Articles by Carl Kozlowski
'Hello, My Name is Doris' a perfect match for Sally Field
Apr 1, 2016 / 00:00 amThis has been a year of bombast at the movies. Super-hyped movies like “Deadpool” and “Batman vs. Superman” crush the box office with enormous openings, while thoughtful movies like “Whiskey Tango Foxtrot” or “Eddie the Eagle” have been tossed in the dustbin of movie memories while barely registering on most filmgoers’ radar. That’s why it’s so refreshing to see a film like “Hello, My Name Is Doris” catching on as a sleeper hit. Starring Sally Field in one of those roles that is a perfect match of talent and writing, it’s a refreshing showcase (and a likely Oscar nomination) for one of our most beloved actresses and one of the most thoroughly delightful films to come out in years. “Doris” follows a woman named Doris Miller (Sally Field), who is in her 60s when her elderly mother finally dies, freeing her from years of responsibility taking care of her at the expense of pursuing her own dreams and relationships. Doris has had the same job for decades, working data entry from a cubicle at a faceless corporation in Manhattan, which she travels to by two subway trains and a ferry each day. Just as she is freed from her daily duties for her mother, Doris is under pressure from her brother (Stephen Root) and his wife (Wendi McLendon-Covey) to sell the home she has spent her entire life in. Doris has been a hoarder for decades, and she is extremely reluctant to leave the comfort zone of a house filled with the cluttered memories of yesterdays. Everything turns upside down for her when she has an awkward meeting in a crowded elevator with a new twentysomething executive named John Fremont (Max Greenfield). With her imagination running wild after decades in repression, Dorissuddenly starts wearing colorful outfits and engaging in outlandish Walter Mitty-style daydreams about this new dreamboat. It all seems pointless until the 13-year-old granddaughter of her best friend Roz (a hilarious Tyne Daly) helps Doris find John on Facebook and gives her inside scoop on his likes and dislikes. Creating a false persona to “friend” him and conduct thorough intelligence, things soon get complicated even as John welcomes Doris to immerse herself into his vibrant social life. Dishing all those plot points only scratches the surface of the joys to be found in this warm, witty and humane character-driven film. Co-writer/director Michael Showalter was one of the members of the cult favorite sketch comedy troupe The State in the 1990s and has spent the years since crafting one criminally underappreciated comic gem after another (see “The Baxter” and “They Came Together” – you’ll thank me). Here, he teams with a young writer named Laura Terruso (who created the character of Doris for an acclaimed 2011 short called “Doris and the Intern”) to write the kind of film that gifted actors are almost dying to get into. The supporting cast here is unbelievably deep, also featuring veteran indie screen darling Natasha Lyonne, Kyle Mooney of “SNL,” Beth Behrs of CBS’ hit sitcom “2 Broke Girls,” “Silicon Valley” star Kumail Nanjiani and the ubiquitously unctuous Peter Gallagher in addition to the actors listed above. When quality actors like these line up ten deep for even a couple of lines in a movie, you know the script is something special. What makes this movie magic isn’t just its unique comic sensibility and sunny disposition – a trait that’s all too rare in movies these days – but its ability to surprise viewers at key moments with the flip side of Doris’ optimistic surface. Field expertly plays a woman who has harbored pain and disappointment for decades, and as she and John open up to each other about their respective hurts, viewers are drawn in to truly caring about them as well. There are only two minor criticisms I can think of for “Doris,” but they were both audibly expressed by other audience members at the crowded Tuesday matinee I attended. First, this is such a sweet and good-hearted movie, and Field’s core audience is generally older and less given to edgy humor, that it’s a shame when characters lapse into a fusillade of comic profanity in a couple of scenes. It seems that Showalter and Terruso are making a subtle comment about how thoughtlessly crude the twentysomething generation can be in trying to carry on even basic conversations. These moments are jarring nonetheless and pointlessly give a movie that could easily be a great family film an R rating, which is certain to also limit the older audience for whom the film is a slam dunk entertainment. The scenes are in one cluster of the film, however, and easily forgiven by the end of the movie. The other issue is the film’s final shot, which leaves viewers with total ambiguity after investing themselves in this wonderful woman’s life for 95 minutes. Does she find love and happiness, or doesn’t she? It’s momentarily maddening to wonder about that fact, but in its own way, leaving viewers with an ending that will engage their own imaginations may just be one more moment of this movie’s magic. I can’t recommend “Doris” highly enough.
'Batman v. Superman' raises big questions about good and evil
Mar 25, 2016 / 00:00 amEver since “Iron Man” took the world by storm in 2008, Marvel’s comic-book movies have been tearing up the global box office with a mix of witty writing, vibrant visuals, A-level actors and an undeniably fun spirit. While the movies had lots of PG-13 level action violence, “The Avengers,” “Thor,” “Captain America,” “Guardians of the Galaxy” and “Ant-Man” were also filled with a joy, pizzazz and sense of solid moral values that made them films the whole family could enjoy together. Meanwhile, Marvel’s main competition in the comics world – DC Comics – hasn’t put out near as nearly as ambitious a slate in the past decade, though Christian Bale’s “Dark Knight” trilogy starring Batman proved extremely successful, and 2013’s “Man of Steel” centering on Superman did OK domestically and cleaned up overseas. DC’s films nonetheless couldn’t be more different than Marvel’s, as they are dark, largely joyless affairs that rarely elicit a chuckle or a genuine smile of surprise while offering grim visions of dystopian societies. This weekend, DC puts those two giant franchises together with “Batman vs. Superman: Dawn of Justice,” and the result is a mixed bag. The movie has a propulsive storyline that does an impressive job of weaving together multiple plotlines for much of its duration, but it’s so relentlessly grim that it’s hard to feel like you’re actually having a good time. The story kicks off in overdrive with a quick and compelling offering of the Batman origin story, along with a quick recreation of “Man of Steel’s” climactic Superman-General Zod showdown that destroyed much of Metropolis. The wow-inducing twist on that battle footage is the fact that director Zack Snyder manages to weave heroic billionaire Bruce Wayne (Ben Affleck) into the imagery, cutting him both into existing scenes and adding extra moments, all of which depict him racing through the city trying to save his beloved staff from their impending doom. The die is cast for an eventual showdown between Wayne, as his alter ego Batman, and Superman (Henry Cavill), when in a fantastic moment, Wayne watches his skyscraper crumble while he sees Superman and Zod wrestling in the sky above the destruction. Wayne misunderstands the context of their battle, and assumes Superman has deigned himself a cocky and ruthless new god rather than living up to the public’s perception of him as a benevolent alien hero. Meanwhile, Superman/Clark Kent watches news of and writes his own investigations into who Batman is, because he thinks the Caped Crusader is an overheated vigilante who has the potential to turn evil amid the squalor of Metropolis’ rival city, Gotham. Leave it to young billionaire inventor Lex Luthor (Jesse Eisenberg) to step in and invite both men to the same party, where Kent comes to realize that Wayne is Batman and Wayne discovers a mysterious and super-hot woman named Diana Prince (Gal Gadot), who turns out to be Wonder Woman. Luthor is a megalomaniac and wants the sick thrill of crushing Superman just to prove his own power. Knowing that Batman and Superman hate each other, he devises a ruthless plan to turn the two against each other in a real battle royale and have the Dark Knight kill the Man of Steel – but will they kill each other, or wind up joining forces together? And what will Luthor concoct next on an even more grandly evil scale? This sounds somewhat more fun than it actually is. The screenplay by Chris Terrio and David S. Goyer has almost no wit, just a heavy darkness that sucks the zing out of many of even the best scenes. Meanwhile, director Zack Snyder – who helmed “Man of Steel” and made it an oppressive bore – manages to do a much better job here, but still chooses such a nonstop sense of gloom and shadow, and makes the superhero showdowns so violent that parents should really think twice about letting their kids under 10 see this. There is no foul language in the form F words, and just one S word in this movie, although there are about five blasphemous uses of Christ’s and God’s names. On the positive side, prayer is used by characters at several key moments, and one man kisses his Cross while praying for mercy on his soul as he’s about to die in the Metropolis disaster. But the violence is intense, though not bloody, and the final showdown with an incredible villain is certain to terrify young children. It’s also implied that Bruce Wayne wakes up with a one-night stand female companion sleeping in his bed, though no sex is shown. Clark Kent and Lois Lane are shown living together outside of marriage, and she’s seen in a bathtub (no real nudity) both before and during a moment when a fully dressed Clark gets in, with the cut-away scene implying they are about to have offscreen sex in the tub. One final thing to point out is that Snyder really uses our collective fears and anguish over 9/11 to draw emotion over the destruction of Metropolis in both “Man of Steel” and this film. In “Steel, “ watching the city’s towers fall and its citizens run from giant, fast-moving smoke clouds seemed distasteful and exploitative because the Superman-Zod showdown was ugly and overdone itself. Here, however, he and the writers have created such a broader universe for the story and raise impressively deep questions about the nature of good and evil, what makes a hero or a vigilante acceptable rather than simply dangerous, and the timeless quandary about the tension between God and man that the 9/11 subtext works. “Batman vs. Superman” may forget to have much fun, but it might actually make viewers think about some important issues.
Double movie review: 'The Brothers Grimsby' and '10 Cloverfield Lane'
Mar 17, 2016 / 00:00 amSome weekends are weird times for new film releases. This weekend, the latest in the “Divergent” film series - “The Divergent Series: Allegiant Part I” – is the only big new movie, and I’m skipping it because I fundamentally don’t see the magic in this obvious “Hunger Games” knockoff. That said, according to the reasons given for its PG-13 rating by the ratings board, "Allegiant" is probably fun, exciting fare for teens. The movie has no foul language mentioned, and there's no sex, but a lot of midlevel action violence that never gets too bloody, but according to IMDB's usually reliable content advisory for parents, there's a quick rear nudity shot of a female as she's sprayed with decontaminant after being endangered. I'm not a particular fan of dystopian teen fiction, wishing that someone could bring back the magic style of John Hughes' best work, but the "Divergent" series that includes "Allegiant" does feature positive portrayals of teens battling dangerously oppressive governments, and that's a good message. So this week, I’m catching up on a pair of releases from last weekend – “The Brothers Grimsby” and “10 Cloverfield Lane” – which couldn’t be more different on the surface. Yet under the surface, one can find a common goal: they’re both trying to freak out their viewers. “Grimsby” is the latest movie by Sacha Baron Cohen, the British comedy star who made a huge splash in America with 2006’s “Borat” before experiencing successful yet diminishing returns with “Bruno” and “The Dictator.” His latest features Cohen as Nobby, a gross and clueless, soccer-obsessed working-class buffoon whose long-lost brother Sebastian (Mark Strong) is the British intelligence agency MI6’s top assassin. Nobby finds Sebastian after 28 years apart just as he’s about to stop a terrorist from committing a murder. But Nobby makes Sebastian shoot off-target, killing an innocent person and injuring others, leading MI6 to believe that he’s gone rogue and sending a team of assassins out to kill him. Since Nobby says he has the perfect place to hide, Sebastian goes on the run with him, and they wind up back in their comically bleak childhood hometown of Grimsby. There, he’s surrounded by Nobby’s gross girlfriend (Rebel Wilson, shameless in her pursuit of laughs) and their seemingly endless gaggle of children, as well as his own disgusting friends and family members. This leads to a string of incredibly crude yet occasionally funny misadventures as they also try to stop terrorists from launching a germ warfare attack, at the same time that they have some surprisingly sweet and serious scenes in which they pierce together the childhood tragedy that tore them apart. But be warned – if the prospect of two men evading killers by hiding inside an elephant’s birth canal (yes, you read right) before being subjected to an unwitting sexual onslaught from a string of male elephants. (again, you read right) “The Brothers Grimsby” is undeniably raunchy and at times unbelievably gross, and as such will freak out the vast majority of audiences. It’s a shame because the movie’s core central plot is inventive, and under the surface, the movie is often exciting, funny and even touching. But if you don’t believe me about it going too far, consider the fact that there’s at least one major sequence that’s even harder to describe than the elephant scene. Add in plenty of foul language and sex jokes, plus graphic nudity, running gags about drunkenness and heroin use, and a lot of non-graphic action violence, and “Brothers Grimsby” is a must-avoid for discerning viewers. Meanwhile, “10 Cloverfield Lane” is a pseudo-sequel to the 2008 surprise horror hit “Cloverfield,” for which I notoriously opened my review by saying, “Wow.” Produced by J.J. Abrams, the man with the golden touch behind hits ranging from TV’s “Lost” to the last three “Mission: Impossible” films, the “Star Trek” movie reboot and the last “Star Wars” movie, “Cloverfield” was perhaps the scariest found-footage movie ever, as it depicted a group of New York City yuppie friends on the run from a giant alien monster. The new film takes an entirely different approach, while remaining rooted in the same cinematic universe as the first. While the first “Cloverfield” starred then-unknowns, “Lane” stars Mary Elizabeth Winstead (a top indie actress marking her first starring role in a major-studio movie) and John Goodman in the story of a woman named Michelle, who flees both an attack on her city and a bad relationship, only to wake up in the underground bunker of a mysterious man named Howard. But this isn’t your typical hostage drama centering on how Michelle can escape. For one thing, a nice local guy named Emmett (John Gallagher, Jr.) is also staying there, with a broken arm from the fact he fought to get inside the bunker before it was too late to be safe outside. Yet he and certainly Michelle don’t know which of Howard’s seemingly crazy-paranoid ideas to believe: that the outside world has been affected by a nuclear bomb, chemical warfare, Russian invasion or an attack by aliens. As they try to figure out if Howard’s just crazy and what happened to a previous woman named Megan who mysteriously no longer lives there, director Dan Trachtenberg manages to weave rich performances (some critics are already calling Winstead and Goodman possible Oscar contenders) with a full spectrum of emotions in a claustrophobic setting. His subtle guidance of the tale is immeasurably assisted by the brilliant score by Bear McCreary, whose work recounts the finest moments of Alfred Hitchcock’s favorite composer, Bernard Herrmann. Tense, unpredictable, surprising and scary, “10 Cloverfield Lane” easily tops its terrific predecessor and sets a high bar for the rest of the year’s films. It also has only one F word, and almost no noticeable other foul language, no sex, and no nudity. There are a couple of brief shocking bursts of violence, but nothing teens can’t handle. In fact, teens and adults should totally love this movie. If you like scifi, thrillers, horror movies or just plain great filmmaking, see it for certain.
Christy Beam’s young daughter says she went to Heaven; now her story is new movie 'Miracles from Heaven'
Mar 16, 2016 / 00:00 amChristy Beam was just a regular wife and mother of three in the Dallas-area suburb of Burleson, Texas, when she learned that her young daughter Annabel was diagnosed with a rare and incurable digestive disorder. It seemed Annabel would never have a chance at a normal life, but on a rare day in which she was able to play outside with her sisters, she fell three stories headfirst into an old, hollowed-out tree and managed to survive without a scratch. During the five hours she was awaiting rescue, the unconscious Annabel says she visited Heaven, and while being checked in a hospital afterward, she was found to have been cured of her chronic illness. That amazing turn of events inspired Christy to write her incredible story in book form, with the intention of it just being a personally therapeutic process. But God wasn’t through with her yet, as her memoir, “Miracles from Heaven: A Little Girl and Her Amazing Story of Healing,” not only got published, but became a national best-seller. And its immensely popular reaction has now led to Christy’s story coming to the big screen today through Sony, with Jennifer Garner playing her in the new movie “Miracles from Heaven.” “Miracles” is a moving and well-made film, with Garner bringing it greater star power and critical acclaim than most recent faith-based movies. I highly recommend it as great Easter season viewing. Beam took time to discuss her remarkable journey, detailing what it’s like to have for a Southern wife and mom to find her life depicted on the big screen with Jennifer Garner playing herself. It’s been a strange and wonderful ride, but one whose impact is likely only beginning to be felt. Q: It’s kind of perfect timing, having this movie released on March 16, aka 3/16, isn’t it? Beam: Sure, but they picked it for an Easter season release because the story is such a story of hope and new life. Q: What’s it like seeing your life up on the big screen? Beam: It’s pretty crazy, the word ‘surreal’ keeps getting thrown around. I’m just in awe that our story is being shared to help people. Q: So is the movie accurate to your story? Did it do a good job in adapting your book? Beam: They did take dramatic license. The book I wrote is the chronicle of everything we’ve endured, everything poured out on the pages. The movie follows it pretty well, except for example, Annabel was really sick for 4 ½ years, but the movie makes her sick about nine months to a year so you can understand time lapses. Where they are different, the book picks up where they’re lacking, but they complement each other really well. People who love the book are going to have a really amazing movie experience. Q: Could you explain your story to those who are unfamiliar with it? Beam: Annabel was very sick, and she started getting sick at the age of 4. She had two major abdominal surgeries, she had obstructed completely and we almost lost her. They finally, after many many tests, diagnosed her with an incurable digestive disorder, pseudo-obstruction motility disorder. It’s not a disorder you ever get better from. You either get sicker or get fed by PRN nutrition, having it fed to your body bypassing your intestines. It was a very hard life, with 10 medications a day taken several times a day and sitting on the sofa in a fetal position with a heating pad on her stomach all day. We went to an expert doctor in Boston, because it was rough, really rough. Then one day she fell 30 feet within a tree on our property and was entombed in that tree for about five hours in the base of a hollowed out cottonwood tree. And when she was examined in the hospital afterwards, they said she was cured. Q: What inspired you to put your life in a book? Did you intend this to reach tons of people? Beam: It’s so amazing, but I thought the whole purpose I wrote the book was cathartic. I felt God told me to do it because I needed healing and needed all this to come out, and then put it in a well-wrapped box with a bow and forget about it. But He had so much greater a plan and brought in brilliant people who made it go above and beyond, like my literary agent, and producer Devon Franklin for the movie, and it was really all just a part of a bigger plan. Q: Was your own faith was shaken, and then strengthened, by all of this? Beam: I just had a lot of support. Kevin my husband is such a rock, and has a solid foundation in his faith. Plus I had his parents and my parents. Anytime I began to get frustrated, overwhelmed asking God where He is, they were right there to refer me back to His Word. And I had strong friends who had me read the book of Job while Annabel was going through this. God purposely surrounded me with friends and family to help me when I was struggling. They gave me the strength I needed. They were the miracle I needed to make it through that difficult time, and we encourage you to be that person for other people. Q: Is there a particular cause you’re associated with now that people can help? Beam: We’re going to go to Boston this weekend for a screening to raise funds for the Annabel Research and Care Fund for Pseudo-Obstruction Motility Disorder. We encourage people to give to that and learn about it because there’s so much to learn in order to try and cure this disorder. Q: Ultimately, what do you hope people take away from “Miracles from Heaven”? Beam: It’s such an encouragement because everybody has struggles, everybody has challenges, and if you don’t have one now, you better buckle up because you’re going to go through one. People can go through challenges with faith, or without, and I’d much rather go through a challenge with faith than without it. This is a story we hope inspires people and challenges them to keep trying, keep fighting through their own struggles because ultimately there’s a bigger purpose. “Miracles from Heaven” opens in theaters nationwide today.
From 'Stoning of Soraya M.' to 'Young Messiah' – a filmmaker's journey
Mar 11, 2016 / 11:51 amCyrus Nowrasteh has spent his entire life caught in between cultural viewpoints. Born in the U.S., his parents moved him back to their native Iran as a boy for several years, and he was drawn to visit again as a young adult.
Tina Fey pulls off serious role in 'Whiskey Tango Foxtrot'
Mar 4, 2016 / 00:00 amSooner or later, it seems that nearly every major comedic talent wants to show at least one opportunity to show their serious side. Sometimes it’s painful to watch, but in the surprisingly great new movie “Whiskey Tango Foxtrot,” Tina Fey totally pulls it off. Based on the memoir “The Taliban Shuffle: Strange Days in Afghanistan and Pakistan” by Kim Barker, the movie follows Fey as the somewhat fictionalized Kim Baker, a woman who’s hit middle age lacking children and a truly special relationship. Baker’s a news writer for a major unnamed cable news network (think CNN), but bored out of her mind and depressed with her life. Her boss assembles single staffers at the network to beg them to head to Kabul, Afghanistan as reporters since they’re hoping to avoid shaking up the lives of married people and parents. Baker jumps at the chance to shake up her life and see what she’s really about, and soon she’s landed in Kabul, where she’s assigned an interpreter named Fahim (Christopher Abbott) and a bodyguard named Nick (Stephen Peacocke). Fey is at first embedded amid a Marine base headed by General Hollanek (Billy Bob Thornton), who tolerates her but thinks that she’s trying to showboat as a woman in the horribly anti-female society of Afghanistan. He fears that her presence could result in an accidental tragedy by distracting the focus of his forces, as well as inspire violent reprisal from the local males and Taliban figures she encounters. Baker also has to contend with Ali Massoud Saddiq (Alfred Molina), who’s running for election as the country’s attorney general and keeps making unwanted passes at Baker whenever she asks him for access to the Taliban leaders who have taken control of much of the nation. The final piece in the puzzle of her life in the wartorn country is Scottish photojournalist Iain MacKelpie (Martin Freeman), who has an obvious crush on her even as she’s dealing with her disgruntled New York-based boyfriend Chris (Josh Charles). Directors Glenn Ficarra and John Requa (“Bad Santa,” “Crazy Stupid Love”) spin all these characters and plotlines perfectly, bringing the ace script by Robert Carlock (Fey’s prime writing partner on her classic NBC sitcom “30 Rock”) to life with a precise mix of humor, drama and surprisingly effective action moments. Their efforts create a potent combination that makes for an insightful, compelling and nonstop entertaining ride. “Whiskey” also offers a look at both the intriguing little details of daily life for an American in Afghanistan, and shocking glimpses of just how insanely hateful and backwards Islamic extremists like the Taliban are. Particularly effective is a riveting sequence in which Baker has to don a full-length blue burqa (dubbed “the blue prison” by Fahim) and enters the heart of Kandahar, the most terrifying province in the country for women. The true brilliance of “Whiskey” lies in its ability to boldly shine a spotlight on the evil side of radical Islam while also finding numerous subtle ways to convey the deep concern that Farhim has for Baker. Carlock’s script manages to do both while not once stooping to using heavy-handed speechifying, and also creates an unpredictability throughout that effectively conveys the feeling of what it’s like to never know when a bomb will hit or a bullet will come flying at you or those you care about. And for anyone worrying by now if this Tina Fey movie remembers to be funny, rest assured that “Whiskey” is shot through with a sharply ironic and pitch-black sense of humor. This is an impressive piece of work, built around a vibrant performance that is not afraid to show Kim as a flawed personality who drinks too much, isn’t shy around a hookah and who shirks off the guilt of a one-night stand with arch sarcasm. On a philosophical level, the movie is refreshingly free from the usual Hollywood attitude attacking the military. While it does have a couple of moments conveying the frustration of soldiers or even the general about how long the war is dragging out, it unfailingly shows both Hollanek and his troops as good-hearted people who truly want to do good for others – an attitude that pays off strongly in the film’s most harrowing and affecting sequence. Morally, “Whiskey” is a bit of a conundrum to consider. On the one hand, it has very frequent foul language throughout, so if one is prone to taking great offense at that, be forewarned. On the other hand, this is a realistic portrait of life in a dangerous, frustrating situation, and this is how many people would really talk in such a world. The journalists who make a long term living at being embedded in Afghanistan are shown to be a hard-drinking lot, with Baker shown having severe hangovers at least twice. She also is shown smoking a hookah, implying that she’s getting high, in one of three party scenes that feature rampant drunkenness among the reporters. The reporters also talk about being promiscuous, and Baker eventually engages in an affair herself – though they are shown roughly starting to undress, there is no nudity. However, there is mildly graphic talk about their sex together and she has a very casual attitude towards the relationship for a long while. Violence-wise, the movie only has a couple of quick battle scenes, but one winds up with a tragically bloody ending that is definitely squirm-inducing albeit tastefully short. But even with all these aspects, I truly believe that most adults can handle this movie, and that it is a fascinating and worthy consideration of the costs of war, the sacrifices made by our military and the reporters who are also endangered on the front lines. “Whiskey Tango Foxtrot” (military code slang for “WTF,” a reflection of Baker’s constant surprise) is above all, thoroughly human. It is unafraid to show life on the other side of the world, in a seemingly inscrutable society, as neither good nor bad, happy nor sad, downright evil or sanctimoniously perfect. In other words, it sets a very high bar as a film that is very likely going to land on my list as one of the top films of 2016.
'Risen' is proof that great Christian films are still being made today
Feb 22, 2016 / 00:00 amNumerous movies have portrayed the story of Jesus over the decades, ranging from the family-friendly “The Greatest Story Ever Told” on through the horrifically detailed and strictly for adults depiction found in Mel Gibson’s “The Passion of the Christ.” Yet somehow, the new movie “Risen” has found a uniquely compelling and fully relatable way to share the Gospel with present-day viewers by showing it through the eyes of a Roman tribune who undergoes the spiritual transformation from non-believer to believer. The movie follows the Roman tribune Clavius (Joseph Fiennes), a man whose job is to oversee the crucifixions of men deemed enemies of the Roman Empire. Reporting directly to the infamous Pontius Pilate, he receives orders to make especially certain that Jesus – seen as an instigator of massive anti-Empire sentiment among citizens – is unequivocally killed and hidden away so that his disciples can’t steal His corpse and claim that He came back from the dead as promised. Pilate’s fear is that if Jesus’ followers learn He is gone and believe He resurrected, then their rebellion will become impossible to manage. When Jesus’ body indeed disappears from His tomb on the third day, Pilate and Jewish leaders who despised Jesus for drawing followers away team up to order Clavius to find Mary Magdalene and demand answers on who stole Jesus’ corpse and where they have hidden it. But just as he’s ready to confront her, Clavius is stunned to find nothing is as he expected. All the while, Roman centurions are also on the trail of both himself and Jesus, as Pilate assumes that Clavius has abandoned his mission. The result is a unique tale of historical fiction, as Clavius is not a Biblical figure yet is the kind of man who very likely existed quite commonly as word of Jesus’ resurrection spread throughout His 40 remaining days on earth before the Ascension, and beyond. What’s refreshing about “Risen” is that, unlike many Christian-themed films forced to contend with low budgets, it is an extremely well-made film with rich cinematography, solid direction and great production design that appears to have solid backing behind it. Fiennes’ performance in the lead role is quite powerful, as he plays a man who is haunted by having to supervise horrific deaths on a daily basis and has come to hate every aspect of his job. As he transforms through his journey, the story becomes extremely touching and inspirational. What’s most remarkable about “Risen,” however, is its first half hour, in which we see Clavius’ life under Pilate and thus experience the horror of crucifixion and Christ’s suffering in a new way, through the eyes of an oppressor who feels genuine guilt for harming Him. Unlike Gibson’s brutal, almost unbearable take on the Passion, co-writer/director Kevin Reynolds (“Waterworld”) manages to convey the horror on a primal level through implication and the reactions of those who both wailed in despair at Christ’s suffering and death, and even more so, through those who mocked Him at His apparent final moments of life. To say more would rob viewers of the impact this movie has, especially at this season of Lent. While the movie has occasional slow patches, it is well worth seeing overall and worthy of monetary endorsement for Hollywood – and in particular, Sony Pictures, which has made the best of the big Christian films in the past few years – to keep producing more.
My Oscars predictions
Feb 19, 2016 / 00:00 amThere is perhaps no other awards show on earth that captures people’s interest like the Oscars. For the past 88 years, the ceremony has built a mythical presence on the world stage thanks to its ability to draw seemingly every star on the planet into one theatre and reward them for bringing magic to life on the big screen. As a professional movie critic, I see over 150 movies a year. The following are the nominees in the top five categories this year, and who I’m predicting should and will win the awards and which ones are worth seeing. BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS Nominees: Jennifer Jason Leigh (“The Hateful Eight”), Rooney Mara (“Carol”), Rachel McAdams (“Spotlight”), Alicia Vikander (“The Danish Girl”), Kate Winslet (“Steve Jobs”) The Breakdown: “The Hateful Eight” was too violently ugly and paled in comparison to fellow Western “The Revenant,” so count Leigh out. Mara drew a lot of hype for the lesbian drama “Carol,” but the movie really belonged to costar Cate Blanchett. Rachel McAdams was really part of a superbly woven ensemble rather than a flashy role. Winslet was great in a movie few really liked. Vikander showed range with a second great role in “Ex Machina” last year, and has the Politically Correct vote as the supportive wife of the world’s first transgender man. Worth Seeing: "Spotlight" (though this is tough but fair exploration of the Catholic Church's priest-abuse cases), "Steve Jobs" (though it's on DVD soon, and a highly cold and intellectual take on the guy, not exactly romantic). Not Worth Seeing: "Carol" is cold, slow and is about a manipulative closeted lesbian woman who abandons her child when her husband gives her an ultimatum, not to mention cheating on him and making a fool out of him and then manipulating her female lovers; "The Danish Girl" features a true but bizarre marriage between the world's first transgender man to have the transfomational surgery and his way too supportive wife; "The Hateful Eight" is indeed hateful, profane, bloody and often unpleasant, not to mention second-rate compared to much of Tarantino's work. Should Win: Kate Winslet Will Win: Alicia Vikander BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR Nominees: Christian Bale (“The Big Short”), Tom Hardy (“The Revenant”), Mark Ruffalo (“Spotlight”), Mark Rylance (“Bridge of Spies”), Sylvester Stallone (“Creed”) The Breakdown: There’s no point in even analyzing this category, as Stallone recovered from a career filled with mediocre action flicks and bad choices to portray one of film history’s most beloved figures – Rocky Balboa – again. The fact that the Academy can finally correct the oversight of leaving him without a statue for the first “Rocky” in 1976 and honor one of the nicest guys in the business for his strongest turn ever in the role makes this a slam dunk. Worth Seeing: "The Big Short" uses comedy a lot to explain the 2008 financial meltdown, but is still too complex at times to be enjoyable, and features a lot of foul language and a couple of brief strip club scenes though mostly played for laughs over prurience, but some will enjoy it; "The Revenant" is a powerful tale of a father trying to care for his son and then avenge his son's death and his own near-death amid incredibly harsh circumstances including a bear attack, but is compelling and extremely well-made; and "Spotlight" are evaluated above; "Bridge of Spies" is a fine spy thriller set in WWII; and "Creed" is the best of them all, a rousing new tale about Rocky Balboa as an older man passing on his wisdom while battling cancer. Should Win: Sylvester Stallone Will Win: Sylvester Stallone ACTRESS IN A LEADING ROLE Nominees: Cate Blanchett (“Carol”),.Brie Larson (“Room”), Jennifer Lawrence (“Joy”), Charlotte Rampling (“45 Years”), Saiorse Ronan (“Brooklyn”) The Breakdown: Blanchett has won before and played a cold, calculating and unlikable woman. Larson came out of nowhere to blow critics away with her powerful portrayal of a mother who has to raise her young son under harrowing circumstances and decide to risk their lives to escape. Lawrence was great, but “Joy” didn’t connect with audiences as much as her last two nominated films, “Silver Linings Playbook” and “American Hustle,” did. Rampling’s portrayal of a long-suffering wife whose marriage falls apart after decades was so little-seen it’s lucky to be nominated. Ronan is absolutely superb in a wonderfully pro-Catholic period romance, but as a 20-year-old she’ll have plenty of other chances ahead. Worth Seeing: "Room" is somewhat disturbing in its first half, but is still a remarkable story of a mother's love for her child in difficult circumstances and winds up with a powerfully uplifting second half, my favorite movie out of all Oscar nominees this year; "Joy" is enjoyable but drags in places, though it's almost totally clean and has an uplifting true story of a woman who stood by her family through much hardship; "Brooklyn" is not only a beautiful and moving romance, but the most positive portrayal of Catholics in ages. Not Worth Seeing: "Carol" (See above). Should Win: Brie Larson Will Win: Brie Larson ACTOR IN A LEADING ROLE Nominees: Bryan Cranston (“Trumbo”), Matt Damon (“The Martian”), Leonardo DiCaprio (“The Revenant”), Michael Fassbender (“Steve Jobs”), Eddie Redmayne (“The Danish Girl”) The Breakdown: Cranston won numerous Emmys for “Breaking Bad” and will have to settle for a nomination here since he’s seen mainly as a TV actor. Damon was fantastic in a role that was almost a solo showcase with a wealth of emotions involved. DiCaprio has been trying for over 20 years to win an Oscar with six nominations, and was subjected to everything from a fake yet brutal bear attack, vicious weather conditions and really bad facial hair here. Fassbender, like Winslet, does a superb job in a vastly underseen movie and played an unlikable man to boot. Redmayne just won last year for “The Theory of Everything” and was clearly nominated not for range here –which he barely showed – but for the Politically Correct reason of portraying the world’s first transgender man in a movie that was heavily hyped yet still flopped badly. Worth Seeing: "Trumbo" features Cranston in a fun, flashy take on 1950s screenwriter Dalton Trumbo battling the Communist blacklist, and has a strong message of forgiveness; "The Martian" is a superb film with many great layers to it and has a positive sense of faith in God; "The Revenant" (see above)' "Steve Jobs" (see above) Not Worth Seeing: "The Danish Girl" (see above). Should Win: Leonardo DiCaprio Will Win: Leonardo DiCaprio BEST PICTURE Nominees: “The Big Short,” “Bridge of Spies,” “Brooklyn,” “Mad Max:Fury Road,” “The Martian,” “The Revenant,” “Room,” “Spotlight” The Breakdown: The Academy has only itself to blame for the controversy over lack of diversity, since it is allowed 10 Best Picture nominations yet inexplicably stopped at eight when the African American-centered films “Creed” and “Straight Outta Compton” easily could and should have been nominated. “The Big Short” scored points for managing to explain the 2008 financial crisis to laymen with humor and urgency, and it’s considered one of three viable winners together with “The Revenant” and “Spotlight,” but it still left me emotionally cold and somewhat confused by its arcane subject matter. “The Revenant” was an incredible epic shot rapidly against very difficult weather and geographical circumstances, but its director just won Best Picture last year and no director has won Best Picture two years in a row since the 1930s. “Spotlight” handled the Catholic Church’s priest abuse cases with remarkable fairness, and seems to have the right combination of acting, writing and direction to take the top prize. “Bridge of Spies” didn’t register strongly with the public, and “Mad Max” will win a slew of technical awards for its look and sound but was too ugly in its subject matter to win here. “The Martian,” is terrific and smart entertainment, but is hurt by its lack of having won major Golden Globes and other second-tier awards means it’ll have to be an also-ran here. “Room” was my favorite movie of this bunch, thanks to an amazing story that makes viewers feel terribly claustrophobic as they watch the young mother and her son attempt to live life in a tiny space, then leaves jaws dropped and pulses racing with a thrilling escape sequence before winding up as a powerful tale of emotional adjustment to the difficulties of the outside world. It is the least-seen of all these films and deserves much better, so please check it out. WORTH SEEING: "The Big Short" (See above), "Bridge of Spies" (See above), "The Revenant" (See above), "Spotlight" (see above), "The Martian" (see above), "Room" (See above), "Brooklyn" (See above). NOT WORTH SEEING: "Mad Max: Fury Road" was liked by many, but I never understood the hype, as it's an overly violent, grim, unpleasant nonstop chase by ugly people in ugly surroundings who will do ugly things to stay alive. SHOULD WIN: “Room” WILL WIN: “Spotlight” Photo credit: www.shutterstock.com
'Zoolander 2' settles for being cruder and louder
Feb 12, 2016 / 00:00 amSome movies come along at just the right time. Others run into bad luck because of when they’re released. “Zoolander” was one of the rare movies that had the blessing and the curse of being both. Released on September 28, 2001, Ben Stiller’s hilarious satire of the male-modeling industry came out just 17 days after the devastating attacks of 9/11. Of course, Paramount Pictures could never have expected that the nation’s worst terror attack would have come so soon before the release, but they took the gutsy move of hoping the nation would need to laugh and stuck to their release date while other movies rescheduled their release dates until months later. And so, many might forget, but the original “Zoolander” was initially a polarizing film. While some critics loved it, Roger Ebert only gave it one star and ripped it for its plot involving the assassination of the Malaysian President, saying that it was just a prime sign of why the Muslim world hates the US. The movie topped out earning just over $40 million, a mediocre figure that seemed to indicate that this was a movie destined to be largely forgotten. But video and cable turned it into a richly deserved cult hit, and talk arose of a sequel. Inexplicably, it’s taken over 14 years to get one made, but this weekend “Zoolander 2” finally arrives. Unfortunately, it suffers from the same kind of problem as countless other sequels that disappointed ala “Ghostbusters 2”: since it can’t be fresh anymore, it settles for being bigger and louder. The movie opens with an elaborate action scene in which a hooded figure is chased through the streets of Rome by a hitman on a motorcycle. It’s revealed that the man in the hoodie is Justin Bieber (hilarious choice), and the audience broke into some mild applause as he proceeded to get shot about 50 times and then drop dead after taking a last perfect selfie. An Interpol agent (Penelope Cruz) is informed of the killing immediately, since Bieber is just the latest in the string of vacuous celebrities including Usher who have all been shot down as well before dying with the same perfect facial pose. Only one man can interpret what the selfies mean: Derek Zoolander. But as a fast-paced montage shows, Zoolander has become a recluse in “extreme northern New Jersey” after his Center for Kids Who Can’t Read Good collapsed, killing his wife and scarring his fellow model Hansel (Owen Wilson) irreparably. Hansel is hiding with a commune in the African desert, engaging in a non-stop orgy that inexplicably includes Kiefer Sutherland as part of the community. The Interpol agent tricks both into coming to Rome for a fashion show, and Derek agrees to come out of retirement only because doing some work will help him regain the son that authorities took away from him due to his parental incompetence. But it turns out that the fashion show is an elaborate scam to get Derek and Hansel to team up again and stop the evil fashion designer Mugatu (Will Ferrell) from a new evil scheme. I’ll leave the plot description there, because much of the rest of the film just gets more and more convoluted, rather than simply being funny. I really wanted this to work, because in my opinion Ben Stiller had an amazing run as very funny yet highly relatable comic everyman who put inventive twists into a lot of his work before wasting his talents the past five years with lame sequels to “Meet the Parents” and “Night at the Museum.” Unfortunately, he instead adds this one to that string. It seems that Stiller is trying so hard to prove he hasn’t lost his edge after making the family-friendly films that he has invested more effort in having dozens of cameos than in writing dozens of great jokes. And it’s really sad to see Wilson return to a role that could restore his own severely weakened box –office luster and wind up with material that doesn’t give him much to do after a couple of hilarious initial scenes. The biggest problem here is that the “Zoolander” films are part of a rare breed of comedies where one really has to judge it based on how offended one might get, as well as by the artistic quality of the movie – and there is a lot here to be discerning about. Implied but unshown bisexuality, homosexual verbal advances, even implied orgies and a quick gag implying bestiality are all at least passing aspects of this movie, though the tone is so clearly absurd it is nearly impossible to take it seriously. While this is definitely not for kids, its intended audience of older teens and young adults can likely understand that this is ridiculous and not face lasting damage. Older audiences would likely be more offended, but then they are also more likely to realize the movie is mostly downright stupid. It’s not that “Zoolander 2” is the worst sequel you’ve ever seen, or will make you hate your life for the two hours you’re watching it. But just as you wouldn’t reward a petulant child for its bad behavior, you shouldn’t reward this movie with your attendance.
'Hail, Caesar!': Look beyond the flash and you might find a real story about faith
Feb 5, 2016 / 00:00 amOver the course of nearly 20 films, Joel and Ethan Coen have veered between low-key movies like “Blood Simple” and “Fargo,” and wildly inventive movies on a grand scale such as “The Big Lebowski” and “The Hudsucker Proxy.” Their newest opus, “Hail, Caesar!” marks yet another stylistic 180 degree turn from their prior release, the 2013 slice-of-life story “Inside Llewyn Davis.” While that film followed a Dylanesque folk singer as he aimlessly drifted through Greenwich Village coffeehouses and meaningless affairs in 1961, “Caesar!” is about a Hollywood studio “enforcer” named Mannix (Josh Brolin) who has to find out what happened to one of the biggest stars in movies after he disappears from his latest set. That star, Baird Whitlock (George Clooney), is a preening womanizer who often ends up drunk on set – so when he’s first noticed missing from the set of a biblical epic called “Hail, Caesar!” in which he plays a Roman soldier who becomes a devout believer in Jesus Christ, no one even considers that he’s actually been kidnapped. Yet indeed he has, and Whitlock winds up waking up in an oceanfront Malibu home, detained by a group of blacklisted screenwriters who are holding him for ransom but are of course dividing that $100,000 request equally, like good Communists should. At first, Whitlock is shocked, but the more time he spends with his captors, the more he finds himself embracing their ideas, in humorous fashion. Now, if “Hail, Caesar!” were just about those key elements, It would be enough plot for most normal filmmakers. But the Coens, who co-write and co-direct all their movies, are not average filmmakers. And their wild ambition is what trips them up here, as the film also follows the story of a cowboy superstar (Alden Ehrenreich, who nearly steals the show) whom the studio chief tries to turn into a romantic lead, to disastrous effect; a dance-movie starlet (Scarlett Johannson) who gets pregnant and has to find a husband quickly to avoid getting her loose living splashed across the dueling columns of twin gossip mavens; and Mannix’s own decision whether to keep his studio job or settle into the higher-paying status of an airplane manufacturing executive. Throw in an original Gene Kelly-worthy song and dance number led by Channing Tatum, plus a full song from a Busby Berkeley-style musical, and a humorous yet impressive stunt sequence from a Western, and it might sound like “Hail, Ceasar!” has pulled out all the stops to be the most ingenious entertainment of our time. But beneath the nonstop razzmatazz lies the most telling truth of all: that there’s simply too much being offered here, like an overstuffed Thanksgiving turkey that ultimately makes everyone who tastes it say, “Enough already!” That is not to say that “Hail, Caesar!” is a disaster. Many of these scenes are entertaining or even awe-inspiring on their own, but it’s simply in putting them all together that the film becomes exhausting and starts to come apart at the seams. The other main aspect of the movie that is hard to define is its attitude towards faith and religion. Several times in the movie – including the movie’s funniest scene, a battle royale of wits between a Catholic priest, a Jewish rabbi, a Protestant minister and a Greek Orthodox priest over how accurate the script of “Hail, Caesar!” is in describing the life of Christ – the script seems to be having good-natured fun with these topics and the divisions that have formed among mankind over the concept of a Messiah. The movie is also clearly having a laugh at the overheated acting style found in many old-time Biblical epics, with Clooney delivering a climactic speech about the powerful impact of Christ in almost ridiculously over-the-top fashion. Most questionable of all is a throwaway gag in which the actor portraying Christ on the cross isn’t seen except for his feet, while a crew member takes his lunch order and they quibble over whether he qualifies for a hot or cold lunch while the actor is clearly implied to be hanging on the cross. But then, just as it appears to be crossing into sacrilege, the Coens pull the curtain back on Mannix’s life and reveal a man who is overly concerned with the state of his soul but is also undoubtedly sincere and treated with respect for it by the filmmakers. He may go to Confession so often that his priest begs him to give it a rest, but in moments of struggle, he also quietly prays the Rosary or walks across the studio lot in the dead of night to find answers and solace from God at the foot of the three crosses standing together on the set. Basically, if you can have a few laughs at the expense of some of the most complex aspects of our Catholic faith, “Hail, Caesar!” may prove to be a surprisingly touching meditation under all the surface flash. But if you can’t stand any form of religious humor, steer clear. I think personally that the Coens’ portrayal of Mannix is a highly positive one and the movie stays on the right side of the line of taste. Ultimately, Mannix’s struggle over whether to continue working in the movies or find a more traditional career seems to be a metaphor for a struggle that the Coens themselves may have gone through. The fact that they have found a way to bring deep personal resonance to a movie that is also occasionally mess in its eagerness to please makes it somewhat more endearing, even if it’s not always satisfying.
'The Finest Hours' and 'Dirty Grandpa': Do yourself a favor and skip the movies this weekend
Jan 29, 2016 / 00:00 amThere are many ways to make a bad movie. This week, I’ve decided to give a spanking to two movies that are vastly different yet are equally painful viewing experiences. First, the newest movie of the two is “The Finest Hours,” which tells the story of the most daring small-boat rescue in the US Coast Guard’s history – that of the oil tanker Pendleton off the coast of New England in 1952. Starring Chris Pine as a square-jawed, by-the-book Guardsman named Bernie Webber who is put in charge of taking a crew out across five miles of ocean in a treacherous storm to save the Pendleton, the movie should be a riveting good time. Unfortunately, it is incredibly slow and boring from its opening moments, when the movie inexplicably starts with Webber meeting a beautiful woman named Miriam (Holliday Grainger) after having spoken to her on the phone for a month. We see him stumble his way through the date, though she is smitten and very forward for a “good girl” of that era. Within a couple scenes, they are fully in love and she’s asked him to marry her. But before he can even tell his superior officer about his engagement, a blizzard hits, bringing to mind painful memories of a failed rescue the year before in which a friend of Webber’s died despite his best efforts. But he mans up and takes the challenge anyway when word comes in that the Pendleton is in danger of sinking, and his efforts to overcome his own fear and the wilds of the windswept ocean parallel the efforts of a crew leader on the Pendleton named Ray Sybert (Casey Affleck) as he tries every imaginable means to keep ship afloat and his men alive until help can come. Sounds exciting, but somehow director Craig Gillespie and writers Scott Silver, Paul Tamasy and Eric Johnson surround a few cool disaster-action sequences with endless segments of sheer boredom. Whether plodding through the developing romance of Bernie and Miriam in the first 15 minutes, or closing with an interminably long sequence in which the rescue boat floats around waiting for a sign of light to guide them to shore in the darkness, “The Finest Hours” instead feels like the longest hours of your life. The guys all pray – a LOT – which is commendable, but when most of it is mumbled, there is literally nothing to get hooked by. Parents, don’t be fooled by the fact that “Hours” is released by Disney. While a life-and-death disaster movie may seem like a fresh move from that studio and you may be inclined to take the kids, trust me: no kid is going to like this boring, slow-as-molasses film. Neither will you. Editor's note: Warning, the next review of "Dirty Grandpa" describes graphic and morally offensive content. Meanwhile, “Dirty Grandpa” is an utterly vile and unfunny attempt at comedy in which a young lawyer is tricked by his grandpa to drive him from New York to Florida after his grandmother dies, only to find that his grandpa wanted to really stop in Spring Break in Daytona Beach to have sex with college girls. The movie follows Jason (Zac Efron), a driven and ambitious young lawyer who is about to get married to a stunning woman in a week. When his grandma dies, her husband, his grandpa (Robert De Niro) reappears at her funeral and he is tricked into driving his grandpa down to Sprint Break in Florida so the grandpa can have sex with a new woman after 40 years of monogamy and 15 years without any sex at all. This crass notion already is offensive, but it’s just the tip of the iceberg for the movie, which sinks all the way down to a scene in which a very young boy sees a naked and hungover Jason on a beach before the two appear to be engaging in pedophilia. The fact that it is a misunderstanding by the boy’s parent is supposed to be funny. It, of course, is not. And that scene follows one in which Jason learns he’s been tricked into smoking crack by a lovable drug dealer, and then is cheered on by the crowd at a party as if smoking crack is a great thing to do. Along the way, Grandpa speaks racial, sexist, misogynistic and anti-homosexual “joke” insults at other characters, only to suddenly do the right thing towards the end by scolding and beating up a gang of straight black men trying to injure and insult another homosexual black man. This lapse of logic is confounding, as Grandpa literally mocks the homosexual man a minute or two before saving his life. We also are treated to seeing DeNiro caught by Efron while masturbating to porn, and to the gross sexual banter between the grandpa and a college girl who inexplicably can’t wait to have sex with him. The movie represents an embarrassing career low for the legendary actor De Niro, while possibly ending Efron’s career in its early stage. God willing, “Dirty Grandpa” is the worst movie of the year.
Another teen dystopian film: 'The 5th Wave'
Jan 22, 2016 / 00:00 amEver since “The Hunger Games” exploded at the box office in 2012, teen movies set in dystopias – the fancy word for messed-up future societies – have been flooding our cineplexes. There have been four “Hunger Games” movies, two in the “Divergent” series (with one to go), two “Scorch Trials” (also with a third on the way) and now, the latest attempt at a series has arrived, as “The 5th Wave” opens this weekend. These movies all share a bleak view of America’s future, while also serving up teen heroes who are the only people who can lead the way to saving society. Since they empower teens and make them heroic, it’s no wonder kids are supporting these films strongly. But as a child of the ‘80s who grew up on the much sunnier and optimistic films of John Hughes, I really wish that today’s teens would lighten up and watch something fun and positive instead. “Wave” follows a teen girl in Ohio named Cassie (Chloe Grace Moretz), who is seen carrying a gun in the opening moments to protect herself amid a largely abandoned and devastated world. She feels forced to shoot a man dead in self-defense, only to find he was innocent. Thus sets off the beginning of a thriller aimed at teens which feels even more intense than the “Hunger” or “Divergent” series at times, because “The 5th Wave” largely takes place in a recognizable present day gone terribly wrong. Via narration, Cassie describes her normal, happy life, which is disrupted suddenly when a giant alien spaceship appears in the earth’s atmosphere and winds up stopping over her hometown. After several days of mysterious peace, the aliens – tagged as “The Others” by humans – unleash a series of devastating attacks on humanity in unusual ways: wiping out electricity, running water and much of modern life’s amenities with an electromagnetic pulse, unleashing floods around the world and making birds all over the world attack and infect humans with bird flu. Just as Cassie, her father and younger brother think they’re safe in a refugee camp, several tanks and school buses show up to take children away to supposed safety from an “imminent attack” by The Others. Then, the kids’ parents are told that The Others are blending in with humanity and there’s no way to know which adults are humans and which are in fact aliens now. After a horrible melee erupts between a protesting parent and the military figures, a huge gunfight breaks out that is largely unseen but leaves Cassie’s dad (Ron Livingston) dead. When she gets separated from her little brother in the commotion, she sets off on foot with a gun her dad gave her to make it to the military base her brother is kept at with the other kids. Along the way, Cassie encounters is shot and winds up saved by a man named Evan (Alex Roe), who tells her more than she realized about what’s really going on with the military and the kids. Thus begins a big final quest to save kids and the remaining humanity. “The 5th Wave” is extremely well-shot and well-acted, particularly by Moretz, one of Hollywood’s most intriguing young actresses. The pacing is terrific, and through much of the movie, director J Blakeson creates an incredible level of tension. Its setup puts viewers right at the start of the problem that devastates humanity rather than explaining history as an afterthought, and that brings a greater level of fear and tension to the movie. In fact, despite the fact the movie has little foul language, keeps most of its violence non-graphic and implies rather than shows a sex scene, the intensity of its action is so strong, and its plot is so dark, that it almost makes this only appropriate for adults despite its PG-13 rating and teen target audience. Unfortunately, some of the CGI effects are obviously fake, especially in the wave scenes, and its last third drags on forever while also revealing an offensive yet ludicrous final plot twist: (SPOILER ALERT) The aliens have taken on human form, and taken over the Army, and want to train human kids as soldiers to kill off what remains of humanity. (END SPOILER.) “The 5th Wave” is clearly trying to be an allegory for Nazism and fascism and how these things occur, using the brainwashing of children as the example. It also occasionally slips in PC elements by talking about how humans wiped out other species on the planet, so it’s only fitting that the aliens now want to wipe out humanity while preserving as much of the planet’s resources as possible for the aliens’ exploitation. Thus, ultimately, while this is an effective thriller for much of its running time, the disappointing ending is a letdown and the level of fear makes this only appropriate for mature older teens and adults.
Ice Cube and Kevin Hart rekindle comic chemistry in 'Ride Along 2'
Jan 15, 2016 / 00:00 am“RIDE ALONG 2” January usually is the deadliest month of the year for new movies, as studios focus on raking in extra cash and awards for their prestige pictures from the previous year. But over the last few years, there have been a few surprise hits at the top of the year, such as “Taken” and a couple of films starring super-hot comic Kevin Hart: “The Wedding Ringer” and “Ride Along.” “Ringer” had some truly funny moments and a lot of charm, but “Ride Along” was about as clichéd as a buddy cop comedy can be. But its stars Ice Cube and Hart had just enough chemistry and charisma to draw some laughs, and the mediocre movie managed to rake in nearly $135 million. So, cue up the inevitable sequel, which comes out Friday and which I dreaded would be even more utterly predictable than the first. But I’m glad to report the new edition is vastly better than the first. The movie reteams hard-charging veteran police detective James (Cube) with his sister’s fiancé Ben (Hart), who was a security guard at the start of the first movie before saving the day and becoming a cop. The new movie takes place after Ben graduates from the police academy and is a rookie cop shadowing James on an undercover drug-sting operation to find the killer of Atlanta’s port commissioner. Ben’s over-enthusiasm for action once again blows the operation. The cops not only lose $100,000 in money designated for use in a drug deal sting, but also lose track of a computer hacker named AJ (Ken Jeong), who works for a respected businessman named Antonio Pope (Benjamin Bratt) but flees to Miami after transferring large amounts of money from Pope’s bank accounts to his own. AJ had also heard Pope give the order to have a hitman shoot the port commissioner dead, so he is in double danger of being killed by the crime lord and his minions. The key to bringing Pope down for the murder and his smuggling plans is to find the decryption key for Pope’s records, but they are on his personal laptop deep within his mansion. The cops team up with AJ and a hard-charging female cop (Olivia Munn) to engage in a series of wild chases and disguises to find what they need. Indeed, it’s a simple plot and has by-the-numbers twists that anyone familiar with the police comedy genre can see coming. Yet “Ride Along 2” works much better than anticipated, and the reason for that is the ace comic chemistry between its stars, Ice Cube and Kevin Hart. They receive criticism from some African-Americans for being silly rather than serious movie heroes, but the humor has almost nothing to do with their race or anyone else’s. The interplay between them merely carries on the classic comedy tradition of Abbott and Costello and Dean Martin and Jerry Lewis, and it is frankly refreshing to see such good-natured comedy from African-American performers, when so much of that comedy scene is often reliant on coarse language and humor to succeed. In addition, the characters of James and Ben are positive role models despite their bending the rules; they always are determined to stop criminals, they are solidly middle-class, and one is about to get married and the other is shy, rather than womanizing as so many movie cops are. Director Tim Story handles the action in bracing fashion, with a particularly funny foot chase and a spectacular car chase that writers Phil Hay and Matt Manfredi put a clever spin on. After Ben has been criticized for his obsession with fast-driving video games, he finally gets the chance to drive while pursued by criminals, and winds up being an incredible stunt driver because he applies the tricks he learned in the games. “Ride Along 2” has a minimum of foul language compared to most other movies in the action-comedy genre, with about 30 relatively mild uses of foul language (about 10-15 S words, 5-10 a-holes and 3-5 GDs, but no F words. The naughtier aspects are relatively quick onscreen and imply rather than show sex, as there are a couple of split-second lustful shots of women in bikinis, a quick scene in which a computer hacker has a video chat with a woman spotlighting her cleavage, and a scene in which the engaged cop is approached by his fiancé dressed as a naughty cop (with bra and panties showing). In the overall scope of the movie, these are not moments that will likely wind up being dwelled upon. It's acceptable viewing for all but the most uptight adults, and most teens should be able to handle it as well. As funny as Hart is, the real MVP here is Cube, who has quietly become one of the most reliable box-office draws today. With franchises in not only the “Ride Along” movies, but also “Friday”, “Are We There Yet?” and the “Barbershop” and “21 Jump Street” series, he’s clearly got his pulse on viewers who just want to have a mindless good time at the theater. Here’s hoping he keeps being one star who delivers exactly what the fans want. If so, he’s got a long ride still ahead of him.
My Favorite Films of 2015
Jan 8, 2016 / 00:00 amWith 2015 finally past us, it’s time to present my Top 10. Rather than picking the most pretentious movies possible like most critics, I try to pick the ten movies that I thought were the most entertaining and engrossing. 1. “The Walk.” Director Robert Zemeckis’ breathtaking depiction of Phillippe Petit’s death-defying high-wire walk between the World Trade Center towers was not only the most astounding movie of the year, but also the most sadly overlooked. The use of 3D IMAX technology as Joseph Gordon-Levitt reenacted the dizzying walk made viewers feel they were right there with him, and combined with ace acting and a fantastic heist-style story structure, this was a movie that enthralled me from beginning to end. Rated PG, this is a wildly fun film for the whole family to enjoy. 2. “Room.” While “The Walk” took viewers on a soaring journey at the top of New York City, “Room” offered equally gasp-inducing moments of tension and uplift from a far more intimate setting. Brie Larson deserves to walk away with the Oscar this year for her performance as a young woman who was kidnapped and impregnated by her captor as a teen, then held with her son in a storage shed for years. When she decides enough is enough and she sends the boy out on their one chance to escape, the resulting sequence has the most harrowing moments I’ve ever seen. The second half brings a different kind of power, as mother and son have to adjust to life in a normal world again. “Room” will make you thankful for every little blessing you have. Rated R largely for its disturbing first half, but the captor’s sexual abuse of the mother is always implied offscreen, the foul language is rather minimal, and the second half’s message is so inspiring that I highly recommend it for adults who think they can handle the subject matter. 3. “Our Brand Is Crisis.” Sandra Bullock plays a campaign strategist who will literally stop at nothing to help her candidate win. After years of retirement due to burnout, she is lured to help a populist candidate in South America, only to find her former archrival Billy Bob Thornton is also on the scene running her opponent’s campaign. The battle of wits and wills that ensues is unpredictable, funny and exciting. Make sure you find this on video, especially if you’re a politics junkie. Rated R mostly for language and drunken behavior in a party scene, though Bullock shows her bare rear end in a comical context for a brief moment. 4. “Brooklyn.” This lovely period romance, about a young Irish woman who moves to Brooklyn in the 1950s in search of a better life, falls in love, and then has to decide what to do with the rest of her life when a family crisis forces her to return home is the most beautifully shot and scored movie of the year. As a bonus, its Irish and Italian Catholic characters are portrayed in uniformly positive fashion, especially a helpful priest who propels the woman’s life into a life-changing direction. Probably the most positive portrayal of Catholicism to come out of Hollywood in many years. Rated PG13 for one F word, one S word and a brief clothed sex scene, this is nonetheless great viewing for older teens and adults. 5. “Inside/Out.” Pixar pulled off another animated classic, this time tugging the heartstrings better than ever with the story of a little girl who’s frustrated with having to move from her childhood home and wrestling with her emotions. The movie brings to life Joy, Fear, Sadness, Disgust and Anger by making them all characters fighting for her attention in her mind, and winds up making every viewer consider how they handle their own lives. Totally brilliant and funny, but watch out for the tear-jerking moments. Rated PG and great for everyone.. . 6. “Goosebumps.” My favorite family movie of the year (“The Walk” was aimed at adult audiences but just happens to be clean), “Goosebumps” featured kid-favorite actor Jack Black as the real-life author R.L. Stine, who sold more than 40 million copies of humorous horror books aimed at kids with his “Goosebumps” series. In the movie, Stine has to lead his teen daughter and the teen boy who is interested in her on a mad-dash series of adventures when the boy and a friend accidentally unleash the monsters from his books into the real world of their small town. Funny, exciting, and occasionally slightly scary, this romp was nearly as much fun as the original “Ghostbusters,” and still managed to pull it all off in a clean enough way to earn a PG rating. 7. “Creed.” Who doesn’t love Rocky Balboa? Sylvester Stallone’s most indelible creation maintains a fascinating hold on moviegoer’s heart strings even 40 years and seven movies into his portrayal of the hardscrabble street fighter turned world champion. Writer-director Ryan Coogler found a fresh way to bring Rocky back to the screen, as he trains the son of his former archrival Apollo Creed while fighting his toughest battle yet: cancer. The result was a smash hit movie that will also likely bring Stallone an Oscar come February for his best performance yet in the role. Rated PG13 for boxing ring violence and a brief implied sex scene between the young fighter and his girlfriend that has no nudity. 8. “Me and Earl and the Dying Girl.” This Sundance Film Festival sensation was expected to be the first big teen-movie breakout since the 1980s heyday of John Hughes, but like a few other great movies on this list, fate wasn’t as kind as it should have been. This must-see heart-tugger featured a trio of terrific performances by young actors Thomas Mann, RJ Cyler and Olivia Cooke in the story of an awkward teen boy whose mom forces him to befriend a girl with cancer, only to find that they actually can have an immense impact on each other’s lives. Surprise: a lot of it is funny, too. Rated PG13 for some language and a few quick sex-based jokes, but the movie itself spotlights a positive chaste friendship and has fantastic lessons that teens should learn. 9. “Spy.” By miles, the funniest movie of the year featured Melissa McCarthy playing a dowdy, overweight middle-aged woman who works a desk gig for the CIA as an assistant to a superspy. But when he’s murdered while on assignment, the assistant becomes the new ace assassin extraordinaire. Writer-director Paul Feig fashioned a movie that was both gut-bustingly funny and featured excellent stunts and fights galore, giving McCarthy her best showcase yet. Can’t wait to see what they do with the female “Ghostbusters” this summer. Rated R both for foul language and for its occasionally strong violence, it was still so goofy that it’s hard to imagine any adult taking real offense. 10. “The Martian.” Ridley Scott and Matt Damon teamed up for what might be the best movie of either of their careers. Damon’s portrayal of an astronaut left for dead on Mars after a storm devastates his crew’s rocket, and his battle of wits to survive while awaiting a rescue, was smart, exciting, witty and was an inventive twist on overcoming-odds clichés. Rated PG13 for brief strong language and the dangerous moments Damon is put through, it’s basically fine for smart kids ages 10 and up and everyone else.
'Joy' and 'The Big Short' offer different approaches to American economics
Dec 30, 2015 / 00:00 amAt some point, everyone dreams of getting rich. For most of us, it remains a dream throughout our lives, a desire that seems too intangible and even surreal to actually grasp, even as the media shows us people who achieve that goal every single day. There are as many paths to financial greatness or failure as there are people. But two movies that came out Christmas week – “Joy” and “The Big Short” - show us that there clearly are noble and nefarious ways of going about it, offering viewers plenty to contemplate from the mostly true stories they tell. “Joy” is the latest in a string of memorable films by writer-director David O. Russell, who is riding one of Hollywood history’s hottest streaks ever with three straight Best Director and Best Picture Oscar nominations for “The Fighter,” “The Silver Linings Playbook” and “American Hustle.” It’s unlikely that “Joy” will match those nods, but it’s still got plenty of strong moments to offer. The film tells the story of Joy Mangano (Jennifer Lawrence), an Italian-American woman in 1970s upstate New York who was stepped on by seemingly everyone in her family after giving up her childhood dreams of being an inventor. Her ex-husband (Edgar Ramirez) and her father (Robert DeNiro) both live in the basement of her house, while her delusional mother spends seemingly every waking moment huddled on a bed in her own upstairs room, watching soap operas and living vicariously through their plot twists. Add in the whining demands of two young kids and an airline customer-service job that just downsized her hours, and Joy is desperate to make a change. After having an utterly oddball dream in which she realizes her destiny is to invent things again, Joy shakes things up and invents a mop whose strings can be quickly cleaned between each room of the house. The idea is revolutionary to housewives disgusted by the fact they have to worry about tracking bathroom germs into their kitchens while mopping, and at first it appears that Joy’s headed for huge success due to the help of a QVC home-shopping TV network executive (Bradley Cooper). But Russell lets Mangano’s rollercoaster ride play out in the unpredictable fashion of her real-life battles, and that keeps the story intriguing enough to ride out some slow patches in the middle and the fact that we are rooting for a woman to become a millionaire off a mop. Thankfully, Russell maintains his incredible gift for putting together casts that create sheer magic together. Lawrence and Cooper have done three straight films together for him, but it’s Lawrence and DeNiro’s scenes together that truly jump off the screen and come to vibrant life. Russell drops in several moments where characters speak to each other about the glories of America and the freedom it offers to succeed at any dream imaginable. That is a tonic for our times, but together with Diane Ladd’s touching voiceover narration as Joy’s grandmother, the movie plays like a fairy tale. Then again, that could be just what viewers need amid our still often dark economic realities. On a moral level, “Joy” has many positive things going for it. While her family is humorously dysfunctional, they are seen as fairly devout Catholics who draw great strength from their faith. Joy is also deep friends with her ex-husband because they want to be good parents together, and because he proves himself to be a good business and legal advisor along the way. Better yet, it’s a celebration of never losing hope and always standing by family, that has only one discernible “F” word and little if any other foul language in it. And that’s a treat worth considering throughout the rest of the Christmas moviegoing season. Meanwhile, “The Big Short” also uses some off-the-wall techniques – including snarky narration and wild montages spotlighting the over-the-top excesses of pre-Great Recession excess on Wall Street - to convey its message. Yet unlike Russell’s portrait of hope and inspiration, it spotlights the ruthless maneuvers that some men (led here by the ace cast of Steve Carell, Christian Bale, Ryan Gosling and Brad Pitt) took to make massive fortunes off the utter collapse of the US housing market by betting against it between 2005 and 2008. “Short” is based on a book by journalist Michael Lewis, whose previous book “Moneyball” was turned into a Best Picture-nominated film and managed to bring the convoluted economic tricks used by Oakland A’s management to create a championship baseball team at bargain-basement prices. Here, co-writer/director Adam McKay and his writing partner Charles Rudolph take infinitely more complicated economic maneuvers and manage to teach viewers about them with a good dose of wit to boot. Among his bag of tricks are brief segments in which hot actress Margot Robbie explains one kind of deal while drinking champagne in a bubble bath, or chef Anthony Bourdain uses the food he cooks to explain how no one seemed to notice when America’s biggest bankers were pulling devastating shenanigans right under our noses. The idea being conveyed overall by “The Big Short” is that modern-day Americans have put far too much trust in politicians to control economic abuses by Wall Street. Even worse, all the lessons we and our leaders supposedly learned from the crash of 2008 haven’t really been taken to heart, as the movie’s ending explanations of where each of the men wound up reveals. While “The Big Short” has strong lessons to offer as well, its methods are vastly different. These are high-strung guys in desperate straits, who didn’t realize until it was too late that the games they’re playing with America’s economic system are far more devastating than they’d ever intended. The movie reflects that dark energy with frequent foul language including plenty of F words, and with a couple of scenes in which the men visit strip clubs to burn off the fact they have way too much money. But the nudity is relatively quick and not very exploitive. Most adults should be able to handle these aspects en route to powerful and – according to a Republican-politician friend of mine – a fair and balanced movie rather than a heavily biased hatchet job. With Oscar-worthy performances by Steve Carell and Christian Bale, plus ace support from the rest of the cast, “The Big Short” manages to be one economics lesson that no one should snooze through. Our very future as a nation depends on keeping our eyes open, always.
"The Hateful Eight" and "Sisters" -- one brutally impressive and one brutally unfunny
Dec 26, 2015 / 00:00 amChristmas movies are like a pile of presents under the tree: there’s hopefully something for everyone. This season is no exception, with an eclectic array of films for seemingly every taste, and then of course the “Star Wars” movie, which is making so much money one might think Congress made viewing it a requirement for citizenship. This week, we’re looking at two movies that couldn’t be any more different: Quentin Tarantino’s latest bizarro epic, “The Hateful Eight,” and the Tina Fey-Amy Poehler comedy “Sisters.” One is one of the year’s most brutal yet impressive films, while the other is just brutally unfunny. Feel free to read on, but I highly recommend seeing “Joy” or “The Big Short” instead – two movies I haven’t had the chance to see, but which have extensive awards buzz. “Hateful” is Tarantino’s second Western in a row, following 2012’s superb and superior “Django Unchained,” which rode a powderkeg mix of racial tensions, ace performances and crackerjack action all the way to huge box office, a Best Picture nomination and a Best Screenplay Oscar. That movie was wildly original in every frame, but “The Hateful Eight” doesn’t have that fresh sense of unpredictability. Rather, “Hateful” plays like a combination of “Django” and Tarantino’s debut film, “Reservoir Dogs.” Both are great films and “Hateful” is also entertaining, but there’s definitely a sense of “ been there, done that” in much of it. Tarantino’s creative muse, Samuel L. Jackson, is back as Major Marquis Warren, who claims his military title from fighting against the Confederates in the Civil War and also claims that he has a letter of support from President Lincoln himself. Warren is trapped in the middle of nowhere with a blizzard approaching, when he encounters a stagecoach with two passengers: a self-proclaimed bounty hunter named John Ruth (Kurt Russell in his coolest role in years), and his latest capture, a hard-as-nails woman with a black eye and bloody mouth named Daisy Domergue (Jennifer Jason Leigh). Soon, they pick up yet another passenger: a man named Chris Mannix (Walton Goggins), who claims that he’s the newly elected sheriff in the town that Ruth is bringing Domergue to for his reward. The four pull up for the night at a remote store and boarding house called Minnie’s Haberdashery, only to find that Ruth’s old friend Minnie is mysteriously missing, with four other men (Bruce Dern, Michael Madsen, Tim Roth and Demian Bichir) as the only occupants. As they settle in for a long night huddled against the elements, it becomes clear that no one in the store has friendly intentions for anyone else, and that everyone has a hidden agenda. You truly don’t want to know more than that. While “Hateful” does copy the “Reservoir Dogs” setup of putting a bunch of dangerous and untrustworthy thugs into a confined area and watching them turn on each other, Tarantino is still utterly incapable of writing a bad screenplay. There are surprises throughout, although if there is one big complaint to make, the film is nearly three hours long and takes nearly half that time for the first gunshot to be fired. The second half is much more action-packed, but it’s also hard to watch at times. Tarantino’s largest budget expense appears to have been the buckets of blood involved from shootings, stabbings and worst of all, the vomiting that occurs after two of the men drink poisoned coffee. Tarantino also is likely to rile some viewers with another problematic aspect: his characters’ copious use of the N-word towards, against and about Warren. But taken in the context of its setting – a bunch of tough white men being outwitted by a black man shortly after the Civil War – and the fact that Jackson always defends Tarantino completely for his uses of that word, should make it tolerable to viewers who know they’re in for a very wild ride. Of course, there’s also a heavy amount of heavy-duty profanity, and one sickening monologue from Warren, as he describes the horrific way he abused and murdered the son of one of the men in the room. Meanwhile, “Sisters” is the latest team-up between Fey and Poehler, adding to their decade-plus collaboration in everything from “SNL” to the hit movie “Baby Mama” and co-hosting the Golden Globes awards. This time, they play two middle-aged sisters named Kate and Maura Ellis, who have grown apart as adults, only to be drawn together when their parents (James Brolin and Dianne Wiest) decide to sell their childhood home, and they refuse to let that happen. Fey’s Kate is a former hard partier, while Poehler’s Maura has spent her life in ridiculous levels of repression. But with Maura refusing to stop grieving the end of her marriage a full two years after her divorce and Kate learning that their home’s new buyers will only purchase the place if it’s in great shape, the two decide to hatch the wildest party of their lives and invite everyone they knew from high school to the house for one last rager. From there, the movie’s script feels nonexistent, as the movie drifts into endless scenes of bad behavior that seem disconnected from not only each other but any sense of compelling narrative. It seems that Fey and Poehler talked a studio into spending about $30 million on letting them turn on a camera and speak and act as crudely as possible. The movie is packed wall-to-wall with nearly as much swearing and bad behavior - including a heavy amount of sexual innuendos and a surprising amount of drug humor - as “Hateful,” but is even less funny despite trying to be a straight-up comedy. Director Jason Moore seems to have turned the camera on and walked away in frustration. Viewers will think about doing the same.
'Star Wars: The Force Awakens' exceeds the hype
Dec 17, 2015 / 00:00 amIn a world where 500 TV channels and thousands of websites offer seemingly countless choices for entertainment, it’s becoming ever rarer that one particular movie or TV show can truly stand out from the crowd and become a full-on, must-see event. But the latest space epic in the “Star Wars” series, “Star Wars: The Force Awakens,” has clearly managed to do that, with a near-constant presence in its own ads, hundreds of sometimes-ridiculous product tie-ins, and an endless parade of media stories about every aspect of the film. The question that hundreds of millions of film buffs have wondered for months now is: Can it possibly live up to the hype? Or will it fail to deliver, like the ridiculously disappointing 1999 prequel “The Phantom Menace”? And will the filmmakers respect viewers’ intelligence by steering clear of creating annoying characters like Jar Jar Binks? I’m happy to report that “Awakens” does indeed deliver in spades, and without any stupid creatures dumbing things down. Knowing that this latest adventure was put in the hands of one of Hollywood’s current top popcorn filmmaker, J.J. Abrams (who has also revived the “Mission: Impossible” and “Star Trek” series), there was plenty of reason to be excited from the very first second the famed John Williams score kicked in. The critic-heavy audience burst into applause with the Lucasfilm logo, the title appearance and the start of the explanatory scroll that brought viewers up to speed on the movie’s events. That’s three rounds of applause in about two minutes, and the first actual image of the film hadn’t even been shown yet. So what’s the plot about? The plot takes place well after the events of its predecessor in the storyline, “Return of the Jedi,” and has the brilliance to involve the three most popular characters of the original trilogy: Han Solo, Princess Leia and Luke Skywalker, backed by an impressive trio of new characters. Luke has disappeared, as the evil Empire’s even more evil successor government known as the First Order is scouring the galaxy looking for him since he is the last of the Jedi warriors. Meanwhile, Leia is now a general in the rebellion, and sent a brash fighter pilot named Poe Dameron (Oscar Isaac) to a planet called Jakku to find a map that would lead to Luke’s whereabouts. He finds it in holographic form, and in a nice homage to the very first “Star Wars” film, he places it into his robot sidekick, BB-8 and sends it off on its own to seek help when an army of Stormtroopers comes to capture the map. The robot is discovered by a young woman named Rey (Daisy Ridley), whose existence as an orphan living in a desert landscape bears intriguing parallels to the origins of Luke Skywalker. She at first tries to sell it off, but suddenly realizes that there’s something important about BB-8 and winds up having to run for safety and hide inside a spaceship that’s seemingly out of commission. It turns out to be the Millenium Falcon, which of course brings her into contact with the legendary Han Solo and Chewie as that dynamic duo helps lead the adventurous quest to find Luke and once again save the galaxy from the forces of evil. There’s plenty more to the story, but I’m not going to ruin it for anyone. Suffice it to say that Harrison Ford takes his chance to revisit his most iconic character and runs with it, bringing the same swagger and wit to the character that audiences have loved for nearly 40 years. Carrie Fisher brings a surprising sense of regret and gravitas to her portrayal of Leia, and her chemistry with Ford is affecting as she carries the weariness of a lifetime of struggle and loss. But the new generation of faces is also impressive, with Isaac appearing to step into the shoes of Solo as a cocky pilot from a younger generation. Ridley owns her role on multiple levels as she moves from naïvete to surprising skills with a lightsaber, particularly in a climactic battle with fellow newcomer Adam Driver as Kylo Ren, the primary villain of the film. And John Boyega does a nice job as Finn, a Stormtrooper with a change of heart who helps our heroes. Writer Lawrence Kasdan returns for the first time since penning what is widely considered the best prior film in the series, “The Empire Strikes Back,” and he teams with Abrams to create a fun and exciting set of new events that strongly parallel the events and characters of the first “Star Wars” film in a way that feels both fresh and nostalgic at the same time. As always in the “Star Wars” series , there is no foul language, sex or nudity in this entry. The movie is rated PG-13, but that’s a reflection of its frequent action scenes and occasionally dark tone when villains are on the screen. The first three films from 1977 to 1983 were rated PG, but that was before the PG13 rating was created to bridge the gap between children’s films and adults. “Force Awakens” is terrific entertainment for all ages. As such, they have wisely made a movie that will appeal to both old fans and new, ensuring that the upcoming movies in the series will likely be popular for another 40 years.
'In the Heart of the Sea' a visually stunning success
Dec 14, 2015 / 00:00 amDespite being an English major with a degree from a decent school, I've never read “Moby Dick.” I just knew the bare bones about its story covering the epic battle between a great white whale and an obsessed band of men determined to bring it to its demise. So I was surprised to learn that there was a true story at the heart of its fantastical tale. In 1820, a New England whaling ship named “Essex” was truly under attack from the biggest whale anyone had ever seen. First detailed in the book “In the Heart of the Sea: The Tragedy of the Whale Ship Essex” by Nathaniel Philbrick, that story is now brought to stunning life on the big screen by director Ron Howard. The story is told via flashback through the voice of an old sailor who was involved in the aquatic adventures as a teenage boy. He is confessing his bottled-up memories of the events at sea for the first time after decades of torment and sharing them with writer Herman Melville, who wound up utilizing his recollections as the basis for his classic story, “Moby Dick.” With dozens of sailors aboard the giant ship, the movie focuses mostly on the battle of wills and wits between the ship’s veteran first mate, Owen Chase (Chris Hemsworth of “Thor”) and its first-time captain, George Pollard (Benjamin Walker). Their well-drawn characters help elicit terrific performances from the two men, who bring to life conflicts that still roil society to this day, namely rich versus poor, and the working class versus the entitled wealthy. Having two men, each desperate to prove themselves correct, is not a good recipe for success on a life-or-death mission that takes years to complete. Their assignment is to lead their crew on whale hunts that will stretch out as long as it takes to kill enough whales at sea to fill 2,000 barrels of whale oil. And that craven desperation for the oil, which is the substance that has been enabling large cities to be lighted, is a harbinger of our own modern quest for crude oil around the planet. Yet, off they sail, with Chase being the tougher yet more sensible officer, and Pollard determined to prove he can be macho rather than being the spoiled son of a whaling dynasty. But when they encounter a Spanish crew of sailors who say they were decimated by the biggest whale they had ever seen, the two men feel that there must be other normal-sized whales in the giant whale’s territory as well. Thus, despite the concerns of their crew, Chase and Pollard finally agree on one thing, ordering the ship to head out 1,000 miles from land and kill as many whales as they can to finally meet their quota and go home. What they never expected is for the giant whale to have seemingly preternatural intelligence to go with its ferocious power. Howard and screenwriter Charles Leavitt do an astounding job bringing this story to life without making it feel like dated, stodgy history. Thanks to the wonders of modern-day special effects, viewers are pulled right into some of the most jaw-dropping storm, wave and whale-battle sequences ever put on screen. The duo also manages to show viewers the incredibly arduous work involved with sailors who have to also kill their prey themselves and prepare it for shipment to buyers. “Sea” has little or no foul language, and no sex or nudity. But some of its violence is incredibly intense to the point of being shocking, and the men are forced to extremely desperate measures to stay alive at one point. So while this is a fantastic movie, it’s still a tough watch at moments. When some complain that no movie is worth today’s ticket prices, I will gladly turn them from this week forward to consider movies like this one. Sure, there’s a steep price involved to enjoy it in a theater, but this film takes you around the planet, sets your pulse racing as both storms and the whale set our heroes’ lives in danger, makes you cry, and most of all makes you think about lessons everyone needs to learn.
'The Danish Girl' and 'Carol' make for a static, morally confused movie going experience this weekend
Dec 4, 2015 / 00:00 amIn a year in which the Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriage nationwide, and a TV landscape in which countless shows like “Modern Family” feature positive gay characters, it’s not surprising that Hollywood is throwing open the doors to filmmakers depicting the issues of gay rights. After all, the mainstream media is eager to support such visions, and films like “Brokeback Mountain,” “Milk” and “The Birdcage” have long shown that gay-friendly films can deliver on a big scale with crossover audiences as well. And so it is that the nation’s theaters are currently home to two high-profile homosexual-themed films at once: “Carol,” in a story of a repressed lesbian love affair in the 1950s, and “The Danish Girl,” which details the life of Danish painter Lili Elbe, who was the first person on the planet to undergo sex-reassignment surgery to become a transgender person in the 1920s. Both films feature impressive casts and directorial pedigrees, with “Carol” starring two-time Oscar winner Cate Blanchett and Oscar nominee Rooney Mara as its secret lovers, and “The Danish Girl” featuring last year’s Best Actor winner Eddie Redmayne as Elbe. “Carol” was directed by Todd Haynes, who has ridden gay-themed material to monetary and awards-season success with the 2002 film “Far From Heaven,” while “Girl” is directed by Tom Hooper, who won an Oscar for helming “The King’s Speech” in 2010. These are obviously not a pair of movies that at the top of most Catholics’ viewing lists, especially during Christmas season. But amid a slow week between the rush of Thanksgiving-weekend family films and the approaching onslaught of Oscar hopefuls to be released between Dec. 11 and Christmas, this is a slow weekend and I’m just trying to make our readers aware of what’s going on in the culture. “Carol” is a fictional tale, depicting the story of an upper-crust wife in 1950s New York City named Carol (Blanchett), who finds herself transfixed by a younger saleslady named Therese (Mara) at the perfume counter of a Macy’s-style department store. Cate is trapped in a lifeless marriage to a man named Harge (Kyle Chandler), who is such a one-dimensional paragon of white-privileged patriarchal power that the audience only sees him pining for and demanding loyalty from Carol and doesn’t even learn what he does for a living. But that’s par for the course with this film, since we also never learn what Therese really wants out of life or why she would abruptly abandon her own serious relationship with a much nicer guy named Richard (Jake Lacy). Carol herself is a cipher much of the time, with the only moments of intrigue coming from the revelation that she had previously engaged in a relationship with her lifelong friend Abby (Sarah Paulson), leaving Harge in despair as he sees her take up with Therese. A custody battle over their daughter Rindi (names like Harge and Rindi should indicate the isolated bubble-world these characters live in) ensues, including dirty tricks like spying on the new lovers. This creates a couple of surprises and Haynes wrings more tension from the script by Phyllis Nagy towards the end, but the overall effect of “Carol” is strangely inert. The same is sadly true of “The Danish Girl,” in which Redmayne starts the film as the Danish male painter Einar Wegener before transforming into Lili. Einar is married to fellow painter Gerda (Alicia Vikander), and the two at first seem like any happy young couple as they get frisky multiple times in the first half hour while trying to have a child. But despite Einar’s seeming red-blooded passion for Gerda, the couple starts engaging in his desire to try on Gerda’s stockings and shoes. This fetish quickly escalates into Gerda taking Einar to shop for women’s clothes, fixing him up as a woman and even taking him out to a swank party while he pretends to be a female cousin named Lili. Flush with new-found freedom to fully express himself, Einar starts to live as Lili more and more in their private time together. Things get more complicated as Gerda finds that her portraits of Lili are becoming a hot art commodity, and soon the couple have to face the ultimate question of how far should Einar go in his quest to live life as a woman. On an artistic level aside from Christian moral considerations, “Carol” suffers from the fact that its setting in a time and moral era that has long since passed makes it seem like an instant museum piece. Meanwhile, “The Danish Girl” is a true story that is obviously timed to take advantage of the hoopla surrounding this year’s transgender media figure Caitlyn Jenner, but it too is often emotionally stifled en route to its tragic conclusion. But both movies wind up being counterintuitive to their own agendas. “Carol” features a woman who wreaks havoc on her marriage, coldly making her husband suffer both social embarrassment and emotional anguish, while also shutting out her past lover Abby as well as Therese when her whims dictate that it’s necessary. Rather than being a sympathetic character, she comes off as a mostly calculating one. SPOILER ALERT: Meanwhile, “The Danish Girl” offers us a story in which there is nothing but tragedy on every level. Einar’s transformation into Lili eventually destroys his marriage to Gerda, who becomes a supportive friend yet seems helplessly sad by the end, and the first step of the experimental surgery involved leaves him in physical agony that leads to an addiction to painkillers, while the second step goes so wrongly that he never recovers from nearly bleeding to death. END SPOILER For the record, “Carol” has just a few words of foul language but it does feature a sex scene between the two women in which they are both toplessly nude and implied fully nude for about 30 seconds, plus another scene in which they start kissing and wake up nude under their sheets. “The Danish Girl” has a fully nude scene with the wife having sex with Einar before he starts transforming, and then features him standing naked before a mirror naked with his genitals tucked between his legs, in addition to showing him paying to attend a “peep show” in which a nude woman is running her hands all over her body, and he tries to replicate her actions in order to learn how to look sensual as a woman. Between the destroyed relationships in both movies and the undeniable fact that Einar’s surgical dream of turning into Lili killed him, it’s hard to see what exactly the filmmakers of “The Danish Girl” and “Carol” are trying to accomplish. They certainly don’t seem likely to appeal to moviegoers in a way that would make them want to follow in their characters’ footsteps.
'Creed' provides all the triumph of a classic 'Rocky' film
Nov 25, 2015 / 00:00 amThere’s something about Thanksgiving dinner’s familiarity that adds to the magic of its enjoyment. You know exactly what you’re getting – turkey, stuffing, mashed potatoes, some sort of greens and cranberries – but yet it’s pretty much the most popular meal of the year. The new film “Creed” is the cinematic equivalent of turkey and all the trimmings. In it, co-writer/director Ryan Coogler and his writing partner Aaron Covington find a new way to return one of the most beloved characters in cinema history – Rocky Balboa – to the big screen. The resulting movie is packed with moments and twists that recall the prior films depicting the lovable boxer’s life, and yet it somehow works so well that by the film’s final fight climax, the audience of critics burst into whoops and anticipatory applause. Don’t believe me? Check out Rottentomatoes.com, where it currently shows that a whopping 95 percent of the nation’s critics have given the movie thumbs up, an even higher rating than the transgender-themed Oscar-bait movie “The Danish Girl.” It’s clear that no matter how many times the Rocky movie series seems to go down for the count, he is one character who is always welcome to come back for another round. The new movie actually focuses on the character of Adonis Creed (Michael B. Jordan in a performance that should catapult him to Denzel Washington-level stardom), the son of Rocky’s greatest boxing rival ever, Apollo Creed from the first two “Rocky” films. Adonis is first shown as a boy in 1998, being pulled out of the juvenile justice and foster care systems by Apollo’s long-widowed wife, Mary Anne (Phylicia Rashad). Adonis had always thought he was abandoned by his father and orphaned as a young child by his mother’s passing, and never realized that he was the biological son of the world-champion boxer and a mistress. But despite his being adopted and raised by Mary Anne, who wants him to just take a smart and peaceful white-collar job, he’s long had the instincts of a fighter and can’t get that rage out of his system just because he’s taken out of a thuggish environment. Having secretly built a 15-0 record fighting across the border in Tijuana, Adonis decides that the corporate world isn’t for him and quits his plum job. Despite disappointing his adoptive mom, he packs his possessions and moves across the country to Apollo’s old stomping grounds in Philadelphia, convincing Rocky to come out of boxing-related retirement and train him to take on the world champion, a British fighter named Conlon. Add in a burgeoning romance with a poor yet rising R&B singer named Bianca (Tessa Thompson), and the formula is complete. Adonis’ love for the young performer parallels Rocky’s sweet courtship of his beloved wife Adrian in the first “Rocky,” while Rocky himself steps into the role of trainer in a way that would make his own former trainer Mickey proud. And as Rocky teaches Adonis to man up and face his demons en route to his battle royale, he himself has to be encouraged to face one final battle: the kind of cancer that killed Adrian years before is now coursing through his own body. Sure, the illness is just as much Oscar bait as Eddie Redmayne transforming into a woman in “The Danish Girl,” but there is a serious groundswell of support around Stallone’s very fine work in this movie that could see him grabbing a Best Supporting Actor award at next year’s Oscars. That would be a well-deserved reward for the efforts of Coogler, who managed to make “Creed” as a reward for his prior success with Jordan, the 2013 modern classic “Fruitvale Station.” The original “Rocky” movie from 1976 was the film that inspired Coogler to pursue a filmmaking career, and he had written “Creed” many years ago as a dream project he wanted to get down on paper but never dreamed would get made since Stallone had written every other film in the series himself. But when Hollywood asked him what he wanted to do next after “Fruitvale,” Coogler dug up his script for “Creed” and asked his agent to send it to Stallone. The result was a miracle: Stallone was so impressed by the writing that he not only signed up, but championed the project to his old studio. With “Creed” now coming out on the night before Thanksgiving, he owes plenty of gratitude to Stallone. And with a movie this richly entertaining, filmgoers of all ages have something to be thankful for as well. In keeping with the rest of the “Rocky” movie series, “Creed” has a minimum of foul language, with one barely discernible F word, a couple of S words and a brief and discreetly shown sex scene between Adonis and Bianca that cuts away before getting graphic. If you can handle the torrent of punch-pounding ring action in the final match, “Creed” is nearly perfectly acceptable entertainment for all ages.