Review – The Sorcerer’s Apprentice

The Sorcerer’s Apprentice is not a very good film. It is extremely predictable (even more so than most movies of this genre) and from the beginning, you know exactly how the movie will progress and end. But because the cast is so good the movie ends up being tolerable.

The story revolves around young Dave Stutter (JAY BARUCHEL) and his encounter with magician, Balthazar (NICOLAS CAGE) who used to work for Merlin (of all people!) Along comes the sophisticated baddy Maxim Horvath (ALFRED MOLINA) who is holding a long term grudge against Balthazar who imprisoned him in a jar with Morgana (ALICE KRIGE) and Balthazar’s ex Veronica (MONICA BELLUCCI) for over a thousand years. There is a lot of conventional nonsense, like Dave being the magician Balthazar has been searching a thousand years for who will save the world and there is a sub-plot about Dave trying to win the heart of Becky (TERESA PALMER) a girl he has had a crush on since childhood.

Really, the only reason to see this movie is for the cast, specifically Jay Baruchel, Tobby Kebbell and Alfred Molina. Baruchel is definitely a star on the rise. He is very sweet, charming and has great comic timing. He has a Woody Allen type persona, but it is more believable that girls would be interested in him. Women will like him because he’s geeky cute and men will like him because he is non-threatening and “like them”. Tobby Kebbell steals every scene he is in, much the way he did in Rock n’ Rolla a few years ago. He plays a self absorbed David Blaine-type “illusionist” and it is a lot of fun to watch him prance about. Lastly, you can always count on Alfred Molina, no matter what nonsense movie he might be in, to give a good performance. As usual, he makes a cheeky, fun villain, but still grounds the character in as much reality as a movie like this will allow.

When the actors in Sorcerer’s Apprentice are working their magic, it is entertaining. But since the whole point of a movie like this is to show off spectacular action sequences, it is ironic that, with the exception of the final sequence, the film drags during them. It is one of those cases where it is clear that the producers thought that cool new effects (lightning bolts shooting from the actors hands) was enough to captivate audiences. But action sequences do not stand on their own without help. They need careful pacing and editing just as dramatic scenes do. Whiz bang effects and stunts are not in themselves engrossing enough to hold an audiences attention. In spite of this problem, one of the more successful moments in the film is the sequence inspired by Fantasia (set again to the famous tone poem by Paul Dukas.) It is a well staged, enjoyable moment and gives Baruchel the opportunity to do some great slapstick comedy.

It is hard to recommend Sorcerer’s Apprentice, unless you are a big fan of one of its stars. But if you are dragged to the theatre by your child, it is a painless way to spend an afternoon.

Review – Iron Man 2

Iron Man may be the funniest and wittiest superhero of all time, thanks to Robert Downey, Jr.’s outstanding performance and the film’s direction under Jon Favreau.

Unlike in most superhero films where the character is a caricature, Iron Man is believable in that it takes a bit of narcissism to think one can bring peace to the world by his own actions. Tony Stark, the billionaire behind the suit, has the resources and the intelligence to make things work, and this time he is up against the U.S. Senate. He keeps his wits about him as Justin Hammer (a weapons contractor played by Sam Rockwell) recruits a dangerous Russian, Ivan Vanko (Mickey Rourke), a self-made, poor man’s superhero who also has past history issues with Stark, to outdo Stark and his weapons technology.

While the first Iron Man film was its Batman Begins storyline, this second installation attempts to introduce more nemeses and possible superhero partners. Scarlett Johansson, with a demure, straight-out-of-the-40s look as Natalie Rushman, Stark’s new executive assistant, astonishes the audience when she reverts to her alter ego, Natasha Romanoff (the name itself lends to images of Xenia Onatopp of 007’s collection). As Natasha, she sexily kicks ass with acrobatic martial arts moves in her skintight suit, knocking down scores of bad guys as Stark’s chauffeur (director Jon Favreau) happily exclaims he’s taken down one (his name is also “Happy”).

Gwyneth Paltrow returns as Pepper Potts, Stark’s super efficient personal assistant who keeps him intact until Stark begins to get reckless while hiding a secret from her. Their relationship progresses and it will be interesting to see how it works out should there be an Iron Man 3 in the future. In this feature, Don Cheadle replaces Terrence Howard as Lt. Col. James “Rhodey” Rhodes. While Cheadle is a great actor, Howard’s previous version of Iron Man’s possible sidekick (the “silver” Iron Man) seemed to have more impact in comparison.

There are plenty of hard iron metal-on-metal action in this film as well as computer imagery. Iron Man battles not only Ivan the terribly unkempt and creepy technical genius, he fights his best friend and a mini army of soldier drones (similar to the metal soldiers in Star Wars Episode II). The sound editing is perfectly clunky-cool for all the flying metal and explosions. All the tough show of iron is offset by Stark’s use of computerized technology at the touch of his fingertips (shades of Minority Report). He manipulates digital graphics that seemingly float around him as he talks to the main “guy” Jarvis (voiced by Paul Bettany).

This is not the dark, psychological superhero film like Batman but a fun, entertaining ride with smart, witty Iron Man. The characters are memorably interactive with each other, and the dialogue at times is spontaneously funny. Iron Man’s suit is hard and shiny, yet he’s vulnerable to human weaknesses. Tony Stark remarks that he is Iron Man, but Robert Downey, Jr. is the perfect embodiment of Tony Stark.

Standard screen vs. Imax? That depends on how large an Iron Man you’d like to see onscreen.

Ultra cool moment in the film: Iron man literally suiting up in his suitcase.
Not-so-cool fact: the trailer clip that repeatedly plays on TV showing Iron Man telling Pepper that she completes him – is not featured in the full length feature.

P.S. After the ending credits there is a short clip hinting what’s to come next from Marvel Comics.

Review – A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010)

The first Nightmare on Elm Street was a low budget, surreal shocker. The classic slasher film would spawn many sequels, a television series (“Freddy’s Nightmares”, 1988), pop songs (“Nightmare on My Street”, DJ Jazzy Jeff & The Fresh Prince) and would launch the careers of actors like Johnny Depp, Patricia Arquette along with directors Renny Harlin (Die Hard 2, The Covenant) and Stephen Hopkins (Ghost and the Darkness and The Reaping). Writer and director Wes Craven would redefine the horror genre much like he did years previous with Last House on the Left. The idea of a killer murdering his victims in their sleep would turn the industry on its ear.

With the recent wave of 80′s film remakes, especially horror films, it was only a matter of time before the antihero Freddy Krueger would be resurrected to slash his way into teen’s dreams once again. The 2010 updated version lackes the soul and fun of the original. Director Samuel Bayer, known for directing music videos for Nine Inch Nails and Smashing Pumpkins, has some pretty big shoes to fit.  He achieved a few visceral scenes but the remake script falls flat with its slow pacing and holes in plot and logic.

The movie is not without some bright spots. Jackie Earle Haley makes a creepy Freddy Krueger. He slips into the character like a glove. Even though Robert Englund will always be the real Freddy. (I was shocked as a kid to know that Freddy was the nice alien from “V”.) Now the new generation will realie that the new Freddy is also Rorschach from Watchmen. Another postivie is that the cast is attractive. But it’s a bummer when one of the prettiest girls is bumped off early in the film.

Review – Death at a Funeral (2010)

James Marsden sitting on a rooftop in his birthday suit, happy and high as a kite; that’s the image that stands out in my head after seeing Death at a Funeral. For the most part, the film was a hilarious blend of line bits and scenes. Starring Chris Rock (Aaron), Martin Lawrence (Ryan), and Zoe Saldana (Elaine) among a cast of characters, this film urbanizes the original British 2007 version written by Dean Craig. Director Neil LaBute (Lakeview Terrace, Nurse Betty) moves this dark comedy in a relatively fast pace albeit subdued for a Chris Rock vehicle.

The story centers on the memorial service for Aaron and Ryan’s father at his home, as the two brothers’ conflicting relationship sets a backdrop for the mayhem that ensues. Elaine (the cousin) brings along her nervous boyfriend (James Marsden) who can’t deal with her father (Ron Glass), and she spends the time warding off her over-confident ex-boyfriend (Luke Wilson). Amidst the wackiness of the mother-daughter-in-law (Loretta Devine and Regina Hall) issues and Uncle Russell’s (Danny Glover) wheelchair-bound crabbiness, along comes Frank (Peter Dinklage) whose sinister creepiness is the prelude to the dark family secret about to unfold. It is that secret that creates the entanglements, breaking up the ceremony in chaos.

While the characters do a fine job of bringing humor to an otherwise solemn event, the scene stealer in this film is James Marsden (Oscar). His smiling dopiness adds to the giggle factor that is mostly understated for everyone else in the film. Who knew the ass-kicking X-Men hero had great comedic timing? The only complaint I had for his scenes were that they were way too short. The rooftop scene, however, is the highlight that brings the open-ended issues to a close, and it’s not short of eye candy (reminiscent of the phrase, “smooth as a baby’s bottom”). Zoe Saldana plays the doting girlfriend seamlessly well in her slim-fitting black funeral dress (where is she hiding that blue Avatar tail?).

As a remake this movie stands well on its own if you haven’t seen the original British version. Of course, with a touch of Chris Rock and Martin Lawrence, you do get a more contemporary feel and more outlandish and sometimes nonsensical humor. This film captures the absurdity of all the individual instances and brings them to a well-rounded and emphatic ending. The one thing it could have left out is the vulgar bathroom humor (think Ben Stiller in Along Came Polly) which is not new to the storyline. Still, it’s worth a matinee or DVD viewing, unless you prefer to see Oscar in his birthday suit a lot sooner on the big screen.

Review – Clash of the Titans (2010)

“Clash of the Titans” star, Sam Worthington, said “This isn’t a history lesson, it’s a f__ popcorn movie”. All I can say is to grab a tub of popcorn and hang on to your seats. The film is fast paced and action packed. It has everything that I look for in a film: action, humor and romance.

In the beginning we get a short background on the story leading up to the “clash”. I appreciated that since I will admit that my exposure to greek mythology is limited to the Poseiden ride at Universal Studios. We follow Perseus (Sam Worthington) as he learns of his parentage from the immortal Io (Gemma Arterton). Events fall in to place that set his path towards his true destiny.

There were quite a few short action scenes (which is what I like), no real long drawn out battles. It kept the film moving. One obstacle would be over and all of a sudden here comes another challenge. Probably one of the longest scenes was the scorpion scene.  I enjoyed watching that knowing that it was Sam Worthington’s favorite scene to film.

I thought that the dialogue was good, not corny. In fact the dialogue is sparse,  short, concise and to the point. But what I liked the best is the dry, sarcastic humor. Just as a character finishes a serious line one of them has a short little quip that had the entire audience laughing.

I didn’t see the original 1981 Clash, so I wasn’t comparing this one to the first. I know that Director Louis Leterrier made it clear that he was not attempting to base this version on the original. This was to be a totally different take on the story, not just a remake of the first film. For that reason I think it doesn’t matter if you have seen the original or not. In my case I enjoyed not looking for comparisons and just enjoying this film for itself.

The entire cast was wonderful. Liam Neeson as “Zeus” and Ralph Fiennes as “Hades” were perfect adversaries. You could just feel the power in the scenes that they had together. Gemma Arterton as “Io” managed to convey a combination of etheral beauty and strength. During some of their scenes together I remembered that Sam Worthington said that Gemma could beat him (and all of the men) in a race. I didn’t find it hard to believe while watching her in this film. The chemistry between “Io” and “Perseus” was evident but low key.

All of the supporting characters are strong as well. As “Perseus” gathers his band of warriors we get introduced to quite a varied group of characters and we quickly like and care about all of them. There are very few superfluous characters in this film. Even those who are featured for only a few minutes, such as Polly Walker as “Cassiopeia”, make a strong impression. I think the only character that was weak to me was “Andromeda” (Alexa Davalos). She was crucial to the storyline, but I didn’t find myself really caring if she got eaten by “The Kraken” or not. And I didn’t even want “Perseus” to become her King in the end.

The battle scene with The Kraken is wild. Even though you know” that Perseus will defeat the monster, you still find yourself holding your breath as the battle unfolds.

Now for the “weakest” part of the film, the 3-D conversion. The film begins with a sequence that I think may have been designed specially for this new 3-D version. It’s probably the only really successful use of 3-D technology in the film.

I couldn’t help but compare the use of 3-D technology to how it was used in Avatar, and would say that the 3-D conversion of Clash was not as “clean” as the 3-D effects in Avatar. It’s not overwhelmingly bad, it didn’t ruin the film. In fact I’m not sure if I would notice if I didn’t know that this film wasn’t filmed in 3-D.  I was sort of “looking for it”. During certain scenes, seemed to me mostly during the action scenes, there was a little blurriness around the figures. You could sort of see the green and red, like you see when you watch a 3-D image withOUT the glasses. Other than some sequences with no characters in the beginning of the film, that I think were done in 3-D from the start for this release, I didn’t feel as if the film was enhanced by 3-D to any great extent. That coupled with the slight blurriness, made me think that it might be less distracting to watch it in 2-D.

I definitely recommend this film if you are in the mood for a fun, fast paced adventure.. and don’t forget to grab the popcorn!

Rated PG-13 for fantasy action violence, some frightening images and brief sensuality.
Runtime: 118 min

Review – The Eclipse

Before we begin, it’s not THAT Eclipse. There are no shape shifters or vampires in this movie. This Eclipse is a spooky tale about love and loss in a picturesque coastal Irish town. Yes, I know it still sounds like that other Eclipse. After earning praise at some film festivals last year Conor McPherson’s film is getting a limited release in the US and opens on Friday March 26th.

Michael Farr (Ciarán Hinds) has been seeing things. Two years after losing his wife to illness there is a disturbing presence in his house that he’s not sure is a ghost or just his imagination. While volunteering for an annual literary festival that’s held in his seaside community, he meets Lena Morelle (Iben Hjejle), an author of supernatural books and turns to her for advice. Lena has to deal with an unwelcome presence of her own, a former flame and fellow writer Nicholas Holden, being honored at the festival (Aidan Quinn) who is eager to continue their relationship. The real and the unreal collide in Michael’s life and it might be what he needs to let go of his grief and move on.

Eclipse is a great grown-up ghost story. It had quite a few instances when I jumped in my seat. Couple that with an engaging love-triangle and you’ve got a layered and interesting film. The heart of the story is Michael, played so well by Ciarán Hinds. It’s a well-rounded and developed character to portray as well: sympathetic, charming and funny. And it’s no surprise really that Hinds turns in a wonderful performance. A delicious contrast is Aidan Quinn’s Nicholas Holden. Holden is entitled and obnoxious and from all accounts, not a very good writer. Quinn makes him almost impossible to like but with glimpses of humanity as he interacts with Lena. The woman between these two suitors is Lena, played by the Danish actress Iben Hjejle. It’s not hard to see Lena’s appeal to our two males. She’s beautiful and approachable, smart and compassionate; a job handily done by Hjejle.

Much like New York City is the 5th cast member in Sex and the City, the town of Cobh in County Cork, Ireland is also a vital part of The Eclipse. The gothic cathedral and ancient graveyards are integral to setting the disturbing mood for the film. So if you’re looking for a good old-fashioned creepy romp through the Irish countryside, The Eclipse is the movie for you. Bring someone along to hold on to for the really scary bits.

Review – Alice in Wonderland (2010)

Could you think of a more perfect paring than director Tim Burton and Lewis Carroll’s classic heroine Alice? Disney has brought them together in easily the most-anticipated film of the spring, Alice in Wonderland which opens on Friday March 5th with an impressive cast and in glorious 3-D. Well hurry up, you’re already late for a very important date.

Alice Kingsleigh (Mia Wasikowska) finds herself in an unenviable situation. Bright and imaginative she’s bristling under the pressure of family obligations and expectation for her future. At a key moment during her surprise engagement party, Alice spies a curious and somewhat familiar sight of a white rabbit in a waistcoat. She delays her fate to pursue the rabbit. Her quest leads her to a sizable rabbit hole and you know what happens when a girl named Alice explores a rabbit hole – she falls in. We’ve seen this before, haven’t we?

But Alice recognizes nothing familiar in these fantastic surroundings and its unusual inhabitants. She’s convinced she is in a dream, despite numerous attempts to awaken herself. And her dream quickly becomes a nightmare when The Mad Hatter (Johnny Depp) tells her she is destined to become the White Queen’s (Anne Hathaway) champion and to do battle with the dreaded Jabberwocky, ultimately bringing about the downfall of the horrible Red Queen (Helena Bonham Carter). It’s all too much for Alice. She must finally embrace her true self, face her fears and put the power of her imagination to the test.

There is a lot to like about this movie. Firstly, the visuals are sumptuous. If anyone could create the world of Underland it is Burton and his production design team. If the 3-D version is available in your area I highly recommend seeing it in this format. Secondly, the performances of Johnny Depp and Helena Bonham Carter are great. Depp’s characterization of The Hatter is layered with sadness as well as madness. I have to add though that sometimes when he mumbles, especially in a Scottish brogue it’s next to impossible to understand him. And Helena gets to camp it up, just a little, as the irascible Red Queen. Additionally, the voice talents used for the animals is an array of Burton alums and great British talent, from Christopher Lee to Timothy Spall and Alan Rickman to Michael Sheen and Stephen Fry. I always enjoy trying to figure out who’s who.

Conversely, there are things that don’t work in this movie. The script relies too much on people having seen the 1951 Disney animated film or having read the books. Like Alice we stumble into Wonderland with no introductions to the characters, who then experience no real development other than what we already know about them. The story itself jumps from setpiece to setpiece with Alice riding some giant animal to get there. The end result is a bloodless and soulless film that looks very pretty but leaves you hollow. To me it was reminiscent of The Golden Compass (2007) in that respect. This leads me to suspect that there is a director’s cut out there in the world somewhere.

As I said, anticipation is pretty high for this film and it should have a decent opening weekend. But I fear the lack of heart to the story will make high box office in the weeks that follow an impossible task. That’s a disappointment when you consider it was the seemingly perfect combination of director and character. Sadly Alice has lost much of her “muchness”.

Review – Valentine’s Day

Relationships are complicated and nothing spells trouble quite like Valentine’s Day for those involved or uninvolved. However, for most people, Valentine’s Day is something special and meaningful or something lighthearted and fun. This film attempts to encompass various scenarios on that day with humor, empathy, and a bit of surprise at the end.

An all-star cast that includes Jennifer Garner, Ashton Kutcher, Shirley MacLaine, and more, the characters’ lives are intertwined by circumstance, friendships, and family. While some relationships are clichéd such as Jennifer Garner and Patrick Dempsey’s fly-by-night rendezvous and Ashton Kutcher and Jessica Alba’s living together in non-commitment, others are refreshingly atypical. Seemingly the perfect new couple, Topher Grace finds conflict when he learns of Anne Hathaway’s side job, a job she’s surprisingly proficient at and for which her office boss, Queen Latifah, eventually enjoys substituting.

What is thrown in the mix is the ultra cute Taylor Lautner and Taylor Swift pairing. If “cute” can be annoying, Taylor Swift has managed that quite effortlessly in this film, but we forgive her since she’s a talented Grammy winner and very young. Besides, she plays a teeny bopper, excitable and oblivious to her dancing skills, who’s in love with hunky jock Taylor Lautner (who’s shy about being “shirtless”).

Whether it’s an older couple, Shirley MacLaine and Hector Elizondo, or the love of a young child, Bryce Robinson, this film embodies the trials and tribulations that love endures all in one day, Valentine’s Day. Julia Roberts plays a soldier on her way home for a short visit, befriended by Bradley Cooper on the same flight. Her real life niece, Emma Roberts, has a special plan for this day with her boyfriend, Carter Jenkins, who finds himself spoiling it in the most embarrassing way. George Lopez sums it all up as Ashton Kutcher’s friend who tells him that he married his best friend.

While everyone is melting away in loveland, a good part of this film is the anti-Valentine scenario with Jessica Biel, Jamie Foxx, Eric Dane, and their loveless lives. Great jobs, beautiful, young – what’s not to love? Does it matter? Let’s break out the heart-shaped piñata and swing the bat. What comes out isn’t just candy, but revelations that there is hope with others who feel the same way.

Personally, I’ll take the flowers and call it a day.

Review – Legion

Hollywood is going back to Sunday school. First we had The Book of Eli, a film about the survival of religion in post-apocalyptic America. Now we have Legion, an end-of-days tale with wrathful angels starring Dennis Quaid and Paul Bettany. But does this make good entertainment and good box office? Movie goers will get an opportunity to decide that this weekend as Legion opens in North America.

Charlie (“Friday Night Lights” Adrianne Palicki) is an unwed pregnant waitress in the middle of nowhere Paradise Falls. A few days before Christmas an un-named disaster and unspeakable horror maroon a handful of strangers at the restaurant, leaving owner Bob (Dennis Quaid) with no answers. The wind blows in the mysterious Michael, (Paul Bettany) whom seems to know what’s going on but offers very little in the way of hope of survival. He reveals that he is a fallen angel and his mission is to save the child Charlie is bearing, that that child is the last chance for all humanity and that the hosts of angels in heaven are coming to destroy the baby and the world. Drawing on faith none of them knew they had the band of refugees struggle against insurmountable odds and their own weaknesses to survive.

Legion is part supernatural thriller, part action film. It’s The Terminator meets The Prophecy meets The Seventh Sign. With the cast this film has: Quaid, Bettany, Charles S. Dutton, Tyrese and TV’s Kate Walsh I was hoping there was something to the story. Sadly, the talky scenes of character development are clunky and uninteresting. There are some nice interactions, like a bit between Dutton and Tyrese when the older man is urging the younger, troubled man to take stock of his life but ultimately they’re all clichéd characters in an all-too familiar story.

I’ll admit I don’t normally think of Paul Bettany as a gun-wielding bad ass. He has that charisma that Chow Yun-Fat has, an unexpected action hero. In the quieter moments you are reminded that Bettany is still a respected actor. Paul bulked up a bit for this to give Michael presence which he needs when going toe to toe with the angel Gabriel (Kevin Durand). As a female member of the audience I was most appreciative of that.

A movie like Legion, it all comes down to special effects and action since at the end of the day, that’s what we’re coming to see. The angels are impressive, the fights choreographed well. Audiences shouldn’t be disappointed in that respect. There were cheers and claps of appreciation at the screening I was at. If you don’t over think the story you may just find yourself enjoying the ride.

Review – Fish Tank

Fish Tank is a gripping slice of life, coming of age drama. It is also an antidote to the proper costume dramas many still associate with British cinema and that some might be sick of. The film is more akin to the “gritty realism” of the angry young man British movies of the late fifties and early sixties, except in this case we have an angry young girl – a very angry and confused 15-year old girl named Mia Taylor (KATIE JARVIS).

Not that Mia doesn’t have a lot to be pissed off about. She lives in a depressing “council estate” (read public housing for American audiences). She has a self-absorbed, non-existent mother (KIERSTON WAREING) who dresses like a striper and literally has zero interest in what her children do. (The only interest she takes in her eldest daughter is trying to get her sent to reform school.) She has no friends and literally has no one to talk to – not even a girlfriend she can commiserate with. On top of that, she is stuck in limbo, with no prospects or future.

Because of this, she is incapable of expressing any emotion other than anger and regularly lashes out at anyone she can, but mostly at her mother and younger sister (REBECCA GRIFFITHS). Mia has no outlet for her emotions except her love for hip-hop dancing – which is her only respite. The only creatures she seems to relate to are the family dog and a horse chained up in the neighborhood, which she tries to free as it seems a symbol of her own trapped self.

So when her mother’s new boyfriend, Connor (MICHAEL FASSBENDER), enters the picture and is just ordinarily nice to her she can’t help but take notice. She at first also pushes him away, like she does with everyone, but then reluctantly finds herself interested in him. Connor is the only positive force in Mia’s life – he encourages to pursue her dancing and to go on an audition. But is Connor just being nice to his girlfriend’s kid, or does he have other motives? His presence also seems to inspire her to reach out and make a new friend in the neighborhood, Billy (HARRY TREADAWAY). Although it is not clear at first whether she is looking for company or trying to make Connor jealous.

A lot of emotionally draining things happen to Mia during the climax of Fish Tank, but to talk about them too much would spoil the few surprises this movie has, as this isn’t a movie about plot. It is the emotional journey of a young girl that draws you in little by little and makes you really care about Mia and cringe every time she does something stupid. But as the drama unfolds, Mia finally comes to term with her life and takes a bit more control and by the end of the film, there is hope that she might actually make it and go onto something a little bit better that what she has known.

Fish Tank is open now in NYC and opens Friday in Los Angeles.

Review – The Book of Eli (spoilers!)

“The Book of Eli” is a film ruled by its religious conviction. So in the opinion of a secular critic such as myself, it’s hard not to consider elements of the film to be laughably ridiculous. Now in my defense, there are films about religion and/or faith that I’ve enjoyed immensely (example: Martin Scorsese’s brilliant The Last Temptation of Christ), but this is not one of them.

[Warning - SPOILERS] The film begins with a wanderer named Eli who walks on foot across a desolate post-nuclear America. Eli is played by Denzel Washington who looks a bit too heavy for someone who exercises all day long, has very little water to drink, and is forced to eat hairless cats for sustenance. After eating the kitty, he happens upon a group of hooligans who try to kill him for water and/or whatever else he may possess. Eli pulls out a large knife and quickly dispatches every bad guy, superhero style. Soon after, he wanders upon a derelict town where he attempts to get his battery recharged (literally, in order to power his iPod) and his water canteen refilled. The people of this lawless town are ruled by Carnegie (Gary Oldman). Oldman, an actor who in my opinion can almost do no wrong, creates the most interesting character in the movie; which, sadly, isn’t saying much because he isn’t given great material to work with. Carnegie is your standard bad guy who is in a quest to find what is supposedly the last copy of the Bible. He feels that quoting scripture is going to give him the power to have greater control over the people of the town and, in turn, territories beyond. I should point out that it is explained that in this post-apocalyptic world, all of the survivors banded together thirty years ago to burn every copy of the Bible because it is believed that the Bible was the cause of the nuclear annihilation in the first place. How all the survivors of the earth were able to communally decide to do this is beyond me. How did they contact each other to discuss this? And what about language barriers?

Anyway, as Eli is waiting for his water canteen to be filled he has an argument with another bad guy. This leads to another scene of SuperEli killing everyone with speed and dexterity. I think there are certain actors who just can’t do certain things. For me, I don’t think Denzel Washington plays a bad-ass very well. There’s something about his acting style, personality or whatever that just makes it hard for me to see him as believable. Now don’t get me wrong, I do think he’s a good actor in some movies, but not ones like this. I don’t think he ever should have won the Academy Award for “Training Day.” It should have gone to Ethan Hawke, who gave a much better performance in the same film in a role infinitely more complex. But I digress… Carnegie is pissed that Eli’s killed so many of his men, so he jails Eli when he won’t agree to work for Carnegie. Later that night Carnegie sends the young Solara to have sex with Eli in order to convince him to join up. Solara is played by Mila Kunis, whose eyebrows are a bit too plucked and shaped for someone in this post-apocalyptic hell. Solara discovers that Eli has the mystical last copy of the Bible with him and he teaches her how to pray. She does this without question, even though her character really would have no idea what the heck he’s talking about.

The next day Eli escapes. It is not explained how he escapes, so let’s just consider this Miracle #1. Eli is going west, you see, because he has a feeling that is where he needs to bring the Bible. Solara chases after him and Eli reluctantly agrees to let her join. Carnegie and his men join the chase as well; yet they seem to have a hard time catching up even though they are driving vehicles. Eventually Eli and Solara happen upon a still-intact house out in the middle of nowhere. They go to investigate and find an older couple (“Harry Potter” alumni Michael Gambon & Frances de la Tour) living there. After realizing that the older couple are cannibals, Eli and Solara attempt to leave. Their escape is cut short as Carnegie and his men suddenly arrive. A massive gun battle ensues, killing many of the bad guys, as well as the older couple. Eventually Eli is trapped and once he surrenders his Bible Carnegie shoots him in the stomach. Carnegie and the men take the Bible and Solara and head back to town. Through outrageous circumstances Solara escapes with a vehicle. She arrives back at the house to find Eli is missing. She finds him walking west. Apparently, he is not dead. We’ll call that Miracle #2.

Back in town Carnegie finally opens the Bible, which had been locked like a child’s diary, to discover that it is written in Braille. (Apparently Eli reads Braille? And, considering how thick the Braille pages are, how can the small book be the entire King James Bible?) Meanwhile, Solara and Eli continue west. (Yes, he’s still alive.) Eventually they reach San Francisco. Somehow Eli knows that they need to go to Alcatraz Island. They get in a boat and Solara lets Eli row…even though he has a bullet in his stomach. On the island is a group of seemingly more civilized people who have a printing press and want to make copies of the Bible. Since he no longer has his copy, Eli recites the entire Bible to them. Yes, you read that correctly, he dictates the entire contents of the Bible to them, word for word. While he does this, they apparently decide he’d look better with a shave because they remove all the hair from his head and scalp and put him in a nice robe. One might assume they’ve done something about the bullet in his stomach, but it’s not clarified. Anyway, once he finishes his recitation he dies. They invite Solara to stay on their civilized island, but she grabs Eli’s big knife and decides she’s going to go out and be a warrior for God.

There are a couple of things this movie is trying to say: 1. A world without the Bible (ergo, without God) is a lawless, despicable hellhole. After all, the people of the world have had 30 years since the abolition of the Bible to become civilized and they have not. 2. Only the Bible (God) will bring peace to the world. (Ironically, the Alcatrazians were civilized and peaceful before Eli arrived, which disproves the movie’s own theories.) Now, I ask, how different is the filmmaker’s role from the proselytizing Carnegie planned on doing? And how are we to correlate the extreme violence in the film with its message of peace (particularly, Solara’s ultimate decision to kick-ass for God)? This film is propaganda at its worst.

Review – A Single Man

A Single Man is a movie that I have a serious love/hate relationship with. But before I continue, I must warn you that this will be a spoiler-filled review, as it is impossible to detail my major complaint with the film without discussing the scene in question.

A Single Man is a beautiful film about grief and moving on. It centers on George (Colin Firth), who plays a British-born English professor living and working in Los Angeles in the 1960’s. His long-term partner (Matthew Goode) dies a sudden tragic death and he is forced to move on. That’s pretty much it, as plot goes. It’s basically a day in his life…how he deals with his grief and how the various interactions he has with people that day shape and change his outlook.

The film is directed by Tom Ford, who was already a famous fashion designer before he decided to get behind the camera and make this movie. As first-time filmmakers go, this is quite a debut. The film is exquisitely painted and gorgeously photographed. He uses various recurring motifs such as clocks and close-ups of people’s eyes. (But don’t ask me to explain the reasoning behind that!) The costumes and set design are impeccable, re-creating the 1960’s to great detail. All of the performances are amazing in this movie, starting with the best: Colin Firth. I believe this is by far the best performance he has given to date and I would be quite pleased if it led him to an Academy Award. Julianne Moore gives a rollicking fun yet brief performance as George’s next-door-neighbor, best friend and fellow expatriate. Also wonderful is Nicholas Hoult as a student who enters George’s life at the right place and time.

This is one of the best films I have ever seen in regards to showing how people deal with grief. It is impossible to watch the film without your heart breaking for George. To see him left alone, unable to see his lover again or even attend the funeral. To watch as he so resolutely tries to go on with his life and retain his composure. To see the profound loss and loneliness he feels that leads him towards suicide. And it fills your heart with joy to watch him fill that hole in his heart, even if only a little bit…enough to keep him from pulling that trigger. You watch him discover that even in the darkest pit of despair, there is hope and see him find new love, wherever it may lead him. And then, after this glorious rebirth, he dies. THIS is my problem with the movie.

I have many problems with this ending. First, I think it does a major disservice to everything that comes before it in the movie. The story was told and a beautiful story it was. So to tack on a “kill the puppy” ending is just ridiculous. Some people may argue that this is the way the story ended in the book by Christopher Isherwood, which this film is based on. But I’ve never read the book so I have no idea if the ending is the same, and I feel the movie should stand on its own merits anyway. Killing off George after seeing his epiphanic transformation is just insulting…especially for someone like me. As a gay man I have spent my whole life needing positive gay male images in my life (as anyone in a minority group would need). Mostly I’ve been stuck with the funny sidekick or, sadly, tortured souls and lecherous villains. I think that’s why this movie hit me so hard. It’s a masterfully crafted piece about a very realistic gay character dealing with grief and overcoming it. To kill him off just adds to the age-old trend of gay characters never achieving happiness.

Review in 100 Words – The Road

Based on the bestselling Cormac McCarthy novel of the same name, The Road takes place in post-apocalyptic America and centers on a father and son’s struggle to reach a safe and warm place in a cruel, cold world peopled with cannibals. Viggo Mortensen plays the un-named father, mourning his absent wife (Charlize Theron) and doing anything to keep his son (Kodi Smit-McPhee) who is his hope, alive. Exceptionally faithful to the book, fine performance from Mortensen and Smit-McPhee brighten up the purposefully drab and colorless landscape. Haunting and yet hopeful, prepare for an emotional ride and well-made film.

Review – Where the Wild Things Are

The beleaguered film that brings a children’s classic book to the screen finally gets released on October 16th. Innovative director Spike Jones gives life to Where the Wild Things Are and gives the audience the opportunity to put on a wolf costume and partake in the wild rumpus.

Where the Wild Things Are is the story about Max (Max Records), a kid from a broken home who’s having a hard time controlling his anger. His sister and Mother (Catherine Keener) receive the brunt of his outbursts and it’s wearing thin. Mom loses her patience after Max’s latest tantrum and Max takes off running. He finds a boat that takes him across the sea from reality to fantasy and to a strange island who’s primary inhabitants are a group of very large, rather odd monsters. The monsters decide that instead of eating him they would make Max their King. With new friend Carol (the voice of James Gandolfini) by his side Max tries to rule justly but finds the responsibility heavy. Tensions run high among the Wild Things in particular between Carol and KW (the voice of Lauren Ambrose) and Max decides that it’s time to go home to his life and his mom.

Let me start by saying I didn’t not like this film. It has some flaws but over all it’s an enjoyable movie. Visually it’s stunning. The Wild Things are right out of the imagination of author Maurice Sendak. Their expressions and movements are wonderfully articulated by the amazing puppeteers from the Henson Workshop. But really, would you expect any less from them? The production design is fantastic. It’s grand in scale and has that childlike sense of awe and wonderment. The Australian locations give it all an other-worldly feel. I should also say how impressed I was with the young star, Max Records. He had some challenges in this film and showed some real maturity as a young actor in facing those challenges.

So here’s what I didn’t like about the film. Firstly the story is extremely dull. There are long scenes of dialogue that go no where. The script focuses primarily on Max’s issues with his absentee father and his frustration over being left behind all the time. Carol mirrors those issues in his impatience for the group to all live together. There are a couple times when you think that maybe the story is shifting to something more interesting like immortality or the death of imagination (similar to The Never Ending Story) or the precariousness of the environment but those never pan out. Secondly the soundtrack by Yeah Yeah Yeah singer Karen Orzolek is intrusive and distracting. Lastly, and this is something I harp on time and time again, the camera work is annoying. It’s a lot of tight shots of heads. As my companion complained “Can I get a wide shot, just one?!” As I mentioned before, the sets were fantastic. I would have loved to seen more of them. It is shot with moving camera but for whatever reason, I didn’t get sick watching this one. Take that for what it’s worth.

I guess when you weigh the pros versus the cons the scale favors the negative side. I think what it comes down to is that I found the story to be such a disappointment. All the visual elements were in place but there was simply no heart to the film. What a shame that is because much like its source material this could have been one for the ages.