Cadillac Records

A bad movie trailer can do one of two things: 1) deter you from the film b/c it doesn't look good; or 2) intrigue you enough to plunk down $10 bucks to check it out. Fortunately for me, the trailer and subsequent commercials for Cadillac Records did the latter. Contrary to popular belief, this is not a movie starring Beyonce. She wonderfully captures Etta James, one of several iconic recording artists signed to Chess (Cadillac) Records, but she doesn't even make her appearance until at least an hour into the movie. Instead, the movie chronicles the rise and fall of the second most legendary, prolific record label of the 50s and 60s. I assume that Motown deserves the top spot. Nevertheless, Chess Records featured the likes of Muddy Waters and Chuck Berry, and was at the foreground of rock n roll. Founded by Polish immigrant Leonard Chess, the record label's first prominently successful recording artist was Muddy Waters, masterfully portrayed in the film by Jeffrey Wright (most recently of Quantum of Solace). Len (Adrien Brody, Hollywoodland) and Muddy meet in Chicago, after Muddy migrates up from the sharecropping fields of Mississippi. Soon after arriving in the big city he encounters his future wife Geneva (Gabrielle Union), after setting up shop playing the guitar on a street corner beneath her small apartment. Geneva, like most women – is instantly enamored with Muddy's soulful voice and guitar. Shortly thereafter he meets a young man named Walter, a skillful harmonica player who provides the perfect accompaniment to Muddy's electric guitar. Muddy, Geneva, and "Little" Walter become a surrogate family, with Len serving as a benevolent godfather of sorts. He provides the backing and obtains radio airplay, while Muddy and Walter keep churning out the hits and sold-out performances. Eventually Len expands the Chess roster to include Howlin' Wolf, Etta, and the legendary Chuck Berry. Chess records was informally known as Cadillac Records because Len purchased all of his artists Cadillacs as reward for their chart-topping songs. He is portrayed as genuine and caring, but one wonders if there wasn't a hint of exploitation as well. He didn't let his artists see the books when they inquired about their royalties, even Chuck Berry. Regardless, there seemed to be a real friendship and partnership between he and Muddy, and he certainly tried to keep his artists on the straight and narrow, though a few of them fell on hard times. Little Walter in particular, had a problem with authority and had frequent brushes with the law and local Chicago hoodlums. His life tragically ended at the age of 37, and actor Columbus Short (This Christmas) did an excellent job of capturing his reckless talent. He was brash and cocky, and eventually the mouth that so skillfully played the harmonica also contributed to his demise, along with alcohol and heroin. Muddy's biggest vice was a penchant for women NOT named Geneva, but he managed to avoid substance abuse, at least according to the movie. This leads me to the most troubled, layered role in the movie – Etta James. I'm beginning to think Beyonce might actually have some acting chops after all. Unlike Deena in Dreamgirls, Etta James is not a pretty character. She is rough, salty, and coarse. Plagued by deeply-rooted feelings of worthlessness and inadequacy, Etta seems to be surrounded by an impenetrable wall that belies her vulnerability until she opens her mouth and releases that soulful, beautiful voice. When Beyonce performs Etta's songs "All I Could Do Was Cry" and "I'd Rather Go Blind," she is in rare form. It is truly something to behold. These moments when music and drama merge are the reasons why art is such a beautiful and powerful medium, the reason why it can take you to another place. She was Etta, stripped bare. Another moving scene featured Etta's failed reunion with famed pool player Minnesota Fats, her alleged father. She explains to Len that her "mother was a whore," and she has just been rejected by her father. She feels worthless, and it's no wonder that she later turns to heroin to numb her pain.

I can't say enough about this movie, which seems to have fared poorly at the box office on its opening weekend. That's unfortunate, because it was a movie filled with flawless performances, from top to bottom. I don't know if it's poor marketing on behalf of the studio or what – but people are missing out. Don't be one of them.

This article first appeared at Poptimal and can be found at http://poptimal.com/2008/12/cadillac-records/. It was reprinted with permission.

Quantum of Solace

So, yeah – I fancy myself more than just a casual 007 fan. I haven’t seen all of ‘em, but I’ve seen all of the ones with Sean Connery, and I know a little about the franchise. Daniel Craig, in spite of his blond hair and blue eyes, has grown on me, and I looked forward to the latest installment in one of the most venerable franchises in American cinematic history.

I’ll keep it brief and say that Quantum of Solace didn’t do much for the franchise. It was beautifully filmed, featuring exotic locales and accents to match, but I found the storyline to be dry and thin at various places. This was disappointing considering the script was partially written by acclaimed scribe Paul Haggis (Crash, Million Dollar Baby). This latest chapter finds our favorite MI-6 agent dealing with the loss of Vesper at the conclusion of Casino Royale. He promises M that he won’t seek revenge, but remains confused about the circumstances surrounding her death. He finds a kindred spirit in Camille, a young woman entangled in high-stakes espionage, seeking revenge for her family’s death. 007 plots are always somewhat nebulous, and Quantum of Solace is no exception. Vaguely it is revealed that a secret organization wishes to gain control of the water supply in the mid-east, and Bond is charged with uncovering the identity of those individuals involved in the transaction. What? Yeah, whatever. I can barely recite the plot to you. I appreciated little things throughout, such as the rugged, much less corny portrayal offered by Daniel Craig. Despite not looking the part of a more traditional Bond, Craig manages to convey an effortless sophistication even when bruised and battered. He has the right swag, and I appreciate his embodiment of the character. Judi Dench is always a pleasure, and the movie had a smart, sleek feel – it was just empty in spots. There was an homage to Goldfinger, when one of Bond’s female allies is drowned in oil, her sprawled and naked body covered in the black liquid just as Goldfinger’s victim was covered in gold over 20 years ago. This was pretty obvious, and it didn’t go unnoticed by all the Bond buffs out there, I’m sure. Nice touch.

While not a “must-see” by any stretch, Quantum of Solace makes for a passable day at the movies. If you’re a fan of the franchise you probably should see it off GP, though be forewarned that you will be underwhelmed with certain aspects of the movie.

RocknRolla

Is it better to be really good at one type of thing, or marginally good at a lot of different things? I’m trying to describe director Guy Ritchie’s movie-making style. He’s sorta like the cinematic version of a one-hit-wonder, having the most success with a certain type of movie. Ritchie excels at the frenetic ensemble crime drama, but has faltered when he’s ventured beyond his comfort zone in the recent past. In RocknRolla Ritchie returns to what he knows best, and that’s just fine with me. Versatility be damned.

His latest effort is in the same vein of Lock, Stock and Two Smokin’ Barrels and Snatch, both of which featured a hodgepodge crew pulling off a heist/caper of some sort. RocknRolla’s cast includes Gerard Butler (300) and Idris Elba (The Wire, American Gangster), who star as One Two and Mumbles, respectively. The pair owes money to a London businessman/gangster named Lenny Cole, played with relish by Tom Wilkinson (Michael Clayton). Lenny has an architecture deal pending with a Russian immigrant, and when the Russian’s money is stolen, the deal is in jeopardy. Unbeknownst to Lenny, Mumbles and One Two are unwittingly responsible for the theft. They were tipped off by the Russian’s accountant, and lifted the money in order to repay Lenny and settle their debt. In other words, they are paying Lenny with his own money. Meanwhile, the Russian is getting suspicious, and everything is inter-connected. The plot details aren’t important, as the movie has a life of its own, spinning from one scene to the next before you can catch your breath. Movies that rely heavily on inter-connected storylines sometimes require a suspension of belief as the characters’ lives overlap, but RocknRolla’s plot is plausible in that all of the characters operate in the same underworld, even if only tangentially. The movie had one silly sequence involving some very persistent hit men, but other than that everything was largely believable. Gerard Butler showed comedic flair, which was an impressive departure from his role in 300. I also enjoyed watching Idris Elba speak in his natural accent. He was so good as Stringer Bell on The Wire that you might forget he’s not American. I’m partial to British gangster movies, so I viewed RocknRolla through the prism of my own preference, but I thought it was good. If you liked Ritchie’s earlier work, you won’t be disappointed. I guess if it’s not broke don’t fix it. Fast paced, funny, and just plain cool, RocknRolla is one to see.

This article first appeared at Poptimal and can be found at http://poptimal.com/index.php?s=rock. It was reprinted with permission.

I.O.U.S.A.

Some topics are just over my head, and I feel no shame in admitting that fact. The nuances of economics often leave me befuddled, and I'm happy if I can just get a broad understanding of the issue. Having said that, I.O.U.S.A. was an informative, very important documentary that was actually relatively easy for me to understand. For those of you with no designs on the Wharton School of Business, I think you'll be able to understand it as well. The film offers an in-depth examination of America's crippling debt, highlighting the financial crisis as one of the most important issues of our lifetime, the handling of which will shape the futures of our children. Economics is not a sexy topic, so despite the film's gravity it probably will not be viewed by the average person looking to enjoy an afternoon at the movies. The film begins with a brief overview of the history of our national debt. Our founding fathers placed an emphasis on eradicating debt and were successfully able to pay down our significant debt in the wake of the Revolutionary War. World Wars I and II increased our debt, but we again were able to pay it down significantly through the purchase of war bonds and other methods. The 1980's bought inflation, and our national debt increased. Under the Clinton administration, the national debt decreased significantly and we actually had a surplus when he left office – no small feat by any stretch of the imagination. As a matter of fact, the surplus was the first we had in over 30 years. Ahh, but that was then and this is now. Our national debt is somewhere around 10 trillion dollars, an astronomical figure that will not change unless we make significant changes here at home. The film outlined the biggest drains on the U.S. economy, the largest of which is the money being eaten up by Social Security and Medicare. It also discussed our dependence on foreign nations, and it's not simply those nations in the Middle East, as you might think. Apparently China practically owns the U.S. We heavily rely on the importation of their goods, while very few other nations are clamoring for any of our products. Even if we stopped spending money on the war in Iraq, fixed Social Security, and eliminated earmarks, we'd STILL be in the hole. I started to feel pretty depressed as I sat through this movie. I appreciate the severity of our current financial situation, but it would have been useful if the movie offered a more detailed look at what everyday folks like you and me can do to help the economy. After 78 minutes of informative but very bleak data, the movie spent the few remaining minutes offering a glimmer of hope. The only problem is that it wasn't enough. You wanna know what we can do to help diminish the national debt? Save money. Don't buy what you can't afford. After sitting through a sophisticated financial tutorial, that's the conclusion the film boils down to? I was a little disappointed. The movie also mentioned that leadership was important, which is very relevant considering that election day is upon us. I just would have liked a more sophisticated discussion of how we can fix the problem. Overall, I.O.U.S.A. was an important film, but the nature of the topic makes for a rather dry night at the movies. It was interesting, but painted a somber picture. I guess the truth hurts.

The Secret Life of Bees

WARNING: This review has more spoilers than usual, so don't read any further if you don't want a detailed plot description of the movie!!

Every now and then I have the privilege of seeing a movie that is special, a movie that touches and connects in ways that most movies do not. I thought The Secret Life of Bees was a beautiful film, one of the best I’ve seen all year.

Adapted from the book of the same name, The Secret Life of Bees features a gifted ensemble cast including Dakota Fanning (Man on Fire), Queen Latifah (Mad Money), Sophie Okonedo (Hotel Rwanda), and Alicia Keys (Smokin’ Aces). Fanning is Lily, a melancholy, sensitive teenager burdened with the guilt of having accidentally killed her own mother at the age of four. She lives with T-Ray, her physically and emotionally abusive father. He is devoid of all love and affection, and punishes Lily for perceived misbehavior by forcing her to kneel in grits on the kitchen floor until her knees are raw. Lily escapes her sorrow by sneaking out to the peach orchard behind her house and looking up at the stars, talking quietly to her mother in heaven. Her only friend is Rosaleen, her housekeeper and nanny. On her fourteenth birthday the two travel into town together, only to be harassed by some racist locals. The year is 1964, and the Civil Rights Act has just been signed into law. This doesn’t sit well with some Whites, and Rosaleen refuses to swallow her pride when provoked, ending up in the hospital and facing jail time for a violent incident. When T-Ray finally gives Lily all she can stand, she makes a break for it, taking Rosaleen with her. They end up in Tiburon, SC – a town Lily’s mother visited at least once before. The odyssey proves to be one that will change the course of their lives forever.

At a local store Lily notices a jar of honey with a picture of a Black Virgin Mary. Intrigued, she learns that one August Boatwright (Queen Latifah) produces the honey. With Rosaleen in tow, they set out for August’s house. Nothing about the Boatwright home is ordinary, from its color (think Pepto Bismol) to its inhabitants. August resides with her sisters June (Keys) and May (Okonedo), tending to a large apiary which yields the honey that sustains them. The Boatwright sisters are refined and cultured, unlike any Black women Lily and Rosaleen have ever seen. When the two wayward souls show up on August’s doorstep she welcomes them with open arms, much to June’s chagrin. May has developmental issues, but is a kind soul. Soon Lily and Rosaleen settle into a routine, with Lily helping August tend the bees and Rosaleen assisting May in the kitchen. Lily finds the solace and love she craves, and all seems to be well for a brief time, but a White girl living with three Black women in 1960’s South Carolina will only go unnoticed for so long. Eventually T-Ray discovers Lily’s whereabouts and comes to the Boatwright property to retrieve his daughter. I won’t tell you how it ends; you’ll have to see for yourself.

The Secret Life of Bees was enchanting, from start to finish. It dealt with significant themes, including guilt, redemption, forgiveness, grief, and most importantly: love. Love is the thread that held the movie together. Lily believed that she was unlovable. The Boatwright sisters, as surrogate mothers – showed her that everything wants to be loved, and through their collective kindness and nurturance they lifted Lily’s burden and enlightened Rosaleen, all the while dealing with their own personal tragedies. The movie will undoubtedly appeal to women, but I hate when people put creativity in a box. It’s just a good film, period. I think everyone should see it. It was wonderfully directed, capturing the beauty of the Southern, rural landscape and the essence of each character. Dakota Fanning continues to add to a stellar career, already having accomplished more than many of her older counterparts. Kudos to all involved with such a lovely film.

This article first appeared on Poptimal and can be found at http://poptimal.com/2008/10/the-secret-life-of-bees/. The article was reprinted with permission.

Appaloosa

“Life has a way of making the foreseeable that which never happens…and the unforeseeable that which your life becomes.” I knew when I heard that line that Appaloosa was gonna be a great movie, and it was.

Ed Harris (A History of Violence) impresses in front of and behind the lens as both star and director of Appaloosa, a Western tale about a pair of most unique lawmen. Harris is Virgil Cole, a “clean up” man of sorts. He and his partner Everett Hitch (Viggo Mortenson, A History of Violence) make their living by cleaning up small towns when law enforcement becomes overwhelmed by the local criminal element. Virgil and Everett’s services are required in Appaloosa after the sheriff is murdered by outlaw Randall Bragg when he tries to apprehend some of his men. Bragg and his men treat Appaloosa like their playground, wreaking havoc and menacing the townspeople. Virgil and Everett arrive on the scene in big boy fashion and get to work cracking down on Bragg and his gang. Viggo Mortenson is wonderful as Everett, Virgil’s quiet but lethal sidekick. He and his 8 gauge shotgun are all the muscle Virgil requires. Things seem to go well enough initially, but there is a tension throughout the movie. The town is like a bubbling cauldron, and you know that eventually that pot is going to overflow. Virgil is stoic and appropriately dispassionate. In order for him to be successful at what he does, he must have no fear of death, and no ties to anything or anyone that can be used against him. All that goes out the window when Allison French rolls into town, played by the heavily botoxed Renee Zellweger. She seems harmless enough, but as it’s been said, a woman can be more dangerous than a pistol. When a witness testifies against Bragg, Virgil appears to have rid Appaloosa of his nemesis, but alas, if you look back at the quote which starts the movie, things are never that simple. Virgil’s love for Allison is used against him, and he and Everett are put in a position where they must make some tough choices.

Appaloosa was a compelling movie. Every facet of the film was superbly acted, from beginning to end. Harris and Mortensen exude a quiet yet powerful air of confidence without seeming like rogue lawmen, though in many respects that is what they are. There is something attractive about their plain, salt-of-the-earth manner. Jeremy Irons made a dastardly cowboy, amoral and unapologetic. Just a good old-fashioned Western and a great movie. Even if you don’t think Westerns are your thing, you’ll be pleasantly surprised.

Miracle at St. Anna

Spike Lee (She Hate Me, Inside Man) presents his first epic film since 1992’s Malcolm X. Miracle at St. Anna is an ambitious undertaking; a project that I think was near and dear to Lee’s heart. It is the story of an infantry of Buffalo Soldiers fighting the Nazis in Italy during WWII. The three leads are Derek Luke (Catch a Fire) as Stamps, Laz Alonso (This Christmas) as Hector, and Michael Ealy (Barbershop) as Bishop.

The movie opens in NYC in 1983(?), in the apartment of Hector Negron, a man of about 80 years. We see him go to work at the post office, quietly carrying out his duties. When a male customer approaches him to buy stamps, he withdraws a gun and inexplicably shoots the man at point-blank range, killing him instantly. As a young reporter tries to uncover Negron’s motive, as well as the mystery behind an ancient artifact discovered in his home, the story of St. Anna unfolds in flashback. We next find Hector in Italy, approximately forty years earlier. He, along with the rest of his infantry tries to advance across a river under heavy fire. When they are pinned down and attempt to radio their coordinates and the enemy’s position to their superior, their requests are ignored. This is only one incident in a series of racially-tinged affronts levied against the soldiers by White civilians and military alike. Eventually they encounter an abandoned shelter where one of them finds a young Italian boy, disoriented and mumbling to an imaginary friend in his native tongue. What follows is an intriguing, disturbing, and inspiring depiction of the soldiers’ brave struggle against an American foe, and in many ways, against America herself. Lee tends to be heavy-handed in his portrayal of race-related issues, but I have to trust that his ostensibly fictional account belies painful accuracies as well. His well-publicized feud with director Clint Eastwood over the latter’s lack of African-American representation in the WWII-based Letters From Iwo Jima probably served as motivation to explore the injustices endured by Black soldiers as they battled the Nazis abroad but were unappreciated at home.

Miracle at St. Anna was daring - grand in its budget, location, and duration. Despite its most intriguing opening, it got off to a slow and somewhat muddled start. There are extensive subtitles as well as the presentation of many plot points that are tied up much later. When we finally discover the “miracle” at St. Anna, we may have forgotten that we were supposed to be awaiting a big event. However, this was one of the most memorable scenes of the movie, and answered a lot of questions, if you are patient enough to wait for it. The performances were very good, and it’s hard to pick a favorite, though Laz Alonso makes a compelling case. This is a difficult movie to review, because it is such a detailed, layered film about both revenge and redemption. To call it a “war movie” makes it feel small and reduces it to the confines of a particular genre. It is a war movie, but is much more. Beware that it’s long as hell, and there are some excruciating scenes not for the faint of heart. It is definitely one to see, and a nice addition to Lee’s already impressive catalogue.

Lakeview Terrace

The funny thing about cops is that they are as scary as they are comforting. I get nervous around them, even when I know I’ve done nothing wrong. Give the wrong guy a gun and a badge, and you’ve got a real problem on your hands. Lakeview Terrace taps into this fear with mixed results.

The movie features Samuel L. Jackson (Black Snake Moan) as police officer Abel Turner, and Kerry Washington (I Think I Love My Wife) and Patrick Wilson as Chris and Lisa Mattson, Turner’s new neighbors. Abel is a disciplinarian to his teenage daughter and young son, and their sole provider. Although the movie begins with him behaving in a relatively normal manner, there is a hint of menace beneath his authoritarian demeanor. He takes an almost instant dislike to his new neighbors, particularly Chris. Chris seems like the kind of guy who’d have a “kick me” sign stuck to his back, and Abel takes full advantage – screwing with Chris enough to rattle him, but not enough to do serious harm or amount to an actionable complaint. For example, after pretending to be a carjacker under the guise of teaching neighborhood safety, Abel tells Chris to turn down the rap music playing from his car radio. Chris complies, and at the end of their exchange, Abel tells Chris that no matter how much he listens to that music, “he’ll still be White.” Yep. Oh yeah. Make no bones about it, the reason Abel dislikes his new neighbors is because he’s not down with the swirl, at all. No ebony and ivory. No salt and pepper, get it? Lisa is Black and Chris is White, if you didn’t know that already. And if you’re offended by my corny references to interracial dating, then I suggest you avoid Lakeview Terrace, because much worse is said in the movie. Abel refers to Lisa as Chris’ little “chocolate drop,” and numerous disparaging references are made to the couple’s racial makeup throughout the movie. It’s kinda funny at first, in an uncomfortable way. Sam Jack has a way of making everything sound funny, you know it’s true. But after a while it becomes trite and a little gimmicky. It’s fine to deal with the interracial marriage aspect in an intelligent manner, and we see glimpses of this when Chris and Lisa argue about having a child and their relationship with each other’s families, however; I think some of Jackson’s lines were rather low-brow. All that aside, there were some good moments in the movie. Jackson is great as the villain. He goes from mildly unsettling to vengeful to homicidal, and it doesn’t feel extreme until the movie is almost over.

I like Kerry Washington and thought she had good chemistry with Patrick Wilson, but some of their scenes just annoyed me. I hate when couples do the whole kissy-face smoochy smoochy thing. Just get it on, or cut it out. I predict this movie will not be a favorite amongst the brothers for the very same reason Sam Jack’s character had beef with Chris: a lot of people still dislike the idea of Black women dating White men. There, I said it. Right or wrong, it’s true. Now how’s that for life imitating art and vice versa?


This article first appeared on Poptimal and can be found at http://poptimal.com/2008/09/welcome-to-the-neighborhood/ . The article was reprinted with permission.

Igor

Yikes. I’m glad my mom didn’t take me to see a movie like Igor when I was a kid. Bambi was traumatic enough, and the star of that one was a sweet little deer. Imagine if I’d laid my innocent young eyes on a movie like Igor, which features hunchbacks and monsters whose sole purpose is to inflict evil upon the world. No thanks. Parents should heed the PG rating of this one. It’s not meant for younger kids and with good reason. This is a pretty dark movie, its title referring to a legion of hunchbacks reminiscent of the character immortalized by Lon Chaney. The movie is set in the (obviously) fictional country of Malaria, a desolate and depressing place where the sun never shines and clouds perpetually fill the sky. In Malaria the hunchbacks A.K.A. igors serve the evil scientists. Think of it as a slave/master relationship. Each year there is a contest to see who can come up with the most evil invention. You see, Malaria’s king sustains the country’s economy by terrorizing the rest of the world by accepting money for NOT unleashing these evil inventions on them. The main character, named Igor (of course), dreams of being an evil scientist but his station in life will not allow him to aspire to greater heights. When his master is killed in a laboratory mishap, he seizes the opportunity to show his stuff. He creates Eva, a giant monster who is supposed to unleash unparalleled evil, winning the contest and liberating Igor. The only problem is that Eva’s “evil bone” doesn’t work, rendering her quite harmless and very kind. This is disastrous for Igor, because in Malaria evil reigns supreme. With Eva’s help Igor realizes that he is good, and they fight to overthrow Malaria’s king, along with their friends Scamper and Brain. Igor had its sweet moments and it definitely tried to teach a few lessons, but I think it’s too dark for the average little kid. First of all, Eva looks scary as hell, period. She’s one of the good guys, but if I were 5 years old I’d probably have nightmares. There was also a scene that I think was blatantly racist, but I won’t get into that because if you blink you’ll miss it. It was almost like subliminal messaging, it happened so fast – but I saw it! There were a few other moments that left me shaking my head, like at the end when a group of blind orphans sang “I can see clearly now the rain is gone.” That’s just wrong.

All in all, I think Igor was wonderfully voiced by a very good cast featuring the likes of John Cusack (1408) and Steve Buscemi (I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry), but the movie was too morbid and offensive for me to recommend. Who thought this would be a good idea for a kid’s movie?

Righteous Kill

For a movie buff, the thought of Pacino and DeNiro teaming up on the big screen is like a fantasy fulfilled. You’ve wondered about it, you’ve been teased (The Godfather II) you’ve had a small taste to whet your appetite (Heat), and now you’re gonna get the full monty, because here comes Righteous Kill. Pacino and DeNiro, what could be more perfect, what could go wrong? Well sometimes a fantasy is best left unfulfilled, because it can never live up to the great expectations you’ve created in your own mind.

The two star as veteran police detectives who are pursuing a serial killer who is murdering criminals that have been allowed to slip through the cracks of the criminal justice system. The evidence points to a cop being the culprit. The killer leaves a poem at the scene of each crime, explaining the victim’s offense. DeNiro is the hot-headed one and Pacino is more even-keeled. Good cop/Bad cop all day. You wanna know my problem with Righteous Kill? Look no further than writer Russell Gewirtz, a guy who was clever enough to pen Inside Man but managed to squander his opportunity with Pacino and DeNiro. Director Jon Avnet didn’t fare much better, and made Al Pacino look every bit as ridiculous here as he did in 88 Minutes, which he also directed and which sucked. I can never truly criticize Pacino and DeNiro, and I feel so bad for not loving this movie – believe me I really wanted to! I’m not saying it was bad, I’m just saying that you should lower your expectations. The only reason anyone is gonna see this movie is because of Pacino and DeNiro, and if people are really honest with themselves they will admit that once you get over the initial hype of seeing them on the screen together, the movie will start to raise questions. And I don’t mean the provocative kind of questions; I mean the “why the fuck did he do that?” type of questions. I hate when writers try to hide the ball with audiences, when they deliberately mislead viewers. If I’m outsmarted, I want it to be like The Sixth Sense or The Usual Suspects, not on some dumb shit. I didn’t like the set-up, I didn’t like the script, and I didn’t like a lot of the dialogue. Oh, I feel so dirty, like I need a shower. How can I not love a movie starring two of the greatest actors of all time??? Again, I’m not saying it was bad – it just wasn’t as good as you’d expect. You should check it out off GP, but don’t say I didn’t warn you.

Burn After Reading

The Coen Brothers (No Country for Old Men) are back, this time on a much lighter note with Burn After Reading, a dark and funny movie depicting what happens when idiots try to smarten up and rise above their social standing. Brad Pitt (Babel) and Frances McDormand (Almost Famous) are two personal trainers who are thrust into a world of blackmail when they stumble across a confidential disc belonging to one Osborne Cox (John Malkovich, Rounders), a disgruntled recently demoted CIA operative. They contact Cox and are astounded when he is not amenable to giving them a financial reward for returning the disc. They are clearly out of their league and their attempt to muscle him is hilarious. Meanwhile Cox’ wife, played by Tilda Swinton (Michael Clayton) is having an affair with George Clooney’s character, who is also sleeping with Frances McDormand. Yeah, it’s a little wacky. This movie seemed like it was fun to make, and Pitt and Clooney have good comedic timing. There’s not much else I can say about it, because I really don’t think it was meant to be taken seriously. This is only the third film I’ve seen from the Coen Bros, and the first comedy. I noticed that despite the obvious humorous interpretation, there were a couple of really violent moments too. Somehow these scenes were also funny when viewed in a certain context, which was interesting, to say the least. Even a guy getting his head bashed in with a hammer is played for laughs, and it somehow works. Those crazy Coens. I wonder what their childhood was like. They probably pulled the wings off flies, but instead of growing up to be serial killers they became filmmakers. Lucky for us.

The Family That Preys

Tyler Perry has taken a tiny step backwards with The Family That Preys. I thought he turned the corner with Why Did I Get Married, but his latest movie shows that he still relies heavily on the mainstays of his filmmaking style: melodrama and one-dimensional characters. Having said that, I still found The Family That Preys to be an entertaining movie, but it simply is not up to snuff in comparison with most other dramatic movies. I think the title is clever, but I can’t say the same about the actual film. I respect Perry’s Hollywood hustle, and the man is clearly at the top of his game in terms of financial success. He also seems like a genuinely nice guy, which is why I hate to find fault with his movies…but hey, it is what it is. Spike Lee, he’s not. Not saying he has to be or should try to be…I’m just sayin.’

Regarding The Family That Preys, Perry assembles a very good cast, comprised most notably of Kathy Bates (Misery-sorry it’s the first thing that comes to mind when you think of her, admit it!) and Alfre Woodard (Something New). They turn in fine performances, and I was particularly impressed with Bates, mainly because her character was the only one that wasn’t totally flat. Bates portrays Charlotte Cartwright, a wealthy magnanimous CEO and best friend to Woodard’s character, Alice Pratt. The movie opens with the wedding of Alice’s daughter Andrea, played by Sanaa Lathan (Something New). Charlotte is footing the bill for the wedding, and it is here we are introduced to the main players, including Charlotte’s son William (Cole Hauser, Higher Learning). Upon their first meeting, William and Andrea share an awkward exchange, with William suggestively telling Andrea to come see him about a job. Cut to four years later, and it’s obvious that the two are sleeping together. Andrea is a total bitch to everyone around her, especially her devoted husband, played by Rockmond Dunbar. I like to call her the dream crusher. She is belittling and mean-spirited to the point of absurdity. Once again Perry goes overboard. In a way, I feel like he’s trying to dumb it down. Does he think that his audience won’t be able to appreciate subtlety? Whatever the reason, the movie felt very implausible and contrived. I will give Perry credit for his depiction of the friendship between Charlotte and Alice. It was a warm and caring friendship that came across as authentic. Both actresses showed their pedigree, and I wish the rest of the cast had the opportunity to do the same. Overall, the quality of the storyline was comparable to what you’d see on daytime TV, and it was very predictable. I’m glad the brother is doing well, but there is always room for improvement and I hope Tyler Perry continues to evolve as a filmmaker.

Traitor

I like Don Cheadle (Talk To Me) a lot, which is why I was looking forward to Traitor, which I thought would be an interesting hybrid of The Bourne Identity and Enemy of the State. Oh, if only it had been that good. Cheadle, while very talented, did not save this movie in my humble opinion. Traitor was smart and suspenseful, but something about it left me feeling inexplicably depressed. It was just a downer of a movie. I definitely don’t mind serious movies, in fact I prefer them quite often, but when the closing credits rolled I felt unfulfilled and dissatisfied.

Traitor opens with a young Samir (Cheadle) playing chess with his father in their Sudanese home. The game concludes and Samir’s father leaves in his car. As he enters the vehicle it explodes, the flames searing his flesh as the image becomes seared in Samir’s memory. Fast forward to the present day and Samir is selling explosive technology to terrorist groups in the Middle East. Here is where everything gets all sketchy. The natural inclination is to root for Samir as the protagonist, but…he’s a bad guy, right? Maybe, maybe not. When a deal goes wrong and Samir and his cohorts are imprisoned, he is accused of being a traitor, hence the title of the movie. Of course double entendres abound, and I won’t spoil the movie for you. It’s too complicated for me to spoil because several moments left me confused – which is either proof of my own stupidity or a convoluted script – take your pick. Cheadle’s performance was great, and he effectively captured the conflicted duality of his character, but something was just missing from this movie. It’s a great one to add to your netflix queue or to catch on pay-per-view – but it was not a very memorable movie, despite being well-acted. I’m also unsure of what agenda Traitor tried to advance. Some parts felt very anti-American, but other aspects of the film seemed to feed into negative stereotypes about Islam. Go figure. Maybe this was a good thing since it mirrored the complexity of religion and real world politics, but I couldn’t make heads or tails of it. Cheadle doesn’t really give bad performances, so it won’t be a total waste if you decide to check it out – I just can’t give it an unmitigated stamp of approval.

The Longshots

Evolution: the process by which one grows and transforms into a more complete and mature individual. No, that’s not Webster’s definition, rather that’s my own interpretation of the word - and by my definition O’Shea Jackson has evolved. You might know Mr. Jackson by another name: Ice Cube. The one time “gangsta rapper,” and star of the seminal flick Boyz n the Hood has evolved into a kid-friendly box office draw. Who would think “Doughboy” would be coaching a little girl in Pop Warner Football? That’s just what he does in The Longshots, an inspiring movie based on the true story of a little girl with one helluva arm.

Cube (Are We There Yet?) is Curtis Plummer, an unemployed former high school football star who walks around the small town of Minden with a football in one hand and a beer in the other. When his brother’s ex asks him to baby-sit his niece Jasmine (Keke Palmer of Akeelah and the Bee) after school for a few hours each day, he can’t think of anything he’d hate more. The feeling is mutual, as Jasmine would rather be left to her own devices. She’s a shy girl who gets teased frequently, but finds solace in science fiction books. The first few times uncle and niece hang out are strained at best. Curtis has a warm heart underneath his gruff exterior, and Jasmine longs for a father figure to replace Curtis’ absentee brother – but they have to realize that they need each other. Eventually the two let their guards down, especially after Jasmine reluctantly begins to toss the pigskin around with her uncle. Curtis convinces her to try out for the school’s football team, after seeing that she’s a special talent. She’s a natural, easily outperforming the starting quarterback while leading the team to the Pop Warner Superbowl. Throughout the course of the movie Jasmine and Curtis’ relationship grows into one characterized by love and pride. She becomes more confident, and Curtis’ life takes on a new purpose. There’s also a good bit of info about the fundamentals of football, which helps the believability factor. The movie does a good job of illustrating how organized sports builds self-esteem and serves as a positive outlet for young people. I won’t spoil the ending for you, but I recommend you take your kid or little brother/sister to check this movie out. It’s heartwarming without being totally corny. Sure, it’s a little cheesy – but most sports movie are, to some extent. Plus, the movie is based on a true story, so although a female quarterback may seem far-fetched – it can actually happen. The movie will put a smile on your face, so what more could you ask for?

This article first appeared on Poptimal and can be found at http://poptimal.com/2008/08/the-longshots-oshea-is-okay/ . The article was reprinted with permission.

Vicky Cristina Barcelona

Vicky Cristina Barcelona intrigued me for a few reasons. I looked forward to a new Woody Allen (Match Point) movie, plus I am a fan of Scarlett Johansson – his latest apparent muse. I also wanted to get a gander at Javier Bardem in a role that promised to be drastically different from his character in No Country for Old Men.

Vicky Cristina was a charming, sensual film that explored the complexities of matters of the heart, from the perspective of best friends Vicky (Rebecca Hall, The Prestige) and Cristina (Johansson, The Black Dahlia, Match Point). The pair visit Vicky’s relatives in Barcelona on an extended vacation, where they immerse themselves in local culture. Vicky is the more grounded, traditional type, whereas Cristina is a whimsical free-spirit who doesn’t conform to traditional societal norms. They have a good yin and yang friendship and an effortless camaraderie exists between them. Their days are spent drinking wine, admiring local architecture, and soaking up the arts. The backdrop was so enchanting I wished I could hop a plane to Spain myself.

Their trip takes an interesting turn when Cristina catches the eye of painter Juan Antonio, played by Bardem. Their attraction is instant, both of them exuding an obvious magnetism. Juan Antonio unabashedly asks Vicky and Cristina to spend the weekend with him, away from Barcelona in the city of Oviedo. Such a proposition is right up Cristina’s alley, but Vicky needs convincing, and only agrees so that she can keep an eye on Cristina. In Oviedo the groundwork is laid for a complicated relationship/friendship between the three of them. Juan Antonio’s romantic, frank overtures mesmerize Cristina and annoy Vicky, but a chance event turns the tables. Juan Antonio awakens heretofore undiscovered passions in Vicky, but his true connection is with Cristina. Sounds like I’m describing some kinky love triangle, right? Not exactly. The real trio to which the movie lends its romantic focus is Juan Antonio, Cristina, and get ready…his ex-wife Maria Elena, played by Penelope Cruz (Volver). Maria and Juan Antonio had a toxic relationship that ended less than amicably. I won’t reveal the details of how the three ended up sharing the same home, and bed – but suffice to say it’s the stuff of movies. In what world can a man shack up with two women and have them be ok with it? In Woody’s World, I guess! But you know what? Somehow it worked. When your characters are non-conformist, free-spirited, sexually liberated artists you can get away with this stuff. While the overall tone of the movie was light, there were moments that made the viewer examine his or her own life, whether single or in a relationship. The idea of pursuing happiness and living with no regrets was a recurring theme, and much like real life there are no easy answers. This was a provocative film with an alluring cast that is sure to please, both aesthetically and intellectually.


This article first appeared on Poptimal and can be found at http://poptimal.com/2008/08/vicky-christina-barcelona-crazy-sexy-cool/ . The article was reprinted with permission.

Hancock

I'm late as hell with this review, so gimme a break.

Will Smith (I Am Legend) AKA Mr. Fourth of July is back. He’s a certified cash cow, and Hancock is no exception. Regardless of your opinion of Mr. Smith, he’s box office gold. Hancock opened at number 1 over Independence Day weekend, marking the twelfth time Smith has grabbed the top spot in his career. While Smith’s resume is impressive, the same cannot be said for Hancock, an entertaining romp with more fluff than substance.

Smith stars as the titular Hancock, a reluctant super-hero. His trusty sidekick is a bottle of whiskey, not another dude in tights. Hancock protects the citizens of Los Angeles in hit-or-miss, devil-may-care fashion, nabbing the bad guys while leaving millions of dollars of damage in his wake. Imagine using a sledgehammer to kill a mosquito, and you’ve got Hancock’s approach to crime fighting. His methods don’t exactly endear him to the city, and soon its residents would rather Hancock take his super powers elsewhere. Hancock does have at least one fan, a man he rescued from death by the name of Ray Embrey, a public relations executive who would like to repay Hancock by repairing his damaged public image. Embrey is played by Jason Bateman (Smokin’ Aces, Juno), an actor whose movie career has been steadily on the rise as of late. Ray has a young son and lovely wife Mary (Charlize Theron, In the Valley of Elah), who curiously takes an instant dislike to the abrasive Hancock. We soon discover that Mary and Hancock have more in common than Hancock could ever imagine and that’s when we enter into (to borrow a phrase from Barack) “silly season.”

I enjoyed Hancock in part because it provided the staples one can expect from a summer flick: entertainment, good special effects, and lots of humor. These are the mainstays of a so-called “popcorn” movie, and in that regard Hancock did not disappoint. On the other hand, the storyline wore quite thin and was actually nonsensical in certain parts. Characters referenced events that didn’t transpire and the dialogue became contradictory. For example, in one scene Hancock attempts to kiss Mary and she rejects him. Later, Hancock references the kiss. The only problem is that it didn’t happen, there was no kiss! Whenever you have characters referencing scenes that were left on the cutting room floor, it serves as an overall detraction from the movie. The performances were fine, but let’s be real – this is fluff stuff here. The camera loves Will Smith and he has charisma by the truckload, but there was no challenge here. The movie tried to explore the emotional pain Hancock experiences as a result of being unappreciated, and his desire to be loved and accepted – but those moments were fleeting and quickly forgotten once the script veered toward the ridiculous. To put it simply: the explanation of Hancock’s backstory and how he discovered his powers was just laughable. Regarding Charlize Theron, she is an extremely talented Academy Award winning actress with a nice mix of serious and light movies in her repertoire, but this is not a performance anyone will be talking about months from now. Actor and director Peter Berg (The Kingdom) has a bright future behind the camera, but I just don’t think he had a strong script to work with, and the movie suffered as a result. Once you get past Hancock’s interesting premise of an “everyman” superhero, the movie falls short. If you haven’t seen it in theaters already, I’d suggest adding Hancock to your Netflix queue instead. If you want to see a real superhero movie check out The Dark Knight.

The Dark Knight

Oh y-y-y-yeah. It’s taken me a few days to find the time necessary to review this movie, this cinematic masterpiece, the illest movie of the year. Some movies manage to be all things to all people, and while everyone does not love the new Batman movie as much as I do, I think it managed to have a little something for everyone, from the fanboy purists to your average moviegoer.

I almost don’t even know where to start. The Dark Knight was pretty close to perfect. There was not a single wasted scene, character, or piece of dialogue. Everything fit together like a perfect puzzle. The performances, score, script, everything was amazing. Sometimes you can tell when you’re watching something special, and that’s how I felt the entire time.

Heath Ledger’s (Brokeback Mountain, Monster's Ball) portrayal of the Joker lived up to its morbid hype. Word on the street was that this was the performance of his career, even before his untimely death. I’ve seen his interviews where he discusses the psychological demands he suffered in preparation for the role, immersing himself in the character. His performance was truly something to behold. Ledger’s interpretation of the Joker was chilling, unnerving and complex. It was nuanced and idiosyncratic, from the way Joker licked his lips, to the way his tone shifted between high pitched and gravelly. It was brilliant, menacing, and ultimately sad. The movie would have had a dark and heavy vibe anyway, but when you acknowledge the reality that Ledger is no longer with us, his performance becomes even more haunting. This is not the Joker of old, the laughing cartoon-ish villain of the sixties television series, decked out in a ridiculous campy get-up. Oh no. Ledger’s Joker is a sadistic criminal who cannot be intimidated or bullied because he values nothing. Possessing a cruel sense of humor and diabolical intelligence, he torments Gotham City for sport. His desire is to give Gotham “a better class of criminal” and to expose Batman’s true identity, all under the nose of Commissioner Gordon (Gary Oldman, Dracula) and new district attorney Harvey Dent. Which brings me to…….

Harvey Dent/Two-Face (Aaron Eckhart, Paycheck): Wow. I think everyone expected Ledger to turn in an immortal performance, but I must say that Eckhart almost stole the show. Almost, but not quite. His character Harvey Dent represents hope and change for Gotham, a sort of take-no-prisoners Elliot Ness type of guy. He begins as a straightforward idealist, but tragedy causes his devolution into a vengeful madman, who doles out his own brand of justice. I won’t take the time of discussing every character, just the three principals, which brings me to….

The Dark Knight himself, Batman. Christian Bale (American Psycho, The Machinist) makes a wonderful caped crusader, in my opinion. To some he comes in a close second to Michael Keaton in terms of Batman greatness, but I haven’t seen Tim Burton’s Batman in years, so I give the edge to Bale. He was outshined by Ledger and Eckhart, but I think it’s because they had more to work with. Bale did an admirable job, playing Batman as the straight arrow who is conflicted about his role and responsibility to Gotham. He is an imperfect hero, hailed one moment but willing to be vilified the next. Beyond all else Batman is selfless, and sacrifices his personal desires for Gotham’s greater good. He and the Joker are locked in a bizarre battle, each adhering to their own personal code. Yes, even Joker has a code, one rooted in his own concept of criminal honor. My only problem with Bale was his choice (I assume it was his choice) to use a hoarse whisper when shifting from Bruce Wayne to Batman. That was a little lame, but it’s not enough to detract from his overall performance. While I’m at it, I might as well give a brief word about Maggie Gyllenhaal, even though I said I would stick to the three main characters. She wasn’t hot. Sorry, that’s mean but it’s my opinion. It’s unbelievable to me that Harvey and Bruce are in love with this “beautiful” woman. Poor casting.

I could go on and on about this movie. It is not like the corny installments we had in the 90’s, rather the Nolan brothers have crafted a dark, psychologically provocative and emotionally-charged tale that will leave you transfixed. There are many scenes that touch upon the fragile balance between insanity and normalcy, between what is right and wrong, and that call upon us to question what we are capable of when pushed to the brink. Words almost don’t do this movie justice, but words are all I have. It was an experience, and if rumors of Ledger being in contention for a posthumous Academy Award are true – he is most deserving. Yes, Jack Nicholson did his THING back in the day, and I take nothing away from Jack – but Heath completely freaked this role. As a matter of fact, no one else can fill his shoes. There, I said it. To the Nolan brothers: don’t let anyone else play the Joker. Heath smashed it, it’s done. Sorry for the rant, but if you are a fan of movies, not just comic book movies or action movies, but real movies: go see The Dark Knight. Spiderman, Superman, Iron Man, Hulk – step your game up because the bar hasn’t just been raised, to borrow a line from Jay-Z: this is high level, not eye level.

Wanted

This was a cool little number, though not as dope as it tried to be. Morgan Freeman, Angelina Jolie, and newcomer James McAvoy (never heard of him until now) star as members of a secret society of assassins known as “the fraternity.” McAvoy is Wesley Gibson, a disaffected twenty-something whose life is one monotonous and miserable blur. His girlfriend is screwing his best friend, his boss is a bitch, and to top it off he’s a wuss who suffers from panic attacks. So yeah, his life pretty much sucks - until the day he is recruited by the fraternity.

Jolie is Fox, a member of the fraternity who swoops into Wesley’s life and turns it upside down. Morgan Freeman, well you can just call him the boss. The fraternity transforms Wesley into one of their own, and it was riveting to see the metamorphosis take place. There are lots of bullets and blood, and just some generally ill-looking stunts and action sequences. There’s good character development, and McAvoy was believable as the weakling turned ruthless killer. Angelina is badass, always. She can play this type of character in her sleep, so she wasn’t stretching with this role, but it was a good one. Morgan Freeman is a legend, he always comes correct. Common also had a small part, so good for him. I have no complaints about the cast. My only criticism of Wanted is that it felt a little self-aware. I think there was a conscious effort to make the movie seem fresh, irreverent, and different. I was reminded of Ed Norton's character in Fight Club while watching some of the early scenes depicting Wesley's life, though of course Wanted is definitely not in the same league as Fight Club. And don’t get me wrong – the movie was dope so it obviously worked, I just think it tried too hard in certain parts. I don’t know. I’ve reached the point where I’ve stopped making sense so I’ll wrap it up :-). Overall, I’d say you can’t really go wrong with Wanted. It was entertaining, action-packed, and even had a few twists and turns along the way. Good $hit.

The Incredible Hulk

Now is the season for movie studios to roll out their blockbuster comic book movies, and the field is a little crowded this summer, with three that I can think of offhand (Iron Man, The Incredible Hulk, and The Dark Knight). If you broaden the category to include superhero movies generally, than I guess you can add Will Smith's upcoming Hancock to the mix, bringing the total to four.

Marvel brought us Iron Man a short while ago, and now we have The Incredible Hulk, which sort of seems like a sequel to 2003's Hulk, but not really. New director, new leading man, new love interest, and it doesn't seem like the new story picks up where the last one left off, so I don't know what's up with that. The new one stars Ed Norton (Rounders), whom I LOVE. No movie he's in can ever be that bad. I must admit that the caliber of actors portraying these comic book characters is quite good. Norton takes the reigns over from Eric Bana (the last Hulk) as Bruce Banner, the scientist whose experiment goes horribly wrong, transforming him into a mammoth green monster. The movie opens with a refresher that rolls during the opening credits, if you pay attention. We see Bruce trying his experiment on himself, and then turning into the Hulk. Unbeknownst to Bruce, the experimental drug was intended to be used as a military weapon. Now that he has turned into the Hulk and fled, the Army is after him so they can refine the drug and begin using it. When we meet Bruce he is on the lam, hiding out in Brazil, working in a bottling factory and managing his "condition" with breathing techniques to avoid getting angry and hulking out. William Hurt (Mr. Brooks) is the Army general on his trail, and his daughter Elizabeth (played by Liv Tyler of The Strangers) is the lovely doctor and girlfriend Bruce left behind.

Ed Norton brings a quiet, sympathetic thoughtfulness to Bruce Banner, and he seems like more of a tortured creature than a terrifying monster. This is underscored by the relationship between Bruce and Elizabeth. Their scenes are sweet and tender, both when it's Bruce and Elizabeth and the Hulk and Elizabeth. The latter scenes reminded me of King Kong, watching this huge thing carry a woman in its arms. Despite relying heavily on obvious CGI effects, I still felt that the movie was very good and wasn't hampered by the apparent inauthenticity of the Hulk. You know what's funny though? When the Hulk busts out of his clothes, he manages to keep his pants on. LOL, how is that possible? I mean, I'm not saying I want to see what's underneath, I'm just sayin'. It doesn't make sense. Regarding the performances, Norton and Tyler had good chemistry together. Not much was required of William Hurt or Tim Roth (Gridlock'd) as the villains, but the presence of such accomplished actors can only enhance a movie. All in all, The Incredible Hulk is a worthy addition to the field of comic book flicks coming out this summer.

The Happening

Poor guy. I don't know whether director M. Night Shyamalan should consider himself lucky or snake-bitten. His first chance at bat (The Sixth Sense) resulted in a home run, while his subsequent films have ranged from solid (The Village, in my humble opinion) to average (Signs). I think he will forever be held to the standard he established with The Sixth Sense, which is somewhat unfortunate. I considered that movie to have been groundbreaking, and it's one of my all-time favorites. It's almost unfair to expect Night to duplicate his initial success, but he's become sort of a joke in some circles.

Regarding his latest effort, The Happening, I must say that I enjoyed it. My opinion is not the prevailing sentiment, but I stand behind it. To each her own. I thought the movie was very high-concept on an micro-level, but I know others will take issue with the overarching outer concept, which is a bit fairy-tale ish. I apologize for the cryptic review, but I really don't want to spoil the movie. The Happening chilled me to the bone. Maybe that's lame on my part, but the concept of the movie was horrifying to me, and if it ever really happened in real life it would be the worst thing the U.S. has seen since 9/11, EASILY. Marketed as Night's first R rated movie, opening on Friday 13th, The Happening was absolutely frightening. It basically explores what could happen if Mother Earth decided to punish her children for their misdeeds. Yeah, chew on that one for a second.

As I've mentioned before, I enjoy the psychological questions that doomsday movies present, and there were plenty of moral dilemmas and tough choices raised by the movie. The sense of urgency and panic in the movie resonated deeply with me, and I was on the edge of my seat throughout. Mark Wahlberg is an effective leading man, though he delivered some lines with a little to much wholesome innocence, if that makes any sense. Maybe I'm just used to him playing a bad ass.

Of course this movie is not on the level of The Sixth Sense, and we should stop holding Night to that standard and just enjoy his movies for what they are. For all of you that see this movie, hit me up, I'm curious as to what you think. tanyarlane@gmail.com

The Strangers

Yikes! This one gave me the heebie geebies, I can't lie. The Strangers tells the story of an estranged couple's absolutely terrifying night in a secluded cabin. James and Kristen have attended a friend's wedding, and are spending the night in a cabin belonging to James' family - one where he spent his childhood. We learn that something is wrong with this couple fairly quickly. It seems that Kristen has refused James' marriage proposal, and the two must spend an awkward night together in the cabin. Don't worry, I didn't spoil anything for you: that little detail means nothing. Anyway, I mention that part of the story because it sets the stage early for the nature and progression of their realtionshiop, as events force them together, physically and emotionally. The movie is tinged with sadness from the very beginning. Although the pair have recently ended their relationship, their love and concern for one another is evident throughout the movie. Anyway, on to the stuff you really care about. I'd say that on a scariness scale of 1-10, I'd give it an 8. I think that's pretty good. I can't give it a perfect 10, because certain parts (as with most horror flicks) exasperated me. It started off pretty strong because it was realistic. James and Kristen pretty much reacted the way you or I would. They were placed in a fucked up situation and were at the mercy of others, essentially powerless. Let me tell you about the plot quick-fast, it's really simple: a family (mom, dad, and teenage daughter) are terrorizing James and Kristen. Why? No reason. And that's the scary part. I think it makes us feel better as human beings if we can look at tragedy and say, "well, they did it for revenge, or for money, etc..." When Kristen asks the strangers why they are doing this to her and James, the answer is simple and chilling: "because you were home." Oh shit! I just scared myself. I'm sleeping with the light on.

Sex and the City

The mother of all "chick flicks" arrived and took theaters by storm. Much hyped, highly anticipated, Sex and the City met expectations - both from a financial standpoint and in the minds' of fans. I wasn't an ardent viewer of the show, but I have the first couple of seasons on DVD and knew enough about the series to keep up. The movie did a good job of explaining each character's backstory and history for any first-time viewers. Samantha is as sex-crazed as ever, Charlotte the embodiment of sophisticated motherhood, Miranda the analytical, self-absorbed ladder-climber, and Carrie, the complicated fashionista that holds them all-together. I know that was a corny synopsis, but gimme a break. I'm not trying to do an in-depth character analysis here! They're all a little more complex and not as one-dimensional as I just described, but you get the idea. Call me a slacker, but I'm not going to spend any more time on this review. It is what it is. I think if you were a fan of the show, you won't be disappointed with the movie. Most people were pleased with it. One thing I have to take issue with is the insane level of excitement expressed by some women. One said it was women's version of the Superbowl. Pump your brakes sweetie. More estrogen than the studio audience at the Oprah show, but it was a good time.

Iron Man

For a while there the only Iron Man I knew about was Ghostface Killah, Wu Tang Clan’s loveable lyricist who adopted the alias Tony Starks. Lo* and behold he took the moniker from his favorite comic book hero of the same name. We’ve become inundated with superhero movies over the last several years, and I must admit I enjoy the genre. I think the first Spiderman movie set the bar pretty high, as Hollywood made a marked departure from the cornier superhero movies of the 1980’s (Christopher Reeves’ Superman comes to mind). With that being said, I think Iron Man continues the recent tradition of very good superhero flicks.

Robert Downey Jr. is one of those highly respected, critically acclaimed actors, despite his run-ins with the law and his substance abuse problems. It looks like all that nonsense is a thing of the past and Downey’s got that proverbial swag back. He’s in rare form as Tony Stark, brilliant billionaire weapons developer and ladies’ man extraordinaire. When Stark is taken hostage after traveling to the Middle East to debut a new weapon, he creates “Iron Man” as a means of escape from his cavernous prison. After a series of refinements, Iron Man becomes not only Stark's altar ego, but a highly advanced, sleek weapon in and of himself. I’m not familiar with Iron Man’s bio, so I don’t know if he’ll evolve into the type of hero that saves everyday citizens by foiling bank heists and other such clichéd foolishness, but for the first installment our hero is just focused on making sure his weapons aren’t in the hands of the bad guys.

I must confess that when I look at Robert Downey Jr, I don’t immediately think of him as a superhero, but he did a great job. I guess I didn’t think Tobey Maguire looked like a superhero either, but I’m sure he has everyone sold as Spiderman. My point is that if you’re a good actor first, you can probably successfully portray a superhero or just about anything else. Unless you’re George Clooney in Batman. LOL. Anyway, Iron Man lives up to the hype. It will be interesting to see how it stacks up against the other highly anticipated comic book movies being released later in the summer: The Incredible Hulk and The Dark Knight. For now it’s probably the best movie based on a comic book in recent memory. Actually, I expect The Dark Knight to $hit on everything Iron Man stands for, but we’ll see!


*I am a spelling fiend and I hate misspellings. This is not a typo! You don't put a 'w' in "lo" when it is used this way, as an interjection.

Baby Mama

The premise of this movie seemed hilarious. A responsible woman who has unsuccessfully tried to conceive must rely on a surrogate to get the baby she so desperately wants - the only problem is that the woman carrying her child seems to be a child herself.

Tina Fey (Saturday Night Live) is Kate Holbrook, a successful, single executive who put her professional life ahead of the desire to start a family. Now in her late thirties, Kate’s biological clock has become deafening. When she learns that her oddly shaped uterus makes it unlikely that she’ll be a mommy (the scene w/ the GYN who tells her this news is hilarious), she decides to resort to alternative methods. Enter Angie (Amy Poehler, also of SNL) as a surrogate who doesn’t mind renting out her uterus for the right price. It’s funny because Kate and Angie couldn’t be more different from each other. Whereas Kate is straight-laced and “together,” Angie seems to be stuck in a second childhood. There are a couple of good twists that keep the story moving forward, and the movie wasn’t too predictable. It relied heavily on its premise but also showed Kate evolve from a total career woman into one that is more open for love and willing to let her guard down. Kate and Angie made a good yin and yang duo, with great comedic effect.

Of course I have a few quibbles, or else this wouldn’t be life and I wouldn’t be me. There were a couple of little racial jokes that I found rather offensive. That’s not to say that there wasn’t humor in the jokes, but it was the kind of humor that makes people uncomfortable. I’ll admit I’m sensitive to that sort of thing, and I don’t think it’s a reason not to see the movie. I just didn’t appreciate it, particularly because people tend to believe jokes that come from certain people, i.e. if Chris Rock makes a joke about Black people, Whites will probably think there’s a lot of truth there, after all Chris Rock is Black, right? So it must be true. Maybe, maybe not. Getting back to the movie, I have a problem with what I assume to be a White writer making a joke about the Black community and having a Black actor deliver the line, almost as if that will lend credence to the negative stereotype. Alright, I’m off my soapbox!

Go see the movie, it was good and it has a strong supporting cast featuring the likes of Steve Martin, Sigourney Weaver (most recently of Vantage Point) and Greg Kinnear (Stuck on You). Over and out.

Deception

Deception, the newly-released suspense thriller starring the talented Hugh Jackman (X-Men, The Prestige) and Ewan McGregor (The Island) opened up this past weekend to dismal numbers, coming in 10th place amidst stiffer competition. I thought it was an intriguing movie and I enjoyed it, despite its disappointing finish.

McGregor stars as Jonathan McQuarry, a timid Manhattan accountant who lives a pretty lame existence. While auditing a law firm late one night he meets one of the firm’s partners, Wyatt Bose, both brash and confident. Guys like Wyatt are usually pricks, but for some reason he takes a liking to the awkward Jonathan, with whom he would seemingly have very little in common. They even fire up a doobie right there in the building, and this little bonding experience foreshadows the naughty lifestyle Jonathan will be experiencing now that Wyatt has entered his world. When the two men mistakenly grab each other’s cell phones, the trouble begins. When Jonathan receives a call (on Wyatt’s phone) asking if he’s “free tonight,” he doesn’t exactly go out of his way to tell the female caller that she has the wrong number. He meets the mystery caller in a posh hotel lobby, a beautiful blonde that looks like just the type of woman that would be phoning Wyatt. They go up to a room and Jonathan feebly confesses that he’s not the man she thinks he is. She asks if he’s the guy she spoke to earlier, and when he says yes the protest basically stops right there. This beautiful stranger makes love to Jonathan, and thus he embarks on a journey of late night, anonymous frolics with different women, each foray precipitated by a phone call asking “are you free tonight?” Now, of course these calls are intended for Wyatt, and Jonathan tells Wyatt about them. Wyatt encourages him to lose his inhibitions and enjoy himself, which he does. Things go awry (as they always do), but I don’t want to give too much away. Suffice to say that Wyatt isn’t the friend Jonathan assumed he was. The two end up engaging in a battle of wits with a mysterious femme fatale (Michelle Williams, Brokeback Mountain) acting as centerpiece.

Whew, I’ve said a mouthful, more than I intended. Deception was stylish and sexy to watch, but was noticeably flawed, particularly towards the end where a good twist was followed by events that defied logic. There was something about this movie that I liked though. Hugh Jackman was perfect as a handsome narcissist who preys on the weak, and McGregor was believable as the straight arrow who gets in over his head. I don’t think the movie’s eye-rolling implausibilities detracted from the overall noir, sleek feel of the film. It wasn't as smart or provocative as Eyes Wide Shut, but the vibe was similar and I liked it.

88 Minutes

Al baby, I love you. You know I do. You and Bobby D are two of my faves. *Sigh* I wanted so much more from 88 Minutes. It wasn’t COMPLETELY terrible, but it was not the smart, entertaining thriller I’d hoped for. A very mediocre script led to many little details that didn’t add up or just didn’t make sense. Okay, I’m getting ahead of myself; let me set it up for you in case you don’t know the plot.

Al Pacino (most recently of Ocean's 13) is Jack Gramm, a psychologist and college professor whose testimony against a serial killer named Jon Forster resulted in his death sentence. On the day of Forster’s scheduled execution, Gramm receives a phone call from an anonymous caller informing him that he has 88 minutes to live. What follows next is a series of attempts to both frame Dr. Gramm for the serial murders and kill him. We’ve seen people be terrorized over the phone before (Die Hard With a Vengeance and Phone Booth instantly come to mind), and I think the idea is a good one. The problem with 88 minutes is that the cast is alternately annoying (Gramm’s teaching assistant), clichéd (the FBI agents questioning Gramm), or just plain stupid. So many little things failed to make sense, and I can’t discuss all of them here. I’ll give you one though. There’s a part where Gramm pays a cab driver to let him borrow his cab, but the driver sits in the back seat. Why the F did this happen? Gramm didn’t speed, so it wasn’t because he needed to drive the way he wanted; he let the cabbie remain in the car – so obviously the destination was not a secret; and he never used the cabbie as a distraction or as a means to trick the person who had been threatening and trying to kill him. It might seem insignificant, but it jumped out at me and I thought it was ridiculous. I thought the movie's premise was a good one, but the execution was rather disappointing. Sorry Al, although your presence alone was enough to get me in the theater, it is not enough to save this movie. 6 out of 10, and that’s generous.

Street Kings

This movie just popped up outta nowhere, real random-like. I like random, so I figured, why not? Street Kings looks like your typical cops vs. bad guys shoot ‘em up, and that’s pretty much what it was. It was a little smarter than your typical variation, so I must admit I was pleasantly entertained by this gritty depiction of the unabashedly corrupt LAPD.

Street Kings stars Keanu Reeves (The Lake House) as Detective Tom Ludlow and Forest Whitaker (Vantage Point) as Captain Jack Wander. The opening scene sets the tone of the movie, as we see Ludlow abandoning the 4th amendment to nab some particularly nasty bad guys. He’s like a one-man wrecking crew, and it earns him the respect of Captain Wander, his mentor and protector in the department. Keanu Reeves is alright with me, I just think he always sounds like a surfer dude. He has an unwavering deadpan delivery. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn’t, but I thought he was serviceable as Detective Ludlow. His delivery lent authenticity to some of his character’s personality traits, particularly Ludlow’s naiveté to the widespread, far-reaching corruption in the department. Another thing I liked about the movie was that the director (or cinematographer, whoever) made the City of Angels appear very dark and ominous – the atmosphere was tense, which I think is a marked departure from the way L.A. usually is portrayed in film. David Ayers (the director) has written, directed, or produced several movies set in L.A., and his familiarity with the setting was an asset to the movie. He has a knack for showing the city’s underbelly, which made the movie better than I thought it would be.

Street Kings was worthwhile, nothing you’ll rave about to your friends, but certainly worth checking out. If you get past the violence and profanity (rated R, no doubt), there are some good performances from Whitaker (of course) and Chris Evans (Fantastic Four) as a straight-laced detective who teams up with Ludlow. A strong 7 out of 10.

20 questions: UNC-Kansas edition

I haven't ranted in a while, so

1) what's more rant-worthy than the debacle of watching my alma mater get thrashed on national television in the most important game of the year?
2) why did i bet on the game?
3) where was the team i watched all year?
4) why did they come out flat?
5) is kansas really that good, OR
6) were we that bad?
7) does asking #5 make me a sore loser?
8) am i a typical, arrogant tar heel?
9) why didn't i know kansas was that good?
10) why did i place my bet AFTER i dreamt that we'd lose?
11) why didn't anyone tell me it was bad luck to bet on your favorite team BEFORE i placed the bet?
12) why is roy still torn between kansas and north carolina?
13) why couldn't kansas have lost to davidson in the elite 8?
14) why did i make a fool of myself while watching the game?
15) should i just be happy because memphis would've beaten us anyway?
16) why couldn't the ball get in the damn hole?
17) why are you talking SHIT to me if you are not a LEGITIMATE Jayhawk or Tiger??? Your team is not better than mine!
18) was this karma?
19) why is roy williams staying behind in san antonio to watch and CHEER for kansas in the championship game when they just trounced us?????!!!!!!!!!!
20) am i the craziest most rabid diehard tar heel in the state of MD??

21

Vegas hasn’t jumped the shark yet. It seems like within the last 5-10 years, Sin City has mushroomed in popularity, if that’s possible. I don’t know…maybe people have always been allured by a city out in the desert where vices can be explored in anonymity. A place where, as one character in 21 so aptly put it, “you can become anyone.”

It is that decadent, hedonistic ambience that attracts Ben Campbell, a broke MIT senior with aspirations of attending Harvard Medical School. Ben’s a genius, even by MIT standards. When he impresses one of his professors (Kevin Spacey, Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil), he is offered the chance of a lifetime – an opportunity to make more money than he’s ever seen. It seems as if Mickey, the good professor, has been leading a team of students in a most interesting extra-curricular activity: high stakes Blackjack aka 21. Every weekend they fly to Vegas where they unleash their brilliant minds on an unsuspecting casino by counting cards. They’d like Ben to join them, as he’s one of the most gifted students in his class. His crush, team member Jill Taylor (Kate Bosworth, Superman Returns) provides a little incentive, and soon Ben has entered a world previously seen in his dreams. In the words of Jim Jones, Ben is BALLLLINNNNNNNNNNNN. He claims that he’s saving money for med school tuition ($300K), and as soon as he gets that amount, he’s out. Of course the excitement of living a double life becomes intoxicating and he gets in too deep.

What I liked about 21 was that I got sucked in right along with Ben. Vegas is depicted as a separate universe, some otherworldly sensory paradise. The contrast between Vegas and Ben’s normal life in Boston was stark. Although he seemed to be living a fantasy, nothing seemed farfetched, which I guess is explained by the fact that the movie was inspired by a true story. This was the best movie I’ve seen lately, and it was well-acted and held my attention throughout. The main character was likable without being annoying and sympathetic without being wimpy. Kevin Spacey portrays Mickey as a presumably thoughtful professor, but we get a hint that something is not quite right. Laurence Fishburne (Akeelah and the Bee) also made an appearance as a casino employee who smells something fishy. 21 is a must-see Vegas movie. If you liked Rounders or Ocean’s 11-13 you will probably enjoy 21 as well.

Stop-Loss

I wanted to see this movie because it seemed moving and relevant. I wasn’t familiar with the military’s stop-loss policy, so I did some research to find out about it. It’s basically a clause in a soldier’s contract that allows the president to extend his period of service. It sucks because it’s like a “backdoor draft.” Like Carlito said, just when you think you’re out, they pull you back in.

Ryan Phillippe (Crash) is Brandon King, a decorated Army sergeant who just led his men into a deadly ambush in Iraq. One man was lost, and another was seriously wounded. When he returns home to Texas he reminds anyone who’ll listen that he’s done his time and is getting out. When he goes to turn in all of his equipment, he’s informed that he has been stop-lossed and will be re-deployed to Iraq. What follows is a depiction of Brandon’s struggle to accept the fact that Uncle Sam basically owns his ass. He panics, he feels helpless, angry, and betrayed. He served his country as a loyal patriot and feels like the Army is not keeping their end of the bargain. The movie is unabashedly critical of the war, showing the cruelty of the stop-loss policy and the horrors of Iraq. However, it also shows the flipside of Phillippe’s character in the form of his best friend, Steve Shriver (Channing Tatum, Step Up). Steve is all about the red, white, and blue through and through. In a way they all are: Steve, Brandon (initially), and fellow soldier Tommy.

Stop-Loss was okay. Ryan Phillippe is a very very good actor. He infused Brandon with the appropriate amount of anger and heroism. His character wants out of Iraq, but he never seemed weak or cowardly, and I think that’s a reflection of the confidence and bravado Phillippe brought to the role. Of course I have criticisms, and they really stood out. Stop-Loss was produced by MTV Films, which may explain the music video-ish approach to some of the Iraq montage scenes in the movie. It also felt a little formulaic. Soldiers joking around and displaying juvenile male camaraderie? Check. Lots of pushing and shoving? Check. Cursory portrayal of post traumatic stress disorder? Check. Regarding the performances, I think Channing Tatum is a capable actor. He cried convincingly and I was impressed by that. He’s also nice to look at. My problem is that there was a 10 minute stretch when he broke into a TX drawl, and then he resumed his normal speaking voice. It was obvious. Does your character have an accent or not??!! I mean, I always wonder how no one catches the fact that a character is dropping in and out of an accent. I can excuse one word or two, but this was more than a slip. I’ll keep the other criticisms to myself so I don’t give anything away. I don’t think Stop-Loss stacks up well against other war movies. Jarhead puts it to shame, and I won’t even mention any of the older classics that portrayed the Vietnam War. Stop-Loss’ value lies in its current relevance, and it will be remembered as capturing people’s dissatisfaction and frustration with the war in Iraq. There’s something to be said for that, but the movie was solid, not great. It’s also depressing, so I wouldn’t see it unless you’re a fan of Phillippe or Channing Tatum. If you are then I’m sure you’ll enjoy.

Meet the Browns

Tyler Perry. I don’t fool with him too tough, but I saw Meet the Browns anyway – mostly just to hang out with my mom. I’ll try to go easy on Mr. Perry this time. The movie actually wasn’t half bad…which also means it was only half good. LOL.

One positive thing about the movie was that it starred Angela Basset (Akeelah and the Bee), with whom you can never go wrong. My only criticism (if you could call it that) of her is the same one I had of Forrest Whitaker in Vantage Point, which is that sometimes they come across as being bigger than their roles. In Meet the Browns Bassett portrays Brenda, a financially strapped single mom living in Chicago with her three children. Her eldest son is an aspiring professional basketball player (Lance Gross), and she is challenged with keeping him off the streets after he tries to hustle to provide money for the family when Brenda loses her job. Yeah, that part is a bit cliché, but okay – I can deal with that. I’m sure it’s not too far from a lot of people’s reality, especially in urban areas across the U.S. Rick Fox is a basketball coach named Harry who takes an interest in Brenda’s son. Brenda is naturally wary of him, as she’s been burnt by every man in her life, from her son’s father to her own father, whom she never knew. Again, this is familiar territory; we know how it’ll end. Boy meets girl. Girl disses boy. Boy wins girl in the end….yaaay! Can I go home now? Seriously, I don’t mind if I know how a movie will end up, at least let me have fun getting there. To Perry’s credit, Meet the Browns is funny. A large portion of the movie takes place in Georgia, where Brenda travels when she finds out that her father has passed away. As the title suggests, she meets her relatives for the first time, and this is where the comedic action takes place. Perry does a good job of balancing drama with humor, and he does allow Bassett to show her skills…my only negative observation is the writing. In some places the script is very contrived. I know that’s the nature of the movies, in some respects, but come on. For example, Harry just so happens to be from the same small Georgia town as Brenda’s family, and they meet up there. What??? Yeah RIGHT! They met in the large metropolis of Chicago, yet they both have roots in some podunk Georgia town and reconnect there. I mean, it’s not even like its Atlanta or something, which would still be implausible but a little more believable. They both are from a one horse town…just not buying it. Another thing I don’t care for is Madea, but that’s just me. “Her” appearance was really unnecessary and not all that funny. It was just an excuse for Perry to show up in his own movie. Don’t worry TP, we know it’s your movie – your name always precedes the title.

In sum, as with all of Perry’s movies, either you like ‘em or you don’t. Simple as that. Nothing I’ve said here will persuade or dissuade you from seeing it. So, have at it! :-)

Semi-Pro

Will Ferrell (Anchorman, Blades of Glory) is back with his unique brand of foolishness for Semi-Pro, the story of the fictional Flint Tropics, a rag tag ABA team with hopes of joining the NBA. What can I say about this movie? Any comedy set in 1976 is already halfway there with the silliness factor. I love the seventies though, I wish I was more than a gleam in my parents' eye back then. Anyway, Ferrell stars as Jackie Moon, a player for the Tropics and also the owner. The Tropics are pretty pitiful, with the exception of Coffee Black, played by Andre 3000 (Idlewild). Attendance is sparse, and the Tropics really just serve as a means by which Jackie can make money and have fun. All that changes when the Tropics have a chance to be absorbed by the NBA in the ABA-NBA merger of '76. If the Tropics can finish in the top 4 of the ABA standings, they will be absorbed. Now Jackie decides to ratchet up the intensity and effort to vy for the last NBA slot. He brings in additional talent in the form of Monix, played by Woody Harrelson (No Country for Old Men). Monix revamps the team while Jackie increases attendance through ridiculous stunts, like bear wrestling and free corndog night. LOL.

Ok, enough of the plot, because this is really all about watching Will Ferrell act like a fool, something he is very adept at doing. Jackie is a pretty funny character. In addition to owning the Tropics, he also had a number one hit called "Love Me Sexy," which plays during the opening credits. HEE LARRY OUS. Semi-Pro is better than I thought it'd be. Will Ferrell movies are hit or miss - for example, I didn't enjoy Blades of Glory that much. Semi-Pro isn't an instant classic, but it's certainly funny and worth checking out if you're a fan of Ferrell.

The Wire

WARNING: MAD SPOILERS

As you know, I don't often write about tv shows, but it's the end of an era, so I have to do it. Wipe your eyes, for The Wire must now bid us adieu.

For 5 seasons we've watched cops, various kingpins and minor players, and a host of politicians take us away to another world, one that is foreign yet familar. Foreign because most of us will never live a life as dangerous or volatile as the characters on The Wire, but familar because Baltimore could be Anycity, USA. Creator David Simon has left a masterpiece that will be remembered as one of the best and most underrated series of the 21st century. What I've always found most intriguing about The Wire is that it consistently challenged our notions of good and evil. The portrayal of that complexity of human nature is what made it such a compelling series. People are not black and white, the world is not black and white. The Wire lived in that gray area between those two shades. Whether it was the depiction of Omar as some twisted, ghetto Robin Hood, or McNulty as a good cop with nasty habits -- The Wire always left me with something to think about, and quite often left me reeling.

The series finale last night was a befitting end to a great series. While not perfect, it was a good resolution to the conflicts we've seen arise in this final season. I will assume all of those reading this review are familiar with the series, so the background info I provide will be sparse, if any.

McNulty and Freamon: They manage to avoid any real trouble for the homeless killer clusterfuck. They get booted from the department, which sucks b/c these two are literally Baltimore's finest. It's a small price to pay though, when you think about them avoiding jail time, which was a real possibility. Wasn't it a little convenient that a copycat killer struck at the right time, allowing Carcetti and co. to wrap up the situation nicely? What would they have done if that hadn't happened, was the homeless killer going to just disappear, never to be heard from again? I guess it doesn't matter. I'll cut David Simon some slack on that one. I think it's plausible that the two of them got away with it, because Carcetti's ass was in a sling, so the whole thing had to be quieted, fast.

Scott Templeton and The Baltimore Sun: What a fucking worm. I wanted him to get exposed for the sniveling fraud that he was. Why didn't Gus give all the evidence he had on Scott to the other editors? Maybe he thought it would fall on deaf ears, but why get his buddy to compile it in the first place? Perhaps he wanted it as an insurance policy of some sort. I thought The Sun angle was a great one, showing how the important news is neglected, or misinterpreted if it's reported at all.

Carcetti & Co.: Well, I thought Carcetti was alright at first. I thought he was idealistic and well-intentioned, but I should have remembered back to when he was nailing his campaign manager that he was a sleaze. Believe it or not, I think less of him for "juking" the crime stats than I do for covering up the homeless killer fiasco. I can understand making an unethical choice when your back's up against the wall, but why'd he have to fudge the numbers too? He's just like everyone else, which brings me to another theme running through The Wire: INEVITABILITY. Was it inevitable that Carcetti would get dirty? In a way, yes. More on inevitablility later.

Kima: I'm done with ole girl. Nothing anyone can tell me can justify her snitching, and I've heard a few explanations. No, I'm not buying it. McNulty and Freamon could have gone to JAIL. And I'm not buying that she's such a straight arrow (no pun intended) that she just couldn't sleep at night while good cops were investigating a phony killer. So fucking what, big deal. There have been plenty of shady goings on within the department to which she turned a blind eye ("Hamsterdam," anyone?), but now she has to blow the whistle?? No, she violated, plain and simple. Freamon and McNulty were very kind to forgive her betrayal.

Marlo: I hate him. He has no respect. No respect for Prop Joe, no respect for anything. He's unrefined and unlikable. He is no Stringer either, did you see him at that swanky affair with his lawyer? He looked like a fish out of water. Couldn't someone have popped him in the head like Cheese or Omar? He's one lucky MF. Oh, and I don't believe that the Greeks would be so willing to start doing business with Slim Charles and the rest of the co-op. They needed a lot of nudging to do business with Marlo, so I'm not buying that they would hop right in with some new players. I know money talks and bullshit walks, but I don't think it's about the money with them. Remember how they insisted that Marlo bring them "clean" money? I doubt some individuals who are that particular would be amenable to a new situation. Oh well, small point.

Michael: Omar 2.0. The biggest parallel I see between the two is that they both lived by a unique code of ethics, both willing to murder - but only if the unlucky victim is "deserving." I would even venture that Michael admired Omar's principles. Omar never gave it to somebody who didn't have it coming, and I think Michael is the same way. He always questioned his orders, always asked why. Again I ask, was it inevitable that Michael ended up this way? I say yes, it was written. Another victim of circumstance.

Dookie: This is maybe the saddest part of the finale. The inevitability of Dookie's descent, his transformation into Bubbles 2.0. Again, The Wire makes you uncomfortable with its harsh realism. Dookie was a good kid. He was looking for work. He wasn't cut out to be a corner boy. He came from a shitty home and had no one. INEVITABLE.

Bubbles: I have to end on a good note. There has to be balance between tragedy and triumph, and it was good to see Bubbs come out on top. He was always a good-hearted person. He wasn't just a fiend looking for a fix, he was a layered individual, as were almost all of The Wire characters. I'll tell you, it is a testament to the quality of a show when ALL of the characters are so incredibly nuanced. Simply brilliant.

Damn I love this show, and it will be missed. It never received the critical acclaim it deserved, and I can't figure out why. It gave you everything you wanted: the joy and pain, highs and lows, and it endeared you to the so-called villain because it always portrayed the human element. I had the pleasure of discussing the series on a radio show, and I think it is ripe for dissection. The Wire not only entertained - it educated and it inspired. The end of an era.

The Bank Job

The heist/caper genre is usually a reliable one. I’m always entertained by the new methods Hollywood comes up with to tell the familiar tale of a band of misfits with their eyes on a seemingly unattainable prize. Whether it’s the clever approach of the robbery in Inside Man, the intricacies of the Ocean’s Eleven plot, or the innovative swipe in The Thomas Crown Affair, I love watching the so-called “bad” guys pull it off. If you’ve seen one caper, have you seen them all? I don’t think so.

The Bank Job’s title is straight to the point. Quite simply, a small band of crooks is planning to rob a bank vault. Leading the crew is Terry (Jason Statham, Crank), a small-time body shop owner desperate to get out of debt. The robbery idea was hatched by Martine Love, an old acquaintance who resurfaces with the plan. Terry rounds up a few more people, and the gang is in place. Problems arise when it appears that Martine’s motives for the job aren’t just to get rich. It seems she’s after the contents of one particular safe deposit box, and may have jeopardized the crew and pissed off the wrong London thugs in the process. What made this movie so fun was that the crew was getting it from all angles: dodging crooked cops, the British government, and the local hoods. Pretty cool, and it’s all based on a true story, which lends a certain air of realness to all the unbelievable predicaments in which they find themselves. Set in 1971, the movie touches on the Black power movement abroad, and Black militancy, as one of the vault’s boxes contains incriminating photos taken by a Black militant who is using them as leverage against the British government. Sounds farfetched, but apparently it’s true!

I like Jason Statham because he’s one of those ruggedly handsome actors that appeals to men and women equally. He’s attractive but not soft. This is probably the most acting I’ve seen him do, as he’s usually kicking ass all over the place. He didn’t resort to fisticuffs until the movie’s final act, but I knew it was coming eventually. The Bank Job is one of those fast-paced mile-a-minute movies that assaults your senses and keeps you fixated the entire time. I mean, it starts with a threesome for crying out loud. I’m like okaaaaaay, I’m here with my mom. LOL. Anyway, I really dug it, it reminded me of Snatch or Lock, Stock and Two Smokin’ Barrels. You won’t be disappointed if you’re a fan of the genre. Even if you’re not, who doesn’t like a good caper flick?

Vantage Point

This movie was pretty funny. What’s that you say, it wasn’t a comedy? Oh shit. Could’ve fooled me. I, along with the rest of the audience, got in a few good snickers. Call Vantage Point another squandering of immense talent. While certainly not terrible, I can’t say it was very good.

The movie examines the chaotic aftermath of an assassination attempt on the president that takes place in Spain, as the US and Spain prepare to enter into some sort of vague (trade?) agreement. As the title suggests, we see the event from multiple vantage points. We see it in “real time” initially, then the events “rewind” to several minutes before the attempt, and we see a new perspective. I don’t mind this technique, but I understand how it can be exasperating. After about the FOURTH time, the theater was laughing and groaning audibly. I don’t think that was the intended reaction. Marketed as a political action thriller with suspenseful twists and turns, Vantage Point failed to live up to its hype and instead played like a hodgepodge of stories, none of which was particularly intriguing - at least not to me. You’d think someone could make a better use of Forest Whitaker (The Last King of Scotland), Sigourney Weaver (The Village), and William Hurt (A History of Violence). These three are Oscar winners/nominees, and I think their combined presence elevates a movie, but they weren’t really used properly. For example, Forest Whitaker is superb, but his performance just seemed overdone – like it was too big for this silly little movie, if that makes any sense. It’s like I’m criticizing him for being too good, which is weird, I know. Sigourney Weaver had a throwaway role, which didn’t require much. She was onscreen for about 10-15 minutes, and that was it. William Hurt as the president did nothing more than act as a helpless victim, waiting for Dennis Quaid to save him. They had one really corny exchange at the end, where I thought they were actually going to kiss!

The theater I went to was packed, and I’m sure people expected a little more. Don’t get me wrong, Vantage Point wasn’t a total waste, but I had high expectations. I thought the plot devices were overdone, and the interlocking storylines felt superficial and contrived. It is what it is: a forgettable contribution to the political thriller genre.