Denzel Washington rejoins director Tony Scott (Man on Fire, Deja Vu) in The Taking of Pelham 123, the movie adaptation of a novel I vaguely remember reading as a kid. Scott likes to blow stuff up, and neither Washington nor co-star John Travolta is a stranger to the summer action flick. Sounds like a formulaic recipe for success.
Washington plays Walter Garber, a hard-working “everyman” employed by New York City’s public transportation system. His job is to oversee the subway line from the control center, which contains maps and electronic grids of the underground system. His day seems like any other, until he crosses paths with John Travolta’s character, a loose cannon who calls himself Ryder. Ryder gets the bright idea to hijack a subway car and hold its passengers hostage until the city agrees to pay him 10 million dollars. He is communicating with Garber at the control center and gives him an hour to come up with the money, or he will begin killing hostages for every minute the money is late. And dude is not playing. The unique thing about the movie was that it didn’t fall into the Hollywood trap of following the “happy ending” rules. I’m not revealing whether or not the movie ends happily, just that conventional methods are not followed here. Innocent people die, a marked departure from traditional summertime popcorn movie formula. Scott effectively captures the atmosphere of the city, with lots of panoramic shots overlooking Manhattan. The writers kept the action and dialogue between the two leads, and didn’t focus the storyline on any passengers too heavily, which effectively dumbed the movie down, in my opinion. I enjoy a good action thriller as much as the next person and I think the best ones manage to entertain while still throwing in a twist or two. That didn’t happen here. There was no intriguing reason for Ryder’s decision to hijack the train. Nope, just good old-fashioned greed. That’s fine, but it would have been interesting if there were more gray area or plot twists regarding corruption or secondary unexpected implication of another character.
Working with what we have, the movie was fairly decent and entertaining. No movie with Denzel Washington is ever actually bad, and this one was better than his last pairing with Tony Scott, Déjà vu. He effectively conveys Garber’s reluctant heroism, and he and Travolta have a couple of good scenes together, which is no small feat since they don’t actually come face-to-face until well into the movie. For me personally, Travolta is beginning to creep into Nicolas Cage spaz territory. He is almost becoming an Al Pacino parody of himself. The gesticulation, the spazzing out, it’s becoming comical. He says MF a lot too, which he seems to enjoy. Alas, I digress. There’s nothing to dislike about The Taking of Pelham 123, and thus I give it my tepid endorsement. The script could have been a little smarter, but it was entertaining and straightforward, never trying to be more than it was: a summertime action thriller for the masses.
This review first appeared at http://poptimal.com/2009/06/the-taking-of-pelham-123/ and was reprinted with permission.
Thursday, June 18, 2009
Friday, May 01, 2009
Obsessed
This was an interesting movie to review. On one hand it didn’t break any new ground, but on the other hand it was immensely entertaining, if the audience in my theater was any indication. Idris Elba (Rock n Rolla) and Beyonce Knowles (Cadillac Records) star in Obsessed, a cross between Fatal Attraction and Disclosure. The fact that I can readily reference those two movies is an indication that Obsessed is a rip-off of more substantive films of the same genre. Whereas Fatal Attraction established the standard for the genre, Obsessed will wind up being another forgettable addition. If there was an award for eye candy, Idris Elba would win quite easily. Unfortunately, I think any other accolades will prove elusive, at least for this role.
Elba plays Derek, a handsome type-A executive with a lovely wife named Sharon and an adorable infant son. The pair has just purchased a new home and seems to be very happy. Their blissful existence is short-lived, as a new temp at Derek’s company makes her presence felt. Lisa (Ali Larter) is assigned to fill in for Derek’s assistant, and begins to drop hints that she’d like more than a professional relationship with him. She’s attractive and aggressive, but Derek remains committed to his wife and rebuffs her advances repeatedly. The broad is really crazy, it’s like she’s delusional, or hard of hearing. She starts with subtle, inappropriate hints and eventually escalates to downright sexual assault, even drugging Derek at one point. She corners him in a bathroom stall and practically forces him to physically restrain her. Things come to a head when the police get involved after an incident. I don’t want to give away too much, suffice to say that by this point Derek and Sharon are living in fear. Here’s my problem with Obsessed. It was not a smart movie. It was formulaic and derivative. There was never an explanation offered for Lisa’s crazy behavior. There was no basis for it, considering that she and Derek never actually slept together. Not that I wanted them to – but I found it hard to believe that it would go as far as it did since they never “sealed the deal.” Derek was the picture of class and fidelity, but we see that some questionable decisions lead to trouble for he and Sharon. The movie ends predictably and happily, as I suspected. The performances were fine, but I don’t believe that either actor was challenged much by the material. Been there, done that – and it’s been done better. Obsessed was an average movie that had its entertaining moments, but it hardly stands out as a cant-miss summer movie. Bring on Wolverine
This review also appears at www.poptimal.com and was reprinted with permission.
Elba plays Derek, a handsome type-A executive with a lovely wife named Sharon and an adorable infant son. The pair has just purchased a new home and seems to be very happy. Their blissful existence is short-lived, as a new temp at Derek’s company makes her presence felt. Lisa (Ali Larter) is assigned to fill in for Derek’s assistant, and begins to drop hints that she’d like more than a professional relationship with him. She’s attractive and aggressive, but Derek remains committed to his wife and rebuffs her advances repeatedly. The broad is really crazy, it’s like she’s delusional, or hard of hearing. She starts with subtle, inappropriate hints and eventually escalates to downright sexual assault, even drugging Derek at one point. She corners him in a bathroom stall and practically forces him to physically restrain her. Things come to a head when the police get involved after an incident. I don’t want to give away too much, suffice to say that by this point Derek and Sharon are living in fear. Here’s my problem with Obsessed. It was not a smart movie. It was formulaic and derivative. There was never an explanation offered for Lisa’s crazy behavior. There was no basis for it, considering that she and Derek never actually slept together. Not that I wanted them to – but I found it hard to believe that it would go as far as it did since they never “sealed the deal.” Derek was the picture of class and fidelity, but we see that some questionable decisions lead to trouble for he and Sharon. The movie ends predictably and happily, as I suspected. The performances were fine, but I don’t believe that either actor was challenged much by the material. Been there, done that – and it’s been done better. Obsessed was an average movie that had its entertaining moments, but it hardly stands out as a cant-miss summer movie. Bring on Wolverine
This review also appears at www.poptimal.com and was reprinted with permission.
State of Play
I was mildly excited about State of Play, as it looked like the type of smart political thriller I typically enjoy. I thought it would be in the same vein of the classic Three Days of the Condor or at least as good as 2007’s Lions for Lambs. While it was a fairly decent movie, it was not as good as either of those I just mentioned.
Russell Crowe (American Gangster) stars as an investigative reporter who is looking into the death of a congressman’s mistress. Ben Affleck (Hollywoodland) gives a turn as the congressman, Stephen Collins. Helen Mirren (Shadowboxer) plays Crowe’s editor at the newspaper, and Rachel McAdams (Red Eye) is a fellow reporter. My problem with the movie was that it went out of its way to present one situation when the truth ended up being with another scenario that was obvious all along. I know that sounds vague, but the gist is that the movie seemed disingenuous and anti-climactic. Despite boasting an above-average cast, State of Play was not the smart thriller I’d hoped. Russell Crowe was fine, as was Ben Affleck, but it just wasn’t enough. Obviously the congressman will be implicated initially when news breaks that he was having an affair with the young woman who was killed. If you are going to eventually expose him, then don’t go out of your way to make it seem like he is innocent. That feels like a bait and switch to me. State of Play is a solid pay-per-view or Netflix choice, but if you’re looking for the next great political thriller, I’d suggest you keep it moving.
Russell Crowe (American Gangster) stars as an investigative reporter who is looking into the death of a congressman’s mistress. Ben Affleck (Hollywoodland) gives a turn as the congressman, Stephen Collins. Helen Mirren (Shadowboxer) plays Crowe’s editor at the newspaper, and Rachel McAdams (Red Eye) is a fellow reporter. My problem with the movie was that it went out of its way to present one situation when the truth ended up being with another scenario that was obvious all along. I know that sounds vague, but the gist is that the movie seemed disingenuous and anti-climactic. Despite boasting an above-average cast, State of Play was not the smart thriller I’d hoped. Russell Crowe was fine, as was Ben Affleck, but it just wasn’t enough. Obviously the congressman will be implicated initially when news breaks that he was having an affair with the young woman who was killed. If you are going to eventually expose him, then don’t go out of your way to make it seem like he is innocent. That feels like a bait and switch to me. State of Play is a solid pay-per-view or Netflix choice, but if you’re looking for the next great political thriller, I’d suggest you keep it moving.
Sunday, April 12, 2009
Knowing
I broke my Nicolas Cage rule to check out Knowing last week. My Nicolas Cage rule is pretty simple. I basically don’t pay to see movies that feature him heavily. I find him to be rather annoying and rarely worth the ticket price. It’s a personal thing. His quirks and mannerisms just get under my skin. Fortunately, I found him to be tolerable in Knowing, a movie that both intrigued and disturbed me.
Its premise was an interesting one. In a small Massachusetts town in the 1950s, an elementary school class buries a time capsule. 50 years later the capsule is uncovered, its contents distributed to a new generation. Among the items is a mysterious piece of paper with several series of numbers. Nicolas Cage plays John Koestler, a widowed college professor. It is John’s son Caleb who ends up with the numerical code. John decodes the numbers, and discovers its chilling meaning. The code represents an accurate catalogue of every global disaster over the last century. All of the events have happened in the past, save for two that are supposed to happen in the future. The code features the date and number of fatalities associated with each event. John is unsure about a certain portion of the code and contacts the adult daughter of the code’s author, a woman about his age with a daughter close in age to Caleb. How convenient. The woman is unhelpful, but John discovers the remaining numbers’ meaning on his own when he unwittingly witnesses the next disaster. While on his way to visit the woman he witnesses/experiences a plane crash from the ground, fulfilling the code’s prophecy. He realizes that the remaining numbers provide the events’ location. In the midst of all this, Caleb is being visited by random creepy, pale, trench coat-clad people who whisper to him. Coincidentally, the “whisper people” also visit the daughter of Nicolas Cage’s new lady friend. In a truly frightening scene, one of the whisper people reveals a chilling scene to Caleb. He shows Caleb a world being destroyed by the equivalent of a nuclear bomb. Trees and animals burn beneath an orange sky, with no human beings in sight.
John tries to reveal the last portion of the code, which was unfinished. He wants to prevent the last tragedy, which as it turns out, is going to wipe out the rest of the planet. The whisper people are actually trying to help Caleb rather than harm him. He and the girl have been chosen to be part of the group that will re-populate the Earth after its initial destruction. This is where the movie got weird and abstract, and a little corny. I don’t mind happy endings, but it just got strange to watch the whisper people morph into aliens and transport the kids up into space. I apologize for the spoilers, but this was a strange movie. The premise was eerily intriguing, and there were some awesome special effects, but I can’t give Knowing much more than a tepid endorsement. The Nic Cage annoyance gauge remained pretty low – which was good – but the movie was just silly enough at the end to dampen my enthusiasm. It was worth seeing but is definitely not a “must see.”
Its premise was an interesting one. In a small Massachusetts town in the 1950s, an elementary school class buries a time capsule. 50 years later the capsule is uncovered, its contents distributed to a new generation. Among the items is a mysterious piece of paper with several series of numbers. Nicolas Cage plays John Koestler, a widowed college professor. It is John’s son Caleb who ends up with the numerical code. John decodes the numbers, and discovers its chilling meaning. The code represents an accurate catalogue of every global disaster over the last century. All of the events have happened in the past, save for two that are supposed to happen in the future. The code features the date and number of fatalities associated with each event. John is unsure about a certain portion of the code and contacts the adult daughter of the code’s author, a woman about his age with a daughter close in age to Caleb. How convenient. The woman is unhelpful, but John discovers the remaining numbers’ meaning on his own when he unwittingly witnesses the next disaster. While on his way to visit the woman he witnesses/experiences a plane crash from the ground, fulfilling the code’s prophecy. He realizes that the remaining numbers provide the events’ location. In the midst of all this, Caleb is being visited by random creepy, pale, trench coat-clad people who whisper to him. Coincidentally, the “whisper people” also visit the daughter of Nicolas Cage’s new lady friend. In a truly frightening scene, one of the whisper people reveals a chilling scene to Caleb. He shows Caleb a world being destroyed by the equivalent of a nuclear bomb. Trees and animals burn beneath an orange sky, with no human beings in sight.
John tries to reveal the last portion of the code, which was unfinished. He wants to prevent the last tragedy, which as it turns out, is going to wipe out the rest of the planet. The whisper people are actually trying to help Caleb rather than harm him. He and the girl have been chosen to be part of the group that will re-populate the Earth after its initial destruction. This is where the movie got weird and abstract, and a little corny. I don’t mind happy endings, but it just got strange to watch the whisper people morph into aliens and transport the kids up into space. I apologize for the spoilers, but this was a strange movie. The premise was eerily intriguing, and there were some awesome special effects, but I can’t give Knowing much more than a tepid endorsement. The Nic Cage annoyance gauge remained pretty low – which was good – but the movie was just silly enough at the end to dampen my enthusiasm. It was worth seeing but is definitely not a “must see.”
Monday, January 26, 2009
Notorious
Sometimes it takes a certain type of viewer to appreciate a certain type of film. We all have our own personal tastes and biases which color the way we perceive things and movies are no exception. Having said that, I enjoyed Notorious more than I thought I would, but that’s probably because I’ve been listening to hip hop since I was in the first grade and the Notorious B.I.G. aka Biggie Smalls aka Frank White was my favorite rapper.
The movie opens with young Christopher Wallace reciting some lyrics with a buddy in the schoolyard. The late rapper’s real life son plays him in the movie, and does a wonderful job capturing his father’s burgeoning love for hip hop. Angela Bassett (Meet the Browns) portrays his mother, Voletta Wallace. She and Christopher have a loving relationship, and share a tender moment when she consoles him about his father’s apathetic approach to parenthood. As Big enters adolescence he yearns for the nicer things in life, and earns a reputation as a fearsome neighborhood emcee. Intelligent but bored with school, he starts hustling. When his mother discovers his illegal activity she gives him the heave ho. Rhyming on the corner one day, he encounters one Kim Jones, who would go on to become the infamous Lil’ Kim. I’ve heard that she was none too pleased with her depiction in the film, and I can’t blame her. She comes across horribly - like a clingy, desperate, and raunchy woman. Her lone redeeming quality (aside from being a gifted lyricist) was her undying loyalty to Big. Unfortunately that loyalty also made her a little pathetic. Faith, in sharp contrast, was depicted as more of the type of woman you wouldn’t mind taking home to meet your mother.
This is a movie for hip hop fans. If you can’t remember rocking to “Juicy” back in the day, or “One More Chance,” you might not appreciate the movie as much as I did. The movie was a revelation in that it showed a side of Christopher Wallace heretofore hidden. I had no idea he was such a caring individual. In his own words he was “black and ugly as ever,” but he never lacked female companionship. The movie illustrated how it was possible for women to fall in love with him, something I never quite understood before. He was funny and charming, both with Kim and Faith. Another aspect of the movie I appreciated was its chronological depiction of his musical career, including the inspiration for his music. I loved one particular scene showing his initial reaction to Puffy’s suggestion that he sample the 1980’s classic “Juicyfruit.” Puff had to convince him to use the beat, and the song went on to become a classic. Little tidbits like that are insightful, and only a hip hop fan can appreciate a detail like that, in my opinion. It also captured Big’s frustration and disappointment with his deteriorating friendship with Tupac, which led to both of their untimely demise.
Notorious is a must-see for all the hip hop heads out there. You can add it to the catalogue along with Belly, Krush Groove, etc. The casting was fantastic, especially when you consider that Jamal Woolard (Big) had no formal acting lessons before this movie. Derek Luke (Catch a Fire) effectively captured Puffy’s hunger and ambition, though his dancing was comical at times. Come to think of it, Puffy’s dancing is comical too, so that actually works. My only criticism of the movie was that some of the dialogue was too expository, and thus a bit contrived. Other than that, there wasn’t much room for improvement. The movie goes a long way in cementing the incredible legacy of one of the best to ever hold a microphone.
This review first appeared at http://poptimal.com/2009/01/notorious/ and was reprinted with permission.
The movie opens with young Christopher Wallace reciting some lyrics with a buddy in the schoolyard. The late rapper’s real life son plays him in the movie, and does a wonderful job capturing his father’s burgeoning love for hip hop. Angela Bassett (Meet the Browns) portrays his mother, Voletta Wallace. She and Christopher have a loving relationship, and share a tender moment when she consoles him about his father’s apathetic approach to parenthood. As Big enters adolescence he yearns for the nicer things in life, and earns a reputation as a fearsome neighborhood emcee. Intelligent but bored with school, he starts hustling. When his mother discovers his illegal activity she gives him the heave ho. Rhyming on the corner one day, he encounters one Kim Jones, who would go on to become the infamous Lil’ Kim. I’ve heard that she was none too pleased with her depiction in the film, and I can’t blame her. She comes across horribly - like a clingy, desperate, and raunchy woman. Her lone redeeming quality (aside from being a gifted lyricist) was her undying loyalty to Big. Unfortunately that loyalty also made her a little pathetic. Faith, in sharp contrast, was depicted as more of the type of woman you wouldn’t mind taking home to meet your mother.
This is a movie for hip hop fans. If you can’t remember rocking to “Juicy” back in the day, or “One More Chance,” you might not appreciate the movie as much as I did. The movie was a revelation in that it showed a side of Christopher Wallace heretofore hidden. I had no idea he was such a caring individual. In his own words he was “black and ugly as ever,” but he never lacked female companionship. The movie illustrated how it was possible for women to fall in love with him, something I never quite understood before. He was funny and charming, both with Kim and Faith. Another aspect of the movie I appreciated was its chronological depiction of his musical career, including the inspiration for his music. I loved one particular scene showing his initial reaction to Puffy’s suggestion that he sample the 1980’s classic “Juicyfruit.” Puff had to convince him to use the beat, and the song went on to become a classic. Little tidbits like that are insightful, and only a hip hop fan can appreciate a detail like that, in my opinion. It also captured Big’s frustration and disappointment with his deteriorating friendship with Tupac, which led to both of their untimely demise.
Notorious is a must-see for all the hip hop heads out there. You can add it to the catalogue along with Belly, Krush Groove, etc. The casting was fantastic, especially when you consider that Jamal Woolard (Big) had no formal acting lessons before this movie. Derek Luke (Catch a Fire) effectively captured Puffy’s hunger and ambition, though his dancing was comical at times. Come to think of it, Puffy’s dancing is comical too, so that actually works. My only criticism of the movie was that some of the dialogue was too expository, and thus a bit contrived. Other than that, there wasn’t much room for improvement. The movie goes a long way in cementing the incredible legacy of one of the best to ever hold a microphone.
This review first appeared at http://poptimal.com/2009/01/notorious/ and was reprinted with permission.
Monday, January 05, 2009
Valkyrie
Excuse my language, but this is not some shit that I would normally see. My love affair with Tom Cruise (The Last Samurai) ended after he went crazy about three years ago, so he’s not a good box office draw, at least not for me. But I was in the company of a handsome gentleman, and this was what he wanted to see – so I went with the flow.
Valkyrie is the story of a failed attempt to overthrow Hitler, and is factually-based. So, on a positive note, I can say that I actually learned something from the movie, and that’s a good thing. What wasn’t good was the overall vibe of the movie. Despite boasting an inherently exciting premise, something about Valkyrie felt lackluster and uninspiring. Cruise portrays Colonel von Stauffenberg, a rouge soldier in cahoots with other Nazis to oust Hitler for the greater good of Deutschland, and so as not to be remembered on the wrong side of history as an enabler of the most monstrous figure of the 20th century. Cool, I’m with that. Even sounds exciting, right? It should have been, but it wasn’t. Writer Christopher McQuarrie and director Bryan Singer are responsible for one of the all-time great movies (The Usual Suspects), but I think they struck out with this one. Cruise’s Stauffenberg seems stoic and resolute, but not especially heroic in that movie-star sort of way you’d expect. I felt my eyelids get heavy on more than one occasion and had to fight to keep them open at one point. I have a pretty good attention span too, so this is a reflection of the movie rather than any narcoleptic tendencies on my part. Valkyrie is as boring as it looks, so I suggest you skip it unless you’re some weird history buff. My handsome companion was also underwhelmed. Booo Valkyrie!! LOL
Valkyrie is the story of a failed attempt to overthrow Hitler, and is factually-based. So, on a positive note, I can say that I actually learned something from the movie, and that’s a good thing. What wasn’t good was the overall vibe of the movie. Despite boasting an inherently exciting premise, something about Valkyrie felt lackluster and uninspiring. Cruise portrays Colonel von Stauffenberg, a rouge soldier in cahoots with other Nazis to oust Hitler for the greater good of Deutschland, and so as not to be remembered on the wrong side of history as an enabler of the most monstrous figure of the 20th century. Cool, I’m with that. Even sounds exciting, right? It should have been, but it wasn’t. Writer Christopher McQuarrie and director Bryan Singer are responsible for one of the all-time great movies (The Usual Suspects), but I think they struck out with this one. Cruise’s Stauffenberg seems stoic and resolute, but not especially heroic in that movie-star sort of way you’d expect. I felt my eyelids get heavy on more than one occasion and had to fight to keep them open at one point. I have a pretty good attention span too, so this is a reflection of the movie rather than any narcoleptic tendencies on my part. Valkyrie is as boring as it looks, so I suggest you skip it unless you’re some weird history buff. My handsome companion was also underwhelmed. Booo Valkyrie!! LOL
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
There is mad buzz surrounding this film, with Brad Pitt (Babel) being nominated for a Golden Globe for Best Actor, and the movie getting serious Best Picture consideration. I have to agree with the other critics that this is all much ado about SOMETHING, because I thought that The Curious Case of Benjamin Button was an absolutely enchanting film from start to finish. Bolstered by a high-concept story, the movie also features truly great special effects, as the titular character ages in reverse. If you’ve been under a rock and are unfamiliar with the unique premise, let me fill you in. Benjamin Button, as an infant, displays all the signs of a man at the twilight of his life. He is wrinkled, afflicted by cataracts and osteoporosis. Curious indeed. Benjamin’s mother died in childbirth, and his father is unequipped to deal with the aftermath of raising an obviously special child. He rips the baby from a midwife’s clutches and runs through the New Orleans streets, hurtling to and fro. He abandons the infant on a doorstep, and it is this home that will prove to be a wonderful haven for Benjamin the rest of his life. Discovered by Queenie, a domestic and innkeeper of sorts, Benjamin is embraced and loved as if she birthed him herself. He grows younger as he gets older, viewing the world through the eyes of a child while the world perceives him as an elderly man. I found this story to be simply fascinating and touching as Benjamin is impacted by the world around him. His physical deformity renders him much more emotionally attuned than a normal child, and he and Queenie, who is Black, share many tender moments. Taraji P. Henson (Hustle & Flow) as Queenie has easily surpassed anything she’s done up to this point, and I hope this role provides her with more opportunities. Pitt is reunited with Cate Blanchett (they were both in Babel), and they have very good chemistry as they portray two star-crossed lovers. The easiest thing for me to say is that the movie just made me feel good. It was heartwarming, funny, sweet, and simply fascinating. It may seem cool to age in reverse, but it’s actually tragic to watch your loved ones precede you in death, to grow younger while everyone else grows older – and for it to be assumed that you have knowledge and experience that you actually lack. Benjamin is forgiving and appreciates the beauty in life and in people, allowing his father to make amends for the cruelest betrayal by willingly developing a relationship with him. I can see this movie taking home a whole slew of accolades, including ones for the script, performances, make-up – you name it. It will all be well-deserved. Director David Fincher (Seven) has outdone himself, and the pairing of he and Pitt almost rivals the nice rapport Scorsese has developed with Leonardo DiCaprio, though obviously Fincher and Pitt are less prolific. If you can’t tell, I liked it LOL. The Curious Case of Benjamin Button is a must-see movie.
Slumdog Millionaire
Alright, now that 2008 is over, I can say with certainty that Slumdog Millionaire was damn near the best thing I saw last year. I guess I’ll have to put it behind The Dark Knight, but it’s a close second. It reminded me of the classic City of God in its portrayal of impoverished youth running wild. I don’t want to reduce it to that superficial comparison though. It was a love story, a drama, and coming-of-age tale rolled together.
The movie begins against the backdrop of the game show Who Wants to Be a Millionaire. Young Jamal is poised to win the top prize and has aroused the judges’ suspicion. He has to explain how he became so knowledgeable, since it’s very difficult to actually advance that far in the game (duh). What follows is a series of flashbacks to his youth, and the movie unfolds as he is asked each successive question and recounts the life experience that yielded the particular knowledge. He and his brother Salim are forced to fend for themselves after their mother is murdered in a raid on their small village, or whatever you call it. The film is set in Mumbai, but the boys live in a destitute little enclave teeming with other “slumdogs.” When their mother is killed the boys begin a life of begging, stealing, hustling, and surviving by the skin of their teeth. They come across another street urchin named Latika, and the three become fast friends. At various times throughout his life Jamal becomes separated from her, but she’s never far from his thoughts. When he and Salim escape the hands of a predator who exploits orphaned children by forcing them to beg in the streets, Jamal is heartbroken that Latika was unable to flee with them. Salim is dismissive, preferring not to compete for his brother’s attention and affection. The actors portraying Salim and Jamal were a revelation. They were adorable, and excellent actors to boot.
The movie was enthralling, masterfully written and executed – from the title to the cast and story. I enjoyed the filmmaking style, which really made you feel as if you were on Jamal and Salim’s journey with them. As a viewer, I was particularly invested in Jamal’s outcome. He and Salim’s paths diverged as Salim, more reckless and daring – falls in with a local kingpin, but it is his heroism and abandon that saves his brother’s life. I’ll leave it at that, an obvious ringing endorsement. This joint is like an instant classic, a real gem.
The movie begins against the backdrop of the game show Who Wants to Be a Millionaire. Young Jamal is poised to win the top prize and has aroused the judges’ suspicion. He has to explain how he became so knowledgeable, since it’s very difficult to actually advance that far in the game (duh). What follows is a series of flashbacks to his youth, and the movie unfolds as he is asked each successive question and recounts the life experience that yielded the particular knowledge. He and his brother Salim are forced to fend for themselves after their mother is murdered in a raid on their small village, or whatever you call it. The film is set in Mumbai, but the boys live in a destitute little enclave teeming with other “slumdogs.” When their mother is killed the boys begin a life of begging, stealing, hustling, and surviving by the skin of their teeth. They come across another street urchin named Latika, and the three become fast friends. At various times throughout his life Jamal becomes separated from her, but she’s never far from his thoughts. When he and Salim escape the hands of a predator who exploits orphaned children by forcing them to beg in the streets, Jamal is heartbroken that Latika was unable to flee with them. Salim is dismissive, preferring not to compete for his brother’s attention and affection. The actors portraying Salim and Jamal were a revelation. They were adorable, and excellent actors to boot.
The movie was enthralling, masterfully written and executed – from the title to the cast and story. I enjoyed the filmmaking style, which really made you feel as if you were on Jamal and Salim’s journey with them. As a viewer, I was particularly invested in Jamal’s outcome. He and Salim’s paths diverged as Salim, more reckless and daring – falls in with a local kingpin, but it is his heroism and abandon that saves his brother’s life. I’ll leave it at that, an obvious ringing endorsement. This joint is like an instant classic, a real gem.
Seven Pounds
*Sigh* It’s happened again. I’ve been bamboozled into wasting my money on another sneaky tear-jerk movie. I don’t do sad, sappy movies, and Seven Pounds was a somber, heavy film that won’t see you crack a smile.
Starring Will Smith (Hancock) as a benevolent man on a mission, Seven Pounds tells the story of Ben Thomas, an IRS agent who decides to drastically change the lives of seven strangers with the ultimate sacrifice. For the first 30 minutes or so it’s pretty tough to figure out just what the hell the movie is about and what is going on. Eventually we learn that Ben lost his fiancé in a tragic accident that also claimed the lives of six other people. Hence, the significance of the number seven, which is repeated a few times throughout the movie. I don’t want to give away the plot, but suffice to say it was an intriguing, well-acted film that will make you look at your own life and whether or not you’re a good person, but it was too much of a downer for my taste though. When it was over my face was ashy from all the crying! No thanks. Will is nice to look at it, and Rosario Dawson turned in the best performance from her I’ve ever seen – but Seven Pounds is just not my type of movie. From talking to others, I’m not alone in my opinion. All in all, skip this one. Total buzzkill.
Starring Will Smith (Hancock) as a benevolent man on a mission, Seven Pounds tells the story of Ben Thomas, an IRS agent who decides to drastically change the lives of seven strangers with the ultimate sacrifice. For the first 30 minutes or so it’s pretty tough to figure out just what the hell the movie is about and what is going on. Eventually we learn that Ben lost his fiancé in a tragic accident that also claimed the lives of six other people. Hence, the significance of the number seven, which is repeated a few times throughout the movie. I don’t want to give away the plot, but suffice to say it was an intriguing, well-acted film that will make you look at your own life and whether or not you’re a good person, but it was too much of a downer for my taste though. When it was over my face was ashy from all the crying! No thanks. Will is nice to look at it, and Rosario Dawson turned in the best performance from her I’ve ever seen – but Seven Pounds is just not my type of movie. From talking to others, I’m not alone in my opinion. All in all, skip this one. Total buzzkill.
Tuesday, December 09, 2008
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.
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.
Monday, November 24, 2008
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.
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.
Saturday, November 08, 2008
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.
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.
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
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.
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.
Friday, October 17, 2008
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.
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.
Sunday, October 12, 2008
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.
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.
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
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.
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?
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?
Sunday, September 14, 2008
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.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)