[REVIEW] - Sucker Punch

While I’m not quite sure he’s the type of filmmaker the originators of the concept known as Auteur Theory dreamed would have fit the bill, it goes without saying that director Zack Snyder does just that.

At least it should, after sitting down and watching his latest film, the action packed fever dream that is known as Sucker Punch.

Chock full of every aspect of a Snyder film that makes up a Snyder film, ranging from empowered women to the discussion of free will, Sucker Punch is the cinematic manifestation of what in writing circles is known as the “vomit” draft of a piece. Getting down everything that Snyder’s 14-year-old brain could put down onto celluloid, it’s been polished into a visually striking, if not perfectly paced, look at free will and the ability that art has to truly free anyone and everyone.

Best described as the proverbial wet dream for director Snyder, Sucker Punch may seem like simple eye candy including dragons, scantily clad blondes and 20 foot tall metallic samurai, but it’s far, far more.

The film follows a young girl, Baby Doll, who is institutionalized by her awful stepfather after the death of her mother, and accidental death of her little sister. Shown a way to retreat to an alternate reality, she learns to not only cope with her past, but make it so her future is a lot more free. Teaming up with a foursome of fellow inmates in the asylum, they head out to attempt and escape the facility and the evil people who run it.

While he may not get any screen time, the film’s biggest star is the man behind both the medium and the message, Snyder.

Coming at an interesting point in the director’s career (after a relatively overlooked animated feature in Guardians Of Ga’Hoole, and before his take on Superman), Sucker Punch looks, feels, and even sounds like the manifestation of everything that Snyder stands for as a filmmaker. Visually, the film ooze’s Snyder’s style. Featuring copious amounts of slow-motion, the film is a candy colored piece of pop art that while it may seem a bit disjointed, is held together firmly by the duct tape that is Snyder’s direction. Using great editing and clever (if a tad bit overused) camera tricks, the viewer flows into and out of each specific world or reality without much of an issue or much confusion. Great action set pieces are all throughout this film, featuring some really well done action choreography, and more so, great use of geography during these set pieces. The viewer rarely feels confused within a fight sequence, and while there are a few brief flubs (particularly near the end), it’s overall really well done, and adds a lot of depth to the film.

Same goes for his use of themes, some new to the director, but some not so much.

At its core a film about free will, the themes of this film may shove a bit too hard into the viewer’s face come the film’s final moments, but it’s an absolutely thrilling look at both free will, and the ability for art to lead to freedom. Before retreating to her alternate universe, Baby must hear music, so that she can dance, which is her transport to this new world. From there, she’s as free as one can get. It’s this freedom through performance or art, that makes this writer think that this film is much more than just a candy coated fever dream with a penchant for short skirts and bullets. Also, the film as a whole plays very much like a personal film for Snyder, who as a filmmaker, comes off as one who simply uses the medium to free himself and the thoughts that he has. It’s a really interesting film that doesn’t harp on its themes too hard, leaving the door open for those to simply enjoy the action, or dig quite deep if one so chooses to.

And it helps when you get such entertaining performances as the ones Snyder has gotten here.

Primarily a female led cast, the on screen star of the film has to be Emily Browning, who may not ultimately be asked to do all that much (her performance comes off as a tad bit one note), but gives a really convincing, and ultimately emotionally engrossing performance. There is something about her and her performance that just truly draws the viewer in, and it has nothing to do with the style of dress that Snyder has her wear. It’s ultimately a really interesting narrative, and benefits greatly from the help of this really fantastic performance.

Being the only real bit of masculinity in the film, Oscar Isaac is enjoyably menacing and just downright despicable here as the evil Blue, the ring leader of things behind the scenes. He’s such an awful guy, that while it may seem like a chance for Isaac to Robin Hood-style ham it up, he gives it this slight level of brooding evil, that it really works. Again, it’s quite one note, but it works for the film as a whole.

And then there is Baby’s crew. Led by the second in command, Sweet Pea, the supporting cast here includes Abbie Cornish, Jena Malone, Vanessa Hudgens and Jamie Chung. Cornish and Malone are the best of the bunch, playing the sister team of Sweet Pea and Rocket. Both give really fantastic performances, and play as the neo-emotional core for the film, particularly when the proverbial crap hits the fan. The final act is very much centered on their relationship, and it’s both believable, and really moving. Hudgens is wasted here, as is Chung, both of which are relegated to the closest versions of eye candy the film really has cast wise. Carla Gugino plays Dr. Vera Gorski here, and is arguably the film’s weakest link, giving a really cartoonish performance, one that didn’t necessarily have to be what it ultimately ended up being. Silly accent and everything, the performance just felt a bit too cartoonish, and for a film like this, that’s saying a lot. Finally, Scott Glenn and Jon Hamm both give tiny performances here, the former being the most charming, and the biggest breath of fresh air.

That said, the film isn’t without flaw.

Overall, while the film as a whole is one that works both aesthetically and intellectually, the film does have a few issues. A few set pieces here have some issues with pacing, which as a whole seems to be an issue with the film holistically. The film is not without engaging aspects, but it’s these brief lapses in overall pacing (I’m looking at you end of second act/start of third), that really takes the viewer out of the film. Also, near the end, the film’s themes begin to be told to the viewer, instead of simply shown through the narrative as a whole. Toss in a few poor performances, and the film is much more mixed than one would previously have hoped.

However, it’s tough to say that these flawed ultimately effected my experience.

Overall, while it may be so in spite of itself, Sucker Punch is an awe inspiring visually charged piece of filmmaking that is wholly original, and wholly Zack Snyder. From a soundtrack chock full of fantastic remixes and covers to a style that takes things like samurais and ogres, tosses them into a blend, and then uses the remnants as paint to toss on this canvas, Sucker Punch is a piece of modern pop art from the modern day pop art auteur. An interesting look at free will and art, the film may ultimately be deeply flawed, but to say that it’s not an engaging and truly deep piece of filmmaking would be to do this film a great disservice.

Far from perfect, Sucker Punch doesn’t truly try to be. It’s a rough, in your face piece of filmmaking, and one that, if you give it a chance, will leave you talking, not only about what the hell you just saw visually.

GRADE ------ B

[REVIEW] - Sanctum

While there may not be a better combo of credits to promote a film with, economically, than the names James Cameron and AVATAR, apparently that doesn’t mean anything qualitative.

Receiving a producing credit on the film, SANCTUM marks the return, of sorts, to the film world for the man who this time last year, was basking in the glory of the highest grossing film ever made, the aforementioned blue cat person sci-fi film. And while AVATAR is ultimately a fun film, SANCTUM not only features a dreadfully cliché narrative like the film that made this one possible, but it ultimately fails on a wholly cinematic level.

Directed by Alister Grierson, SANCTUM follows a group of adventurers, as they attempt to explore one of the world’s last yet-to-be-accessed cave system. Featuring a cast of relatively smaller named actors, the film has all the makings of something really intriguing. The mixture of James Cameron producing, interesting visuals, and inherent tension from the fact that it takes place in a cave, should have meant easy cinematic math, resulting in an answer equal to or greater than a solid piece of cinema, right?

Yeah, this isn’t that.

Ultimately, the film’s biggest flaw comes within the narrative. Based on a screenplay penned by John Garvin and Andrew Wight (who also gets the story credit on the film), SANCTUM isn’t necessarily a poorly written film. There are a few great moments of character development here, and while it itself is also part of the film’s overall problem, the relationship between the father and the son, script wise, works.

That said, the relationship is completely trite, cheap and cliché, that while it may work conceptually, it does nothing to set itself apart from films of its ilk, and it also says nothing about father/son relationships or how they work. It’s a fine piece of writing structurally, but even there, you see the series of events, and after the first mishap, the film pans out like a quarterback screaming out to a receiver to prepare to catch a pass. You’ll be the cornerback more than willing to pick it off early, walk out, and feel much better for not having waited to see what you expected to happen come true (sorry, I’m in a Super Bowl type of mood).

Grierson himself does save a lot of this material. The inner cave shots, of which make up the majority of the film, are really breathtaking, despite some hackney CGI. However, it is the underwater shots that really save the film. They look absolutely fantastic, and have a great sense of depth and scope to them, ultimately making the film seem far broader and far more interesting than it actually and truthfully is.

The film’s cast dismantles much of his work however.

You know you are in a bit of trouble when Ioan Gruffudd is your biggest star, and he makes good on that very worry. He stars as the financier of the expedition, a free spirit named Carl, and gives one of the most laughable performances I’ve seen in some time. It’s tonally all over the place, but with his arch completely telegraphed by the writers, you feel no emotional connection to him or his plight. Alice Parkinson is completely cartoonish as his girlfriend Victoria, who gives line readings like she’s giving a sermon, just without the conviction. Richard Roxburgh and Rhys Wakefield play father and son Frank and Josh, and while they themselves give fine performances for what they are asked, their characters seem to come right out of a screenwriter’s text book. Dan Wyllie is ultimately the star, but is absolutely wasted here as the comedic relief, George. It’s a really fun performance, that gets no room to breath.

Overall, this film doesn’t do much cartoonishly wrong. However, it has no pretentions at doing anything of much at all. It’s a horribly cliché film that seems to be ripped right out of the pages of any Screenwriting 101 textbook. Cameron may have had his hands on the film, but if so, I’d really like to see his work, because he and this film’s crew botched a pretty easy equation of cinematic entertainment.

SANCTUM – 4/10

[REVIEW] - Black Swan

In Darren Aronofsky I trust.

With only five films under his belt (Black Swan being the director’s fifth film), director Darren Aronofsky has both become the most viscerally interesting director of his generation, as well as one who seems to grow, change, and shift with each new picture.

Moving from the MTV-style punk auteur who created such energetic looks into obsession as Pi and the brilliant Requiem For A Dream, Aronofsky has not only made one of the decade past’s most epic and misunderstood masterpieces in The Fountain, but done much more.

His latest, the haunting look into the world of ballet that is Black Swan, sees the second film in this new, neo-neo realist, almost Dardenne Brothers-like cinema verite style that has now become his staple. Toss in a collection of top tier performances, and you have a film that’s not only the year’s best, but an absolute Masters class in style and genre.

Black Swan stars Natalie Portman, and follows a veteran dancer, Nina, who must come to terms with finally getting the role of her dreams, The Swan Queen. A “brilliant” ballet director, played by Vincent Cassel, has cast the dancer in a “real, stripped down, and visceral” take on the classic Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky ballet. However, the “sweet girl” must ultimately come to grips with her inner “Black Swan,” which ultimately starts to slowly take a toll not only on the dancer’s body, but more so her mind, particularly after a new girl is brought into the company by the director.

A mixture of Roman Polanski style psychological horror, In My Skin style body horror, and the 16mm auteur style seemingly rooted with Aronfosky’s own essence, Black Swan is a visual treastice on the artistic experience. It’s also much more than that. It’s the best film of the year.

Part of the trilogy of films that I’ve deemed Aronofsky’s “Mind, Body (The Wrestler) and Soul (The Fountain)” trilogy, Black Swan is the quintessential psychological horror film. The atmosphere instilled here by the director is so perfectly realized, that while much of what happens on screen truly does happen, more times than not the viewer is left contemplating if they too have gone a bit off the edge. A simple look at a painting, a brief glimpse at a passing woman, or movement within the background of the stunningly grainy frame, you are never quite at ease within this world.

Featuring the director’s patented behind the shoulder tacking shot, Black Swan is seemingly a manifestation of many things that he attempted to touch on both thematically and visually within something like his previous film, The Wrestler. Very much about a person completely giving oneself over to his or her craft, Black Swan is a stunningly intense feature. However, it’s Nina who proves to be the most interesting piece of thematic material.

Inherently, this film is about the artistic experience and the ability for one to truly become lost within his or her respective art. That said, with our lead, the film also proves that to become a truly great artist, there must be a sense of self destructiveness, or at least an ease with that concept. Ultimately, without being at ease with the idea that this art may ultimately take more than your time, one can never truly touch either their inner most darkness, nor the precipice of true art.

It’s this sense of danger, and something being just a tad bit off, that keeps the viewer both inherently engaged within this narrative, but also engaged with what is taking place within the frame. Aronofsky never quite shows the viewer his complete hand, always leaving something off about each frame. Be it an operatic sound cue, or the sound of faint words being uttered somewhere within the depths of our troubled protagonist, this is a masterwork in both thematic depth, and the setting of true, haunting atmosphere.

Oh, and the acting here is really damn good to boot.

Giving a career defining performance, Portman plays Nina as not only a truly brilliant dancer (doing much of her own dancing as well), but as a girl so inherently unable to give herself over to life. Not darkness, but life in general. Still living with her mother, Nina is a frighteningly weak woman, looking for nothing more than cold, clinical perfection. There is so much depth within this role, and while it could have ultimately been played far more theatrically, there is a sense of truth given to this role, that makes it truly the year’s most raw and energetic performance. Oscar should be knocking at her door anytime now.

The supporting cast is also top notch. Barbara Hershey turns in an Oscar worthy performance as Nina’s trouble mother, who herself was a gifted dancer, until she ultimately had to choose her daughter over furthering her career. There is this off putting dichotomy between being an overbearing mother, and yet one so heavily steeped in jealousy that when the bomb under the table finally goes off, it’s one hell of an explosion.

Mila Kunis is equally as great here as the sexy and free-spirited Lily, and is absolutely on fire here. She’s not asked to do much thematically, but what she does perfectly is play the absolute polar opposite of our lead, which ultimately leads her to becoming the thing that pushes our lead over the mental edge. Kunis is absolutely stunning visually, which makes her role in Nina’s change all the more believable. This woman must be absolutely stunning to get such a worrisome woman to drink the night before her big day, and while that’s in the bag for the beautiful actress, the fire she gives this performance is absolutely pitch perfect.

Winona Ryder is great here as the aging Beth Macintyre, and rounding out the cast is Vincent Cassel, who becomes the film’s weak link. He isn’t asked to do much, but what he does is gives a performance that feels like a performance. In a film that looks and feels so visceral and raw, the performance is ultimately out of place in this neo-neo-realist thriller. He fits the role perfectly; just visually off-putting enough, and truly convicted in the dictum he spouts, but is undone by a script that doesn’t quite do the character justice.

That said, it’s truly Darren Aronofsky’s motion picture.

Drenched in Polanski-like dread, Black Swan is much more than a thriller, thanks to its director. With a frame that’s as visually alive as it’s stunningly choreographed ballet sequences, the film dances so poetically on the edge of ultimately becoming camp. Featuring absurdist moments of body horror, and equally jarring moments of true dread, Aronofsky’s hand is so intensely assured here, that one has to think that he himself has already come to terms with the artistic experience.

Darren Aronofsky’s sly re-telling of the ballet of the same name, Black Swan is a horror film unlike anything we’ve ever seen. Small and intimate, the film deals with themes ranging from what it means to create art and what that entails, to something far more minute like a mother-daughter relationship. With a claustrophobic cinema-verite touch, Black Swan is simply the best film of the year.

Aronofsky leapt off the artistic edge. And we couldn’t have asked for a more beautiful landing.

BLACK SWAN – 9.5/10

Go see something good!

[REVIEW] - 127 Hours

Sometimes, stories that are bred out of the headlines can be a mixed bag when being converted to the big screen.

With various biopics hitting on both the great side (Ali pops into mind) and less-than-great side (Walk The Line is a perfect example of this) of the quality spectrum, there may not be a single more difficult task within the world of film than attempting to make a single entities’ time on this earth interesting cinematically.

However, in the hands of someone like Danny Boyle, the life, or at least one moment within that very life, of canyoner Aaron Ralston has, conceptually, the makings for a film that would land on the plus side of that sliding scale. You have a single moment of one man’s life, a stunningly gifted filmmaker, and a harrowing tale of true human strength and perseverance, all with one of today’s more interesting actors, James Franco, as the top billed acting talent. How could this ever possibly go wrong one would think?

Well, despite becoming something of a pop culture entity, with various reports of patrons fainting during festival and theatrical screenings of the film (and even more reports of ambulances being placed outside of those very screenings), it has also become one of this year’s most upsetting disappointments of the year.

127 Hours, the latest film from director Danny Boyle (Trainspotting, 28 Days Later, Sunshine, Slumdog Millionaire), follows a mountain climber named Aron Ralston, who after heading out to the canyons outside of Moab, Utah, becomes trapped after his arm becomes stuck between a canyon wall and a boulder. Ralston, who neglected to inform those in his life where he would be during the trip, then must resort to whatever measure he possibly can to free himself. The film is based on Ralston’s autobiography, Between A Rock And A Hard Place, and has become one of 2010’s biggest Oscar players.

However, it’s also one of its bigger messes.

The real star of this film is James Franco, who not only gives the single greatest performance of his young career, but gives far and away the year’s best male performance, at least at this point. Ralston is a truly charismatic young man, who is not only an adventurous young soul, but one who doesn’t fit within the normal constraints of the real world. The rugged terrain of a mountain or canyon are the places this free spirit calls home, and those he comes across, like two perky young girls he meets during the extent of this film, are simply fleeting moments of social interaction.

Those very words are oozed out of every pore by Franco here, who brings a completely fleshed out take on this man, and in turn, gives us one of the most breathtakingly heartbreaking performances of the year. Drenched in so much energy, and yet so much regret and melancholy, the film may seem like your run of the mill Gatorade commercial at the outset, but with the film’s true narrative starting once the boulder falls, the film shifts into something holistically flawed, but performance wise, utterly stunning.

Rounding out the film’s main cast are a trio of actresses; Lizzy Caplan (Ralston’s sister Sonja), Kate Mara and Amber Tamblyn, the latter two playing the hiking duo of Megan and Kristi, two young girls Aron meets before becoming trapped. While none of these three are given anything to do (particularly Caplan), both Mara and Tamblyn add a bit of life to a film that while it may not need it, definitely enjoys its company. Other than that, the film is the James Franco show, and for that, it’s wholly worth your time and money.

That said, the film’s other point of interest, director Danny Boyle, doesn’t quite live up to his end of the deal.

Following up his rather cliché and uninteresting pile of slop better known as the 2008 award winning film Slumdog Millionaire, Boyle continues his streak of MTV style filmmaking that while entertaining, does this film, much like it did Slumdog, a complete disservice. The equivalent of a Mountain Dew commercial on steroids put together by a doctor on acid, 127 Hours is a visual feast of a film, that is ultimately undone due to the overwhelming style that Boyle instills in this film.
The primary flaw in the filmmaking here is twofold, but falls under one deciding factor: artifice. Featuring a cavalcade of jarring cinematic staples like obnoxiously off-putting product placement, and the ever present dream sequence, the film ultimately feels just like that, a film, thanks to Boyle’s love for overbearing moments that are as cliché as anything that word’s ever helped describe.

127 Hours opens perfectly. You get a beautifully poetic coda, set to some lively music from Free Blood, looking at people going about their days, in the hustle and bustle world known as their lives. Then, we jump into that very same thing, but for Ralston, a man who doesn’t deem it important to hold himself to those boundaries that others do. However, from there we get a series of moments ranging from simply cliché dream sequences, to truly silly moments of premonition, that instead of adding to the overall experience, remind the viewer that yes, this thing that is in front of them is indeed a film. Toss in an equally intrusive score from composer A. R. Rahman, and you have the makings of a relatively mediocre mess of a exercise in hamfisted filmmaking.

That all said, the film is ultimately saved by not only a great, Oscar-worthy performance, but an equally fantastic script. The film is inherently about human nature and the extent to which any of us would go to not only live and see our loved ones again, but to try, in any way possible, save the relationships that make us human, and that comes across perfectly in this film. It may be the great performance, but the screenplay, from Boyle and writing partner Simon Beaufoy, is quite stunning. Dual cinematographers Anthony Dod Mantle and Enrique Chediak (the former continuing his career long streak of brilliant visual pieces such as Antichrist and In The Mood For Love) and while the film as a whole may be a mess, there are more than enough to warrant a viewing.

Overall, 127 Hours ultimately succeeds and being a stunning performance piece, but fails equally at being an interesting and visually compelling piece of filmmaking. Featuring a brilliant performance from Franco, and equally stunning cinematography and writing, the film isn’t a dreadful watch, just a true disappointment best saved for a rental. With all the makings in the world to be one of the best biopics cinema has yet seen, instead of leaving me thinking about what I had just seen, I was left thinking what could have been if it were in someone else’s hands.

Werner Herzog is calling, he wants the film he was born to make back.

127 HOURS – 7/10

Go see something good!

[REVIEW] - A Somewhat Gentle Man

While many people may focus ultimately on the lower quality, Hollywood fair, that often clogs the drain that is the dumping ground known as January, it is often the world of indie or foreign releases that truly save the beginning of a respective year from being nearly unbearable.

One of those very films, at least conceptually, is Hans Petter Moland’s latest effort, the Stellan Skarsgard-starring neo noir, A Somewhat Gentle Man. I mean, it’s really just simple math: interesting filmmaker, plus great lead actor, has to equal a solid film, right?

Well, when it comes to A Somewhat Gentle Man, it does. But only slightly.

Gentle Man follows a recently released convict, named Ulrik, who is released after serving 12 years for murder. Coming out, his world has changed holistically. He must deal with his crew, an ex, a few new women, a snitch, his son, and his forthcoming grandchild, which all have decisions that must be made. Some decisions are easy, so are difficult. However, this film follows this somewhat gentle man’s return to what we all call life.

The film’s star is the man behind the camera, and the style and aesthetic he crafts here. Oozing a sense of noir style that would make the Coen brothers blush with flattery, the film is very much in the vein of films like Fargo or specifically something like Miller’s Crossing, in the best way possible. A very cold and seemingly sterile film visually, there isn’t much going on within the frame, except straightforward visuals, that revel in being lo-fi stylistically. Really a breath of fresh air for what has been so far a rather bloated and unbearable obnoxious first month of 2011. The violence is completely and utterly blunt in the best and most visceral way possible, as is every line within the film, and it is this Coen-esque style, from palette to framing, that makes the film utterly compelling on a solely visual level

That said, the film also has a flaw within its core, which is almost insurmountable.

Within this really compelling bit of pulp narrative, the use of sex is nearly offensive. Seemingly mocking the sexuality of one of its characters, it is this character that is ultimately used as nothing more than a glorified plot device, which instead of being funny, is nearly offensive. Thankfully, a relationship that isn’t dreadful also plays a part of the film, which is actually one of the film’s strongest suits.

The film’s true strong suit however, is its wonderful acting.

Spearheading the film are a trio of really great performances. Skarsgard is great as the brooding, and yet truly “gentle” Ulrik, in one of the more interesting performances he’s given in quite some time. He’s one of today’s most interesting thespians, and while he is often relegated to films like Mama Mia, it is his work in such films as this that truly prove that. Jannike Kruse is the film’s real star, giving a wonderfully sweet, warm, and truly compelling performance as Ulrik’s love interest, Merete. Rounding out a great cast is Jan Gunnar Roise, as Ulrik’s estranged son, Geir. The relationship between Ulrik and Geir is ultimately the film’s most compelling aspect narratively, as it’s one of the only relationships that truly feels fleshed out. There is a sense of undying love between the two, maybe a mutual respect, that when the action begins to fall within their relationship, it’s utterly heartbreaking.

That said, the film ultimately fails itself at the very outset.

While wonderfully deadpan, the film’s screenplay and overall narrative is the physical embodiment of mediocrity. There is a great sense of dark humor that only sees brief moments of life, with the film relying on its lifeless sense of sentimentality to truly move the plot and the characters forward.

There is something to be said for a narrative like this. We as humans have an inherent sense of control over our given lives. However, what happens when that life falls into the hands of outside forces? That is, at this films core, the main thesis being discussed here. And while there are great glimpses into a world like that, such as the relationship between father and son shown so brilliantly here, we are instead given this absurdly limp and thematically sterile noir comedy, which prays on simple and uninteresting plot points to draw attention and emotion out of the audience.

Overall, the film isn’t a poor one. Featuring a fantastic collection of performances, the film’s visual style is overly compelling, doing the film more than a fair share of favors. A great turn by Stellan Skarsgard spearheading this film, fans of noir and dark comedies will find quite a bit to enjoy here. However, as a whole, the film doesn’t quite hit the mark. Jettisoning its inherently existential premise for a series of sentimental moments connected by straightforward line readings and one nearly offensive female character, the film ultimately leaves you feeling as though you missed out on something. Or not that you missed out on something, but something is wholly missing. A heart. A brain. Something is missing from this limp, cold, lifeless corpse of a film. Something at all. Something to make this film more than a disposable piece of cinema. Something to give this film traction. Something.

A SOMEWHAT GENTLE MAN – 5/10

Go see something good!

[REVIEW] - Kaboom

While he often finds himself compared to director’s like David Lynch, there are truly very few filmmakers quite like Gregg Araki.

Best known for his 2004 film Mysterious Skin, the filmmaker is back to his relatively dark and darkly comedic world after a brief departure into lighter fare with 2007’s Smiley Face, this time, with a tale of sex, corruption, more sex, and the occult.

Oh, and some more sex.

His latest film, Kaboom, has just hit theaters, and follows the story of an 18-year-old college freshman who, prior to his 19th birthday, stumbles upon a conspiracy in a Southern California seaside town. Written and helmed by Araki, the film has found comparisons to narratives like Twin Peaks, which, along with a top tier cast of up and coming thespians, definitely peaked my interest.

And for once, my high expectations were not completely shattered, as this may very well be Araki’s best film since his stunning masterpiece, Mysterious Skin. It’s an absolute mind-bending winner of a film.

The film’s true star is not quite Araki’s direction, but it’s the skill he has behind the pen. Like an interesting mix between a show like Skins and film like Twin Peaks: Fire Walk With Me, the film lacks the off putting nature of angst that makes a show like Skins nearly unbearable for those who lack prescription drug problems, and while it may lack the creativity that makes a film like Fire Walk With Me the classic that I truly believe it to be, it’s the film’s sense of humor that makes this an absolute must see.

The film’s narrative itself isn’t all that new. A series of murders have been taking place in a seemingly innocuous town, and our lead, along with his right hand girl and his love interest, go on the trail to hunt down just what exactly is going on. However, the film is richly written, in both its darkly comedic dialogue as well as its low-key sense of science fiction, which makes this otherwise cliché narrative, truly out of this world. There is a sense of in your face, almost punk rock audacity that while causing for a few stale beats, particularly near the end when the exposition begins to truly set in, ultimately makes this film far more charming than your run of the mill indie film. Truly a punk rock science fiction thriller, the film is in your face, uncompromising, and an absolute blast.

However, all would be for naught if it weren’t for this film’s cast, which may feature three of my favorite performances of the past 12 months.

Thomas Dekker stars here as our ambisexual lead, Smith, in a revelatory performance. While this performance oozes emo angst that would make a Hot Topic patron blush in self referential disdain, the performance is also full of comedic moments, all of which are delivered with this wonderful sense of brutal bluntness that really adds this level of depth to an already deep acting picture. Not a world shattering performance, but he’s charming as all hell, and for a film like this, that really adds a lot.

However, it’s the ladies that have this writer fawning over this film.

Joining Dekker are Haley Bennett and Juno Temple as Smith’s best friend Stella, and his new “love” interest London respectively, and both give absolutely amazing performances. Temple is the perfect free spirit here, with a sense of confidence that even leaves the viewer willing to walk up to a stranger and make out, and the banter between Bennett and Dekker may be some of my favorite interchanges I’ve seen in a very long time. Bennett is a perfect opposite to our lead, and really shines in her subplot with a witch, Lorelei.

Araki’s visual sensibilities really allow the action on screen to shine as well.

The director's frame is definitely a loving one, llingering on our leads as if they were that person we eye from across the bar, and sly uses of editing, particularly near the end, really give hope that one day, Araki will reach outside of his comfort zone, which he is directly settled in with Kaboom. Kaboom is vintage Araki in both his blunt use of the camera, and his audacious use of narrative and narrative structure, that even though the things on screen seem absolutely bonkers, there is this lingering feeling that leaves you wondering if a conspiracy like this could actually exist. It’s a really compelling, if not all that inventive piece of direction, that is ultimately more audacious than it is creative. And I loved every minute of it.

A sci-fi fever dream of an ode to screwball comedies, Kaboom is more than just your run of the mill, brooding indie film. It is an audacious look at sex, sexual experimentation, and what it’s like to be a teen, searching for something to cling on to. Some may dismiss this film as nothing more than Araki being Araki, but Kaboom is much more than that. It’s fun, funny, full of an audacious heart, and one of the most compelling sci-fi films I’ve seen in a very long time, despite a final 20 minutes that seems to be more exposition than inventive explanation. Simply put, this is 2011’s first true must see film.

Kaboom – 8.5/10

Go see something good!

[REVIEW] - The Rite

Sometimes, all that’s really needed to brighten up a relatively slow, uninteresting, or just plain poor slump of movies, is a good old scare. There is nothing quite like, cheap or not, getting your pants scared off you to make the January doldrums a little less hard to take.

And then there are films like The Rite. Films that not only have no true reason for existence, but also shove your face into the mud that is the pile of dung left in the wake of Hollywood studios giggling all the way to the bank after dumping a load of cinematic crap right onto the proverbial chest of filmgoers. Films that take admittedly interesting plots, and turn them into unwatchable pieces of celluloid so easily, that you are left thinking that the filmmaker and the people involved have it out for the public.

Films that just simply do not work, on even the campiest of levels.

Films like The Rite.

Directed by Mikael Hafstrom, The Rite follows a young American priest, who, despite is floundering faith, decides to travel to Italy to study with the hopes of becoming an exorcist. After meeting a wayward exorcist, the young man must not only battle his own thoughts on faith, but some shockingly cliché and trite moments of wannabe horror.

When talking about horror films, while most of the focus may be on the ability of the film to truly scare you, what makes a good horror film just that, is the ability for the film to be economic in every sense of filmmaking. From the use of plot and dialogue, to the nature of the scares, the more economical the film, the better, just ask someone like Wes Craven. Red Eye is the perfect example of this.

And The Rite is the worst.

The film’s biggest flaw is that most of the film is simply either wholly cliché, or simply superficial. From the use of subtitles in a very specific and jarring classroom scene (the scene itself is used as nothing more than a plot point to bring our two students together), to entire scenes (I’m looking at you whoever added a scene of our lead pissing while being gawked at by a religious statue), the film is hilariously long. Clocking in at 112 minutes, the film could have stood the loss of a good thirty minutes, without much of an issue.

However, the longer length would have been understandable had the film been narratively or thematically compelling. The film relies heavily on previous exorcism films, even mentioning a point from one of the genre’s most iconic, and then scoffing at it, showing the audaciously large balls that this film unjustly believes it has. Our lead is unconvincing in his wavering faith, particularly when the falling action begins, and he is shown truly behind the curtain and to what’s going on here. The film leaves no doubt as to what has happened, thus giving us a clean ending, which for a film focusing so heavily on the idea of what it means to have faith, and what faith itself means, is really uninteresting and neo-repulsive.

That said, the film’s biggest sin may be placed on the film’s cast as a whole.

Starring Anthony Hopkins, Colin O’Donoghue and Alice Braga, the film lacks any performances worth their weight in method preparation, and while Hopkins does bring it home near the end (particularly with a thrust of the back of his hand near the end of the film, which is one of the film’s first and only inspired moments), it’s far too little, much too late. O’Donoghue lacks any depth as our lead, and is about as convincing in this role as yours truly would be in the role of a wooden block. Actually, that is the perfect role for O’Donoghue, come to think of it. Alice Braga is fine here, as she’s always a joy to watch on screen, but her character as a whole has little reason to exist, thus making all of her moments seem wholly false, and entirely superficial.

Director Hafstrom does the film no favors either. Visually as cliché as the film is narratively, The Rite has poor set design, and this sense of sterility in both its visual style directorially, as well as its style cinematically that really leaves you at arm’s length from the film. Clinically framed, Hafstrom does very little within the frame to excite the viewer, and does even less to leave you on the edge of your seat. For a horror/thriller, this film lacked any terror both on screen, and in the viewer’s mind, which is ultimately a problem found at the film’s very core.

Despite a few choice moments near the film’s conclusion, The Rite is one of the most superficial and long winded horror/thrillers I’ve seen in some time. A horror film without much horror, and a thriller without a single thrill, a film so focused on the concept of the questioning of faith, did instill that very thought in my mind. However, instead of questioning my religious faith, I was left questioning my faith in the world of modern horror filmmaking. Hell, humanity seems a little less honorable after this damn thing.

THE RITE - 2/10

Go see something good!

[REVIEW] - Rage

There are very few filmmakers that seem to bring with the simple addition of their name to a film, an automatic sense of credibility or inherent respect quite like the man himself, Guillermo del Toro.

Whether it be producing credits on films like The Orphanage, or his upcoming writing credit on Peter Jackson’s The Hobbit, del Toro has taken his insane amount of and truly turned it into something of a father figure, furthering on the careers of young, up and coming filmmakers.

The latest to get the del Toro bump, Sebastian Cordero, is back with his follow up to his well loved sophomore effort, Chronicles, and while it may seem to just have del Toro’s name attached as a producer, not only is this film covered in del Toro’s light touch, but it’s also a genuinely well crafted, engaging, and well acted thriller. Rage is shares quirks with films like Cronos as much as it does the erotic voyeuristic thrillers of Brian De Palma.

Rage follows the story of a construction worker who, after accidentally killing a man after confronting him about recently being fired, hides in a mansion where his girlfriend is working as a maid. A story of rage on the truest plain conceptually, the film is a romantic thriller that looks at what happens to a man who literally loses everything, ranging from relationships with his girlfriend and the outside world, to ultimately the sanity that makes you and I human.

However well conceived the film truly may be though, all would be undone if it weren’t for this collection of really fantastic performances.

Starring Gustavo Sanchez Parra as our film’s lead, Jose Maria, the film relies on his performance from the very outset. Thankfully, he knocks it out of the park. The film is drenched in this sense of melodrama that extends into the performances, but they as a whole, particularly Parra’s, feels so real within this given world. This man has literally lost everything that makes him human, and while it may be slight in the grand scheme of things, you get this great sense of true building rage within this performance, that is simply just lights up the screen. He himself is the bomb under the table in this film, and its one hell of a time watching it slowly tick down to zero.

Playing his love interest is the wonderful and beautiful Martina Garcia as the maid, Rosa. She is perfectly cast in this roll, and while it’s hard to believe that a woman like this would stick around for a man who had killed a man, there is a sense of truth within the performance (and a certain plot point definitely helps the plot move forward), that really gives way to a great counterpoint to the overtly brooding performance from Parra.

Rounding out the cast are four really great supporting performances from Alex Brendemuhl, Concha Velasco, Xabier Elorriaga, and Iciar Bollain. The four of them play the family that Rosa is the maid for, and they really give this sense of reality to this otherwise hyper-melodramatic story. Great supporting performances can really hold a film together, and these four are the general glue that keeps this film from falling into the realm of high class telenovela.

That said, the premise, and often the writing, don’t hold the film to that relatively high standard.

Written by Cordero, and based on a novel penned by Sergio Bizzio, the film is an inherently compelling narrative, the writing here doesn’t do it any favors. Often putting the film’s main thesis right into the ether that the film creates, Cordero doesn’t quite take the same sense of subtlety that he does with his frame as he does here in the script. A script ripped straight out of a Lifetime movie, the cast here has to pull more than their fair share of weight, and while it ultimately works as a campy B-thriller, Cordero doesn’t do himself any favors on the written page.

That said, he does save himself visually.

Seemingly taking cues from both del Toro and a filmmaker like De Palma, Rage has this sense of up front and real world brutality that gives the early films of del Toro their sense of raw filmmaking aesthetic. Pair this with a voyeuristic sense of thrilling eroticism, and you have a low-key thriller that takes more than its fair share of cues from the aforementioned filmmakers. In the dingy world of thrillers, the film gives the viewer a breath of fresh air both visually and thematically, bringing you a visually visceral look at a man losing his sanity and his humanity.

Overall, while the film may lack a screenplay that is worth its weight in pulp, the film thrives on a fantastic collection of performances, as well as an assured filmmaker at its core. A breath of fresh air in the world of feature film thrillers, Rage is a relatively single location film that makes the most of its creepy location and relatively intriguing themes.

While it may not be the strongest film ever made, but for fans of thrillers, this is definitely a must see picture.

Rage – 7.5/10

Go see something good!

REVIEW: The Last Airbender

Coming into this weekend, you had two films that ran the spectrum of expectations.

First, there was The Twilight Saga: Eclipse, which looked like a dreadful fang covered soap opera of a melodrama, and didn’t have much, outside of a great soundtrack and David Slade as a director, going for it. Then there was The Last Airbender. Based off of what I, and many, consider one of this generations most stunning television shows, the film looked visually striking, but coming from one M. Night Shyamalan, had all of us walking on eggshells going into the film.

Well I’ll be damned, expectations can really be a bitch some times, and this is exactly one of them, because I would never had expected the outcomes to be so vastly different than one could have expected. Never have I would have thought that a film could be so utterly disappointing as the one featuring the bald kid with the power of air, earth, water and fire.

The Last Airbender follows the story of Aang, the latest in a long line of people known as Avatars. These rare and special breed of people, all reborn from the same soul, are able to bend the four essential elements, of water, earth, air and fire. The Fire Nation is on the hunt, and enslaving any that get in their way in hopes of completely ruling the world. This is the story of Aang, and his two friends, Sokka and Katara, who will help him on his quest. However, it’s a story that has already been told, and this is definitely not a welcome addition to the series.

Personally, expectations were high for this film. First, I utterly adore Shyamalan and much of his work, particularly Unbreakable, Signs, Sixth Sense, and if drunk off my rocker, The Happening. Second, and more importantly, this story is based off of what I think may quite be the best animated television series ever put to television. It’s a basic heroes journey, but the sheer scale, style, and magnitude of the story, makes this a show that is not only a must see, but watchable like none other.

However, here, we get a horribly written, poorly paced, and thematically obnoxious piece of cinema that offers very few reasons to watch.

While many people have been calling this the worst film of the year, as it’s now the worst reviewed film of the year on Rotten Tomatoes, I do have to disagree. The film isn’t nearly as disgustingly vile as a horrible and utterly dreadful film like Grown Ups, or as boring and eventless as a film like Dear John, as this does have some solid aspects.

First and foremost, the film looks fantastic. Shyamalan is a master behind the camera, particularly in engrossing the viewer cinematically into either the world in and of itself, or a particular fight scene. The fight’s are visually impressive, ILM is doing fantastic stuff effects wise, and while the costumes are laughably cartoonish, almost Street Fighter-esque, I do believe, visually, that this world exists. Also, while the score is cliché and completely rehashed from previous adventure films, it does work for the film. It’s not the most original thing Howard Shore has done, but it isn’t anything dreadful. Just completely serviceable, which may be a bigger sin than if it were off, but I’ll let it slide.

That my friends, is where the positives stop, and they stop with a thud.

To me, the film’s major sin is something that Shyamalan has gone on record saying is a dream of his. Within the original series, the great thing about it was that it’s themes, while apparent, weren’t punching you in the jaw every moment. However, here you get lines like “I want to show the Fire Nation that we believe in our beliefs as much as they believe in theirs.” Not only that, but the themes as a whole are continually thrust into your face, which no matter if I agree with it or not, would be hard to take in. While I don’t believe in the overtly Christian themes that Shyamalan is verbally happy to give us, I would be fine with it, if it were far less obvious and hamfisted. It is simply too jarring that completely takes you out of what is best described as a classic hero’s tale.

Now, there has been much talk behind the changing of the lead character’s races, in the case of Zuko, Katara and Sokka. With Zuko being of seemingly Caucasian background, and Katara and Sokka of Inuit (apparently the ethnicity of the village in the film) or Middle Eastern decent, the races have been completely switched here, making it a story of good ole’ Caucasians being attacked by extremists of Middle Eastern decent. Sure, that in and of itself is horrible and really jarring when in Katara and Sokka’s village, but what is even worse, is that the three just don’t work.

Noah Ringer is fine here as Aang, however, both Nicola Peltz and Jackson Rathbone are really poor here. Peltz is as wooden as one could imagine, and Rathbone lacks any of the charm, comedic timing, or true character features that made Sokka such a watchable and loveable figure. Patel is menacing as Zuko, but also lacks any of the darker undertones that really made the character a powerful and dark figure within the original series. Appa is pretty much a none character here, which is a real shame, because as a fan of the series, some of the show’s best aspects come between Aang and his trusty six legged flying whatever-he-is.

Overall, while the film is definitely not the worst of the year, actually, it’s not even close, it is indeed one of the year’s biggest disappointments. It doesn’t fail on every level, but it also excels in very few, making this one of the year’s most underwhelming and mediocre films. It’s not challenging, not offensive, not fun, not dreadful, and it’s not inspiring. It’s simply a film that you will see, and then never remember the next day. It’s like that boring party that you simply go to for a free night of binge drinking. You won’t remember it the next day, and after you go through it, you’ll feel empty and used.

THE LAST AIRBENDER – 3/10

REVIEW - The Twilight Saga: Eclipse

So, over the past few years, the film world has had a brand new punching bag to join the side of easily mocked video game adaptations and toys who jump from the toy room to the big screen, like Transformers and G.I. Joe. That fang adorned emo wet dream of a punching bag is better known as the Twilight franchise, and it has become the biggest thing on the planet.

Literally, it caused theaters to show 3 a.m. showings. It’s that big.

However popular the series may be with the I-hate-my-parents-so-I-wear-black-clothes-and-right-sad-poems set, it has seemingly gone over the heads of the critic set. Hell, even the franchise’s fans realize that they are fans of lesser than type of material. However, it keeps them coming back.

It’s like crack for pre-teens and creepy neo-pedophile moms.

That said, for some reason, I still had hopes for the third film in the franchise, Eclipse. Maybe it’s the cast, which I think is a really gifted collection of actors, or maybe it’s the film’s director, David Slade, who got my ass in the seat. Hell, the soundtrack is one of the best I’ve heard in years, so maybe it’s that.
Frankly, I don’t care, because for some reason, this film didn’t fail like I had expected.

Eclipse finds our lead, Bella Swan, again caught in the middle of her awkward and horribly misguided love triangle between Jacob and Edward. An army of new born vamps have been sent out by the villain Victoria, who wants to avenge the loss of her former lover, James. A bunch of brooding looks, whining, and poorly done special effects shots ensue, making this the epitome, no, the physical manifestation of mediocrity.

Personally, going into the film, I had my mind set. I have had a long and storied history with the franchise, which I find not only boring and a butchering of the vampire mythos, but also a really deplorable statement to the young, impressionable pre-teens and 40 something cougars around the world. However, I was shocked to find that while that message was still here (which I go in depth on here), what seems to be put in its place is a film that ultimately fails, but has moments that didn’t want me to put bullets in my skull. That is this film’s true success.

The great thing that this film is able to do is instead of making this a boring and turgid three way between a homoerotic glowing vampire, shirtless werewolf, and a girl torn between them, and makes it a semi-watchable film with true stakes that gives you a payoff that makes the free ticket I used to see it somewhat worth it.

The cast here is solid. The three stars have solid chemistry, with Lautner, who plays Jacob, actually showing a bit of an arrogant side that makes his character seem a bit more human, and much less of a caricature. Pattinson is fine as Edward, but is about as lively as a piece of wood he’d use to kill himself, and Stewart is actually kind of solid as Bella, who while being given absolutely nothing to do, keeps your attention on screen. However, it’s people like Jackson Rathbone and Ashley Greene who really shine here, as does the entire supporting cast, which seems to be a constant theme throughout the films. Always the more interesting characters, the supporting cast get a rather massive chunk of on screen presence, giving us fans of them a lot to really chew on.

David Slade is also impressive here, as he’s been given nothing to really do here, but has instead crafted a stunning visual piece, and again proves that he’s far better of a director than this material really deserves. The film looks utterly breathtaking, particularly when he gives us a visual glimpse of the world we are dealing with, and the landscape that it covers. I adore these moments in the film, that are way too few and far between. Also, the action is well done here, which is quite the shocking surprise.

Oh, and this has to be one of the best collections of source music collected in recent memory. Seriously, this is one of this year’s most fantastic soundtracks. Pick it up. You won’t be sorry.

However, that’s where it all stops, as this is remarkably unforgettable.

Personally, the film fails just about as fast as it starts. The film’s ultimate sin is that no matter how high the stakes are here, you have no need to really care. You don’t care about these characters, particularly the three leads, which we are supposed to have so much invested in. There is no narrative or dramatic weight here, which leaves you simply wanting to watch this stunning landscape that Slade has crafted. He and his crew do what they can with the material, but those who aren’t fans of the books really won’t have much to dig into here. It’s visually impressive, but for a film to have such little keeping you glued to the screen, this all seems to get lost amongst a bunch of uncalled for angst and emo bullshit.

Overall, the film does what it can with the awful source material. If you love your films without any narrative or emotional weight, and with a copious amount of unfounded whining, then this is your masterpiece. However, for those of you like me, who like our movies engaging, then maybe this is one to let your girlfriend and her friends go see on a girl’s night out.

ECLIPSE – 4/10

REVIEW: Bright Star...

I think I’m secretly a woman.

As the cinephile that I am, I am a big fan of a few different genres. Science Fiction, Film Noir, and dark comedies are just a few different genres and styles of films that catch the eyes of this guy. However, one genre that you may or may not expect to hear come out of my mouth, or typed from these fingers when discussing favorite genres, is costume drama. That said, I still believe that it’s one of the most interesting genres, and it’s just one that hits me in the right spot. That little pit right somewhere in your gut, that when tapped, automatically gets your attention, and ultimately, your tears.

Bright Star is easily the best costume drama I have seen, since at least Pride and Prejudice, and is arguably the best film so far this year. I know it’s my favorite.

Following a secret love affair, Bright Star tells the tale of legendary Romantic poet, John Keats, as he aims to win the heart and affection of his ultimate muse, one Fanny Brawne. The outspoken student of fashion is at once smitten by Keats’ ways, and the unlikely pair, who started at odds, are drawn together by the illness and death of Keats’ brother. Touched by her efforts to help, he agrees to teach her poetry, and from there on, the relationship gains unstoppable momentum, as they are intensely and helplessly absorbed into each other’s lives. However, troubles come, and seemingly insurmountable odds stand in their way.

Arguably the biggest problem that film goers have with costume/period dramas are how stuffy and seemingly uninteresting the dialogue, characters, and stories can be. However, Bright Star could not be any more opposed to that sentiment. Not a whole lot happens during the film, as it’s basically the story of boy and girl meet, fall in love, quibble, and then the ultimate conclusion. It’s a breezy film about John Keats, and yet is all the more powerful and effective for that.

The film is light and airy, and fits the style and ideal of Keats and what the Romantic poets stood for so perfectly. Director Jane Campion, whose film The Piano is one of my favorites, paints a stunningly beautiful frame, one that is as dreamy and gorgeous as the words that Keats put to page. It’s an intimate look at a love that knows no boundaries, money included, and one that is so pure, that it makes the average romance film look like a porn in comparison. Sure, it’s a period film, but this film doesn’t rely solely on period staples like films like The Dutchess do.

The true star of this film however is the cast, particularly the two leads. Given a script full of poignant dialogue with some of the most beautiful and lyrical poems ever dreamt, Ben Wishaw and Abbie Cornish make this a romance that one can believe in. Wishaw has previously done a poet character, albeit a bit more cynical, in I’m Not There, and here, he pulls in one of the best lead performances of this year. Abbie Cornish is great here, and is a true treasure as the wide eyed, yet sarcastic Fanny. Another surprising turn from Paul Schneider, best known as the brother in Lars and The Real Girl, and you have one of the best ensemble casts this year, and one that sure hope gets some sort of recognition come Oscar time.

Most costume dramas get accused of being turgid and soulless self masturbatory production design manifestos, yet Bright Star seemingly falls as far from that stereotype as possible. Full of life, not only in the lead roles, the film absolutely jumps off of the screen. It’s an elegant film, with the poetic touch and dreamy style that made Keats the fantastic poet he was. It doesn’t bash the viewer in the face with production design, but instead, takes that design, which is easily the most elaborate and stunning this year, and simply make it secondary to this love story. As all romance films do, Star relies on the chemistry of the two lovers, and that ultimately may be the films biggest strength. The two do not fall for each other right away, but as they do, you begin to see the fire between the two, come on the faces of the respective actors, via a look, a smile, or a nod. Also, Campion lets the camera linger, and often times randomly pop up to show something as simple as a young girl walking in with a cat, and it just forces the viewer to dig deeper and deeper into this world that she has so beautifully crafted.

As a film, and as a biopic, I feel as though this is the blueprint for how to create one that truly works.

Star, instead of following the entire span of Keats’ life, it simply follows three years, the final three years of this poets life. It encapsulates Keats’ at his most prolific, most loving, most cold, most frail, and most tortured, which allows the viewer to simply dig into the subject, for that period of time. There is no need to show Keats’ when he is young, as that is not directly important to the viewer, in any meaningful way. It allows the film to live and breath on it’s own, without being lagged down by any back story. It’s almost like a superhero origin tale. One can only see so many of them before they begin to play as if they are all too similar. This one simply plants us in this time, and forces us to fill in any back story that we may or may not want. That choice is far to important, and one that I am thankful Campion gave us. If you want to know more, read up on him. If not, enjoy what may be one of the best films of ’09.

All in all, this is the opposite of a blockbuster, and opposite of a film that will work for everyone. This isn’t an explosion filled action fest, nor is it a melodrama heavy soap opera style romantic drama, what this film is however is a poetic look at three years, and one wonderful romance, that, instead of forcing you to tears, or scaring the shit out of you, simply asks you to think about love, life, and the art of words. It’s also leaves you, at least I hope it does, saying you were glad to see it.

I almost wish we were butterflies and liv’d but three summer days—three such days with you I could fill with more delight than fifty common years could ever contain.

BRIGHT STAR – 9/10

Go see something good!

REVIEW: The Box...

I hate Donnie Darko.

Southland Tales, even moreso.

So, one can postulate that I wasn't to keen on seeing The Box, Richard Kelly's newest film. However, for some random reason, I still had a bit of anticipation for his adapation of Button, Button, a Richard Matheson tale. Starting with Darko, which is a grossly overhyped and overrated little cult hit, which is the case for any mediocre genre film, and then going to the bombastic and voistrous trainwreck that was Southland, this should be easily his worst film yet, right? Well, that pleasure I didn't have. What I got was a slightly above mediocre little film, that missed about as much as it hit.

The Box follows Norma and Arthur Lewis, a suburban couple with a young child, who receive a simple wooden box as a gift, which bears fatal and irrevocable consequences. A mysterious stranger, delivers the message that the box promises to bestow upon its owner $1 million with the press of a button. But, pressing this button will simultaneously cause the death of another human being somewhere in the world; someone they don't know. With just 24 hours to have the box in their possession, Norma and Arthur find themselves in the cross-hairs of a startling moral dilemma and must face the true nature of their humanity.

I normally don’t talk much about music, but I think this films score is almost a perfect replica of the problems the film has.

Scored by The Arcade Fire, a brilliant and creative band of which I am a devout acolyte is not as sonically stellar as one would hope. Sure, it’s fine, and it fits the film, but it’s simply ok. It’s neither good, nor bad, and is in some spots even cliché in its tone and it’s even more depressing of a standard thriller score, when you realize who is behind it all. It’s a perfect microcosm for the film as a whole.

Based on a short story, Button, Button, which was also adapted into a Twilight Zone episode, Kelly shows that yes, he is quite a creative film maker. While I don’t truly enjoy either of his previous efforts, I understand just what level of creativity goes into creating those tales, and particularly his interesting visual style. However, while it’s not truly a commercial film, this is far more commercial than either of his previous efforts, and is almost as intellectually dull.

The true star of this film is the visual style in which Kelly paints his looping tragedy. A modern riff on ‘70’s sci-fi, Twilight Zone-esque tales, and the film fits perfectly in that world. While there isn’t much physically in the way of ‘70’s era style, outside of costumes of course, the style and shot structure would be right in that world. The blocked off frame, slow zooms, and the morality play of a premise, this would be a perfect fit as a new episode of the aforementioned Twilight Zone.

However, outside of that, the film falls more than flat. For most of the film, the story is somewhat coherent, and equally as straightforward. It’s a morality play that is basically a riff off of W.W. Jacobs’ The Monkey’s Paw, and yet is neither as good as this short story, nor as interesting as its direct source material. Full of Arthur C. Clarke, Christmas, child and adult abduction, and Sartre’s No Exit (my personal favorite play), the film attempts to have some weightier themes, yet revels in its own mediocrity.

The cast also don’t truly help Kelly out in any respect.

James Marsden is fine here, but is equally the biggest disappointment, as he is simply mining similar territory. As the father in the household, one could imagine that this would have been his character from any of his numerous romantic comedies, just if he was set in the ‘70’s. He’s fine, but is simply sitting comfortably in his recliner of a character type. Cameron Diaz trumps him however, as a wooden porn star version of the woman we once saw with jizz in her hair. She delivers her lines with such dry and soap opera style emotion, that it lies flat on the dingy frame painted ever so creatively by Kelly.

That said, the film does have a few shining moments. The main star of this piece is Frank Langella as the man with the box, Arlington Steward, and is a true joy to watch on screen. He fits the role like a glove, and is truly fun to see chew up the scenery. Gillian Jacobs, who plays Britta on Community, is a nice addition to the cast, and so is Sam Stone, who plays Walter, the couple’s son.

However, when the film goes into creep mode, the atmosphere set by Kelly is beyond solid. There are a few motifs within the film that, when the falling action begins to head to the floor, have set up the tension so well, that it’s all the more compelling. That said, when the climax does come, it’s so utterly preposterous, that not only is it uninteresting, horribly cliché, but it’s also rather boring.
That is ultimately this films main sin. The ending hits the viewer in the face, and then proceeds to tell us that everything will be okay, as if we were sitting on a hospital bed during an episode of a Spanish telenovela. It’s a television episode stretched 4 times the 30 minute length, and just as good as that sounds. Ending with a do-or-die situation, a similar situation from where we started, we see that this is simply a looping tragedy, which, due to human nature, is doomed to repeat itself. That, in and of itself, is inherently intriguing, and an idea that I would more than like to sit down and sift through. However, what Kelly gives us, is an overly emotional scene involving these two lovers, completely ditching the cynical idea of human nature, in hopes of a more commercial ending. Full of declarations of love and tears, instead of wrenching the gut, the performances are so unengaging, that it fell completely flat.

All in all, this film is neither good, nor horrible. This has been a primarily negative review, but it is only because I know that everyone involved with this film has more up their sleeve, and could have made this film much more interesting. The film is neither the fun-to-hate, hard-to-find-something-to-appreciate fever dream that was Donnie Darko, nor the shockingly bad and hilariously insane schlock fest that was Southland Tales, but instead, it’s simply a convoluted and anticlimactic thriller, with a few golden moments. The film is well made, is slightly interesting and compelling, and while being a tad bit frivolous and almost downright preposterous, it still makes sense. It’s just not a worthwhile puzzle to put together, at least in theatres.

This is a great step forward for Kelly however, and if this film does do one thing, it gets me insanely interested into what he does next.

THE BOX – 5/10

Go see something good!

REVIEW: The House of the Devil...

There are a few things that I love in this world. Two of them happen to be horror films and sports analogies. Oddly enough, when discussing what makes a good horror film just that, good, the same thing can be said for what makes a sports game compelling.

Few things in this world are as compelling as a close and down to the wire sporting event. Same goes for horror films. When a horror film is good, it gives you a close game throughout, or in a films case, a good horror film gives you a films worth of tension and suspense. Then, when the games finale comes, a team has seconds left on the clock, only to drain a last second shot to win the game, and send you flying up and high fiving your buddy next to you. Then there is the great horror film ending, which is a continuous set of intense falling action, ending with a close that sends you jumping out of your seat and saying "Oh my god!" Then there are bad horror films, that are suspenseful, jut like a sporting event, and yet end inconsequential, or to end the sporting analogy, with one team shooting foul shots to win by 10.

That is why, after watching The House of the Devil, one can't help but think that this is one of the year's best games. It's the Game 7 of horror films, and to much success.

Set in the 1980's, The House of The Devil follows young college sophomore Samantha Hughes, as she picks up a babysitting job she found whilst looking for a way to make rent on campus. Much to the opposition of her best friend, Sam takes a job babysitting for a creepy yet soft spoken elderly man, in what can be accounted for as one of the creepiest houses you'll see this side of Hill House. The job however, also coincides with a full lunar eclipse, and as she slowly realizes that her clients harbor a horrifying secret, she discovers that there is something much more evil, and much more satanic at the heart of this job.

With films like Paranormal Activity, Grace, and Drag Me To Hell, this has been one of the better years for the horror genre. Minus Drag Me To Hell, the overarching similarities between these films is that PA, Grace, and House of the Devil are all slow burns. The lull the viewer into being not just full of tension, but also truly make the viewer uncomfortable, by creating a true world. This world just happens to be an homage of '70's and '80's horror, and also, the ending actually delivers on the films promise, unlike the buzz kill of a horror film, Paranormal Activity.

This isn't just a Scary Movie style pastiche however. This is full blown homage, and hits the viewer in the nuts making them gasp for a true breath of fresh, painful air. Intensely low-tech and stunningly so, the film is not your splatter stick style horror film. It's like putting your hand on a burner and slowly raising the heat until your hand bubbles as you realize your hand is melting like a Nazi who hangs out with Indiana Jones on a daily basis. The first true jump scare comes about 20-30 minutes in, and it's one hell of a shock, and from there, sends you on a journey straight from the canon of people like Roman Polanski.

The film stars Jocelin Donahue, in what can be accounted for as a secondary performance to the films overall atmosphere. Not truly a protagonist, as not a whole lot happens during the course of a majority of the film, but she still is a compelling lead. She completely sells her role, and seems to be directly ripped off of a frame from a '70's horror film, even down the feathered-do that she is sporting. However, the true star of the film, is Tom Noonan as the elderly homeowner, Mr. Ulman. He is so brilliantly soft spoken, that you aren't sure to be creeped out by him, for fall oddly in love with his quiet demeanor. Mary Woronov is also great as Noonan's wife, but is in it for far to little of the film.

The film is also stunning to look at. As a homage to horror films of the past, the film is shot stunningly on 16mm, the direction from director Ti West, is so "inspired-by", yet instead of seeming like a Planet Terror style pastiche of films past, West has fashioned a potent, almost poetic horror film that would fit right in with films from the era of his inspiration. And sure, the ending is a storyline we have seen before, but the way it is handled still had me saying "what!?" as I turned off my XBOX 360.

That may be the films biggest let down, as this is one film that I truly sh could be seen by a large group of people, in a theatre setting. The film works as a whole to set a story and mood, that I think this film could do gangbusters at the box office, given a solid, Paranormal Activity style marketing campaign. Where that rather stellar horror film failed, the horrible and completely buzz-kill of an ending, this one makes up for in spades. It seems ripped straight out of the trailers for Grindhouse, and in fact, would have played brilliantly as the true film shown before Death Proof. It's Don't Tell Mom The Babysitters Dead, but if it were shot by William Freidkin as a pet project while on a bender post Exorcist.

However, this film is not for every horror fan. If you are like me, and fans of films like Repulsion, Rosemary's Baby, or The Exorcist (which I am in no way comparing this films quality too) then this is the horror film for you. Even the score sounds directly ripped out of the music for The Exorcist. Short on Saw like gore porn, but deep with atmosphere and mood, this film is for the horror fan who has had enough with gorno, and wants some thought with his or her horror. However, for those who are salivating at the thought of Saw 49403021, skip it.

HOUSE OF THE DEVIL - 9/10

Go see something good!

SCRIPT REVIEW: Nightmare On Elm Street...

GENRE: Horror

PLOT: A group of suburban teenagers are being haunted in their dreams by a "horribly disfigured killer" known as Freddy Krueger

STARRING: Jackie Earle Haley, Rooney Mara

SCREENPLAY: Wesley Strick, based on A Nightmare on Elm Street by Wes Craven, with revisions by Eric Heisserer

DIRECTOR: Samuel Bayer

So Halloween has passed us by.

One of the films I try the hardest to see at least once a year during this season is the original Nightmare on Elm Street. Sure, some of the effects are dated, but nothing screams true horror like a murder who hunts his victims in their most vulnerable of states. While they are sleeping.

This brilliance, mind so perfectly in the legendary original then lead to exponentially worse sequels (even a very meta seventh film, called Wes Craven’s New Nightmare, which if you haven’t seen, should, just for how bizarre the entire film really is). However, in this world where nothing is sacred, and even classic pieces of cinema (really, Third Man, really?) are being remade. When news that Platinum Dunes, the same people behind the rather stellar remakes of Friday the 13th and Texas Chainsaw Massacre, got the rights to this franchise, one couldn’t help but groan at the thought. That said, when the cast began leaking out, and the discovery that Jackie Earl Haley would take the reigns as Freddy Krueger, one couldn’t help but be intrigued.

Then came the films trailer. That damn trailer.

The first trailer for Nightmare on Elm Street came out, and hit the webs like fire. Some didn’t go for it, but personally, I could not have liked it more. Hinting at an interesting backstory that wasn’t truly mined, at least in the original series as a whole, and giving the film, and Freddy in particular, a much darker and horrific tone really has me digging this project. Then, by sheer accident, I came across this script, so I couldn’t avoid it, right?

And I’m glad I didn’t.

This version of Nightmare takes place in the present day, and we follow a group of teens, who are similar to that of the original, just placed in the modern day. We meet Dean, who is Freddy’s very first kill, at least that we see. We also meet Kris, a girl next door type teen who is similar to the originals Tina, and Jesse, a member of the swim team and a similar version of the original’s Ron. The primary focus of the film is left on the shoulders of our other two leads, Quentin, who is reminiscent of the Johnny Depp role Glen, who also hosts a podcast, and of course, Nancy, our goth girl lead.

13 years after the death of Freddy Krueger, he is back for revenge on the group of children that once ratted him out for alleged abuse. Freddy, a good looking and kind man, got along more than great with the children, who were fond of the fedora wearing gardener. However, after being accused of child molestation and abuse, Freddy is accosted by parents, and forced to leave. Or is there something deeper that happened those 13 years ago? That is the main thrust of the story. The film is primarily a horror mystery, which follows Quentin and Nancy as they try to not only survive, but find out what truly happened to the former gardener.

The most shocking, and the most endearing thing about this script, and why I really don’t think Platinum Dunes even knows what kind of hit they have on their hands, is that all of the things that superficially make Freddy who he is, are gone. He’s not charismatic, he’s not witty, and most importantly, he has regained that edge and sheer brutality that makes the concept of who he is so inherently terrifying. Near the end of the franchise, instead of being horror movies, the films almost became horror/comedies, and there is not a single hint of that mixture in this piece. It’s a dark, brutal, and violent look at what it would be like if someone could kill while in their victim’s dreams. It’s inherently horrifying, and so is this screenplay. The kills in this film are both interesting in a cinematic kind of way, as well as being sheer violent and gory. I’m not normally a gore fan, but the premise that is encompassing the gore is so deeply interesting, and it’s done with such skill in this screenplay, which one can’t help but think that there is potential for something special here.

However, the previous films have not been forgotten. Throughout the script, there are many tiny look backs at the original, a couple of which can even be seen in the trailer. There is one sequence in particular, where Freddy’s clawed glove reaches up out of a bathtub while Nancy is taking a bath, that is a nice tip of the hat back to what once was in the Nightmare franchise. That’s one thing that I think Platinum Dunes does best. While I do think this group has a great sense of genre, I also personally believe that these guys have a great sense of what made each of the franchises that they have remade, truly them. In Texas Chainsaw Massacre, it was the gritty feel and attempt at realism. In Friday the 13th, it was camp, boobs, and inventive kills. In Nightmare, it’s a dark tone, violent kills, and one hell of an interesting premise. These guys, spearheaded by Michael Bay, have really stepped up their game for this film, and I think there is definite potential here, especially with Samuel Bayer, director of Nirvana’s Smells Like Teen Spirit video at the helm.

The final interesting thing that this script does is how Freddy’s back-story is explained. While in the original it was primarily done through discussion and exposition from Nancy’s mother, this film takes a new and more interesting spin on it. Using a fresh mix of flashback as well as including dream sequences to further the story, there really isn’t much of a dull moment here. Sure, the opening is a bit slow, and things don’t pick up until about 15-20 pages in, but at a brisk 110 pages, one can’t help but wish this was coming out now, instead of April of 2010.

All in all, the script is dark, compelling, and full of great moments. Yes, the opening is a bit slow, and the kills may not be on the scale of Saw, in terms of inventiveness, but as a fresh take on one the most beloved horror films, one can’t help but appreciate what is going on here. Great story, one hell of a premise, and a much needed breath of fresh air into this slowly dying franchise, the remake of Nightmare on Elm Street is set to be the next big horror blockbuster, and for very good reason.

8/10

Go see something good!

SCRIPT REVIEW: Green Lantern...

Genre: Action/Sci-Fi/Comic Book/

Plot: A man is granted a mystical green ring that bestows him with otherworldly powers, as well as membership into an intergalactic squadron tasked with keeping peace within the universe

Starring: Ryan Reynolds

Screenplay: Greg Berlanti, Marc Guggenheim, Michael Green

Director: Martin Campbell

It should come as no surprise to any person who reads this blog on a regular basis, that I’m a bit of a comic book geek, and that is just putting it lightly. So, when I get the chance to go through the first draft of a script for a hotly anticipated comic book film, let alone one for a legendary character, you better believe I pump through that as fast as I can.

That’s when Green Lantern landed in my lap. While I’m not the world’s largest Green Lantern fan, I have read a few of the runs of the character, and know of the Corp. and other iterations of Green Lantern, which is definitely something useful when going into this script. Not a necessity, but it is helpful.

So, throughout the past couple of days, whenever I’ve been given a little bit of time, I would pull this screenplay out of my messenger bag, and pick through it. And to kick off my review of this script, I’m going to say, that it was really, really good. Not solid, but darn near brilliant.

The most apt comparison that I could make to this script is that of Supermax, the Green Arrow film, in the fact that this is going to be a film that fanboys and girls are going to flip their respective shit over. It’s an engaging, and brisk screenplay (coming in at 104 pages for the first draft, and allegedly 109 pages for the second), which is always an added bonus, but it is also almost constant action. Similar in tone and style, at least script wise, to films like Iron Man, this is one hell of a fun time. Actually, Iron Man is a perfect comparison. As Warner Brothers first, big, post Marvel superhero film, one can seriously see the effects that that companies success has had on the big boys over at WB. It’s not a dark film (although the script is toned really weird, which I will get to in a minute), but it has almost a carbon copy of the humor seen in Iron Man, and with Ryan Reynolds in the lead, I must say, it’s pitch perfect.

Also, having just finished up the first half of my Story Making class here at Grand Valley, I must say, this screenplay is rather well written. Hal Jordan has an apparent conflict that he must overcome, a distinct personal character arc, as well as some interesting romantic plot points, as well as some of the most action packed fight scenes I’m sure any of us will ever see. The idea of a man with a ring that can create ANYTHING his or her heart desires not only means interesting story elements, of which there are many here, but it also means that this will be one of the most visually arresting superhero films that we will ever have a chance to see. The plot is a close equivalent to the Green Lantern origin, so fanboys will love it, and those who are not normally comic book fans, but love some heart pounding action, you will have more than your fill of that within this screenplay, and hopefully the final film.

The origin tale goes like this:

Abin Sur’s ship crashes in a desert on Earth also known as Gaia to those within the Green Lantern Corps., after his fight with a giant beast, known only as Legion. Legion haunts the Corps, and has recently killed three Lanterns, before taking the life of Sur. When Sur dies, his green ring answers Sur’s final request, and goes on the hunt for someone honest and brave. Passing Clark Kent and Guy Gardner, the ring bursts to the side of Hal Jordan. Hal sees Abin, who dies in his arms. By the end of the first act, Hal has taken the famous Lantern oath, and is set flying.

Meanwhile, we meet Hector Hammond, who, at the request of the government, performs an autopsy on Sur. During the act, a piece of Legion infects Hammond, and gives him insane powers like mind reading and the ability to control any object, even whole spaceships (which is proven late in the script), with the power of his mind. Hammond is the films second villain, and while not the biggest threat to Earth, one that Green Lantern needs to take care of. From this point forward, it’s basically non-stop Green Lantern action, and some of the most comically written (in just how ludicrous it all sounds), and budget pushing action scenes ever put to paper.

I’m really not lying. Imagine hundreds of green lanterns flying around in space, throwing giant weapons at a “Doomsday” sized beast. It’s almost comical how insanely over the top all of these action scenes are written, and I must say, it’s really refreashing. The trio behind this draft obviously have no shame with what they want this film to be, and it’s what I think every person who wants to see a Green Lantern film truly wants in the said film. It’s non-stop action for about the entirety of the 2nd and 3rd acts, and even the first act has a bit more action than one would expect.

However, the script does have a few flaws, particularly in its tone.

The screenplay wants to be this big budget, box office juggernaut, and yet the film has characters like BIG MOTHERFUCKING BOYFRIEND. While this doesn’t play into the rating of the character, and character only curses maybe once, it does make for a bit of a jarring read. Also, some of the violence, like a Senator getting riddled in the chest with bullets in almost a poetic piece of prose, or a man’s head ripping apart, makes for a weird tone for the film. It wants to be humorous and action packed, yet it has these hints of a darker side, that aren’t truly minded to any meaningful depths, making it just awkward. Also, the romantic angle, while sweet and a fitting zone for star Ryan Reynolds, is far to cliché to make it anything more than a typical love story. Nothing new, just paint by numbers romance. Finally, the first act is a bit slow, and the overall storyline isn’t anything that we haven’t seen before. It’s a standard hero’s tale, but it’s one that is going to stun viewers with just how visually arresting it has the potential to be.

All I know, from this script, is that if the studio allows the film maker, Martin Campbell, to do as he wishes, and gives full creative control of visual effects to the crew, Warner Brothers may have the next Dark Knight on their hands. Maybe not in tone or even quality per se, but this film has blockbuster hit written all over its green frame. Martin Campbell has proven himself to be a fantastic director, not only overall, but particularly in the realm of action (he has saved the Bond franchise twice now), and with a lead like Reynolds, who fits the role of Jordan like a glove, this has hit written all over its head.

Seriously, don’t tell me you don’t want to see THIS on the big screen!



Go see something good!