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.
Monday, April 28, 2008
Monday, April 21, 2008
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.
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.
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.
Monday, April 07, 2008
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??
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??
Thursday, April 03, 2008
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.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)