Tag Archives: movies

REVIEW: “Fruitvale Station”

by

25

FRUITVALEPOSTER

For those who may not know, “Fruitvale Station” is a docudrama based on the shooting death of 22-year old Oscar Grant by a Bay Area Rapid Transit police officer. The shooting took place on January 1, 2009 and was caught on numerous cell phone videos from witnesses. The incident would spark protests, unfortunate rioting, and dialogues about a number of feelings and concerns. Some have said this is was a racially motivated crime. I’m not sure there is definitive proof of that. Others have said the shooting resulted from Grant resisting arrest. I don’t think there is any way this tragedy can be fully placed on Oscar Grant’s shoulders. One thing is for certain, a young African-American man, a father, lost his life and it should have never happened.

“Fruitvale Station” marks the filmmaking debut from Ryan Coogler. He was drawn to the story and spent time with Grant’s family in order to develop a deeper more human profile. Coogler stated “I wanted the audience to get to know this guy, to get attached, so that when the situation that happens to him happens, it’s not just like you read it in the paper, you know what I mean? When you know somebody as a human being, you know that life means something.” It’s a smart approach that gives the film a real emotional kick. But some have criticized the overly sympathetic portrayal of Oscar saying that is glosses over some of his real personal and legal problems.

Fruitvale

When you go in the docudrama direction, especially when tackling such a potent incident, you open yourself up that kind of criticism. I did feel Coogler was softening the edges a bit in order to draw more empathy from the audience. That said, it never took away the hurt I felt for the family, the discomfort of watching the police aggression, or the sadness brought on by Oscar’s death. The film does a good job of drawing those emotions from us. Is the film emotionally exploitative at times? I think so. A few scenes are a bit heavy-handed and a more seasoned filmmaker would have probably avoided them. Still the overall impact of the film is strong despite these issues.

This movie is a remarkable feature film debut for Coogler but he’s not the only revelation found in “Fruitvale Station”. 26-year old Michael B. Jordan is excellent. Known mainly for his work in television and in last year’s “Chronicle”, Jordan has caught a lot of attention playing Oscar Grant. There is a raw authenticity to what he is doing on screen that works perfectly with the role. He’s joined on screen by Academy Award winner Octavia Spencer who also helped produce the film. She plays Oscar’s mother and once again she is very good. Melonie Diaz does great work as well playing Oscar’s wife Sophina.

Minus a few small stumbles, which can be expected from a first time filmmaker, “Fruitvale Station” is still an emotionally powerful film that puts a spotlight on an unfortunate tragedy. Coogler makes a strong directorial debut but Michael B. Jordan also makes a statement in what should be a breakthrough performance. Even though I felt slightly manipulated as the story was moving along, the tense and gutwrenching ending was no less devastating. In the end this movie works, and it’s impossible not to be effected by it.

VERDICT – 4 STARS

REVIEW: “Blue Jasmine”

by

32

BLUE poster

Each year has its share of certainties: we grow a year older, we have to pay our taxes, my sports teams disappoint me, and Woody Allen puts out a new movie. Now that doesn’t mean that every one of Allen’s films are masterpieces (ala “Midnight in Paris”). In fact some of them are just dreadful (ala last year’s “To Rome with Love”). But one thing about the bad ones, you always know the next film is only a year away. And maybe, just maybe, Allen will land one of the real gems he’s capable of making.

Here’s the good news – “Blue Jasmine” is one of the good ones. This character study touches on a number of subjects from business ethics to family troubles to rabid consumerism. At the center of it all is a captivating performance by Cate Blanchett. She plays Jasmine Francis, a New York socialite whose posh lifestyle collapses when her crooked husband is arrested and loses their fortune. Penniless and without a place to go, Jasmine flies to San Francisco and moves in with her estranged working-class sister Ginger (Sally Hawkins). It’s here that she must learn to start a new chapter of her life or drown in her despair of leaving the affluent upper crust.

BLUE1

To go further, Jasmine is a wreck. She’s coming off of a nervous breakdown, she pops anxiety pills like candy, and she has an affinity for heavy drinking. She still carries her spoiled and privileged attitude which clashes with her new destitute reality. And all of this is brought on by her lousy husband. We see the events leading to Jasmine’s fall from luxury through several cleverly incorporated flashbacks. We watch her husband Hal (Alec Bladwin) and his penchant for women and shady business deals while she lives in a diamond-studded state of naïveté. She’s content with living high on the hog while asking no questions whatsoever. That proves to be a costly mistake, both mentally and monetarily.

Jasmine’s snooty ego doesn’t fit well with the circle of people she is introduced to in San Francisco. This class clash is the prominent focus for most of the film. This is also where we meet the film’s fantastic assortment of side characters. Hawkins is great as Jasmine’s kindhearted sister and I really liked Bobby Cannavele as her blue-collar beau hunk boyfriend. We get Michael Stuhlbarg as a lovestruck dentist and Peter Sarsgaard pops up as a wealthy businessman with political aspirations. But the biggest treat was Andrew Dice Clay. Yes you heard me, Andrew Dice Clay. Gone is the loud obnoxious standup routine. Here he plays a humble, hard-working fellow that you can’t help but sympathize with. And it’s all because of the unbelievable turn from Dice Clay. He was completely natural and restrained. Brilliant work.

BLUE2

But the true star is Cate Blanchett who undoubtedly gives one of the year’s finest performances. There are bits of subtle humor that are sprinkled in throughout her story. But she’s more of a sad, self-destructive woman who has no sense of direction or belonging. Blanchett visualizes her struggles through every fidget, every bead of sweat, and every outburst. She’s not a likable character by any stretch but she’s simply mesmerizing. Blanchett gives a performance that is getting some Oscar hype. Personally I think it demands an Oscar nomination.

It’s clear that “Blue Jasmine” was influenced by other films. For example if you listen closely you can hear “A Streetcar Named Desire” passing in the distance. But Woody Allen has always been a filmmaker who treasures inspiration and when he is on his game he can truly deliver. This is really good material handled by an excellent cast including a surprise performance from Andrew Dice Clay and some of the best work of Cate Blanchett’s career. “Blue Jasmine” may not stay with you for a long time nor be considered among Allen’s very best by the bigger fans of his work. For me it really worked and it’s definitely good Woody Allen.

VERDICT – 4 STARS

REVIEW: “Grown Ups 2”

by

15

GROWN UPS POSTERWhy would I subject myself to the torment of watching “Grown Ups 2”? Am I a glutton for punishment? Did I actually think this would be a watchable film? I mean let’s be honest, Adam Sandler hasn’t made a good movie in years and the first “Grown Ups” picture was a laborious exercise in stupidity. So there’s no reason to think this would be a funny and entertaining comedy, right? Or is there? After all it did rake in nearly $250 million at the box office. Oh who am I fooling? “Grown Ups 2” is yet another painfully bad film that I think goes down as one of Sandler’s worst (and that’s saying something).

Where do I begin when a movie is this terrible? How about with the opening scene which clearly tells you what you are in store for. Sandler wakes up one morning to find a huge deer in his bedroom. He scares the deer causing it to urinate all over his face. This sequence is out of the blue, amateurish, and embarrassingly unfunny. Actually that’s a good way to describe this entire movie. I know Sandler has a following and many people subscribe to this brand of humor, but I would rather have my eyeballs dug out with an ice cream scoop than to sit through this torture again.

There are so many egregious problems with this movie. Let’s start with the biggest issue – it’s not the slightest bit funny. I may be wrong but the object of most comedies is to make the audience laugh. If that is a key measurement of success “Grown Ups 2” fails miserably. I sat stone-faced through the majority of the film’s 100 minutes only slightly grinning on a couple of occasions. The humor is ostensibly juvenile and astoundingly idiotic. Sandler and his co-writing compadres seem to have no idea on how to conceive or setup a gag. Instead they wallow in cheap, lazy, and overused nonsense that have become signatures of Adam Sandler movies. For example take Sandler’s infatuation with toilet humor. We get farting, urinating, projectile vomiting, picking and eating from a belly button. All of this lowbrow garbage that serves as a substitute for actual good writing.

GRown Ups

Another glaring flaw is the complete and utter lack of a plot. I’m still stunned at the absence of any cohesive and coherent story. It’s kind of like a series of poorly conceived comedy sketches pasted together to form a storyline. The problem is nothing ever happens. It’s as if Sandler is more interested in creating a playground for him and his buddies. He tosses in several weird and awkward cameos and small roles from the likes of Shaquille O’Neal, Adam Samberg, Steve Buscemi, Stone Cold Steve Austin, Taylor Lautner, Dan Patrick, and several more. Perhaps the filmmakers thought that drowning us in these appearances would divert our attention away from the absence of a decent narrative. It didn’t work.

I suppose Sandler, David Spade, Chris Rock, and Kevin James were trying to make another movie about childhood buddies and their middle-aged lives. Yet it’s interesting that these characters have become more childish and imbecilic in the three years since the first film. But I don’t think anyone involved really cares. There’s no sense of shame whatsoever. With an $80 million budget, this was clearly a cash-in for the whole bunch.

Remember I described the first scene of the movie? Well the final scene features a man passing gas on his wife. Do you get the gist of what “Grown Ups 2” is all about? This film incited more facepalms and head-shakes than laughs and the script feels like something Sandler could have scribbled on the palm of his hand. There isn’t an ounce of creativity, originality, or intelligence and if they weren’t making millions of dollars I would be embarrassed for everyone involved. Instead they are laughing all the way to the bank, and I promise you they were laughing a lot more than I was.

VERDICT – 0.5 STARS

REVIEW: “The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug”

by

36

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

by

23

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”

by

19

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