Saturday, July 16, 2011

PARTING IS SUCH SWEET SORROW: a review of "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2"


“HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS PART 2”
Based upon the novel by J.K. Rowling
Screenplay Written by Steve Kloves
Directed by David Yates
**** (four stars)

It is finished.

“Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2” is a supremely grand finale that entertained wonderfully, stirred my soul significantly and as I felt when I first completed reading the original novel, I exited the theater wanting for nothing more…other than the chance to see it all over again. Dear readers, I am honestly stunned that this 10 year film series adaptation of J.K. Rowling’s wonderful seven novels has turned out so extraordinarily well. As I have stated in previous reviews of the “Harry Potter” film series, I originally detested the idea of Hollywood turning Rowling’s terrific books into movies for fear they would just sell it out, dumb it all down and rip the heart and soul from it in the process. Was I happily proven wrong!

Despite some minor quibbles here and there, every time I thought that the filmmakers would botch the entire story, they surprised me again and again as they created films that grew as rich, dark, complex and as heartbreaking as the source material. I cannot congratulate Director Chris Columbus enough for building the film world of this series from the ground up so brilliantly and to Directors Alfonso Cuaron and Mike Newell for extending the series in endlessly creative and emotionally resonant fashions with the third and fourth installments. Director David Yates has hit my cinematic sweet spot with his adaptations, which have found him fearlessly tackling four films in a row with increasing confidence, strength, heft and unquestionable and powerful emotion. “Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2” definitely packs an enormous wallop and closes the series with grace and solemnity from the first frame all the way to its tender and melancholic epilogue.

“Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2” opens at the precise moment the previous installment concluded. A fully empowered Voldemort (Ralph Finnes) has obtained the supposedly mythical Elder Wand, one of the three titular Deathly Hallows. Along with his growing army of minions, including the sadistically unhinged Bellatrix Lestrange (Helena Bonham Carter), he is on his way to wage war with the wizards and students of Hogwarts with the hopes of killing Harry Potter (Daniel Radcliffe) once and for all.

Meanwhile, Harry, Ron Weasley (Rupert Grint) and Hermione Granger (Emma Watson) remain in exile as they feverishly seek and hope to destroy the remaining Horcruxes, magical items that each contain a piece of Voldemort’s splintered soul. Our heroic trio’s quest eventually leads them back to now fascistic Hogwarts, in which Severus Snape (Alan Rickman) is the new Headmaster, for the ensuing war and final confrontation between Harry and Voldemort, a confrontation which will ultimately determine the fate of the world.

When I first read Rowling’s novel when it was published in 2007, I found myself wondering exactly how were the filmmakers going to pull this off. As I have said time and again and especially concerning the film series, books are books and movies are movies and the filmmakers have to figure out how to render these books into successful visual experiences that are able to stand on their own and not be religiously tied to every moment in Rowling’s novels. Yet, as I read, and while I felt that certain bits here and there could conceivably be truncated, I just had no idea of what they could omit as everything contained significance to the saga as a whole. “If they’re really gonna do this,” I thought. “They’re gonna have to do it ‘Lord Of The Rings’ style!! Make this thing three and a half hours and go for it!!” Essentially, Yates has done just that by making Rowling’s book a four and a half hour film cleaved into two effectively distinct sections.

Certainly, some of the skeptical have definitely made their voices heard that splitting Rowling’s finale into two films was simply and solely a lucrative decision. Of course it was a lucrative decision! But I firmly believe that it was also an artistic decision as this conclusion could not be sifted, cherry picked and stuffed into a two hour running time. The halving was a brilliant move I thought, as it could satisfy those who love the story, allowed the filmmakers to treat and realize it with the proper reverence and yes, it would ensure the Hollywood machine could remain in the “Harry Potter” business a little while longer. It was a “win-win” move for Rowling, the filmmakers, the fans and bean counters all at once.

David Yates’s adaptation of Rowling’s final episode in the story of Harry Potter is appropriately epic yet it is also a somber, funereal experience. I appreciated how he was unafraid to plunge into the deep gravity of Harry’s story and fate while also taking the time to still find moments of humor, wonder, amazement, romance and always upholding the bonds of friendship that have been a central element from the tale’s beginnings. All of the actors have brought everything in their acting powers to this finale and not one false note was struck. I loved Eduardo Serra’s cinematography, which is complete with grim, grey skies and clouds of doom signifying the potential end of the world. The special effects throughout are seamless, the war sequences are simultaneously propulsive, poetic and wrenching.

Most importantly, how satisfying it was that Yates and Screenwriter Steve Kloves (who wrote the scripts for all of the films save the fifth installment) remained true to the emotional core of Rowling’s series. It is a core that is indeed painful and filled with succulent sorrow which in this film was visually presented at its best during a late sequence set in the Forbidden Forest and magnificently in the full, revelatory back story of Severus Snape (Alan Rickman’s shining hour in this entire series).

Yates and Kloves beautifully, and with tremendous care and effort, mine the sweet sorrow contained throughout Rowling’s entire saga. It is the sorrow that is contained within the pains of great loss. The loss of childhood and youth itself. The loss of parents and children. The loss of lives and humanity in times of war and catastrophe. The loss of faith, reason and hope when the obstacles seem insurmountable. The loss of lives consumed by fear, recrimination and vengeance. The loss carried forevermore within people who have never felt or accepted love. And certainly, the loss contained within every farewell…even one as spectacular and satisfying as this one.

This loss and the sorrow of “Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2” is always evident, even in and especially during the most Herculean of battle sequences of which there are many. Yates is a filmmaker desperately needed in our Michael Bay universe because what Bay has never cared about as a filmmaker and what he has never, ever, ever cared to learn is that story and characters are the key and even in the mightiest of big budget blockbuster movies, sometimes, silence is golden.

Yates utilizes silence and pauses to incredible effect, allowing the full weight of this series to resonate within the audience. He knows when bring the lightning and the thunder and he knows fiercely well when to have quiet, which is sometimes even more devastating than being bludgeoned by all manner of audio/visual special effects and a bombastic music score.

The silence contained within pauses in the war at Hogwarts, the moments when characters silently weigh life and death decisions and in one sequence late in the film of transcendent meditativeness speaks volumes and in that movie theater, as the film continued onwards, heartfelt sobs from viewers were easily audible. I wonder if any of my fellow movie theater patrons heard mine.

To think, all of this outpouring emotion over a story about a boy wizard. And why not? Should it matter what the story is if it allows us all to think, to feel, and to dream grandly? “Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2” is the wondrous culmination of a 10-year cinematic journey that has been consistently at the top of its class and has shown eight times in a row that big budget films need not be brainless, thoughtless, soulless and heartless. It is a celebration of the three young actors, plucked from obscurity, who breathed succulent life into Rowling’s literary characters and allowed us to grow up with them. Furthermore, the film is a testament to the seven book series created by and written so luxuriously by J.K. Rowling, a writer whose dreams took flight and was fortunate and lucky enough to share them with us all.

Goodbye Mr. Potter…once again. Yet, this goodbye is not forever as this series, and film in particular, has vividly earned the right for many return visits. As Rowling wrote in her novel, "All was well."

Indeed it was.



Sunday, July 10, 2011

THE SADS: a review of "Beginners"


“BEGINNERS”
Written and Directed by Mike Mills
***1/2 (three and a half stars)

How is it that we are the people we are? How are our personalities formed? Are they learned or innate or somehow mysteriously intertwined and brought into the fullness of life due to our experiences and how we perceive and react to them?

Dear readers, I am a fairly melancholic person. I have absolutely no idea why or how I am the way I am, especially as those qualities do not seem to exist inside of my parents, but throughout the trajectory of my life, I have always felt a certain wistful sadness. That does not mean that I feel that there is a black cloud constantly over my head threatening to drench me with life’s rainfall. Quite the contrary, there is much to life that makes me deliriously happy and to those that know me, I can often be found laughing often and loudly. But still, there is this feeling I have that sits at the center of my spirit that makes me aware of things typically not turning out in the most desired ways and that feeling of disappointment is always present, even at its smallest.

“Beginners,” the new film from Writer/Director Mike Mills taps into that precise level of sadness in a film I found to be beautifully melancholic and miraculously, not depressing in the least. It is a quiet, languid, deliberately paced experience that deftly illustrates how we, as human beings, all exist symbiotically through the sameness of our life’s experiences yet we all seem to travel alone together in pursuit of connection and understanding. And if there’s a nice animal, let’s say a Jack Russell terrier to act as our faithful, unconditionally loving cohort along the way, then we are the better for it.

Ewan McGregor stars in one of his most accomplished, engaging and emotionally bare performances as Oliver, an artist, who in the year 2003, found his life at a peculiar crossroads. After enduring the passing of his Mother, Georgia (a great Mary Page Keller), Oliver’s Father, Hal (Christopher Plummer), at the age of 75 and 45 years of marriage, comes out as a gay man. Within four years of that seismic revelation, Oliver is faced with death again as Hal dies after a lengthy battle with cancer.

Oliver, consumed with grief, withdraws from his friends and co-workers, and dutifully attends to his Hal’s belongings, which includes inheriting his dog Arthur (played winningly and with occasional subtitled captions by the dog Cosmo). One evening, after being coerced by friends to accompany them to a costume party, Oliver (with the very needy Arthur in tow), meets Anna (a stunning Melanie Laurent), a French actress with whom Oliver soon begins a new love affair.

In some ways, “Beginners” could serve as a somewhat less esoteric companion piece to Terrence Malick’s astonishing “The Tree Of Life,” as Mills also weaves huge themes about our collective humanity on Earth throughout an intensely personal, non-linear designed film. As Oliver copes with Hal’s death and attempts to tentatively forge onwards into a relationship with Anna, the film flies backwards and forwards in time and memories much like how we, the audience, performs each day of our lives. We are witness to aspects of Oliver’s childhood, memories of his parents’ marriage, his relationship with his Mother, the stages of Hal’s illness and the tenderly awkward relationship that existed during the last years of Hal’s life as he embraced his life as a homosexual male, member of the homosexual community and began a relationship with the much younger Alex (Goran Visnjic from television’s “ER”).

What makes all of these episodes so crucial to the overall effectiveness of “Beginners,” is how we can see how memory is completely subjective and how our memories can never fully inform us as much as we think they should. Oliver exists with a fear of commitment that continues to manifest itself through enduring a series of failed relationships. On one hand, we can easily understand why his views of commitment are they way they are as his memories of his parent’s marriage inform him, and the audience, that although they remained a couple for 45 years, the marriage itself was decidedly chilly and seemingly not nearly as romantic as the relationship Hal eventually shared with Alex.

Even Oliver’s relationship with Georgia feels strained as his Mother strikes a somewhat inscrutable figure. She’s loving yet distant. Playful yet prickly. Permissive yet aloof and seemingly as uninterested in her son’s emotional development as Hal, who is depicted in Oliver’s memories as a tall man with his back always facing Oliver’s eyes. Oliver is a product of an environment that shows commitment as being fueled by various degrees of dissatisfaction and emotional emptiness, so no wonder why he is terrified of openening his heart so completely to another. Why spend 45 years of your life with someone when you never loved them and denied the truth of yourself in the process? But are his memories the fullness of truth?

The core of “Beginners,” is indeed Oliver’s adult relationship with Hal, which Mills presents so lovingly yet without any maudlin shading, prefabricated histrionics, or any clichéd homilies. Hal, now at his own life’s crucial stage, begins to transform himself into the man he has always known himself to be but due to the times in which he lived and grew, was unable to. Hal, witnessing his son’s shortcomings, tries to subtly imprint his greatest teachings on how life can be lived, ironically just at the point where his body begins to fail him.

As I watched “Beginners,” I felt that pall of melancholy wash over me but it never engulfed me. I ached for these characters but never fell into any sense of despair. These emotions were simply the humane feelings of just wanting people to discover and attain their own personal levels of happiness, whatever they may happen to be and I greatly appreciated how Mills matter-of-factly depicted the ways we all trip ourselves and upend our own happiness. Yes, I regarded the sadness of Hal’s life, a man knowing from the age of 13 that he was gay, and not ever feeling able to express the fullness of himself due to circumstances not of his making. Yet, this is no pity party. His life is what it is and he moves ahead as best as he is able and armed with a newfound sense of purpose that he hopes his son can gain from. How touching is was to see how near the end of his life how much he embraced. Not only his identity but whatever life he had remaining. Hal did not want to waste even one more minute or moment.

Christopher Plummer’s performance is supremely enchanting. I enjoyed how he injected a childlike sense of wonder within his new relationships within the gay community and even smaller, yet no less significant pleasures of literature, drink and even his new discovery of…house music. But, this was not presented as cutesy. Just a man determined to not allow his final years to be lived in vain, a lesson he attempts to instill within Oliver, who continues to struggle emotionally as he and Anna grow closer.

Every time Melanie Laurent appeared on screen, I could not take my eyes off of her. Her face contained oceans of expressions and moods, clearly evident in her first several sections of scenes with McGregor, as her character is suffering from laryngitis and is unable to speak. It is obvious to me why and how Oliver could fall for her so instantly. She is so nuanced, her movements, vocal inflections and character’s inner qualities are so minutely observed that she never once strikes a false note...even when she says not a word. To think that this is the same actress who commanded the screen with mountainous dialogue in Quentin Tarantino’s “Inglourious Basterds” (2009)! I am hoping for Ms. Laurent to find herself overrun with offers from strong filmmakers for she is indeed that talented and deserves to have her skills shown often.

Granted, “Beginners,” like the films of Sofia Coppola, may try the patience of audience members as it is a slow moving film and nothing really happens. But I hope that does not discourage any of you from seeing this movie as “Beginners” is not a film about what happens. It is a film that gracefully, poignantly and with many wry slices of humor shows us how and why we all need each other and despite how our personalities are formed, there is always room to change.

“Beginners” is a film that is about that very moment of change and the painful steps sometimes taken to bring that change into complete fruition because by the nature of beginning, something, sometimes invariably has to end. With Hal, his life fully begins as it is about to close permanently. Oliver’s life, hopefully with Anna, cannot fully form without finally discarding the sad life and perceptions he has claimed for himself. Mills, through his film, show how the process of change can be very uncomfortable even when one’s present situation is not anything to write home about. Oliver may be lonely and unfulfilled but it is the only life he knows and deviation from that fuels his fear of opening up fully. Mike Mills is in tune with that confusion so empathetically and without judgment.

Sometimes, it feels pretty good to engage and lose yourself in the waters of melancholy. “Beginners” is like a long, sweet, sad, soulful sigh and it is one Mike Mills earnestly wishes to share with us.

Monday, July 4, 2011

AN EVERLONG ROCK AND ROLL DREAM: a review of "Foo Fighters Back and Forth"



“FOO FIGHTERS BACK AND FORTH”
Produced and Directed by James Moll
***1/2 (three and a half stars)

What happens when a dream comes true?

In the opening moments of Director James Moll’s excellent new documentary “Foo Fighters Back and Forth,” bandleader Dave Grohl vividly speaks about his childhood dreams of possibly attending a rock concert only to discover that his favorite band’s drummer is out ill. Then, an announcement is made form the stage wondering if anyone out in the audience just happens to know the parts to all of the songs. Grohl envisioned himself immediately leaping into action, saving the day and existing as a rock and roll hero for just one spectacular show. How I could easily and completely relate to that very dream as I have had that same dream myself…and still do. “Foo Fighters Back and Forth” is not simply an extended episode of “Behind The Music” or a career retrospective puff piece. It is an experience that celebrates the realization and nurturing of a shared musical dream between musicians who were all shaped by rock and roll.

Beginning with Grohl, the film officially opens with his stint as one third of the cultural alternative rock juggernaut Nirvana as Moll deftly establishes the band’s rise to fame and eventual disintegration after the tragic suicide of bandleader/songwriter/singer/guitarist Kurt Cobain in 1994. After spending some time away from all aspects of the music business, Grohl decided to book five days of studio to fully realize some songs he had written over the years. He had no plans or intentions of doing anything in particular with the music other than to work as a form of healing. By week’s end, after writing every song and performing all of the vocals and instruments by himself, Grohl had completed one cassette tape worth of music, music that would eventually become the début album credited to the Foo Fighters.

Slowly and pondering if he could potentially create a new band, Grohl began passing his cassette around which did indeed gather the enthusiastic attention of bassist Nate Mandel and drummer William Goldsmith, both of whom were just about to complete their stint in their own disintegrating band. Seizing an opportunity, Grohl placed a call to Pat Smear, who served as Nirvana’s touring guitarist, and asked if he would be interested in joining the new band. Smear listened to Grohl’s cassette, was instantly hooked and the birth of the Foo Fighters was complete.

Over the film’s briskly paced two hour and twenty minute running time, Moll takes us through the band’s history from its gradually and continuously evolving heights, band lineup changes, interpersonal and artistic struggles and Grohl’s desire and ability to carve out a new musical identity when the world seemingly wanted him to remain firmly placed in his musical past, especially one as groundbreaking at Nirvana’s. Moll fills the movie to the brim with archived material from the band’s pre-Foo years, concert footage, clips from their celebrated music videos and they are all anchored with brand new engaging and insightful interviews with all members of the band, past and present.

Since I happen to be of the age that experienced Nirvana before and during their musical explosion as well as the birth of the Foo Fighters, it was just fascinating to me to watch all of this material speed by and consider it all to be “vintage,” even as that time still feels so fresh to me. As the Foo Fighters have endured for over 15 years, throughout all upheavals within the music business industry and technological advances with music distribution, the band has only continued to capture new fans. Knowing that, I truly wonder those younger listeners would think of the material that showcases MTV at a time when music was the entire means for that channel. (And on a side note, I wonder what that Tabitha Soren is doing these days…)

Beyond the mountains of footage from the vaults, “Foo Fighters Back and Forth,” showcases Dave Grohl’s enthusiasm and sheer joy for the pleasure and ability to perform and create music. Throughout the film’s entirety, his ebullience permeates this joyous film and I swear you can easily obtain a contact high from his boundless energy and spirit. Grohl’s endless affability makes for a film that is a gracious, honest, down to Earth and as open-hearted as he seems to be. I was also struck by his willingness to allow some cracks to show within the veneer.

While we are witness to an artist of fierce independence and head strong nature, especially as he famously turned down an invitation to officially join Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers as their permanent drummer in pursuit of how own personal musical dreams, that head strong nature also has gotten Grohl into tight spots with the band mates he clearly cherishes as his friends. He is visibly uncomfortable when asked about the decisions which led to him re-recording all of the drums for the band second album “The Colour and the Shape” instead of Goldsmith. Or how guitarist Franz Stahl, who joined the band after Smear’s departure due to touring fatigue, was eventually fired from the band via a phone call—something that still obviously hurts Stahl as we can see during his interview segments. Most painfully, we learn a little more about a particularly dark period where the band nearly called it quits and most crucially, the near overdose of drummer Taylor Hawkins, who was experiencing his own troubles with the rapid onslaught of fame, fortune and adoration.

Moll displays the fragility and tentative nature that exists within all bands, as new members appear, old members desire to return, everyone questions their role and place and wonders about any potential longevity. And that is where “Foo Fighters Back and Forth” finds its extra nugget of truth, its profound grace notes.

Guitarist Chris Shiflett perhaps explains it best when he expresses a willingness to simply enjoy every single moment he has within this band just because no one really knows how long this glorious time will last. That very sentiment sits at the core of this film and the band as they continuously try to find ways to keep the bonds of their friendships strong while also keeping the music they make as pure as possible. Grohl is especially thankful for the time when the band won a Grammy Award for their third album “There Is Nothing Left To Lose.” That album was created by eschewing all fancy, big budget recording studios solely for the pleasure and tranquility of recording at Grohl’s home in Virginia (where he claims all of his vocals were recorded on his couch).

The film devotes its final third to the band’s recording of their current album “Wasting Light,” again at Grohl’s home and mostly within his garage along with legendary producer Butch Vig, Nirvana bassist Krist Novoselic and alternative music legend Bob Mould. Those sections are fraught with family, children, swimming pools, laughter, smiles, relaxation as well as determined musical commitment. The scenes of Grohl and Mould practicing vocals and Grohl’s quick five minute lyric writing session, prove so enlightening into the band’s process and willingness to never phone it in, even after all of their rock star spoils and glory. Another sequence, featuring Novoselic working out his bass parts as Vig and Grohl sit nearby on the epic song “I Should Have Known” sends chills as we regard three fourths of the team who created Nirvana’s landmark album “Nevermind” bringing their friendship and creative process full circle.

A short sequence set at Wembley Stadium really hit home for me as to who these band members are as people. While on the top of that rock star mountain, the Foo Fighters are all still kids in their bedrooms pouring over album after album, worshiping at the feet of their musical heroes. The gratitude shown of Grohl’s speechless face as what seems to be the world’s fans cheer him and his band upwards and onwards was supremely uplifting

James Moll’s “Foo Fighters Back and Forth” is a testament to this band’s endurance, perseverance and dedication to each other and to the art of always continuing to find ways to write and perform that perfect song that will rip the roofs off and shake the clouds in the sky. Like last year’s excellent documentary “Rush: Beyond The Lighted Stage,” Moll wisely gives us a film that stresses determination and musicianship during a time when people are famous for simple being famous and worldwide success is expected without effort. Foo Fighters fly in the face of that nonsense as they have kept a fierce perspective on their good fortune as none of them want to squander even one minute.

If you permit me, I must return to Dave Grohl’s opening musical fantasy where I proclaimed that I still entertain that same dream. Everyday I carry a satchel to work and inside of that satchel is a pair of drum sticks. Those sticks go with me wherever I travel and finally, I was once asked by my wife exactly why I carry those drums ticks around.

“You just never know when someone, somewhere is going to need some percussion. And I want to be ready,” I explained.
Skeptically, she looked at me and asked, “Really???”
“You never know,” I always say. “You just never know!”

For Dave Grohl and his band mates, that dream came true and they are all hanging onto it with all of their might. And with this terrific film, you may even be able to grab a piece of that dream for yourselves.

Sunday, July 3, 2011

ZACK SNYDER'S CGI WET DREAM: a review of "Sucker Punch"


“SUCKER PUNCH”
Story by Zack Snyder
Screenplay Written by Zack Snyder and Steve Shibuya
Directed by Zack Snyder

1/2 * (one half of one star)

No matter how many bad reviews one may read about a certain film, it can never truly compare to the experience of having sat through the entire production. “Sucker Punch,” Director Zack Snyder’s third film and follow up to his incredible interpretation of Dave Gibbons and Alan Moore’s “Watchmen” (2009) is an unmitigated and unquestionable disaster. The film is a nightmare CGI wasteland of such extreme soulnessness that it makes Tim Burton’s miserable “Alice In Wonderland” (2010) look like a chamber piece art film. Everything in the movie is negligible and there is not even one honest emotion conveyed through it from its characters and even through the possible intent of the film’s creator. Yes, dear readers, this film is truly that awful and if you think I am being too hard on it, just know that I am actually complimenting it by even considering it to be a movie. If you are thinking of seeing “Sucker Punch,” enter at your own risk for you have been warned.

Emily Browning stars as the orphaned and horrifically named Babydoll, who after accidentally murdering her younger sister while trying to protect her from their lascivious stepfather, is unfairly imprisoned into a bizarre insane asylum; the kind of which that only houses fashion model ready young girls who lash out and writhe around on the floor together in untamed psycho versions of caged heat. If life was not already grim enough for Babydoll, it is about to meet its end as she is scheduled to be lobotomized by the Doctor (Jon Hamm) and subsequently raped by the evil orderly Blue Jones (Oscar Isaac) within five days.

Before her fateful day, Babydoll retreats into a fantasy world where she envisions the asylum as a brothel, Blue as a gangster/pimp and Dr. Vera Gorski (Carla Gugino) the asylum’s psychiatrist as a Madame. Babydoll is soon befriended by a gaggle of “dancers” including: the tough talking Sweet Pea (Abbie Cornish) and her gentle sister Rocket (Jena Malone), Amber (Jamie Chung) and the ironically named Blondie (Vanessa Hudgens). And before you can say, “Nobody puts Babydoll in a corner!”, Babydoll enlists the aid of her new friends as she has devised an escape plan for which they will have to retrieve five items: a map, fire, a knife, a key and one last mystical object.

In this sexualized dream world, Babydoll and her friends are forced to stage erotic dances for clients. Babydoll’s dances prove to be so sexually charged and mesmerizing, to viewers as well as herself, that she retreats into yet ANOTHER fantasy world where she and her friends become gun toting and sword carrying warriors led by a spirit guide (Scott Glenn). In these wild battle and rock music driven action sequences, they must vanquish zombie Nazi soldiers, dragons and 50 ft tall samurai demons, with each success signifying the retrieval of one of the items needed for escape. Yet, will they be able to achieve their dreams before Babydoll becomes a mindless vegetable ready to be deflowered?

OK, dear readers, I am of the mind that a filmmaker could be able to make a successful film about nearly anything and even with a story as ridiculous as this one, that feat should still be able to be accomplished. But, I’m sorry…”Sucker Punch” fails on all counts and spectacularly so. The set design and cinematography is repugnant and the daydream/nightmare slow-mo photography, so effectively stunning in “Watchman” is painfully over utilized here. The fantasy within fantasy war sequences play as nothing more than sections of the worst video game you have ever plunked a quarter into. They are loud, excruciatingly overlong, yawn inducing and devoid of any subtlety, awe, mystery, danger or wonder. Any imaginative streaks in the conceptual looks of these worlds is a meaningless mishmash of styles, genres and eras. If anything, the absolute hell of these sequences should serve as a lesson to any aspiring or even currently working filmmakers who desire to utilize special effects in their films: don’t use these cinematic toys just because you can!

It only gets worse when we come to the actual performances in “Sucker Punch,” which to be fair cannot be the fault of the actors as they are really just chess pieces to be moved around in Snyder’s green screen world. While Abbie Cornish and Jena Malone do seem to be trying to inject…something...anything into the proceedings and their cartoonishly sexualized heroine, Emily Browning as Babydoll is reprehensible. She doesn’t even deliver anything resembling a performance. She’s all doe eyes, bee stung lips, tiny clothes and a mouth that is either partially open or fully closed. She is no heroine. She is no trapped butterfly ready to transform into a wasp. She’s a blow up doll and I have this cringe inducing feeling that is exactly what Zack Snyder may have wanted.

On the whole, “Sucker Punch” feels as if we have purchased a ticket inside the teenaged wet dreams of Zack Snyder and it is truly an uncomfortable place to be. Feminists, Women Studies majors and frankly, anyone who loves women would have a field day with this movie as these characters are ones that Snyder really seems to believe are empowering yet they exist solely as sex kitten dream girls. There is just no way around it. There is no subtext here folks, because this movie just isn’t that smart enough to even know what a subtext actually is.

Every woman in the film is dolled up, dressed up in skintight clothing ready to be raped, beaten, or killed by some horny male authority figure. When the women are indeed allowed to become ready for battle as leather clad warrior women with giant artillery kicking ass, it is only through the prism of Babydoll’s erotic dances. For Snyder, it seems that the stripper pole is a means to be a no holds barred fighter against a sexist world and that’s a gigantically steaming load of crap if he really wants us, in the 21st century, to buy into that fantasy.

And yet…as much as I am criticizing the film’s sexual politics, there is a part of me that also faults the film for not going far enough. Here is what I mean, dear readers. If Zack Snyder is essentially giving us a front row seat into his wet dreams, then why is this film rated PG-13? If you’re going to bother to go down this road, with this subject matter and these characters who have to do these things, then at least have the cojones to go all the way! Go for the gold and be an unrepentantly nasty, sexual fantasy like that 25-minute sequence from the R rated animated film “Heavy Metal” (1981). That film’s centerpiece features a mute, warrior woman named Taarna on a revenge quest for the one who slaughtered her homeland. The entire movie and that section in particular, made no apologies for having a soft porn section in the middle of her storyline which depicted her simply bathing and getting herself dressed for war (in thigh high boots, lip gloss, bustier and sword). She is accosted on several occasions, raped (off screen) by the main villain in another section and yet she still is able to decapitate her tormentors with the cold-blooded efficiency of a classic Clint Eastwood character. Or even better, there’s Robert Rodriguez’s adaptation of Frank Miller’s “Sin City” (2005), a gloriously shot and gleefully R rated production that, although it overstayed its welcome, went whole hog into its grisly violent and prurient sexual universe with all manner of deviants lurking around every dark corner.

“Sucker Punch” is a film that wants to be dirty without really being dirty and that also makes the production feel so disingenuous. Going back for a moment to those erotic dances that Babydoll performs that are just supposed to be so explosively sexual. Well…we, the audience, never see even one of those dances. All we get to see is the sight of Emily Browning just swaying side to side. Then, she closes her eyes and wakes up to battle a dragon. It is as if Snyder didn’t want the nation to come down upon him like a ton of those proverbial and puritanical American bricks for fear we would decry his right to hold whatever sexual fantasies he desires. Trust me, Zack Snyder can have whatever sexual fantasies he wants. I am no one to judge anyone else of their proclivities as long as they do not harm another living thing. If imprisoned lipstick lesbians who can fly warplanes and wield swords are his thing then more power to him. But, please don’t dress it all up in CGI comic book special effects and claim that this is really a film about empowerment! That is an insult to the intelligence of everyone who chooses to view this movie and how insulting it is to be insulted by a film this stupid.

Seeing “Sucker Punch” truly exemplifies the statement I use sometimes to friends: I see these things so you don’t have to. I saw “Sucker Punch” and trust me, you really, really, really do not have to sit through this as it is easily the worst film I have seen so far in 2011.

Saturday, July 2, 2011

AUSLANDER: a review of "Unknown"


“UNKNOWN”
Based upon the novel Out Of My Head by Didier Van Cauwelaert
Screenplay Written by Oliver Butcher and Stephen Cornwell
Directed by Jaume Collet-Serra
** ½ (two and a half stars)

At least this was a marked improvement over “The Adjustment Bureau.”

For any of my multi-lingual readers, I do apologize for the title of this review as I am of the understanding that the German term, essentially translated as “foreigner,” just may be an offensive one. If so, being offensive was not my intent by any means. Yet, for the purposes of reviewing this particular thriller, which does contain a certain level of pulp and sordidness, the title seemed to be fitting to me.

Director Jaume Collet-Serra, who previously unleashed the grisly bad seed horror film “Orphan” (2009), returns with “Unknown,” an unseemly and grimy European crime thriller about a man’s search for his identity starring Liam Neeson whose righteous anger, so brutally on display in the equally brutal “Taken” (2008), is always a sight to behold. His fury is instantly relatable, his primal rage completely palpable. And his theatrical heft is almost enough to carry this decent but underwhelming film all by itself. If not for Neeson, there would not be much else to make this film worth watching.

Liam Neeson stars as Dr. Martin Harris, a botanist arriving with his wife Liz (January Jones) in Berlin to give a presentation at a biotechnology summit. Upon arriving at their hotel, Martin realizes that his briefcase containing his notes, passport and all other forms of his identification was forgotten at the airport. Leaving Liz to deal with the hotel accommodations, Martin frantically takes a taxi, driven by illegal immigrant Gina (Diane Kruger), to attempt to retrieve his briefcase. Suddenly, the taxi becomes involved in a major traffic accident, which causes the taxi to crash through a bridge and into the river below. Martin is instantly knocked unconscious and falls into a coma but is quickly saved by Gina and brought to shore to meet the emergency medical response team. Gina quietly exits the scene of the accident leaving Martin in safe medical hands.

Four days later, Martin awakens in the hospital, disoriented, confused and feverishly wondering what had happened to him as well as the whereabouts and safety of his wife in this unfamiliar city. Checking himself out of the hospital, Martin returns to the hotel hoping to check himself in and reunite with Liz, which proves more than difficult with out having any identification proving is identity. The hotel staff eventually acquiesces to allow him inside of a gathering of the biotechnology summit’s participants to speak with his wife yet upon their reunion, Liz claims she has never seen Martin in her life. To make matters worse, another man claiming to be Dr. Martin Harris (Aidan Quinn) arrives at Liz’s side professing to be her true husband and as proof, offers identification signifying this apparent stranger to be the real Martin Harris!

Enlisting the aid of a private investigator (Bruno Ganz) and former member of the German secret police as well as the reluctant assistance from Gina, Martin Harris prowls the streets of Berlin on a quest to prove and reclaim his identity.

Liam Neeson is a cinematic treasure and with his recent stint as an unlikely action star, he has proven to be an asset to a genre that typically does not receive very much respect. With “Unknown,” a film that at times seems like Doug Liman’s “The Bourne Identity” (2002) or even Paul Verhoeven’s “Total Recall” (1990), Neeson serves as an everyman even when he seethes with indignant rage, fights with ferocity and drives a car like a Superman. As with “Taken,” Neeson completely elevates what could have been another run of the mill mistaken identity thriller. He injects unquestionable soul and depth into the proceedings, again making him a hero worth following almost anywhere.

Thankfully, Neeson does not have to carry “Unknown” all alone as Collet-Serra has populated his film with strong character actors that surround Neeson handsomely, making the world within this film appropriately grounded within the realms of plausibility. In addition to seeing Aidan Quinn, an actor I never thought has ever fully received his proper due, I was also impressed with Bruno Ganz’s gravelly performance as Ernst Jurgen the private investigator as well as brief moments from Clint Dyer (as a confidant of Gina’s), Karl Markovics (as the kindly German doctor who aids Martin Harris) and even Eva Lobau (as a doomed nurse). All of these supporting actors do what they can to hold the screen and add to the complexity of the story and the locale of Berlin itself, an element that is also aided by Flavio Labiano’s luridly excellent cinematography.

But, of course, there are problems contained within “Unknown” that stopped me from fully embracing it. Nothing that derailed it by any means but problems nonetheless.

For instance, I just do not know or understand what the fascination is with January Jones but for me, in regards to this film, she felt to be rather stiff and just another bland blond that is arm candy to her much older co-stars. Diane Kruger, so effective in her early scenes when she utilizes her resourcefulness to rescue Neeson’s Martin Harris from drowning, hardly registers in her scenes afterwards. This problem is nothing that I blame her for because I believe she has given what she was able to a role that was sadly underwritten. Considering how brilliant she was in Quentin Tarantino’s “Inglourious Basterds” (2009) we all know that Kruger has the chops and the ability to go toe to toe with Liam Neeson and it was just a shame to essentially see her being relegated to the role of “the girl.” And for times here and there, the film seemed to drag when it needed to be ratcheting up its level of intensity.

But, please take these quibbles for what they are, just minor quibbles in an otherwise fairly solid thriller which remains consistent with itself and does indeed follow through to a conclusion that is appropriately two-fisted and again, plausible.

And if we haven’t truly learned by now, I believe that we can all take away one major lesson from “Unknown”: Don’t make Mr. Neeson angry. We wouldn’t like him when he’s angry.

Awww…who am I kidding? We LOVE him when he’s angry!

PLAN B: a review of "The Adjustment Bureau"



“THE ADJUSTMENT BUREAU”
Based upon the short story “Adjustment Team” by Philip K. Dick
Written for the Screen, Produced and Directed by George Nolfi

* 1/2 (one and a half stars)

Dear readers, I just knew there was a good reason that I did not see this film in the movie theaters during its brief run this Spring.

“The Adjustment Bureau,” Writer/Director George Nolfi’s adaptation of a Philip K. Dick short story has a particularly strong concept sitting at its core but the execution of that concept is disastrously scattershot and logistically ridiculous. Which is quite a shame as this film begins and sets itself up to be the very type of conspiracy thriller/head spinner combined with an urgent romance that I tend to gravitate towards. The film is well cast from top to bottom, it is well paced, well filmed and still it was all for naught. Yet, to the film’s credit, it was not for a lack of trying…something I can greatly appreciate. “The Adjustment Bureau” is not a standard Hollywood exercise in laziness but despite any commitment to the material at hand, the end result was one that was just enormously unsuccessful for me.

Matt Damon gives another solid performance as David Norris, a young New York Congressman in the throes of a seemingly victorious campaign for the United States Senate, a race he unexpectedly loses. While rehearsing his concession speech in the men’s room, he is interrupted by the presence of wedding crasher Elise (Emily Blunt), who has been hiding from security in one of the bathroom stalls. The twosome strike up a flirtatious conversation filled with instantaneous and unpredictable honestly, which builds into an undeniable romantic connection. Yet, due to their respective personal circumstances, their union is forced apart moments later with the added disappointment of knowing they may never see each other again.

One month later, David, contemplating a return to the political stage, is beginning his first day in private sector employment. On this fateful morning, he purchases a coffee, boards his morning bus and is surprised to find Elise riding same bus. It is as if a day had not passed between them as their playful honesty and sexually charged flirtatiousness returns without missing a beat. Once Elise departs the bus, this time giving David her first name and number, David arrives at work to discover an unfamiliar group of suit wearing men examining an office full of incapacitated workers, including his own best friend Charlie (Michael Kelly). David is soon apprehended by these dapper gentleman, taken to what appears to be a warehouse and accosted by a man known only as Richardson (John Slattery—possibly wearing the same suit from the “Mad Men” set). Richardson explains to David that around the world, these suit wearing men are essentially “watchers” who control the lives of the human race and ensure that everyone sticks to their individual plans created by “The Chairman,” thus extinguishing any notions of free will.

David, by interacting with Elise upon the bus that morning and not spilling his coffee before boarding the bus, has essentially gone off of his life’s script. Not only must he be returned to that script as soon as possible, he is to never see Elise ever again as they were never meant to be together. David is also warned that if he ever tells anyone of what he has seen behind life’s curtain, even inadvertently, his mind will be irrevocably “reset,” his brain lobotomized.

Determined to follow his heart and exert his own free will in the face of fate staring him down, David continues his search for Elise, as he rides the same bus every day for three long years just hoping to catch a glimpse of her again. Which of course, he does, thus beginning the battle for true love and free will.

Now, this is more than enough of an intriguing premise and since it has originated from the mind of Philip K. Dick that should not be surprising at all. The conceit of “The Adjustment Bureau” pulled me in very quickly with its philosophical framework, which from time to time took me straight back to some of my college Philosophy courses during which we debated the concepts of fate vs. free will often and enthusiastically. The spiritual games set into play with this story appealed to me but without the proper gravity, those games would have meant nothing. That’s where the effectiveness of having Matt Damon and Emily Blunt at the helm comes in as they provided the film with crucial emotional gravity.

Matt Damon (complete with an appropriate young politician’s paunch) and Blunt are wonderful together as they create immediate chemistry that never for a moment feels forced, strained or manufactured by the all seeing, all knowing Hollywood suits. Their ease with each other made me feel very often that their dialogue was even perhaps ad-libbed, as they exuded a true romantic and sexual energy while also being so playful. I found myself remembering the excellent chemistry created between Tom Cruise and Penelope Cruz in Cameron Crowe’s “Vanilla Sky” (2001), a personal favorite and another film grounded within the everyday mystiques of interpersonal romantic relationships and connections long before the story transforms itself and plunges into conceptually uncharted waters. Damon and Blunt’s connection indeed gives “The Adjustment Bureau” its beating heart and soul and frankly, the one contributing factor that made me want to sit through this feature all of the way to its conclusion.

But, the problems for me began with the presentation of the titular Adjustment Bureau members. These beings describe themselves as being the ones who gave humanity the capability to produce eras like the Renaissance and periods during which there were great evolutions in scientific knowledge and so on. They also describe themselves as being the ones who observed the human race slide into fascism and the threat of nuclear war once they stepped backwards and allowed humans to the fullness of their free will. With that level of knowledge and omnipresence at our disposal, then why are they so shockingly and surprisingly easy to distract and dissuade? How and why do they make mistakes for reasons as non-sensical as oversleeping? Why should the fact that they wear a hat or not change their overall effectiveness? Their repetitive gaffes just made the mystery of “The Adjustment Bureau” more than a little silly and the sillier they became, the effectiveness of the film as a whole dwindled dramatically.

The titular Adjustment Bureau team members are essentially nothing more than beleaguered, overworked, underpaid and remarkably understaffed men in fedora hats and well-tailored Brook Brothers suits. There is absolutely no menace to these characters. Nothing is ever foreboding. Nothing even feels remotely otherworldly about them and there’s no sense of doom. Whatever one could say about a film like 2009's “The Box” (which I reviewed last month), at least Writer/Director Richard Kelly created a universe where Frank Langella’s character and the minions that surrounded him possessed a true darkness that permeated the entire film, making the entire proceedings very unsettling. Yet for “The Adjustment Bureau,” these elegantly dressed men are less like omniscient watchers of the universe and more like a put upon middle management team of a hefty but ineffective corporation.

Beyond this silly team, the plotting of “The Adjustment Bureau” and the variety of rules for the team members felt as if the filmmakers were creating it from moment to moment and it all felt so arbitrary and utilized solely to keep the wheels of the plot spinning. Does the presence of water negatively affect the team or not? If they do not have enough members to watch everyone in the world, then why should Damon and Blunt assume that everyone who happens to be wearing a hat is a potential threat to their love and safety? And then, there were the questions that popped into my head with the non-mystical pieces of the story including this following tidbit: Why doesn’t Elise just tell David her last name when she has the chance?

There were just too many points where this film felt like that God awful John Cusack/Kate Beckinsale romantic comedy “Serendipity” (2001), where the entire plot hinged on the very things that only a screenwriter would think up and not anything that real people would or could potentially do. Yes, “The Adjustment Bureau” is an existential fantasy but it does attempt to ground itself into the real world and the real emotions that are contained within this wild storyline.

I did say at this review’s outset that “The Adjustment Bureau” was not a lazy exercise. But I’m not certain if the filmmakers firmly believed in the material given to them. I mean—if you are going to have a film that is a debate about the existence or non-existence of free will, then I think you should be able to take that concept to the wall and this film just did not go there. It tried, yes. But, it’s a film that is almost impossible to take remotely seriously. “The Adjustment Bureau” never builds any real tension and never arrives at any crescendo of paranoia. No, the film doesn’t have to become more serious than it already is or more ponderous than it needs to be. It can be wholly entertaining yet still, emotionally wrenching, especially when we do have this strong love story at the center of it all.

Before I put this review out into the world, I would like for you to please take a moment and think of how the televisions series “Lost” tackled this type of material. Yes, they had many more hours to devote to their concepts than this under two-hour motion picture but it is the weight that they gave to their concepts and characters that made the overall storyline sing loudly.

“The Adjustment Bureau” has one hell of a song to sing but unfortunately, it just hums a little tune very softly and more than a bit out of tune.

Friday, July 1, 2011

SAVAGE CINEMA'S COMING ATTRACTIONS FOR JULY 2011

I typically do not use any on-line movie ticket purchasing sites for the following simple reasons: I tend to see matinees anyway, so there's not the rush of crowds to deal with--even in the summer. And I suppose, I am very tied to the ways of my cinematic youth when you just made your plans, arrived at the theater and let the chips fall where they may. But, there have been exceptions over the years and for this month, that exception can easily be boiled down to two words: "Harry" and "Potter."

Dear readers, I am no fool and the moment I see that tickets have gone on sale for the final installment in this unbelievably and gloriously classy film series, I am purchasing that on-line ticket for I will not wait longer than I have to to see Harry, his friends and enemies in their grand finale, "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2."

Aside from Mr. Potter, I am very excited for the month of July and I am simply gobsmacked at how wonderful a cinematic month June happened to be. Summer at the movies has not been this wonderful in seemingly eons and I am hoping that July will continue this fine streak.

1. The Marvel Comics Universe continues this month with the highly anticipated "Captain America: The First Avenger" from Director Joe Johnston.

2. Director Jon Favreau steps outside of the "Iron Man" franchise with the equally highyl anticipated and brilliantly titled "Cowboys and Aliens" starring Daniel Craig and Harrison Ford.

3. I am also hoping that the smaller scaled independent film "Beginners," starring Christopher Plummer and Ewan McGregor arrives in my city this month.

4. While I am typically not one for movie love stories, I am very excited to see "One Day," Director Lone Scherfig's adaptation of the excellent novel from David Nicholls starring Anne Hathaway and Jim Sturgess. Let's see if that film garners a wide release and makes it to my city as well.

5. I also have plans to bring you perhaps one or two new installments of "Savage Cinema Revisits."

6. If I am able, I am hoping to squeeze in a screening and review of the new music documentary "Foo Fighters: Back and Forth."

7. And finally, I am already composing and piecing together a tribute to Bongo Video, my local video store, an independent small business that will sadly close its doors later this summer.

Phew!!! Busy plans for a busy month. I hope to bring them all to fruition for me and for you.

I'll see you all when the house light go down...