Articles by Carl Kozlowski
Being Catholic in Hollywood: it's possible. Just ask Neal McDonough
Aug 26, 2016 / 00:00 amThere are few actors in Hollywood brave enough to wear their Catholic faith on their sleeve and base their career decisions about the films and TV shows they will and won’t do on the morals they’ve been instilled with. Jim Caviezel, who played Christ in “The Passion of the Christ” before becoming the star of the hit CBS series “Person of Interest,” and Mel Gibson are two of the standouts. But Neal McDonough is another staunchly Catholic actor who is making a splash in Tinseltown, with nonstop work in television including a regular role on the CW network’s hit superhero show “Arrow” as villain Damien Dahrk. What’s even more remarkable about him, however, is that the married father of five’s strong standard of not performing sex scenes has inspired him to walk away from a $1 million payday for the ABC “Scoundrels” in 2010, drawing attention and admiration for his principles from those in show business as well as far beyond. Now he’s the one of the stars of the new faith-driven movie “Greater,” in which he plays the real-life character of Marty Burlsworth, who instilled a passionate faith and unquenchable spirit in his younger brother Brandon. Brandon went on to become the greatest walk-on player in the history of college football, becoming a beloved player for the Arkansas Razorbacks despite being considered too short and too fat to play, and who set an inspiring example for all when he made it all the way to the NFL – only to be killed in a car crash 11 days after being drafted. The movie powerfully addresses his remarkable life and the way that his death also inspired others to greater faith and trust in God, and McDonough took the time to discuss the movie with me for CNA. The movie is playing in select theatres nationwide, and you can find the them by visiting the movie’s site at www.greaterthemovie.com. You play Marty Burlsworth in GREATER. Tell us a little about the character. Well, Marty is a real guy – and a really great guy. He’s the older brother of the movie’s central character, Brandon Burlsworth, a phenomenal offensive lineman for the Arkansas Razorbacks in the late 90s. Brandon is right on the cusp of making it the NFL, he gets drafted by the Colts, and he dies. That really puts Marty through the ringer – and the movie follows how he tries to get his faith and his joy back after the tragedy. Sounds like a meaty and emotional role. It really is. Marty is a typical big brother –- loves Brandon, wants the best for him, razzes him a little bit throughout his life. But as much as Brandon looks up to Marty, Marty looks up to him, too – because he has such high character and commitment to all he does. Particularly when it comes to his religious faith, Brandon’s is deep and consistent – and Marty admires that. Especially when he struggles with his own faith after Brandon dies. Speaking of faith, you’re well-known as a Christian in Hollywood for your strong Catholic faith. Did that influence your decision to star in a faith-based film like GREATER? My Catholic faith is central to who I am as a human being – not just as an actor – so it informs every decision I make, whether it’s deciding on a project or deciding on how to treat the guy who cuts me off in traffic. And, for the record, I don’t get it right in either case every time! I’m always on the lookout for projects with a strong moral and inspirational core – and GREATER certainly qualifies there. It’s an entertaining, thought-provoking take on what it looks like to follow the path God lays out before you even when it has bumps and twists and turns. As long as we’re on the subject of your faith, it’s been reported that you actually lost a role because you wouldn’t do the graphic love scenes that were demanded of you. That your Catholic convictions and your respect for your wife made you uncomfortable about the part. (Laughs) yes, it’s true that I don’t like to do – I won’t do – those kinds of scenes because of my desire to honor Ruve. One of the reasons I take my fair share of villain roles is because very rarely are villains required to do love scenes. I’m just more comfortable as a man and a husband when that’s not part of the job. Speaking of villains, you were the chief bad guy on last season’s ARROW, the CW series based on the Green Arrow comic books. You played Damien Darhk, who was very dark indeed. How much fun was that show to do? Well, it’s still fun to do – I’m filming the upcoming season now and it’s a delight. He is really a rich, hammy villain – very much in the brilliantly crazy mold of other comic-book bad guys like Lex Luthor and even the Joker – without the clown makeup. I mean, who doesn’t want to be in a superhero series or film? I’ve been in two now, and it’s a dream come true for every actor who was a kid who loved comic books. Can you give us any details on the new season of ARROW? You know a good villain never gives away his plot. You’re going to have to tune in like everybody else. Let’s go back to GREATER. The young man who plays Brandon, Chris Severio, is a first-time actor. What was it like working with him? Chris is a top-notch young man and a very fine, intuitive actor. He’s the moral center of this movie – and that’s a tricky thing to play without coming off as too pious or self-righteous or boringly goody two-shoes. Chris does a very good job of avoiding those stereotypes and giving a very honest, real performance. You root for Brandon, you see why Marty and everybody else admires him so much, because of the sincerity and grit Chris brings to the part. Were you aware of Brandon’s story before the film? I knew about the tragedy of his death, of course. And about what a remarkable story he was as a player – to make it as a non-scholarship walk-on at a major school like Arkansas and end up being drafted fairly high into the NFL. That takes a remarkable amount of determination. But I didn’t know his backstory, the struggles his Mom went through as a single parent and the obstacles they had to overcome. Nor did I know about Brandon’s strong faith – God was the center of his life and his character. In fact, Chris Severio says he was so moved by Brandon’s faith and how it helped him be the best he could be that he, Chris, was actually inspired to grow closer to God in his own faith just by playing him in the movie. What do you hope audiences walk away with from the film? First and foremost, I hope they’re truly entertained. This is a movie of very big ideas and themes but also great fun and humor. There is some excellent, exciting football action in this movie, along with lots of solid family drama. And there’s plenty of humor, too, in Marty’s relationship with Brandon but also as we see Brandon expanding his social skills as he gets more and more accomplished at football. But I also hope audiences leave encouraged – reminded that when hard times do come, and they will, that God has a purpose in them. And we can actually be blessed through the pain if we follow Him through it. What’s next for Neal McDonough? Let’s hope it’s celebrating the opening weekend success of GREATER.
'Ben-Hur' remake aims high, but falls short of its 1959 predecessor
Aug 19, 2016 / 00:00 amIn 1960, the biblical epic “Ben-Hur” became the all-time Oscar-winning film, with 11 of the gold statuettes going to the tale of a Jewish prince who is betrayed and forced into slavery by a Roman friend, then regains his freedom and seeks revenge. The movie was also a huge box-office success, featuring one of Hollywood’s most iconic performances by Charlton Heston in the title role. It seemed “Ben-Hur” was considered sacrosanct, a film that would not be subjected to modern Hollywood’s obsession with remaking every popular film of decades passed. Yet, amazingly, this weekend features the release of a remake of the classic story, now featuring amped-up effects in its climactic chariot race and a more direct message of forgiveness, redemption and the basic principles of Christianity. Only it inevitably lacks much of the charisma and energy that only Heston’s innate acting magic could provide. Both films are based on the 1880 novel “Ben-Hur: A Tale of the Christ,” by Lew Wallace, a Civil War general and governor of the New Mexico territory from 1878 to 1881 who sought to inspire forgiveness and patriotism among citizens after the painful war and difficulties of Reconstruction. He saw parallels between Roman slave owners and those of his own time and hoped that he could use Christ’s message of forgiveness to inspire Americans to allow modern slave traders to put their evil actions in the past. The latest take on “Ben-Hur” stars Jack Huston as the title character Judah Ben-Hur. At the start, he is a prince enjoying a rich existence in occupied Jerusalem with his mother, sister and adopted brother Messala (Toby Kebbell), who was taken in by the House of Hur when he was orphaned as a child. But things go awry after Messala becomes a Roman Army officer, one desperate to build a reputation as a strong leader. This thirst for power causes Messala to turn on his adoptive family, making Judah the scapegoat for an act of treason that was actually committed by a young rebel named Gestas (Moises Arias). Messala turns the family over to his superiors, causing them to be separated before being sold as slaves. Judah is forced to work as a rower on an enormous galley ship, but becomes free when he washes ashore after a fierce battle sinks the vessel. As he searches for his family, he briefly meets Jesus (Rodrigo Santoro) and becomes a believer. He is ultimately given a chance at revenge against Messala by facing him in a chariot race in Circus Maximus, with charioteer trainer Ilderim (Morgan Freeman, whose character also narrates) secretly on Judah’s side. The race is an impressive 10-minute sequence that takes strong advantage of modern filmmaking techniques and movie ratings that are highly lenient toward violence. Director Timur Bekmambetov, who previously helmed the Angelina Jolie action flick “Wanted” and the cult classic “Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter,” is no stranger to cinematic violence. He knows how to make a pulse-pounding action sequence and the race is a great deal of fun, certain to induce at least a few gasps in response to bodies bouncing off horses and chariots during the race. The problem is that, despite a $100 million budget and impressive sets and costumes, the lack of star power makes this film less compelling than it should be. An argument can be made that picking relative unknowns like Huston and Kebbell for the leads makes them more relatable to the audience, but there’s a reason why Hollywood’s strongest era of Roman epics featured superstars like Heston and Kirk Douglas of “Spartacus,” which was released in 1960: Their star power made viewers sit up and pay attention even during quiet moments. This edition is produced by Mark Burnett and Roma Downey, devout Christians behind the epic TV miniseries “The Bible” and “A.D.”, and they are trying to make a huge leap forward here with this mega-budget spectacular. Their hearts are in the right place, and there’s no sex, nudity or foul language involved. The violence is mostly limited to the battle between ships and the riveting chariot race, although there are also harrowing glimpses of the suffering brought by crucifixion. This is a film that can easily be seen by teens and adults, and even if it’s not as awe-inspiring as the 1959 classic, it’s still well worth supporting as solid moral entertainment. It’s important to remember that the 1959 film is itself a remake of a 1925 version of Wallace’s work, which was a take on a very short 1907 version. The leads here try hard, and eventually Judah becomes a person viewers can root for. But, unfortunately, this movie ultimately does not possess the electric charge of its immediate predecessor. On the other hand, at 124 minutes for the current version versus 212 minutes for the 1959 edition, the new film might be the only way Wallace’s classic story can reach the current generation of moviegoers.
Highs and lows of showbiz explored in worthwhile indie flick
Aug 12, 2016 / 00:00 amThere’s a moment of truth that every struggling entertainer has to face. That’s the moment when they have to question themselves about whether they will ever succeed, or if their dreams are really a delusion. That’s the dilemma faced by the member of a New York-based improve troupe in the new movie “Don’t Think Twice,” which uses a documentary-like feel to draw viewers into the humorously rattled nerves and tortured psyches of artists who have hit their personal crossroads. As a graduate of Chicago’s Second City improv conservatory who’s been immersed in the LA and Chicago comedy scenes for 20 years, I can vouch that writer-director-costar Mike Birbiglia has absolutely nailed this world, both in moments of joy and sadness. The movie centers around a troupe called The Commune, who are all fairly smart and witty and getting scared about their lives as they face their mid-thirties. Miles (Birbiglia) is the troupe’s leader, but he’s 36 and has been guiding them through weekly shows at a 99-seat theatre for 11 years, while sharing an apartment with half the troupe and sleeping in such a tiny loft space that a visiting college girlfriend refuses to sleep with him there. The other members are also well-drawn and unique, defined further by spot-on performances by a cast of veteran indie comedy actors including Kate Micucci, Tami Sagher and Chris Gethard. These actors have graced the real improv stages of Chicago and LA so long, and have faced the same dilemmas en route to their eventual success, and that impassioned perspective does wonders for opening up the backstage world of this movie to viewers who may be wholly unfamiliar with the improv scene. But the standout duo in the cast are Keegan-Michael Key (of Comedy Central’s “Key and Peele”) and Gillian Jacobs (NBC’s “Community”) as Jack and Samantha. Jack has a long-standing, annoying habit of trying to steal the show whenever talent scouts show up at a Commune show. Despite Miles begging him not to showboat, he bursts into a terrific Obama impression when talent scouts from a “Saturday Night Live” style show come to watch, and both he and Samantha are invited to audition for the big time. What happens when Jack gets the break and Samantha does it due to surprising circumstances winds up having huge ramifications on the entire troupe, both onstage and off. Jealousy, rivalries and the harsh tug of reality that some members just don’t have star potential all interfere with their decade-plus relationships. At first, “Don’t” comes off as perhaps too insular a look at a very specific slice of showbiz life. But as the characters develop into people viewers can truly laugh with, empathize with and root for, Birbiglia finds ways to make their dilemmas universal as they each slowly have to face their own shifting visions of their futures. In the way that Birbiglia provides a perfect fit for each of these characters’ lives, both inside big-time showbiz or on their own smaller levels of personal satisfaction, is also a wonder of quality writing. “Don’t Think Twice” is rated R, though it’s kind of hard to see why – not that it would interest teens anyway, being a story about adult crises. It has one F-word that I recall, as well as a few uses of God’s or Jesus’ names in vain; if anything slipped past me, that is a reflection of how low-key any foul language is here. One surprising pro-life subplot involves the girlfriend of a main character, who discovers she's pregnant from a previous fling. She says that being in her 30s, she can't consider not having the child, and her new boyfriend in the improv troupe steps up and offers to change his entire life and become responsible by offering to take a real chance on their relationship and serve as the child's father as well, with strong implications that they're heading for marriage. There is a scene in which an unmarried couple is having sex but are hidden from their bare shoulders down by sheets, and another scene implies that Miles has just had sex with a young 20-something improve student of his. There are also a few moments in which marijuana is smoked by some members of the group, but is almost too casual to be noticed. This is the second feature film that Birbiglia has written and directed, following his 2012 debut “Sleepwalk With Me.” A veteran standup comic who took the “Sleepwalk” concept – the story of how he overcame a bizarre battle with sleepwalking to reach success - to a lengthy off-Broadway run in addition to national tours and a bestselling book, Birbiglia proved that he had real chops coming out of the gate. By expanding his vision to an ensemble-based, character-driven film, he proves here that “Sleepwalk” was no fluke and he could very well develop into a filmmaker capable of keeping Woody Allen’s style of comedy alive and well at the cinema. This is playing in a few major cities now, but is well worth seeking out as it expands into more cities and in its DVD and VOD runs.
'The Innocents': a powerful, must-see film for Catholics
Aug 5, 2016 / 00:00 amThere are few films that tell tales of Christian faith truly tested and used to win over incredibly troubling situations, but the current movie "The Innocents" manages to do this in remarkable fashion. It is a disturbing tale through much of its storyline, but there are beautiful moments of grace, compassion and forgiveness throughout, a strongly pro-life message and an unexpected happy ending that manages to be perfect rather than feeling contrived. The story takes place in Poland during the winter of 1945, when a young intern working with the French Red Cross named Mathilde (Lou de Laage) is confronted by a young nun who has run miles to get to the Red Cross clinic. The nun pleads for help but can’t specify why, and Mathilde coldly tells her to find the Polish Red Cross instead – until she looks out the clinic window and finds the nun on her knees in the snow, praying intently through tears. At that point, Mathilde sneaks out and goes with the nun to her convent, and there she finds that her mission must change. She’s supposed to help find, treat and repatriate French survivors of the Nazi German camps, but her life and beliefs change when she discovers the advanced state of pregnancy that affect several of the Sisters of the convent. With the mother superior of the nuns incensed that the nun snuck out for help because she’s afraid that word of the pregnancies will cause trouble with the Vatican and lead to their convent being shut down, Mathilde is only allowed to help if she promises to keep it a secret and not bring in other doctors. With at least seven nuns pregnant, it’s an overwhelming secret to keep and workload to maintain on top of her normal job, but Mathilde helps despite the fact that she’s an ardent atheist. The movie is absorbing as it shows the many sacrifices and dangers Mathilde has to endure in order to help the nuns while keeping her job and staying alive. It also shows the dramatic effect that working with the nuns has on her personality, although her love for the nuns and determination to help them never translates into a conversion to faith. However, the movie does show the nuns in a thoroughly sympathetic and positive light, aside from the Mother Superior who harbors a horrible secret through much of the movie. In the end, Mathilde concocts an elaborate yet thoroughly perfect and beautiful solution about how the nuns can maintain their relationships with their babies without facing shame or retribution. “The Innocents” is a very emotional and draining film for much of its running time, yet it is a film that all people of Christian and Catholic faith should see. One can hardly imagine a more difficult dilemma than the ones these nuns faced, and as such the movie manages to provide a stunning example of what can happen positively even when a woman keeps a child conceived by the horror of rape. Bringing faith and a pro-life message on screen through an historic tale also adds to the power of this film, as no one can accuse it of being a fictional propaganda story. The performances, writing, direction and especially the cinematography are all a wonder to behold “The Innocents” is too heavy for children to see, but older teens and adults will certainly find it to be one of the most compelling films about faith they will ever experience. Since it has been playing in a limited number of theatres for a month now, please keep it in mind for its release on DVD and VOD.
Nuanced, thoughtful and still action-packed: new 'Bourne' flick delivers
Jul 28, 2016 / 00:00 amMatt Damon has long been an interesting choice for the character of Jason Bourne, a man assigned that name as a false cover identity after he was brainwashed by the CIA to become a super-agent and then suffered amnesia. Damon is one of Hollywood’s most outspoken liberals, a guy who never met a left-leaning cause he didn’t like, so the very idea of him playing a gun-wielding killer when he openly advocates widespread gun control has made for an intriguing dichotomy. But it’s that duality that helps make him the perfect choice for the Bourne film series, which stands at four action-packed thrillers and counting, since the movies themselves deal with the character’s inherent moral conflicts over whether his actions do more good than harm. Having a thoughtful actor like Damon in the role, rather than a generic muscle-bound action hero, helps lure audiences in for the rare kind of adventure that engages the mind as well as providing visceral kicks. It’s been nine years since “The Bourne Ultimatum” seemed to draw the series to a close after a trilogy of smash hits, but director Paul Greengrass (who handled “Ultimatum” and “The Bourne Supremacy” in 2004 after taking the reins from Doug Liman following 2001’s “The Bourne Identity”) has returned as well, making this an artistically legitimate effort in addition to a global box office cash cow. The new movie finds former Bourne (Matt Damon) living off the grid, surviving by taking part in brutal fistfights on an underground professional fighting circuit. Meanwhile, his former friend and colleague Nicky Parsons (Julia Stiles) is also living on the run, taking part in a hacking activist network in which she downloads highly classified files about the assassin training programs that included Bourne both in his current false name and in his real birth name, David Webb. Passing the information to Bourne in order to make him aware of his true past and let him know he was innocent in his violence due to brainwashing, Nicky arranges to meet him in Greece after she realizes her hacking was discovered. CIA director Robert Dewey (Tommy Lee Jones) brings in another assassin known only as Asset (Vincent Cassel) to shoot Bourne and Parsons, setting off a chain of globetrotting chases, fights and shootouts that leapfrog to London and climax in Las Vegas. It’s there, in Sin City, that Dewey plans to appear at a debate with the founder of a Facebook-style social network about cybersecurity vs. privacy rights. The catch is, Dewey has far more nefarious intentions in mind that Bourne has to race against time to stop. “Jason Bourne” is a fast-paced, highly exciting and perfectly executed thriller that de-emphasizes the direct political allusions of the earlier Bourne films in favor of a broader approach more focused on entertaining rather than forcing a message on viewers. It’s also a very nuanced movie, thoughtfully showing the arguments for and against the CIA programs depicted in the movie, but ultimately portrays Bourne as a patriot who wants the best for America. As Bourne, Matt Damon continues to be a lean mean fighting machine, acing his action sequences ranging from a harrowing motorcycle chase through an even more epic car chase and countless fistfights and gun battles. Jones oozes smug self-assurance and steely resolve in his position as the CIA director, while the broad array of other actors all handle their fast-paced antics admirably. The move has no sex or nudity, and maybe five uses of Christ’s name in vain, with no other foul language of any kind. While the movie has frequent action, only a couple of moments are cringe-inducing, such as when the main villain walks in on a bloody man who’s bound and gagged and it’s implied that he shoots him point-blank in the head. Otherwise, “Bourne” has plenty of intense chase scenes, shootouts and fistfights, but all are presented tastefully in a way that teens and adult action fans can easily enjoy. Greengrass has fashioned a film that is at once pulse-pounding and thoughtful, offering a harrowing look at the surveillance technology that we all live under today, in which it is all but impossible to escape capture or death if the government targets you. Yet its title character, while conflicted, remains a man who loves his country and simply wants to do the right thing to keep it safe. Here’s hoping our real-world secret operatives have the same kind of conscience.
'Star Trek: Beyond' packs forgiveness and action into one entertaining film
Jul 22, 2016 / 00:00 amScience-fiction can be a difficult genre of film for non-geeky, Average Joes and Janes to get their heads around. Often, the creation of new worlds and inventive forms of technology can simply become confusing if one isn’t already predisposed to being a technical genius, but there are some forms of science fiction that become so popular they transcend their genre and enter the general public consciousness. The “Star Wars” and “Star Trek” juggernauts are perhaps the two best designed to make anyone in the universe fall prey to their charms. Packed with wit and humanity beneath all the jargon and effects, and often loaded with action that parallels the fun found in Westerns, cop movies and adventure films, these two franchises have lasted nearly 40 and 50 years, respectively, and are more popular than ever. One man has been the mastermind behind both film series exploding into the 21st Century without losing a step: J.J. Abrams. The mastermind behind groundbreaking TV series “Alias” and “Lost,” as well as the last three “Mission: Impossible” films, Abrams has taken over being our funnest filmmaker from Steven Spielberg – and his only possible misstep so far was the prior “Star Trek” 2013’s “Star Trek: Into Darkness.” Following a wildly inventive reboot of the entire “Trek” mythos with 2009’s “Star Trek” showing the key characters’ origin stories (dating back even before the William Shatner TV series), “Darkness” was a creative disappointment because it largely mimicked 1982’s smash hit “Star Trek: The Wrath of Khan.” So Abrams decided to shake things up, switching over to directing last December’s new “Star Wars” movie and handing the reins over to Justin Lin, who had turned the “Fast and Furious” series into the best action films currently being made on the planet. Lin drew concern from some Trekkies for seeming to pack too much action into the new “Star Trek: Beyond,” at the expense of the series’ penchant for deeper philosophical discussions. But with an ingenious plot structure in which the team of heroes is divided helplessly into a series of duos, Lin and his writers Simon Pegg (who also plays Scotty) and Doug Jung have managed to exceed expectations with a film that explores issues of war and peace, division and unity, in fresh and exciting ways. “Beyond” opts for a fresh villain this time around, as a hideous, beastly alien named Krall (Idris Elba) unleashes thousands of small but deadly ships he likens to a swarm of bees upon our heroes’ iconic Starship Enterprise. Captain Kirk (Chris Pine) and the rest of the gang were lured into the dangerous confrontation with Krall by being asked to save another ship in a distant nebula, and the Enterprise is so devastated it crashes into an unknown planet. The escape pods necessary to getting off the crashing starship wound up splitting up the overall group into a series of pairs, which means both that we have more emotions and laughs than in “Darkness,” especially when Spock and McCoy are forced to team up for survival. The resulting adventure gets more entertaining as it goes, constantly upping the stakes with a series of impressive action setpieces until a final showdown that’s wildly entertaining and manages to use the Beastie Boys’ classic rap-rock tune “Sabotage” as the ingenious soundtrack for an epic space battle. “Star Trek: Beyond” is a real hoot, and richly entertaining for anyone over age 13 (it’s PG-13) and possibly even over 10. The action scenes are occasionally intense but never graphic or bloody, only one or two S-words and zero F-words are heard, and sex and nudity are not actively shown. The main moral qualms for “Beyond” lie in a couple of quick scenes in which it’s implied that male and female crew members are having casual sex on the lengthy space missions, and in a very quick and surprisingly subtle moment that reveals that Sulu (John Cho) is homosexual and that he and his partner are fathers of a daughter. While the idea of Sulu being gay drew a lot of media hype, Lin and the writers make it as casual as an afterthought. Sulu scoops up his young daughter upon his return to earth from an early mission, and Kirk smiles from afar as he watches Sulu’s husband put his arm around his back as they walk away with their child. This is unmistakably an attempt to make homosexual marriage a sympathetic idea, but it is played so subtly that it’s unlikely to truly offend adult and teen viewers and may be even not noticed at all by those under 8 or 10 years old. The film’s message of unity and forgiveness (amongst Enterprise members, not of Krall) makes this an overall positive experience in a summer packed with disappointments.
'Ghostbusters' reboot brings big laughs in the midst of dull summer remakes
Jul 15, 2016 / 00:00 amIn a summer ranging from uninspired retreads (“Now You See Me 2,” “Independence Day: Resurgence”) to big-budget original busts (“The BFG”) to at least one solid hit (“Finding Dory”), no film has drawn as much buzz or stirred up as much frenzied controversy as the “Ghostbusters” reboot. Sony Pictures brought top creative talents in for the project, starting with director Paul Feig of “Bridesmaids,” “The Heat” and “Spy” fame, who also co-wrote with Katie Dippold of “The Heat”. And despite starring the female dream team of Melissa McCarthy, Kristen Wiig, and current “Saturday Night Live” stars Kate McKinnon and Leslie Jones, it has been under fire from day one. Critics wondered why the movie was being redone in the first place, and “fanboys” complained about the female stars. Throw in terrible trailers and one of the worst theme songs in movie history, and it has not been looking good for the film. This seemed destined to be one of the worst train wrecks of all time. And now that it’s here? The new “Ghostbusters” was finally screened for critics and the public last Thursday — and they’ve mostly pulled off a winner. The movie has great laughs in the first half that will be liked by a lot of people, but loses a lot of its big laughs in favor of splashy special effects in the second half. Overall, though, it’s a fun romp that most families can enjoy together, in which risqué humor is kept to a minimum, and the scary moments are offset by goofy ghosts elsewhere. It’s definitely appropriate for teens and adults, per its PG-13 rating, and possibly as young as 9 or 10 year olds if they’re used to some scares in their entertainment. The reboot first focuses on Erin Gilbert (Kristen Wiig), a college professor who gets approached by a museum owner and is hoping she can help him because the museum seems haunted and she's written about the science of ghosts. This gets her in touch with her old friend Abby Yates (Melissa McCarthy), whom she had abandoned years before because the scientific community kept mocking their research on the paranormal. After reuniting with Abby and being introduced to Jillian Holtzmann (Kate McKinnon), a scientist who goes on to engineer their proton packs and other equipment, the three head to the museum and Gilbert gets her first caught-on-camera meeting with a ghost. For Erin, it is her first step to getting recognition for her past work. On the other hand, Abby sees it as a new start to a career in the field she loves so much. But the two are shunned and laughed at. The three ladies begin to see the end of their old lives and the beginning of a new one — aiming to save their city from spirits and other paranormal experiences. They find a workplace and hire Erin's dream man, Kevin (Chris Hemsworth), as their assistant because he looks good in anything he wears. The final piece in the puzzle comes when they hire a fourth Ghostbuster, the streetwise Patty (Leslie Jones), who comes to them after encountering a ghost and an evil genius named Rowan (Neil Casey). Rowan has gone nuts over demanding recognition for his own past scientific accomplishments concerning the spirit world, and now wants to destroy New York. Battling a fast-paced and occasionally funny string of obstacles, the new Ghostbusters set out to save the day. This movie is a story all on its own, with no real connections to the past ones, and it’s baffling why the movie’s trailers were so unfocused and unfunny when the actual movie is richly entertaining. The movie’s trailers led to complaints that the special effects were too reliant on CGI, whereas the original film used more traditional methods and modeling to create its effects. Yet in reality, the effects are top-notch and are particularly impressive in 3D. Most importantly, the large audience watching the movie along with the critics was extremely positive toward the film. The audience was laughing out loud throughout, and burst into applause several times, particularly when original “Ghostbusters” star Bill Murray makes his entrance as a completely different character than before. It’s not just a split-second cameo, and the surprise rendered by that fact is indicative of the pleasant surprises throughout.
Some big films open this weekend: here's three reviews to help you pick
Jul 1, 2016 / 00:00 amThe 4th of July is of course a great time for fireworks, but it’s also a great time to go and see movies. This summer hasn’t been as good as recent ones for films, but there’s a few fun ones out there. “Finding Dory” is fantastic for all ages, and “Central Intelligence” is easily the funniest movie of the summer and highly recommended for teens and adults. This week, there are three new movies out, which I’ll touch upon briefly for each: There is perhaps no other filmmaker who has been more inspired by Walt Disney than Steven Spielberg. While he’s mixed in adult historical dramas including “Schindler’s List” and “Amistad,” as well as intense thrillers such as “Minority Report,” the man who did “E.T.” has created dozens of movies the whole family can enjoy. So it’s surprising to find that he’s never made a movie for Disney studios until now, nearly 50 years into his career. Unfortunately, his new film “The BFG” doesn’t deliver the kind of magic one might hope for. It’s tale of an orphan girl named Sophie (Ruby Barnhill) who is grabbed and then befriended by a Big Friendly Giant named Runt (Mark Rylance) before having to be rescued by him from other giants is nowhere near as compelling as it should be. It’s family-friendly, but almost too gentle, offering no real spark for at least half its running time. “The BFG” is based on a classic children’s book by Roald Dahl, the famously cheeky British writer who delighted kids by slipping a mischievously witty streak into his tales such as “Charlie and the Chocolate Factory.” I haven’t read the book, but it is almost stunning to experience how utterly boring the movie version of “The BFG” is in the first half. Aside from a spectacular sequence in which the giant captures Sophie and races across much of England to take her home (he’s afraid that having seen him, she’ll tell other humans about him and put him in danger), the film seems to slog through at least a half-hour of the girl and the giant largely sitting around his house talking as she learns about his life in Giant Country. It turns out that Runt is harassed by a group of even bigger giants who are child-eating cannibals who mock him for being a vegetarian. The story springs to some life when the Queen of England and her military forces step in to help root the mean giants out of Giant Country. Their mission is to keep them from scaring children in England, leading to a mix of whimsical comedy as Sophie encounters life among the royals and some humorous, mild action between humans and the giants. One surprising aspect of the movie is that it has some elaborate fart jokes that almost need to be seen to be believed. Spielberg manages to walk the fine line of not making them utterly gross, but it feels kind of beneath his amazing skills to rely on that kind of humor for the movie’s biggest laughs. But I’ll admit that the packed house of kids at the advance screening I attended exploded in laughter when the people on screen passed gas. There are few movies with a more timely title than this one, seeing as how our two apparent presidential nominees – Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton – are extremely polarizing. But this third entry in the intense “Purge” series of thrillers takes place about 20 years in the future, and reveals an America that’s in even worse shape, although it offers some hope underneath its violent surface. The “Purge” movies center around the idea that America eventually becomes so violent that its leaders create a special night once a year in which people can act on their wildest criminal impulses – even including murder – for 12 hours without any legal consequences. Each one of these films has become more ambitious in their scope, action set pieces and even in raising some important philosophical points about where the real-world, present-day America might be headed. The new film, “The Purge: Election Year” picks up with the character Leo Barnes (Frank Grillo), who started the second movie, 2014’s “The Purge: Anarchy,” as a grieving father who wanted to kill as revenge for the tragic death of his own son in a prior Purge, but became a hero saving others instead. Now, he’s a Secret Service agent protecting Senator Charlie Roan (Elizabeth Mitchell), whose family was killed before her eyes as a teenager 18 years before while she was helplessly bound and gagged. Now a Senator running for president, she has vowed to end the purge and restore decency and genuine law and order to society. Meanwhile, the story also follows Joe Dixon (Mykelti Williamson), an African-American store owner who has a young Latino assistant named Marcos (Joseph Julian Sorra) and is threatened by black teenage girls who vow revenge for making them give back stolen candy. They have a friend named Laney Rucker (Betty Gabriel) who used to cause trouble but now drives an armored vehicle on Purge nights to help injured people get to secret medical care. The main government leaders want to stop Charlie from being elected president, both due to their bloodlust and the desire to save money on helping the poor by letting the poor kill each other en masse during the Purge each year. Thus, Leo tries to save Charlie from a team of white supremacist commandos as well as other crooked agents, and once they flee her attempted assassins and hit the streets of Washington, DC, they then have to contend with vicious random criminals. But eventually, they cross paths with Joe and his friends, creating unlikely alliances and cross-class and cross-racial understanding in a desperate attempt to stay alive and bring the Purge’s leaders down for good and the good of society. “The Purge: Election Year” is very dark and violent in places, although it keeps some of the worst violence offscreen and implied. It also has an unfortunate tendency to use PC stereotypes that make rich white people all look like they are blood-lusting evil people who want to use the Purge for nefarious political ends. However, this fast-paced and well-written thriller is entertaining on its action-level terms and has many positives as well, particularly in showing statues of Christ as a man and as a baby at key moments of grace in the finale and in Charlie’s strongly worded message of forgiveness towards the evil leaders – insisting that people vote them out of office rather than kill them in revenge. Overall, this is an exciting movie that is also thought-provoking, but it is not for the faint of heart. “The Purge: Election Year” is definitely aimed at adults, and can be enjoyed with extreme caution by those who can handle strong violence and language. Finally, “The Legend of Tarzan” is aimed at the teen and adult audience, and plays like the recent live-action version of “The Jungle Book,” only with adults. Alexander Skarsgard plays the title hero, who is a British nobleman in the 1840s who was largely raised by apes after his parents were killed while working in Africa when he was a baby. Now married and seemingly refined, he gets sent into Africa to help find out why a Belgian king is rounding up natives as slaves for a diamond mining operation. With an American mercenary named George Washington Williams (Samuel L. Jackson) in tow, he gets back in touch with his true, near-savage nature to save the natives and rescue his kidnapped wife Jane from the clutches of the Belgian expedition leader Leon Rom (Christoph Waltz). The performances are solid in “Tarzan,” and both the cinematography and groundbreaking special effects (not one animal in the movie is real) are astonishing. The only possible downside is that the plot is almost too smart in the beginning, with lengthy details about the cultural and historical forces at odds with each other. But there’s plenty of jungle action to make this fun for most kids, as well as definitely teens and adults. The PG-13 rating is for its action violence as well as a bed scene of foreplay between a married couple in which the wife is clothed and the man is shirtless.
Even while dealing with morally problematic issues, 'Maggie's Plan' highlights reconciliation, forgiveness
Jun 24, 2016 / 00:00 amGreta Gerwig is perhaps the most underrated actress working in Hollywood today. A blond beauty with a grace and sweetness that makes her feel like she stepped straight out of the 1920s flapper era and into a present-day world that doesn’t know how to handle her sparkling personality, she has lit up the silver screen with a string of Woody Allen-esque indies for the past six years. Track down “Frances Ha” or “Mistress America” to see her at her best, but Gerwig has a terrific little movie in theatres right now called “Maggie’s Plan,” which has some really interesting things to say about marriage, adultery and parenting. The fact that it centers around a New York City woman in her early 30s named Maggie (Gerwig) who wants to have a baby so badly that she’ll artificially inseminate herself with the sperm of an old acquaintance and not hold him accountable to stay in the child’s life may make it sound like typical Hollywood amorality, but in fact its twists and turns wind up making it a surprisingly moral film by the time all the issues are resolved. Written and directed by Rebecca Miller, the daughter of legendary “Death of a Salesman” writer Arthur Miller, “Maggie’s Plan” has the witty dialogue and lovingly drawn characters of Allen at his best. As noted, Maggie is a single woman who is concerned that she’s never maintained a romantic relationship longer than six months and is afraid that her chance at motherhood is passing her by. Her best friend Tony (Bill Hader) is an ex-boyfriend from college, and she spends a good deal of her time hanging out with him and his young child. His wife Felicia (Maya Rudolph) is fine with their friendship, but Maggie feels alone and decides the only way to ensure she’ll have a child is to ask a gourmet pickle maker she knew in college and has become a success. Despite the pickle maker being on the climb financially, Tony feels that the insemination and choice to raise the baby entirely alone are the wrong decisions. Just as she’s about to inseminate herself with a sperm sample, Maggie is interrupted by a visit from John (Ethan Hawke), a married writer who met her at the college they both work at, and who is feeling utterly harried by his cold wife Georgette (Julianne Moore), who is more successful than he is and is incredibly demanding. John shows up, confesses his love to Maggie and they have mostly off-camera sex – leading to a jump three years in the future, where Maggie and John are now married and the parents of a young girl. Maggie wants to make her marriage to John work, but notices he’s maintained unusually strong friendship ties to Georgette (Julianne Moore) and pays more attention to his kids with her than to his and Maggie’s child. When Maggie meets Georgette and realizes she’s not quite the cold shrew that John has long described her to be, she feels incredible guilt and decides to hatch a plan to lure John back to Georgette and make his initial family intact again. Of course, complications ensue from there, but “Maggie’s Plan” is to be commended strongly for its rare honesty about the wrongs perpetrated by adultery and for portraying a woman who wants to make things right again after realizing the error of her ways. The fact that she does so with wit and genuine heart, rather than heavy-handed moralizing, makes this movie even more special. The film is rated R, but has extremely minimal foul language (about four F-words), classy way of discussing its morally difficult subject matter, and a sex scene that cuts away after barely showing a female nipple. The artificial insemination angle of the story is obviously morally problematic, but it mostly serves as merely the launching pad for the real story of Maggie’s affair, marriage and plan to set things right. Amid a summer of blockbuster noise, I heartily recommend this movie to adults wishing for something a little more quiet and thoughtful, yet richly entertaining. It’s in limited release around the country now, but if it’s not in your area, “Maggie’s Plan” should make its video on demand and streaming debuts in another couple of months.
'Central Intelligence' sends strong anti-bullying message
Jun 17, 2016 / 00:00 amEveryone can remember a mortifying moment from their high school days, or can relate to the feeling of having fallen from the heights of popularity and success in that period. And facing up to 20-year reunions is a daunting experience for anyone. The new movie “Central Intelligence” finds an incredibly funny, exciting and unique way to show that struggle by teaming up Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson and Kevin Hart in an action-comedy that still has much to say about bullying and the ability to turn one’s life around. Bob Stone (Dwayne Johnson) is a former high school loser who went from being a morbidly obese teen with a horribly funny name to being a muscular CIA agent with a new identity. But when he was a senior in high school, five bullies teamed up on him while he danced and sang while naked in a gym shower, and dragged him into a gym packed with classmates before dumping him to be humiliated in front of everyone. The only student who wouldn’t laugh at him was the school’s star student, Calvin Joyner (Kevin Hart), who gave him his letterman’s jacket to cover his implied naked genitals and walk out with some dignity. Twenty years later, now known as Bob and musclebound, the loser victim finds Calvin while in town for their reunion. Calvin has gone from star to average-joe accountant, and he now feels disappointed in his life, but Bob finds him on Facebook and asks him to meet night before reunion for drinks to talk. Then, he invites his way into staying overnight in Calvin’s house. The next morning, Calvin is shocked to find three CIA agents at his door, looking for Bob. Bob disappears instantly though, but quickly returns to drag Calvin into a crazy set of misadventures as they try to figure out who a secret villain named the Black Badger is in time to prevent him from selling a chip with government secrets on it in an online auction to enemy nations. Bob needs Calvin’s accounting expertise to track down where the bank accounts of the bidders are located and find the winner to arrest him. But the three agents claim that it is Bob who went crazy and turned traitor, and is the one selling the secrets himself. Calvin is asked by them to report if Bob contacts him, but within moments Bob has swooped back to get him, Calvin is convinced Bob is telling the truth and the two go on the run from the feds while hoping to arrest the auction winner and reclaim the files. Yet all the way to the end, “Central Intelligence” keeps viewers wondering if Bob is a hero or has gone rogue, and if he’s going to wind up killing Calvin or really liking him. It’s an impressive feat for a genre in which writers are often lazy in their plot creation while rushing to have big laughs or explosions happen. Director Rawson Marshall Thurber also does an unbelievably great job mixing action with comedy and then having strong emotional moments in which the characters express their disappointments in life and encourage each other to overcome. Johnson and Hart far exceed their expected acting limitations to truly shine on every level. The movie has a strong anti-bullying message, but also makes the point that anyone can change their lives for the better and overcome adversity. There is a noticeably lower level, of foul language than many other similar movies, with one F-word and about 20 milder swear words like the S-word scattered throughout with one misuse of Jesus’ name and one G-D. The violence is never disturbing or bloody and mostly played for laughs in funny fights. That leaves three close shots of male rear nudity, two of the obese teenage version of Bob that are at first meant to be funny then tragic, and at the end of him fully fit and nude from the rear as a way of showing his classmates they didn’t break him, but drove him to improve his life. None of the nudity is meant to be prurient in any way to the viewer. Overall,”Central Inteligence” is an absolute blast and highly recommended as perfectly executed action comedy that teenagers and adults should both enjoy tremendously.
Strong faith in the face of evil: 'The Conjuring 2'
Jun 10, 2016 / 00:00 amFor decades, “The Exorcist” was considered the standard-bearer of horror movies, a full-throttle ride through the dark side that was nominated for 10 Oscars and became the highest-grossing horror film of all time. But in 2013, a movie called “The Conjuring” burst upon the summer movie scene to become a scary sensation in its own right – riding a controversy over its MPAA rating all the way to nearly $150 million (making it second only to “The Exorcist” in the genre) despite the fact it had no major stars in its cast. The reason why “The Conjuring” drew so much buzz was the fact that it received an R rating without having any foul language or sex, and no graphic violence. Rather, it was labeled that harshly for “sequences of disturbing violence and terror”, reflecting the unbelievably tense and suspenseful tone that Wan managed to establish in detailing the true story of the famed Catholic couple Ed and Lorraine Warren. The Warrens were the top non-clergy exorcists on the planet, having helped eradicate dozens of cases of alleged possessions and demon attacks among people worldwide. In the first “Conjuring,” they helped save a family from demonic attacks at their rural Rhode Island farmhouse, and in the new film they help a British single mother and her three young children who believe they are under siege from evil spirits. Both movies are scary as hell, with the first widely regarded as second only to “The Exorcist” as the scariest film ever made, and the sequel ups the ante in scale and nearly in its ability to terrify viewers. Since the fun of these movies lies in the shocking surprises, I’m sparing details other than the fact that these films will thoroughly scare you, and am explaining how they attain their unique mix of faith and fear. Is it worth seeing? Despite the fact it has totally clean language, and again no sex or nudity, this is a very intensely scary film. If you can handle a truly unsettling mix of faith and fear that will stick with you and give plenty to think and talk about long after the movie is over, then by all means check it out. There is little or no graphic violence, but you will see a horrifying demon in a nun’s habit at points throughout the film, as well as spinning crucifixes and all sorts of other creepy uses of Catholic iconography – but, to be clear, it’s all in the service of good. These films’ ability to reach a horror audience that normally would steer clear of anything religious makes them some of the most invaluable films to come out of Hollywood these days. If you’re not into scary movies, definitely stay away. As with the first, director James Wan and the co-writing brother team of Chad and Carey Hayes - who are self-professed devout Catholics - surprise viewers by transcending the usual shock factor of such demon-possession films with a bracing existential battle centered around the very concept of good versus evil itself. “These movies are not directly Christian films, but faith is integrated into them,” says Chad Hayes, speaking from the movie’s press day at the Four Seasons Hotel in Beverly Hills. “The idea beneath it all is that when good people do nothing, Satan prevails. Ed and Lorraine only literally had their faith as their weapon, with no cellphones and no gadgets. We learn much more about them and their faith because we’re not having to explain everything about them like the first time, and we could show what drove them into their calling.” “I believe that people identify with this because it’s a true story they can look up and see that it happened,” adds David Leslie Johnson, who teamed up with the Hayes brothers to write the sequel. “Because the characters have this strong faith and you know that they will find a way to a happy ending, this becomes something very rare: a positive horror film. So there’s a sense of hope with them. It’s not so much the quality of the death and despair, but of the hope you get at the end.” Knowing that “The Exorcist” was notorious for having suffered the deaths of nine people - cast or crew members or their close family members – during its legendarily dark production, Carey Hayes was happy to see that the production invited a Catholic priest to come bless the sets on the first day of shooting the sequel. For Wan, who has also frightened audiences as the co-creator of the “Saw” and “Insidious” horror franchises, that visit was more of a fun insurance policy for the shoot than a serious endeavor. Yet it’s clear that he’s been fascinated to see the responses to his films, going from pariah status labeling him as a purveyor of “torture porn” with “Saw” to a master of suspense with Christian heroes in the “Conjuring” films. “When I made ‘Saw’ I got accused of being fascist, with ‘Insidious’ they said I was godless, and now with ‘Conjuring,’ some say there’s too much God,” says Wan. “It’s really interesting to see people react to my three sets of horror films. These characters are such devout Catholics, there’s no way to make a movie about them without touching on that world and their view of it. They use their faith as a crutch to stand on, and their love for each other, and I thought that was such a dynamic thing to show in a movie.” “The Conjuring 2” opens nationwide Friday.
A Tale of Two Egos: one make-believe and one real-life light up the silver screen this weekend
Jun 3, 2016 / 00:00 amIt’s amazing how much ego a human being can have if left unchecked. That’s the lesson found in two current movies that are seemingly disparate on the surface, but have a lot in common in both form and substance. “Popstar: Never Stop Never Stopping” is a ribald yet occasionally funny mockumentary spoofing the boy band/Justin Bieber craze by following what happens when a singer named Conner (Andy Samberg) breaks up with his vocal group to go solo and finds everything in his life goes awry. Meanwhile, “Weiner” is also surprisingly funny, a documentary that finds both great comedy and tragedy in the ego-driven sexting scandal and New York City mayoral campaign of former New York Congressman Anthony Weiner. The fascinating thing about these films is it’s almost impossible to tell which one seems more absurd. And the fact that the events in “Weiner” actually happened is jaw-dropping. “Popstar” comes from the comedic trio known as The Lonely Island – former “Saturday Night Live” star Andy Samberg and his writer-director partners Jorma Taccone and Akiva Schaffer – in their first attempt at a full-length movie following dozens of brilliant shorts on that late-night TV institution. It follows the story of Conner, the breakout member of a vocal group called Style Boyz , who are basically a cluelessly obscene combination of the Beastie Boys and Backstreet Boys. While its opening credits give a history of Conner’s rise through his own self-aggrandizing narration and reveal that the Style Boyz broke up in an onstage mid-concert fight, its main events take place as he prepares to launch his second solo CD and attendant concert tour. The problem is, Conner has decided to make his new songs have social relevance while he is personally a classless nitwit, and his debut single in which he advocates gay marriage while also repeatedly rapping that he’s not gay winds up drawing embarrassingly bad reviews. Things get worse as his album tanks, his concert ticket sales are fading fast, and his manager (Tim Meadows) brings in an extremely aggressive rapper named Hunter as an opening act. When the crowds embrace Hunter more than Conner, and Hunter pulls a devastating prank on Conner’s wardrobe that results in viral-level humiliation, Conner’s life spirals out of control. Can he ever get the magic back? “Popstar” is impressively made, perfectly mimicking the deluge of stupid celebrity-worshipping shows like “E! Hollywood True Story” that fill way too much of the TV dial. Samberg, Taccone and Schaeffer have pulled in one of the most extensive cameo casts in memory, with Mariah Carey and Seal used to particularly great effect. The movie zips along, tearing through an array of dirty song lyrics and outrageous escapades before building in more depth in the final act. That last third of the movie gives it a much-needed shot of sweetness and humanity that helps Conner become more likable and makes “Popstar” more than just hollow fun. But unfortunately, despite the fairly positive resolution and Conner’s efforts to seek forgiveness for his arrogance, “Popstar” relies too much on shock-value lyrics and one egregiously gross and offensive scene involving a fully-seen penis to recommend viewing by discerning Catholics. There is also a quick moment in which Conner boasts of sleeping with ten women, and another offensive moment comes when his mom is shown snorting cocaine before it is implied she has sex with a much younger man. “Weiner” shines fresh light on one of the most notorious political scandals of the past decade, as directors Josh Kriegman and Elyse Steinberg enter the world of Weiner and his high-powered wife, Huma Abedin, amid some of the hardest moments one can imagine having in marriage. Weiner was forced to resign from Congress in 2011 after he admitted texting a photo of his erect penis stuffed into his underpants to multiple women across the country. Even though he apologized and managed to save his marriage to Abedin – who’s most famous for being Hillary Clinton’s right-hand aide for the past 15 years – Weiner felt drawn back into the spotlight two years later by his desire to run for the position of New York City mayor. Just as he hit the top of the polls in that race, however, Weiner was busted again, for sexting photos of his exposed penis to even more women. How he and Huma handle that second crisis and the media circus surrounding it makes “Weiner” a fascinating exploration of tabloid culture as well. But while “Popstar” manages to make Conner more likable as it goes on, “Weiner” makes viewers feel both laughter and contempt for its subject as it unfolds. This truly is a very funny documentary, even as it is sharing a story of modern-day tragedy. The directors should be commended for handling the subject matter directly yet as tastefully as possible. The first round of the scandal is only implied in discussion rather than directly shown. But later, when Weiner was even more exposed in his second round of scandals, the filmmakers hide the offending image by digitizing it. There is very little foul language, and what is heard generally comes in passing from bystanders who had nothing to do with the scandal. Any adult who is either interested in the Weiner story or interested in the world of politics or media should definitely check this out. There are probably many parallels between the Weiner story and that of Bill Clinton, as both men were extremely popular politicians whose careers were impacted by their sexual peccadilloes and their wives stood by them far more patiently than most women would. That Weiner allowed its directors so much access to his life is an example of an even bigger problem: the hubris that enables a person to think they can win the votes of thousands of strangers can also cause their downfall by making them believe they’re unstoppable.
'Alice Through the Looking Glass' teaches valuable lessons about forgiveness
May 29, 2016 / 00:00 amWhen Tim Burton brought Lewis Carroll’s classic tale “Alice in Wonderland” to life on the big screen in 2010, he captured lightning in a bottle. Through a combination of lavish effects and costumes that wound up winning Oscars, a star-studded cast having fun playing their iconic roles, and most of all, the giddy weirdness of Johnny Depp in the role of the Mad Hatter, Burton managed to have the biggest hit of his lengthy career, as the movie became a billion-dollar-grossing smash worldwide. That “Alice” also had the benefit of being the first big 3D movie to come out after the groundbreaking artistic triumph of “Avatar”, and no doubt a great part of its success came from riding that then-fresh artistic wave. But one big problem with the movie was that, despite it being spectacular eye candy, Carroll’s odd tale often was a confusing mess narratively when translated to theatres. This weekend, Disney’s releasing the inevitable sequel “Alice Through the Looking Glass,” and while it’s now directed by James Bobin (who directed the first of the two recent “Muppets” movies) rather than Burton, it’s still eye-popping to watch and thankfully makes more sense now that we’ve settled into knowing the characters. This time, it also has a couple of good messages that come through clearly, about forgiveness and making the most of our time in life. On the other hand, many members of its large cast – particularly Anne Hathaway as the White Queen – have almost nothing to do, creating an imbalance that is noticeable enough to be a distraction at times. The movie starts off with a bang as Alice (Mia Wasikowska) is now the captain of a giant merchant ship caught in a vicious storm and shot at by other ships. She bursts into action to save the day in a series of impressive stunts, only to find that her efforts are unappreciated when she arrives back onshore and meets her employer, a man whose marriage proposal she had declined in the past. Denied the chance to take her ship out on another voyage despite her success, Alice storms off and enters a room with a looking glass that seems to be a bit strange - when she touches it, her arm passes straight through. With her employer and his henchmen banging on the door of the room, angrily demanding to know what she’s doing, she jumps through the looking glass and finds herself in her beloved Underland. While most of the characters from the first movie are delighted to see her, Alice learns that her best friend the Mad Hatter has locked himself away in his house to mourn the tragic loss of his family as a child. In order to break him out of his horrible depression and bring his attendant joy back to Underland, Alice decides to go back in time and change the course of events that both led to his family’s deaths and which also turned the Red Queen (Helena Bonham Carter) into her embittered, furious self. With Time (Sacha Baron Cohen) -the figure in charge of keeping the past, present and future in proper order - and his forces out to stop Alice from breaking through time frames, the challenging quest is on. The result is a movie that is likely more engaging for children than for adults, due to it’s at times simplistic plot, but is nonetheless an impressive lush experience that is unlike anything else in theatres right now. Depp, as always, is fun to watch as he recreates this latest in a string of eccentric roles, but brings extra depth to his role due to the sadness he’s experiencing. Carter steals the show, however, as the Red Queen, not only being funny and slightly menacing with her anger, but also touching as she comes to terms with her past and learns the value of forgiveness. With the Memorial Day weekend upon us, thankfully there are plenty of good options available for families and anyone wanting good clean entertainment. While I had to take note last week at the filthy “Neighbors 2” and the definitely adult but entertaining “The Nice Guys,” there are thankfully four good-to-great movies to choose from at the multiplex right now: “Alice,” “Captain America: Civil War” (which is violent but completely clean on the sexual level), and the absolutely superb “Jungle Book” and “Zootopia.” These all come from Disney, and they deserve extra kudos for making clean fun paramount to their mission and for executing these films at a very high level of artistry and entertainment.
'The Nice Guys' and 'Neighbors 2' show the best and worst ways to handle adult content in films
May 20, 2016 / 00:00 amSometimes there’s a fine line between good taste and bad taste. A filmmaker can choose to tackle an “adult,” R-rated subject with class – avoiding graphic sex or violence and leaving extreme behavior to be implied offscreen – or simply wallow in the worst behavior human beings have to offer. This weekend, the nation’s movie theaters will be offering stark examples of both ends of the spectrum, as the detective comedy “The Nice Guys” and the raunchy, anything-goes sequel “Neighbors 2: Sorority Rising” hit the big screen. “Nice Guys” features two hard-luck guys who team up to solve a string of murders committed against performers tied to a porn movie in mid-1970s Los Angeles, while “Neighbors 2” features a suburban couple and a formerly antagonistic frat house president who team up to battle and clear out a houseful of unbelievably wild sorority girls living next door. While both may sound utterly offensive, “The Nice Guys” relies on its classy star duo of Russell Crowe and Ryan Gosling as well as its ace writer-director Shane Black (creator of the “Lethal Weapon” movies) to tell its story in a way that remains entertaining, is fairly restrained in its tone and has some surprising moments of grace. “Neighbors 2” has none of those redeeming qualities. “The Nice Guys” follows private investigator Holland March (Ryan Gosling) and muscleman-for-hire Jackson Healy (Russell Crowe), who are initially at odds but team up to find a missing young woman named Amelia and find out what her connection is to the death of a porn actress. Amelia had asked Healy to protect her from men who were following her, and March is one of the guys she wants kept away from her. Healy meets March when he shows up at his house to sucker punch him and break his arm to get him to stop following Ameilia. But as he realizes March is a widower raising his young teenage daughter on his own, he takes sympathy on him and the two begrudgingly team up to find her, after she disappears following news reports on the mysterious car-crash death of a porn actress. With March’s preteen daughter in tow for much of their escapades, “The Nice Guys” manages to be a movie that deals with definitely adult subject matter and has adult-level immorality scattered throughout – yet doesn’t cross the line into being tawdry or worse. Co-writer/director Shane Black is an outstanding writer who keeps things humorous throughout and doesn’t dwell on the depictions of sex, instead showing just enough of a glimpse to get the point across and only in a couple moments, while the action is played for laughs and not gruesome either. And for a movie of this genre, the language is relatively minimal as well (many cop/action movies these days use well over 150 and even 200 profanities and obscenities, while this has about half that total.) There are also a couple of thoughtful moments, as March’s daughter asks Healy to let her find an ambulance for a villain who was hit by a car, even after the villain had just endangered her own life moments before. This kind of extra moment of thoughtfulness happens at other points in the movie as well, and the daughter’s presence in the film serves as a check on the bad impulses of Healy, who is clearly touched by her innocence and feels guilty for his failing when he’s around her. Basically, if you can handle a “Lethal Weapon”-type movie, then you’ll enjoy “The Nice Guys” even more. If you don’t, then this might be one to avoid, although it has a funnier, nicer, and less intense tone throughout than that action classic. Meanwhile, “Neighbors 2: Sorority Rising” is an utterly hopeless example of the worst instincts of American comedies today. The unnecessary sequel to the 2014 hit “Neighbors,” which was already pushing the boundaries of good taste, this movie crosses that line from its opening minute and goes on to include numerous sight gags and sequences that obliterate any sense of decency. Mac Radner (Seth Rogan) and his wife Kelly (Rose Byrne) are a suburban young married couple with a young daughter who, in the prior movie, were forced to do battle against a ruthless and paganistic fraternity headed by Teddy Sanders (Zac Efron) in order to save their home and their sanity from their reckless next-door fraternity neighbors. This time, the couple are about to sell their home to a new couple and have to survive 30 days of escrow in order to accomplish that. The stakes are made even higher by the fact that they already have purchased a new home and if the sale falls through, they will owe money on both homes and be financially ruined. Just as they think it’s smooth sailing, a local college girl named Shelby (Chloe Grace Moretz) gets fed up with the strict rules at her university, which prevent sororities from throwing their own parties. Together with other rebellious outsider girls, she decides to launch her own off-campus sorority free from the campus rules, and the girls decide to rent the house next to Mac and Kelly. When Shelby and her crew meet Teddy, who wants revenge against the Radners for losing his fraternity and his power, Teddy offers to help them raise as much havoc as possible and ruin the Radners’ lives again. But when the girls decide that even Teddy is forcing too many rules upon them, they toss him out of the house. Utterly helpless, Teddy is invited to move in with the Radners , and the former enemies team up to root the girls out in time to sell their house. What ensues is a battle royale that hinges on mass quantities of marijuana, underage alcohol consumption, implied promiscuity, and all manner of dirty tricks and backstabbing. Utterly disgusting sexual matters are discussed and shown, with some of the most vile moments inviting the toddler daughter of the Radners being subjected to horrible language and behavior. A few brief scenes – including the chase and battle over the bag of marijuana – are well-staged enough to draw some laughs inadvertently, but overall this is a moral mess. From the opening minute almost all the way through the end, “Neighbors 2: Sorority Rising” traffics in the worst of human behavior in the name of comedy that is simply too raunchy to be enjoyable. Worse, the behavior it depicts is intended to make it seem admirable that young women would act just as much or more degrading than similar men. In the end, the warring parties do make some peace and forgive each other, but it’s a case of too little, too late to be redemptive in any form or fashion. This is a must to avoid for anyone with a sense of discretion.
'Money Monster' doesn't quite hit a home run
May 13, 2016 / 00:00 amIn a summer movie season packed with superhero movies , sci-fi spectaculars and raunchy comedies, it’s refreshing to find a movie for adults that respects viewers’ intelligence and is actually about something. This weekend’s big new movie, “Money Monster,” attempts to fill that bill with the dynamic-duo star combo of George Clooney and Julia Roberts, but doesn’t quite hit a home run. Clooney plays Lee Gates, the host of a TV show called “Money Monster” in which he uses outrageous costumes and nonstop silly gimmicks to dispense advice on what stocks to invest in or avoid. Clearly modeled on longtime CNBC analyst Jim Cramer, Gates is the kind of self-absorbed guy who makes flashy announcements without really considering the consequences, while Roberts plays his harried longtime director, Patty Fenn. It seems like just another typical show taping day until a blue-collar deliveryman named Kyle Budwell (Jack O’Connell) sneaks onto the set with a couple of large boxes, whips out a gun and proceeds to force Gates to strap on a laced with explosives. Budwell’s hand is on the detonator, so if he gets shot or attacked and his thumb slips off, everyone in sight will die. Budwell demands that this all plays out on live national television, as he demands answers from Gates about how a high-tech company Gates recommended and Budwell invested in could have tanked so badly that it lost $800 million for investors overnight. Realizing that this could only have happened under human error rather than computerized algorithms, Gates finds himself stalling for time to stay alive long enough to solve the mystery and confront the schemers who cleaned the company out. Meanwhile, Fenn has to figure out how to keep her news crew safe, and later the people on the streets of New York when the quest for answers spills outside. Combining the frantic search with a string of darkly funny jokes and plot twists, director Jodie Foster handles the various plot strands and strong performances deftly. Clooney is strong throughout, alternating between his onscreen bravado and a surprisingly vulnerable fear that he is going to die. Roberts is steely as Fenn, but while her performance is solid, it’s the kind of role any number of actresses could have played, and might make viewers long for the day when her energy lit up the screen in just about anything she appeared in. O’Connell largely plays two modes – furious and crazy – and handles both well enough, but his character is more of a stereotype of the little man hurt by the system. But his shrill and often annoying character is just one small part of a bigger problem with this movie: None of the characters are really likable, so it’s hard to care too much what happens to any of them. And that unlikeability and shrill tone also might cause problems for some viewers on a moral level, as “Money Monster” features a profuse amount of foul language. Whether enraged or speaking casually, as a noun, adverb, adjective and beyond, the “F” word, “GD” and Jesus’ name are laced into the tense proceedings so often that it becomes an annoying distraction and detracts greatly from the parts that are intelligent, funny and exciting. There is also a brief, mostly clothed but graphically thrusting casual sex scene between two supporting characters. Overall, “Money Monster” offers some interesting insights in the world of finance and has both exciting and funny moments. But discerning viewers will have to think twice to decide whether to see a movie that wallows in foul language as much as it does financial jargon.
'Captain America: Civil War' a crowded, confusing superhero reunion
May 6, 2016 / 00:00 amThere are about 400 films released each year, and for the past decade it feels like at least half of them star comic book superheroes. The two main comics companies bringing them to the silver screen are DC and Marvel Comics, which have had distinctly different approaches to their heroes’ exploits, with DC taking a dark and somber approach in the “Dark Knight” trilogy and “Man of Steel,” and Marvel using vivid visuals and a heavy helping of humor in its films. This year is barely a third over and we’re already experiencing the biggest showdown between DC and Marvel so far, as each created a mega-film combining their biggest heroes into one project. DC’s “Batman Vs. Superman” came out at the end of March and made over $300 million in the US alone, despite terrible reviews and the fact that no one seemed to actually enjoy it. But now, Marvel is unleashing its own latest superhero flick, “Captain America: Civil War,” this weekend and is not only pitting Captain America against Iron Man, but about a dozen other superheroes in a movie-long battle royale between factions of the Avengers. The result is exciting, fun and at times hilarious as the incredible all-star cast members let loose with zingers as much as they do with weapons. But while this entry in the superhero sweepstakes is undeniably entertaining, it does start to show the strain of forcing too many characters into one movie. With around a dozen heroes all trying to save the planet while disagreeing enough on their methods that they will fight intensely over it, “Civil War” comes off feeling too hectic and overstuffed sometimes, cutting into what Marvel clearly hoped would be the Ultimate Superhero Movie. The film hopscotches all over the planet, as well as between the present day and December 1991, as it shows how Captain America/Steve Rogers’ best friend Bucky was subjected to dangerous forms of mind control by evil Russians and programmed to become an unremorseful killing machine. In the present day, the Avengers are about to be forced into being controlled by the United Nations after the State Department says that the collateral damage wrought during their global missions in the two “Avengers” films so far is bringing shame and the danger of retaliation upon America. But the Avengers are sharply divided over whether they will agree to being controlled, rather than operating as a private entity using their own best judgment. Tony Stark/Iron Man (Robert Downey, Jr.) is the leader of the contingent willing to be put in check by the global authorities, while Steve Rogers/Captain America (Chris Evans) weighs in on the side of the idea that the Avengers are saving the world from its most nefarious threats, and sometimes a few innocent people are hurt or killed while striving to save millions more. But just as the accords are about to be signed, a massive explosion sends everyone scrambling for dear life while taking the life of the friendly king of Wakanda. When news reports reveal that Captain America’s old friend Bucky was near the scene of the explosion, a slew of cops come gunning for him while the Captain and his half of the Avengers team race to capture him before he can be killed, since the Captain believes that he was innocent of the killings or at least did them under the unwanted control of Russians. Thus sets off the titular civil war, as the Avengers battle each other in an insane series of set pieces that bring in characters as far-flung as Ant-Man and (in his movie debut) Black Panther. The crowd went especially wild for an extended pair of sequences introducing yet another actor as Peter Parker/Spiderman. While the movie wisely steers clear of the utterly ugly, brutal tone of the “Batman vs. Superman” battle royale, it still makes for a confusing mess at moments. I hadn’t refreshed my memory of the prior “Captain” and “Avengers” films and found myself lost at a few points, so I can only imagine how confused someone who is checking out this as their first Marvel movie would be. It’s clearly made for the genre’s superfans above all else, but at the same time it’s impossible not to be left in a state of dropped-jaw wonder by the stunt work and just as impossible not to laugh at its many lighter moments and sarcastic lines. And one other concern is that parents seem to take very young children, even toddlers, to these films under the idea that since they’re comic book stories the violence can’t be considered real enough to affect young minds negatively. But take out the superhero angle and leave in all the nonstop punching, kicking and shooting, and I guarantee that most parents would run the other way. Consider this good fare for ages 13 and up for sure, most kids 10 and up likely OK, and then really use discretion below that age.
Musicals reinvented in 'Sing Street'
Apr 29, 2016 / 00:00 amMusicals were thought to be a dead film genre for decades, until the movie version of the Broadway classic “Chicago” came along to save the day as a smash success in 2002. Yet even as that film’s smash-hit $170 million gross and Best Picture win brought song and dance numbers back to the big screen, there are still relatively few of them, and most are driven by having the splashiest song and dance routines imaginable. Irish writer-director named John Carney has spent the past nine years bucking that bigger-means-better trend. Instead, his simple stories with terrific tunes, including the Oscar-winning 2007 indie hit “Once” and the Oscar-nominated 2014 film “Begin Again,” make music a vibrant and organic part of real-world settings and relatable, downright human characters. His latest, “Sing Street,” may be his most personal and my favorite movie of his, even though his “Begin Again” made my top 10 list two years ago. Set in 1985 Dublin, “Sing Street” follows the story of a 14-year-old Irish boy named Conor (Ferdia Walsh-Peelo), who is renamed Cosmo by a beautiful 16-year-old girl named Raphina (Lucy Boynton) he’s attracted to. Cosmo finds he has to start a rock band on the fly because he told her he’s a lead singer. As he forms the band with a group of his friends, Cosmo has to overcome a series of challenges, including a home life being torn asunder by his battling parents and their monetary struggles. To save money, they’ve moved him to a strict, state-run Catholic school, where he faces off against bullies, both in the classroom and in the front office (a vicious religious brother named Brother Baxter, played by Don Wycherley). But as his older brother Brendan (Jack Reynor) teaches him about the latest and greatest New Wave bands, and Raphina inspires his heart, Cosmo is determined not to give up. His musical journey as he and his bandmates develop songs copying the styles of Duran Duran, The Cure, Hall & Oates and many others en route to finding his own true composing spirit is energizing, romantic, funny, occasionally sad and thoroughly engaging. Carney gets this movie right on every possible level, from his wise casting of utter unknowns who help keep the story fresh and unexpected, through its genuinely terrific songs and the perfectly impassioned feelings of young love. “Sing Street” provides viewers with a thoroughly immersive experience, making them feel so invested in these charming characters that they will have to restrain themselves from cheering throughout. Carney dedicates the film “To Brothers Everywhere,” an indication that the film is very close to his own heart. As the bassist for the popular Irish band The Frames from 1991 to 1993 before embarking on his filmmaking career, he clearly developed a strong sense of how to express the way great songwriting can give a rush of confidence and vitality to a writer. The one small drag on the movie from a Catholic perspective is that the Brother in charge of Cosmo’s school is portrayed as a vicious and mean man who won’t tolerate an ounce of rebellion and teenage spirit in his students. He crosses the line big-time in slapping and nearly drowning Cosmo in a sink full of water for wearing a bit of makeup in the vein of the New Wave bands that he admires like Duran Duran. But the scene is a brief couple of minutes in a movie in which the kids have refreshingly good values, and to be honest, I was slapped hard myself once by a mean-spirited Brother, so Carney is likely recounting his own reality rather than creating an anti-clergy agenda. He also quite possibly used his own life for the stirring mix of good times and bad that Cosmo goes through, and the profound influence Cosmo’s older brother has on his future. With barely a word of foul language and a generally sweet disposition throughout, the crowd-pleasing “Sing Street” may prove to be the perfect film to take your mother to either this week or next, when Mother’s Day rolls around.
A timely message: 'Barbershop: The Next Cut' answers social issues with community
Apr 19, 2016 / 00:00 amPlenty of movies can be entertaining, and some are blatantly designed to have a message. But it’s truly a rare occasion when a movie manages to be both truly funny and downright important. I’m as surprised as anyone reading this to say that statement fits the latest movie in the “Barbershop” series of movies, “Barbershop: The Next Cut.” But this is the third movie in a series that has portrayed positive role models for the black community while offering meaningful truths that are universal to anyone, and this time it couldn’t be more timely or profound in its attempt to address the insanity of violence on the streets of Chicago as well as the nation. Lead barber Calvin (Ice Cube) is still trying to make it in his barber shop on the South Side of Chicago, but the recession has forced him to team up with a beauty salon that makes the movie now have a strong balance of male and female characters that greatly improves the already solid comic performances and writing of the first two movies. With his son 14 years old now and getting rebellious, Calvin is concerned he’ll join a gang and ruin his life. Meanwhile, Calvin’s opening narration shows Chicago to be the nightmare it is in real life: overrun with violence, gangs and broken homes. Calvin is inspired to stand up against the crime wave and tricks two rival gang leaders into meeting and having a 48 hour cease fire, during which time he and his fellow barbers and stylists will bring the community together with a marathon of free haircuts and discussion of social problems. Other shenanigans happen, as the barbers banter and argue about politics, relationships and much more, and as various people experience romantic entanglements and misunderstandings, which are handled with taste and discretion. While this movie is entertaining, it’s also invaluable and important for addressing the fact that governments can’t save communities, but only personal values and standing up for good can do so. And as a surprising bonus, Calvin seriously considers sending his son to Catholic school because he considers the public school as failing the good kids like his son. When his son complains "I don't know anyone at Catholic school," Calvin replies "Maybe you need some Catholics in your life!" It's a dead serious moment, and stunning coming from Ice Cube, who started his career as a gangsta rapper. Freeflowing with plenty of funny and serious moments, "Barbershop: The Next Cut" feels like a true labor of love from all involved, and an important message of individuals handling social problems rather than relying on government assistance to save them. There are also beautiful messages of the importance of fathers and intact homes, and as such, teens and adults should overlook the plethora of mild profanities and see this movie. It’s not just a “black” movie, it’s a human one. And one that is necessary and vital unlike anything else to come out of Hollywood in a very long time.
Disney reinvents a family classic with "The Jungle Book"
Apr 15, 2016 / 00:00 amBack in 1967, Disney’s release of “The Jungle Book” as a cartoon took the world by storm, not only sparking massive box-office success but also inspiring screen legend Gregory Peck to lobby unsuccessfully for the MotionPicture Academy to change its rules to allow animated films to compete for Best Picture honors. It also was the last cartoon Walt Disney worked on before he died, and its success following his passing helped save the studio from shutting down its animation division. Now, nearly 50 years later, Disney has conjured up an epic live-action version of “The Jungle Book,” this time featuring one on-screen human actor – an Indian-American boy named Neel Sethi, who had just one prior credit in a short film – as the main character of Mowgli. The rest of the film’s vibrant sets and incredibly realistic animals are all computer-generated, with every frame of the film shot on indoor sets rather than any actual jungle locations. And the results are spectacular. Director Jon Favreau (“Iron Man,” “Elf,” “Chef”) was a surprising choice for the material but he knocks it out of the park from first moment to last with a lush, vibrant, exciting and often funny movie that appears fully alive and gives “Avatar” a run for its money as perhaps the lushest effects-driven movie ever created. The movie’s tale, based on the classic book by Rudyard Kipling, follows the life of a boy named Mowgli, who was found by a panther named Bagheera (voiced by Ben Kingsley) after his father had been killed by an evil tiger named Shere Khan (Idris Elba). Shere Khan was horribly scarred by fire as Mowgli’s father defended himself and his child, and ran off without seeing the boy. Now, ten years later, Shere Khan wants to kill the boy (called a “man-cub” by the jungle’s residents) as revenge for his disfigurement. Bhagheera and the wolf pack that raised him are determined to save Mowgli long enough to enable him to return to the nearest human village, but as Mowgli dodges all manner of danger along his journey home, he winds up befriending a sloth bear named Baloo (Bill Murray) and using his human ingenuity to help the two of them thrive in the jungle. The tension between the fun parts of Mowgli’s life and the menacing dangers he encounters makes for a perfectly paced and thoroughly engaging time at the movies. It is rare for a movie to so thoroughly immerse viewers in an entirely different world, and that process is helped immeasurably by the pitch-perfect voice casting of stars in even brief roles. Scarlett Johannson is smoothly seductive as a giant python named Kaa, whileElba and Kingsley bring regal charm and menace to their turns as the most powerful creatures battling over Mowgli’s fate. But it’s Bill Murray as Baloo that really brings the movie to its fullest level of magic, as he brings full-bodied humor and impish charm to the best-loved character in both this film and the original cartoon, where Baloo was voiced by George Sanders. The fact that Sethi pulls off a wide-ranging performance without any other actual humans to play off of for nearly two hours is remarkable, but it’s a debut for the ages that should open many more doors for him as an actor. While this “Jungle Book” is much more realistic due to the incredible leaps in technology and the live-action approach, it doesn’t forget its sense of fantasy and wonder (and two terrific songs carried over from the original and sung here by Murray and Christopher Walken) thanks to the fact its animal characters speak and act so believably. Favreau and the rest of the Disney team pull off the difficult feat of having Mowgli survive tiger attacks, rampaging water buffaloes, mudslides, floods, bees and much more while still maintaining a PG rating that ensures entire families can have a thrilling time together.
'The Boss' could have been a fun family flick, but crude language keeps it at an R-rating
Apr 7, 2016 / 00:00 amVery few movie stars these days have managed to craft their image as well as Melissa McCarthy. Having come out of nowhere like a human tornado to steal Kristin Wiig’s 2011 smash “Bridesmaids” and earn a Best Supporting Actress Oscar nomination, she has managed to find one role after another that has enabled her to make a total fool out of herself while still always getting the last laugh. Her only misstep thus far was 2014’s “Tammy,” a dramedy about a working-class woman who hits the road with her out-of-control grandmother after losing her job and learning her husband cheated on her. That movie featured too many overly earnest moments in which audiences were expected to feel sorry for her character, while the attempts at broad humor were too jarring – and strangely, she only had herself and her husband Ben Falcone to blame, since he directed the movie and they co-wrote it together. That’s why I was worried that McCarthy’s new movie, “The Boss,” might be a mess as well. Surprisingly, Hollywood has allowed her to team with Falcone again on writing and directing duties for the story of a powerhouse businesswoman named Michelle Darnell (think Martha Stewart mixed with Oprah) who goes to prison for insider trading. Thankfully, this time the results are much more entertaining. Darnell lost everything when the Securities and Exchange Commission seized all her assets, and turns to her long-suffering former assistant Claire (Kristen Bell) for a place to stay while she gets back on her feet. Claire reluctantly allows her to move into the small apartment she shares with her preteen daughter Rachel (Ella Anderson), but Michelle gets Claire fired up for life again after meeting Rachel’s Girl Scouts-style troop of Dandelions and realizing that their cookie sales could be a major cash cow. Michelle raids the Dandelions’ membership to form her own organization, and offers her girls both 10 percent commission and the establishment of college-savings accounts for their work selling chocolate brownies. This sets off a war with an irate Dandelions mom and draws renewed attention from her former lover-turned-rival Renault (Peter Dinklage), who wants to take over her new brownie empire and shut it down. These events are just the starting point for a film that has a consistently fresh and creative point of view, a well-drawn three-dimensional character in Michelle, and a whole lot of belly laughs. In fact, Michelle might be McCarthy’s best all-around creation yet, as she alternates between hilariously steely verbal attacks against her enemies and sympathetic moments that mostly avoid being saccharine. There’s no one quite like McCarthy on the Hollywood landscape, with her ability to offer one rapid-fire hate-filled insult after another while keeping a sweet smile on her face, and her willingness to pratfall her way through one outrageous physical scenario after another. She’s backed up here by a winning straight-woman turn by Bell and an absolutely terrific team of girls portraying her troop, particularly in a slow-motion battle royale with the Dandelions that must be seen to be believed. Dinklage also makes for a hilarious rival, especially in a quick flashback to their hot-and-heavy past that plays up the absurdity of the giant Michelle making out with the diminutive tycoon. In fact, the movie’s only weak spot comes from its final act, as it slows down a little too long while attempting to get emotionally grounded before going too far over the top in its overly frantic finale. But with a winning denouement, “The Boss” regains its footing and gives its audience a healthy helping of hilarity that makes it easy to forgive its very infrequent missteps. While all this may sound like an endless array of bad language and behavior, tone is crucial to this movie. It is impossible to take most of it seriously at all, which mitigates the language somewhat. The one truly offensive scene is relatively brief, when Michelle tries to convince a straight friend to distract a gay guard by performing oral sex on him; the suggestion is of course refused adamantly, but they use crude terminology while arguing about it. Plus, the movie has several surprisingly strong positive elements, including a depiction of Michelle’s childhood at the movie’s opening. She is seen being adopted then rejected three different times in her childhood, and returned to a Catholic orphanage every time. The nun in charge of her is shown as sweet and sympathetic to her plight. Secondly, while Michelle is bitter about families at the start of the movie due to her traumatic experiences, she comes to appreciate and love her assistant’s young daughter as well as the assistant, and has a big change of heart that reflects a strong pro-family sentiment. Finally, and most importantly, the movie is very positive towards capitalism and entrepreneurship. Michelle’s insider trading charges were a setup by her rival, and despite her abusive language and tactics around the kids, she teaches them to work hard and enjoy financial incentives for their hard work selling brownies. By the end of the movie, Michelle fully reforms her ways and even makes peace and forgiveness with her main rival. Overall, this movie is recommended on an entertainment level, and for its core final messages, but with extreme caution for anyone who’s highly offended by crude language. The real shame here is that the filmmakers had the makings of a terrific family movie, or at least could have kept it PG-13 for teens and adults, if they had just washed their mouths out and kept the same plot.