REVIEW: “Focus”

FOCUS poster

I can’t say I have always shared the general enthusiasm for Will Smith’s movies or his performances. It’s not that he is a bad actor. But, with a few exceptions, he often seems to play variations of the same type of guy. That is certainly not a problem for his fans who have made him a bonafide box office draw, but as someone who doesn’t always care for ‘that guy’ he plays, it can be a turn off.

Smith’s time on the big screen hasn’t been as prominent as during his heyday. He had at least one film (sometimes more) come out every year between 1995 and 2008. “Focus” ushers in a bit of a return to the starring spotlight and once again he is playing a variation of the same type of guy. He’s cool, stylish, cocky, and a bit of a wise guy. Sound familiar? Here he plays a dapper professional con-man with a seemingly endless amount of resources at his disposal. But more on that later.

 

FOCUS1

The story begins with Smith’s character, Nicky Spurgeon, being seduced and conned by a novice scammer named Jess (Margot Robbie). Nicky isn’t fooled and he sees through her amateurish scheme. A few days later Jess approaches Nicky in dire straits begging to be his protegé. Nicky agrees and tests out her sticky fingers on Bourbon Street in New Orleans. Impressed by her success Nicky invites Jess to join his crew. A few good scores and a painfully predictable romance follows.

Nicky’s dad always taught him that business and pleasure don’t mix, so he drops Jess after realizing he was falling for her. But obviously the story doesn’t stop there and the two meet again three years later in Buenos Aires. Is it a chance meeting or doesn’t Jess have something up her sleeve? A web of twists, turns, deceptions, billionaires, parties, and race cars make up the second half of the story.

FOCUS2

There are times when “Focus” could be called a fashion extravaganza masquerading as a con-artist movie. Some scenes serve only as opportunities for the two stars to show off their good looks, nice physiques, and chic attire. This works well with the aforementioned typical Will Smith character. We get a lot of that here. It’s interesting that the film’s best scene features Smith casting aside that persona and showing us a vulnerable and intensely human side of his character. I won’t build it up but you will know it when you see it.

Ultimately “Focus” is a movie stymied by its amoral vanity, its overload of mediocre twists and turns, and the lukewarm chemistry between Smith and Robbie. If you view it through a very simple and straightforward lens you’ll notice a few fun moments. But it is never as cool or crafty as it tries to be and designer sunglasses, swanky sports jackets, and posh gowns only carry things so far. And even the movie’s title makes you wonder if you are the one being conned because there isn’t a lot of focus here.

VERDICT – 2 STARS

2 Stars

“DJANGO UNCHAINED” – Breaking down the trailer…

Everyone has probably seen the new “Django Unchained” trailer that is supposed to hit big screens in front of tomorrow’s “Prometheus”. It’s the new film from Quentin Tarantino that’s set to be released this Christmas. This is a highly anticipated trailer from a highly anticipated film. In fact it’s #8 on my “Most Anticipated Films of 2012” list. But I have to admit, I have mixed feelings when it comes to Tarantino and I also had mixed feelings after seeing the trailer.

Some view Tarantino as a visionary and a filmmaking genius. For me, he has an undeniable style. His visual presentation is very impressive and the way he crafts his stories show off a slick and unique flare for storytelling. But while I think Tarantino is a solid director in terms of style, I’ve never seen him as the writing genius that others have. I think he is a case of style over substance. Now don’t misunderstand me. Not ever movie has to be thick with complexity. There’s nothing wrong with making simple but stylish films. Some have made the case for the underlying themes found in many of Tarantino’s pictures. Some I can see while others are a bit of a stretch. If their were more deeper meaning to his films, they didn’t connect with me. I tend to see his movies as hyper-violent exercises broken down by clever and unique forms of storytelling. In other words, a simple story told with a slick visual style.

This brings me to “Django Unchained”. I was really anxious to see this trailer for several reasons. First, I was interested to see how Tarantino would present the “old west”. Say what you will about him, but Tarantino is a film lover first so the fact that he would invest in creating a modern-day spaghetti western really appealed to me. That brings me to the second reason I was excited about this trailer (and film). I love the spaghetti western genre. Sergio Leone remains one of my favorite directors of all time and his spaghetti westerns remain my favorite westerns of all time. “A Fistful of Dollars”, “For a Few Dollars More”, “The Good, the Bad, the Ugly”, and “Once Upon a Time in the West” are wonderful films and seeing Tarantino tip his hat to them is great.

That being said, the trailer left me feeling mixed. Now let me preface this by saying that I know you don’t judge a movie by a trailer. Just look at the first trailer for “The Avengers”. It was slow and pretty lifeless yet the movie was a fun action romp that I loved. But there were things with the “Django Unchained” trailer that really left me scratching my head. One key issue I had was the jarring shift in tone after Django is, well, unchained. The James Brown music kicks in which I thought was a little self-indulgent. The movie seemed to be flaunting it’s cleverness and style at the cost of setting the mood and tone. I was also surprised at some of the cheesy lines that, again, seems more aimed at a comedy that a spaghetti western. On the flip side, the production value looks fantastic and it doesn’t look as if Tarantino is going to shy away from the grit you’ll find in many of the great spaghetti westerns. Then there’s the fun assortment of characters. Let’s take a look at the big three:

DJANGO – (Jaime Foxx)

My biggest question mark for this entire production was the casting of Jaime Foxx. It’s said that originally Will Smith was sought after for the part but I’m not sure he would be a big step-up from Foxx for this type of role. Foxx is a decent enough actor. I liked him in “Ray” but not as much as most people. I actually thought he was better in “Collateral Damage” and in his sketch comedy work on the TV show “In Living Color”. There are elements to each of these past performances in the “Django Unchained” trailer. But the trailer did nothing to really sell me on Foxx as a genuine western buttkicker. At times it seemed like he was doing straight parody and it didn’t really work for me. Can Foxx handle this role remains the biggest question for me moving ahead.

 DR. KING SCHULTZ – (Christoph Waltz)

I love Christoph Waltz. He was the very best thing about Tarantino’s last film “Inglourious Basterds”. So naturally I was drawn to the idea of him playing a German bounty hunter in the wild west. Waltz seems to have a wide range and I have no doubt he will be able to handle this material. He looks right at home with the Schultz character and even with his exposition-heavy contribution to the trailer, I found myself drawn to him. Unfortunately he looks to be softer and friendlier than I hope he turns out to be and he features a gun draw so slow that he would never live through a Sergio Leone duel. But Schultz looks to be an intriguing character and it’s still unclear whether he’s to be trusted or not.

CALVIN CANDIE – (Leonardo DiCaprio)

Talk about an actor that has really shown a range. DiCaprio has proven to be more than capable of handling a wide assortment of roles and he certainly was an interesting choice to play the evil plantation owner Calvin Candie. The first thing we quickly notice is that DiCaprio is having tons of fun with this role. He clearly has a ruthless side but there is a suave and sophisticated charm about him as well. In the trailer DiCaprio shows us a character that seems completely self-absorbed but yet mesmerizing. Plus he has the best line of the entire trailer: “Gentlemen, you had my curiosity, but now you have my attention”. Of all that I saw in this trailer, DiCaprio’s character and performance excited me the most.

So there’s a few thought’s on the trailer so many are talking about. Have you seen the “Django Unchained” trailer yet? What were your thoughts?

REVIEW: “Men in Black 3”

Let me preface this review by saying that I wasn’t the biggest fan of the previously two “Men in Black” movies. But I was certainly in the minority. The first “Men in Black” earned just under $600 million at the box office. The sequel brought in another $440 million. Obviously expectations are high for this third installment and it’s $300 million budget. Both Will Smith and Tommy Lee Jones are back as is director Barry Sonnenfeld and Steven Spielberg as Executive Producer.

It’s been almost 10 years since we last saw Agent K (Jones) and Agent J (Smith). K is still the stiff-as-a-board, emotionless, straight-shooter, J is still a rapid-fire wisecracker with attitude to spare, and aliens are still on earth masquerading as humans. They both still serve as operatives working for a secret agency commissioned to protect the Earth from alien threats. This time their main threat is an alien named Boris (Jemaine Clement). Agent K apprehended Boris back in 1969 and put him in a lunar prison designed specifically for him. But Boris escapes and travels back in time to kill Agent K before he is able to thwart his original plan. After noticing K’s absence and a difference in the timeline, J travels back to 1969 a few days prior to K’s death to protect him from Boris.

The movie starts off looking and feeling just like a “Men in Black” film. Funny exchanges between K and J and alien confrontations get the movie off on the right foot. There’s also a really cool time travel sequence as J heads back to 1969. It’s here that the movie both introduces it’s biggest asset as well as hit it’s biggest speed bumps. Josh Brolin plays the younger Agent K and he is fantastic. I swear there were times where I completely believed I was watching a younger Tommy Lee Jones instead of someone doing a Tommy Lee impersonation. Whether it’s his accent, his nicknames, or facial expressions, Brolin nails a 29-year old Agent K.

But while Brolin shines, the story really spins it’s wheels. There are a few back-in-time set pieces and late 60’s details that are fun but they get lost in the story that’s really pretty flat and lifeless. The humor loses it’s pop and seems to rely much too heavily on Will Smith’s quick wit. There’s great chemistry between Brolin and Smith but even it gets bogged down in the sometimes drab exposition. I have to admit, I found myself struggling to stay focused and interested in what was going on especially when an all-knowing alien named Griffin (Michael Stuhlbarg) enters the picture. I did enjoy Emma Thompson and Alice Eve as the older and younger Agent O and the movie is a visual delight. I just wish there was more energy and substance to go with the movie’s stronger points.

While I did have issues with the middle of the movie, it was almost made up for by a really good and surprisingly tender ending. There’s no way I can go any further without spoiling things, but I’ll just say that it makes you look at all three “Men in Black” movies from a different perspective. The ending is well conceived and even though there were a few questions that immediately came to mind, it really worked for me.

“Men in Black 3” most certainly isn’t a great movie but it’s definitely an upgrade over the almost unwatchable second film. Then again, that’s not really saying a much. MiB3 starts off strong and has a nice ending but it’s what’s in between that keeps it from being as good as it could be. Brolin is the highlight and he’s a lot of fun to watch. There are also some other pretty good performances. As I mentioned, the visuals are high quality, exactly what you would expect. But none of these pluses can outweigh the minuses. There’s just not enough substance or humor to make this anything more than an okay movie.

VERDICT – 2 STARS

HOLLYWOOD WRITER’S BLOCK? SEQUELS, REBOOTS, & REMAKES

If there is one constant in the modern-day movie industry, it’s the steady barrage of motion picture sequels, reboots, and remakes that bombard theaters each year. For a while now it’s seemed as if the sheer number of sequels, reboots, and remakes has steadily grown from year to year. Just look at 2011. The year featured reboots such as “Rise of the Planet of the Apes” and “X-Men: First Class”. We also got several pointless remakes like “Footloose”, “Fright Night”, “The Smurfs”, and “Arthur”. And of course, the year was loaded with sequels from popular “franchises” such as Harry Potter, The Transformers, Twilight, and Pirates of the Caribbean; animated films like “Cars 2”, “Kung Fu Panda 2”, and “Happy Feet Two”; and a host of other stuff ranging from “Spy Kids” to “Scream 4” to “Hangover 2”.

That was last year. Just take a look at what we have already seen and what we can expect for the rest of 2012. It’s still early in the movie year and we’ve already seen remakes like “21 Jump Street” and “The Three Stooges” and a host of sequels such as “Journey 2”, “Wrath of the Titans”, “Underworld Awakening”, and “Ghost Rider”. To add to it, this year we have already seen  3-D re-releases of three movies: “Star Wars: Episode 1”, “Beauty and the Beast”, and “Titanic”. Here’s just a sample of what’s still coming out this year:

  • “Men in Black III” (sequel)
  • “Piranha 3DD” (sequel – I guess)
  • “Madagascar 3” (sequel)
  • “G.I. Joe: Retaliation (sequel/reboot)
  • “The Amazing Spider-Man” (reboot)
  • “Ice Age: Continental Drift” (sequel)
  • “The Dark Knight Rises” (sequel)
  • “Step Up: Revolution” (…….sigh…..)
  • “The Bourne Legacy” (sequel)
  • “Total Recall” (remake)
  • “The Expendables 2” (sequel)
  • “Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn Part 2” (sequel)
  • “Resident Evil: Retribution (sequel)
  • “Paranormal Activity 4” (sequel…kinda)
  • “Red Dawn” (remake)
  • “Skyfall” (sequel)

There are several more that you can expect to see in 2012 but you get the point. It seems that sequels and remakes aren’t a big thing these days. They’ve become commonplace. Now let it be known that there are some movies on the list that I am really excited about seeing. It’s also true that some sequels are incredible movies. It’s also worth noting that THE TOP 9 GROSSING MOVIES of 2011 were sequels which shows that there is an audience for them. So it certainly isn’t a question of bad financial decisions and it’s certainly not unreasonable to make movies that will sell tickets. But it begs the question, is there a shortage of originality and creativity in Hollywood?

I can remember when a movie sequel was a pretty big deal. You didn’t see many of them and when you did it usually drew a lot of attention. That’s certainly not the case today. And Hollywood’s sudden affection for remaking 80’s movies and TV shows has led to more head-scratching results than memorable films. I guess in a way that’s my biggest concern. Just how many of today’s sequels, reboots, and remakes are really good, memorable films? How many will stay with us for the rest of our lives. How many are just easy money grabs that have little to no lasting impact? I tend to think more of them are utterly forgettable than true movie treasures.

But as I mentioned, not every sequel, reboot, or remake is bad. Christopher Nolan’s “The Dark Knight” not only rose above the superhero genre but it was an incredible movie. This year’s “The Dark Knight Rises” is my most anticipated movie of the year. And there are still many good quality filmmakers that are making great original movies for us to enjoy each year. Add in independent films and foreign cinema and there are several outlets to discover good movies. But so much of Hollywood’s efforts and resources are going into treading the same water that I can’t help but wonder, is the struggling industry desperate for dollars at the theater or does Hollywood have a bad case of writer’s block that only seems to be getting worse?