REVIEW: “The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug”

HOBBIT poster

Excitement, intrigue, skepticism, and division. These are just some of the words that describe the reactions to Peter Jackson’s “The Hobbit” trilogy. Was there enough material to stretch out into three films? Was there enough character depth? I’m certain you’re familiar with all of these debates and concerns. With the tablesetting done in the first film, the attention now turns to the second installment. In many ways this is the film that will tell whether the trilogy decision was a mistake. With the first movie set around introduction, does the second film have enough meat-and-potatoes to satisfy an audience especially considering Jackson’s format of near 3 hour movies.

The short answer to that question is an emphatic yes. “The Desolation of Smaug” is another huge sprawling Middle-Earth epic loaded with special effects and ambition. Better yet, it’s actually a nice step up for the trilogy. The film carries with it a true sense of adventure and I felt a much greater sense of urgency and peril than in the first film. These were big reasons why I really liked “The Desolation of Smaug”. While the first Hobbit picture was a fun and entertaining experience, I felt it lacked the big dynamic threat or plot driving exigency. That’s certainly not the case here.

HOBBIT1

After a strange but brief opening flashback, the story picks up right where the last film left off. Gandolf, the hobbit Bilbo, Thorin Oakenshield and his twelve fellow dwarves continue their quest to retake their home within The Lonely Mountain. Hot on their trail is the pale orc Azog and his troops. Their journey takes them through cursed forests, ancient runs, and expansive mountains. They encounter skinchangers, giant spiders, elven warriors, and of course a deadly fire-breathing dragon named Smaug. The urgency grows, the stakes get higher, and by the end we are set up for what should be a tremendous final chapter.

I have to admit I was really surprised at just how well the story moves along and how much ground is covered. I’ll admit there were a couple of points where things slowed down a tad and Jackson does buy some time while his camera pans around admiring the beautiful scenery or impressive set pieces. But as a whole these things didn’t bother me. The story is compelling and the excitement moves from one great action sequence to another. The best is an amazing barrel escape down a white rapid river as an army of orcs attack our heroes from the shores. It’s an incredible spectacle to watch.

HOBBIT3

I think the decision to include sections from Tolkien’s “The Return of the King” appendices was a key reason this worked. Having read neither “The Hobbit” nor the “Lord of the Rings”, I can’t say how well the film melds the contents of both books. But from a cinematic standpoint the appendices do a great job of not only adding more content and weight to the story but also connecting it to the three “Lord of the Rings” films. Some have taken issue with this creative choice but for me it worked very well and it helps bring together Jackson’s massive cinematic universe. There is a clear link being formed between the two trilogies which go beyond simple references. Old favorite Legolas (Orlando Bloom) has an action-packed presence in this film. The true corrupting influence of the ‘one ring’ begins to surface. And there are several other cool connections that I wouldn’t dare spoil.

Once again the characters of the story are a real treat. Ian McKellen is great as always although he is given a few too many overly dramatic lines. You know the ones – the camera zooms in on his face and he utters an intense one-liner about the peril that lies ahead. Martin Freeman hits another home run as Bilbo. There is a real transformation (both good and bad) going on in the character and Freeman’s performance wonderfully captures that. But perhaps my favorite performance again comes from Richard Armitage as Thorin. This strong but emotionally driven character is tough as nails but he is constantly trying to reign in his sorrow, anger, and thirst for revenge. It’s a great character and a great performance.

HOBBIT2

But there are also some really good new characters introduced. Evangeline Lilly plays Tauriel, a headstrong elf who can certainly hold her own. Then there is Luke Evans who plays Bard, a single father who finds himself thrust into the middle of Thorin’s quest. Both have significant roles and add a lot to the picture. I also like Lee Pace’s small but intriguing part as an Elvenking from Mirkwood. And then there is Benedict Cumberbatch who voices Smaug the fearsome, treasure-hoarding dragon. There simply couldn’t have been a greater choice than Cumberbatch. Then you have the twelve other dwarves. Thankfully we do see an expanded role for a couple of them, but unfortunately the majority of them remain indistinct making empathy for them rather tough.

So let me get back to the original debate. Could “The Hobbit” story be told in two films? Probably so. Am I glad they expanded it to three by adding content from “The Lord of the Rings”? Absolutely! “The Desolation of Smaug” is a solid answer to the questions and criticisms thrown its way. The special effects are superb, the action sequences had my heart racing, the stakes are high, and we spend more time with these wonderful characters. On the flip-side there are a couple of lulls and the indistinct tag-along dwarves still bug me. But those gripes do little to hurt the overall experience and Peter Jackson has me hooked for what the third installment will bring. It should be a blast.

VERDICT – 4.5 STARS

5 Phenomenally Funny Christmas Movie Characters

movie_theatre - Phenom 5

Christmas movies come in all shapes and varieties. From Christian-themed films to the Hallmark Channel mush, the holiday has invited literally hundreds of movies. As you look at the vast library of Christmas films you can’t help but find a ton of really funny characters. That’s who we are looking at today. Undoubtedly many would come to mind at just the mention of funny Christmas movie characters. So with that in mind, I wouldn’t call this the definitive list. But there’s no denying that these a five funny Christmas movie characters are nothing short of phenomenal.

#5 – Myron Larabee (“Jingle All the Way”)

JINGLE

“Jingle All the Way” may not be considered a Christmas classic but it is one my family watches almost every year. Schwarzenegger plays the bad father who forgets to grab his son a Turbo-Man action figure for Christmas. He tears out on Christmas Eve to try to pick up what is the hottest toy of the holiday season. That’s when he runs into Myron played by Sinbad. I’ve never even a huge Sinbad fan but he’s really funny here. He plays on the deranged postal worker angle and becomes Arnie’s chief friend/rival in obtaining the elusive Turbo-Man. Myron has several laugh-out-loud lines and he’s a huge reason the movie is such fun (at least until the very end).

#4 – Harry and Marv (“Home Alone”)

HOME ALONE

Talk about stepping into a new role. Who would have ever thought Joe Pesci would be a highlight of a modern Christmas classic. Such is the case with “Home Alone”. In the film he teams up with Daniel Stern to form a suburban burglar team known as “The Wet Bandits”. Pesci and Stern are hilarious. The two numbskulls meet their match when they try and rob the home of 8-year old Kevin McCallister who has been accidentally left at home by his family. Harry and Marv fall prey to an assortment of Kevin’s booby traps which seem pulled right out of the classic Looney Tunes cartoons. They’re goofy and over-the-top, but they’re also a load of fun.

#3 – Papa Elf (“Elf”)

BOB NEWHART

Ok, this certainly isn’t a character in the same comedic vein as the others on this list, but he is an enormous reason I did the list to begin with. I’m talking about Papa Elf from the Christmas comedy “Elf”. Will Ferrell as Buddy would be the obvious selection here but I have to give some love to Bob Newhart. His casting was brilliant. There are several reasons he is so funny to me. First, we get Bob Newhart in tights and an elf outfit. Priceless! I can’t look at him without laughing. But then there is his serious, deadpan delivery which works to perfection. Newhart is just a funny guy and the way he handles this role cracks me up every time. He has to make my list.

#2 – Cousin Eddie (“Christmas Vacation”)

EDDIE

Surely you know Cousin Eddie would make this list, right? “Christmas Vacation” is a funny movie but the laughs go off the charts when Eddie and his family crash the Griswold family Christmas. Talk about stealing the show. Randy Quaid’s real-life misadventures proves that he has this type of character figured out. From Eddie’s wardrobes, to his antics, to his nutty lines, the movie is filled with one hysterical Eddie moment after another. As good as “Christmas Vacation” is, it’s safe to say it wouldn’t be the same without cousin Eddie. They just don’t get much funnier than him.

#1 – The Old Man (“A Christmas Story”)

CHRISTMAS STORY

As funny as all of the aforementioned characters are, there are none that make me laugh more than The Old Man (aka Ralphie’s father) in Bob Clark’s Christmas classic “A Christmas Story”. The late Darren McGavin Is nothing short of brilliant in his portrayal of this working-class father raising his family in Indiana. He has so many wonderful moments. His furnace and Oldsmobile battles, his bargaining with the Christmas tree man, his fights with the neighbors hound dogs, his major award. I could go on and on. He’s not only the funniest Christmas character but he’s one of my favorite characters period. And it’s all because of some very good writing and a fabulous performance from Darren McGavin. He’s my clear #1.

So what do you think of my list? I’d love to hear your favorite funny Christmas movie characters. Please take time to share your thoughts in the comments below.

REVIEW: “The Book Thief”

BOOK THIEF POSTER

Add this to the ever growing list of movies based on popular books that I’ve never read. “The Book Thief” was a popular novel released in 2006 by Australian author Markus Zusak. At least that’s what I’m told. I obviously had not read it or even heard of it until the new film adaptation hit theaters. I have to say the trailer instantly grabbed me. I’m naturally drawn to movies about World War 2, the Holocaust, or the people affected by them. So even with the film’s small amount of press and lukewarm reviews I was still anxious to see it.

Let’s not beat around the bush. I loved “The Book Thief”. Even further, I’m really surprised at some of the criticisms that have been thrown its way. Some I simply don’t agree with while others feel terribly unjust. It’s true that the movie doesn’t delve deep into the horrors of its setting. And it’s also true that it has its share of melodrama. But I never felt this film needed to be more graphic or detailed and melodrama in itself isn’t a bad thing. For me “The Book Thief” was a sweet, tender, and moving story. Yes those adjectives tend to be overused, but for me they fit this movie perfectly.

DF-05687.JPG

Oddly enough Death is the narrator. ‘He’ sets up the story by introducing us to a young girl named Liesel (Sophie Nélisse). She and her younger brother are being taken by their mother to meet their new foster parents. But when her brother dies in route, Liesel is left alone in this new and difficult environment. Her new parents, the cold, strict Rosa (Emily Watson) and the gentle, compassionate Hans (Geoffrey Rush), live in a small German town during a tumultuous time. Naziism is gaining strength and World War 2 is nearing.

Director Brian Percival takes us along as Liesel tries to adapt to and survive in her new world. There are a few people she meets who helps her along the way. Her new next-door neighbor, a young boy named Rudy (Nico Liersch), is instantly attracted to her and the two become great friends. She also encounters a Jewish man named Max Vandenburg (Ben Schnetzer), who Hans and Rosa put into hiding. But perhaps her greatest source of comfort is found in her newly discovered love for books. Through books she grows closer to her new father, she learns the ways of the new world, and she learns a way to express herself that she had never known before. Throughout the film many things in Liesel’s life changes. Her love for books isn’t one of them.

“The Book Thief” moves slow and deliberate but I never had a problem with it. I found myself glued to the story and the characters particularly young Liesel. Canadian actress Sophie Nélisse is asked to carry much of the load and she is certainly up to the task. The 13-year old gives a mesmerizing performance. She captures the childlike innocence and playfulness while never falling under the weight of the heavier emotional scenes. It was also amazing to see the way she handled a German accent. She really blew me away. Then there is the brilliance of Emily Watson and Geoffrey Rush. Both are perfectly cast and hit every note just right. In fact Rush deserves some serious Oscar consideration for this performance.

Book thief 2

But this is also a beautiful movie made so by Florian Ballhaus’ fine cinematography, some wonderful costume and set designs, and a lovely score by John Williams. There are several camera shots or visual moments that are still etched in my mind. The film is striking as it visualizes several uncomfortable events including a nighttime book burning, a home-by-home search for Jews, and people scrambling for bomb shelters as air raid sirens eerily scream in the background. And it’s made even more effective by the fact that it’s all seen through young Liesel’s eyes.

I love it when a film grabs me and pulls me into its world. That’s exactly what happened with “The Book Thief”. For two hours I was a resident on that small town German street. I cared about the characters, laughed with them, and was pierced by the tragedies they endured. It may be too dry for some people, too tame for others, and perhaps it is just a tad too long. I still had an incredible experience. A stirring story, some beautiful direction, some of the year’s best performances, and a near perfect ending all contribute to this being one of my favorite films of 2013.

VERDICT – 4.5 STARS

REVIEW: “Austin Powers: International Man of Mystery”

Austin powers posterIt was 1997 when the wacky Mike Myers concoction known as Austin Powers hit the big screen. I still remember the large number of people talking about the movie and quoting it’s numerous lines. Yet, for one reason or another, I never took time to check it out even though it was really popular. Well that has changed and now I’ve seen “Austin Powers: International Man of History” but I wouldn’t say my movie watching life is the better for it.

Saturday Night Live alumnus Mike Myers created his Austin Powers character as a spoof of popular spy movies most notably the earlier James Bond pictures. It begins with a brief scene in 1967 of Austin trying to take out his arch nemesis Dr. Evil (also Myers). Dr. Evil escapes by jettisoning into space and placing himself into a cryosleep. For weird reasons unknown, Austin has himself cryogenically frozen only to be brought back if Dr. Evil resurfaces. Wouldn’t you know it, he does return 30 years later and Austin is brought back to hunt him down again.

The movie goofs around with several familiar gimmicks but its main thing is Austin as a man out of time. He was a big player in the days of free love and excess. The problem is, that brand of chauvinistic hedonism doesn’t sit too well in 1997. Dr. Evil also runs into his share of complications due to the changes in the world since his departure. Now there are some funny bits scattered throughout all of this and it’s politically incorrect silliness can be amusing. But it is the film’s bread and butter and quite honestly it grew tiring after a while. The culture shock angle is a big focus and how much you like the film may depend on how long you can stay with that.

AUSTIN POWERS photo

And if course there is Myers’ ludicrous antics and appearance. Sporting ridiculously bad teeth, a flowing mane of chest hair, and outfits that I don’t believe any normal person wore in the late 60’s, Myers clowns around with goofy poses and dialogue loaded with corny lines and overused innuendo. Now to be fair it’s all played as absurd and it certainly is that. But after a small dose it can be a bit taxing. Dr. Evil has some of the film’s funnier moments particular when his genetically created son Scott (Seth Green) appears. But even he grows old after a while. Perhaps the best thing about the film is watching the beautiful Elizabeth Hurley. I’m not saying she or her character is great, but watching her certainly made digesting everything else a little easier.

I know this film has its share of fans. I just can’t be counted among them and I can’t see myself checking out the sequels. Again, the movie does have its moments but most of them are drowned out by repetitious gags that quite frankly grew old. I spent most of the film stone-faced and that’s just not the reaction I’m looking for from a comedy. I certainly don’t begrudge anyone for liking it since comedy is so subjective. But I can think of a ton of other comedies I’ll be checking out before I watch this one again.

VERDICT – 2 STARS

REVIEW : “The Descendants”

DESCENDENTS POSTER

“The Descendants” is a film from director Alexander Payne that first came out Oscar ripe. It’s a heavy story that deals with several conflicting emotions that flow from situations that are all too real for many people. It can be a difficult film to watch at times but it can also be quite moving. I can certainly understand the reason for the Oscar buzz it received mainly due to some incredible performances. But the movie both underplays and overplays some parts of the story which for me held it back a tad.

The story follows Matt King (Clooney), a husband and father of two who lives in Hawaii. He’s a rich man who gained his wealth by being a descendant of Hawaiian royalty. He is the sole trustee of 25,000 acres of pristine virgin land on the island of Kauai. But Matt tries to stay grounded. He works as a lawyer and uses that salary to support his family while employing his father’s perspective that you should always work for your money. Matt and his cousins have entertained offers for the land. Some want to sell it to a huge group from Chicago while others want to sell to a local Kauai developer. Matt has the final say and must weigh the wishes of his family with what’s best for the community. We learn most of this in the first few minutes of the movie through expository voice-overs. In many films this could be seen as a crutch but here it works surprisingly well and gives us key elements to the story which sets up what’s to come.

But within the first few minutes of the film it’s revealed that Matt’s wife has had a serious boating accident which leaves her comatose in an intensive care unit. Things look bleak and Matt struggles to bring together his two daughters. One is the impressionable 10 year old Scottie (Amara Miller) and the other is the bitter, irreverent 17-year old Alex (Shailene Woodley). To make matters worse, Matt finds out that his wife has been cheating on him with a younger real estate agent. The story takes Matt on an emotional roller coaster as he tries to balance feelings of anger and betrayal with the reality of his wife’s current state. There is a unique complexity to the story and while there is a lot going on emotionally, Payne makes everything feel genuine and authentic.

DESCENDENTS1

While “The Descendants” does keep everything feeling reel, it does overplay a vital element to one of the film’s key relationships. Matt struggles and at times looks inept when it comes to parenting. This was never more clear than in his relationship with his older daughter Alex. Payne certainly portrays her as angry and rebellious but I felt he terribly overdid it. I was particularly turned off by her constant vulgarity and irreverence. Even as their relationship supposedly grows stronger, we see her or her airhead boyfriend speak to Matt as if they were drinking buddies. Woodley gives a brilliant performance but I never completely appreciated her character mainly due to some shoddy writing which kills the otherwise wonderful moments between the two. Her character never truly evolves as I had hoped.

And while it overplays that particular relationship I felt it underplayed the relationship between Matt and his wife. To be fair, we do get all the information we need and I had no trouble understanding the relationship between the two. But I couldn’t help but wish for more. We never see them together before the accident. All of the details of their marriage is brought out through conversations with neighbors and family. It’s a smart method of storytelling and I guess it worked well enough. But the nitpicker in me really would have liked to have seen more.

Descendents2

One of the most important lines in the movie occurs during a conversion Matt has with another character. Matt is told “Everything just happens”. This seems to be a main point that Payne tries to make with this film and we see it throughout the picture. But I couldn’t buy into that premise. I go back to Matt’s relationship with his daughter. Alex’s attitude and disrespect didn’t just happen. She is a product of her parents poor parenting. His wife’s affair didn’t just happen. Her poor decisions and lack of self-control led to the adultery. If “Everything just happens” is a main point as many have said, Payne never sold me on it.

As I mentioned, their are some fantastic performances here. Clooney is controlled and reserved and delivers one of his best performances. I’ve already mentioned the great work from Woodley but young Miller is also quite good. With the exception of the peculiarly cast Matthew Lillard, there are several brief but strong performances from actors like Robert Forster and Beau Bridges. I also loved the use of Hawaii as a location. We do get small glimpses at its island beauty but for the most part Payne treats it as a real place where people live – a community with all the same trials and troubles as any other state. The mix of uniqueness and commonality was very effective.

There is a lot to like with “The Descendants”. It deals with some weighty subject matter in a real and thoughtful way. It shows glimpses of greatness even though it’s brought back down by some poor creative direction that strips one of the more intriguing characters of much of her likability. But I found myself caring about what happened to these people. It’s strong stuff and “The Descendants” handles it all well. It’s a film with a great concept and some great moments. Unfortunately a few speed bumps in the script keep it from being a truly great film.

VERDICT – 3.5 STARS

REVIEW: “Robot & Frank”

robot-and-frank-Poster

“Robot & Frank” may offer the most unique look at growing old that you’ll find. It touches on several of the age-related elements we’ve seen addressed in other movies, but the key difference here is that it’s looked at through a semi-futuristic lens. This comedy/drama from director Jake Schreier is a smart and well made picture that may not instantly call you back for a second viewing, but it will touch your heart and make you laugh. And on those two merits alone, it’s easy to call “Robot & Frank” a success.

But there is more to the movie than just that. In fact what originally drew me to the picture was that it offered a starring vehicle for Frank Langella. I’ve always been a big fan of his and consider him one of the more underrated actors. At age 75 he’s no longer Hollywood’s prime target age for lead roles (unfortunately) so it was a nice surprise to see him here. He’s joined by Susan Sarandon, James Marsden, Liv Tyler, and Peter Sarsgaard who supplies some really fun voice work.

In the not too distant future, Langella plays an elderly man reasonably named Frank who lives by himself in upstate New York. Frank is starting to see his health deteriorate particularly through early signs of dementia. His son Hunter (Marsden) lives five hours away and he’s grown tired of the weekly trips to see his father. Frank’s daughter Madison (Tyler) is an ‘out there’ activist who occasionally checks on her father via video phone. Their entire family dynamic is fractured due to some past baggage and Frank’s health issues force them all to deal with it. But it takes a little prodding before anyone is willing to do that.

Robot and frank

Hunter’s solution for caring for his father is to provide him with a robot caregiver who will cook, clean, and watch over him. Frank hates the idea and does everything he can to discourage the robot. But he begins to grow fond of it after this man and machine make an interesting connection. Frank begins sharing memories of his past jobs to his robot. Now Frank’s job was no ordinary job. He wasn’t a carpenter, a truck driver, or a lawyer. Frank was a thief and actually spent time in prison for it. Before long he begins to see some new possibilities with his robot friend, possibilities that may not be the wisest.

You may think you know where this movie is going but the path it takes is an unconventional one. That’s what sets it apart from so many other movies that deal with these subjects. Langella is fantastic and he gives us an endearing and genuinely sympathetic character. He grumbles and growls in some scenes while in others he masterfully portrays a man in mental decline. It’s a beautiful performance and he’s the force that really drives this picture. Sarandon appears as a local librarian. She’s very good and I have to say some of my favorite scenes are when she and Langella are sharing the screen together.

“Robot & Frank” is a small movie built around a tight script and Frank Langella’s strong work. It’s humor is often subtle but always effective and the emotionally meaty undercurrent really worked for me. Now, as I mentioned, I wouldn’t say this is a film that I want to rush out and see again. It’s just not that kind of movie for me. But I won’t deny the film of the praise it deserves. It accomplishes a lot by taking a few weighty subjects and taking them on in new creative ways. That’s something I really appreciate and responded to.

VERDICT – 4 STARS