Originally Reviewed – 9/26/2011

Every few years or so, Hollywood decides to kill the world. Ever since the first ever disaster movie, 1924’s The Last Man On Earth to more recent efforts like I Am Legend, 28 Days Later and the Resident Evil series, filmmakers have often fantasized about a world afflicted by plague, pestilence and natural disaster. That said, it’s been about five years since 2008, the “Year Of Airborne Sickness” which saw the release of such films as Doomsday, Blindness, The Happening, Quarantine (a remake of REC) and the A&E reimagining of The Andromeda Strain. After that, mankind was relatively safe from the ravages of invisible threats, that is until Steven Soderbergh released his 2011 film, Contagion, a thought provoking yet bland film about an easily transmitted virus ravaging the world’s population.

Featuring an ensemble cast of usually fine actors, Contagion opens with the story of Beth Emhoff, played by Gwyneth Paltrow. Beth is off doing business, among other things, in Hong Kong and upon returning to her Minnesota home, develops a case of the sniffles. Of course, as the film’s title suggests, this seemingly benign illness quickly turns into a strange disease that nobody has ever seen before. This sets in motion a mad chase by the Center for Disease Control to try and contain this newly discovered sickness before it infects the entire world. From this one plot point, literally six different story points branch off. To fight this new affliction, you have the head of the CDC trying to keep a nation under control (Laurence Fishburne), a plucky doctor hell bent on finding a cure (Jennifer Ehle) and two field agents doing the ground work, one in Hong Kong (Marion Cotliard) and the other in Minnesota (Kate Winslet). Add to that a muck raking blogger trying to get to the truth (Jude Law) and Beth’s seemingly immune husband who just wants to keep his family safe (Matt Damon) and you have a tangled mess of storylines, none of which ever really hold together or hold your attention.

That said, the main narrative drive of the movie, the search for the virus’ antidote, is done rather well. The film takes great pains to make sure the scientific jargon makes sense and, thanks to a well researched screenplay by Scott Z. Burns, the film succeeds at that aim. Never once are you confused over the science, even when they throw around medical terms and rush around laboratories. The very idea of a deadly virus simply appearing is an inherently scary one and as a description of that terror, Contagion takes a very adult and honest position. For example, this virus is never described as a “world killer”, it simply could off a quarter of the population. This grounding in reality brings about some the film’s best moments, which includes the social backlash of word getting out. The fix takes time and in the year or so depicted in the film, we see humanity at its most base, fighting for supplies, looting homes and existing in a general sense of panic. Although I could criticize the fact that they never show the more empathetic side of society, a side that we’ve seen through our own crises, this natural panic is important in giving the film some spark and life.

And why would that be important in a film about a deadly disease ravaging the world’s population? Because you sure don’t get any sort of excitement out of the people affected by it. The problem with having so many storylines and characters is that none of them ever have time to develop, creating a disaster impacting people we really don’t care about. Storylines snap off and pick up an hour later, main characters are describable only by their jobs and even Matt Damon, the character we spend the most time with, comes off disinterested in the events affecting his family. Only Jude Law, in the role of the anti-establishment blogger, injects any personality or life into his character, a character that’s really only there to provide the conspiracy theorist angle. While Damon does finally start to show a hint of emotion towards the end, it’s too little too late for the film. If it weren’t for movie poster wow, Soderbergh could have left at least two of these storylines on the cutting room floor, allowing the reaming characters to breathe a bit. The result is a tensionless film that’s almost as sterile as the hazard suit wearing scientists finding the cure or the bottles of Purell it’s constantly shilling.

Make no mistake, I enjoy most of these actors and I really enjoy Soderbergh as a director. He has made some amazing films in the past and will continue to make amazing films in the future. The problem is, Soderbergh eschews character development for solid film structure and the result is a movie that has all the tension and intrigue of a medical procedural. Interesting, yes, but emotionally involving? Not even close. Despite the weakness of the main cast, the film does have a fairly interesting storyline attached to it, and although the ending is obvious as most of these films are, the way it investigates the solving of the riddle is fun to watch. In the end, Contagion is opportunity squandered by below average acting, very poor characterization and more plot points than an Ayn Rand novel. Mission accomplished, by the way, in getting me to stop touching my face so often. Just would’ve been better if the movie had shown me a good time while teaching me to do so.

Score – 60%

Originally Reviewed – 9/24/2011

Director Jean-Pierre Jeunet wasn’t always such a playful guy.

Sure, the director will forever be linked to his most popular film, Amelie, a story about a charming young woman’s search for love, courage and serenity in modern day Paris but Jeunet wasn’t always so cheerful. His first two films, 1991’s Delicatessen and 1995’s The City of Lost Children were bleak visions of a future that had its inhabitants stealing dreams from children, suffering from famine and slaughtering people ala Sweeny Todd. Even his one foray into Hollywood directing, 1997’s misguided Alien Resurrection was dark in tone. So imagine everybody’s surprise when in 2001, Jeunet broke free from long time directing partner Marc Cano and released a sweet romantic comedy starring then unknown Audrey Tautou. The response? Not only did the film end up on many critics Best Of lists, it managed to gross over seventeen times its initial budget and snag five Academy Award nominations along the way. French cinema was suddenly very cool. Now, over ten years later, Amelie stands out as one of the finest films of the past decade, creating a world of magic, whimsy and sweet simplicity.

Amelie, as a film, is really broken out into two parts. The first part is her role as an arm’s length matchmaker and guardian angel. Throughout the movie, Amelie learns there’s great joy to be had in helping others and finds herself flitting about Paris providing silent assistance to people who didn’t realize they needed it. From walking with a blind stranger to describe the world around him to hooking up a customer and coworker at the restaurant where she works to convincing her widowed father to see the world via a globetrotting garden gnome, Amelie revels in the helping of others. However, all this worldly insight means nothing when it comes to her own relationships and that leads to the charming and sometimes maddening cat and mouse game of the second part, where she pursues, in a number of ingenious ways, a strange young man. Most people fall in love with the Amelie character due to her playful nature and love of the simplistic pleasures life has to offer, but it’s here where we start to get a bit annoyed with her. While this is a credit to how well the character is written and how much we come to really root for her, there’s many a moment when I yelled, “Just talk to him!!” at the movie. Her indecision and constantly escalating mechanisms work as a plot device and are charming in their own way but the game runs a bit too long before the eventual ending.

Luckily for the film, that’s my only criticism as the rest of the movie is truly fantastic. In the role of Amelie, the person we all wish we could be, Audrey Tautou is magnificent in a part nobody else on this planet could probably play. While many fans remember her playful smile, beautiful big eyes and magnetic personality, the character of Amelie is much more complex than people realize. Although Amelie finds inner piece in being the silent matchmaker, she sacrifices her own happiness in the process, creating a character that remains relatable throughout the diabetes inducing plotline. It’s a subtle trick, but an effective one. Luckily for us, the character Tautou creates glazes everything with a lighthearted sheen even when she’s at her most maddening and her most devious. Again, most remember the sweet French girl that does some amazingly creative boy chasing but Amelie has a devious side as well, especially when driving a particularly nasty food grocer to near madness via a series of practical jokes. It’s this balance that helps us stay connected to a character that teeters on the edge but never exceeds to the point of parody.

And of course, nobody can talk intelligently about a Jeunet film without discussing some of the most brilliantly unique cinematography in all of filmmaking. With his old directing partner Marc Cano, his previous efforts had a dark pallor to them but in Amelie, unhinged from his long time collaborator, Jeunet opens up the color palette to astonishing levels. Everything in Amelie is over-real, thanks to some ingenious camerawork and sets so brightly saturated with color, it’s almost impossible to take it all in during one viewing. Amelie is pure visual eye candy, helping to create a surreal world that’s almost dreamlike in its composition, important in a film where two people communicate via chalk arrows and signs reading, “Who Are You”.

When all is said and done, Amelie is a film about following one’s passions, no matter how small or how big they may seem. From the simple pleasure of skipping stones on a pond to popping bubble paper to more grand aspirations like traveling the world and falling in love, Amelie treats all of these pursuits with an even keel. Some critics deride this film as being too sweet, too saccharine, too whimsical and that, in a word, is hogwash. The sad fact is, those people are simply too embittered to appreciate the joy pouring out of every frame this movie has to offer. From the opening frames of a young Amelie playing childish games to a final encounter that chokes me up every damn time I see it, Amelie is a small wonder, a movie so full of life, it makes you want to seek out those tiny little treasures yourself. In the end, life in Amelie is full of small miracles, miracles we can find for ourselves if we only take a second and look.

Score – 90%

Originally Reviewed – 9/20/2011

A curmudgeonly old super sitting in a secret back room library. A brilliant young girl holding a hand held camera. A kindly old sophisticate. A pair of hyper medicated, under appreciating parents. A single image of a swimming goldfish. Adapted from the bestselling book The Elegance of the Hedgehog, this French import is filled with images, some sad, some serene and some purely metaphorical, but chock full nonetheless. Films of this type can sometimes border on high minded melodrama but thanks to an excellent combination of acting, writing and storytelling, The Hedgehog rises above the dour setup of the first act, providing one my biggest surprises so far this year.

The film starts off through the lens of eleven year old Paloma’s handheld camera as she introduces you to the people that color her world: her distant parents, her constantly irritated sister, her quietly swimming goldfish, all constant reminders of the drudgery that growing up has to offer. Intelligent enough to realize that she doesn’t want to become those people yet too young to see how she can escape, she sets in motion a nine month plan to document the world as she sees it and then, on her twelfth birthday, commit suicide, leaving behind her film as a photographic death note.

While this may seem like a heavy handed setup at first glance, The Hedgehog has a darkly comic edge to it, important in balancing out the impending death of a pre-teen. Paloma, played perfectly by Garance LeGuillermic, fills the role with an equal measure of sharp wit, surprising insight and youthful naivety. Smart kids often play too much like adults but LeGuillermic and writer Muriel Barbery avoid that trap by giving the character time to be childish, even when she’s discussing the origins of Go with her sister’s boyfriend or ruminating about the boring life of her bowl bound goldfish. There’s a playful air to Paloma’s melancholy and that pulls us through a film that could have easily been too heavy to handle.

Thirty minutes in, however, the film starts to hit its stride when Paloma meets Renee, the frumpy yet cordial concierge of her family’s apartment building. Played by famed French actress Josiane Balasko, Renee has a prickly exterior, caused by years of personal neglect and private pain, a facade that Paloma sees right through. Balasko is near brilliant in a complex role that requires her to be begrudging of her high class tenants while harboring an inner sweetness that many years of drudgery has kept hidden. While Balasko is great in her interactions with Paloma, her character really blooms when she becomes romantically involved with a new tenant, Kakuro, played expertly by Togo Igawa. Keeping with the tone of the film, their relationship is a quietly simple one: Renee struggles for things to say, stumbles about Kakuro’s meticulous apartment and squirms at his noodle slurping, all watched by the patiently understanding eye of Kakuro. Their relationship is all about careful acceptance and although the moments we see are minutia, each character is defined by their subtleties in very special ways.

In fact, if asked to sum up The Hedgehog in twenty words or less, I’d probably say it’s a darkly sweet story about healing from old wounds, rediscovering love and valuing the quality of life. Backed by fantastic performances, a disarmingly dark storyline and sucker punch ending that, while shocking, makes perfect sense for the message the film’s trying to send, The Hedgehog is yet another excellent offering from the French filmmaking industry. And much like the small goldfish swimming in his bowl, the grouchy old lady sitting amongst her books or the kindly gentleman living life the best he can, The Hedgehog creates a sense of serenity that’s magically dreamlike, even when rooted in the realities of the world. A wonderful film indeed.

Score – 90%

Originally Reviewed – 9/15/2011

Let’s take a step back and really examine this situation. Rise of the Planet of the Apes. Really? How did we get here, discussing a reboot of a failed remake of a campy late sixties franchise? Frankly, why does this movie exist? Luckily for you, I’ve thought long and hard about this and I can only come to one conclusion. It’s all about the moohla. The Tim Burton remake, while being universally panned by audiences and critics alike, still brought in major bank, 300 million dollars worth. Despite the studio’s insistence that they would support a second film if the first was financially successful, Burton reportedly said that he would, “rather jump out of a window” than do another Apes and the project broke down. Now, exactly ten years later, in the hopes audiences have forgotten the Burton experiment and to hopefully gain some box office gold, Hollywood is again giving us a reboot of the classic franchise. The good news is that as reboot prequels of corny Charlton Heston movies go, this version, directed by indie director Rupert Wyatt, is about as good as a movie of this type could possibly be. The bad news? It’s still Planet of the freaking Apes.

Taking place in modern times, this Planet stars a robot version of James Franco as scientist Will Rodman, a genetics expert who is experimenting with a serum intended to restore brain function in people afflicted with Alzheimer’s. The point of this miracle cure is his addled father, played by the only human being in the film, John Lithgow. However, when the project gets nixed due to a manic monkey attacking a board room full of executives, Robot Franco sneaks home young Caesar and raises him like a son. Naturally Caesar, infused with the power of Robot Franco’s brain juice becomes self aware and, after a stint in ape prison for an ill advised neighbor attack, becomes that much more aggressive.

This leads us to one of the finest examples of filmmaking trickery you will probably see this year. Almost freakishly lifelike, the character models in this version of Planet far surpass anything I’ve ever seen as far as realism and technical mastery go. Of course, I’m talking about the amazing work done in creating true to life CGI models of stars James Franco, Frieda Pinto and Brian Cox as the main scientist, his veterinarian love interest and the keeper of the monkey jail. A true feat of modern filmmaking techniques, these animatronic cyborgs, look, sound and for the most part act like their human…

Wait a minute. Those are the real actors? Seriously?! C’mon! That can’t be same James Franco who co stared in Milk or the famed character actor Brian Cox sleepwalking through these roles. Can’t be! Even Frieda Pinto who was charming in Slumdog Millionaire can’t be that wooden. Really??? Lemme check Rotten Tomatoes real quick…

Oh! Ohhh. Ooooohhhhhhh……

Sarcasm aside, for all the great work Serkis does in the role of Caesar, the main failing of the film is the wooden performances by the rest of the human cast. Only Lithgow makes an honest, if overdone go of it, leaving the rest of the cast to wallow in mediocrity. Now, one could argue that this film is all about Caesar: his rise to intelligence, his struggle to adapt and his arc to becoming master of the new Darwinism. While I agree Andy Serkis did do an outstanding job in the main role, he shouldn’t win any sort of Oscar for it, simply because the movie forces him to break the number one rule of acting: make your fellow actors feel something. If you can make them feel, they make you feel and alacazam, good acting is borne. Despite how much we feel for the main protagonist, he can’t emote to his fellow actors because he isn’t really there. Sure, I don’t know how they pulled this off, but I imagine is was a lot of Andy Serkis acting like a monkey or James Franco trying to feel for a guy in a body suit with facial sensors. The result is a supporting cast that looks like they are playing to nobody and when that happens, the film takes a few steps back from greatness.

That’s not to say, however, the film isn’t good. Far from it, Rise provides some highly entertaining set piece action scenes. From battling armies of hapless humans on a bridge, to a daring escape from the monkey pound to a very stirring engagement with the sadistic night watchmen in the main compound, a scene that climaxes with such a start, the entire audience gasped, Wyatt wisely balances action, suspense and winks to the original film. The result is a satisfying is forgettable experience that doesn’t do a whole lot wrong in Caesar’s journey from slave to master.

And yes, much ado, hootenanny and ballyhoo has been made over the performance of Andy Serkis as the main ape Caesar and, sure thing, that praise is well deserved. The facial expressions and emoting of Caesar is frankly stunning and although I felt his supporting cast was dreadfully dull, the damn dirty ape more than makes up for it. Serkis is excellent at telling a story with his eyes and this skill really helps you lose yourself in the character. Towards the end, I completely forgot this was a guy doing monkey pantomimes and lost myself in Caesar and his struggle, a commendable accomplishment. Not an award winning performance like many reviewers have said, but one that deserves my respect.

Like I said in the opening, despite the exciting action, easy to swallow story and fantastic work by Mr. Serkis, this is still Planet of the Apes, which based on the premise alone can’t help but feel charmingly B-movie. Wyatt almost takes the material too seriously but I can’t fault a guy for giving it his absolute all, which he most certainly did. Come for the monkeys, stay for the action scenes and grab some popcorn when Franco starts yapping, Rise of the Planet of the Apes is a totally enjoyable summer flick that peppers just enough skill but behind the camera and behind the scenes to make this a worthy watch on the big screen. Just don’t expect an animated Caesar at the Academy Awards this year.

Oh by the way, this reboot has made nearly exactly the same amount the Tim Burton film made ten years ago. Mission accomplished, Hollywood.

Score – 70%

Originally Reviewed – 8/30/2011

Newsflash to the world: It’s easy to be a white straight guy in America.

Despite growing up as one of a few Irish/Polish kids in a neighborhood of Italians, I’ve never once been discriminated against. Picked on for my big dorky glasses? Sure. Made fun of for my lack of kick ball skills? You bet. Forced to drink from a different water fountain just because I was born with a darker skin tone than the government accepted race? Not ever. Despite my heart knowing that such prejudice is a weakness in spirit and an absolute wrong, I’ve never been personally subjected to it. Sure, I can go on for hours about equal rights for gays and modern day socioeconomics. Yes, I’ve seen a fair share of filmstrips in school about Martin Luther King and the civil rights movement. And, oh boy, I’ve seen plenty of movies that have decried the injustice of racism from all sides of the issue. Despite all that exposure, the fact of the matter is, I’ve never felt the pain of discrimination. Never been told that I can’t take a piss in a certain bathroom, never had my choice of marriage partner legislated by a government, never been forced to live a life of inequality. However, thanks to the personal stories and heartfelt acting of the women in The Help, I not only feel more connected to the pain these victims of discrimination had to endure, I feel as though I’ve been on a journey with these amazing survivors, experiencing their hardships, trials and ultimate triumph in a way I can only describe as magical.

Featuring the finest female cast from any movie so far this year, The Help tells the tale of a group of African American maids toiling their days away in the segregated South. The focal point of the story surrounds two of these laborers, Minny, played by Octavia Spencer and her best friend, the amazing Viola Davis. Working in separate households, a plucky young writer by the name of “Skeeter” Phelan (Emma Stone) comes back to her childhood home of Jackson, Mississippi to discover with new eyes the injustice around her, primarily at the hands of local socialite Hilly Holbrook, played by Bryce Dallas Howard. Partly to help get her a job at a fancy New York publication and mostly because the racial injustice around her has worsened since she was a child, Skeeter starts to write a book telling the true stories, both good and bad, of the women who serve the Southern class elite.

Note my use of the term “good and bad” because, above all things, that is what this movie does brilliantly. First time director Tate Taylor does a wonderful job of telling both sides of the tale, giving the audience humor, drama and excitement in equal measure. Civil rights movies are often heavy handed in their treatment of the subject but The Help balances out the natural tension with some much needed comedy. The result is a film that will have you weeping one moment and laughing the next, poetically dancing between the two extremes. Taylor also does a fine job in giving his actors space to breathe, feel and live the moments on screen. Too many directors these days rely on quick cuts and jumpy editing to tell their stories but Taylor directs with a steady hand, filling the screen with stunningly heartfelt moments that never cross the line to melodrama.

That said, good actors doing great work in those long drawn moments make The Help one of the finest films of the year. Each actress in the film works the tightly balanced script to perfection, mining comedic gold one moment and heartfelt emotion the next. In one of the more difficult roles in the film, Howard could have played the prissy Hilly Holbrook as a pure villain but makes a brave decision to humanize the character. Much like many of the people living during this era, Holbrook thinks she is completely in the right when it comes to segregation, and in peppering the character with this unwavering sense of self righteousness, Howard makes the character bearable even when she’s committing hateful acts, a real feat by an actress I’d love to see more of. In the role of Skeeter, Emma Stone reaffirms herself as a quickly rising star in Hollywood, portraying the spunky journalist with a brave gentility mixed with heartfelt empathy. The scene stealer of the film, however, has to be Spencer as baker extraordinaire, Minny. Jumping from dogged determination to gut wrenching fear and always with a sharp comic edge, Spencer will make you forget she’s the subject of grave injustice simply in the way she laughs with her friends, cracks wise to her superiors and takes big handfuls of life. Not to give anything away, but there’s one uproariously fantastic moment in the film that will sure to dominate the post film conversation. Just have two words for you: Two Slices.

In a cast filled with brilliant acting, though, it’s Viola Davis who takes the main prize. In what is sure to be an Oscar nominated role, Davis expresses a range of emotions in her character. Nervous about helping a white woman write a taboo book yet emboldened at the thought of her story being told, Davis is tasked with tapping into a wide range of emotions and to her credit, never falters once. Viola Davis shocked the word with her one scene turn 2008’s Doubt and if you loved her in that role, this time around you get an entire film’s worth of excellence. Quite simply, if you cherish good film acting, Viola Davis in The Help is a slam dunk must see.

If you follow my reviews with any frequency, you know I don’t pass out 100% scores very often. To get that marker, you must be near perfect and The Help is exactly that: a near perfectly realized labor of love that wells up the tears, tickles the funny bone and feeds the soul. In fact, that’s the one phrase I can use to sum up The Help: a labor of love. Directed by the very good friend of the book’s author, featuring family members in supporting roles and acted by performers who obviously felt the weight and magic of the material, this film more than lives up to the hit book it was based on. Every actor from the main cast, to the supporters to even the few male roles sprinkled throughout give the film their absolute all, creating an experience that is a triumph of acting, of heart and of soul.

Films of this quality usually get released around awards season, a time when the air gets colder, the films turn arty and audiences have long forgotten their local cineplexes. The fact that this movie is not just competing with the Marvel movies and action flicks of the summer season, but beating them in the box office, is a testament to the quiet beauty of this amazing piece of filmmaking. Much more than a Disney-fied retelling of early sixties race relations, The Help is a remarkable film that should garner more than few Oscar nominations come January.

And while I still can’t say I know firsthand what it’s like being discriminated against, me being a straight white male in America and all, I think I can now say I at least understand what those brave people went through. A remarkable accomplishment for a remarkable movie.

Score – 100%

Originally Reviewed – 8/20/2011

Before starting my review of the latest indie crime comedy starring Brendan Gleeson and Don Cheadle, let me share the trailer of the film with you. Seriously, stop reading now and give the link a click. No worries…I’ll wait!

The Guard Trailer

So, what was your first impression? Looks pretty funny in a dark comedy sort of way, doesn’t it. The movie poster outside the theater labeled the film as a “Raucous Comedy”, reviews have been unilaterally positive and, despite the rough nature of the humor, the trailer actually had me laughing. To me, the movie looked like a mix of Lethal Weapon meets In Bruges with a heavy focus on the Irish countryside. In fact, the trailer looked so much like that excellent movie, I firstly thought it might have been done by that film’s director, Martin McDonagh. Turns out I was half right as The Guard was penned and directed by John Michael McDonagh, the brother of the famed Irish playwright. Sad thing is, John Michael doesn’t have nearly the chops of his brother and while the film has a strong cast, some decent writing and more than a couple of cringe inducing laughs, the experience as a whole falls apart due to some poor direction and character development, forcing me to label this as a minor disappointment.

The Guard tells the story of Sergeant Gerry Boyle (Gleeson), a whore mongering, hard drinking Irish cop who, with the unlikely assistance of FBI agent Wendell Everest, is on the hunt for a trio of drug runners in the countryside of Ireland. The high points of the film live with these baddies as they commit murders while waxing philosophical about the nature of their crimes, creating some humorous juxtapositions in their drug dealing affairs. Unfortunately, the team we’re there to see, namely Cheadle and Gleeson never seem to gel as buddies, important in a film that boils down to a buddy cop movie. While both actors deliver their clever lines with the expected vigor and flair, the combination of the two never mixes. The witty repartee is expected to propel the film but that forward momentum ends up never happening, creating a film that’s like a soda without fizz. That being said, high marks have to be given to Fionnula Flanagan who plays Gleeson’s cancer ridden mother, easily my favorite character in the film. In a role that could have been clichéd and overdramatic, she plays the sweetly foul mouthed role with a serene acceptance of her condition, taking every opportunity to sneak a drink with her son, laugh and take in life the way it’s meant to be taken. My only issue is that this narrative thread is that is has no real place in the film, other than establishing the Gleeson character as a nice Irish boy beneath the flawed exterior, creating moments that are quite wonderful but completely out of place.

That’s not to say The Guard doesn’t have its moments. The movie does provide a decent amount of laughs, all of which are pointed, irreverent and quite funny. The sad thing is, I just ruined most of those laughs in the trailer you just saw. The rest of the movie tickles the funny bone in spurts but the experience as a whole just has a flat monotone that covers the funny bits in a blanket of blah. The periphery characters, aside from the mother, are uninspired, the story has a predictable conclusion and the action, dependant on the tension of two friends going up against all odds, fails to inspire or excite. All in all, The Guard, while an acceptable first try, suffers from having the wrong McDonagh directing. The brilliance of Martin is his uncanny ability to create likable yet twisted characters, a balancing act that’s only possible with thoughtful writing and careful direction. The Guard has neither and despite a fine attempt from the principals involved, The Guard never lives up to the promise in the trailer or the lineage of his brother. Here’s hoping that the next McDonagh movie has the right one at the helm.

Score – 60%

Originally Reviewed – 8/18/2011

Famed Rotten Tomatoes contributor Mr. Taylor has been writing over and over again about the Superhero Overload of 2011 and, finally, I’m starting to feel the strain. So far this year, in the span of only eight months, we’ve seen five major superhero movies come out in theaters, the same amount as the last two years combined. In fact, we haven’t had a year like this since 2008, when there were a whopping eight movies released in the comic / superhero genre. Unlike that year, which was dominated by the universally praised The Dark Knight, the caped popcorn munchers of 2011 have all seen the same level of quality. While they’re all good enough movies, nothing has stood out as amazing, making the influx seem monotonous and one noted. Captain America: The First Avenger is the final big budget hero flick to hit theaters this summer and while it’s not a bad movie by any stretch, it’s not a particularly great one either and provides the final explosion filled flatline to a summer full of caped crusaders.

Staring Chris Evans as the shield wielding super soldier, Captain America tells the story of Steve Rogers, a Brooklyn based Army wannabe who supplements his wishey washey physique with a heart of gold. After applying and getting rejected for the armed forces multiple times, a scientist, played by Stanley Tucci, selects him for a secret government experiment that transforms him into the muscle bound Captain America. Up to this point the film is entertaining yet uninspiring but when the film takes an unexpected turn, taking on the notions of pro capitalist propaganda, the movie starts to show signs of life. The shift is awkward, but at least it’s different, providing plenty of 1940’s nostalgia and pompous energy. Unfortunately, about twenty minutes into this new thread, the movie shifts back to the type of action set pieces that’s dominated the genre for the last decade, inexplicably dropping the new plot point. While I get that director Joe Johnston needed to get to the action, the hamhanded way he goes about it makes the side track seem out of place and unnecessary.

Luckily, that was one of the few missteps made by Johnston as Captain America is a well directed action movie. Once Cap dons the uniform, he spends most of his time jumping on moving trains, saving scores of American POW’s and fighting laser gun toting villains dressed like the 1940’s version of The Gimp from Pulp Fiction. The action is fast, frenetic and is on par with the set pieces offered in the other Marvel films from this summer. One of my favorite aspects of the film, however, has to do the with the excellent art direction. Johnston took great pains to make sure the high technology would seem believable given the World War 2 setting and the result is a great blend of period elements and comic book pop. Much like Johnston’s other work in the Rocketeer and The Wolfman, the film has a great look to it, a very nice change from the standard dank cities we’re used to seeing in this style of movie.

Sadly, all the great action in the world can’t save a weak main character and this is where The First Avenger hits the skids. Despite an earnest performance by Evans, the character of Captain America doesn’t have an arc: he starts the film eager to help the world and ends up the exact same way. Just to make a relative comparison, consider other modern heroes: Batman in Nolan’s Dark Knight series learns to deal with his demons, Tony Stark learns humility in Iron Man and even Thor gains a touch of maturity, but Captain America stays strident and brave. While being a shining example of American bravado may work as a plot point, this limits the Captain’s growth as a character and that hurts the film immensely. Although it’s nice to see him get the brawn to go with the bravery, once that happens we’re left with seventy minutes of Captain America simply being awesome. Sure, there are some low points in the story of Steve Rogers’ fight against Nazi extremists but the core of the character never changes, creating a lead that’s not bad, just uninteresting.

The rest of the cast does a more than adequate job with the archetypical roles presented to them and you better believe that all the action flick stereotypes are firmly represented. You have the tough as nails love interest (Hayley Atwell), the curmudgeonly drill sergeant (Tommy Lee Jones), a young, vibrant Howard Stark (Dominic Cooper) and the wise scientist (Stanley Tucci). All of the cast members, while stuck in the confines of their roles, do a fine job with them, especially Tommy Lee Jones who gives off a sense of tough comedy as the US commander. The other notable performance is the one given by Hugo Weaving as the nefarious Red Skull, leader of the underground Nazi offshoot Hydra and the film’s main antagonist. Weaving is deliciously over the top as the crimson faced baddie, strutting in his M. Bison inspired uniform, chewing lines and bellowing in unintentionally hilarious close ups. Weaving plays the part with comic book gusto but, like most of the characters in the film, suffers from gross underdevelopment. Yes, he was fun to watch but again, not that interesting.

That, in fact, is best way one could sum up the Captain America experience. While the movie features an impressive visual style and some lightly entertaining action, the film meanders around mediocre, failing to provide an interesting protagonist or villain for audiences to latch onto. Like a loud Harley with a quarter tank of gas, the film has all the potential to be big, explosive and awesome yet quickly runs out of steam before reaching the finish. Easily the weakest of this year’s Marvel offerings, Captain America: First Avenger is worth a viewing for “Avengers Completeness” but falls a few strides short of the company’s previous efforts.

Also, one more note on my final score: walking out of the theater I was ready to give the movie a 70% but now, about one week later, my feelings have dropped a notch and it has nothing to do with acting, action or directing. To be perfectly honest, the Superhero Overload of 2011 has taken its toll and I’m now officially sick of the genre…that is, of course, until The Avengers comes out in 2012.

Score – 60%

Originally Reviewed – 7/26/2011

Even been asked, “Sooo…what’s your story?”

It’s a hard question, isn’t it.

Where do you start? What do you include? More interestingly, what do you omit? Some may think to start at the very beginning but then the story goes on forever, boring the listener to tears. Maybe you include just the important details, the events that impacted you most directly but you then run the risk of sounding like a blowhard, never betraying the missteps that also shaped your psyche. Everything from personal triumphs to momentary setbacks to the minutia that makes us, “us”, all of our stories are much more complex then we realize.

Now imagine answering that same question to a theatre full of five hundred people. Some in attendance have never heard of you, some know bits and pieces of your tale, and some have been following your story your entire life. Who do you target? Your long time followers have their own interpretation of your life, bringing a head full of demands as to what you should include. Do you cater to fan service? What about those who know a bit about you and simply need you to fill in the blanks while staying true to what they know. And let’s not forget the newbies who need everything re-explained, much to the chagrin of the veterans of your story. How do you satisfy that entire theatre? How do you keep everybody happy.

That is the primary challenge facing director Matthew Vaughn (Kick Ass) in the origins story / franchise reboot X-Men: First Class and while the movie has some issues with character development, plot structure and pacing, the end result is a satisfying first chapter in the long running superhero story.

Right off the bat, this review has to assume you, the reader, are a member of the X-Men newbie club, so forgive me if I’m reluctant to give away what most people already know. X-Men: First Class is essentially a tale of two friends, one by the name of Charles Xavier, a professor of mutation with telepathic powers (James McAvoy) and the other a Holocaust survivor with the ability to manipulate metal, played by Michael Fassbender. These two unlikely friends, in conjunction with a team young mutants and a special division of the CIA, look to take down the nefarious Dr. Schmitt (Kevin Bacon), an energy absorbing mutant whose end game is to take the Cold War to a whole new level. Much like Captain America, X-Men: First Class is based in revisionist history and while the new take on events like the Cuban Missile Crisis works as a device to push the story, I couldn’t help but laugh at the generous leaps the film takes to make it all work. The plot is contrived, silly and fairly ridiculous but luckily it knows it, doing its best to stay out of the way.

Luckily, like I said at the outset, this is really a film about the relationship between McAvoy and Fassbender and in that respect, the two leads do a great job. McAvoy plays the part with a surprising amount of charm mixed with the empathy comic fans expect from the long standing character. Despite his mutation, Dr Xavier has a strong sense of the human condition and wants nothing more than to co-exist with the dominant species, a drive that is portrayed perfectly by McAvoy. Fassbender, on the other hand, brilliantly balances his desire for revenge with his burgeoning friendship with Xavier. Both McAvoy and Fassbender are fine actors and it’s good to see them in a high profile role that allows them to really get entrenched in some quality characters.

Sadly, the same can’t be said for the rest of the cast. Kevin Bacon is fine as the evil doctor but the rest of the young mutants play the parts to type. In this film, we get introduced to many of the classic characters, but rather than examining each story, the film does it all montage style, convenient for time purposes but bad for character development. As a result, these kids, while well acted by the youngsters involved, never rise above their powers, creating characters that are a little difficult to connect with. Luckily, Vaughn, who I thought did a relatively poor job with Kick Ass, directs with a confidence and focus that I haven’t seen in his previous work. While there are characters that just exist for the sake of the action and scenes that look as though half got left on the cutting room floor, Vaughn does the best he can with the script he was given. Although I can’t help but think a more seasoned director could have given the movie a more even flow, Vaughn does an admirable job with the sheer amount of material presented.

X-Men: First Class is an enjoyable yet uneven ride that is complimented with fine action, entertaining set pieces and two great performances by the leads. Fassbender and McAvoy both have chops to spare and propel the film past the breakneck pacing, giving the audience something interesting to latch onto. As I mentioned earlier, films of this type are innately difficult, especially given the popularity of the source material. While it could be easy to nitpick the ludicrous story, critique the scenes that end unexpectedly and laugh at the awfulness of the Beast costume (seriously, what the heck was that), the goal of the film was to cement the relationship between the stars of the franchise and tell us how the team got together. To that end, X-Men: First Class is a genuine success, even if it ends up being the ultimate compromise: when you attempt to please everybody, nobody is fully satisfied. An easy film to pick apart but a hard one to provide any insight on how it could have been better, X-Men: First Class is am enjoyable introduction to the world of mutants and men.

Score – 70%

Originally Reviewed – 7/19/2011

Woody Allen, as of late, has been hit or miss. From critical highs like Match Point and Vicky Cristina Barcelona to box office bombs such as Whatever Works and Cassandra’s Dream, to describe Allen’s work as a writer / director in this decade could be kindly described as “uneven”. Although nobody can deny Allen’s skill in writing and humor, many have thought that he may be a relic of a time gone by, tossed aside by slicker, smarmier and more adult comedies. Maybe the days of wit and charm belong to bygone age, taken over by comedic cynicism and if so, Allen may just have been a victim of the passage of time. Well, I’m here to tell you there’s still room for Allen, charming witticisms and films that make you feel good with simple, sweet stories. The film that changed my mind is Midnight in Paris and not only is it the best Woody Allen film since 1994’s Bullets Over Broadway, it’s certain to find a place on my Top 10 films of 2011.

Midnight In Paris stars Owen Wilson who plays Gil, a disenfranchised Hollywood screenwriter who would like nothing more than ditching the corporate writing machine to elope to the enchanting City of Light. Finding himself tagging along a Parisian holiday sponsored by his fiancé’s family, Gil wanders the streets of the night-swept city looking for the mystery, romance and magic the French city is known for. Gil is a classic Allen character. Glib, unassuming and kindheartedly quirky, Wilson plays the part with his standard country boy charm and thanks to the expert direction of Mr. Allen, he translates on screen as completely charming daydreamer. While Gil has a standard Hollywood fiancée, played by Rachel McAdams, the third point of this Parisian love triangle Is native girl Adriana played in usual fantastic fashion by Marion Cotillard. Adriana, like much of the viewing audience, is caught up with the bumbling Gil and takes him on a series of late night adventures that not only changes his perspective of his current relationship yet changes his thoughts on nostalgia and its effect on living in the now.

Now, for those of you who have had your fill of the standard romantic comedy love triangle flicks, take heart. There’s much more to Midnight In Paris than a standard rom com, thanks to a delightful script by Mr. Allen. Not only do you find yourself drawn to the plight of Gil and the beauty of Adriana, you find yourself drawn to city itself. The best Allen films have always featured its city as a major character and Midnight is no exception. While there are moments where you think a caption reading, “Courtesy Of The Parisian Tourism Board” is going to flash on screen, the city is featured in a loving way, adding a dose of much needed character to a script that, aside from a brilliant twist thirty minutes in that sets the tone for the entire rest of the film, is fairly by the numbers. No worries, I won’t give away the twist but suffice to say, if you have any interest in the film at all, do not let a friend ruin it for you as doing so would considerably lessen the magic. My only quibble would be that the characters of Gil’s fiancé, mother and father aren’t nearly fleshed out enough to make them any more than foils to Gil’s nocturnal adventures, a small point when compared to the fun and complexity of the two main leads.

While I’m aware I’ve already used this word once in my review, the most succinct way I can describe Midnight In Paris is delightful. Although many film fans will cringe at the tidy way the film wraps up, I felt myself wholly satisfied that our main characters don’t fall off a cliff or die in a tragic bus accident. Sometimes, it’s good for things to turn out exactly like we want and in the case of Midnight In Paris, the strength of the characters make the easy ending more than acceptable. Fresh, charming and yes, a touch magical, Midnight In Paris re-cements Woody Allen as a relevant director, able to provide laughs, feeling and insight in equal measure. More than a standard date night movie, Midnight In Paris is an absolute joy to watch and is easily one of my favorite films of the year.

Score – 90%

Originally Reviewed – 7/8/2011

Oh Michael Bay, how I dislike thee. Let me count the ways….

Is it your innate ability to take something as simple as a goofy movie about an unlikely duo breaking into Alcatraz to stop a renegade general from launching chemical weapons at the population of San Francisco and turn it into an overblown mess?

Is it the way you eschew character development for flipping cars and uninteresting gun battles?

Is it your skill in filming in a place full of haunted spiritual power like Alcatraz while using none of that energy to elevate your movie beyond hack one liners and random violence?

Or is it your complete lack of respect for the intelligence of your audience.

You know? It just might be all of the above.

Welcome to The Rock, a loud, obnoxious and overblown film that does nothing but blow a few things up in the City by the Bay. Starring Nicholas Cage as a chemical weapons expert, Ed Harris as the rebellious general and Sean Connery as a convicted escape artist, The Rock does its best to be everything at once and in the end, fails to be anything at all. While the movie does have some bright spots, the entire experience is plagued with some head scratching decisions concerning story, character development and plot holes the size of Ghirardelli Square.

The main problem with The Rock is that the film suffers from having too much story. Yes, you read that correctly, too much story can be a bad thing. If the writers had kept things a little simpler, Bay would have had more opportunity to flesh out the situations and actually have them make a lick of sense. Some fans may claim some suspension of disbelief is in order for this genre to work but I find it hard to believe that Sean Connery, after being given a hotel suite, lavish food and a suit in return for helping the FBI sneak into Alcatraz would need to go on a fifteen minute car chase just so see his daughter. Couldn’t he have also demanded, “Hey, I’d like to see my daughter”? Sorry, but no amount of “loosing myself in the movie” will explain how the general with his team of heavily armed mercenaries was able to walk into a military installation and steal chemical weapons. Did the Army not have the budget for surveillance cameras? Silly leaps of faith like this cause the film to crumble under its own preposterousness.

Of course, if you can get past the ridiculous story, the characters don’t help the cause either. Harris is over the top as the general but the biggest issue is that his performance never gives the audience any direction. Harris has held the city ransom for a hundred million dollars, to be paid out to the families of men killed under his command. While a little ambiguity is fine, the audience doesn’t have a clear antagonist to root against. Should they see him as a hero going outside the rule book to prove a point or do we see him as a villain, willing to put an entire population in harms way for monetary gain. Having a complex villain is fine so long as his motivations are clear but in the case of The Rock, you never really know what the general’s end game is, making him frustrating to watch.

Cage, as the chemical expert, suffers from the same issue. Half the time playing the role weirdly funny and the other half as an action bad ass, Cage flip flops between the two performances, again, causing our brains to hurt from inherent confusion. Sean Connery is the only lead who doesn’t have this issue as he completely ignores any direction and simply plays himself. I imagine he realized there’s no real character to immerse himself in, so he just spouts the lines in his Scottish accent and the result is classic Connery. Despite the weakly drawn characters, the relationship between Connery and Cage is the best part of the film, featuring two actors who are genuinely having a good time. However, even this fun chemistry is destroyed by horrible one liners, cheesy jokes that fall flat and action scenes that, aside from a few exceptions, fail to deliver even the most modest of thrills.

In the end, The Rock is just plain stupid. Stupid marines holding a group of stupid tourists hostage while they bully a stupid government into paying up for a stupid cause, this movie is like a disgusting stew: throw every ingredient you can think of into a pot, boil it all down to the bare essentials and force us to spend over two hours eating it. With bit characters that go nowhere, plot jumps that make no sense and an ending that was telegraphed hours beforehand, The Rock is all noise with little impact. Alcatraz deserved better than this.

Score – 30%