Rating: 0 to 5 stars
© 2008 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
artsalamode.com
Information from this site may not be reproduced in print or online without specific permission from artsalamode.com
| HANCOCK Rated PG-13 for some intense sequences of sci-fi action and violence, and language. Action/Adventure/Comedy/Sci-Fi 92 minutes
2½ stars |
Trying to change superhero mythology is tricky. Even having an actor like Will Smith, who has a huge reservoir of good will with the audience, doesn’t guarantee a movie will work if there is a fundamental flaw. The flaw here is the story. Yes, it’s interesting to give the plot some twists, and the writers, Vincent Ngo and Vince Gilligan do try, yet it’s difficult to empathize with Hancock.
Mr. Smith plays Hancock, a gloomy, bad-tempered superhero if there ever was one. He woke up in a hospital with amnesia and his super powers intact, but can’t remember who he is. This apparently makes him so grumpy that kids call him names he can’t abide. As he reluctantly goes about saving people, he also causes millions in property damage. This is how he meets Ray Embrey (Jason Bateman doing a good job with what he’s given). Ray is stuck on railroad tracks and Hancock saves his life. He’s a down and out PR man who decides all Hancock needs is some love and understanding for the public to grow to like him. So he tries to be a combination of image consultant/anger management teacher. Ray’s wife, Mary (Charlize Theron, excellent throughout, even given some terrible lines) doesn’t want Hancock in their lives, with good reason. The only one who seems to connect with Hancock is Ray’s young son, Aaron (Jae Head doing a nice job).
There are contradictions and plot holes about how Hancock came into being “the only one of my kind,” but it’s never really answered. There doesn’t have to be an explanation of every last detail, but to create a mythology there needs to be some coherent story line, even if it’s fantastic. It can be a fine line between telling too much, and not enough. Here it’s the latter, so that by the time the final big showdown occurs, there’s no great sorrow for this lonely being, whoever or whatever he is. The director, Peter Berg, is responsible for the overall tone of the movie, which is inconsistent, and disappointing.
The technical aspects of the movie are serviceable, though not exceptional, and the acting is good, but there’s not one really horrendous villain to focus on. Although Hancock can be counted on to make money from Will Smith fans alone, it doesn’t go down as easily as his other big movies where his personality is allowed to shine through. The audience I saw this with had few good laughs aside from kids cursing, or that weren’t forced. Hancock is different alright, it’s not much fun. Review by Ann Marie Oliva
AN AMERICAN GIRL |
KIT KITTREDGE: AN AMERICAN GIRL Rated G Family/Adaptation/Comedy/Drama 101 minutes
3 stars |
This is a family-friendly, earnest, well-intentioned movie that becomes inconsistent and a bit too sticky sweet over the course of the film, but girls will probably appreciate it as it has a young, spunky heroine. Kit Kittredge (Abigail Breslin doing a super job as always) is the ten year old who wants to be a reporter. It seems all spunky girls wanted to be reporters in those days as it provided a way to a more exciting lifestyle. It’s the early 1930s and the Depression is hitting everyone hard. Kit’s father, Jack (the reliable Chris O’Donnell moving effortlessly into youngish father roles) has an auto dealership, while Mom (Julia Ormond doing a fine job) manages the home.
Unfortunately, more and more people become affected by the economic downturns, with many losing their houses to foreclosure. Eventually the Kittredges are touched, too, when Jack loses his job, which forces him to leave home to find work in Chicago, and Mom has to take in borders just to survive.
The borders are an odd group. There’s a mother & son who’ve been abandoned by the husband and father, the fussy Mrs. Howard and sensitive Stirling (Glenne Headly giving a layered performance; Zach Mills fitting in well with the females). Miss Dooley (Jane Krakowski), is a man-hungry dance instructor; Miss Bond (Joan Cusack, playing very broad) is a rather awkward traveling librarian with poor driving skills; Jefferson Berk (Stanley Tucci, exacting) as a magician who keeps them amused. Also dropping in is Ruthie Smithens (Madison Davenport, doing well as the loyal friend), the banker’s daughter. And two “hobos” whom Mom treats kindly and allows to work for food, Will Shepherd (Max Theriot, bringing some nuance to the role), and Countee (Willow Smith, cute and engaging). There is a subplot about the hobos, one about the newspaper where Kit is trying to sell her articles to the editor Mr. Gibson (Wallace Shawn, under control here) with the help of her older brother’s friend Billy (Douglas Nyback, a good fit for the part). Then there is a subplot about a series of robberies which turns the movie into a Nancy Drew-like mystery.
The look of the film is not especially realistic, (the hobos are too clean), but the costumes are not overdone either. The tone is increasingly uneven as the movie meanders, but still, it will probably be enjoyable for families looking for live action G-Rated fare. Review by Ann Marie Oliva
| WALL-E Rated G Animation 97 minutes
5 stars |
WALL-E, no matter how you say it (in the movie it is uttered with nothing less than appealing cuteness) is a charmer from start to finish. There's messages (about love, man's stewardship of earth, and the future), but the messages are cleverly packaged and easily swallowed (but no less important for being so). Yeah, the kids will love the robots and their antics (and will likely, incidentally, pick up some worthwhile cautions), and adults will be equally delighted. Unless the viewer is cyncial beyond belief, or a teenage boy too would-be macho to give it a break, the movie will leave you with a smile.
WALL-E (an acronym for Waste Allocation Load Lifter-Earth Class) is the last functioning waste gathering and compressing robot on Earth. He is, in fact, an intelligent compacter and his task is enormous. Earth, seven hundred years hence, has been abandoned by humankind after they've ravaged it and rendered it uninhabitable. What they have left behind are piles, everywhere and in heaps, of abandonded goods thanks to corporations as epitomized by Buy And Large which seems to have consolidated all businesses into one world-wide, all encompassing business entity. And, it is B N L that, long ago, lead humans to a paradise off-planet. Cleaning up the Earth was left to WALL-E and his fellow robots. Now, he is alone, his only company a lone cockroach. (Point of fact, these creatures pre-date humankind and, it has been predicted, will outlast us, though in much greater numbers than the movie indicates. And, too, the real thing is far less savory than its movie version. Talk about good PR.) What's appealing about WALL-E are the seemingly human traits he possesses (and why not, he was, after all, created by humans). He is curious (about the nature and use of the waste he gathers), is domestic (he has a residence in some sort of metal loading vehicle), is an inveterate collector (of odds and ends he has neatly and logically indexed on revolving shelves), is self-preserving (he has amassed a supply of spare parts from his broken breathern), and is overwhelmingly sensitive (caring and parental to his roach companion), and longing for love. The latter emotion he has learned second hand from a tape and soundtrack of the film Hello Dolly. What better illustration of the castoff society left behind as well as the innocence and naivete of WALL-E who uses one of its sacharine scenes as his template of romance. You got to feel for this robot.
And you do and root for him when, out of the sky, comes a potential companion robot named Eve (another acronym but more pointedly the name of the first "female" of our species). WALL-E woos and wins her affection but when he shows her a small plant he has found amid the refuse, she takes it in (literally) and closes up (having achieved her directive). When she is retrieved, WALL-E tags along not being willing to give up his newfound love. Eve's destination is a huge spaceship wherein dwell the descendants of humankind (having evolved into ultimate, helpless consumers) overseen by legions of pampering and controllling robots.
The stage is set. WALL-E strives to save Eve. She is torn betwen her embedded instructions and her feelings for him. Various robots rebel. Others faithfully follow instructions. The humans start to break loose. The ending is happy, but see the climax and the aftemath for yourself. The wit, cleverness, and intelligence are best experienced first hand.
Kudos to Andrew Stanton for direction that is equally mindful of the smarts and sympathies of the audience. Also for his script, along with Jim Reardon, for being timely on the issues while avoiding heavy handness. Production-wise, this is Pixar and so, technically, it is superior in every way (the opening shots of a smoggy, desolated, waste strewn Earth are striking and the human spaceship are a nonstop visual treat) - camera by Jeremy Lasky, lighting by Danielle Feinberge, editing by Stephen Schaffer, production design by Ralph Eggleston. How good is the movie? Heck, even the end credits are worth a look.
WALL-E - Love that Bot. A winner all the way. Review by Charles Zio
| WANTED Rated R for strong bloody violence throughout, pervasive language and some sexuality. Action /Adventure/Drama 108 minutes
4 stars |
Since the success of 300, graphic novels seem to be quickly filling a niche. Not having to send draft after draft of an original screenplay to the studio suits for approval is, apparently, a very good thing for Hollywood. The stories are fully formed and illustrated so there’s no missing the point, and it speeds up the process of getting a movie to the screen. Wanted is one of those dark, violent graphic novels with characters who are intriguing but have little redeeming social value except to have the audience identify and safely live through them. Russian/Kazakh director Timur Bekmambetov has created a stylish, though relentlessly bloody movie.
Wesley Gibson (James McAvoy, very good here) is a cube-dweller, as in he’s an accountant in a loser job whose female boss emasculates him at every turn. His girlfriend has sex with his so-called best friend without consequence. In short, his life sucks. One day as he’s picking up his tranquilizers at a drug store, Fox (a provocative Angelina Jolie), saves him from a killer, followed by an impressive car chase where she escapes with Wesley and almost scares him to death. He’s told he’s the son of an assassin who has just been killed and a group called the Fraternity want him to join them and become an avenger like his father. Wesley can hardly believe the whole scenario yet is clearly fascinated. He resists at first, but he’s drawn into the world of killers/assassins headed by Sloan (Morgan Freeman, bringing more to this role than he has to others lately).
The middle of the film is all about Wesley “toughening up” with his teachers inflicting damage that then gets healed with special baths, and living up to his destiny. Fox is Wesley’s special tutor, and he develops some feelings for her, although “feelings” are low on the priority list for the Fraternity (and graphic novels in general). Wesley has to make some decisions about getting revenge for his father’s demise, and what he does shows that his special gifts for killing are not an accident.
There is probably something especially exhilarating about this storyline for men, with its sarcastic, ironic dialogue. The modern human condition has left most feeling like nobodies at one time or another---when Wesley googles his name he gets “no results,” then suddenly a beautiful woman is telling him he has skills and powers beyond belief, with others backing that up. The testosterone overflows but real-life women are unappealing: the ex-girlfriend is a whiny nag; the boss woman is obese and obnoxious, yet Fox, the dream woman, is credible and devastating as the beautiful assassin.
There is somewhat of an attempt to tone down the nihilism. Wesley and Fox both have father issues (mothers make no appearance) that cause them to pursue this murderous lifestyle, but it’s really all about being in control and revenge, and secondarily becoming an efficient killing machine; oh yes, with explosions and exciting action sequences, too. Any connection to reality is tenuous. The characters may live fast and die hard, but what a fantasy ride. Review by Ann Marie Oliva
| GET SMART Rated PG-13 for some rude humor, action violence and language. Action /Comedy /Crime 110 minutes
4 stars |
It’s a pleasure to see an old television show revived and made into such a clever, funny movie. Based on the characters created by Mel Brooks and Buck Henry, the old TV show was a spoof on spy movies. There are some vestiges of the old Russian competition during the Cold War that carry over into the film, but director Peter Segal makes a wise choice to not have the actors try to mimic the original characters. Rather he lets them bring their own particular “take” to them. Steve Carell as Maxwell Smart, Agent 86, and Anne Hathaway as Agent 99 are excellent in their roles, and work well together. Mr. Carell does utter a few of the well-known Don Adams lines, but does it with his own style.
As the movie opens, Maxwell is the smart, detailed intelligence geek stuck in the offices of CONTROL (the good guys), but desperately wants to get out into the field. They are still battling the forces of KAOS (the bad guys) and coming up with clever gadgets. (Homage is paid to the old shoe phone and some of the other old gags.) Maxwell’s boss, The Chief (played with relish by Alan Arkin) wants to keep him in the office where he thinks he can serve CONTROL the best, even though Maxwell passed the agent test with high marks, and lost 150 pounds.
When the offices are broken into and others put out of commission, The Chief has no choice but to promote Maxwell to Agent 86, and have him partner with Agent 99. Anne Hathaway is beautiful and has good comic timing. She is less goofy than the original character (played so well by Barbara Feldon), but it works well here. Dwayne Johnson, as Agent 23, is cast in his usual role as the perfect physical specimen. He’s seems to taking over the Arnold Schwarzenegger parts—and looked what happened to him? On the KAOS side there is Terrence Stamp, who can probably play the evil boss in his sleep. Bill Murray has a silly cameo as Agent 13, and James Caan seems an odd choice as the President, but overall the casting is well done.
There are some genuinely funny bits and sight gags in the movie, including “dueling dances” where Agent 99 and her partner try to out-dance Maxwell and his partner, a very large lady. What makes the movie rise above the usual mediocre material is that the humor comes out of the characters, not forced on the audience by straining to make a joke out of nothing. Maxwell is a dork, which we all can identify with at one time or another, so we root for him to overcome, and it happily pays off. Review by Ann Marie Oliva
| THE LOVE GURU Rated PG-13 for crude and sexual content throughout, language, some comic violence and drug references. Comedy 88 minutes
1 star |
What makes a good comic go bad? Mike Myers has given audiences many funny moments, but The Love Guru, which he wrote and helped produce, is a total misfire, unless you think urine and feces jokes are the height of comic genius. In the first place, this supposed spoof on Indian gurus is not funny or fun. There are a few amusing moments, but for the most part the audience I saw this with sat numb. The juvenile humor is sub-par by any standard. What were they thinking?
Mr. Myers portrays Guru Pitka who wants to achieve higher consciousness. His master, in training him from when he and Deepak Chopra (that’s right) are boys, is Guru Tugginmypudha (Ben Kingsley with crossed eyes and little inspiration). There is a silly, convoluted plot about Guru Pitka saving a hockey team in the US if he can bring the star player Darren Roanoke (Romany Malco) and his wife Prudence (Meagan Good) back together. The wife is living with a rival hockey player called Jacques “le coq” Grande (Justin Timberlake, at least watch able in a turn as a French-Canadian ninny with a huge…you know). The hockey team is owned by Jane Bullard (Jessica Alba, pretty but---why is she acting again?)
The movie is one self-indulgent shtick after another. Stephen Colbert as sportscaster Jay Kell, and Jim Gaffigan as his on-air partner Trent Lueders, do what they can with the parts as written, but it’s not easy to inject humor where there is none. Verne Troyer, who plays Mini-Me in Myers' Austin Powers movies, plays the bad-tempered coach of the hockey team. Telma Hopkins shows up as star player Roanoke’s mother, who of course, he’s afraid of (it’s always Mom’s fault isn’t it?). Not to mention cameo appearances by: Jessica Simpson, Val Kilmer, Mariska Hargitay (whose name they use as a chant), and Kanye West.
Obviously, great care was taken with the technical aspects of the movie. How could it not when you have two live elephants on the set? But what’s with all the extreme close-ups of Mike Myers? Talk about in-your-face…
Even though the movie is short at 88 minutes, it seems like an extended Saturday Night Live script. What might have worked as a skit on the television show is a dud here. The humor doesn’t translate. Many former comics from that show should reevaluate the characters they are creating. Good will from the show won’t last forever. I predict Mike Myers will go back to another Austin Powers movie in the future---and I didn’t need a guru to tell me that. Review by Ann Marie Oliva
| STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE Rated R for disturbing images and content involving torture and graphic nudity, and for language. Documentary/War 116 minutes
3 stars |
There is no doubt that the incidents of torture and maltreatment at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq are shameful for the United States, even considering the prisoners were suspected terrorists. Yet some turned out to be low level at best. As Americans we always feel that because of our actions and our conscience we have moral authority over others, but some of our men and women in uniform disgraced us and it’s impossible not to acknowledge that.
Sitting through this documentary, though, is painful in more than one way. It is by far too long, and too heavy-handed. In his effort to be thorough, director Errol Morris gives the audience too much repetition. When a point is made, it’s stronger when not repeated over and over. That only serves to lessen the impact. The style of interviewing those involved, too, who look directly into the camera is effective, at first, but then just becomes one talking head after another.
Yet, the guilty words’ indict them. They talk about some of these incidents as if they were no different than taking a dog for a walk, or observing some scenario they had no part of. It’s one thing to be an obedient soldier, it’s another to cross the boundary of decency and morality.
The excuses range from: it was like that when I got there; so-and-so told me to do whatever needed to be done; I didn’t want to let my friends down or leave them alone; I personally really didn’t do anything bad, although others did; the prisoners might know others out on the street trying to kill our soldiers, etc. The prison photos belie these casual explanations. As the investigator said, criminals usually make a mistake; that’s what the photos were, not to mention chilling and disgusting.
There is an especially horrifying sequence when a prisoner died. They put him in a body bag with ice covering him to preserve the body, and into a prison cell by himself. But then the soldiers go in and open the body bag look at the dead body, like it’s some sort of freak show. It gets worse. They take photos of the body, and themselves with the body.
Are some of these soldiers more culpable than the others? Probably. War is awful and stressful, and pushes people to do terrible things. Except these weren’t immediate battlefield decisions. Each person had to make choices. No matter what excuses they come up with, it’s sickening. Yet, this documentary pushes too hard to make obvious points. Review by Ann Marie Oliva
| THE INCREDIBLE HULK Rated PG-13 for sequences of intense action violence, some frightening sci-fi images and brief suggestive content. Action/Fantasy/Sci-Fi 114 minutes
4 stars |
Universal is on a roll with comic book superheroes this summer. More surprising is that one of them is The Incredible Hulk. With its checkered history, much wasn’t expected of this remake, but the filmmakers came through with an intelligent, interesting, appealing, exciting movie. Rather than picking up the story and creating a new episode, we get quick flashback versions of how Bruce Banner became the Hulk. It’s not labored, which is good, because many already know the story.
A big decision that pays off is casting Edward Norton as Bruce Banner. He creates a believable Banner, in part because the character’s regular persona of a mild-mannered scientist fits him so well. Although there’s no doubt he’s a good actor he’s not the first one that would come to mind for the part, but that’s exactly what makes it work. Good for director Louis Leterrier whose instincts were sound. Screenwriter Zak Penn and others (reportedly Edward Norton under a pseudonym) do a credible job with the script, with appreciation and esteem going to the original comic book writers, Stan Lee and Jack Kirby. Imagine how they must be feeling about their creations coming to movie screens?
One thing that has always made The Incredible Hulk work is the metaphor that when men get angry and go into a rage, they and those watching them feel like they turn into a monster. This psychological fact has always been used to great advantage in this series. What they do is show that Bruce doesn’t change of his own accord. He is given the serum by General Thaddeus 'Thunderbolt” Ross (William Hurt) because he wants to create a super soldier. That’s why Bruce goes to Brazil, so he can “do no harm.” Yet the General tracks him down and bring home his monster so he can create more of them. But the movie goes out of its way to show that even when Bruce is the Hulk, he still knows who his enemies are and who he should protect.
The General gets into cahoots with an ambitious agent, Emil Blonsky (Tim Roth) who will stop at nothing to become more powerful than the Hulk. Their monster fighting scenes in New York (where else in the world is havoc more acceptable to movie makers?) are graphically well done with CGI and whatever else they use.
Aside from Norton, Liv Tyler is touching and effective as Dr. Betty Ross; she and Norton have a good chemistry. William Hurt brings believability to his role as the general, Tim Roth is fine if stereotypical as the bad guy agent, and the rest of the large cast is uniformly good. There are a few surprises that will delight fans of the genre. Hold on world, more super hero more movies will follow the success of The Incredible Hulk. Review by Ann Marie Oliva
| THE HAPPENING Rated R for violent and disturbing images. Drama/Sci-Fi 91 minutes
2 stars |
M. Night Shyamalan’s movies, sorry to say, have not lived up to the promise of The Sixth Sense; Crop Circles being the best of the rest. It’s too bad because he does know how to set a mood and carry it through, but The Happening, even more than the others is a hollow shell. To write, produce and direct a movie is a huge undertaking, but it doesn’t explain why the writing, especially the plot, got such short shrift. The story is eerie, interesting, engaging in the beginning. The wind rustles in Central Park. Suddenly, everyone stops in his/her tracks, and then a girl on a park bench takes a large hair pin and sticks in her neck. Scary.
In science high school class in Philadelphia, the teacher Elliot Moore (Mark Wahlberg) is asked to leave his class and meet with all the other teachers in the auditorium. They learn about Central Park. His best friend Julian (John Leguizamo) says they can go to the country and get away from the frenzy. Julian has his daughter Jess (Ashlyn Sanchez) with him, but his wife is taking a later train. For a reason that’s never explained, Julian seems outraged by Elliot’s wife, Alma (Zooey Deschanel) He thinks she’s not in love with Elliot is the best I can figure out. Elliot has his doubts, too, but it turns out to be a silly nothing, and I do mean nothing. The four get on the train; find themselves stranded in the middle of nowhere when the conductors lose touch with “everyone.”
There are some theories in the media starting with bio-terrorism, but it’s too random. The stranded group, led by Elliot, come to believe it’s the plants running amuck, so whenever the wind rustles and overtakes people, they are overcome by the “virus.” When that happens, they kill themselves in whatever way they can. As the group gets smaller and smaller, trying to outrun the virus, the movie loses steam. Unfortunately, there is one exceptionally bad and embarrassing sequence involving Betty Buckley towards the end.
The look of the film is fine. The same can’t be said for the acting. Walhberg and Deschanel have no chemistry, and both have line readings that are almost laughable at times. John Leguizamo is the only half-way believable character, but he’s gone pretty early in the story. As writer/director/producer, Mr. Shyamalan is to be the on responsible for this bad movie. It’s one thing to be ambiguous and allow the audience to fill in the blanks, but when a story is so purposely vague, and there’s nothing to back it up, you feel taken—taken on a ride that goes nowhere and means nothing except to the person telling the story. Some words for Mr. Shyamalan: don’t promise what you can’t deliver. Review by Ann Marie Oliva
SEE YOUR FATHER? |
WHEN DID YOU LAST SEE YOUR FATHER Rated PG-13 for sexual content, thematic material and brief strong language. Biography/Drama 92 minutes
4½ stars |
Despite a title that sounds like either a comic setup or a punch line, When Did You Last See Your Father? is an adult, intelligent, sensitive portrait of a strained father-son relationship. And, by the way, the question posed will resonate and be answered movingly in the film. The summer season would seem an odd choice for a work obviously directed toward adults. Then again, a fine movie is always welcome whenever.
Blake Morrison (Coliin Firth, skillfully conveying resentment and affection) has come home to his father's deathbed meaning to resolve their ever troubled relationship, but the older man, Arthur (Jim Broadbent, superb throughout), is too ill and slipping away too quickly. Blake is forced, on his own, to look back and sort out the past. Arthur wasn't a terrible parent, just thoughtless. He did not hesitate to intrude himself on Blake (the poor kid couldn't even read a book in peace), insulting him, dragging him into social settings for which he was unprepared, embarrassing him at every opportunity, and insisting he accompany him on excursions he strongly wished to avoid. In short, Arthur wouldn't take no for an answer. To cap off matters, Arthur was gregarious (hail fellow well-met to men) and outgoing (charming to women) leaving Blake with no allies and frustrated that he seemed the only one who could see through his father's huffing and puffing. More maddening still was Blake's conviction his father was cheating on his mother, Kim (Juliet Stevenson, beautifully embodying anger,acceptance, frustration, and devotion), and she was allowing him to do so. If there was a ray of light, it was the boy's brief affair with the maid (his first lover) with his father cast as the "sex police" trying to catch him or, at least, forestall consumation.
As Blake reflects on the past, and Arthur slips increasingly out of mental reach, it's evident that reconcilation will not be possible. How will Blake address the unhappiness and dissatisfaction he harbors? The strain on his own marriage is evident with his wife Kathy (Gina McKee, a strong presence in her few scenes) and that we don't see him with his own children may imply he is going in the opposite direction of his father and be absent, even when present. But as in his youth, Blake's anger remains his alone for no one else sees or remembers the situation as he did. The viewer, needless to say, understands what the boy wanted all along was affection, approval, validation. The same things, in fact, that the grown man still craves and awaits from his father. And he will have them. Not as he preferred. But in the form of a memory in a powerful, truly moving moment of emotional revelation. The effect is that much greater because, up till this point, the events have been understated, presented calmly and matter-of-factly. Chances are excellent that the tears will not be limited to the screen. There's a little bit of summing up (lesson learned) at the end (tied in with the title), but in such an honest film this is a very minor blip (and not at all annoying).
Who to thank for this fine picture? Start with the excellent script by David Nicholls, based on Blake Morrison's novel, wherein the flow of events never feels forced and the build of feelings is quietly effective. The photography by Howard Atherton is clear-eyed and subtle as it easily drifts from present to past and back again all of which is reinforced by Trevor Waite's able editing and Alice Normington's believable production design. Finally, high praise is due director Anand Tucker for his highly professional marshalling of his tech crew and for eliciting great performances from every actor involved, with a particular nod of the head to Colin Firth and Jim Broadbent. Tucker never loses sight of the humanity of his characters nor does he attempt to insert false drama out of synch with the story. Though it's a familiar one, when it's handled with sensitivity and thoughfulness, like Tucker does here, the result will inevitably be a worthwhile movie experience.
When Did You Last See Your Father? - No question, this is a sincere and heartfelt film not to miss. Review by Charles Zio
| THEN SHE FOUND ME Rated R for language and some sexual content. Comedy/Drama/Romance 100 minutes
2 stars |
If I was Helen Hunt’s mother, like Bette Midler in Then She Found Me, the first thing I’d say is, “Have a bagel, already!” Ms. Hunt looks not only too thin, but strained and haggard. Although she’s told several times in the movie she looks beautiful, I found it almost painful to look at her. Maybe that strain is from directing her first feature film; helping adapt the screenplay from the novel, and being a producer. The mood carries over because the pace is too slow; most of the actors seem drained of energy. Underplaying is fine, sometimes, it’s a style choice; but here it works against the material.
Ms. Hunt plays April Epner, an adopted Jewish woman in her late 30s, desperately trying to have a baby with her man/child husband Ben (Matthew Broderick in one of his least attractive roles), a fellow teacher. Just as Ben decides being married to April is too much---one wonders why, she’s not exactly high maintenance---she gets a visitor who says her birth mother wants to meet her. Aside from trying to get pregnant and all the issues that raises about motherhood, April resents her adopted mother, who conveniently dies early on, and resents her birth mother as well for giving her up.
As mentioned, Bette Midler plays her birth mother, Bernice Graves a local television talk show host, with at least some spirit. Things pick up whenever she’s on screen. The relationship is rocky because Bernice lies by trying to embellish the story of her adoption, and April catches her in the lies. That’s another issue that doesn’t help this movie; the character of April is whiny. I almost feel like shouting at the screen, “What are you complaining about?” So your Jewish mother was a little overbearing, she obviously loved you. So your birth mother is a little bit crazy, she did the best she could. At almost forty, it’s not appealing to be still thinking and acting like a narcissistic adolescent who believes the world should revolve around how she feels on any given day.
Colin Firth, normally interesting to watch, is sucked into the depressing black hole of this film. It doesn’t seem to know when or if to be funny; you have to kind of guess, and so doesn’t work as a comedy/drama. I did not read the novel, but the transition from book to screen is a questionable one. It may be that Ms. Hunt is too close to the material. For whatever reason, she did not serve the movie, or herself, very well. Review by Ann Marie Oliva
| KUNG FU PANDA Rated PG for sequences of martial arts action. Animation 91 minutes
4 stars |
Who couldn’t love a big, round, self-deprecating panda bear? Dreamworks Animation has a good script to work with and talented voice actors, but the animation is the star of this film which moves at a good clip to a respectable 91 minutes. The characters are all animals so there is freedom to assign whatever qualities they want to them. In ancient China in the Valley of Peace, Po (voice of Jack Black), the panda, works for his father serving noodles and dreaming of becoming a martial arts expert. Since he’s overweight and clumsy, this indeed seems like a distant dream.
The Valley is one of those happy little places in CGI land where the residents live in harmony until their way of life is threatened. That threat comes in the form of the savage snow leopard Tai Lung (Ian McShane). It seems the ancient master turtle, Oogway (Randal Duk Kim), has had a dream that Tai Lung, who is the only prisoner in a fortified prison, will escape and terrorize the countryside. A “chosen one” must save the people, but who is he/she? Kung Fu master Shifu (Dustin Hoffman) has been training his fearsome group of five and expects one of them to be chosen: Tigress (Angelina Jolie), Monkey (Jackie Chan), Mantis (Seth Rogan), Viper (Lucy Liu), and Crane (David Cross). It’s a surprise to all when Po, through a silly sequence where he can’t even get inside the walls to see the spectacle gets chosen by Oogway, much to the annoyance of all present.
Po is unsure of himself, knowing he is unprepared and as perplexed as the rest of them as to why he was chosen. Shifu is beyond angry as it was he who found Tai Lung when he was an abandoned baby and took him in and treated him like his own son. His pride blinded him to Tai Lung’s psychopathic ways, now he feels responsible for stopping the monster he created and (initially) has no belief in Po. Yet, through modesty and hard work, Po begins to win over all his kung fu brethren.
Of course, it can’t be easy for Po to attain his status, so he has to go through his trials. The story of having good character is very much part of the ancient martial arts. It’s not just about jumping around knocking others out (though there’s plenty of that). Winners lose, and losers win---eventually, if they work hard, have integrity, are honest, kind, unselfish. Although not an original story, it's well told. This is a delightful, charming movie for the young of all ages. Review by Ann Marie Oliva
WITH THE ZOHAN |
YOU DON'T MESS WITH THE ZOHAN Rated PG-13 for crude sexual content throughout, language and nudity. Action/Comedy 113 minutes
2 stars |
Calling You Don’t Mess with the Zohan an “action/comedy” is laughable, but not in a good way. If you are into crude, tasteless, offensive, adolescent, silly shtick that’s supposed to pass for farce, then this could be your lucky day. I have liked a thing or two Adam Sandler has done in the past, but this is just a bad movie. Why a bunch of talented people have roles or cameos in this mess can only be under the heading of, “It seemed like a good idea at the time.”
Sandler has gotten into shape for the role; it’s obvious he’s been working out. He plays Zohan, a fierce Israeli commando who is so talented he can catch a fish---between his buttocks?? It goes downhill from there. He’s tired of war, and what he really wants is to be a hair stylist. He fakes his death at the hands of his Palestinian sworn enemy, Phantom (John Turturro, diappointingly not funny), and escapes to New York City where he hopes to work for Paul Mitchell. Oh, and did I mention the sexist attitude towards women? Once Zohan gets into a hair salon, he’s full service. He takes the poor, dumb, sex-starved middle-aged and elderly ladies into a closet and goes at it, leaving them happy.
I suppose the sentiment about being tired of war and getting along with your enemies is a hopeful one, but is entirely misused and misplaced here. The actors struggle to be funny, or at least amusing, but it’s tough. The writing doesn’t help. How many humus jokes can you take in one movie? Maybe on the set they were cracking each other up, who knows, but the audience is paying to be entertained. And PG-13? Enough. You get the idea. Review by Ann Marie Oliva
| MONGOL Foreign Film-Germany/Kazakhstan/Russia/Mongolia Rated R for sequences of bloody warfare. Drama/History 126 minutes
3 stars |
Chances are, Genghis Khan has not been the subject of any of your recent conversations, and Mongol will keep it that way despite the fact his juvenile-young manhood years (as presented here) are chock-a-block with dangers, hardships, and heroics. You’ll be curious to see what happens next while likely remaining, at most, an uninvolved/passive spectator.
To begin the tale, the future Genghis is a nine-year-old named Temudgin (Odnyam Odsuren, self-possessed/confident) on his way with his father Esugei (Ba Sen, sensible/forceful) to pick out a wife from the very clan from which the older man originally stole his mother, a gesture meant to insure peace. A good plan, except that overnighting with an ally, the young lad meets Borte, a daring and forward little girl who declares Temudgin should choose her for a mate. And, defying his father (the Khan, that is, leader of his clan), he does select her, with dire consequences for all involved, and it is arranged Temudgin will return for her in five years.
However, on the ride home Esugei, a believer and upholder of Mongol traditions, is treacherously poisoned and dies. His father’s aide seizes control and Temudgin begins a series of captures, escapes, threats to his life, mystical interventions, as well as forming a blood brothership with another young boy named Jamukha, plus Borte is kidnapped by his mother’s previously betrayed clan (memories and vendettas being long). Many years (and incidents) pass and the adult Temudgin (Tadanobu Asano, tough/determined) joins forces with the now clan leader Jamukha (Honglei Sun, forceful/self-assured) to make war and retrieve his wife. Success. The young lovers are reunited and Temudgin is so open-minded (remember it’s the 1100s) and in love with Borte (Khulan Chuluun, tough/believable throughout) that he announces the child she is bearing is his. In fact, he’s such a swell guy, he generously shares his cut of the spoils of victory with some of the foot soldiers, unlike Jamukha who keeps it all to himself, and the grateful men follow him out of camp. Jamukha is not happy and eventually a war breaks out which Temudgin loses and, though spared, he’s sold into slavery and ends up on display behind bars in a distant city yearning for Borte.
Not to worry, Borte is much tougher and wiser than everyone (including Temudgin) and finds her way to her true love in his cell and, yes, helps him escape. They return to Mongolia where Temudgin expresses his intention to reform the degenerating Mongol culture and unite its people. Jump cut to his having gathered an army facing off, for a second time, against a superior force lead by Jamukha. Surprise, Temudgin wins, with smarts and a bit of help from nature (God?), and the rest will be history.
Mongol is visually striking (photography by Sergey Trofimov and Rogier Stoffers) with impressive views of mountains, hills, sands, villages, and shots of single/multiple riders and/or wanderers. While the battle scenes (effectively staged) feature spurts of blood and hacked bodies, the editing is such that they’re quick and less graphic than expected (not necessarily a negative). Director Sergei Bodrov has a subject of promise (aside from his homeland, how many of us actually know anything about Khan) and fine technical assistance. Yet, the movie seems flat and static. Is it the script by Arif Aliyev and Bodrov? Hard to think so as the elements are present for a compelling and gripping tale. The actors? No, they’re fine. It’s got to be, it surely is, the pacing. The movie doesn’t flow. It ambles. It strolls. It should instead be charging ahead, pulling the viewer along as it relates how a boy with the odds continually against him manages to survive, thrive, and triumph to become one of the greatest leaders and conquerors of all time. There’s nothing wrong with a history lesson. Except when only it feels like one.
Mongol – A slow saunter (nice countryside) rather than an exciting ride. Review by Charles Zio
THE SELF |
THE CENTURY OF THE SELF The NoDa Film Festival Neighborhood Theatre BBC Documentary Four - one hour episodes Not Rated |
The folks at the NoDa Film Festival continue to bring provocative work (this time for FREE mind you) to the Neighborhood Theatre on Sunday, June 1, with all episodes. The diverse and enthusiastic crowd was almost at capacity. The topic is the BBC four-part documentary series The Century of the Self, subtitled: A secret history of the 20th Century, a story of politics, advertising and psychoanalysis. Episode One, Happiness Machines, is fascinating. Business people and students have probably heard of Edward Bernays, founder of public relations. What some may not know is that his cousin was Sigmund Freud and that Bernays used Freud’s theories about individuals and groups to create the “consumer” concept.
The wealthy have always had discretionary income to buy goods they want but don’t necessarily need. But as America headed into the 1920s after World War I, Bernays became a business consultant and advised business leaders about packaging and marketing products so that people would want them, even if they weren’t necessities. The idea was to find the unconscious desire and create the product to fit, thereby giving the person the “feeling” of achieving their wish. Ironically, both Freud and Bernays thought the masses were none too bright and easily manipulated.
Episode Two: The Engineering of Consent is even more disturbing. Bernays continues his influence in business, but now the government is asking him for help to overthrow an unfriendly government in Latin America. Freud, ill with cancer, leaves Austria before World War II and goes to England with his daughter Anna. When he dies, she continues working with his theories and conducts mental health counseling (an experiment of sorts) when asked to help a family with their adjustment. She believes teaching the children to follow cultural conformity will help make them “normal” but the results are not exactly successful. Psychoanalysis starts to lose some luster when Marilyn Monroe is unable to be helped and commits suicide.
All four episodes will be shown again. Monday Episodes 1 & 2 will be shown starting at 7:30 pm. Tuesday Episodes 3 & 4 will start at 7:30 pm as well. The documentary is interesting especially since we are in an election year. It’s not too comforting to think that governments, businesses (and some would now add media) try to control our behavior unconsciously, including even trying to influence how we vote. Review by Ann Marie Oliva
| SEX AND THE CITY Rated R for strong sexual content, graphic nudity and language. Comedy/Romance 148 minutes
3½ stars |
Well, it’s finally here. After seeing Sex and the City with an almost totally female audience, some dressed in boas with drinks in hand, I understand why the faithful are so excited. The television show, based on the book by Candace Bushnell created a way for women to see reflections of what they may have thought and felt, but dared not say. Watch the TV show and what’s most special about it is the relationship among the four women, and that is very much played up here.
Sarah Jessica Parker (Carrie), Kim Cattrell (Samantha), Cynthia Nixon (Miranda), and Kristen Davis (Charlotte,) expertly revive their characters who have great clothes and messy lives. That’s why we like them. They are even better off in the financial area than they were during the HBO days. The social circles they travel in may not be what most women can ever aspire to (or want), but that part is fun to watch as pure “entertainment.” The real point of Sex and the City has always been about friendship and loyalty. Unfortunately, those two things are often in short supply in the “real” world, and if you’ve lived at all, you know the sad truth that many people have no idea of what it means to be a “friend.” If you’re lucky enough (as a woman) to have a few friends who will stand by you no matter what, you will appreciate the movie for what it is. If not, you may wonder what all the hype is about.
The gals are four years down the road, older now and “sex” isn’t the recreational sport it used to be. All four are in monogamous relationships, although it’s killing Samantha, the true hedonist of the group. Carrie is living with the love of her life, John James Preston (Chris Noth), better known on the TV show simply as Mr. Big---get it? When he decides to buy a penthouse apartment in Manhattan, Carrie starts having second thoughts about giving up hers and her future security. They decide to get married. It’s almost like a business deal; very unromantic, and Carrie gets sucked into a Vogue spread touting her as the last single girl to tie the knot. They deck her out in spectacular, sometimes far out, wedding dresses (more of the fun part). But Big, who has been married twice before, starts getting those famous cold feet. Things spiral out of control and the women close ranks and support each other through their chaotic story lines. Have no fear, the gals weather the storms.
Aside from Noth, who fits well into the stew, the other men: David Eigenberg (Steve), Harry Goldenblatt (Evan), and Jason Lewis (Smith) are all competent and compliment their on-screen female partners well. There is some other stunt casting as Candace Bergen and Joanna Gleason show up (though with not enough time to use them to best advantage). Stereotypical comic relief is supplied by the gals’ two gay friends, Mario Cantone and Willie Garson. Jennifer Hudson has the role of Carrie’s personal assistant, Louise, and as good as she is the subplot is stale.
I’m not sure there is a justification for a two and a half hour movie, and there was a technical glitch at our screening (that detracted but didn’t ruin the movie), which I have no doubt will be fixed. Some people (mostly men) may never get the shoe thing, or the fashion thing, or the New York City thing, or the Carrie/Samantha/Miranda/Charlotte thing. But if the skeptics get nothing else, they should look for the friend thing; it’s an example of something truly rare, and most women in the audience will definitely get that. Review by Ann Marie Oliva
| THE FALL Foreign Film - India/UK/USA Rated R for some violent images. Content Advisory for Parents Adventure/Drama/Fantasy/Sci-Fi 117 minutes
4 stars |
Films that combine "real" life situations with a fantasy narrative growing out of those events don’t always succeed, but The Fall does. Although it would seem to be easier to create something fantastic rather than staying within a linear structure, there has to be skill in making a congruous whole of the movie. The reason The Fall works starts with an intelligent, complex screenplay by Dan Gilroy, Nico Soultanakis, and Tarsem Singh, the director, who deserves much credit for weaving together the elements and making the film credible as well as moving.
In 1920s Los Angeles, a young girl, Alexandria (Catinca Untaru in a very natural/sweet/touching performance) is in the hospital with a broken arm. Not really “sick” like the other children on her ward, the imaginative, bright Alexandria is bored. Her favorite nurse Evelyn (Justine Waddell, good in both her roles, showing versatility), allows her the freedom to come and go. She wanders over to another hospital building where there is a men’s ward and she meets Roy Walker (Lee Pace, believable as distraught/troubled/desperate), a movie stunt man who has injured his legs in a fall from a horse, and thinks his stunt days as well as his life is over. Roy isn’t only injured physically; he is heart-broken and suicidal because his girlfriend left him for an actor in the movie. They become “friends” and Roy weaves a fantasy story for Alexandria with an ulterior motive.
To Alexandria, the story becomes more and more real with Nurse Evelyn becoming the kidnapped Sister Evelyn, and Roy and other ordinary people around the hospital becoming heroes of the fantasy. The story revolves around five magical heroes who swear to kill Governor Odious (Daniel Caltagirone), and destroy his army of black-garbed soldiers. The adventures become more extraordinary with Alexandria getting deeper into her own versions of Roy’s storytelling. Roy knows he is using her child-like wonder for his own purposes, but his angst gets the best of him, until another “fall” threatens to have tragic consequences.
The stunningly beautiful visuals, with cinematography by Colin Watkinson, are striking and spectacular; with scenes photographed in various countries. The original music by Krishna Levy, costumes by Eiko Ishioka, and especially the editing by Robert Duffy are all to be commended. Of the actors who contribute to the overall success of the movie, several have two parts: Marcus Wesley, Leo Bill (who plays an orderly and Charles Darwin, complete with monkey), Julian Bleach, Robin Smith, Jeetu Verma, and Kim Uylenbroek. The Fall is a feast for the imagination and well worth seeing. Review by Ann Marie Oliva
and the KINGDOM of the CRYSTAL SKULL |
INDIANA JONES and the KINGDOM of the CRYSTAL SKULL Rated PG-13 for adventure violence and scary images. Action/Adventure 124 minutes
4 stars |
Indie’s back! And he’s passing his hat to the next generation...almost. I wish it hadn’t been 19 years since the last Indiana Jones movie, but it’s well worth the ticket price to experience all the updated, fast-paced cliff hangers. George Lucas and Steven Spielberg have packed the movie full, some say too full, but I think they want to give the audience another fantastic ride with this hero we so admire and like, and they mostly succeed.
Indie is decidedly older, and Harrison Ford and company make no attempt to shave any years from his age. That’s a good thing. All the Indiana Jones set-ups are back again, and admittedly more complicated than before. What I continue to find very amusing about this series is the sense of humor and wink at the audience. It’s 1957, well past World War II of the previous adventures now and into the Cold War era. The unruly 60s did not spring up out of nowhere; the stifling social restraint and fear of nuclear war were preludes to the coming rebelliousness. The late 50s were the last hurrah of a more innocent, naive time, and the film is full of references to that time period.
In a characteristic Spielberg touch, we see Indie’s hat first, symbol of a hero that won’t be compromised. A hero like there used to be. When Ford puts the hat on his head in close-up, the years are evident, but they will not be denied. Still in fine physical form, it’s easy to go with Ford and the inevitable flow of the movie.
The plot is complicated: Dr. Henry Jones (as the archeology specialist) is kidnapped by a Russian officer/dominatrix named Irina Spalko (Cate Blanchett managing to pull off a stereotypical evil "Red" complete with costume, haircut and accent) who takes Indie to a huge warehouse to look for an important artifact---a crystal skull, that, what else, contains powers that will give the owner control over the world. Hey, these people don’t fool around. Why settle for just Russia and the USA when you can rule the planet? Indiana escapes, but loses his teaching position. As he’s about to leave on the train, a young guy on a motorcycle, Mutt Williams (a very appealing Shia LaBeouf, more than up to the challenge) calls out to him. This first shot of him on the motorcycle, dressed like Marlon Brando in The Wild One, is a not so subtle hint of what the producer and director think of his talent.
Mutt is brash/cocky/impetuous, and convinces Indiana to help him find his mother and a mutual friend, Professor Oxley, who have been kidnapped somewhere in the jungles of Peru or thereabouts. And so it goes that Irina is not far behind because all of this is about the mysterious Crystal Skull and what it means to the possessor. Karen Allen returns as Marion, the love of Indiana’s life and I wish she had more scenes. Also good are John Hurt as the, at times, catatonic Professor Oxley, Ray Winstone as Mac, Indiana’s friend and fellow adventurer, and Jim Broadbent playing the new dean of the college. Dearly missed is Sean Connery as Indie’s late father, but he’s referenced with affection several times.
Thanks to George Lucas and Steven Spielberg for providing this next installment (if almost two decades late)! Don’t stop now. I look forward to Harrison Ford passing the hat to Shia LaBeouf, but not quite yet. The dysfunctions of the Jones family could still provide us with plenty of fun and adventure. Review by Ann Marie Oliva
| SON OF RAMBOW Rated PG-13 for some violence and reckless behavior. Comedy/Drama 96 minutes
4 stars |
This small independent film is a gem. Writer/director Garth Jennings has made a movie, partially based on his own childhood (which may be why it seems so authentic) about two lonely young boys in the early 1980s who find something to give focus to their lives---making films. It is charming, funny, poignant, and original. Will Poulter plays Lee Carter, Will Proudfoot plays Bill Milner, and both do an excellent job.
Bill’s father died leaving him in a strict religious family with his anxiety-ridden mother Mary (Jessica Stevenson, conveying emotions seamlessly), trying to keep her small family together that includes her elderly mother (Anna Wing) and Bill’s younger sister, Tess (Tallulah Evans). Bill draws and has a vivid imagination that he tries to stifle for his mother’s sake. Because he’s not allowed to see any video during class, he’s sent out to sit in the hall where he meets Lee Carter (Poulter) who has been kicked out of his class, again, for acting up. Lee takes Bill to his “home” which is a residence for the elderly where he lives parentless (they travel) with his older brother Lawrence (Ed Westwick playing disaffected very well) who treats him like a servant. Lee shows Bill a video of one of the Rambo movies not knowing about his religious restrictions, and Bill becomes hooked on film. Lee, seeing an opportunity to take advantage of the younger, naïve Bill, decides the two of them will make their own movie based on the exploits of the original Rambo, called Son of Rambow (purposely misspelled), with Bill doing the stunts and Lee behind the camera.
There is a funny subplot about French exchange student named Didier Revol (Jules Sitruk, exactly right) who the students in the school become enamored of as the embodiment of “cool.” Another subplot involves Mary's suitor (Neil Dudgeon), from the religious community who disapproves of Bill and wants to control the family. The two outcasts begin to bond as they make the movie with a camcorder, and soon find their activities have caught the attention of the rest of the students. Bill and Lee have a falling out that leads to some of the most moving moments in the film.
The young actors in the film, leads and otherwise, are absolutely believable in the way boys behave toward each other at certain ages. The humor doesn’t overshadow the touching circumstance of two boys who are desperately in need of caring, close family members in their lives. Will Poulter is especially good in this way, with a macho, “don’t care” attitude covering feelings of hurt and abandonment. If you walk out of this movie without feeling like you’d like to give these two characters a hug, you have no heart. Review by Ann Marie Oliva
OF NARNIA: PRINCE CASPIAN |
THE CHRONICLES OF NARNIA: PRINCE CASPIAN Rated PG for epic battle action and violence. Action/Adventure/Fantasy 144 minutes
4 stars |
Those waiting for the second installment of the Chronicles of Narnia won’t be disappointed in this tale of Prince Caspian. In fact, at almost two and a half hours, there’s more Narnia than you could hope for (or need?) in one sitting. The Pevensie children, Peter, Susan, Edmund, and Lucy (William Mosley, Anna Poppelwell, Skandar Keynes, Georgie Henley, all reprising their roles) return to Narnia once again after being summoned unknowingly by Prince Caspian (Ben Barnes). There is no wardrobe now, but they are whisked from a train station back to the fictional land. It’s been one year since their first adventure there, but that’s thirteen hundred Narnian years. In that time the land has been taken over from the evil White Witch (Tilda Swinton playing a very small cameo) by an equally evil King Miraz (Sergio Castellitto, believably full of malice) leader of the ruthless Telmarine soldiers. He declares himself ruler after a son is born to him. He tries to kill his nephew, Prince Caspian, who is the rightful heir to the throne. The Prince escapes, but an epic battle is fought for the future of Narnia.
Many characters, both human and animal, populate Narnia and either help or hinder Prince Caspian and the Pevensie children who are kings and queens of Narnia. Among them is Trumpkin (an excellent Peter Dinklage) a ill-tempered dwarf who they have to work hard to win over, but becomes one of their biggest assets. On the wicked side is General Glozelle (an engaging Pierfrancesco Favino), serving King Miraz.
What’s really spectacular are the special effects. The CGI and the cinematography help create a sense of wonder and magic. Mostly shot in New Zealand, Poland, and the Czech Republic, the images are striking, some even breath-taking. The actors are up to their roles with Georgie Henley drawing the most attention as Lucy. Because of Prince Caspian, Edmund doesn’t figure as prominently in this segment of the Chronicles, which is too bad because Skandar Keynes deserves more screen time. Ben Barnes has the right look for the part and only occasionally loses his accent.
The film stands on its own, although if you didn’t see the Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, or read the book, you may be a bit lost a few times. The world created by C.S. Lewis is very rich with symbolism, ancient prophesies, magic spells, and fantasy creatures. There are more battle scenes than you might expect, but it’s not gory or bloody. All in all, The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian continues to be a fascinating, if metaphorically heavy, tale of good versus evil. Review by Ann Marie Oliva
| REPRISE Foreign Film - Norway Rated R for sexuality and language. Content Advisory for Parents Drama 105 minutes
3½ stars |
Have you seen this film - two best friends in their early twenties trying to sort out their futures? Or how about – creative types (writers) trying to succeed and reacting to different outcomes? Either story line, though familiar, can be entertaining. Reprise combines both and is pleasantly amusing, for about two-thirds of its length. Then, the familiar subject matter becomes predictable/uninteresting. On the other hand, even if only a partial success, it’s a polished debut for the Norwegian director Joachim Trier.
Best friends Philip (Anders Danielsen Lie, sensitive/obsessive/moody) and Eric (Espen Klowman Dhoiner, insecure/drifting/tentative) are aspiring writers and the movie opens with them mailing out their manuscripts. Philip’s is rejected, as he expects. Eric’s is published and a success, and he follows it up with (what else?) a mental breakdown. Upon his release, with drug prescriptions galore, he attempts to renew his romance with Kari (Viktoria Winge, attractive/sympathetic/supportive) whom he once squired to Paris to gain her love (and attempts to repeat) and who may be, it’s suggested, the cause of his instability. Philip and Eric are surrounded by a circle of good friends (Odd Magnus Williamson as Morten, Pal Stokka as Geir, and Chiristian Rubeck as Lars) each with meant-to-be charming quirks (they are mostly). Women are on the periphery as either a girlfriend to be endured (Philip’s situation) or for passing sexual gratification (though these guys are far from players). Completing the cast are a pretentious publisher, his impatiently self-confident assistant, a reclusive writer (with companion dog, of course), and various acquaintances from the men’s past. What’s pictured are the social/cultural/intellectual life of a particular place (Oslo) and lives experienced in close proximity and inevitably overlapping, deliberately and accidentally, through the years. A particular upbeat (pun intended) element is music. Namely a punk band (or two) appreciated by/uniting/leading to connections between characters (and yeah, the featured song has a raunchy title).
Not that everything on view is realistic. On occasion, the movie portrays events based in dream or fantasy and some interesting touches, like superimposed titles of character names to expedite familiarity. On the minus side there’s the old, familiar continuing tease of Philip’s suicidal tendencies. Fortunately, the actors (every one) are convincing/charming enough to make this growing up tale more than palatable, indeed it is often engaging. There are no big surprises which in itself is not a fault, but it does mandate a film short enough not to make that point overly evident and tiresome.
This last detail is too often a fault with films written or co-written by the director – he/she is too close to know when to quit, yell “that’s a wrap.” Hopefully, Joachim Trier will have learned that lesson for the next go-round. And there should be another movie as there’s plenty of assurance and promise here. This one, however, missed in the end by going into overtime.
Reprise – Once, for the most part, is enough. Review by Charles Zio
| P.V.C. 1 Foreign Film - Spanish/w subtitles IFC - Independent Film Channel Content Advisory for Parents Drama/Thriller 85 minutes
4½ stars |
A remote controlled bomb is placed around Ofelia Valdez’s neck. What will happen? This straightforward premise is played out, most winningly in PVC-1, with continuous, real-time, seat-squirming suspense. As far as revealing the end - no spoiler, forget it, not the slightest chance. And by the way, this movie isn’t make-believe but was “inspired by a true event.” That’s frightening enough in itself.
Fear is, of course, unavoidable in PVC-1 (and let’s get it out of the way – the title is a chemical component of the bomb) starting with an open-ended truck rumbling along a rutted, country road somewhere in Latin America. Led by Benjamin (Hugo Pereira, blustery/intimidating) cursing and aiming a gun at the other men (including a nephew and a henchman with a reverently held briefcase), it’s evident they’re a gang and up to no good. Arriving at the prosperous Valdez farm, the barking watchdog is shot (animal murder establishing lack of conscience and potential for casual violence) and the family taken hostage. The father Simon (Daniel Paez, believably resolute/emotional) is first choice, but instead his wife Ofelia (Merida Urquia, movingly brave/fearful) has a close fitting pipe bomb (taped together) placed around her neck while Benjamin demands 15 million pesos. The gang departs and a tape, found in the briefcase, restates the monetary demand, warning against notifying the police.
Taking charge, Ofelia instructs her young son Mariano (Christian Carrilo Lamus, nervous/obedient) to contact the authorities and departs with Simon and older, teenage daughter Rosita (Liz Pulido, tearful/supportive) to meet the anti-explosives team. It is a journey fraught with anxiety by unanswered questions. Are the criminals monitoring their actions? Will they detonate the bomb? Has the device also been set to self-destruct? Will Lieutenant Jairo Hurtado (Alberto Zorniza, heroic/comforting) be able to defuse the bomb? And always, will Ofelia escape?
And always, is there enough time (for the minutes are actual and continuous)?
The script of PVC-1 by Spiros Stathoulopoulus and Dwight Istanbulian is commendable in its restraint. Avoiding outright violence, Benjamin threatens loudly but sheds no blood and even the animals killed (the dog, some little chicks) is done off screen. Dialogue is brief and meaningful open to interpretation/implication/subtext (to define the characters, their relationships, and the world they live in). Further the horror of the situation is not occasion for long, sentimental speeches. Ofelia sums it up eloquently in her repeated, brief statement, “I can’t take it anymore.”
Another kudo to Stathoulopoulus for his photography. The farm and rural countryside are presented truly – the countryside boasts roads of dry, broken earth, farms are productive, the surrounding woods lush with growth, and the meeting place with the police a grouping of abandoned, dilapidated structures (former purpose undeclared). Effective use, singly and to build tension by repetition, is made of the technique of panning. For instance, along the journey to the police meeting the camera will move from Ofelia to the surrounding woods. Are the criminals hidden, monitoring their progress? Or as Hurtado works on the bomb, the camera will travel away to Simon and Rosita watching in the distance. Will we see their reaction to an explosion? Here and there a take may run a few seconds longer than necessary, but this is at most a minor complaint.
And, a third pat on the back to Stathoulopoulus for his overall direction. He has, mastefully, fused the various elements of PVC-1 into a coherent, successful, and entertaining film. Spiros gets viewers to the edges of their seats and keeps them all but glued there till the end (and no, there’s still no spoiler). Hitchcock couldn’t have done it better.
PVC-1 – Everything a suspense movie, or any good movie, should be. Review by Charles Zio
| NEAL CASSADY IFC - Independent Film Channel Content Advisory for Parents Biography/Drama 80 minutes
2 stars |
here are films only a fan (as in “fanatic”) of the subject matter can love and “Neal Cassady” will fill the bill of those enamored, like director Noah Buschel, by Kerouac, Kesey, and particularly the title character. For those not already admirers, there’s scant enjoyment or hope of arousing further interest or inquisitive pursuit concerning the Beats.
Tate Donavan is committed and convincing in his portrayal of Neal as drug imbibing, sexually opportunistic, responsibility phobic, happy-go-lucky. That Cassady was charismatic is attested by the chronicling of his antics (alias Dean Moriarity, a moniker/identity he proudly embraced) in “On The Road” by Jack Kerouac (Glenn Fitzgerald, intense/suspicious) and his nickname “Superman.” On the other hand, his wife Carolyn (Amy Ryan, believable/toughly enduring) and several children present the flip side – the pain and hardship left in his wake. Throughout the movie, Neal searches for his father (whose name he shared) and the family connection is easy to see (maybe too easy) since the older man preceded his son as a wandering ne’er-do-well. As time passes, Cassady pals up with Ken Kesey (Chris Bauer, self-important) who uses Neal once more as a model in “Cuckoo’s Nest” and, along with a group of young followers dubbing themselves the Merry Pranksters, travels the country in a flower-power decorated bus. The drugs, of course, never cease and, almost inevitably, the last view of the hero is unconscious on a muddy train track.
While the script (also by Noah Buschel) is commendable in its refusal to soften the unattractive, not to mention destructive, aspects of drugs, alcohol (Kerouac’s preference), and, yes, fame, can it be the Beats were this uniformly humorless and boorish? Is it possible the bulk of the charm, wit, and intelligence of the Beats went into their written works? Or maybe the movie is simply a demonstration of the old excuse “You had to be there” to explain why the supposedly funny/crazy/great moments being portrayed come across as dull and boring. In short, it’s far from pleasant watching Cassady either soberly sad/melancholy or displaying drug-induced rudeness/humorless silliness.
There is, though, a compliment owed and that’s to the photography of Yaron Orbach. The early part of the film is shot in black and white and the textures and shadows are effectively moody and evocative. Even when color appears, it is muted and restrained. This is a somber tale (too much so as stated above) and the palette is similarly rendered. Reinforcing the visuals, too, is the music, primarily Johnny Horton and Don Cherry, at times in background to conversation, which instills a sense of rue and regret. Still, the movie is well-meant. Unfortunately, writer Buschel is too much a Cassady devotee and director Buschel too intently serious.
Neal Cassady – A tedious bio that won’t gain Cassady any new friends. Review by Charles Zio
| MADE OF HONOR Rated PG-13 for sexual conduct and language. Comedy/Romance 101 minutes
1½ stars |
Patrick Dempsey may be McDreamy, but the premise of Made of Honor is McSilly. Here Dempsey plays Tom, an incorrigible playboy who won’t do “back-to-backs” with women, meaning he won’t sleep with them twice in a row so as not to get them too attached to him. (It seems odd in the first place that self-respecting women would put up with his “rules,” I mean he’s appealing, but come on.) Of course, Tom is rich besides being good-looking and charming when he wants. The love interest here is his best friend, Hannah (Michelle Monaghan, smart/sweet), and despite being told she was a freshman to his senior in college when they meet, she still looks every bit the decade younger that she is than Dempsey. They go around New York performing their little rituals, like having Hannah name a gooey dessert while waiting on an outrageously long line to get one. Cute.
Tom has his guy friends who encourage his childishness, and a father (Sydney Pollack?) who is on his 5th or 6th marriage as if we don’t get the idea already that Tom is a commitment-phobe. When Hannah goes to Scotland for work and needs to spend six weeks there, Tom suddenly realizes he’s in love with her. Kevin McKidd plays Hannah’s fiancé Collin McMurray well, so well in fact, we’re wondering why she even gives Tom a second thought after she meets him. The kicker comes when she gets engaged she asks Tom to be her maid of honor. What does he say? Yes. Now I ask you, would any man, let alone a rich player actually consider being a maid of honor, even for his best friend’s wedding? Why wouldn’t he be one of the groomsmen, or better yet, just a guest at the wedding? The explanation given here is that being closer to the bride will help him tell her he loves her. What’s holding him back? Oh, wait, there needs to be a reason for the movie.
There’ve been a number of these movies where the man and woman are best friends then one day look at each other and realize they are in love. That’s fine, if unoriginal, but this maid of honor thing has no justification or humor to it. It’s just a device to keep the story (as it were) going. The shame here is that the screenplay is not a match for satisfaction in other areas. Patrick Dempsey is pleasant enough; Michelle Monaghan is pretty enough; the supporting cast is fine; the production values excellent. The look of the film, especially the lush surroundings of Scotland is well done by cinematographer Tony Pierce-Roberts. But again a man is so selfish and desirable to other women that it takes something drastic to make him realize what he has lost; a back-handed compliment at best. Even McDreamy can’t make me buy into this one. Review by Ann Marie Oliva
| SPEED RACER Rated PG for sequences of action, some violence and language. Action/Adventure/Fantasy/Sci-Fi 126 minutes
2½ stars |
If you think you might like living inside a pin ball machine, then you’ll like Speed Racer. Otherwise, get ready for a lightning fast, but disorienting ride as the story of the person named Speed Racer rushes along. Adapted from the Japanese cartoon of the same name by writers/directors Andy and Larry Wachowski, the movie is hard to follow and not nearly as much fun as it could be. Yes, it’s all supposed to be over the top, except, there seems to be no top. The racing goes on and on with some pretty impressive animation, but at over two hours, the fun house ride is too much. Yet, it’s a wonder how much work was put into it.
This parallel universe of Speed Racer starts when he is a young boy and obsessed with cars. His father Pops (John Goodman) designs them; his brother Rex (Scott Porter) drives them. They are an independent lot that defies the greed and corruption of the racing establishment and prefers to go it alone. This leads to the tragedy that haunts the family—Rex dies in an accident during a race. Rather than dissuade Speed, this makes him even more determined. Supporting him since childhood is his girlfriend Trixie (Christina Ricci), his Mom (Susan Sarandon), a younger brother, a mechanic, and a chimp. I’m sure this all makes sense if you are familiar with the cartoon, but it was difficult to keep up.
Knowing how good a racer Speed is, a villain tries to buy him, but Speed resists and becomes a target for all the bad guys who show up without introduction to knock him out of various races. Helping Speed is Racer X (Matthew Fox) who spouts “racer philosophy” trying to make it sound profound.
Emile Hirsch as Speed is rather sullen the majority of the time. He doesn’t seem to vary much in his response to what’s going on, which is disappointing. This is supposed to be his movie. Better at bringing some spark is Susan Sarandon as the Mom. Even in this movie she stands out. John Goodman is watchable though he doesn’t seem like he would design cars, but then little makes sense in this family. Matthew Fox is believable as the hero, Racer X, although his gravity is lost on this bunch.
The action, animation and acting is so campy as to be an inside joke. If so, I don’t get it. Review by Ann Marie Oliva
IN VEGAS |
WHAT HAPPENS IN VEGAS Rated PG-13 for some sexual and crude content and language, including a drug reference. Comedy/Romance 99 minutes
3 stars |
Cameron Diaz and Ashton Kutcher are two very attractive people. In What Happens in Vegas, it’s a very good thing because although the movie gets off to an okay start, the ending is about as pedestrian as you can get for a romantic comedy. Jack Fuller (Kutcher) gets fired by his father, Jack, Sr. (Treat Williams, of all people). Joy McNally (Diaz) gets dumped by her fiancée at a surprise party that she’s throwing for him. Jack is a boy/man; Joy is a high strung, over-responsible worker bee on Wall Street. To lick their wounds after these psychic insults, they both head for Las Vegas where they meet cute along with her friend Tipper (Lake Bell), and his friend, a sloppy looking lawyer named Hater (Rob Corddry).
Although they are opposites, they began drinking and (I suppose it’s been proven over and over), if you drink enough, anything or anyone starts looking tempting to you. Or, you just want to jump in bed so badly; the first halfway decent person across your path will become your spouse?? Well, I guess there has to be some way to get these crazy kids married. And they do say “I do” although each regrets it the next morning . He wins a jackpot with her quarter, each wants a divorce and the money, but Judge Whopper (Dennis Miller, with that familiar cadence) sentences them (inexplicably) to six months of living together, and therapy with Dr. Twitchell (Queen Latifah, too good for the this part).
Joy moves into Jack's filthy apartment and the merriment begins as each tries to outdo the other and push him/her into leaving with the help of their friends. They continue to go to counseling, find out about each other’s lives, and begin to, dare I say it, “bond” with each other. Excuse me? Didn’t he notice what a catch she is? But why am I expecting logic?
Diaz and Kutcher have a credible rapport. Lake Bell is fun as the humorless, pragmatic friend and quite pretty herself. The rest of the cast is adequate to good with some interesting choices in casting. The weakness here is a script that needs further polishing and some originality. (It is tough to come up with romantic comedy material that brings a twist to essentially the same story over and over.) As a date movie, the gals will probably enjoy it more than the guys. Review by Ann Marie Oliva
WAITING ROOM |
THE WAITING ROOM Foreign Film - UK IFC - Independent Film Channel Advisory Content for Parents, nudity Drama 110 minutes
3½ stars |
A speeding train, the opening shot of The Waiting Room, is a not very original metaphor for the rapid passing of life, but the strength of this subtle and gentle film is be found in its presentation of the reactions (conscious and otherwise) of its various characters to that reality. In the end (which is pleasing) it’s an old fashioned, though comfortable, ride.
Unhappiness and discontent is the lot of those met at the start. Anna (Ann-Marie Duff, quiet/moving/sympathetic) is a single mother raising her young daughter with little help from former husband Toby (Adrian Bower, believable/intimidating), the host of a children’s television show, and resentful of her turning his child against him. Bored, restless, and angry, Anna has turned for solace to next-door neighbor George (Rupert Graves, serious/low-level desperate) whose marriage to Jem (Zoe Telford, convincingly bewildered) is falling apart despite their mutual affection for their son Joe. Meanwhile, Stephen (Ralf Little, charming/kind/confused), an attendant at a nearby nursing home, is being pressured by girlfriend Fiona (Christine Bottomley, vulnerable/helpless) to have a child. In short, they’re a sad group.
Not so the patients of the nursing home. Some may be out of touch, but bed-ridden Helen (Phyllida Laws, underplaying nicely) offers sensible and supportive words to Stephen who admits he, like her father, is convinced the grass is greener somewhere else. Inadvertently offering an avenue to the unseen land is Roger (Frank Finlay, touchingly fine as a man mostly lost in memories) with a propensity to walk to the closest train station to await the arrival of his wife. On one such trip, Anna comes across him and then Stephen who has come to fetch him back to the home. The attraction is instant/flirtatious and while Roger (no fool he) declares the young couple a good match, and there’s no denying their attraction, they part with nary even an exchange of names.
And yet, Anna and Stephen’s happenstance meeting becomes fraught with consequences (plus and minus) to all, and most especially themselves as what begins for them by chance, blossoms into fantasy, and concludes in the promise of a gratifying future. Sure there’s some broken hearts, but it’s clear even those will be to the benefit of the recipients. Now and then, there are films that leave the viewer with a smile as the end credits roll. This is a light and mellow example. (By the way, listen to the end song. It actually embroiders on aspects of the film.)
The director/writer of The Waiting Room is Roger Golby and a fine job he has done in both respects moving the action and characters along easily and assuredly without a lag or pause – confident and entertaining, equally. Ably assisting Golby are James Aspinall with photography (to mention it again, the opening shot of the train rounding a curve, hinting at the twists and turns of the ordinary, is a beaut), David Thrasher’s editing, and Ana Viana’s production design. Overall, we’re talking low key and professional here. For yelling and fireworks, look elsewhere.
The Waiting Game – Familiar but enjoyable little story to pass some time. Review by Charles Zio
| IRON MAN Rated PG-13 for some intense sequences of sci-fi action and violence, and brief suggestive content. Action/Adventure/Fantasy/Sci-Fi 126 minutes
4½ stars |
The summer movies start off with a winner in Iron Man. Not only is the cast a cut above of the usual, but the story is interesting and relevant. Although I’m not familiar with the comic book character, the story is easy to follow. Tony Stark (Robert Downey, Jr.), is a genius weapons manufacturer who builds bombs and such without much of a conscience. His partner in the company is his deceased father’s partner Obadiah Stane (Jeff Bridges). Tony lives a selfish, carefree life, not giving much thought to doing anything except exactly what he wants. His loyal personal assistant Pepper Potts (Gwyneth Paltrow) takes care of whatever he needs. When Tony goes to Afghanistan with the military, including his good friend Jim Rhodes (Terrence Howard), an Air Force officer, to show off his weapons, their convoy is attacked and Tony is taken prisoner by terrorists who want him to build one of his missiles from scratch with help of an assistant (Shaun Toub).
Tony looks at the twisted metal he is supposed to work with and instead of a missile he comes up with an iron suit, complete with all kinds of special attachments and suddenly, he’s Iron Man. He makes his escape, but comes home a changed man. He realizes the weapons he was selling to the military were being sold to terrorists, too, and being used for killing innocent civilians. His decision to no longer make weapons for war causes stock in his company to plunge, which makes plenty of people unhappy.
The CGI is terrific with three dimensional plans, computer graphics, great aerial and fight scenes. I especially like when Tony gets suited up and takes off into the atmosphere as Iron Man and only succeeds after several disastrous tries. What makes the film especially amusing is Tony’s ironic sense of humor. Director Jon Favreau has created a near perfect balance of comic book camp paired with droll dialogue delivery and sincere acting. Much credit goes to Robert Downey, Jr., an inspired choice who wouldn’t immediately come to mind when thinking of a superhero. He has a natural ability to be sarcastic and vulnerable at the same time; he’s a terrific Iron Man. Gwyneth Paltrow is thankfully without mannerisms and she and Downey connect as a pair of almost-lovers. Jeff Bridges plays against type with an entirely different look that works. Terrence Howard almost always elevates any role he plays. The rest of the cast is likewise uniformly good.
Even though the film is just over two hours it goes by quickly. Iron Man is quite simply well done and lots of fun. Review by Ann Marie Oliva
| MR. LONELY Foreign Film - UK IFC - Independent Film Channel Content Advisory for Parents Comedy/Drama 112 minutes
3½ stars |
There’s something appealing and whimsical in the idea of a haven for celebrity impersonators nestled in the Scottish Highlands as featured in Mister Lonely which boasts lovely/lively/heartfelt moments. Overall, unfortunately, the effectiveness of the fantasy, rising and falling as it interweaves with reality and despite a cumulative impact at the end, is not sustained throughout. On the other hand, the parts, and fanciful ones they are, just might offer sufficient satisfaction to the amenable.
The movie’s title song (a Bobby Vinton tune surely familiar to Boomers) is the lament of a lonely soldier stationed away from home. Not an obvious match to a visual of Michael Jackson on a mini motorcycle with a toy monkey trailing behind. Then again, this is a tale, isn’t it, of a solitary guy soldiering on through life? And that fellow is not the tabloid Jacko, but an impersonator (Diego Luna, truly interesting/intriguing from start to finish) who is ever sympathetic in his gentleness and innocence. He meets Marilyn Monroe (Samantha Morton, believable/pitch perfect) who invites him to join an enclave of fellow would-bes. Enchanted by her, Michael agrees and accompanies her to a rural greenery wherein dwells her husband, Charlie Chaplin (Denis Lavant, convincingly callous), her daughter Shirley Temple (Esme Creed-Miles, cute/natural), as well as The Pope (James Fox, magisterial) and Abraham Lincoln (Richard Strange, imposing), among others, all engaged in contributing to the running of the commune while planning to put on a show for the locals. Almost idyllic. Yet, life intrudes. The sweet/vulnerable Monroe is bullied by her hubby Chaplain (who also tries to boss the others), Lincoln curses up a storm, there’s sleeping around, and thanks to some disease the entire herd of sheep must meet their demise (at the hands of the Three Stooges).
The great strength of the group is the camaraderie (Jackson is accepted immediately/unconditionally on arrival) and support of those living as someone else. And the charm for the viewer is summed up by The Queen (Anita Pallenberg, regal and down to earth): “There’s no truer souls than those souls who impersonate for we live through others in order to keep the spirit of wonder alive.” She utters those words after the show, whose highlights are one of the delightful moments in which the film abounds.
Oh yes, the flying nuns. In parallel, another story is told of an unusual order of sisters (e.g., they sneak out for smokes and play volley ball minus the ball) running an orphanage (South America?) and one wonders if, perhaps, Michael was raised there. Tenuous but it would at least confer a link between the two tales and, aside from Marilyn who says she met Chaplain on a ship, there’s no personal history offered for any of the impersonators, as if their existence lay in their adopted personas (aha!). At any rate, the nuns are under the supervision of Father Umbrillo (Werner Herzog, sincere/strong willed) who drops food provisions onto jungle settlements. On one mission, a nun falls out the open door of the small plane and fervently prays to God to be spared death upon landing. And so it comes to pass. After which the other nuns follow her example of devotion and begin skydiving without parachutes. When the Vatican extends a call to the nuns to meet the Pope (the real one), Umbrillo is thrilled and off he, and several of them, fly.
The end of “Mister Lonely” offers a number of surprises, twists, tragedies, and touches of melancholy. It isn’t easy to grow up, but sooner or later there’s no choice (“life comes and gets you” Michael says). On the other hand, there’s something to be said for sensitivity (like Michael’s farewell to his room that’s captivatingly naïve) and make believe (as in the song rendered by Michael’s painted doll heads). Director Harmony Korine ably achieves fine/touching moments as penned with his co-writer Avi Korine. He’s capably assisted, too, by Marcel Zyskind (photography), Paul Zucker and Valdis Oskarsdottir (editing), Richard Campling (production designer), and of course given the needs of the impersonators, Judy Shresbury (costumes) and Jo Allen (hair and makeup). All in all, not a wipeout, but not a triumph either.
Mister Lonely – Nice guy, at times memorable, but not always/or enough. Review by Charles Zio
| THE FORBIDDEN KINGDOM Rated PG-13 for sequences of martial arts action and some violence. Action/Adventure/ Fantasy/Comedy 113 minutes
3½ stars |
Jackie Chan and Jet Li deliver the goods, martial arts-wise, which is good enough if you like this kind of movie. The story itself is mostly fantasy with twists and turns that justify the exciting martial arts sequences. A high school student, Jason Tripitikas (Michael Angarano) obsessed with kung fu heads for the south side of Boston to rent movies from an old man. A group of thugs decide to rob Old Hop and force Michael to join in. Helpless to stop the robbery he gets injured, falls, and magically lands in another time/space.
He is thought to be “the one” who will save the Monkey King from the prison where he has been confined for thousands of years. So the adventures begin. Michael meets Lu Yan (Jackie Chan) an immortal with a drinking problem and a corny sense of humor. Along the way they meet The Silent Monk (Jet Li), and Golden Sparrow (Yifei Liu) who are also trying to save the Monkey King and destroy his nemesis, the Jade Emperor (Deshun Wang). However, Michael turns out to be very bad at kung fu, and time must be spent teaching him to be up to the level of the others. Even Golden Sparrow is an expert. She and Michael develop something of a romance although it is very chaste. The student/teacher set up brings humor and a reminder of other movies where the student must be taught then tested on his own.
Jackie Chan spends the entire movie in a bad wig cracking typical Jackie Chan jokes. As might be expected, Jet Li is more subdued. When these two go at each other, though, even with the help of special effects, it’s masterful. Michael Angarano is earnest and shows promise in his acting. Yifei Liu is compelling as Golden Sparrow. The villains are equally entertaining, as is Jet Li as the Monkey King. Of course, there must be death so that wrongs can be avenged and set right.
Screenwriter John Fusco has crafted a wily story and director Rob Minkoff has put together a movie that kung fu lovers will appreciate. The cinematography by Peter Pau deserves special mention as does the art direction by Eric Lam, and the production design by Bill Brzeski, as well as all the technical folks who make the look of the film interesting. If you want to enjoy a few hours of fantasy and martial arts mastery you won’t go wrong with The Forbidden Kingdom. Review by Ann Marie Oliva
| BABY MAMA Rated PG-13 for crude and sexual humor, language and a drug reference. Comedy 96 minutes
3 stars |
Ah, baby hunger. I suspect many career-oriented women know the feeling as maternity is delayed well into their 30s. Let me say upfront that Tina Fey is an appealing and engaging leading lady and well able to carry a movie and Amy Poehler is delightful in that “kooky, not educated, but bright gal” kind of way we all know. But they are sabotaged by a narrative that starts off with promise but ends up flat. There are some funny lines and situations, and overall the acting is good, but it’s more like mildly amusing and predictable rather than incisive or above average comedy.
Kate (Tina Fey) is a highly paid executive at Round Earth, an organic food chain, but at 37 is not married and really wants to have a child. She decides on in-vitro fertilization, but her doctor says he “doesn’t like her uterus” and gives her a one in a million chance to have her own baby. Sure that’s funny, but what woman isn’t going to get a second opinion? Any woman that successful would know enough to do that. (OK, already it’s straining credulity for me, but I’m willing to go with it.) Adoption would take years. Now Kate’s only option is to have a surrogate carry her baby. We move on to Chaffee Bicknell (the ever entertaining Sigourney Weaver), who has an agency that provides surrogates for a mere $100,000. No problem. For this amount of money she gets a thoroughly checked out woman (sure), Angie (amusing Amy Poehler) from the poor side of town to carry her child, along with her ignorant common-law husband Carl (Dax Shepherd) helping push her into it. No problem. Carl and Angie break up and Amy comes to live with Kate. This is when things should pick up, but when Kate catches Angie sticking her gum (with other wads of gum already there) under Kate’s expensive coffee table it’s not exactly side splitting.
There are plenty of supporting characters who give, at least, some dimension to the story in the form of an acquired boyfriend (a likable Greg Kinnear), a crazy rich boss (an under control Steve Martin with a long gray ponytail), the typical know-it-all doorman (a refreshing, if stereotypical Romany Malco), and two other actors I find especially watchable but who don’t have enough to do as Kate’s mother and sister; Holland Taylor and Maura Tierney.
I wanted to like this film because the subject is topical; pregnancy is interesting to women, and finally we have a comedy with potential that has female leads. I’ve been pregnant and a parent, so I can relate; that’s why I’m disappointed by too many missed opportunities at real humor in this film. The audience seemed to enjoy the movie, but I suspect it’s more about the charm of the actors. I wouldn’t count on it being a classic. Review by Ann Marie Oliva
| YOUNG@HEART Rated PG for some mild language and thematic elements. Documentary/Drama/Music 107 minutes
4½ stars |
This documentary about the two dozen or so members of the Young at Heart Chorus, average age 81, is a must see film. It is funny, sad, poignant and uplifting all at the same time. Because we don’t have many chances to see realistic portrayals of our elders, we tend to think of them only as stereotypical “old” folks. Here they are real people---with lots of living behind them, and lots of personality. That’s one of the things that is so enjoyable. They are the “grandparents” you may have or remember, the customer you serve, your neighbor. They are good people who have lived honorable, hard-working lives and are filling their “golden years” with music and friendship. What’s clear is that they deserve our honor and respect.
Bob Cilman, a youngster in his 50s, is the chorus director and treats his chorus members with the right mix of prompting and expectation. He doesn’t demand, but he does ask them to push themselves, especially when he picks songs of other, younger generations like Lou Reed, The Rolling Stones, The Ramones, Coldplay, Sonic Youth, The Clash, and OutKast that tend to be tongue twisters for them, or they just frankly don’t understand. Some of the chorus members prefer classical music or songs from stage musicals, so it says volumes that they’re willing to try new, difficult material. The rehearsals turn out to be the majority of the film. It’s fun to see them befuddled at first, then start to warm up to songs like, “Schizophrenia,” “Yes, We Can Can,” “I Wanna Be Sedated,” “I Feel Good,” and “Fix You” which turns out to be a highlight of the film (and online it turns out), because the words take on a different meaning when sung by the chorus. It also proves that good music can be adapted and has staying power.
British director Stephen Walker spent seven weeks with the chorus and gives the audience the realities that life giveth and taketh away when death intrudes and two members die within a week of each other right before a local performance in Northampton, Massachusetts where they live. Yet, none of the seniors are self-pitying. They know their day is coming sooner for them than the rest of us, and remain vital and loving to each other. They and their families were also