Category Archives: Movie Reviews – T

2016 BlindSpot Series: “Touch of Evil”

by

16

TOUCH poster

When examining Orson Welles’ career as a director you won’t find a huge volume of movies. What you will find is a filmmaker not only willing, but driven to experiment and explore every facet of making a movie. You see it in “Citizen Kane”, his most acclaimed film and what may be the greatest directorial debut. You see it in his superb period drama “The Magnificent Ambersons. But you may see it best in his 1958 crime noir classic “Touch of Evil”.

Originally hired for the supporting role of Police Captain Quinlan, Welles was convinced to also rewrite the screenplay and direct. The resulting “Touch of Evil” is considered by many to be one of the last great examples of film noir, featuring a fun cast, a twisting story, and a fantastic visual style.

touch1

The story is set in a Mexican/United States border town and begins with one of cinema’s greatest openings. A bomb is planted in the trunk of a car. A couple gets in the car and begins to drive through town towards the US border. Welles follows the car in one continuous three-minute shot stopping in traffic and slowly weaving through large numbers of pedestrians.

We the audience know something bad is bound to happen. We just don’t know when. Welles plays with our expectations and strings us along until the car does indeed blow. Among the nearby gathering crowd is Mexican drug enforcement officer Mike Vargas (Charlton Heston) and his new wife Susie (Janet Leigh). Vargas begins an investigation but is pushed aside by Captain Quinlan, an American police investigator who instantly butts heads with Vargas.

The film follows the investigation but it soon takes a backseat to issues of corruption, prejudice, and abuse of power. Welles’ story makes several wild and unexpected turns and the tone gets darker the further it goes. The moody camerawork embraces the visual approaches that made noir such a fascinating cinematic movement and it helps stress the edginess of Welles’ screenplay.

touch2

Heston was an odd choice but added star power and heft to the lead role. Leigh is very good and is featured in one of the film’s darker angles. Welles’ performance is also strong as the heavy, unpleasant Quinlan. But you have to tip your hat to the wild array of wonderful side characters who fill in this seedy, shady tale. Joseph Calleia is great as Quinlan’s right-hand man. Marlene Dietrich has a small but captivating role as a local ‘procuress’. Dennis Weaver is uncomfortably weird as a Norman Bates-like hotel night manager. Akim Tamiroff is a hoot playing a scuzzy gang boss. These characters and more pop in and out of Welles’ story and offer up some of the film’s best moments.

The original cut and unquestionably Welles purest vision for the film ended up being chopped, re-edited, and released in a 93 minute form. Over time it has been put back together as well as could be. That’s good for cinema fans because “Touch of Evil” is a movie filled with craft and vision. Its winding labyrinthine plot and deep moody visual style work together magnificently and highlight the very best film noir had to offer.

VERDICT – 4.5 STARS

4.5 STARS

REVIEW: “10 Cloverfield Lane”

by

29

cloverposter

So I guess we can actually say there is now a Cloverfield franchise? That certainly seems to be the case with the release of “10 Cloverfield Lane”. Whether this is the first of several Cloverfield tie-ins, who knows, but I do wonder if the creators of the original film (a 2008 surprise hit) ever envisioned this thing being a series.

This film is nestled in the Cloverfield universe but is not a direct sequel. In fact it differentiates itself in a number of ways. Its narrative connections to the previous film are vague. The visual approach is significantly different. The first film used the once popular found-footage technique while this one (thankfully) stays away from it. The two films even dabble in completely different genres.

10 CLOVERFIELD LANE

“Cloverfield” was a Godzilla-like science fiction monster movie. “10 Cloverfield  Lane” plays around in several genres, but at its core it is a psychological thriller. Mary Elizabeth Winstead plays Michelle who leaves New Orleans after an argument with her fiancé. Later that night, while driving across rural Louisiana, she has a car accident that knocks her unconscious. She wakes up to find herself chained to wall of a small concrete room.

A creepy and cryptic John Goodman plays Howard – the man who brought her to his fully furnished underground bunker. He explains that there has been an attack either by foreign countries or alien forces which left everyone on the outside dead and the air saturated with lethal radiation. An overwhelmed Michelle must determine whether to fear Howard as her captor or be thankful for him saving her life. There is one other piece of the puzzle.  Emmitt DeWitt (John Gallagher, Jr.) is also in the bunker but the reason and his intentions are a mystery.

“10 Cloverfield Lane” ratchets down on the psychological thrills. For the majority of the film the events outside the bunker take a backseat to the intense drama within. In his directorial debut Dan Trachtenberg shows an impressive understanding of pacing and tension building. His focus on character dynamics serve as the main source of tension and suspense. It slowly builds through character interactions. Trachtenberg maintains a level of uncertainty while never tipping his hand.

Cloverfield2

He does overplay his hand a bit in the final act. I wouldn’t say the film has a poor ending, but the approach, both visually and narratively, clash with the tone the rest of the film worked hard to develop. In a weird way I appreciated the sudden jolt the final act gives. At the same time I couldn’t help but feel it belonged in a different movie.

I’m actually intrigued to see where the Cloverfield franchise goes next. This installment made over $100 million against a $15 million budget so I’m sure we will get more of them. I would love to see them follow this film’s blueprint of playing around with different ideas while making characters the chief focus. But hopefully they won’t feel compelled to tack on another popcorn movie ending that feels completely at odds with everything else they are going for.

VERDICT – 4 STARS

4 Stars

Retro Review : “Tootsie”

by

18

TOOTSIE POSTER

I was 11 years-old in 1982. During that year the main movie conversation revolved around Steven Spielberg’s intensely popular “E.T.”. A bit surprising, the second biggest movie of 1982 was “Tootsie”. Now this was prior to the advent of the PG-13 rating so my parents took me with them to see “Tootsie”. I don’t remember a single thought or impression left in my young mind, but after watching it several years later and again just recently, it is a lot easier to appreciate what “Tootsie” is going for.

I mentioned its huge box office office appeal, but “Tootsie” was generally praised by critics as well. It would go on to be nominated for a whopping 10 Academy Awards (interestingly, it would only win one – Jessica Lange, Supporting Actress). That’s a pretty big success especially for a film that went through a number of delays, director changes, and recastings.

Tootsie1

Dustin Hoffman is the face we most associate with “Tootsie” and rightfully so, but one of the most important creative geniuses behind the film’s success was Sydney Pollack. He directed, co-produced, and gave a superb supporting performance. The script was finalized by a collective effort which featured Larry Gelbart, Murray Schisgal, and uncredited assistance from Hoffman favorite Barry Levinson and comedy great Elaine May.

But when talking about “Tootsie” you inescapably come back to Hoffman and his absurd but deeply committed two-sided performance. He plays Michael Dorsey, a talented but insufferable actor who has burned every bridge in the New York and Hollywood acting community. No one will hire him which stresses his relationship with his agent George Fields (Pollack). After months of no work and to prove his agent wrong, Michael auditions for a part in the daytime soap opera “Southwest General”. Here’s the catch – the part is for a woman.

Tootsie2

Michael dresses up and creates the persona of Dorothy Michaels in hopes of winning the part and earning $8,000 to help finance the play of his best friend (Bill Murray). Dorothy not only wins the part but she becomes a soap opera sensation. Dabney Coleman is so good as the smug, sexist director who Dorothy constantly butts heads with. Lange plays a co-star who Michael quickly falls for, but she only knows him as Dorothy which makes for some obvious complications.

Dorothy’s popularity makes it impossible for Michael to cleanly end his charade. But at the same time Dorothy brings about some needed self-reflection. This is the heart of the story, but “Tootsie” is still a comedy. Along the the way we get all sorts of comical, pinpoint jabs at sexism particularly in show business. There is also some hilarious satire aimed at popular Soaps particularly “General Hospital”. It also gives us quirky but revealing observations on relationships. “Tootsie” is a funny movie, but its sense of humor is anchored in its surprising intelligence.

Tootsie3

Hoffman is key. He gives 100% commitment despite the absurdity and without it the entire film would fall. He never winks at the camera. He never mugs. But the supporting cast is just as good. I mentioned Lange, Pollack, Coleman, and Murray. All are perfect fits. But I also loved George Gaynes as an air-headed veteran actor and Teri Garr is a lot of fun playing the manic and fragile Sandy. We also get good work from Charles Durning and Geena Davis in her motion picture debut.

“Tootsie” has held up surprisingly well in the 34 years since it was released. It was a tricky thing to pull off. It could have easily misfired and resulted in just another wacky comedy. But there are brains behind the film which allow it to be funny and provocative in its observations on gender roles and women’s equality. “Tootsie” manages it all very well without being too silly or too heavy-handed.

VERDICT – 4 STARS

REVIEW: “Trumbo”

by

21

TRUMBO POSTER

Everything about Dalton Trumbo’s life seems ready-made for a big Hollywood movie. There is certainly plenty there to tell an intriguing story. Trumbo was a complex character with incredible writing talent and strong, divisive political persuasions. His headbutting with Congress and the major studios offers plenty of material for a fascinating biopic. Unfortunately “Trumbo” is a glossed-over account that seems most interested in only presenting half of the story.

The centerpiece of the film is Bryan Cranston as Trumbo. His performance is big, showy, and certainly something the Oscars would feel compelled to nominate. But I don’t want to shortchange him. Cranston is very entertaining and he often keeps the film afloat. His postures, tone, and mannerisms are a lot of fun.

TRUMBO1

The story looks at Trumbo’s life as a screenwriter and family man. But its main focus is on his confrontation with the House Committee on Un-American Activities due to his pro-Communist position and how it led to a prison sentence and a spot on the Hollywood Blacklist. Director Jay Roach and writer John McNamara paint Trumbo as a martyr for free speech by concentrating on the persecution he and his family went through at the hands of the government, entertainment figures, and the public.

To do this a wild variety of fictional and true-life characters are brought into the story. Most are there to make Trumbo look more heroic. Take the clownish, cartoony portrayal of gossip columnist Hedda Hopper (played by Helen Mirren). Every scene she is in aims to make her the most sinister person on the planet and Trumbo more sympathetic. John Wayne (David James Elliot) is there to show Trumbo’s bravery. Edward G. Robinson (Michael Stuhlbarg) is there to show Trumbo’s unwillingness to cave under the most unfair threats of persecution. So many characters seem present to serve a specific purpose instead of bringing any real humanity to the people or the story.

The one place where it is different is at home. The pressures eventually bleed over into his family life as Trumbo shuts himself off from his wife and children. This is the one place where Trumbo isn’t portrayed as a saint. Diane Lane if good as Trumbo’s wife Cleo. She is depicted as the anchor who keeps the family together, but at the same time she is written as quiet and subservient. I wish she had been given a little more to do. Elle Fanning plays Trumbo’s daughter. She is a fireball and is given much more personality.

TRUMBO2

There is a host of other supporting cast members including Louis C.K., John Goodman, Alan Tudyk, Dean O’Gorman, and Christian Berkel among others. They are all fine but basically get lost in the film’s biggest problem – its lethargic story. “Trumbo” is such an up-and-down experience. It can be smart and surprisingly funny. At the same time it lacks a consistent energy that you would expect from such a story. There are a number of dull runs where the story just sits and spins its wheels.

Aside from its lack of spark “Trumbo” fails to dive into the character and story complexities which would have made this an interesting biopic. Instead the film chooses to make a statement by painting Trumbo as the innocent, persecuted hero free of any possible culpability. They certainly have the right to tell that kind of one-sided story, but considering the lulls the story suffers through I can’t help but think a more truthful telling would have resulted in a better and more compelling drama.

VERDICT – 2.5 STARS

2.5 stars

REVIEW: “The 33”

by

22

33poster

I can’t help myself. I’ve always had a soft spot for disaster flicks and there has never been a shortage of them. Hollywood has found a way to make a movie about any and every conceivable disaster. The good ones are fun, exciting, and inspired. But many have been shallow, formulaic, and shamelessly melodramatic. “The 33” is the latest and let’s just say it falls somewhere in between.

Based on the 2010 Chilean mining accident, the title refers to the thirty-three miners who were trapped some 200 stories down after the San José Mine near Copiapó, Chile collapsed. The story gained global attention with news agencies from around the world covering the day-by-day rescue efforts. Concerned family members stood vigilantly by pressing for action which led to the Chilean government taking over the intense rescue operation.

33movie1

The film follows most of these main story points with its own bits of drama added in. We get the obligatory introduction scene when local families are having a big shindig. The following day the miners head to work 17,000 feet below ground. A foreman (Lou Diamond Phillips) has growing concerns over the mine’s safety but the owners dismiss his suggestions. As the men start their work the mine begins to collapse driving them deeper into the mountain. The thirty-three make it to a safe room called The Refuge only to find its food and water supply understocked and the radio broken. They are trapped with few supplies and no way of communicating.

Antonio Banderas plays Mario, the face of the miners and their de facto leader. Banderas is quite good spreading inspiration and emotion like butter on toast. I always find him entertaining and any fault with him can be tracked to the script. He is often asked to lay it on really thick, something he has no trouble doing. He is also given a few corny made-for-the-movies lines. After the mine collapses he says “That is the heart of the mountain. She finally broke.” You can’t help but laugh.

The second part of the story takes place above ground. The private company who owns the mine wants to keep things quiet, but their resources for a rescue are limited. Family members led by the fiery Maria (Juliette Binoche) grow tired of the lack of information about their loved ones. The young Minister of Mining (Rodrigo Santoro) convinces Chile’s President Piñera (played by Bob Gunton in an odd bit of casting) to send him to the site to oversee the rescue attempt. Gabriel Byrne is brought in as the chief engineer and James Brolin pops up as a drill operator.

33movie2

The topside story hops back and forth between the efforts of the rescue team and the families gathered outside the mine in a makeshift camp. There are several decent dramatic threads between the two but nothing that stands out. The same could be said about the drama inside the mine. After a really good opening the miners’ story grinds to a halt. In fact the entire movie drags its feet around the midway point. A good 20 minute cut to the film’s bulky 127 minute running time would have helped a lot.

There are some good performances, an inspirational true story, a really good beginning, an emotionally satisfying ending, and one of the final scores from the great James Horner. But aside from the laggy middle, the film mainly suffers from being glaringly formulaic. Being based on a true story obviously tips its hand in many regards, but “The 33” hits nearly every disaster movie tick. I still enjoyed the film overall, but I kept waiting for it to do something unique. It never quite does.

VERDICT – 3 STARS

3 Stars

REVIEW: “Terminator: Genisys”

by

31

GEN POSTER

Since its inception way back in 1984, the Terminator franchise has made a name for itself. The first film was an unexpected success but it was the first sequel, “Judgement Day” which arrived seven years later, that launched the series into the upper stratosphere of pop culture. “Terminator Salvation” came out in 2009 and unlike most I thought it was a fun and unique perspective on the series. The film wasn’t as profitable as normal leaving the direction of the franchise uncertain.

But fear not, now we have a fifth installment in the form of “Terminator: Genisys”. It offers up a new  story angle with a completely new set of people playing the same franchise characters. The only familiar face is Arnold Schwarzenegger who returns as the outdated but tough T-800 Terminator. While it does try to do several interesting things ultimately it rehashes too much from its predecessors and nearly all of its attempts at originality fall flat.

Gen2

To be honest laying out a story introduction is easier said than done. In the future John Connor (this time played by Jason Clarke) leads a big final assault on Skynet. As victory looks certain it is discovered that Skynet has sent a T-800 back to 1984 to kill Sarah Connor (remember the first film?). John Connor sends his most trusted man Kyle Reese (this time played by Jai Courtney) back in time to protect his mother but during the process the timeline is disrupted. Basically this flubs up everything from the past movies which grants the writers a new canvas to work on.

Once Kyle arrives in 1984 he is attacked by a liquid metal T-1000 Terminator. He is rescued by a young Sarah Connor (Emilia Clarke) and her pet…err guardian Pops. Pops (Schwarzenegger) is a T-800 sent back years earlier to protect her. Follow me so far? The rest of the film features the trio setting out to destroy Skynet before it destroys humanity. Skynet is hiding under the guise of Genisys, a popular worldwide operating system nearing its global launch. Infiltrate Genisys, blow it up, save the world. But of course that is easier said than done.

The time traveling hopscotch does offer some intriguing possibilities and the tie-ins with previous films at first are pretty great. But eventually the time element grows convoluted and most of the tie-ins feel more like crutches than attempts at any meaningful continuity. The further the movie went the more disconnected I became. In the end I kept saying to myself “This doesn’t feel like a Terminator movie”. Sure it is playing in the same sandbox, but nearly everything new it offers feels generic. There are some funny moments where they capture some of the charm that first surfaced in “T2”. There just aren’t enough of them.

GEN1

And then there is the casting. Arnie is entertaining playing the cold, dry terminator (a mirror to his usual acting ability). He is given more fun things to do than anyone else and he has a blast with it. One the other end there is Emilia Clarke who never offers up a convincing Sarah Connor. Perhaps comparing her to Linda Hamilton is grossly unfair, but she doesn’t come across as genuinely tough or tenacious. Sometimes her performance is just bad. And it doesn’t help that she and Courtney have practically no chemistry. Even Jason Clarke’s scar-faced John Connor felt a bit off.

My problems with the cast could also be due to fatigue. It could be I’m just tired of seeing the same characters constantly being portrayed by new faces. The series has often addressed this issue with age gaps. But now we have had Clarke and Christian Bale as older John Connor; Edward Furlong and Nick Stahl as younger John Connor; Courtney, Michael Biehn and Anton Yelchin as Kyle Reese; Clarke and Hamilton as Sarah, etc. It may be an unavoidable dilemma but if so it stresses the importance of casting the right people.

“Genisys” does have a couple of cool action sequences, some good laughs, and an occasional fun nostalgic nod. And on its own it does make for decent, lightweight science fiction. The problem lies in its connection to a major popular franchise. A ‘Terminator’ film brings with it certain high expectations (from some audiences) and “Genisys” doesn’t meet them. As I said, it doesn’t feel like a ‘Terminator’ movie which in the end is a pretty bad thing.

VERDICT – 2.5 STARS

2.5 stars