Tag Archives: movies

REVIEW: “Austin Powers: International Man of Mystery”

by

35

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”

by

26

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”

by

30

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

REVIEW: “Cloverfield”

by

15

Cloverfield poster

Whenever I’ve heard people talk about the movie “Cloverfield” they usual use words such as “disappointing” or “mediocre”. In light of that my expectations for the film were pretty tepid. But “Cloverfield” had something else working against it. I’m not a fan of the handheld ‘found footage’ technique that at one point had become wildly popular. For me it only works in small doses and more often than not it turns out to be a liability. So here we are, five years after the film’s release and I’m giving it a shot.

I have to say that as a whole there’s not a lot to “Cloverfield”. It’s very cut-and-dry. It takes no real chances. It has practically no depth to it at all. Yet it’s completely honest. It’s committed to its simple but clear vision. It nicely captures that 1950’s sci-fi B-movie vibe. Most importantly I was with it from the opening government archives “credits” all the way through to its rip-roaring finale. Is it the greatest thing since sliced bread? No. But I enjoyed it a heck of a lot more than I anticipated.

As I mentioned, “Cloverfield” is filmed using the ‘found footage’ method which means that weak stomachs may end up a but queasy. It starts off calm enough. The first 15 minutes or so of its tight 85 minute runtime is spent at a party introducing us to the central characters. Rob (Michael Stahl-David) is preparing to move to Japan. His brother Jason (Mike Vogel) his girlfriend Lily (Jessica Lucas) plan the surprise going away party in their New York City apartment. “Hud” (T.J. Miller) is tasked with “documenting” the party on video. And then there’s Beth (Odette Yustman), a girl that Rob has a tricky romantic relationship with. That’s really all you need to know about any of these characters and we get it all in the first few minutes of the film.

The movie picks up when the party is interrupted by a huge tremor. The first reaction is that it’s an earthquake but we quickly learn that’s not the case. I won’t go into heavy detail but let me just say that the huge old school creature feature fan in me was pretty excited. I think this is where the movie fell short for some people. This is clearly a classic tip of the hat to the big monster pictures of the mid to late 1950’s mixed with a popular modern filmmaking technique. Your enjoyment of “Cloverfield” will probably depend on how much that interests you or how much of it you can buy into.

Cloverfield

Director Matt Reaves and writer Drew Goddard borrow from several older movies. My favorite are the television
newscasts taken straight from George Romero’s “Night of the Living Dead”. It’s here that we and the characters first learn about the deadly threat facing New York City. Things only get worse as the filmmakers throw us right down into the middle of the city in chaos. We’re take along with our main characters in what turns out to be a survival horror/science fiction. It’s simple but it’s at times exhilarating and it’s clever in its execution. The special effects are a blast and we get them in carefully measured doses. I also thought the performances were serviceable with the exception of T.J. Miller whose line reading is never all that convincing. He has an occasionally funny line but he’s mainly just your run-of-the-mill doofus.

There are a few other things that keep this from being a full-blown gem. There isn’t one hint of explanation in terms of the creature’s origin or makeup. It simply pops up downtown and the rest is catastrophic history. Now this was clearly intentional and it wasn’t a huge deal for me. But I still couldn’t help wanting to know more about this threat. Also, while the hand-held camera was more effective than in most films that have employed it, it’s still not my first choice for how I want to watch a movie. It’s also worth noting that “Cloverfield” was a really fun experience the first time through but it doesn’t seem to be the kind of movie that would have near the same effect the next time around.

Yet still I have to say I was surprised with this movie. I don’t agree with the common criticisms and I found myself thoroughly entertained. With its short running time it doesn’t overstay its welcome and it’s never misleading or pretentious. Sure it has some throw-away characters and you never get as much information as you would like. But it’s still a fun and well-made return to the monster movie genre that I still love to this day. In other words it delivered for me. I’m not saying it will have a long-lasting impact, but for 85 minutes I was glued to the screen and I soaked up every bit of what I was seeing.

VERDICT – 3.5 STARS

REVIEW: Seeking a Friend for the End of the World”

by

33

SEEKING POSTER

The film “Seeking a Friend for the End of the Earth” has several interesting things going for it aside from its ridiculously long title. Writer and director Lorene Scafaria takes a very familiar movie subject but looks at through a very unique and compelling lens. She tosses some romance and some humor into her story and allows her two lead performers the room to bring it all to life. These cool nuances are what initially drew me to this picture. It’s such a shame that it didn’t work nearly as well as it should have.

The clever and funny opening scene really got my hopes up and it sets an interesting tone. Dodge Peterson (Steve Carell) and his wife Linda (played in the film by his real life wife Nancy Carell) are sitting in their car listening to a news update on the radio. The DJ tells of a failed last-ditch effort to stop a 70 mile wide asteroid from crashing into Earth and ending the world. The two find out that the asteroid (strangely named Matilda) is expected collide with the planet in only three weeks. The DJ ends the report by saying “For your up to the minute coverage of the countdown to the end of days along with all your classic rock favorites, Q107.2”. A Beach Boys tune follows the devastating news and Nancy opens the car door and leaves Dodge on the spot.

From there Dodge is basically a rudderless ship. He’s a man who looks like he’ll spend the final few days of Earth’s existence alone, that is until he sees his neighbor Penny (Keira Knightley) crying outside his apartment window. She’s an eccentric girl who left her loser boyfriend Owen (Adam Brody) and has just realized she has missed the last of the flights to England where her family lives. Dodge brings her inside which begins a quirky but appealing little relationship. As the apocalypse nears these two lost souls set out together, each after for something different but neither able to see that what they want is right in front of them.

Seeking

The movie begins pretty strong, using its unique perspective in several funny and intriguing ways. Unfortunately the comedy flames out as the movie progresses and I couldn’t help but think that Scafaria played all of her cards in the first half. There are some interesting questions and subtle examinations wrapped up in the movie’s hit and miss humor. We see people’s reaction to the impending end of days range from shameless hedonism to rioting and violence. But the movie also tinkers with smaller questions and in many ways these were the better moments for me. There are also funny little mentions of End of the World awareness concert and opportunistic high premium Armageddon insurance packages. But there aren’t enough of these moments as the movie progresses.

But this film isn’t a total write-off mainly due to the unlikely and offbeat chemistry of the two leads. Carell is in familiar territory and his nerdy, square peg Dodge seems right up his alley. But his performance is more subdued which I found to be more effective. The bigger surprise was Knightley who showed a nice comedic side. These two are asked to move back and forth between comedy and deeper drama which they handle beautifully. The drastic shifts in tone don’t always help the film but the performers nail it. Many have criticized the ending which is soaked in sentimentality. For some it’s popular to treat sentiment in movies like a curse word. I don’t agree with that and while it is a little heavy here, I think it does work in the end.

So what do I make of a movie with tone issues, a draggy middle, and inconsistent humor but that still manages to entertain? “Seeking a Friend for the End of the Earth” has its share if flaws but its also has several things that really sold me on what Scafaria was going for. So this was a mixed bag for me. It’s a film worth checking out but you just may leave with the feeling it could have been so much more. I know I did.

VERDICT – 3 STARS

REVIEW: “Solaris” (2002)

by

27

SolarisI love science fiction and I’ve watched a lot of sci-fi movies over the years. But I’ve been amazed at how many sci-fi flicks have slipped under my radar or that I have unfortunately ignored altogether. Steven Soderbergh’s “Solaris” is a good example. I’ve had several opportunities to see it since it’s 2002 release but have always back-burnered it for some unexplainable reason. Well it took me long enough but I’ve finally sat down and watched “Solaris” and I can honestly say I understand why it’s a movie that’s driven a lot of debate.

Although “Solaris” is often referred to as a remake of Andrei Tarkovsky’s critically adored 1972 film, writer and director Steven Soderbergh stated that he intended it to be a new version of Stanislaw Lem’s original novel from 1961. I haven’t seen Tarkovsky’s film or read Lem’s book so I can’t make any comparable judgement. But I can tell you I enjoyed this version a great deal even though I can see where it would potentially push some movie fans away.

George Clooney stars as Dr. Chris Kelvin, a psychologist who is convinced to visit a space station orbiting a mysterious planet called Solaris. He receives a cryptic message from a friend on the station asking for his help with some troubling psychological events. I’m not sure how the process works, but Kelvin takes a solo flight to the station to investigate the situation on his own. I’m not sure if that was the best idea. What he finds is quite troubling and soon he’s fighting to keep himself from being consumed by the phenomena.

Solaris1

If it sounds like a science-fiction action story it’s not. “Solaris” is a psychological thriller told through the stylistic lens of Soderbergh’s camera. His impressive penchant for angles and shots that relay a feeling of observation is clearly seen here. These unique touches are sprinkled all through the film giving it a slight sense of unease. That’s exactly what Soderbergh is going for and he succeeds. I also love the accentuated use of sound. From the ominous and distinct hums of each of the space station’s rooms or hallways to the strategic use of Cliff Martinez’s simple but menacing score. Through these things the tone of the film is quickly developed and it never once ventures from it. I liked that.

Clooney is also very good in a role that requires him to do more storytelling through expression and body language than dialogue. It’s said that the role was originally written with Daniel Day-Lewis in mind but scheduling conflicts landed the script in Clooney’s lap instead. I’ll be honest, I would love to see what DDL would have done with this role but the film doesn’t suffer one bit by having Clooney onboard. He goes all out, pouring emotion and paranoia into the character. It’s a really good performance.

“Solaris” may be a challenging watch for some but I found it to be quite fascinating. I’ve intentionally stayed away from some pretty important plot points but lets just say things take some interesting turns. Some may struggle with certain aspects if the story but fans of unique science fiction that’s soaked in eerie ambience are going to be intrigued with this one.

VERDICT – 4 STARS