Tag Archives: movies

REVIEW: “Looper”

by

17


Time travel is one of those fun and intriguing concepts that has found its way into every movie genre. Obviously there is time travel in science fiction films, but it can also be found in the horror, action, drama, comedy, and even romance genres. So there’s an apparent attraction to the idea of time travel and its been explored in a variety of different ways. Therefore the real challenge for a filmmaker is to take this familiar subject and give us something new and fresh – something we haven’t seen before. I’m thrilled to say that’s exactly what writer and director Rian Johnson has done with his mind bending sci-fi action film “Looper”.

As you can guess, “Looper” takes place in the not-to-distant future. Time travel has been realized but by the year 2074 it has been outlawed. The crime syndicates illegally use time travel as a means of executing and disposing of targets, something that has grown increasingly difficult to do in their time. That’s where loopers come in. They are mob killers who execute the targets sent from the future, collect the silver bars sent with the target as their reward, and then dispose of the bodies – no mess and no connections to the mob. Loopers operate out of Kansas City in the year 2044 and are headed by a mobster named Abe (Jeff Daniels). In fact, we learn that Abe is essentially running the entire city.

Joseph Simmons (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) is one of Abe’s most trusted loopers. He’s efficient and by-the-books. But soon Joe is faced with what’s called “closing the loop” – the syndicate’s version of retirement. You see, the looper will be sent the future version of the himself to be executed. No party or shiny plaque. Just a hefty payment in gold bars and a release from their contract. “Good-bye” and enjoy the next 30 years. As we hear in the movie, the looper job doesn’t attract the most forward thinking people. Joe is surprised and unprepared when his latest target turns out to be himself only 30-years older and bald (Bruce Willis). He makes the biggest mistake a looper can make – he hesitates and old Joe jumps him, knocks him out, and then escapes. Soon young Joe has the mob hot on his trail as he’s trying to “make things right” by catching up with and killing old Joe. But old Joe has a mission of his own which really turns everything on its head.

The first half of the movie focuses more on the loopers, on introducing us to Johnson’s world, and setting up Gordon-Levitt’s character. A huge part of any movie like this, especially when dealing with time travel, is creating a believability to what you’re presenting. In other words, we need to buy into what we’re being shown. The concept behind this Rian Johnson futuristic concoction is brilliant and a breath of fresh cinematic air. What’s even more impressive is how well it’s realized on screen. He doesn’t overdo his futuristic landscape so I never felt too disconnected from this world. But there is some cool technology and Johnson clearly has fun with some of it including his ugly green energy dependent cars and the bad cell phone reception. But the city itself is a dirty and unpleasant place filled with poverty and drug use – just what you would expect from a mob-led city.

The second half of the movie takes a slight change in direction. Much of it takes part on a farm outside of town owned by a single mother Sara (Emily Blunt who exchanges her English accent for a country girl one) and her son Cid (Pierce Gagnon). Young Joe’s search for old Joe leads him to the farm where he hopes to find shelter from the syndicate and clues to what his older self is up to. But he quickly learns that there’s more to this farm family than meets the eye. These scenes add some authentic emotional punch to the film. But Johnson also uses this part of the movie to open up several new doors which add more and more layers to the already challenging story. Of course there were a couple of times where I had to stop and process what I had just seen, but I really liked these different directions and as a whole, the complex yet miraculously cohesive script is constructed with such intelligence and precision so that I never felt lost nor did I feel the material ever bogged down.

It’s also worth mentioning the spectacular visuals and no-holds-barred action sequences. It doesn’t take long to recognize Johnson’s skill with framing shots and moving his camera. He uses several unconventional techniques which give the move a unique look. We get several close-ups where Johnson wants the expressions of his characters to tell the story. He also often times places his camera at ground level giving us the feeling we are looking up at them. This is very effective particularly during the buildup to a couple of key action scenes. Speaking of the action, it is incredibly done. It’s a brutal and violent mix of sci-fi and 1980’s gun-blazing action and both work extremely well. Johnson doesn’t skimp on the blood but it feels right at home in this picture.

I also have to talk about the acting. The performances in “Looper” are solid throughout with some being Oscar caliber in my opinion. Joseph Gordon-Levitt continues to prove that he’s a top Hollywood talent. Here he’s armed with heavy makeup, a prosthetic nose, and a Bruce Willis smirk. The funny thing is he channels Willis perfectly from his slouch to his expressions, all while giving a very different performance than Willis. And speaking of Willis, he is excellent here. What stood out was the range that he shows in this performance. For instance there are scenes where he’s a cranky codger, an emotional wreck, and laugh out loud funny. But there were also scenes that reminded me of John McClane from Die Hard – steadily yelling while his machine gun pumps loads of lead. Emily Blunt is fantastic as always, Jeff Daniels just eats up his lines, and Paul Dano plays the same measly, wormy character that he always plays. Then there is young Pierce Gagnon who is phenomenal. He’s such a tender presence but his performance goes well beyond that standard cute kid role. He’s given a lot to do and he really stands out.

I’m sure it’s obvious by now that I really liked “Looper”. But it’s not a perfect movie. While the story is intensely original and thoroughly engaging, there are a few plot holes as well as some pointless throw away scenes in the first half of the movie. For example early on we see young Joe has a relationship with a prostitute. He appears to be quite fond of her even though she’s only in a couple of scenes, one of which seems to be there strictly to add some pointless content to the film. This time could have been spent better elsewhere. I also couldn’t help but ask the question – what type of crime organization would actually hire Paul Dano’s character to be a looper? His performance is fine but I had a hard time believing in him. That said, he did provide us with one of the films very best sequences. I’ll just leave it at that.

I could go on and on about “Looper” but let me just sum it up by saying that it’s the most ambitious and imaginative movie I’ve seen all year. It’s smart and audacious and Rian Johnson actually pulls it all off. It’s completely unpredictable and no matter how hard you try, you never catch up with it. It’s always one step ahead of you. “Looper” takes the familiar device of time travel to new places through a brilliantly original concept. Johnson lays out that concept clearly for the audience. Then he takes it, shakes it, twists it, and contorts it and then challenges the audience to keep up. He dabbles in different genres and themes, examines societies, questions morality, and asks us to take it all in and process it. That’s something I’m happy to do especially when the movie is this good.

VERDICT – 4.5 STARS

“SEEKING JUSTICE” – 3 STARS

by

10

Nicolas Cage’s career has been amazing to watch and I don’t necessarily mean that positively. The once promising actor and Academy Award winner is now known more for his current long streak of bad movies. But yet Cage continues to pump out these pictures every year. That brings us to “Seeking Justice”, his latest film co-starring Guy Pearce and January Jones. This action thriller isn’t the sharpest movie you’ll find nor is it one that will stick with you long after watching it. But I found it to be a fairly entertaining picture and definitely better that Cage’s most recent efforts.

Cage plays Will Gerard, a high school English and literature teacher in New Orleans. He has a great life. He loves his job and he just recently celebrated his wedding anniversary with his lovely wife Laura (Jones). One night as Will is hanging out with his best friend Jimmy (Harold Perrineau), Laura is attacked and raped while walking to her car from a concert. Later, as Will is sitting in the hospital waiting room, he is approached by a mysterious man named Simon (Pearce). Simon tells him he works for an organization that knows who raped Laura and can take care of the rapist in ways the police can’t. In return, Will has to promise to do the organization a small favor at a later date. Will struggles with the decision but ends up saying yes which catapults him into a mess he never anticipated.

The idea behind the story isn’t a bad one and I found myself interested in the whole grief-stricken husband seeking justice from a secret organization thing. Cage actually gives a fairly solid performance as a very ‘anti-action hero’ hero. January Jones is also good individually as his wife. The problem is they have no real chemistry whatsoever and I had a hard time believing in their relationship. Putting that aside, their relationship takes some interesting turns as she copes with her life after such a violent crime and he deals with the decision he made regarding her assailant. Unfortunately these and several other key plot points are never fleshed out. For example, there’s one point in the movie where Laura is just magically over the trauma of her rape. It’s as if the film just decided to drop it altogether. Another example is when Laura finally finds out what Will did. We never see them wrestle over his decision that has put them in such danger. There are several things like this that feel terribly short-changed.

Another issue I had was with the abrupt and almost jarring jumps the movie makes in the first half. This too is related to what feels like shortcuts in the storytelling. There are mammoth emotional holes where the movie skips from one moment to another. And it’s unfortunate because the movie is never boring. There is some good tension and there are some cool twists even though none of them are particularly that surprising. And even though the film ends up taking a pretty conventional path, I still found it kept my interest despite the shortcomings of the script.

I’ve talked about Cage and Jones. Guy Pearce, who is always great, has a lot of fun with his shady Simon character. When I first saw him he reminded me of Paul Newman’s character early on in “The Verdict”. Newman was checking the newspapers for car accident fatalities then attending their funerals where he shamelessly slipped his lawyer business card to the grieving family. Simon hits up Will at the most vulnerable time – an almost predatory approach. Pearce slithers in and out of his scenes and he was the best part of the film even though his character doesn’t have as much mystery behind him as he first leads you to believe.

“Seeking Justice” isn’t a bad movie. In fact it’s a considerable step up for Cage. But is that really saying anything? There are clear issues with the plot and tone and the story ends up with the traditional loud, action-driven finale. But it’s hard to really rail against a movie that did keep my interest throughout and had some really solid moments. Plus Pearce is Pearce which is always a good thing. As I mentioned earlier, “Seeking Justice” isn’t a movie that will stay with you very long, but it does manage to entertain.

REVIEW: “The Master” (2012)

by

17

The last time we saw acclaimed director Paul Thomas Anderson was in 2007 with his sensational drama “There Will Be Blood”. With it he solidified his position as a film critic favorite. Now he’s back with his next movie, “The Master”. As with every other feature film Anderson has made, he both wrote and directed this audacious drama that bounces between captivating and utterly frustrating. There are some award-worthy performances and loads of ambition, just as you would expect from a PTA feature. But while there were moments where I couldn’t take my eyes off the screen, there are others where the story bogs down in the deliberate pacing and slight self-indulgence. Nonetheless Anderson presses all the right critic’s buttons so this will has a good chance to be an awards season contender.

No one can deny Anderson’s filmmaking skills. “The Master” looks every bit of an epic, landmark film. There are a number of scenes that stand out due to their framing and camera work alone. Anderson uses several amazing tracking shots, sometimes shifting focus three or four times while still maintaining a single fluid shot. He also uses several fantastic locations which he captures through his stylish and precise lensing. I also have to mention the way he recreates America in 1950 both narratively and visually. The wardrobes, hairstyles, furnishings, etc. all fit perfectly, right down to the smallest details. Anderson takes no shortcuts on selling the audience on the period and that’s one of the reasons it’s so easy to connect with the story.

It’s in this 1950 America that we are introduced to Freddie Quell. He’s played by Joaquin Phoenix who gives the performance of his career. While not as breathtaking as Daniel Day-Lewis in “There Will Be Blood”, Phoenix is magnetic portraying a man emotionally scarred from his time in World War 2, or at least that’s what I presume. Freddie’s life is in shambles. He’s a raging alcoholic who resorts to drinking his own concoctions made from paint thinner and any other chemical he can get his hands own. He also has a twisted sex disorder that pops up here and there. His alcoholism is destroying his life and ends up playing an important part in the film. On the other hand, his sex addiction felt terribly underwritten and is only explored by adding a handful of uncomfortable scenes that quite frankly I could have done without. But as I said, Phoenix is brilliant and should be in prime position for an Oscar nomination.

Freddie ends up crossing paths with the charismatic leader of a group called “The Cause” named Lancaster Dodd (wonderfully played by Philip Seymour-Hoffman). Dodd is a self-proclaimed philosopher and intellectual with a steady and devoted group of followers. He also has a way with words which draws Freddie to him and his movement. Dodd takes a special liking to Freddie, at one point calling him his guinea pig but clearly growing more fond of him. Dodd is able to suppress Freddie’s mental issues to the point where Freddie begins to buy into his teachings. But his inner turmoil resurfaces on several occasions making him more and more conflicted.

The story often moves with an amazing rhythm and Phoenix and Hoffman share some mesmerizing scenes together. But for such a hyped picture, I was surprised to see the overall lack of plot. “The Master” features some of the best scenes you’ll see in the theaters this year, but honestly, there’s not a lot that happens within the film’s long running time. But a bigger problem with “The Master” is that for the entire film Anderson keeps the audience at arm’s length from what we are seeing. We’re never allowed to fully get to know the characters who truly are the driving forces behind the entire story. Anderson wants us to do a lot of guesswork and come to our own conclusions. But for me, a little less ambiguity and more intimacy with the characters would have been a big plus.

Overall there is a lot to like about “The Master”. Anderson’s style of filmmaking is about as good as you will find and it really stands out here. The movie looks and feels right at home in post-World War 2 1950 and the cinematography will blow you away. The film is also helped by tremendous performances from Phoenix and Hoffman and I didn’t even talk about Amy Adams’ strong work. Expect to hear all of their names when the Oscar nominations are announced. But while Anderson’s story is good, it doesn’t pack the punch that it’s going for. While it’s fascinating to watch these characters, I couldn’t help but want more. That, combined with a few pacing issues and a couple of scenes it could have done without, keep this from being the Best Picture frontrunner many are touting it as.

VERDICT – 3 STARS

THE THROWDOWN : John Doe vs. Hannibal Lecter

by

16

Wednesday is throwdown day at Keith & the Movies. It’s when we take two movie subjects and pit them against each other and see who’s left standing. Each Wednesday we’ll look at actors, actresses, movies, genres. scenes, and so much more and see how they stand up one-on-one. And it’s not just my opinion that counts. I’ll share my take and then open up the polls to you. Visit each week for a new throwdown. Vote each week to decide the true winner!

Many movies are made by their villains. Some are loud, in-your-face, and charismatic. Others slither under the surface and their presence is felt even as they are rarely seen. In other words, there are a wide variety of movie villains. In today’s Throwdown we are looking at two of the sickest and creepiest villains to ever hit the big screen – John Doe from “Se7en” and Hannibal Lecter from “The Silence of the Lambs”. The question is which one of these truly messed up killers is the sickest and creepiest. Your votes will decide.

David Fincher’s grisly but calculated thriller “Se7en” features detectives Brad Pitt and Morgan Freeman trying to find a serial killer who is patterning his murders off of the Seven Deadly Sins. The two discover each disturbing crime scene but we never completely see the killer, John Doe, until the last few scenes of the film. Kevin Spacey plays this truly twisted murderer who shows up at the police station soaked in the blood of two different people. I won’t give away the end but let’s just say the pure evil John Doe provides one of the most shocking and gruesome endings to a thriller you’ll find. Spacey’s John Doe doesn’t appear in every scene but he permeates every scene and he is chilling, even in his absence.

Everyone knows Hannibal Lecter mainly due to Anthony Hopkins Oscar-winning performance in “The Silence of the Lambs”. Forget about the Hannibal spin-off films, “The Silence of the Lambs” is where Lecter staked his claim as a sick and twisted character. Hopkins is perfect for the role and he manages to mix Lecter’s immense intelligence with his sheer gruesome and murderous side. His manipulative and cryptic conversations with Jodie Foster are mesmerizing and even before he makes his big escape later in the film he’s extremely unnerving. Hannibal Lecter has several memorable lines and memorable scenes and it’s impossible to watch him and not remember him.

So which of these two intelligent yet twisted psychos is the creepiest. You get to decide. Leave your comments below but don’t forget to click below to cast your vote.

“THE CABIN IN THE WOODS” – 3.5 STARS

by

8

I love a good horror movie. But there’s no denying that the horror genre has been struggling and just isn’t as strong as it used to be. Well leave it to Joss Whedon and Drew Goddard to take the genre, turn it on its head, and give it a good shake. Their film “The Cabin in the Woods” is far from conventional even though it certainly starts that way. But the fact is Whedon and Goddard are setting up the audience for what turns out to be a horror comedy that ranges from satirical to a full-blown critique of what the horror genre has become. Goddard directs, Whedon produces, and both write this bit of welcomed freshness that isn’t a perfect film but it certainly works on many levels.

It’s impossible to watch “The Cabin in the Woods” without seeing tips of the hat to several horror movie classics. You’ll also quickly recognize many of the same tropes and devices used in the genre for years. Whedon and Goddard dabble in the familiar territory of slasher movies, zombie flicks, ghost stories, torture porn, and even creature features. But its simply impossible to go into much detail without spoiling the film. Let’s just say that all of these ingredients fit very well into what “The Cabin in the Woods” is trying to do. And trust me, you’ll start out in very familiar territory but things quickly change as the story progresses.

Tell me if you’ve heard this before: five college friends set out to a remote cabin in the woods for a weekend of partying and frolicking. We have the big jock (Chris Hemsworth), the sultry blonde (Anna Hutchison), the studious good guy (Jesse Williams), the dope head (Fran Kranz), and the straight-laced, level-headed heroine (Kristen Connolly). These are all characters we’ve seen over and over in horror films. But here they are used intentionally and with good reason. Obviously their little getaway isn’t going to end well and we get little hints of that along the way. As things begin to go bad, we see these characters making some of the same bone-headed decisions that they always make in these pictures. But the bigger difference here is with the consequences and more specifically who’s behind them. That’s as far as I’m willing to go in describing the story. It’s best to go into the film simply knowing that there is more to it than what you’re introduced to. Just know that things go nuts in the final act and the audience, especially horror fans, will find it an entertaining challenge to process all that we are given.

But the movie does have a few issues that keep it from being a great film. The most glaring issue for me was with the gaping plot holes scattered throughout the story. There were instances where the film changed course while leaving unfinished business behind . There are also a couple of times where certain characters drop off the map. I know I’m being incredibly vague here for fear of spoiling things, but let’s just say the story requires you to sometimes brush aside what seems like useful information. The ending also requires a very abrupt acceptance of what you’re seeing. Don’t get me wrong, it’s lots of fun and it will have you wanting to watch the movie again. But it’s so out-of-the-blue that when the credits start to roll you have to accept what you’ve seen and just go with it.

I didn’t mention one of “The Cabin in the Woods” strongest features – it’s humor. There are some really funny moments in this picture and I found myself laughing out loud on more than one occasion. On the flip side, the movie isn’t scary at all which I found to be a bit disappointing. But then I asked myself if Whedon and Goddard cared if it was scary or not. In the end, this is one part homage and one part critique of a genre that has seen better days. Looking at the movie from that perspective makes it a very satisfying horror experience. And even though it stumbles with its storytelling in a few places, the undeniable freshness, good humor, and blood-soaked final act make it all worthwhile.

5 PHENOMENAL MOVIES FROM 1981

by

22

I recently did a Phenomenal 5 on the movies of 1980. Well now it’s time for 1981. As a kid of the 80’s, there are so many of these films that strike a nostalgic chord with me. There are also many genuinely classic pictures that came out of the decade that still stand up today. As I look at these years I’ve decided to allow both nostalgia and classic movies to influence my choices. That was never more evident than with my picks for the year 1981. Of course, with so many movies released that year, I couldn’t call this the definitive list. But there is no denying that these 5 movies from 1981 are certainly phenomenal.

#5 – “AN AMERICAN WEREWOLF IN LONDON”

1981 wasn’t the greatest year for movies but it did give us some memorable ones including “An American Werewolf in London”. This crazy mix of horror and comedy follows two American backpackers vacationing through the English countryside. They are attacked by a werewolf which kills one and leaves the other in a London hospital. But everyone knows that if you’re bit by a werewolf you’ll turn into a werewolf and so this story goes. The film features some truly fantastic special effects and Academy Award winning makeup. But one thing that set this apart from most horror pictures is its clever sense of humor from the dialogue to the various moon-oriented songs. It definitely mixes laughs with its buckets of gore.

#4 – “CLASH OF THE TITANS”

I wouldn’t normally think a fantasy film starring Harry Hamlin would be a good experience. But when you throw in Laurence Olivier, Burgess Meredith, and special effects from the master of stop-motion animation Ray Harryhausen, I’m automatically onboard. This mythological fantasy picture pits our bushy haired hero Perseus against an awesome assortment of creatures including Medusa and of course the mighty Kraken. Sure the movie is campy and loaded with cheese. But there were many of these fantasy movies that hit the theaters during the 70’s and 80’s and “Clash of the Titans” is one of the best of them.

#3 – “THE ROAD WARRIOR”

“The Road Warrior” was the second film in the Mad Max series and it was the movie that put Mel Gibson on the international map. This Australian action picture from George Miller creates one of the most impressive postapocalyptic landscapes in the movies. Gibson’s Max is a tough-as-nails ex-cop who ends up helping a group of settlers who are being terrorized by a murderous gang. The film features some amazing action, none better than the breath-taking vehicle chase scene at the end that still rivals anything else like it. This isn’t a movie that will appeal to everyone but it’s one I thoroughly enjoy.

#2 – “THE EVIL DEAD”

“The Evil Dead” remains one of my favorite horror pictures of all time and to this day it still creeps me out. Two friends and aspiring filmmakers Sam Raimi and Bruce Campbell made “The Evil Dead” with a tiny budget of around $350,000. Now it’s blossomed into a cult classic with two really good sequels. A group of college kids head out to spend their spring break in a cabin in the woods. Once there, they discover The Book of the Dead and end up unleashing a horde of demons who begin killing them off one-by-one. It’s unashamedly gory but intensely creepy. It’s also a great example of quality filmmaking without the benefit of boatloads of money. And of course Campbell is a blast to watch. This is without a doubt a horror movie classic.

#1 – “RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK”

Without a doubt, one of my favorite movies from the 80’s was Steven Spielberg’s “Raiders of the Lost Ark”. Not only was this a classic action picture but it introduced one of the most iconic cinema heroes of all time – Indiana Jones. Harrison Ford makes Indiana great through his pitch-perfect performance, rugged grit, and cracking whip. The movie features one of the greatest action-fueled character introductions you’ll find as Indiana and a young Alfred Molina venture into a deadly cave to retrieve a golden head. But his true adventure starts after he finds out the Nazis may have found the lost Ark of the Covenant. Indy races off to find it before the Nazi’s do and encounters a great assortment of friends and villains along the way. Brilliant construction, amazing action sequences, and just the right amount of humor help make this a true movie classic.

There are my five picks of phenomenal movies from 1981. Do you see one that I missed? Disagree with my selections? Please take time to share your thoughts.