Author Archives: Keith Garlington

REVIEW: “The Taking of Pelham 123” (2009)

by

1

I bet these guys didn’t expect their day to go like this? That seems to be a reoccurring question in Tony Scott’s “The Taking of Pelham 123”, a stylish but sometimes preposterous remake of the 1974 film. At its core this is a pretty formulaic, run-of-the-mill action thriller that takes no chances but also never wastes a moment. It moves at a quick and fluid pace which makes overlooking it’s shortcomings a little easier but not impossible.

“The Taking of Pelham 123” has all the bells and whistles of a Tony Scott production. The quick camera jerks, clever angles, and showy pyrotechnics work well to create an intense environment. In fact often times his camera adds more tension than the screenplay can muster. Scott has a recognizable style and can sometimes be called self-indulgent. He flirts with that label here but as a whole his high-tech machinations work just fine. It often times overcomes the story which is pretty basic material.

The movie starts with four heavily armed men walking into a New York subway station and taking control the Pelham 123 train. The film won’t do anything to enhance your view of post-911 security. There’s no elaborate well executed plan at work. The hijackers simply walk in and take the passenger-filled train. The leader is a man we come to know as “Ryder” played by John Travolta. Sporting a crew cut and fake neck tattoo, Travolta is clearly having fun with the role even though he goes a little over the top sometimes. “Ryder” soon contacts the Subway Control Center and connects with dispatcher Walter Garber (Denzel Washington), a middle-aged husband and father of two who ends up completely out of his element. Washington has played some rough and tough roles but he also has a wonderful knack for playing these “everyday man” characters. Here he’s subtle yet expressive and I loved watching how he handles the role. John Turturro is good as a head hostage negotiator and James Gandolfini is fine as the mayor even though his character is pretty poorly written.

Pelham

While the story is fast paced and it does have its moments of tension, sometimes it’s just plain silly. For example we get a key scene involving an accidental sniper rifle discharge due to a rat bite and there’s a head-scratching sequence involving the cops transporting ransom money through the city. It’s beautifully filmed but utterly ridiculous. The story is also fairly conventionally and predictable. But the movie is also let down by a really flat and lifeless ending. It seems hurried and it packs absolutely no punch whatsoever.

In spite of the movie’s flaws, Tony Scott manages to pack some entertainment into this linear, straightforward action thriller. Washington and Travolta’s CB radio chemistry is compelling even if they aren’t saying much and Scott’s cinematic style gives the story energy and drives the tension in the scenes that do work. But the sub par material is too much to overcome. I especially hate to see such a strong Denzel performance go to waste but in reality there just isn’t enough here to make this anything more than an average movie.

VERDICT 2.5 STARS

REVIEW: “Vicky Cristina Barcelona”

by

0

Many critics touted “Vicky Cristina Barcelona” as Woody Allen’s return to quality filmmaking after a few clear misses. I have to say I was with them, at least for the first half of the film. But that’s when Allen’s story started to undo everything I had bought into. His sharp locational eye beautifully captures the Spanish architecture and countryside and his good-looking characters lay the groundwork for a promising story. But the movie is never as funny or as clever as it tries to be and it ultimately falls apart in its nonsensical third act.

“Vicky Cristina Barcelona” is a romantic comedy that takes a rather cynical look at romance. Vicky (Rebecca Hall) and her friend Cristina (Scarlett Johansson) are spending the summer in Barcelona. Vicky holds what you might call a more traditional look at relationships. She is grounded, sure of what she wants, and engaged to a preppy young business man back home. Cristina is somewhat of a free spirit, prone to dive into love and life headfirst regardless of the consequences. One of the more compelling things about the friends is that they are so opposite at first. Hall and Johansson have some great moments together bouncing their own perspectives and idiosyncrasies off each other. They start off as genuinely interesting and believable best friends.

VICKY 1

Their summer takes an interesting turn when they meet Juan Antonio Gonzalo (Javier Bardem), a struggling artist who invites the girls to spend the weekend with him in the city of Oviedo. Vicky is against the idea but Cristina sees it as intriguing. The stronger spirit wins out and the three take off. Over the weekend the relationships between the three grow more complex. But things go from complex to nutty when Juan Antonio’s neurotic ex-wife María Elena (Penelope Cruz) enters the picture. All four of the main stars are fantastic. Cruz, who won the Best Supporting Actress for the role, gives the movie some energy just as it was starting to lag. But even she is undermined by Allen’s off-the-wall final act which seems to make everything earlier feel disingenuous.

VICKY 2

For me the biggest casualty of Allen’s uneven story is the unique difference between Vicky and Cristina. By the end of the film I didn’t feel that were that unique at all. Even when Cristina becomes involved in an absurd love triangle, the Vicky character, who I thought was more grounded and level-headed, responds in a way that seemed inconsistent with who she has been. Some may attribute that to an evolution of her character but I think the movie goes on to show that she isn’t as deep of a character as she appears to be at first. I also didn’t find the film nearly as funny as others. Sure it has a few dry quirky moments, but it’s real attempt at humor falls flat particularly in the second half of the film. This truly is a tale of two movies in one.

Some have felt the movie promotes the pursuit of love and happiness and the idea that romance may be fleeting but it’s worth the effort. I feel it looks at love through a very pessimistic and sometimes skewed lens. There’s no denying that “Vicky Cristina Barcelona” is a beautiful movie. The gorgeous Barcelona sights and sounds and the attention to the culture creates the perfect environment for what could have been. For me “Vicky Cristina Barcelona” wasn’t the summer to remember. Although it might have been if the second half of the film was as good as the first.

VERDICT – 2 STARS

REVIEW : “No Country for Old Men”

by

6

Joel and Ethan Coen have established themselves as some of the best filmmakers in the business. Their wide creative range and unique storytelling style has given us great films from several genres. Yet there are several common threads woven throughout a Coen brothers picture and one of the greatest compliments I can give them is that you know a Coen brothers movie when you see it. “No Country for Old Men” is my personal favorite of all of their films and that’s saying a lot. Winner of four Oscars including Best Picture, “No Country for Old Men” examines several themes that the brothers frequently explore while incorporating their familiar quirkiness, dark humor, and gritty violence. But the film is also unlike any of the Coen’s other work and that uniqueness gives it its own special voice.

Adapted from Cormac McCarthy’s novel, “No Country for Old Men” stays pretty faithful to the book. It could be called a crime thriller or even a modern-day western. It’s rugged look and tone gives this modern tale of violence an almost old west feel. But that plays to one fascinating subtext to the film. It is a movie about the evolution of violence and the moral callousness at its root. It says “things aren’t like the used to be” but from a more broken and defeated point of view. But there is much more to the film than that. It’s also a story of choices and consequences, old versus new, and chance versus fate. I’m being rather vague on all of these but let’s just say the ideas are interwoven throughout the movie.

Set in West Texas during the early 1980’s, the story opens with Llewelyn Moss (Josh Brolin) stumbling across a drug deal gone wrong while hunting one day. Among the blood-soaked bodies and bullet-riddled pickup trucks, he finds a lone but wounded survivor begging for water. Having no water Llewelyn leaves him. Before leaving he finds another body with a satchel full of money. Faced with the first of many key decisions that drive the story, he grabs the satchel and leaves the scene. Several ill-advised decisions later, Llewelyn finds himself on the run from the Mexican cartel and more notably a psychopathic hired hitman named Anton Chigurh (Javier Bardem). Tommy Lee Jones plays Ed Tom Bell, a small town Texas sheriff following in the footsteps of his father and grandfather. He and his deputy find the busted drug deal and Llewelyn’s abandoned truck and start trying to put the pieces together. The rest of the story focuses on the triangle of Llewelyn, Chigurh, and Sheriff Bell. And even though they share practically no screen time together, their lives slowly become intricately connected.

As with every Coen brothers film the casting is impeccable. Almost every performance is pitch-perfect and there is rarely a moment where the characters feel false. Josh Brolin not only looks the part of Llewelyn Moss but his flawless accent, the delivery of his lines, and west Texas mannerisms nail his character. He is perfectly complimented by a subtle and reserved performance by Kelly Macdonald who plays his wife Carla Jean. She’s simple but sweet and you are drawn to her as she’s drawn into Llewelyn’s situation. I also loved Tommy Lee Jones’ work as Ed Tom Bell. He’s the perfect choice for a small town Texas sheriff and I was enthralled with how he flawlessly embodied his character. Even Woody Harrelson has a small but great role as a rival hired gun looking for the missing drug money. But the best performance may be from Javier Bardem (who captured the Best Supporting Actor Oscar for the role). He may sport the worst haircut in film history but he’s also one of the most chilling and brutal villains on film . Even with his amoral propensity for violence, he’s fascinating to watch and the film’s best moments are when he’s on-screen.

“No Country for Old Men” is also a technical gem. Cinematographer Roger Deakins, a long-time Coen collaborator, uses his camera to create a dark and dirty world but one grounded in a true sense of realism. The sparse, dusty landscapes provide the perfect canvas for the Coens to create their violent world. The action scenes are ferocious but even in their brutality they never seem gratuitous. Instead they feel perfectly in context. I also loved the Coen’s use of sound, or in many instances their lack of it. Many scenes feature no background music instead relying on natural ambience. Several intense scenes feature no music or dialogue yet it’s the silence that really thickens the tension. While the Coen’s can sometimes be a little, for lack of a better word, wild with their filmmaking, every thing here feels a little more tightly structured and controlled.

The Coens have made many good films and they have a style that’s undeniable. You may like or dislike their approach to filmmaking but you have to respect it. Their unique vision is stamped all over this film. The violence is startling, the pacing is perfect, and there is just the right amount of dark comedy. You’ll wince in one scene and laugh out loud in the next one. “No Country for Old Men” is a brilliantly written adaptation and a beautifully crafted film. It’s one of those movies that features several scenes that will always stick with me. It’s also helped by some truly searing performances led by Bardem’s memorable work. I understand that this film may not appeal to everyone but for me this is a masterpiece. It’s a lesson in expert filmmaking and cinematic creativity. It’s also a movie I can watch over and over and never grow tired of it. Yes, it’s one of my favorite movies of all time. There, I said it!

VERDICT – 5 STARS

5 STARSs

5STAR K&M

REVIEW: “Act of Valor” (2012)

by

2

“Act of Valor” is a tough movie to judge. I’ve always taken into consideration what a movie is trying to be when reviewing it. I look at the intentions of the filmmakers and the target audience to better understand if they accomplished their goal. But there are also certain elements to a film that should be consistent in every good picture. “Act of Valor” is a straightforward and unashamed action picture. It’s one point of uniqueness is that it stars real-life active duty Navy SEALs. In fact, none of they SEAL’s real names were mentioned in the film or featured in the credits. At first I wondered if this was strictly a gimmick to draw action lovers to the film. But the very first action sequence showed me that they really brought something to the movie. Unfortunately there are other areas where the picture falls short and even the fantastic action scenes can’t totally overcome these flaws.

Mike McCoy and Scott Waugh produced and directed “Act of Valor”. They gained permission from the United States Navy to use real SEALs and received access to training areas and equipment to give the film a heightened sense of realism. The Navy’s involvement certainly is effective and the action scenes are brimming with grit and intensity. The SEALs legitimately give the military styled action an adrenaline shot that many of these films don’t have. Their familiarity with the missions and the process is evident and when they start speaking the special forces lingo I was completely involved. There is also a genuine sense of patriotism in these men that you can’t help but be impressed by.

McCoy and Waugh use several camera techniques to give the movie more grit and energy. Some work and some don’t. There are some scenes, especially earlier in the film, where we get shifts of focus that are really distracting. There are also some moments where the herky-jerky shots make deciphering the action almost impossible. But thankfully the erratic handheld technique is used sparingly. We also get several action shots from the first-person perspective that closer resembled a Call of Duty video game than a movie. But I grew to like those instances regardless of its obvious gimmickry.

While the action scenes clearly show the movie’s strengths, the attempts at drama and character development are definitely weaknesses. The biggest problem is with the acting. Look, I completely understand that these aren’t professional actors. But most of their non-action line-reading is cringe-worthy. They really give no life to these characters and the movie suffers for it. The character-driven moments seem false and the guys just don’t have the skills to sell them. The story also suffers from a fairly generic and painfully predictable script. There’s one key moment in the film that you see coming 10 clicks away.

“Act of Valor” is sure to get its share of criticism and it’s hard to argue for its shortcomings. But when the night vision popped on and the bullets began to fly, I found myself enthralled. This is a movie that at times feels like an obvious recruiting tool and at other times a hard-core military action movie. The filmmakers do get several things right. When the SEALs are in their element I was completely drawn in. But when it comes to simple everyday things like…well…carrying on a conversation, the movie goes limp. I think “Act of Valor” does enough of what it’s aiming for to offer some entertainment. I’m actually anxious to see the action scenes again. Too bad I’ll probably have to forward through everything else to get there.

VERDICT – 2.5 STARS

Review: “A Separation”

by

2

“A Separation” is the 2012 Oscar winner for Best Foreign Language Film and the first win for a movie from Iran. Written, produced, and directed by Asghar Fahadi, “A Separation” is a carefully structured and nuanced story that is at times painful and tragic but always mesmerizing. Set in modern-day Iran, the film is a devastating look at divorce through the cultural lens of a very complex country. Fahadi uses an almost methodical approach to storytelling yet his film is brimming with intensity and true human emotions. It touches on a reality of life that transcends any political or cultural barrier while also offering some thought-provoking insight into the religious laws and social structure of that part of the world.

“A Separation” opens with a well conceived scene that sets the stage for larger story. The scene shows Nader and Simin petitioning a judge for a divorce after 14 years of marriage. Simin is spearheading the separation because she wants to leave the country due to its current state of affairs. She is concerned with how it will effect the future of their 11-year-old daughter Termeh. Nader has no desire to leave mainly because he takes care of his father who is in the advance stages of Alzheimer’s. The judge rules their complaints to be petty and not warranting a divorce. With no divorce granted Simin still moves out leaving Nader to take care of his father and Termeh.

It’s here where we begin to see the many layers of Fahadi’s story. He examines a variety of social issues while offering a subtle but clear critique of Iranian culture. Yet nothing here feels forced or contrived. He looks at these things through the eyes of his characters in a true and organic way. Plus we learn more about the characters as they’re faced with things such as elderly care, school pressure, and rigid orthodoxy. But the biggest dissection of the characters comes through an intense court battle between Nader and a caretaker he hired to look after his father. It’s here that we see each character struggle with a variety of difficult choices and moral quandaries. It becomes a true character study that reveals a side of people that we can recognize as wrong while also understanding the root cause of their moral compromises. This is where the story could have evolved into a convoluted and self-indulgent mess. But Fahadi’s razor-sharp screenplay never misses a step and the film moves with a fluid yet painful grace.

While Fahadi takes his characters through various moral gray areas, he never labels one the hero and one the villain. There are no white or blacks hats in this story. In fact, one of the most compelling things about the film is trying to figure out who to sympathize with between Nader and Simin. I was constantly going back and both between them as things unfolded. But that’s just another reflection of the tremendous screenplay. Fahadi engages the audience and encourages them to make their own conclusions about his characters. And while his story does examine social and cultural issues, “A Separation” is a film about a divorce that’s happening right before our eyes. But as I was watching this husband and wife I realized that the heart of this story was young Termeh. Like a tennis ball she is bounced back and forth in the background of the film until everything reaches it’s breaking point. She’s simply heart-breaking.

Another reason the movie works so well are the performances. Everyone across the board is fantastic and no one buckles under the weighty material. The performances flow perfectly together with such ease. They nicely handle a script that can sometimes pack more intensity in an on-screen conversation than most action films. I remember several scenes that had me on the edge of my seat just by its searing dialogue. But while the story is very well written, there is one problem I had. There’s a pivotal moment close to the end of the film where key information is revealed in what feels like the most convenient way imaginable. It’s the only time in the entire film where something didn’t feel authentic.

“A Separation” is a fantastic movie that does more to prove the broad range of global talent in filmmaking. It’s a fascinating look at the cultural inner-workings of a complex society yet the main thrust of the story goes well beyond that. It examines the horrible effects of divorce by looking at it through a very clear lens. Fahadi doesn’t try to take sides even if it appears so at first. Instead he exposes what drives some people to end their marriage. It’s an honest and often times crushing picture but one that is incredibly well crafted. It does have a minor hiccup or two but these minor flaws do nothing to spoil what a fine accomplishment this is. “A Separation” should cause the serious viewer to think and to ask ourselves questions. For me, that’s just a reflection on how good this movie is.

VERDICT – 4.5 STARS

“LAST NIGHT” – 2 1/2 STARS

by

2

“Last Night” is more of a relationship drama than a romance movie. First time director Massy Tadjedin also wrote this story of a seemingly happily married couple whose relationship will be tested during a 24 hour period apart. It’s a story that does supply some good moments and asks some good questions. But it also lacks the life and energy needed to sell these characters and it’s never quite as provocative as it tries to be.

Keira Knightley and Sam Worthington play Joanna and Michael Reed. The couple are working on their third year of marriage and seem to have found their place in New York City. But Joanna becomes jealous when she sees Michael spending a suspiciously large amount of time with a beautiful colleague of his (Eva Mendes) at a company party. At home, later that night, we see the couple argue over this but make up in time for Michael to head off on a brief business trip in Philadelphia. While he’s gone Joanna runs into old flame Alex (Guillaume Canet) who she agrees to meet for a drink later. Meanwhile Michael finds himself tempted in Philly by the same colleague that stirred his wife’s jealousy.

The movie evolves into a will-they-or-won’t-they-cheat narrative driven by the lead characters’ insistence on putting themselves into the worst possible situations. Granted, we the audience are meant to suspect that this allegedly happy marriage is really built on a weak foundation which is exposed by their behavior. But I kept shaking my head wondering why anyone would continue to put themselves in such positions to fall unless they just weren’t very nice people. And that’s an issue I had with “Last Night”, none of the main characters are all that likeable and in a story like this it’s nice to have someone to root for.

The film does keep a certain level of intrigue as both Joanna and Michael repel the temptations they face only to put themselves back in the line of fire. I was genuinely interested in whether or not the couple could weather the storm and resist what could potentially destroy their marriage. But my interest wasn’t sparked by any direct connection to the characters. In fact, it’s really hard to connect to these characters. Knightley certainly gives the best performance in the film but even she is let down in spots by the material most notably with this past relationship with Alex. It just doesn’t sell. I actually like Sam Worthington but he seems out of his element here. He sometimes comes across as wooden and emotionless which can hinder a story like this..

“Last Night” has good intentions. Massy Tadjedin does ask good questions about jealousy, devotion, and marriage. It’s seems to make the good point that strong marriages aren’t built on weak foundations and even what looks like a good relationship can crumble if it’s not intended to be. But unfortunately the movie doesn’t give us the characters we need to really emotionally invest in this type of story. We get hints of genuineness and there are some scenes that feel true. But it also sometimes feels lifeless and mundane. “Last Night” is a nice first effort from Tadjedin who gets some things right. But a character-driven film requires characters and we just don’t get consistent ones here.