist who suspects her Opera-expert husband David (Liam Neeson) of cheating on her. In an unconventional move (though not entirely out of place for your average psychotic woman) she enlists the practices of an upscale call girl, Chloe, played by the lucsious lipped Amanda Seyfried, a role seemingly made for her. The dynamic in play throughout is that of the psychological: A woman scorned and her need for knowledge; a man constantly tempted yet resisting temptation; a woman who chooses to hold power over the men in her life.

Julianne Moore is very good at portraying this character and I feel she is the link that holds the film together, however, not even her performance here can save the fact that the film is too slow paced for the subject matter and it never really delves deep enough into the psychology of the husband or the call girl. We are being toyed with by the director and when the very unfulfilling and predictable ending occur I feel nothing - something you wouldn't expect from a film that is selling emotional content.

** out of 5

A movie review: An Education (2009)

An Education (2009)

Director - Lone Scherfig
100 min; PG-13
Cast
Carey Mulligan - Jenny
Peter Sarsgaard - David
Rosamund Pike - Helen
Dominic Cooper - Danny
Alfred Molina - Jack
Cara Seymour - Marjorie

16 year old Jenny (Carey Mulligan) is about to move from theoretical education to the practical. A top student bound for Oxford, she is a musician, a linguist, and very pretty. She is also very dull and seemingly driving through life on auto-pilot. All that changes in almost in instant when a chance-encounter with a handsome older man David (Peter Sarsgaard) presents itself, and soon young Jenny finds herself in a world she may have seen in films or read about in books, but frolicking in Paris for a birthday weekend was not something she had ever envisioned for herself.

An Education is a film that hinges squarely on the young shoulders of Mulligan, and she pulls off the role with such ease and poise that it is no wonder she received such acclaim. Without her ability to transform between young, naive but eager to sophisticated, worldly and bold and back again is something special, and her light-heartedness with the role plays well against her use of a dramatic tone in certain scenes. I'm not willing to say this is a great film but it certainly would have made my top 10 of 2009 had I seen it in time. It is a very very good film that I highly recommend for a wonderful performance by Mulligan but also for an overall very well acted piece by the supporting cast. With the exception of Rosamund Pike as Helen (David's friend Danny parades her around on his arm) the perfromances are all nuanced and well placed. Helen, however, feels out of place with the film, and though I understand her role as the older and chique woman whom Jenny both envies and pities, she doesn't ever seem to fit in with her surroundings.

Alfred Molina and Cara Seymour represent fairly common 1960s British parents in their style and wants for their daughter and I found great little moments out of each of them. Ultimately the story reveals itself a little too easily for my tastes, but that does not detract from the overall sense of wonder at a film that actually allows you to escape into the world of a completely different person and really enjoy the ride. To over-simplify things, this is a coming of age tale with all the typical puzzle pieces falling into place, but it is done with a subdued flare that really left me with a warm feeling.

**** out of 5

A Movie Review: Salt (2010)

Salt (2010)

Director - Phillip Noyce
100 min; PG-13
Cast
Angelina Jolie – Evelyn Salt
Liev Schreiber – Ted Winter

I purposely waited 2 days to write my thoughts on the new film Salt, wanting to do my best to accurately gauge my feelings about another ‘summer movie’ of which I clearly tend to dislike. I’m glad I did wait because I was generally laughing when I left the theater, but I now realize that it has the feeling of a film that is on the verge of being better than it is, yet it holds up well enough to be exactly what it is striving to be, and if you understand what I am saying then you’ll understand what I am getting at… or something.

This isn’t a good movie, but it’s ok for a summer action film in the sense that it is over-the-top implausible. The film would not work with a male lead (Tom Cruise was reportedly offered the job) and so it is that Angelina Jolie as Evelyn Salt took over and made it passable. It is not difficult to watch Jolie on screen – she’s beautiful and athletic and she holds her own when she speaks. As a member of team CIA she is accused of being a double agent for Russia (These storylines still exist?) and the movie hinges on her escaping many impossible situations as she works to clear her name. Her co-worker Ted (Liev Schreiber) is flabbergasted by these events and he wants nothing else than to catch her. The twists and turns are as nuanced as a sledgehammer to the head, but they work ok for most of the film – I simply cannot write this review without mentioning how absurd the final 1/3 of the film is… summer movie or not, from the White House scene on it is just LOL-tastic.

Director Phillip Noyce has been involved in some pretty decent movies over his career and I think it is that experience that saves this film from completely crumbling: Patriot Games (1992); Clear and Present Danger (1994); The Saint (1997); The Bone Collector (1999) (You’ll notice all of these are from a 10-15 years ago and they are all infinitely better than this film – but at least he brings his experience to this project.)

Whereas Jolie took part in the ungodly awful Wanted (2008), a film which was just terrible on every level no matter how you try to describe the genre to me, she pulls off a decent secret agent role here. My major contention with the film is that is moves from a potentially exhilarating spy piece to an over-the-top, impossible, plot-hole riddled piece that can’t save itself. Pay for some candy and a large coke and maybe catch this one as a double feature some afternoon.

*** out of 5

A Movie Review: Winter's Bone (2010)

Winter's Bone (2010)

Director - Debra Granik
100 Min; R
Cast
Ree - Jennifer Lawrence
Teardrop - John Hawkes
Merab - Dale Dickey

It is easy to see why Winter's Bone won both the 2010 Sundance Film Festival award for Grand Jury Prize as well as the Waldo Salt Screenwriting award. It is not as easy to watch the film without digging a little deep within yourself to appreciate the film art in front of you. I suspect the subject matter and the way it is filmed will not sit well with a general viewing audience, so I caution anyone considering this film that they understand what they are getting into: a real world of bleak hopelessness in which a child is forced to grow up all too quickly, a family is forced to face demons, and in the end, maybe, just maybe, a small amount of hope can be squeezed from frozen stone.

Jennifer Lawrence plays 17 year old Ree, a girl who has gone through more turmoil than anyone should experience in a lifetime. Her family lives in a pretty run down home in the Ozark mountains and with her father out of the picture on bond for meth production, she is left to raise her two younger siblings and her mom, who has basically checked out of reality and is now a walking zombie. Her neighbors and seemingly inbred family are all around her world, some offering a little help, most offering nothing. With their home and property up as bond for her father to appear in court, Ree realizes that he is never going to show and they will lose everything they have (what little they have, but it is truly everything for their survival) and she sets out on a journey to discover where he is, dead or alive, and to make sure they don’t lose it all.

Plot points aside, this is a film about dialogue, acting, and hardships. John Hawkes as the down and out Teardrop who helps Ree with as little as he can is magnificent, and Dale Dickey as Merab, Ree’s relative of some sort is as tender as she is wicked, and Ree feels both emotions first hand. Jennifer Lawrence truly shines in this film as a young girl who must be completely confused and hardened by her life results, yet she is keeping it all together as best she can, teaching her brother and sister survival techniques of shooting squirrels and how to make them into stew. This isn’t a heart-warming tale, but there is some hope involved, though very little, and in the end it may just be two baby chicks in the hands of the younger children that leave you pulling for this family, for Ree.

**** and ½ out of 5

A movie review: The Girl Who Played With Fire (2010)

The Girl Who Played with Fire (2010)
aka "Flickan som lekte med elden" - Sweden (original title)
(film subtitled in English)

Director - Daniel Alfredson
129 Min; R
Cast
Michael Nyqvist – Michael Blomkvist
Noomi Rapace – Lisbeth Salander
Micke Spreitz – Ronald Niedermann
Georgi Staykov – Alexander Zalachenko

The Girl Who Played with Fire is the second of a series of 3 novels by Stieg Larsson adapted into Swedish films, the first being The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (My original review of that excellent film can be found here: http://randomthoughtsbymatt.blogspot.com/2010/07/movie-review-girl-with-dragon-tattoo.html ). Both Noomi Rapace and Michael Nyqvist reprise their roles as the emotionally scarred yet tender Lisbeth Salander and the fact-finding journalist of the popular Millenium papers.

I wish I could say there was more to compare with the first two films, but unfortunately the cast is about all I can find.

Not since Caddyshack II (1988) came along and ruined the legacy of one of the all-time greatest films have I felt so disappointed in a follow up. Having not read the novels I cannot possibly review this film with any frame of reference regarding the validity of the content, but as for the actual filmed content, well, let’s just say I quickly made a list of things that I would much rather do over the course of 129 minutes than watch the steaming pile of *$%& which occupied the screen:

1. I would rather go to the dentist. The time it takes to get ready, drive there, wait, have my teeth cleaned, settle up and drive home would take roughly the same amount of time it took to watch this film, but at the end of the dentist appointment I would have a nice feeling of satisfaction that something positive had been accomplished.

2. I would rather do my taxes and re-check them for errors.

3. I can’t say I would prefer to have a colonoscopy, but the incredibly empty feeling in my gut after viewing the film would probably be on par with that procedure.

And so I write this review with a very heavy heart, for the first film is one of my favorites of the year, but it can only feel somewhat tainted by this travesty of a follow-up. Whereas violence and sexuality are used with vigor and purpose in the Dragon Tattoo, they are completely misguided and haphazardly placed throughout Fire. Whereas the suspenseful build up of the first film kept you guessing and playing along the entire time, this film spoon feeds you back ground information and then, without being intentional I’m sure, completely loses interest in what it is telling you and leaves you to guess how such a wonderful premise could turn so drab. Whereas in part one Lisbeth and Michael spend quality time feeding off each other as partners seeking to solve a crime, here they barely share the screen as Michael seeks to track down the real killers in a murder of which Lisbeth has been implicated, leaving each to create a new chemistry with those around them that never works.

The appearance of Micke Spreitz as Niedermann would have probably intrigued original James Bond enthusiasts, but to be perfectly fair he is simply the spitting image and character of what you would expect if the albino monk from The Da Vinci Code (2006) mated with Renard, the man who feels no pain from The World Is Not Enough (1999). A large, strong, albino haired man who can’t feel pain and hardly speaks. Yup – that’s what this movie needed to give it a kick! The script becomes absurd with about 45 minutes to go, and for the first time in as long as I can remember, when the credits rolled I literally threw my hands up and huffed. A few people near me let out a chuckle. Could this really be the follow up film? Really? I can only hope I was having some sort of an Inception (2010) moment and eventually I’ll drive off a cliff and wake up and possibly not fully remember what I saw.

Do yourself a favor and see The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo and then forget the second movie was ever made.

* and a half out of 5

A Movie Review: Inception (2010)

Inception (2010)

Director - Christopher Nolan
148 Min; PG-13

Cast
Leonardo DiCaprio – Cobb
Ellen Page – Ariadne
Marion Cotillard - Mal
Joseph Gordon-Levitt - Arthur
Ken Watanabe – Saito
Tom Hardy – Eames
Dileep Rao – Yusuf
Cillian Murphy – Robert Fischer Jr.
Tom Berenger – Browning
Michael Caine – Miles

(Note: no major spoilers in this review)

Inception is a magnificent film without any help from my adjectives or accolades, but I will say that what, for me, ultimately makes it a great film, is the hands-down best ensemble casting job for an action/drama in a long time. I am reminded of how I felt about the great heist movies of my generation, the first being Heat (1995) and the second, though some will disagree, is Ronin (1998), both very good movies made even better by the cast of characters who each fulfilled their rolls perfectly. In this film, a mind-bending exploration of the mind and, more specifically, the dreaming and subconscious mind, the entire cast comes together to fulfill rolls which are required but never feel forced, and in the end you cannot help yourself from thinking that not a moment of this film was wasted by character actors just hanging around for no reason.

Christopher Nolan is famous for a flurry of films which were critically acclaimed or, at the very least, cultishly revered. Starting with Memento (2000) Nolan proved he is capable of making a layered film that will have you second guessing yourself at every turn while simply enjoying the mind-f**k you are experiencing. The tale of a man with short-term memory loss told backwards who struggles every moment of his life to understand his identity is said to be the film that Nolan was working on when he began his basis for Inception, a 10-year love affair as it were. In 2002 Insomnia was released and though I do not recall it receiving much publicity, I thought it was a brilliant film that focused on mind games and deception, two qualities woven throughout Inception. Batman Begins and The Dark Knight were Nolan’s foray into the superhero genre and both films were widely received as instant classics. The Prestige, sandwiched between the previous two films, has been hotly debated but there is no doubt in my mind that it was a well thought out and executed film.

It is with all this experience that Nolan has delivered to us the perfect Summer movie, one which is full of action and suspense, but not of the mind-numbing variety. You should be prepared to put on your thinking caps when you enter the theater (and I highly suggest you pay the extra $5 for the IMAX experience) and be well-prepared for two and a half hours of thought-provoking suspense. I never even once thought about the time, and the fairly packed theater around me was as quiet as a mouse throughout, in deep respect and thought for the film in front of them, and only when the credits rolled did a collective gasp of relief let go as people immediately began discussing the film. Some had no idea what they had seen (these are the people who only want explosions and no plot), while some began to debate (incorrectly) about some of the dream sequences and the consequences (people who enjoyed the film but didn’t put in the effort required to really GET the concepts), but the vast majority seemed to enjoy very much what they had been a part of, which, if you have to nail it down to a simple thought, would be “That…..Was…..Awesome!”

The basic premise of a man infiltrating the dreams of people for pay, for various reasons, is actually, to my memory, an extremely unique concept. I love this film for its originality and that with every layer added you never feel that you are being spoon fed answers nor do you feel you are being asked too much to figure things out on your own. Leonardo DiCaprio as the infiltrator and Ellen Page as the ‘architect’ of the dreams work perfectly together, never forced and never dull. Marion Cotillard is woven throughout the film as a back story and deeply important role for which DiCaprio must answer or be lost forever. She is the perfect mix of beauty and bitch. The rest of the cast mentioned in the credits is perfect, each playing the part of a willing or unwilling participant in this dream experiment.

It must have taken a hundred re-writes to get everything correct in this film and even now as I rehash scenes in my head I cannot find a single fault with the film. From the bookended opening and closing I was completely immersed in this world of rolling cities and anti-gravitational scenes which pull on the not-really-physical bodies of those in interwoven dreams, and I simply cannot give this film enough praise as an instant classic that, if you are willing to give your full attention span, you will be greatly rewarded.

***** out of 5

The American President #6: John Quincy Adams

#6
Please feel free to add anything you want about John Quincy Adams

-6th President of the USA; One term (March 4, 1825-March 4, 1829); Vice-President John C. Calhoun

-Born July 11, 1767 in Braintree (now Quincy), MA; Died Feb 23, 1848 in Washington D.C.

-Election of 1824: Electoral vote split 99 Jackson; 84 Adams; 37 Clay; 4 Crawford; Popular vote split 153; Jackson; 109k Adams; 47k Clay; 46k Crawford
- Due to lack of a majority the House of Representatives declared Adams the winner, even though Jackson won both the Electoral and Popular votes

- Religion: Unitarian
- Profession – Lawyer
- Higher Education: Harvard 1787

- The first family dynasty of the office of Presidency, John Quincy Adams was the son of the second President, John Adams

- At an early age he accompanied his father to France where he became fluent in the language and learned a great deal. Upon his return to the US he enrolled and finished 2nd in his class at Harvard, giving a speech with the aptly penned title: “The Importance and Necessity of Public Faith to the Well-being of a Nation” – a just the age of 21

- He kept a diary from the age of 12 until nearly the time of his death that remain to this day a valuable source of information on the times

- He was the only President to be elected to the House of Representatives after leaving the office of the President

- Amistad: in 1839, 49 enslaved Africans aboard the ship Amistad took over the boat and killed the captain and his mate. Upon arriving in New York it was John Quincy Adams who defended the slaves in front of the Supreme Court which ultimately declared them all to be free.

-He was a champion for a national museum and though he could not pull it off while President, during his lifetime he would witness the birth of the Smithsonian.

- He was the first President to be photographed

- Us Population in 1825: 12,866,020
- National debt in 1825: $83,788,433
- President’s salary - $25,000/year
- Number of states in 1829: 24

Final thoughts: Compared to the previous 5 Presidents there just doesn’t seem to be too much memorable about the Presidency of John Quincy Adams. It appears that his most important work came in all the years later as a member of the House of Representatives when he was able to vote on a number of incredible important issues.

A Movie Review: Predators (2010)

Predators (2010)

Director - Nimród Antal
106 min; R
Cast
Royce - Adrien Brody
Isabelle - Alice Braga
Edwin - Topher Grace
Cuchillo - Danny Trejo

I don’t have much to say about Predators that anybody who would enjoy this movie would want to hear, so I’m just going to say it is pretty awful in the grand scheme of things, but not so horrible that you should pass up a chance to walk into it after seeing a good film. Maybe you’ll be with the right kind of person and the two of you can enjoy placing bets on what order the random group of killers will be killed by the alien things. I definitely lost out when I thought the Yakuza Japanese guy was going to get it next and it turned out to be, wait, no no no, I will not give away a spoiler here! You’re just going to have to see the movie like everyone else.

Adrien Brody simply cannot pull off a tough guy role. It can’t be done. At least not here. I mean, how is it possible to watch this film without comparing everything to the infinitely better original film Predator (1987) and the completely perfectly cast Arnold Schwarzenegger as Dutch? Can’t be done. I suppose the creators of this film knew exactly what they were doing when they had the entire cast literally drop into the movie with no back story via parachutes – I mean, we never really know why things have happened the way they have, and we never really care, either.

* and a half out of 5

A Movie Review: The A-Team (2010)

The A-Team (2010)

Director - Joe Carnahan
117 Min; PG-13
Cast
Hannibal - Liam Neeson
Face - Bradley Cooper
B.A. - Quinton 'Rampage' Jackson
Murdock - Sharlto Copley
Sosa - Jessica Biel

I love it when a plan comes together. I also love it when I go to the theater and see a movie that doesn’t make me look at the time, like, 5 times. Not to say the The A-Team adaptation of the cult tv series was all bad, I mean, I laughed a few times, but this simply isn’t good enough. Like the Dukes of Hazzard, the A-Team was a tv series I grew up with, but don’t really recall any specific storylines, and the idea that there is a 2 hour story for a feature length film just doesn’t add up, unless, of course, you’re interested in physically impossible and highly coincidental explosions that defy all laws of physics.

Bradley Cooper has become the token smug bad-boy in his films and thankfully he does provide some of the best scenes in this film, but Quinton 'Rampage' Jackson as “Mr. T”??? You could seriously pick any black male off the street with a few muscles, shave his head to a Mohawk, and pay him $1,000 to do a better job at what we in the movie-watching for pleasure business like to call ‘acting.’ Sharlto Copley as Murdock is good comic relief, I suppose, but what I really wonder is how much money Liam Neeson owes to his bookie to have signed on as the leader of this gang, Hannibal, the man with the plan? I’m not trying to vault him into the upper echelon of greatest actors of his generation, but this film smells very much like a paycheck.

Of course there is a woman to look at throughout this ‘film’ - Jessica Biel, obviously playing a high ranking military official who is seemingly everywhere but doing nothing, and I’m not quite sure how we are to ever take anything coming out of her mouth as remotely serious.

This is a summer film for people who don’t care much about taking 2 hours to laugh a bit at Bradley Cooper, although I admit I did laugh out loud more than a few times at how absurd everything was, and really, just at how awfully cast the production crew was with Rampage.

* and ½ out of 5