Archive for the ‘Movie Reviews’ Category

Q&A – The Extra Man’s Kevin Kline on Florida, Frankenstein Dancing, and the Importance of Being Funny

Sunday, July 11th, 2010
Kevin Kline has established himself as one of the finest actors of his generation, with a much-respected career in both theater and film. He has won two Tony awards, for On the Twentieth Century and The Pirates of Penzance, as well as an Oscar, for A Fish Called Wanda. The latter role illustrates his ability to move between comedy and drama with ease, and, indeed, his performance remains one of the few comedic turns ever to win an Academy Award. In his latest film, The Extra Man, he plays a fallen New York aristocrat who scrapes by providing "companionship" to wealthy older women. He spoke at length about the film during a recent interview with the press.

Q: Would this film be any different if it weren't set in New York?

A: It's very New York, with all it has to offer culturally. My character is literally feeding on that, on art openings and galleries and museums. All these social events that are very specific to New York. I don't know if he cold exist in L.A., for example, though there are extra men in L.A. and Florida. When we played the Sarasota Film Festival, so many people came up and said, "You're in an extra-man city!" There are so many wealthy widows and retirees in Florida, and they all need a male friend.

Q: So what was the attraction of the role for you?


A: I knew on page two that I wanted to play this character. The word "delight" kept coming up. It just delighted me, and tickled me, and made me laugh out loud. I found his voice so original, even though you can compare him to other eccentric characters in literature and film. He was just so outrageous, and flamboyant, and extravagant, and contradictory, and complicated, and funny.

Q: Do you know anyone like him?

A: I'm sure I've met them, but didn't necessarily know what they did. Working in the theater in New York, one can meet flamboyant men-about-town. Bons vivants. But I didn't base him on anyone in particular. I just took him from the novel and from the screenplay.

Q: Do you miss the camaraderie of the theater when you do a film? That familial bond of a small group of performers trying to make it work?

A: Actually, there can be familial bonding on a film as well, and that phenomenon can get trying in the long run in theater, especially if you're in a theater company, which I was, for four years. The family can get dysfunctional as time goes on. People say that an ensemble takes years to develop, but you can have an instant ensemble if everyone is -- and I hate the expression -- on the same page, in terms of the project you're working on. You're all in the trenches together, and it can be very intimate.

Q: How about the dancing you did in the film? How did you develop that?

A: In the book, he dances in a much more -- sort of a fox-trot movement. He says, "I try to move whatever I think is rotting." We kind of took that to the next step, where everything is rotting. I'm moving pretty much everything. A brilliant choreographer and an old friend named Patricia Birch was brought in, and we tried different things with her. Finally she said, "Why don't you try that goofy modern dance, that Martha Graham-meets-Frankenstein dance, and just do your own thing?" It was pretty free-form and much longer. It was about a five-minute dance, and they just took a little piece of it.

Q: Even at the end, we don't fully understand this character. Do you have to understand him in order to play him?

A: That's a very good question, and the answer is no. He is a mysterious character; he's full of contradictions. There's a side of him that's very theatrical, as if he's playing a role. Part of that is wanting a mystique and being mysterious, and part of it is that there's things he doesn't want to talk about. That's part of his charm. If you understand the pathology of a character, it's not necessarily dramatic or funny or interesting. Also, you've explained it all away.

Q: How do you create that feeling of an age gone by -- this notion of living in an older time, while the rest of the world has moved on?

A: With the character. I think the character is quite aware that it's moved on and finds it vulgar. Shameful and common and without style. His response to that is to live in the past, to create his own past. He's a guy who lives in his own world. He's Don Quixote, in a way. They're just windmills, but, to him, they're giants who need to be conquered. That ability to delude yourself into making the world a more beautiful place than it is -- and to scorn those parts which aren't up to your standards -- is very critical.

Q: Are there any unique challenges to approaching comedy that you wouldn't find in a more serious role?

A: I remember Richard Attenborough said something once. I did a film with him and I went off afterward to do A Fish Called Wanda. He said, "Comedy is so difficult because it's so binary." It's either funny or it isn't. With comedy, sort of funny doesn't work. You've got to thread the needle and get it right.

Top Ten “Just One Last Job!” Flicks

Saturday, July 10th, 2010

When criminals retire, no one gives them a farewell luncheon and a gold watch, let alone a pension. Hence, they need the Über-clichéd One! Last! Big! Job! to provide comfort and serenity in their twilight years. Occasionally, it's redemption they're after and a return to the right side of the law, as in Leonardo DiCaprio's soon-to-be-released Inception. But, usually, it's all about the Benjamins. Below, our ten favorite films about that fateful final heist.

thief.jpgThief
Smarter and more involving than your average thriller, Michael Mann's first feature stars James Caan as a talented and successful criminal who decides that what he really wants is a quiet life with Tuesday Weld -- and who can blame him? But for that, he needs a nest egg, so he signs on for one big final caper. And, from there, it's vice, vice, baby.


the heist.jpgHeist
David Mamet, master of intricate plotting and testoster-rific dialogue, has ping-ponged from stage to screen and back again. Heist was his first film for a major studio, and it brought together an unlikely cast of performers: Delroy Lindo, Sam Rockwell, Danny DeVito, and Gene Hackman, as the aging criminal strong-armed into executing that one last job: here, the liberation of a shipment of Swiss gold.


the getaway.jpgThe Getaway
In a shady little example of quid pro quo, the wife of a prisoner arranges his release by offering his services (as a former bank robber) and hers (as a sexy lady) to a corrupt politician. Critics griped about the nonsensical plot, but the movie did at least two people some good: as the loving couple, Steve McQueen and Ali MacGraw delved so deeply into their roles that MacGraw left her husband for McQueen. McDangerous liaison.


sexy beast.jpgSexy Beast
Sexy Beast features Ben Kingsley at his snarly-est, though he's not the fellow pulled back in just when he thought he was out. That would be Ray Winstone, as unwillingly un-retired safecracker Gal Dove. British director Jonathan Glazer stirs things up by adding elements of horror and surrealism to what would otherwise be a fairly clichéd tale -- but, needless to say, it doesn't go well.


unforgiven.jpgUnforgiven
Clint Eastwood snagged two Oscars for this almost embarrassingly acclaimed revisionist Western, making his mantelpiece a possible candidate for its own heist. As former hell-raiser William Munny, Eastwood would really rather hang out on the farm raising his kids than seek out a bunch of cowboys with a price on their heads, but his pigs are sick. And those vet bills don't pay themselves, so he straps one on, and, well, you know what happens from there.


the killer.jpgThe Killer
John Woo paid homage to two of his idols, Martin Scorsese and Sam Peckinpah, in this action drama. The great Chow Yun Fat plays a Triad assassin who agrees to pull off one last hit in order to finance a nightclub singer's eye operation: it's the least he can do, since he's the one who blinded her, in the first place. And, as the director explains, "once you pick up a gun, it's hard to put it down."


rififi.jpgRififi
None other than François Truffaut called this noir-y French flick the "best crime film I have ever seen," and many others have praised its second act, which contains the heist itself and is devoid of dialogue and music. The grizzled con at the heart of the tale -- Tony le Stéphanois (Jean Servais) -- opts out of the first job he's offered, only to reconsider shortly thereafter. The reason? A girl. Naturally.



the killing.jpgThe Killing
A collaboration between Stanley Kubrick -- it was his first major motion picture -- and pulp author Jim Thompson, The Killing follows Johnny Clay (Sterling Hayden) as he plans and executes the big racetrack heist that will net him enough scratch to finally quit the game and settle down with his sweetie. The plot entranced critics, who praised the film's suspense and fine performances.


heat.jpgHeat

Michael Mann cast wisely for his second appearance on our list: Robert De Niro and Al Pacino, playing (respectively) the career criminal craving a comfy retirement and the cop determined to take him down. The two stars appear onscreen together only twice, but the gripping plot -- in which Pacino and his gang successfully pull of a never-need-to-work-again armored-car heist -- was more than enough to give this one instant-classic status.



the wild bunch.jpgThe Wild Bunch
Sam Peckinpah's then-revolutionary mix of slow and standard motion makes this film's final shoot-out scene one of the genre's best. Here revenge is but one catalyst for the eponymous gang's ultimate score. They'd also like to retire peacefully and prosperously. Alas, things go terribly awry, as (note to career criminals) they so often do.

rank-this-list.gif

Despicable Me

Thursday, July 8th, 2010

A few weeks back, Despicable Me co-screenwriters Ken Daurio and Cinco Paul graciously sat down for a candid interview. We talked about the inspiration for the Eastern European accent affected by their leading man, Steve Carell. They addressed the challenges of devising innovative action sequences when they knew, in advance, that their animation had to be in 3-D. And they shared lessons they learned while writing Dr. Seuss's Horton Hears a Who!

I asked them if it stuck in the back of their minds that their original animated feature happened to be coming out in the same summer as a fourth Shrek and a third Toy Story.

"No, that's at the front of our minds," Daurio said with a nervous chuckle. "There's no way to say, 'Oh, two of the biggest animated franchises ever are coming out on either side of our movie. That's fine! We'll be fine!'"

The collaborators maintained a brave front because they are confident in their movie. But they were right to worry.

Despicable Me is perfectly fine by most animation standards. Carell voices Gru, an evil villain who seems to have wandered out of a '70s-era Bond movie. Gru is getting on in years, and his plans for world domination are routinely upstaged by a younger, smarter menace named Vector (Jason Segel). Gru needs one more scheme to get back in the game, so he devises a plan to steal the moon by shrinking it to the size of a silver dollar. But to complete the mission, he must adopt three adorable orphans who are in dire need of a family.

Spoofing the secret-agent genre by telling a story through the eyes of a conventional villain opens Despicable Me up to a world of options. The subtle satire gleaned from Gru's predicaments caters to adult audience members. His adorable yellow minions will entertain the film's youngest patrons. There's a memorable riff on Brian De Palma's Mission: Impossible that involves a dangling shrink ray and a killer shark. And there's a warm-hearted subplot regarding the joys of parenthood that will inspire moms and dads to clutch their cuddly kids and thank them for being around.

But Despicable Me arrives on the heels of Pixar's masterful Toy Story 3, and while I acknowledge it's unfair to compare them, the movies simply don't occupy the same playing field. Lee Unkrich's comical, tearful sequel moves its audience with a profound, multi-layered adventure aimed at the heart as well as the mind. Similarly high aspirations can't be found in Despicable Me. It sets out to entertain, and for the most part, it succeeds. Back when multiplexes were filled with the likes of Antz, Treasure Planet, Brother Bear, or the Ice Age series, that was acceptable. But the animation bar has been raised, permanently, and Despicable Me misses it by a mile.

Predators

Thursday, July 8th, 2010
Not really a remake in the standard sense, the Robert Rodriguez-produced Predators wants to make you forget everything that's happened with this "franchise" since 1990. That's when the wayward Predator 2 brought the alien hunters to a not too distant future L.A., with very middling results. So forget Alien vs. Predator and the equally awful follow-up and prepare yourself for another Most Dangerous Game take on the material. This time around, a rag tag group of killers (both professional and "hobbyists") are whisked off to an extraterrestrial game preserve. There, they are pitted against well-armed squads of the crab-mouthed monsters in a deadly, frequently derivative, test of survival.

We first meet Special Ops mercenary Royce (Adrien Brody) as he's freefalling toward the planet's surface. Within minutes, he's hooked up with an executioner from a Mexican drug cartel (Danny Trejo), a Brazilian military ace (Alice Braga), a Russian war vet (Oleg Taktarov), a rebel soldier from Sierra Leone (Mahershalalhashbaz Ali), a death row inmate (Walton Goggins), a member of the Japanese Yakuza (Louis Ozawa Changchien) and a doctor (Topher Grace). Quickly figuring out their "kill or be killed" place on this jungle otherworld, they discover that they are not alone. Not only is there a band of space slayers out to get them, but the area has been populated with beings from other galaxies as well.

Thus we get the Predator riffs we know so well: the infrared night vision sequences; the ominous vocal clicks; the ability to mimic the environment around them; the arm blades, the shoulder lasers, and the pulse cannons. New this time around are the predator attack dogs (cool), flying surveillance devices, a long standing blood feud that finds the bigger hunters picking on the smaller, and one incredibly whacked out cameo (no - the Governator does not show up here, though his original movie mission is referenced). Had Predators done more with this, had it offered up even more novel reinterpretations of the creature and its mythology, we'd enjoy this movie a lot more. Instead, director Nimród Antal goes back to the standard action movie beats -- some down time to establish personality and exposition, and then ramp up the foot chases and jungle firefights. The results are fun if wholly formulaic.

It's sad that the man who made Vacancy and Armored doesn't have more to say. There is no vision here, no spark of imagination to get your inner geek re-invested in this series. Basically, if you loved the first film and can tolerate the Arnold-less sequel, you'll have a good time. But if you are expecting something inspired, something that takes the whole Predator experience to a whole new level (like James Cameron did when he turned Alien into Aliens), you will need to look elsewhere. What you get instead is a thoroughly professional, journeyman thriller which avoids surprises and stays well within the genre. Even the acting is nothing short of decent. Brody and crew aren't give all that much to do, and they manage such a minimized requirement quite well.

Frankly, one expects a little more from producer Rodriguez. Given the blood-splattered insanity of his Planet Terror and the astonishing optical wonders of Sin City, should we really be simply satisfied? Granted, it's Antal behind the lens, but one imagines the filmmaker functioning under the full faith and artistic credit of his overseer. Somewhere buried deep inside a scenario in which interstellar sportsman hunt humans for fun lies a really superior cinematic experience. In fact, it's already happened -- some 23 years ago. Predators had two decades to find a way to freshen up this concept. Instead, it goes back to the motion picture truisms that worked before. While not bad, it's definitely not bad ass.

The Kids Are All Right

Thursday, July 8th, 2010
A video featuring men going down on one another (in cowboy costumes, no less) that a suburban couple breaks out when they decide to fool around is undoubtedly the most "gay" thing about The Kids Are All Right, Lisa Cholodenko's terrifically entertaining and moving fourth feature. The fact that the couple in question is comprised of two women, one a serious-minded doctor and the other a scatterbrained job-hopper, factors in only as much as your definition of "liberal" and "conservative" limits your views on family dynamics and, indeed, concepts of right and wrong.

But as the title suggests, the film begins and ends with the two children Dr. Nic (Annette Bening) and earth-mother Jules (Julianne Moore) conceived through an anonymous sperm donor. Both Joni (Mia Wasakowski, much stronger here than in the languid Alice in Wonderland), mere weeks away from collegiate bliss, and Laser (a very good Josh Hutcherson), a pensive jock, come from the same donor but only Laser has the itch to meet the man, evident in a scene where he joyfully watches his borderline-psychotic best friend (Eddie Hassell) literally wrestle with his father. Fulfilling her sisterly obligations while keeping the "moms" in the dark, Joni is the one who first contacts their absentee donor, a restaurateur and organic farmer named Paul, played with reliable intelligence and swagger by Mark Ruffalo.

Unexpectedly, it's Joni who takes to Paul right away, while Laser gets rustled and mildly insulted by his ambivalence to sports; the denim-adorned donor is seemingly too busy putting it to his gorgeous hostess and flirting with a dread-locked hippie at his farm to throw around the ball. Whereas Paul is overwhelmed with his lover man persona, Laser lets their meeting slip while being passive-aggressively grilled over his possible homosexuality by the moms. Hesitant as always, Nic allows the motorcycle-driving Lothario into their house for wine and a barbecue before Paul impulsively hires Jules to redecorate his "fecund" backyard. A shot of Paul hypnotized by Jules' thong as she works and her rousing reaction to a slice of his strawberry-rhubarb pie points to the stormy weather ahead.    

Cholodenko has gone from treating the LGBT community as a seductive society, as she did in her superb debut, High Art, to portraying a singular homosexual couple as, well, suburban. The casting of Moore and Bening, both spectacular and wildly funny, and the film's pedestrian structure could have been shallow attempts at commercial acceptance, but this actually constitutes a risky maneuver on the director's part, one that pays off immensely. The politics and sexuality of The Kids Are All Right are covertly complex or, perhaps more pointedly, so natural that they defy mapping. Either way, they are embedded in the characters rather than guiding them, something that many films strictly about homosexuals have been unable to fathom.

Don't be mistaken: The Kids Are All Right certainly comes from a liberal state of mind but it never belittles or condescends to conservatives, nor does it bark its opinion like so many films of its ilk have in the past. Here, Cholodenko, who co-wrote the script with Stuart Blumberg and who herself gave birth to a boy with the help of an anonymous sperm donor, enters a similar class of filmmaker as Alexander Payne in her handling of serious comedies grounded by complexly drawn characters and urgent social issues. Sideways, it is not, but The Kids Are All Right is, in a particularly dull summer at the movies, a friendly reminder that there are...alternatives.   

Winnebago Man

Thursday, July 8th, 2010
The phrase "YouTube sensation" gets thrown around an awful lot, describing every popular online video from lip-synching loonies to adolescents on Novocaine. But Jack Rebney is the real deal. Who's Jack Rebney? That's a good question, one that filmmaker Ben Steinbauer felt destined to answer in his search for the guy who became known as Winnebago Man. The result of Steinbauer's three-year journey is knee-slapping fun, a relentlessly entertaining documentary about fame and the unlikely famous. And the art of cursing. 

Jack Rebney didn't start in the limelight: In the late 1980s, he was just a guy starring in a corporate sales video for the Winnebago RV company. Innocent enough, sure, until you see Rebney's outtakes, in which he regularly spews a slurry of profanity so raw, so ridiculous, so harmlessly angry, you can only laugh at the performance.

Somehow, Rebney's bloopers and blunders were put onto a VHS tape, copied onto many other tapes, and distributed throughout the entertainment industry. They eventually stormed the world on YouTube some 20 years after the Winnebago Man first filled the frame with filth.

Lucky for us, Steinbauer wants to know everything about this lightning strike of popularity, and wants to share it with us, the right approach for a culture now supersaturated with the very idea of sharing information. After the quiet director breaks down the particulars of how and why the outtakes spread like wildfire, he is practically obsessed (or, he appears obsessed) with finding Rebney. Questions abound. Does Rebney know of his fame? Has he ever watched YouTube? Is he still really pissed off?

Steinbauer and company make sure we get plenty of Rebney's rants right up front; when the filmmaker actually finds the guy, the thrill is a bit intoxicating, like finally meeting a famous actor and wondering about his "real" persona. When he shows up on screen, Rebney is in his 70s, crotchety yet charming, and sly enough to continually keep us guessing about the real Jack Rebney. He's a character with character.

And that's where Winnebago Man turns from a simple idea into a complex look at cultural iconography and public perception. Rebney's initial fame -- or infamy, if you will -- is as viral as it gets, a pristine example of the retweet, long before there was a Twitter. But when Rebney starts showing up at public screenings of his videos, revving up the cult crowd, fame takes a very revealing turn.(Think Troll 2's popularity, as seen in Best Worst Movie).

Intended or not, Steinbauer creates an enlightening case study about the zeitgeist, and how cool becomes cool. And even if Winnebago Man didn't peer deeply into the eyes of popular culture, it works simply by recognizing how exciting it can be to see a frustrated guy curse his brains out.

Letters to Juliet (2010)

Saturday, June 19th, 2010

It’s never a bad thing when you laugh the whole way through a movie, which is exactly what happened whilst  watching Letters to Juliet. The film is not a comedy though. I’m afraid to say my friends and I were laughing at how unbelievably bad and predictable the film was. Yes it’s a chick flick romance and these types of films always contain predictable elements: a happy ending, a romance which starts with a few bumps but ends up smooth sailing, and a love rival, but seriously, there’s such a thing as good scriptwriting which can at least make a predictable plot enjoyable. Clearly the team behind Letters to Juliet don’t believe in making an effort with scripts. I genuinely believe that I could have written better dialogue, and I don’t claim to have any script writing experience or talent.

The concept behind the main story is actually rather sweet. On a pre-honeymoon to Verona, Sophie (Amanda Seyfreid) comes across the lengendary wall and balcony where Romeo supposedly courted Juliet Capulet in Shakespeare’s famous tragedy. Women from all across the world visit the attraction and write letters to Juliet asking her for help. These letters are then replied to by a group of women who call themselves ‘Juliet’s secretaries’. Sophie finds a letter from fifty years ago that had gotten lodged in a gap in the wall. The letter is from a confused young british woman called Claire who has just jilted her fiancee because she was afraid her family would disapprove of the match. Although the woman will now be an old lady, Sophie decides to reply to the letter; an action which leads to the chain of events that take up the rest of the film. On receiving this late reply, Claire jumps on a plane and comes to Verona hoping to find her long lost love Lorenzo and apologise to him for her cowardice.

Nice simple storyline. Where did it all go wrong?

The two main men in the film were completely unbelievable and ridiculous. Christopher Egan plays Claire’s grandson Charlie with one of the stupidest British accents i’ve ever come across. Instead of trying to sound like a normal english person, it’s like he’s trying to impersonate a member of the royal family. It’s not obvious why he is talking so posh, since his grandmother’s accent is nothing like that. During the course of the film he is supposed to go from rude and offensive to charming and kind, but this transition does not work at all and although he comes across as slightly more likeable than his love rival, he’s really just the better of two evils. Gael Garcia Benal plays Sophie’s fiance and considering he’s proved himself to be a magnificent actor in films like The Motorcycle Diaries and can’t be short on work offers, I have no idea what possessed him to get involved in this film. This is the first English speaking role i’ve seen him in and I can only hope the next is better, as he really was terrible. He plays the role eccentrically and over the top, but he does this so excessively that it’s hard to comprehend why Sophie got together with him in the first place. To be fair, he was working with a poor script though.

Some of the dialogue was so bad that I couldn’t help but laugh in disbelief. In the pivotal scene where Charlie and Sophie declare their love for one another, Charlies doesn’t just say ‘I love you’, but makes a ridiculous speech about loving her ‘madly’, ‘deeply’, ‘passionately’. Pass me a bucket please. Even the soundtrack was predictable and cheesy. Taylor Swift’s song ‘Love Story’ was played during the happy ending. Need that bucket again.

rating: 2

Starring: Amanada Seyfreid, Christopher Egan, Vanessa Redgrave

Dir: Gary Winick

Hot Tub Time Machine (2010)

Wednesday, May 26th, 2010

When you go see a movie called Hot Tub Time Machine you know you are not going to be seeing anything intellectual. You expect to see a silly film with hopefully a lot of laughs, and that is exactly what Hot Tub Time Machine provides you with. It never pretends to be something it’s not. Since I was fully prepared for ninety minutes of pure silliness, I found I rather enjoyed it.

There are no bad performances in the film, but the stand-out performance is from Rob Corddry as the suicidal and manic Lou. He is bitter and outrageous and his destructive tendencies tend to make it difficult for his friends to be around him. Rob Corddry plays Lou with a lot of energy and jumpiness, which makes the character seem even more unstable and unpredictable.

It was also nice to see John Cusack in a comedy that’s actually funny for once. His last few attempts at comedy, including the terrible Must Love Dogs were lacking in any humour.

The film revolves around four dysfuntional men. Three of these guys: Adam (Cusack), Lou, and Nick (Craig Robinson), were best mates in high school but have lost touch over the years, largely because they stopped liking each other. The fourth in the group is the teenage nephew of Adam, and is a geek who likes to spend all his time playing computer games, rather than doing anything remotely sociable. These four are brought together when Lou attempts to commit suicide and since he has no interested relatives, his old friends are called upon to help raise his spirits.

In order to cheer Lou up, they take him to a ski resort they used to go to in the 80s. When they arrive at the resort though, they find it is no longer the desirable place it used to be. The only upside to the place is that their room has a working hot tub. They surround the tub with copious amounts of alcohol, jump in, and start partying. Somehow, during the course of their partying, the hut tub takes them back in time and when they wake up the next day they realise they are back in the 1980s.

It is never made very clear what caused this time travel, but since it’s not a film that you are meant to take very seriously, you shouldn’t really care about this, and if you do, RELAX.

Crispin Glover’s role as the one armed bell boy provides the best laughs in the film. When the film goes back in time he is in possession of both of his arms, and the director plays with the viewer’s morbid curiousity as we hope to discover how he loses his arm. You know he’s going to lose the arm during the course of the film, but you have no idea how. There are numerous close shaves before the arm eventually comes off, and these near misses create the only real suspense in the film.

Overall I enjoyed Hot Tub Time Machine. It kept me engaged and I didn’t find the time dragged at all. My only problem with the film was that I felt it could have been funnier. Although the jokes are flowing throughout, there are no real laugh-out-loud moments. It consistently makes you chuckle, but nothing more substantial. There were no surprises, and except for its ridiculous title, there is nothing very memorable about it.

Dir: Steve Pink

Starring: John Cusack, Rob Corddry, Craig Robinson, Clark Duke

rating: 5

The Living Wake (2010)

Monday, May 24th, 2010

When anyone watches a movie they enter into a non-verbal contract with the director that states that as we place ourselves in their hands for the next two hours, we trust that they will not screw with us. That does not just cover that they won’t plant us back in the Middle Ages and then have someone make a phone call on an Iphone but also that they know what they are doing and will not film someone’s chin when they intend to be capturing a close up. If they do film a chin, that chin better be important in the third act. Director Sol Tryon in his debut film “The Living Wake,” breaks this contract.

“The Living Wake” covers the last day of self proclaimed genius K. Roth Binew (played by Michael O’Connell, also co-writer of the screenplay). He is diagnosed with a “vague and grave sickness.” On the plus side, the doctor is able to pinpoint to the second the moment Binew is going to die. Therefore, K. Roth sets out on his last day to pass out invitations to his final party, a living wake. He enlists his best and only friend, Mills Joaquin (Jesse Eisenberg) to take him around on a bike-powered rickshaw. The quirkiness only escalates from there. In an attempt to finally get the brief but powerful monologue his dad promised him, a monologue that would uncover all of life’s mysteries, he endures trials and tribulations, mostly of his own making. He concludes his day with a final performance at his living wake. On a makeshift stage, in an open field, Binew’s friends gather to witness his madness one last time.

Jesse Eisenberg, still doing his best Michael Cera impersonation (God bless him), does an adequate job being a dutiful and long suffering lackey. He is the reason this film is getting a release at all, as he is the only known name in the entire roster, and I guess they figured they could release the film on his recent success in Zombieland and Adventureland. Carter Little wrote the music, which was often overpowering, (Michael O’Connell has his hand in this as well), although I did enjoy their attempt at wit by placing the Westminister chimes throughout the score as if to show how time is slipping away from K. Roth Binew. Ha ha! So witty.

There are places in the film where the actors physically pause for the laughter as if they are playing before a live studio audience…but the laughter in my audience never came. It is very difficult to express why and/or how this film misses the mark and I think the difficulty in the explanation is part of the mark-missing in itself. Let me explain. The film wants to be over the top, both with its characters and their audacity and with the settings and situations they are placed in. However, it feels that Tryon is too timid and decides to play it safe. It’s not quite tongue-in-cheek and it’s not quite convincing me that these are real characters. The movie lies in some middle lukewarm ground where everything is simple and boring. There is a song that K. Roth Binew sings, his final hurrah as it were where he shucks off this mortal coil and says goodbye to his acquaintances. The event itself is big. The character, to Mr. O’Connell’s great credit, is played very big. The song, however, felt understated, underdeveloped and under whelming. Perhaps in a different director’s hands this would have been a cult house classic – certainly something I would enjoy. In fact, I feel this film is begging for an immediate remake. I would love to see this story with most of this cast in a capable director’s hands. Tryon seemed to have been watching “Rushmore” on an endless loop while making this film and I can see what he was going for. Honestly, he just lacked the confidence to be brazen, to really let K. Roth Binew loose, to let him be an utterly contemptible jerk and, perhaps, hated by the audience. That’s where he was written to be. That’s where O’Connell was playing him. Instead, Tryon pulled way back on the reins, too scared that his protagonist was not going to be adored and therefore landed in the queasy no-man’s land of apathy.

The gravest sin, and the one that finally pushed me completely out of the fanciful world this film was attempting to weave around me, came at the end of the film. I would say that this is a spoiler because there is a tissue-thin veil of doubt the film tries to throw over our eyes about the finality of K. Roth Binew’s life at the end of the day. And perhaps it is because of that shred of doubt that I was in such a quandary about what happened. In any case, if you care at all, don’t read further and know that I would recommend waiting until the re-imagining to watch this film.

K. Roth Binew dies. Shocker, I know, but he times it very well with the ending of that final “big hurrah” song I was describing earlier and lands in his coffin, standing up, arms folded across his chest (if only he could have been holding a lily). The problem is, Michael O’ Connell CAN NOT STOP MOVING! And it’s not a subtle, “Did I just see what I think I saw?” kind of thing. This was serious hand twitching, chest heaving, Adams apple moving going on here. It was to such a point that, when none of the mourners who were staring intently at him even mention it, I felt that they were either in some serious denial or that they had all gone mad. “Binew is going to get up at any minute now” I thought to myself. Then they nailed shut the coffin and Mills Joaquin takes him away. “He’s taking Binew to a secluded place where he can open the coffin” I thought to myself. Then Mills Joaquin places the coffin on a boat in a river and sets it ablaze. “Oh, so Mills Joaquin wasn’t in on the gag and K. Roth Binew will soon burst out of the flaming coffin and it will be funny” I thought to myself. Then the screen went black and the end credits started to roll. Then I finally realized that it was not the audience at the living wake who could or would not see the dead man moving, it was the director. And it was then that I decided that if the director, Sol Tryon, could not be bothered to care about his film, then neither could I.

Harry Brown (2010)

Sunday, May 9th, 2010

It’s always great to see an exciting director’s first film. To say, “Wow! Once that guy polishes up some of his story telling skills, he’s going to make some impressive works.” Harry Brown is Daniel Barber’s first feature length film and it knocks the wind out of you. From the opening scenes, shot on what looked like grainy home movie stock, or what it was trying to resemble, cell phone footage blown up way beyond what it should be, the tone is set for this visceral film. What we see when the movie starts is what looks like an initiation, a bunch of youth hanging out in an alleyway, smoking drugs and playing with guns. Cut to two guys on a motor bike, shaky-cam, film the ground, driving through a park, whooping and laughing uproariously, pass a mother pushing her child in a stroller, bike stops and doubles back, driver circles the mother, pulls out the gun from the opening scene and opens fire on the poor woman. What happens next still has me scratching my head wondering how they accomplished it. The sudden, senseless, intense and brutal violence, which becomes the signature for this film is established up front and a director who doesn’t stylize and doesn’t shy away from such harsh images emerges into the zeitgeist.

This film is two parts to me. The first part is the story, which is extremely pedestrian, and is raised just above the common by Michael Caine and his extraordinary talents. Set in modern day Britain, we follow one man’s journey through a chaotic world where teenage violence and debauchery runs rampant. When his best friend is killed, he becomes the vigilante he was always meant to be. As I sat there watching the film I was constantly thinking through the first half – “Oh, he’s got a military background. That means he can do something about all the stuff we’ve been seeing these hooligans pull. He only needs one thing to push him ove… Oh… his only friend is going to go confront the hooligans…Yeah…that’ll do it.” This was a paint-by-numbers vigilante film; they might as well have gotten the outline to Death Wish or The Brave One and just plugged in new names. The music by Martin Phipps and Ruth Barrett do it no favors either, foretelling what is about to occur so far in advance that any emotional shock or connection with the characters is often lost. Emily Mortimer is all but wasted in this film, not given much to do but push exposition through and give us a glimpse into the fractured legal system that allows such horrible actions as are happening on the streets and apartments complexes in this film to go unchecked. As I stated before, the only thing that saves this portion of the film is getting to watch Michael Caine be the guy who gives these ruffians what for. It reminded me so much of the films and roles he’d done when he was younger, it almost made me nostalgic. The only other actor I want to spotlight is Sean Harris who did an outstanding job being a drugged-out-of-his-mind creep. With the bare minimum that he was given he styled a character so menacing and fascinating, in the portion of the film he was in, he stole the show from Michael Caine.

The second part of the film for me is utterly astounding and makes my mouth water for what the director will do next. The way that Daniel Berber handled the color, the texture, the mannerisms and rough aggressiveness of the streets and the children they spawn was amazing. It really made me wish he had chosen a better project to put this talent to. I wonder what he would have done with Sin Nombre, Bully or even transplanting a City of God type tale into England. He could bring those kinds of storylines to brilliant life. I don’t want him to get pigeon-holed, but from what I saw here, I just want him to fan this flame a little more and see the skill that’s began shining to come to full fruition before he moves on. The cinematographer, Martin Ruhe, as well must be complimented for making such raw and gritty images look absolutely beautiful.

It must be said that the kind of actions of violence portrayed in this film are not over exaggerated. The police advisors for the film, it is mentioned in the notes for the movie, had far more shocking stories to tell. That said this film does not come down praising or condemning either one side or the other, as well it shouldn’t. If the intention of the film was to entertain, it did so very well. However, if the intention was to inform, to educate or to stir something in the hearts of its audience and make a difference, it missed completely. It is difficult to do so when your hero’s response to violence is more violence.