Elysium worth hanging around for two hours

Movie Review: Elysium

 

Elysium is writer and director Neill Blomkamp’s second feature after District 9. Like District 9, Elysium is a thinly disguised communiqué on the state of the human race in the early twenty-first century. Where District 9 focuses on race relations, Elysium delves into class division. But neither put up any flashing neon signs announcing their intentions. Our focus and attention remain on the characters and story, a testament to Mr. Blokamp’s movie-making skills.

                Elysium is the name of the space station that’s become an Eden for the human race’s wealthy. It is an Eden where not only are the lawns well groomed but so too are the people. All of humanity’s physical deficiencies, including disease, have been eradicated through modern technology. The one thing that hasn’t developed is inclusiveness. On Earth everyone struggles with the burdens of mortality. There are routine attempts by Earth dwellers to breach Elysium in order to save their terminally ill but they are met with lethal resistance from Elysium’s security forces, led by Secretary of Defense Jessica Delacourt (Jodie Foster).

Elysium shares the same traits as old westerns. The stories involve characters who set out on a journey to redeem themselves or to set past wrongs right. Max (Matt Damon) is a reformed thief doing his best to stay out of trouble. Mr. Damon with shaved head and tattooed body gives Max a menacing persona needed in the slums of Earth. Mr. Damon’s boyish demeanor makes Max’s loyalty and tender side believable. He is injured by a patrol of police robots and is taken to a hospital where he is reunited with a nurse, Fray (Alice Braga). He and Fray shared an innocent childhood romance from which they made promises to each other that still occupy Max’s dreams. Max returns to work with his injured arm since job security is nonexistent to be a victim of radiation poison due to a mechanical malfunction. He is given five days to live which prompts an intense determination to reach Elysium and a cure.

The action revolves around Matt’s efforts to get to the “Promised Land.” He recruits the assistance of Spider (Wagner Moura), a technical wizard and gang lord. Spider accepts his offer but only if Max does a favor in turn. Spider suits Max up with a steel computerized skeleton that increases Max’s strength and allows his brain to capture computerized data. They launch a plot to capture Elysium’s data which is stored in the brain of one of its corporate denizens so they can infiltrate and override Elysium’s computer systems.

But in between the steel, electronics, space stations and weapons is empathy. The empathy is what makes “Elysium” a good movie. It is about humans helping and sacrificing for each other. There is a sincerity with which Mr. Damon plays Max and the way Mr. Blomkamp tells his story that it becomes easy to latch on to Max and hope he gets to his Promised Land.

 

Mr. Damon is surrounded by some solid acting. Ms. Braga doesn't ring a false note. Ms. Foster maybe considered one of the best actors alive but she doesn’t have much room to maneuver as Secretary of Defense Delacourt. Ms. Foster can add layers to even mundane scenes but Delacourt’s deception and maneuvering to obtain more power doesn’t allow Ms. Foster to change gears.  Mr. Moura, on the other hand, makes his scenes pop. His bargaining with Max is an engaging affair.

 

The most important movie devise used in science fiction movies is sound effect. The machines and vehicles of the future may look cheap but if they sound authentic then the world we are spending time in is believable. Mr. Blomkamp has paid attention to the sounds of his movie which adds a jolt. Ryan Amon has created a score that intensifies the menace and the drama. Part fog horn crossed with an electronic scratch, it enhances the feeling of dwelling in an uninhabitable land while giving off a warning that danger is approaching. It adds goose bumps to an already intriguing movie.

 

 Written and directed by Neill Blomkamp; director of photography, Trent Opaloch; edited by Julian Clarke and Lee Smith; music by Ryan Amon; production design by Philip Ivey; visual effects supervisor, Peter Muyzers; costumes by April Ferry; produced by Bill Block, Mr. Blomkamp and Simon Kinberg; released by TriStar Pictures. Running time: 1 hour 42 minutes.

WITH: Matt Damon (Max), Jodie Foster (Delacourt), Sharlto Copley (Kruger), Alice Braga (Frey), Diego Luna (Julio), Wagner Moura (Spider) and William Fichtner (John Carlyle).

Better to go get a Bud then to watch The Millers

Movie Review: We’re the Millers

 

Comedy is laughing at the tragedy that befalls others. But when that tragedy has been set up for the purpose of making us laugh it loses its appeal. Director Rawson Marshall Thurber’s (The Mysteries of Pittsburg, Dodgeball: A True Underdog Story) We’re the Millers is a movie that when pitched must have seemed like a solid idea for a comedy. But it was filmed as though it was going to be seen during a primetime line-up with other television sitcoms. As a movie it doesn’t have any narrative flow. Whatever edge a story about a marijuana dealer, a stripper, a runaway and an awkward teenager who collaborate to move drugs into this country might have had has been lost.

                David Clark (Jason Sudeikis) is a thirty-something marijuana dealer who has made a good living doing something he’s done on the side since college. Unfortunately, David involves himself in an altercation involving a runaway girl, Casey (Emma Roberts), and some hooligans and his profits and savings are robbed. He owes his supplier, Brad Gurdlinger (Ed Helms), putting him at Brad’s mercy. David has no options but to accept Brad’s assignment to transfer a small shipment of marijuana from Mexico back to Denver. How he does it is up to David but there is a time limit.

                Lacking ingenuity, David is inspired by a couple driving through Denver in a motorhome. His plan is to go to Mexico disguised as a tourist vacationing with his family. He shaves, gets a haircut and shops for touristy clothes influenced by primetime sitcoms and the “Simpsons.” Using cash he recruits Casey, Kenny (Will Poulter) –  a latch-key teenager who hasn’t seen his mother in a week – and his next door neighbor Rose (Jennifer Aniston), who happens to be a stripper, to be his family. They set off on their expedition. The rest is easily figured out. They make it into Mexico without a hitch. All is smooth when they arrive at the drug lord’s compound and the “small” shipment fills up their RV. They start their journey back and have to overcome a break down, the border patrol, the drug lord wanting his shipment back and the company of another traveling motorhome family.

                The frustration that builds from watching We’re the Millers comes from the tip-offs before the jokes. The spider that crawls into a fruit basket and stays put for half the movie until it’s convenient for it to crawl up the leg and into the shorts of Kenny. Kenny gets a lesson on the proper way to kiss a girl from both his imitation sister and mother while his phony dad takes pictures so it doesn’t come as a surprise when the object of his affection walks in on them. There are four credited screenwriters – Bob Fisher, Steve Faber (both screenwriters for The Wedding Crashers), Sean Anders (Mr. Popper’s Penguins) and John Morris (Hot Tub Time Machine)- and yet no one seemed to feel that a low level drug dealer with a runaway, a stripper and a naïve teenage boy could produce some cutting edge humor. The Wedding Crashers had more of an edge than We’re the Millers. But to be fair, the screenwriters are not the ones in charge of the movie’s production. I’m sure the studio wanted their main stars to be in as funny a movie as possible, so they sent the word down to make sure there were as many comedy skits as possible to get their money’s worth from their stars.

                Ms. Aniston, Mr. Sudeikis, Ms. Roberts and Mr. Poulter do a commendable job with the script they were given. They seem to be having a good time, which makes sitting through the skits less painful. It is also a sign that Mr. Thurber let his stars have free reign. It would have been nice if Mr. Thurber took this movie by the reins and asked his screenwriters to make the narrative flow. The four characters don’t want to be with each other – maybe with the exception of Kenny who is looking for any kind of attention – but get talked into this crusade by David only because of the money he offers them. Being locked up in an RV with these odd characters should be enough fodder for comedic situations without having to set up poor gags.

                The most intriguing character is Rose. She elicits many questions. For one, how is she not able to pay rent being a stripper? The motivating factor which makes David’s proposition desirable is that she is evicted from her apartment. Rose is fortyish, okay, let’s say in her late thirties, whose been stripping for a while. She is attractive, smart and has survival instincts so you would think she would be working at the most popular gentlemen’s club in Denver. Why doesn’t she have the money to pay her rent? It’s an obvious question that’s a major glare in the story. There could have been all sorts of other factors to have set Rose off on the trip. She is an intriguing character for the fact that the screenwriters write her as someone who has smarts but uses her body to make a living. Mr. Thurber didn’t do much directing with Ms. Aniston because she played the role as though Rachel Green became that stripper. The movie would have benefited if Mr. Thurber and Ms. Aniston had explored the darker and edgier side of Rose. Ms. Aniston has done it before and was more exciting to watch when she played complicated characters in Friends with Money and Horrible Bosses.

                Instead We’re the Millers would be better seen on TBS or TNT right after an episode of Friends where it would answer the question of what ever happened to Rachel?

Directed by Rawson Marshall Thurber; written by Bob Fisher, Steve Faber, Sean Anders and John Morris, based on a story by Mr. Fisher and Mr. Faber; director of photography, Barry Peterson; edited by Mike Sale; music by Theodore Shapiro and Ludwig Goransson; production design by Clayton Hartley; costumes by Shay Cunliffe; produced by Vincent Newman, Tucker Tooley, Happy Walters and Chris Bender; released by Warner Brothers Pictures. Running time: 1 hour 50 minutes.

WITH: Jennifer Aniston (Rose O’Reilly), Jason Sudeikis (David Clark), Emma Roberts (Casey Mathis), Nick Offerman (Don Fitzgerald), Kathryn Hahn (Edie Fitzgerald), Ed Helms (Brad Gurdlinger), Will Poulter (Kenny Rossmore), Molly Quinn (Melissa Fitzgerald), Tomer Sisley (Pablo Chacon) and Matthew Willig (One-Eye).

"2 Guns" is packing action!

Movie Review: "2 Guns"

 Director Baltasar Kormakur’s "2 Guns" is a rare throw back to the days of film noir. The basic ingredients of film noir are a major score (in this case the robbing of a bank), a double cross and an engaging hero, who, along with the audience, doesn’t know who to trust or who not to. Mr. Kormakur has made a riveting movie where the action is exciting and makes sense (a lot of the action in movies today is just for show) as well as a mystery about whose money was robbed, who’s after the money and who’s going to end up with the money. The two stars, Denzel Washington and Mark Wahlberg, are stuck in the middle but their appeal and chemistry make it easy for us to latch on to their fates.


Mr. Washington’s Robert Trench is the one who’s grounded. He wants to be in control of any situation he’s involved with. He thinks things out, plans and then strategizes. Mr. Wahlberg’s Michael "Stigs" Stigman regards caution as a speed bump. He believes he can adapt to any situation and runs head long into the chaos confident that his skills- both wit and athleticism- will bail him out. His recklessness is agreeable only because his motives are honorable. He believes in loyalty to his friends and to the organizations of which he joined. Bobby has been scarred by both associates and by organizations and analyzes all with suspicion. It’s a wonderful pairing both in characters and in the actors who play them. Their sparing and attempts to clean up their mess by using opposing strategies is entertaining. But even this caliber of talent would be wasted if it wasn’t for a great story and good script.

The screenwriter Blake Masters has written a movie, based on the graphic novel by Steven Grant, where the story not only has baffled the main characters but keeps the audience off balance. Stigs and Bobby have teamed up to rob a bank where they think a Mexican drug lord (Edward James Olmos) has stashed his laundered money. When the deed is done they are happy to learn there’s a lot more money then what was expected but are baffled by the lack of resistance. They each went into the robbery with different motives, none of which would have benefited their partner. The larger and more powerful parties who are interested in the money put Stig’s and Bobby’s fates on a rollercoaster. Mr. Master has done a wonderful job of weaving a web of deception that keeps the audience from ever guessing what the next scene will bring. Adversaries in one scene must partner up in the next; a reliable collaborator may turn into a betrayer.

The script is sharp and we get a sense of who Bobby and Stig are by just listening to them converse. With the exception of a few throw away lines helping to establish Stig’s flirtatious nature toward the opposite sex the dialogue between two clever opposites adds flavor to an intriguing story.

The supporting characters are well shaped and Mr. Kormakur has filled the supporting roles with some wily veterans. There are not many varying degrees from which to choose on how to play a Mexican drug lord. Salma Hayek in "Savages" had her daughter’s love to worry about as well as the productivity of her cartel. There is nothing differentiating Mr. Olmos’ drug lord from any other but he is engaging in a brutal way. He is threatening but allows enough humanity to drip out for us to care about his bafflement over the mysteries hanging over the money. Bill Paxton is the C.I.A representative whose mind has run off the tracks. Mr. Paxton turns up the voltage making his performance menacingly juicy. Paula Patton seems a little light as a DEA agent but the perception puts us on unsteady ground when the story begins to shift. We buy into her role after we’ve been through the first twist and turns of the story.

Mr. Kormakur does a nice job of keeping the suspense throughout the movie. There are pockets within the action where these two characters grow on each other and our affection for them grows as well. Mr. Kormakur films the fight scenes and chase sequences clearly which is a rarity this summer. But its best feature is two main characters an audience can put their faith into and take a ride with in an exciting and suspenseful movie.
Directed by Baltasar Kormakur; written by Blake Masters, based on the BOOM! Studios graphic novels by Steven Grant; director of photography, Oliver Wood; edited by Michael Tronick; music by Clinton Shorter; production design by Beth Mickle; costumes by Laura Jean Shannon; produced by Marc Platt, Randall Emmett, Norton Herrick, Adam Siegel, George Furla, Ross Richie and Andrew Cosby; released by Universal Pictures. Running time: 1 hour 41 minutes.

WITH: Denzel Washington (Bobby Trench), Mark Wahlberg (Stig Stigman), Paula Patton (Deb Rees), Bill Paxton (Earl), James Marsden (Quince), Fred Ward (Admiral Tuwey) and Edward James Olmos (Papi Greco).

"Blue Jasmine," Diamond Blanchett.

Movie Review: "Blue Jasmine"

Writer/director Woody Allen’s "Blue Jasmine" is a movie who’s comedic and dramatic impulses derive from the head long crash between the classes. Jasmine (Cate Blanchett), a socialite, loses everything after her husband, Hal (Alec Baldwin), is arrested for financial fraud. Jasmine is forced to drop luxurious habits cold turkey and has to move into her sister’s apartment where she goes into major withdrawal. There are a lot of undercurrents in "Blue Jasmine:" behavior between the classes, money and codes of conduct. But at its heart is a tortured heroine who generates a morbid fascination as she spirals into madness. It is a classic tragedy refreshed by Mr. Allen for the twenty-first century.

Jasmine has latched on to the golden ticket which is Hal’s life. She left college early to marry- giving up a chance at a career of her own- and master that complex game of being a socialite. It is a world were the names on the labels tell if one’s fashionable, location of residences settles rank of importance and yardage measures value of wealth. When she falls out of that world she retreats into the care of her sister, Ginger (Sally Hawkins). Coming from a place where words like "modest" and "simple" are demeaning her sister’s apartment becomes an assault on the senses. Ginger takes her under her wing and forces her to focus on a career. Having advised friends about the look of their homes Jasmine feels her talents lay in interior design. With the assistance of Xanax and vodka she shores up her nerve and begins her journey toward independence.

Jasmine is not a likable character. But her transformation is spellbinding. Ms. Blanchett is worth the price to admission in anything she does and in "Blue Jasmine" she gives us an exercise in the stages of decline. To start with she is the faithful wife who maintains a polished surface even though storms are raging around her. She clings to her position sacrificing her dignity. Then comes the shock of actually mingling with a lower class. She treats her visit to Ginger’s as a sentence and looks as though she were confined to the refuge room of a fish market whenever she encounters a member of her sister’s class. The more she realizes that the life she once lived is not coming back her mind dabbles in the past to keep out the tragedy of the present. She begins to lose focus on reality. Ms. Blanchett’s performance plays all the right notes and makes it hard to keep one’s attention on the story.

The supporting characters, as in all of Mr. Allen’s movies, are rich and shape the story as it unfolds. Ms. Hawkins’ Ginger is a prototype of a long line of Mr. Allen’s supporting female roles. Ms. Hawkins provides the right mixture of sweet and simple. She has accepted her lot in life and is content with only attention, sensitivity and love. She doesn’t stand a chance under Jasmine’s scrutiny. She doesn’t think that there is anything wrong with her friends or tranquil life until Jasmine analyzes it for her. Personalities shape relationships in the lower classes. When Jasmine rings in on Ginger’s life she makes money an issue. The longer Jasmine stays the tighter she grips the reins on Ginger’s life. Ginger decides to make waves in her life by having a taste of what its like to be up on the next rung. Al (a steady Louis C. K) is step up from the relationships she’s used to. The casting of Andrew Dice Clay and Bobby Cannavale as Ginger’s ex-husband and current love interest are authentic stamps of middle class malaise. They are harden and cynical about life but possess a tenderness they want to share with Ginger. Ginger and her band, whether awed or just plain courteous, are, at first, sympathetic to Jasmine. That is until she begins to put a crack their relationships.

Mr. Allen has written a Balzacian tale of which the movies and fiction rarely focus on. "Blue Jasmine" could easily fit within the scenes of Paris of which Balzac wrote about the social mores that were in play for the aristocracy in Paris. To obtain titles and high standing one must be adept at shrewdness, conniving and ruthlessness. Not much has changed in a century and a half. Mr. Allen’s study of this fallen eagle who must now adapt to living with the animals that crawl is a mix of satire, mystery and tragedy. Mr. Allen and his editor Alisa Lepselter ("To Rome With Love," "Midnight in Paris")have done a fine job at intercutting between the past and the present; telling us how Jasmine has ended up where she did but never giving away how this movie will end. Mr. Allen’s script has hit the mark on the mannerisms of two social classes and is insightful about what happens when they mix. He doesn’t linger or make judgments about Jasmine or Hal’s decisions. They have a life style to maintain and they do it. The script is so good but what is missing is a cinematic touch. It would have helped the impact of scenes if Mr. Allen were still in his Ingmar Bergman stage. The approach he took when filming "Manhattan" or "Another Woman," playing with light and darkness and setting up unforgettable imagery, would have put "Blue Jasmine" into an elite group of films. But as it stands "Blue Jasmine" is the benchmark of great movies for 2013.

 

Written and directed by Woody Allen; director of photography, Javier Aguirresarobe; edited by Alisa Lepselter; production design by Santo Loquasto; costumes by Suzy Benzinger; produced by Letty Aronson, Stephen Tenenbaum and Edward Walson; released by Sony Pictures Classics. Running time: 1 hour 36 minutes.

WITH: Alec Baldwin (Hal), Cate Blanchett (Jasmine), Louis C. K. (Al), Bobby Cannavale (Chili), Andrew Dice Clay (Augie), Sally Hawkins (Ginger), Peter Sarsgaard (Dwight) and Michael Stuhlbarg (Dr. Flicker).

"The Conjuring" is worth hanging around for.

Movie Review: "The Conjuring"

Any time you see "Based on true events" starting off a horror film there is a queasy feeling that it could have been you who jumped at a good real estate deal and purchased an abandoned eighteenth century house complete with lake in back, an old dead tree with large branches to hang swings on (or anything else for that matter) and a rowboat tied to a dilapidated pier that no one seems interested in knowing how or why it is there when you arrive on your first day. That’s our star of "The Conjuring," a traditional house that seems like any other.

The movie opens with a prologue about the Warrens, Ed (Patrick Wilson) and Lorraine (Vera Farmiga), who are paranormal investigators and what it is they do. We are then introduced to the Perron’s, Roger (Ron Livingston) and Carolyn (Lili Taylor) and their five daughters who move into the aforementioned house. The first sign that things are amiss is when the dog refuses to enter.

"The Conjuring" is a cross between the movies "Poltergeist" and "The Exorcist." It takes a lot of liberties from both movies including, as in "Poltergeist," surveillance of paranormal activity with equipment available a decade before that movie took place and demon possession from "The Exorcist." But who’s paying attention? Once the dog refuses to enter director James Wan ("Saw," "Insidious") has a tight grip on our dispositions. Mr. Wan uses the sense of the unknown to rattle his audience’s nerves rather then relying on blood and gore. Location helps. He proves that noises in an old house can still stimulate the goose bumps. He builds tension slowly by introducing strange occurrences that, at first, baffle the family. He knows the right time to play an orchestra of basses on low strings while his camera approaches a closet door. The ball starts rolling when the Perrons play a traditional family game where the girls hide while their blindfolded mother seeks them out with only the sound of their clapping to guide her. Of course the clap she picks to follow doesn’t come from a relation. Just when the tension tightens Mr. Wan turns up the heat by throwing in visual hints of the evil that has infested the house.

The screenwriters Chad and Carey Hayes have written a horror movie that bucks the trend of the traditional slasher film. In those pictures the victims’ lack of sense inevitably led them to the butcher’s blade. Whenever there was a noise in the middle of the woods during the dead of night they would cry out for the perpetrator to identify themselves and then investigate when there was no reply. It is a cheap ploy that warns the audience something is about to happen after they take that first step into the woods. The Perron’s, on the other hand, are written with basic intelligence at their disposal. They try to figure out why certain incidences are happening. This handicaps the viewer because we’re not sure what’s waiting for the Perrons around every corner and our nerves aren’t given time to rest. The Hayes have locked the Perrons into the house since they have put all their financial resources into it. Fleeing to a safer haven is not an option. Mr. Livingston and Ms. Taylor’s supporting role status give them the feel of a regular couple that’s easy to relate to. There is that feeling that what’s happening to them could happen to anyone. When they come to their wits end they reach out to the Warrens.

The Warrens act as the "sheriffs" of the film. They are a couple the audience grabs on to for comfort. Ed is a straight-laced investigator. He approaches his job like a scientist checking off the list of probabilities from which this paranormal activity can be attributed. When they’ve concluded that the cause is from some paranormal being they identify what kind and then go about in a scientific matter to rid the affected object of that spirit. Lorraine is a clairvoyant who bridges the spirit world to this one. But the Hayes’ sly screenplay adds a twist to the Warrens relationship which begins to unravel the safety net the audience has latched onto since their arrival.

When leaving the theater and walking in the care of the summer sun- if past experiences have taught you that afternoon is the best time to watch horror movies- you will begin to think about certain scenes and wonder about logic. The conclusion is a chaotic mess. Some explanations don’t add up. But during the heat of those questionable scenes logic is not what’s on the mind. The only thoughts going through your head is whether or not to close your eyes, hide under your seat or run like hell. That’s the sign of a good horror movie. And rule number one: always listen to the dog.

 

Directed by James Wan; written by Chad Hayes and Carey W. Hayes; director of photography, John R. Leonetti; edited by Kirk Morri; music by Joseph Bishara; production design by Julie Berghoff; costumes by Kristin M. Burke; produced by Tony DeRosa-Grund, Peter Safran and Rob Cowan; released by Warner Brothers Pictures. Running time: 1 hour 51 minutes.

WITH: Vera Farmiga (Lorraine Warren), Patrick Wilson (Ed Warren), Ron Livingston (Roger Perron) and Lili Taylor (Carolyn Perron).

"The Wolverine" is a fun ride.

Movie Review: "The Wolverine"

Director James Mangold’s ("Walk the Line," "3:10 to Yuma") "The Wolverine" has taken its introduction from the Marvel Comics 1982 limited series "Wolverine," written by Chris Claremont and drawn by Frank Miller. That is not a bad thing. Mr. Miller at the time was injecting many stories and titles, including Daredevil, with a Japanese influence. The limited series was very cinematic. It combined the animalistic ferocity of Wolverine with the elegance and simplicity of Japanese traditions. The movie would have benefited tremendously if it had followed the artistic lead of the series. "The Wolverine" starts off the same way the limited series did. Wolverine, aka Logan (Hugh Jackman), is out in the wilderness doing some meditation and soul searching. He comes across a bear that was shot with a poison arrow by a group of hunters. These hunters do not bother to track and kill it so the bear goes on a rampage killing some campers. Wolverine puts the bear out of its misery then tracks the hunters. He is about to introduce them to his form of justice when a Japanese girl, Yukio (Rila Fukushima), interferes and allures Wolverine to Japan. This is where the movie veers away from the limited series. The story, like the series, involves Japanese Mafioso, ninjas and a Japanese love affair. The movie adds samurai, robots and twenty first century technology.

The screenwriters Mark Bomback ("Total Recall [2012]," "Live Free or Die Hard") and Scott Frank ("Marley and Me," "Minority Report") add an interesting twist to Wolverine’s trip. Yashida (Haruhiko Yamanouchi) was a soldier in a POW camp near Nagasaki when the bombs were dropped. Wolverine saved his life. On the trip to Japan Yukio informs Logan that Yashida is dying and wants to say his farewell. When he makes his audience Logan is surprised to learn that Yashida is not so eager to leave this world. He has found a way to transfer Logan’s mutant ability- self-healing- from the mutant into himself. Yashida makes an attempt to persuade Logan that he has outlived his gift. He has seen much death including the love of his life, Jean Grey (Famke Janssen), and living so long without purpose is hell. He offers Logan a chance to become mortal. It’s an interesting story line. Nothing creates more intrigue then watching the protagonist lose the source of his power while he tries to get it back; more so when he loses it involuntarily.

The problem for "The Wolverine" is what most action pictures suffer from and that is a director who is unable to create tension or excitement within action sequences. In all the action sequences there is a feeling that Mr. Mangold is performing a balancing act between showing Wolverine- who is a killer without remorse- doing what he does best, while at the same time not turning off families. There is precedent here. The old directors of samurai films from the fifties and sixties such as Akira Kurosawa ("Seven Samurai," "Yojimbo") and Kihachi Okamoto ("Samurai Assassin," "Sword of Doom") show merciless violence in their films but with an artistic flare. There is no gore. They also use a stationary camera. The action is shown without jittery movements or multiple cuts so you can see an assailant sneak up behind the protagonist and get a charge when he’s terminated. During "The Wolverine" a dizzying sensation accompanies the action sequences which are filmed with a moving camera. During a chase scene all the participants of a melee run through the streets and the camera jumps up and down as though we’re running along side of them. We can’t tell who’s chasing who or identify anyone except for Wolverine (thank goodness the scene doesn’t take place on the streets of Oregon or we would lose sight of him as well).

The backdrop of "The Wolverine" is spectacular. The art director Ian Gracie ("Star Wars: Episode III- Revenge of the Sith," "Moulin Rouge!") has created a picturesque canvas within traditional Japanese houses and villages where the action takes place. The violence among such beauty is a nice contrast. Mr. Miller’s series created some memorable visuals using the same backdrop to accompany the violence. He had the ninjas and Wolverine confront each other at night where they both feel they had the advantage. It was a series of pictures of only their silhouettes, within the darkness, with only the moonlight gleaming off the ninjas’ swords and Wolverines claws showing us the action. Watching "The Wolverine" one wishes Mr. Mangold could conjure up the same visual artistry. Fortunately the story carries us to the conclusion which, unfortunately, drops like a bag of bricks. Too much of the twenty-first century comes into play and an arch-villain, Viper (Svetlana Khodchenkova), who is pretty much irrelevant throughout the movie finally wears out her welcome. But running along side Wolverine is still fun even when it makes you dizzy.

 

Directed by James Mangold; written by Mark Bomback and Scott Frank; director of photography, Ross Emery; edited by Michael McCusker; music by Marco Beltrami; production design by François Audouy; costumes by Isis Mussenden; produced by Lauren Shuler Donner and Hutch Parker; released by 20th Century Fox. Running time: 2 hours 6 minutes.

WITH: Hugh Jackman (Logan/Wolverine), Hiroyuki Sanada (Shingen), Famke Janssen (Jean Grey), Will Yun Lee (Harada), Rila Fukushima (Yukio), Tao Okamoto (Mariko), Svetlana Khodchenkova (Viper) and Haruhiko Yamanouchi (Yashida).

Man of Steel pretty super.

Movie Review: "Man of Steel"

Many people are familiar with the origin of the oldest and most popular of super heroes, Superman. "Man of Steel" is Warner Bros. attempt to reboot the franchise so we start at the beginning. The origin told in "Man of Steel" runs along the same lines as "Superman" the 1978 film with Christopher Reeve as the title character. But "Man of Steel" decides not to skip over Superman’s earlier days when he was coming to terms with who he was and where he came from. Written by David S. Goyer ("Batman Begins," "Jumper") with the story being credited to Mr. Goyer and Christopher Nolan, who also produced "Man of Steel," we watch a young Clark Kent navigate his way through life with some freakish abilities that makes him odd and different. And, you know, kids can be cruel.

The genesis is the same. The planet Krypton is on its last legs. The scientist Jor-El (Russell Crowe) is the only one prepared for the end. He builds a spacecraft and places his newborn son, Kal-El, in it and sets the coordinates for Earth. Knowing his race will be extinct, Jor-El places a genetic codex with Kal-El that contains the genetic code of the Kryptonian race. Meanwhile, General Zod (Michael Shannon) attempts a failed coup. He is arrested and banished to the Phantom Zone. When Krypton explodes General Zod and his cronies are freed. They begin their search of Kal-El and the genetic codex.

Director Zack Snyder ("300," "Watchmen") starts the story of Kal-El (Henry Cavill) on earth when he is a young man traveling the country taking odd jobs. Every once in a while he is forced to use his mysterious powers which are witnessed by the locals forcing him to move on to escape unwanted attention. Mr. Snyder intercuts segments of Kal-El’s youth with his Earth parents, Jonathan (Kevin Costner) and Martha Kent (Diane Lane), as he tries to contain his overwhelming super powers. We see his insecurity as a child but also the love and encouragement from his parents that make him the man he is to become.

This human side of the man who will become Superman was never explored before and makes for an intriguing story. When he finally understands who he is and his place on this world he puts on the suit and goes about doing good for the world. Of course we are in the twenty-first century and a man who can fly in a blue suit and cape with certain powers makes those responsible for our national security a little nervous. This is another interesting aspect about  a modern day Superman that the filmmakers explore. In earlier stories his goodness is taken for granted.

The movie runs into trouble when General Zod finds his way to Earth. A battle between Zod and Superman is only inevitable and this is an action movie but the execution is poorly done. The fight itself is boring. Also, these two warriors have similar powers and the fight happens long enough that one begins to wonder whether it will ever end. You also realize how big Metropolis is. When the fight does conclude it is anti-climatic.

Mr. Reeve was cast as the original Superman in part for his resemblance toward the comic book character. Mr. Cavill doesn’t have the same impression but his acting covers a wider range. It helps to watch a man called Superman struggle with what to do with himself and although he isn’t human Mr. Cavill makes him so.

 

Directed by Zack Snyder; written by David S. Goyer, based on a story by Mr. Goyer and Christopher Nolan, and characters appearing in comic books published by DC Entertainment; Superman created by Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster; director of photography, Amir Mokri; edited by David Brenner; music by Hans Zimmer; production design by Alex McDowell; costumes by James Acheson and Michael Wilkinson; visual effects supervisor, John Desjardin; produced by Charles Roven, Mr. Nolan, Emma Thomas and Deborah Snyder; released by Warner Brothers Pictures. Running time: 2 hours 24 minutes.

WITH: Henry Cavill (Clark Kent/Kal-El), Amy Adams (Lois Lane), Michael Shannon (General Zod), Diane Lane (Martha Kent), Russell Crowe (Jor-El), Antje Traue (Faora-Ul), Harry Lennix (General Swanwick), Richard Schiff (Dr. Emil Hamilton), Christopher Meloni (Col. Nathan Hardy), Kevin Costner (Jonathan Kent), Ayelet Zurer (Lara Lor-Van), Laurence Fishburne (Perry White), Cooper Timberline (Clark Kent at 9) and Dylan Sprayberry (Clark Kent at 13).

Iron Man 3 deflates.

Movie Review: "Iron Man 3"

The first attention grabbing scene in writer/director Shane Black’s ("Kiss Kiss Bang Bang") "Iron Man 3" occurs when Tony Stark (Robert Downey, Jr) discovers mystery-breaking information in Tennessee that leads him to the hidden base of the movie’s villains in Florida. It’s not the information about the terrorists or the discovery of their secret location that makes one sit up and take notice. It’s the very next scene when Mr. Stark drives from Tennessee to Florida. It’s the only scene up to that point filled with drama. The Iron Man suit is out of commission and the desperate need to get to that hideaway comes out. "Iron Man 3" is a well financed action picture benefitting from the momentum of the first two movies and the blockbuster "Avengers" movie. The studio’s focus was on getting this movie into theaters and the audience into their seats as soon as possible. Mr. Black and his collaborator Drew Pearce seem handicapped by the studio’s time constraints and the depth of the story and its development of the characters has suffered because of it. The focus should have been on making a memorable and legend worthy film. The story lacks a sense of obligation toward the fans whose money it is that keeps this series alive. Instead we get the fourth part of an interwoven franchise which was treated as a sitcom episode rather then a movie event.

It is always a let down in a movie when the authorities can’t seem to get anywhere in an investigation but the hero easily finds the clues and breaks the case. The Mandarin (Ben Kingsley) is the terrorist claiming responsibility for bombings around the world and in the United States. No one can locate him until Tony Stark does an investigation. And Mr. Stark sets off to find the Mandarin only after he challenges him on live television (a bit amateurish) and the Mandarin responds by destroying his home (to obvious). How Mr. Stark discovers the important clues prompts the question, why couldn’t the authorities have figured this out? The filmmakers don’t want to steal the thunder from Iron Man especially in an Iron Man movie but making everyone inept doesn’t make Tony Stark any smarter and it cheapens the intrigue. It doesn’t help that the villains aren’t memorable. The first creative brainstorming the writers should have done when continuing the series is to create villains that aren’t easily thwarted and will cause dramatic impact several movies down the line. Instead they are cheaply drawn. Guy Pierce is interesting to watch in anything he does. He’s not given much of a character to handle in the nerd turned villain Aldrich Killian. He’s supposed to be smart and conniving but the writers fail on both counts. Rebecca Hall does a nice job with the most complex character of the movie, Maya Hansen. You’re never really sure what motivates her character or what her goals are until the end. Then there’s the slimly drawn villain Eric Savin (James Badge Dale) who seems to do everything he can to announce to the world he’s a terrorists including behaving like an adolescent in waiting rooms. Yet no seems to notice, except for Happy Hogan (Jon Favreau). And no one pays attention to him until he’s injured in an attack.

The regulars, besides Mr. Downey, Jr., are Gwyneth Paltrow and Don Cheadle. Ms. Paltrow plays the roll of Mr. Stark’s life partner tring to wrestle him away from his business and superhero life. We hope that Mr. Cheadle’s check didn’t bounce. An actor of his talent on the payroll should have been given more to do. The screen writers know who they have to play their characters. The first thing they should have figured out was how to add juice to their rolls. Instead they handed out characters as dry as the Mojave Desert. The only exception is Mr. Kingsley as the Mandarin. It’s a small part but Mr. Kingsley is a diamond amongst the noise and distractions and is the one reason that makes viewing "Iron Man 3" worth it. His performance is more entertaining than any scene filled with special effects. That should be a lesson for the filmmakers and studio.

Mr. Downey, Jr. was interesting as Tony Stark during the first two movies. He played the character with a swagger and arrogance necessary for a billionaire weapons manufacturer. But he also added enough charm to make him likable. I don’t know if Mr. Downey, Jr. has grown tired of the character in "Iron Man 3" but the charm and likability have disappeared. The story is third rate and it looks like that was the level Mr. Downey, Jr. set his performance at. It would help the franchise as well as ticket sales if more time was put into the story. Franchises cannot live on special effects alone. That’s why a simple car ride from Tennessee to Florida can feel like the biggest revelation in a one hundred and thirty minute movie.

 

Directed by Shane Black; written by Mr. Black and Drew Pearce, based on the Marvel comic book Super Hero Iron Man; director of photography, John Toll; edited by Jeffrey Ford and Peter S. Elliot; music by Brian Tyler; production design by Bill Brzeski; costumes by Louise Frogley; special effects supervisor, Dan Sudick; produced by Kevin Feige; released by Marvel Studios and Walt Disney Pictures. Running time: 2 hours 9 minutes.

WITH: Robert Downey Jr. (Tony Stark/Iron Man), Gwyneth Paltrow (Pepper Potts), Don Cheadle (Col. James Rhodes), Guy Pearce (Aldrich Killian), Rebecca Hall (Dr. Maya Hansen), Stephanie Szostak (Ellen Brandt), James Badge Dale (Eric Savin), Jon Favreau (Happy Hogan), Ben Kingsley (the Mandarin) and Ty Simpkins (Harley).

White House Down along with two hours of our lives.

Movie Review: "White House Down"

The first shot of adrenaline that hits the brain while watching director Roland Emmerich’s "White House Down" happens a little more then half way through the movie. It occurs during a car chase. The brain is triggered into action to decipher if what we are witnessing is a hint of genius, a new approach toward action movies or just pure stupidity. Then, as the cars are riddled with bullets, the brain begins to re-create the origin of this thrilling sequence: Movie Executive, "What this movie needs is a car chase!" Screenwriter, "But all of the action takes place within the confines of a house." Movie executive, "Not my problem!" As the cars complete their second lap around the fountain on the White House lawn forgotten childhood memories of Duck,Duck Goose materialize.

It’s just not the absurdity of the chase that stands out but also the originality. Anything original is needed in "White House Down" since the movie clearly follows, almost to the detail, the blueprint of director John McTiernan’s 1988 action movie "Die Hard" starring Bruce Willis. The similarities are uncanny. From the concept of the story- a group of heavily armed men take over a building with only one man to stop them- to the tiniest of details- first name and wardrobe of protagonist- the story is "Die Hard" in the White House. The filmmakers, to their credit, wanted to add a shot of emotion to their ending and since emotion is vacant in "Die Hard" they lifted a scene from the 1939 movie "Gunga Din."

The only other difference between the two movies is the protagonist himself. John McClane (Mr. Willis) was a cynical New York City cop. The McClane character of the earlier movies was a bit more flawed which made the action sequences more adventurous. His hand to hand combat skills were a bit sloppy, his handling of weapons was adequate but his survival skills were unquestionable. Even Mr. Willis’ unpolished acting style helped lend an everyday working man’s persona to McClane. John Cale (Channing Tatum) is a nice guy from small town U.S.A. Mr. Tatum, who is developing a consistency of strong performances, makes this character believable within an unbelievable context. Mr. Tatum doesn’t overdue it when his character has to face up to his amateurish parenting skills but can turn up the heat enriching the action sequences. Mr. Tatum, in fact, adds depth to this action hero.

John is put in the position, after failing to make the cut for the Secret Service, of having to protect The President (Jamie Foxx). Mr. Foxx’s portrayal of a President is another breath of fresh air squeezing itself out of an asthmatic production. This president isn’t a graduate of any Ivy League establishment nor does he possess any combat skills from previous tours of duty. He takes a stand against the military industrial machine which sets the story in motion. This President is strong when it comes time to shape the big picture but while being protected by John his survival skills are questionable which gives the action sequences their only sense of intrigue. When the time comes his moral clarity is apparent in the decisions he makes which focuses on the good of the whole instead of any individual in the movie. Keeping conventionality away from this President is a little bone the credited screenwriter James Vanderbilt ("Zodiac," "The Amazing Spider-Man") throws his audience.

The rest of the cast is formidable. They include heavyweights such as James Woods, Maggie Gyllenhaal, Richard Jenkins and Michael Murphy. Every one does what they can to fill a shell of a script with spirit but to no avail. With every turn Cale makes through the halls of the White House Mr. Vanderbilt and Mr. Emmerich evoke memories of "Die Hard." Cale and the President find refuge on top of an elevator of which the villains are transporting heavy artillery; a close associate of one of the villains is killed by Cale and seeks revenge; Cale is under assault by a villain and he takes cover under a kitchen counter; Cale has a fire fight with the enemy on the roof of the White House while the military begins an attack on the White House only to be stopped by the heavy artillery and there is even a computer geek (Jimmi Simpson), complete with nerdy glasses, whose task it is to break into and disable the national security system of the United States. With the memory of the original "Die Hard" growing strong it comes as a confused surprise to watch the car chase around the fountain. In a film of originality it would be subjected to ridicule and marked as nothing but a disciple of stupidity. But in a weak copy cat it is a relief.

 

Directed by Roland Emmerich; written by James Vanderbilt; director of photography, Anna J. Foerster; edited by Adam Wolfe; music by Thomas Wander and Harald Kloser; production design by Kirk M. Petruccelli; costumes by Lisy Christl; produced by Bradley J. Fischer, Mr. Kloser, Mr. Vanderbilt, Larry Franco and Laeta Kalogridis; released by Columbia Pictures. Running time: 2 hours 11 minutes.

WITH: Channing Tatum (John Cale), Jamie Foxx (President Sawyer), Maggie Gyllenhaal (Finnerty), Jason Clarke (Stenz), Richard Jenkins (Raphelson), Joey King (Emily), James Woods (Walker) and Lance Reddick (General Caulfield).

Movie Review: "Star Trek: Into Darkness"

J. J. Abrams’ "Star Trek Into Darkness" is the second installment of his rebooting of the Star Trek franchise. Unlike, say the Star Wars trilogy, Mr. Abrams’ second film has very little connection, other then the continuation of some romances, to the first. It would have helped the drama of this franchise if, like "Return of the Jedi," there was a dark twist of which our heroes must battle through so we’d have to wait for the next installment to see if they are successful. But it is not to be. Instead "Into Darkness" stands on its own without drawing much attention to itself.

 

One of the sub plots that runs through this reboot is whether Captain James T. Kirk (Chris Pine) has the ability to hold down his position. Being adverse to rules and regulations and going with his "gut" against all odds and logic is a magnet for insubordination charges. It happens at the outset of this movie. He loses his command so he must work to get it back. That journey begins when a secret Starfleet command center in London is bombed and all of the Starfleet commanders convene to plot out how to bring the perpetrator to justice. One would think that a location with all of Starfleet’s commanders present would be well fortified. Not the case here. The group is attacked by a rogue Starfleet agent John Harrison (Benedict Cumberbatch) and commanders are killed. Kirk is part of the Enterprise crew assigned with tracking Harrison down and killing him.

The story is straightforward. There are some moral discussions about whether or not they should kill Harrison or capture him and bring him to justice. There are a few surprises that fans of the series will relish but will be missed by everyone else. A few characters from the earlier movies and the television series make appearances. But what makes "Into Darkness" entertaining and worth the price of admission is the motley assortment of characters that have to live and work with each other in the confines of the Enterprise.

Mr. Pines has the formidable task of recreating one of the most beloved cinematic characters of which William Shatner has left his mark. Mr. Pines wisely doesn’t mimic Mr. Shatner’s portrayal. Instead he is tuned in to this well defined character and lets the circumstances dictate his reactions. He doesn’t allow Mr. Shatner to be missed. The best foil for Mr. Kirk’s gung-ho approach is the logic minded Spock (Zachary Quinto). The clashing personalities are more interesting then the drama that has ignited them. Validating the term "three’s a crowd" is Dr. McCoy (Karl Urban) whose temperament is somewhere in the middle of Spock and Kirk’s. Then there’s Uhura (Zoe Saldana) who is navigating through a relationship with the emotionally reserved Spock. "Into Darkness" introduces the beloved engineer Scotty (Simon Pegg) who might be argued is the real hero of the franchise since he’s the one who manages to get the Enterprise to work just when the moment of truth arrives.

The characters are what make this movie. They’ve been developed for decades starting with the television series. Each episode had a point which was relative to the time Star Trek was created. The creators of "Into Darkness" tried to make t

he story relevant for today but have come up short. But going on this adventure with the crew is worth it and increases the anticipation of sharing the next one with the same old friends.

 

Directed by J. J. Abrams; written by Alex Kurtzman, Roberto Orci and Damon Lindelof, based on “Star Trek” by Gene Roddenberry; director of photography, Dan Mindel; edited by Maryann Brandon and Mary Jo Markey; music by Michael Giacchino; production design by Scott Chambliss; costumes by Michael Kaplan; produced by Mr. Abrams, Mr. Kurtzman, Mr. Orci, Mr. Lindelof and Bryan Burk; released by Paramount Pictures. Running time: 2 hours 12 minutes.

WITH: John Cho (Hikaru Sulu), Benedict Cumberbatch (John Harrison), Alice Eve (Carol), Bruce Greenwood (Captain Pike), Simon Pegg (Montgomery Scott), Chris Pine (Capt. James T. Kirk), Zoe Saldana (Nyota Uhura), Zachary Quinto (Spock), Karl Urban (Dr. Leonard McCoy), Peter Weller (Starfleet Admiral Marcus) and Anton Yelchin (Pavel Chekov).

World War Z is worth the Fight.

Movie Review: "World War Z"

Place and mood are just as essential to the horror genre as the creatures or killers who set the story in motion. Usually its one or two people trapped in an isolated area that has to escape or fend off their nemesis. The intimacy of the locale with limited light and movement restriction adds to the suspense. A long stretch of hallway with a door at the end and a mystery behind it can be more nerve-racking then witnessing the most frightful characters chasing down their victims. Practically every horror film from as early as "Dracula" of 1931 to the "Saw" franchise has relied on this formula to build suspense.

Director Marc Forster’s "World War Z" is a different type of horror movie. There is a zombie infection and its world wide. The streets are overflowing with chaos and there doesn’t seem to be a town, city or country that isn’t being overrun by these creatures. Philadelphia native Gerry Lane (Brad Pitt) and his wife, Mireille (Karin Lane), along with their two daughters are caught up in the panic as the healthy try to flee from the swarming infected zombies. These zombies seem to be hungry for human flesh but all they do is bite and move on. Unfortunately, if a human is bitten you can add one more to Team Zombie.

Gerry is lucky enough- in this situation- to have worked for the United Nations so he is called back to duty by his former boss Fana Mokoena (Theirry Umutoni), the UN Deputy Secretary- General. Gerry and his family are flown to an aircraft carrier where the military has set up their headquarters. Fana asks Gerry to team up with a virologist, Dr. Fassbach (Elyes Gabel), to find the source of the infection with the intent of discovering an antidote for the virus. This is where "World War Z" veers away from the usual rules of a horror flick and for that matter the action picture.

Mr. Forster’s sly opening credits show a hint at how this disease was able to get as far as it did. During a montage of television broadcasts, squeezed in between low brow talk shows and fluff newscasts are scientists warning viewers of a possible epidemic that will spread wildly if we don’t do something about it soon. Did anyone do anything about it? Sound familiar? After the opening credits Mr. Forster doesn’t waste any time turning on the action. He creates tension as the family is stuck in traffic and several odd occurrences are noticed by Gerry. Soon they are swallowed up by a wave of panic that has spread through the Philadelphia streets. Gerry and family find their way to a Newark, New Jersey apartment complex where they await a helicopter to take them to the aircraft carrier. Here Mr. Forster relies on the old formula of creatures pursuing the family in dark hallways and close quarters. Mr. Forster is one of a handful of directors working today who knows how to shoot a simple action sequence. The norm for an action sequence today is blurry images cut multiple times hoping the chaos generates excitement. Unfortunately it only sows confusion. The viewer cannot grasp who is doing what to whom. Mr. Forster’s sequence of Gerry’s family eluding zombies is clear and concise which in turn increases the intensity.

When Gerry and family get onto the ship the movie becomes something else- a mystery thriller. He is assigned to find the origin of the virus with Dr. Fassback who heightens the intellectual angle of the movie by outlining what they’re looking for. The Doctor explains that their adversary is Mother Nature and She is the greatest of all serial killers. But she leaves clues around because like all serial killers she wants to be discovered. The solution may be hiding in plain sight. The intrigue builds when pieces of information are fleshed out and questions are answered. Why was South Korea the first to report zombie-like activity? Why is there no zombie infections reported in North Korea? Why was Israel the only country to build a wall to keep the zombies at bay?

Mr. Pitt is so much in the tabloids that every movie he appears in is a fresh reminder of what a talented actor he is. With Gerry there is no bravado ala Stallone, Schwarzenegger, Willis or Smith. He cannot blast his way to save civilization. Instead Gerry carries around real feelings- fear, tenderness, an intellectual intensity- making him one of the more interesting action heroes created for the movies. Of course with an action hero you do need action and Mr. Pitt is convincing as he fends off zombies. This could be the new action character of the twenty-first century and it is a breath of fresh air.

"World War Z" pits humans against Mother Nature when potential natural disasters get out of hand. It is a movie that subtly lets the world know that to ignore the problem will cause unmitigated headaches later. But it also puts its faith in the intellect and determination of people to solve these issues. It is a very entertaining, suspenseful and creepy movie as well.

Directed by Marc Forster; written by Matthew Michael Carnahan, J. Michael Straczynski, Drew Goddard and Damon Lindelof, based on the novel “World War Z: An Oral History of the Zombie War,” by Max Brooks; director of photography, Ben Seresin; edited by Roger Barton and Matt Chessé; music by Marco Beltrami; production design by Nigel Phelps; costumes by Mayes C. Rubeo; visual effects supervisor, Scott Farrar; produced by Brad Pitt, Dede Gardner, Jeremy Kleiner and Ian Bryce; released by Paramount Pictures. Running time: 1 hour 56 minutes.

WITH: Brad Pitt (Gerry Lane), Mireille Enos (Karen Lane), James Badge Dale (Speke), Daniella Kertesz (Segen), Matthew Fox (Parajumper), David Morse (Burt Reynolds), Fana Mokoena (Thierry), Abigail Hargrove (Rachel Lane), Sterling Jerins (Constance Lane), Ludi Boeken (Warmbrumm), Fabrizio Zacharee Guido (Tomas), and Peter Capaldi, Ruth Negga and Moritz Bleibtreu (W.H.O. Doctors).

Almodovar Gets Excited!

Movie Review: "I’m So Excited" – Foreign, Spanish

The landing gear for a commercial flight from Spain to Mexico is jammed. The closest available airport is in financial crisis and there is no one to help land the plane. This story has all the ingredients of a disaster film. Instead it is the premise of Pedro Almodovar’s comedic farce "I’m So Excited." The crew of the distressed aircraft find a way to circumvent the drama and panic by drugging the passengers and half the crew. With the tension discarded we can now get on with the show.

Mr. Almodovar has ventured into the dark recesses of the human mind and has told intense stories about parents and children, religion, lust and love, fate and circumstance. Once in a while he will ease up and deliver lighter fare such as "Women on the Verge of a Nervous Breakdown." He has done that with "I’m So Excited." Although both are comedies "Women" had more substance. "I’m So Excited" seems more of a mischievous exercise for Mr. Almodovar.

To say there is no drama in "I’m So Excited" is a misnomer. For the crew there is plenty of drama. Joserra (Javier Camara), Ulloa (Raul Arevalo) and Fajardo (Carlos Areces) are the three gay flight attendants who put the rest of the plane under sedation. With the situation stable they are able to concentrate on their own issues. Joserra’s lover is married. Ulloa cannot get enough lovers, alcohol or drugs and no one seems to be home when Fajardo prays for his co-workers to abandon their vices. The pilot (Antonio de la Torre) has a shadowy past. The co-pilot (Hugo Silva) wonders what its like to be a homosexual until at the end of the flight and then there’s some confusion about what it is to be heterosexual. The four passengers who avoid being drugged have their own issues and mysteries but nothing that cannot be predicted.

What "I’m So Excited" is is a homosexual romp that plays like an American teenage romantic comedy of today. That means more raunch and sexually explicit innuendos. Being this is a Spanish movie and the Europeans are less squeamish about sex than Americans and Mr. Almodovar being blunt there is no airbrushing the needs or actions of the characters in this movie. Having three gay lead characters some audience members might not be ready for this movie.

Mr. Almodovar is a quick wit and has good comic instincts. You can tell he was having a lot of fun making this movie and may have been letting off some steam. All of his other movies left something to ponder long after they ended. "I’m So Excited" won’t do that but it will cause you to laugh and squirm for ninety minutes.

Written and directed by Pedro Almodóvar; director of photography, José Luis Alcaine; music by Alberto Iglesias; choreography by Blanca Li; art director, Antxon Gómez; costumes by Tatiana Hernández; produced by Agustín Almodóvar and Esther Garcia; released by Sony Pictures Classics. In Spanish, with English subtitles. Running time: 1 hour 35 minutes.

WITH: Antonio de la Torre (Alex Acero), Hugo Silva (Benito Morón), Miguel Ángel Silvestre (the Groom), Laya Martí (the Bride), Javier Cámara (Joserra), Carlos Areces (Fajas), Raúl Arévalo (Ulloa), José María Yazpik (Infante), Guillermo Toledo (Ricardo Galán), José Luis Torrijo (Mr. Más), Lola Dueñas (Bruna), Cecilia Roth (Norma) and Blanca Suárez (Ruth).

Now You See Me, Now You Shouldn't

Movie Review: "Now You See Me"

The movie "Now You See Me" is tale of four magicians Daniel (Jesse Eisenberg), Henley (Isla Fisher), Jack (Dave Franco) and Merritt (Woody Harrelson) who are assembled by a mysterious stranger so they can rob banks through their collected talents and distribute the loot to the needy. The public first notices them during a Las Vegas show. They pick someone randomly from the audience and tell him they are going to rob his bank and give the money to the audience. Their "volunteer" happens to be from Paris and his bank is French. With a camera strapped to his teleport helmet he is transported into the bank’s vault. The audience is able to watch as he walks around brinks of money. The magicians ask him to leave his Las Vegas ticket and a playing card on which he signed his name in the middle of the stack of money. They then suck the money up from the vault and miraculously it descends upon the audience. Needless to say they become a big attraction.

They also attract the authorities led by FBI agent Dylan Rhodes (Mark Ruffalo). Agent Dylan is one of those hard nose street wise agents who know nothing of magic but knows how to knock some heads around. He is teamed up with French Agent Alma Dray (Melanie Laurent) from Interpol who is investigating the robbery of the French bank. Another interested party is Thaddeus Bradley (Morgan Freeman) who as an ex-magician making a living at debunking other magician’s tricks. He follows the group and records their show breaking down how they’re able to perform the stunts that they do. Add to that Arthur Tressler (Michael Caine) who bank rolls the groups’ shows until he becomes a target. Dylan asks for Thaddeus’ help since he is clueless about magic while Alma teaches herself about the origins of magic. Thaddeus tells them that magic is deception and illusion. The point is to focus the audience’s eyes on one spot while the trick is happening somewhere else. He warns the detectives not to look too closely or they’ll miss "the big score" the group is setting up. The premise of this story is exciting. The actual movie is as empty as the box the rabbit goes in to.

Just as magic is an illusion so are the movies. But the illusion of the movies works when the audience can connect with it. First and foremost that is where story and characters come into play. Written by Ed Solomon ("Men in Black," "Charlie’s Angels"), Boaz Yakin ("Safe," "Death in Love") and Edward Ricourt the schemes are explained partially but still feel empty and untrue. The elaborate set-ups are preposterous and would have been better left unexplained. The dialogue hasn’t been this lousy since the low-budget movies of the 70’s. A romance was thrown in for who knows why and there is a twist that is so shocking that it makes as much sense as the rest of the movie. Twists work when there are clues spread around that come together at the end. This twist comes from no where.

At least the director Louis Leterrier ("The Transporter," "Clash of the Titans") does all he can just short of rewriting the script to keep things moving. He is helped by an all star cast who take the dialogue seriously and does their best to sell it. Unfortunately we aren’t buying.

Mr. Ruffalo is especially good at portraying one of those cops who takes a case personally and is way out of his element. There is a throwback moment that reminded me of "The Thomas Crown Affair" (1968) when the police detective finds out he’s been partnered with the agent from the insurance company played by Faye Dunaway. Mr. Ruffalo has the same reaction when he finds out he’s being teamed with Agent Dray. He seems to be drawing from the cop movies of the 70’s and its very entertaining to watch. The rest of the cast make the movie worth sitting through although they have strong competition from a wasteful script.

Directed by Louis Leterrier; written by Ed Solomon, Boaz Yakin and Edward Ricourt, based on a story by Mr. Yakin and Mr. Ricourt; directors of photography, Larry Fong and Mitchell Amundsen; edited by Robert Leighton and Vincent Tabaillon; music by Brian Tyler; production design by Peter Wenham; costumes by Jenny Eagan; senior visual-effects supervisor, Nicholas Brooks; produced by Alex Kurtzman, Roberto Orci and Bobby Cohen; released by Summit Entertainment. Running time: 1 hour 56 minutes.

WITH: Jesse Eisenberg (J. Daniel Atlas), Mark Ruffalo (Dylan Rhodes), Woody Harrelson (Merritt McKinney), Mélanie Laurent (Alma Dray), Isla Fisher (Henley Reeves), Dave Franco (Jack Wilder), Common (Evans), José Garcia (Etienne Forcier), Michael Caine (Arthur Tressler) and Morgan Freeman (Thaddeus Bradley).

"Django Unchained" is Tarantino Unleashed.

DVD Review: "Django Unchained"

"Django Unchained" is writer, director Quentin Tarantino’s revenge on the institution of slavery. It is a mish-mash of a film that bounces between comic book fantasy and slap stick. The story is a simple one. The slave Django (Jamie Foxx) is freed by a bounty hunter, Dr. Schultz (Christoph Waltz), so that Django can identify three brothers with a price on their heads of which Dr. Schultz is intent on collecting. The two find their men and in the process develop a bond with Dr. Schultz agreeing to assist Django in rescuing his enslaved wife, Broomhilda (Kerry Washington).

It is a simple tale that when the Tarantino touch is added runs to one hundred and sixty-five minutes. Mr. Tarantino’s film pays tribute to the western with an emphasis on spaghetti westerns. The opening credits transport us back fifty years. The movie is aided by music composed by the spaghetti western maestro himself Ennio Morricone ("The Good the Bad and the Ugly," "Once Upon a Time in the West") which does a nice job setting the mood. Mr. Tarantino uses a quick zoom which was popular and hasn’t been used (with the exception of Mr. Tarantino’s movies) since the early seventies when it was invented. But no matter what tweaks are used this is first and foremost a Tarantino movie.

A Tarantino movie is its own genre. "Django Unchained" is a new extension of that. It adds a bit of farce to a story that handled seriously would drain the emotions out of its audience. Instead we have no doubts about the outcome and can watch without putting too much emotional weight into any one character since this world of the old United States of America is a total fabrication of Mr. Tarantino’s imagination. It includes Mr. Tarantino’s stamp of parable-like dialogue, camouflaged intelligence in unlikely characters and buckets of bloodshed unrealistically splattered about. It is also a movie that takes its time going where it wants to go. Mr. Tarantino can afford to do that since his talent is creating imaginative scenes the likes of which we’ve never seen before; distracting us enough from realizing we’ve wondered off the narrative path.

Mr. Waltz’s Dr. Scholtz is a character ahead of his time. Seemingly without any preconceptions of blacks whether slave or free he makes Django his equal partner. Mr. Waltz’s bounty hunter is also remorseless- not a bad thing for his line of work treating the "alive" part of "dead or alive" as too much work. There is also an intelligence and sense of justice that attracts our sympathies. With Mr. Waltz every scene is a mystery. We know he will get out of the circumstances he has put himself in but how he does so is the surprise.

For the first half Mr. Waltz carries the movie. Mr. Foxx is hand cuffed (not literally) since his actions are limited being black in America when slavery was still fashionable. He has to control his emotions and takes a back seat to the Dr. Scholtz character which makes Django a less appealing character.

It is not until Calvin Candie (Leonardo DiCaprio), Broomhilda’s owner, enters the movie that it takes off. Portrayed by Mr. DiCaprio Candie is deliciously evil. Dressed in nineteenth century aristocratic attire with a long pointy goatee and long wavy hair Candie is the incarnation of the devil himself. Mr. DiCaprio adds pizzazz and charisma that makes this vile character alluring. It is one of the best performances in Mr. DiCaprio’s career.

When Dr. Scholtz finds out that Candie owns Broomhilda he devises a scam for traveling back to Candie’s plantation to free her. The cat and mouse between Dr. Scholtz and Candie is the first hook of drama the audience can grab on to. When they arrive at the plantation, Candyland, we meet the overseer, Stephen (Samuel L. Jackson). Just when you think Candie is the reincarnation of evil Stephen brings a heavier dose of maliciousness minus the charm. Stephen is a quintessential Uncle Tom whose priorities are to himself and then to Candie’s plantation. Mr. Jackson’s performance is brilliant. He is a sly manipulator. In public he’s a limp, nosy, absent minded, pain in the derriere manager but behind closed doors with Candie he is cold and ruthless. His presence in a scene tightens the stomach and makes the hairs stand on guard. It is in this setting Dr. Scholtz and Django have to work surreptitiously to free his wife. It is worth getting to that point.

It is the tradition of most westerns that a gun battle settles the narrative. But as the movie reaches the climax and the confrontation erupts, Mr. Tarantino pulls us into farce. Just as a fire hydrant sprays water, blood is sprayed everywhere unfastening our sympathy for Django and his wife. Perhaps it is a tribute to Sam Peckinpah’s "The Wild Bunch" but the blood letting had a point in that film and even after five minutes we still cared for the characters. In "Django Unchained" the final battle doesn’t conclude the movie. Django is taken prisoner again and must once again come to the rescue even after our sympathies have been squandered. It is a tough task to rebuild interest again but at least Mr. Tarantino makes it entertaining.

It is a mish mash of a movie. We even get a pony show at the end as Django shows off for Broomhilda just as they used to finish a Will Rogers’ film during the golden age of movies. But the performance seems out of place in a film with this much red paint being splattered. But then again there is a little bit of everything in this movie with about half of it being gripping drama. The other half can stand on its own since its being held up by Mr. Tarantino’s writing.

Written and directed by Quentin Tarantino; director of photography, Robert Richardson; edited by Fred Raskin; “Django” theme by Luis Enriquez Bacalov; production design by J. Michael Riva; costumes by Sharen Davis; produced by Stacey Sher, Reginald Hudlin and Pilar Savone; released by the Weinstein Company. Running time: 2 hours 45 minutes.

WITH: Jamie Foxx (Django), Christoph Waltz (Dr. King Schultz), Leonardo DiCaprio (Calvin Candie), Kerry Washington (Broomhilda), Samuel L. Jackson (Stephen), Don Johnson (Big Daddy), Walton Goggins (Billy Crash), Jonah Hill (Bag Head No. 2), Quentin Tarantino (Mine Company Employee) and Franco Nero (Bar Patron).

A Great Gatsby!

Movie Review: "The Great Gatsby"

"The Great Gatsby" is writer/director Baz Luhrmann’s adaptation of the novel by F. Scott Fitzgerald. Mr. Luhrmann seems to have taken the advice administered by Howard Hawks to John Huston when Mr. Huston was attempting the third adaptation of Dashiell Hammett’s "The Maltese Falcon," of which the first two films were duds. Just film the book was, in essence, what Mr. Hawks had said and it is what Mr. Luhrmann has done with "The Great Gatsby." This collaboration is a wonderful marriage as Mr. Luhrmann’s ability to tell a story with enticing visuals translates well Fitzgerald’s picturesque sentences.

Nick Carraway (Tobey Maguire) narrates the film from a sanatorium while he recovers from a hangover brought on by the roaring twenties. Mr. Maguire still holds on to a boyish quality in his facial features that works well at presenting Nick as an innocent in the devious world of money. We take a ride with Nick through the exciting world of the privileged but watch as Nick grows disenchanted when the glamour peels away and the callousness is revealed. Nick recalls the summer he moved from the mid West to Long Island renting a small house wedged in between mansions of money. Across the bay lives his cousin Daisy (Carey Mulligan) and her husband Tom Buchanan (Joel Edgerton) who is wealthy from his inheritance. In the mansion next door lives the elusive and mysterious Jay Gatsby (Leonardo DiCaprio). The event for the money sect every summer is Gatsby’s parties which are extravagant even by their standards. What makes them provocative is that no one has ever seen their host. Gatsby is a mystery and somewhat of a legend since he doesn’t make himself accessible to anyone. People have come to their own conclusions about him which embellishes the legend.

One day Nick finds an invitation to one of Gatsby’s parties which may be linked to a condition since no one has ever received one before. Gatsby makes his acquaintance and Nick learns that Gatsby’s existence has been focused on rekindling his love for Daisy of whom he had an affair many years before. Gatsby recruits Nick to reintroduce him to Daisy and Nick agrees believing that Tom’s philandering is proof of a rotting marriage. Daisy and Gatsby are reunited and their love blooms but all they have collected in their lives during their absence is also present and shaped them into different people. This reunion is more complicated than when they first met.

Mr. DiCaprio, with his movie star status, can stand still and be Jay Gatsby for both have money, power and mystery. But Mr. DiCaprio, just as Mr. Maguire, has boyish features in his face that the lines of experience have been powerless to evict. It is a hindrance when Mr. DiCaprio has to portray men who have to look danger in the eye (e.g. "Gangs of New York," "The Aviator," "Blood Diamond") but in "The Great Gatsby" it fits the character rather nicely. When Nick first meets Gatsby, Gatsby’s a free-wheeling millionaire playboy. When Gatsby reveals his desire for Daisy Mr. DiCaprio turns him into a young school boy going on his first date. Gatsby glows with love when he is finally reunited with her. But when that love is threatened we can see a dark transformation come over Gatsby. It is a wonderful performance by Mr. DiCaprio, from being the loving, long lost love of Daisy Buchanan to a disillusioned loner.

Mr. Luhrmann has surrounded Mr. DiCaprio with a cast that could fit into anyone’s ideal image of the characters they have conjured up while reading the novel. Ms. Mulligan is Daisy. She is a young woman whose only hobby is to milk the days away in leisure while giving Tom the occasional headache whenever his mistresses invade her space. That is the extent of her life until Gatsby re-enters it. Ms. Mulligan bounces about in giddy excitement from once again being able to taste young love. But there is a limit that Daisy’s intellect and courage can handle. Faced with a choice that could release her from her serenity her lack of fearlessness keeps her anchored. Ms. Mulligan has the charm and the radiance of life that makes Daisy lovable but when the heat turns up the actress shows us the iceberg that makes up her soul. As Tom, Mr. Edgerton gives the least developed character some spice. Doing his best Richard Burton impression Mr. Edgerton intensifies the heart rate of the scenes he’s in and turns a cad credible when he competes for Daisy’s loyalty with Gatsby.

This fine enactment of "The Great Gatsby" is done on a colorful canvas that Mr. Luhrmann has painted. In all of Mr. Luhrmann’s movies, and this one is no exception, he flexes every muscle in the canon of filmmaking. From rich color palates to camera movements to new arraignments of contemporary pop songs to imaginative production designs there is no mistaking that one is watching a movie extravaganza and that is not a negative. Mr. Luhrmann who is gifted with an imaginative visual style uses Fitzgerald’s visual prose as a blueprint from the breeze filled curtains during Daisy’s introduction to the menacing eyes in the expired ophthalmologist advertisement on a decrepit billboard. The making of this movie in three dimensions is another toy you can feel Mr. Luhrmann enjoyed playing with.

But the joy Mr. Luhrmann had from making "The Great Gatsby" can be felt through the story that explores familiar territory for the filmmaker ("Romeo + Juliet", "Moulin Rouge!"). That is a protagonist who goes after love but once they obtain it find that it is too slippery an object to hold on to. Mr. Luhrmann is still unable to find a character who can capture love and we are better off for it.

Directed by Baz Luhrmann; written by Mr. Luhrmann and Craig Pearce, based on the novel by F. Scott Fitzgerald; director of photography, Simon Duggan; edited by Matt Villa, Jason Ballantine and Jonathan Redmond; music by Craig Armstrong; production design and costumes by Catherine Martin; produced by Mr. Luhrmann, Ms. Martin, Douglas Wick, Lucy Fisher and Catherine Knapman; released by Warner Brothers Pictures. Running time: 2 hours 23 minutes.

WITH: Leonardo DiCaprio (Jay Gatsby), Tobey Maguire (Nick Carraway), Joel Edgerton (Tom Buchanan), Carey Mulligan (Daisy Buchanan), Isla Fisher (Myrtle Wilson), Jason Clarke (George Wilson), Elizabeth Debicki (Jordan Baker) and Amitabh Bachchan (Meyer Wolfsheim).