Trailer Talk: The Apparition
CLICK HERE TO GO TO THE REVIEW OF THIS MOVIE
The concept is interesting enough. Some young attractive folks test a theory that ghosts only exist because we believe in them. Ergo, to believe in a ghost can facilitate the manifestation of one. It works, “it” is pissed, and it haunt-hunts them down one by one. The imagery and F/X strategy feel just like Pulse, but the trailer offers a variety of approaches to prey upon the paranormally-intrigued protagonists.
Release Date: August 24th, 2012
CLICK HERE to watch the trailer.
This looks like Americanized releases of Pulse (2006) and The Grudge (2004) had a child…as if the Grudge ghost was the evil force in Pulse, more specifically. Trailers can be very deceiving. This flick has all the potential to be as good as either of its siring movies, but could just as well turn into another One Missed Call disaster.
I’ve been batting just over .500 with horror trailers lately. My Trailer Talk on Grave Encounters paid off well. So did The Cabin in the Woods. But my hopeful expectations of Chernobyl Diaries led only to crushing disappointment.
No means no, Grudge ghost!
Some Concerns: First off, writer/director Todd Lincoln hasn’t really done anything yet other than an early screenplay for the Devil’s Due comic-to-movie Hack/Slash; the producers have almost no horror experience between them; and none of the actors have the experience to capture the audience—not that horror movies typically do. The cast includes Tom Felton (Draco Malfoy of the Harry Potter series; Rise of the Planet of the Apes) and the lovely Ashley Greene (the Twilight series) prancing around in her underwear looking scared.
Don’t worry, Ashley Greene. If the Grudge ghost shows up he’ll use his baseball bat. That should work, right? Right? A bat against a ghost…that only exists because we believe it does?
Share this post:
Battleship
If the Academy Awards started a new category called “best dirt placement on a poster’ Battleship would win the award.
Here is a tip for you:
Let Battleship be Battleship.
It is not Prometheus (I’m guessing) but it is better than Cowboys and Aliens, Transformers, Wrath of the Titans and Battle LA. Battleship is a loud, dumb and incredibly fun. The dialogue can be laughable (“You are a hotshot”), the acting bad (Brooklyn Decker trying her best) and Rami Malek (The Pacific) needed more to do.
If you can’t sit back and enjoy this movie I feel bad for you. It is a huge gamble that is helmed by an excellent director. Enjoy a movie that was made to enjoy.
I understand why people do not like this movie, It is a peculiar and alienating film. However, it worked on me. I loved the weirdness (bearded aliens), odd humor (the beginning of the movie is all about getting a chicken burrito) and Friday Night Lights reunion between Peter Berg and Taylor Kitsch.
I’ve talked to several people who all scoff at this film. They laugh at the name and seem to have forgotten that Peter Berg (Rundown, Kingdom, Friday Night Lights) directed the film. Here are some reasons to watch this film.
1. A Friday Night Lights reunion with Peter Berg, Taylor Kitsch and Jessie Plemons.
2. A wonderful celebration of Veterans. Some of the key members who repel the invasion are actual veterans. One of the main characters is Gregory D. Gadson. He is a real life Iraq hero who lost both of his legs. Gadson is a commanding screen presence who is not too ornery.
3. A cohesive plot amidst the money. Battleship Unlike Transformers 2&3 and Wrath of the Titans has a legit three act plot that moves full steam ahead.
4. The gamble. They made a movie based on a board game with a slightly unknown Canadian actor who worked on Friday Night Lights and got a bad rap from John Carter (read the review).
5. The movie is meant to make you cheer. There is zero pretension. Don’t cheat yourself out of a ridiculous time.
The movie focuses on a section of Hawaii trapped inside a force field. The aliens lost their communications so they try to use massive satellites in Hawaii….The same satellites that were meant to contact them. Kitsch battles them at sea and Brooklyn Decker battles the aliens on the mainland.
Who cares that the aliens have bad goatees? Who cares that the movie resembles a better version of a Michael Bay film? Movies are made for you to enjoy. Battleship is a movie that is filled with unpretentious joy….And Liam Neeson.
Sidenote: Battleship did something brilliant. Sensing a poor opening weekend in the US ($25 million) they opened it up worldwide a month before it hit US theaters. The film was a success grossing $250 million and paying for its budget. Now, that the film has flopped here the press statements revolve around how the film is a worldwide success. I see this smart marketing continuing in the future. It proves that people around the world love stuff blowing up.
Share this post:
Bad Movie Tuesday: This Means War
This Means War was directed by McG. This means the movie was guaranteed to be loud, dumb and clumsily edited. My girlfriend and I did the worst possible thing when we watched this movie. We had hope. We went against the critics, audiences and McG’s history and hoped it would be dumb romantic comedy fun.
We were wrong. This movie is not fun because it is lazy. Watching it made me think of the film No Strings Attached. NSA gets a lot of criticism because it is incredibly uneven. I like that about NSA. It is an odd little film that attempts to be different. For instance, Lake Bell’s insane character, Cary Elwes odd doctor and an inventive usage of 3D glasses. Natalie Portman tries to be foul-mouthed and Kevin Kline drinks sizzurp. It doesn’t always work but it tries. This Means War does not try and it shows on-screen.
Let me give you an example. There are two scenes where Tom Hardy is watching his kid wrestle in the same auditorium. The scenes take place months apart but Hardy is wearing the same clothes. They couldn’t bother to give him a new outfit. They just shot right through the two scenes. This same thing happens twice in the movie with other characters.
Also, there is scene where Hardy and Reese are getting romantic and Pine unleashes the water sprinklers in the million dollar apartment. Pine wrecks everything in his best friends home and nobody ever says a word. Pine and Hardy also spend millions of dollars spying on Reese as she talks to her terrible BFF Chelsea Handler.
What annoys me is that McG landed three wonderful actors and he does nothing with them. Everything they say is stock, the action is bland and poor Reese plays the worst character of her career. Portman caught crap for her foul-mouthed and strange doctor character in NSA but at least she tried something new. In This Means War Reese lies to her ex fiance about having a boyfriend. Later you find out that the ex cheated on her and broke her heart. After all of this she is incapable of telling him off. All I could think about was her role in Walk the Line and how she says “baby baby baby..it’s always baby baby baby.” Witherspoon was saucy. Here she is a depressing little bugger.
The men who fall for her are Chris Pine and Tom Hardy. They play two incredibly tiny/well dressed CIA agents who fall INSTANTLY in love with her on the same day.
Neither of them wants to call it off so they both decide to date the Reese. Poor/shady Reese doesn’t know about the deal or tell the men she is dating two people. She happily dates the two spies. What follows is nut shots, blow darts and montages.
Whilst dating Witherspoon the two spies take their eyes off a eurotrash villain who wants revenge for the death of his brother. The dude would be nondescript but he is played by Til Schweiger. All I can think of when I see him is “Hugo Stiglitz.”
My favorite movie critic Roger Ebert said this in his review:
“If there’s anything I hate more than a stupid action comedy, it’s an incompetent stupid action comedy. It’s not so bad it’s good. It’s so bad it’s nothing else but bad.”
Ebert disliked this movie with a passion. If you look at the words I highlighted you will notice the seven negative words in three short sentences.
I didn’t hate this film. I was annoyed at the inability to say anything new. McG had a big budget, lots of talent and an opportunity to do something special. Instead he annoyed Roger Ebert and witnessed his film sink at the box office.
This movie is like diluting Hendricks gin with Coca-Cola. It wrecks the taste and doesn’t let you appreciate the fine ingredients. Hardy, Pine and Witherspoon are watered down amidst the shiny lights and saccharine plot.
This Means War is a lazy film. Don’t waste your time on a movie that offers nothing new. Check out a classic or at least enjoy the randomness of No Strings Attached.
Share this post:
John’s Horror Corner: Chernobyl Diaries (2012)
MY CALL: The trailer looked promising, but the product delivered only disappointment. Even devout horror and suspense fans will be disappointed as this movie delivers neither enough or effectively. [D] WHAT TO WATCH INSTEAD? Grave Encounters, the Paranormal Activity series and White Noise deliver the creepy suspense desired in this flick. For hungry mutant redneck whatevers aim for The Cabin in the Woods, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre series or Wrong Turn. For suspense and blood and guts galore mixed with a lot of funny: Final Destination 5.
I guess it was about time somebody capitalized on the horrors left in the wake of this historical event: Chernobyl, named after the city with the poor nuclear reactor of the same name. On April 26th, 1986, the Ukrainian power plant had a bit of a bad day when reactor 4 was getting a bit wonky from a power surge. What ensued was an emergency shutdown attempt, a series of explosions, the fall of the Soviet economy, and ultimately (evidently) some tribal-gone-cannibal locals in the neighboring town waiting to prey on 20-something tourists. CLICK HERE to see the trailer.
The tour guide is charmingly funny. He has his little Geiger counter and puts on a nice show.
The trailer doesn’t show us a whole lot in terms of estimating what kind of horror this will be. Really, we see just enough to know that the acting doesn’t suck (actually it looks quite good…for a horror flick) and the production value is competitive. I’ll go so far as to say that an unusually good job was done building the plot up to the “extreme tourism” trip to Chernobyl. I liked the characters (enough, at least) and enjoyed a few clever, light-hearted laughs. Jonathan Sadowski (S%#! My Dad Says (2010-2011), Friday the 13th (2009)) is charmingly funny and he brings that to the screen here early in the movie. Characters like his are typically fun to watch when the shit hits the fan. Makes me think of Grave Encounters (2011), where the jokester finds himself freaking out as he learns “it’s not a joke.” This flick also features Nathan Phillips (Wolf Creek, Snakes on a Plane), Ingrid Bolsø Berdal (The ABCs of Death, Hansel and Gretel: Witch Hunters), Olivia Dudley (Chillerama, The Dictator), and Jesse McCartney (Greek).
Yes, sure, the apartment is small. But the location!
What do you mean the car won’t start?
Such a lively bunch. They have no idea…
Though a bit prepackaged—a la Wrong Turn past the Cabin in the Woods where the Hills Have Eyes—the premise worked and the creepy setting created the opportunity for some great scenes. Just the opportunity, though. While the set design worked, the crux of the movie (i.e., the anthropophagous mutants), was poorly delivered. Sadly, there are really no special effects at all in this movie. That is not to say they are bad, but that the way the “action” and “horror” are presented no effects are really necessary. Now, horror movies can vary. Depending on the style they may not need any CGI or fake blood (e.g., Paranormal Activity had minimal FX). Contrarily, movies in the Texas Chainsaw Massacre vein rely heavily on excellent make-up artists and mutant movies need solid mutant concepts that keep us from saying “hey that’s just like in that other movie with that guy in it that came out last year.” Well, this was a mutant movie, and no one in the audience could pick one of these mutants out of a line up after seeing this movie. That’s how little you see. Bummer.
It says WHAT about mutant Chernobyl residents in the guide book!?!?!
Producer Oren Peli (Paranormal Activity director/producer; PA 2 and PA 3 producer) has a great mind for creepy suspense. I think he was going for a monsters-driven quite creeper; the reason we never really see more than blurry silhouettes of the flesh-eating antagonists. This general mystery tactic worked in Insidious (2010), when the creature was some other-worldly specter. But this movie was advertised as suggestive of The Hills Have Eyes in an abandoned fallout city. Maybe there was a way to make this work, but Peli didn’t find it.
Everyone knows that you never–NEVER–approach the weird little girl in the dark!
I haven’t really addressed the plot…there’s not much to say that you don’t get from watching the trailer. Some likeable 20-somethings on a European vacation decide to take an extreme tourism excursion to a village in sight of Chernobyl. When they try to leave the car doesn’t start. Then they start dying one by one—and you never see it happen! The escape strategy never gets anyway, the characters (not surprisingly) don’t develop beyond a few cheap lines of dialogue, and there’s an inexplicably stupid not-so-twisty ending.
Share this post:
Hello all. Mark here
The MFF crew watched the latest trailer for GI Joseph 2 and had a lively discussion. During the discussion we learned the movie was going to be pushed back nine months so it could be converted in 3D. Read our theories, snarky comments and appreciation of mountain ninjas.
Chuck Finley: Good thing this movie has The Rock in it. Otherwise this would be a movie without The Rock in it.
Mark: I love how easy everything is in Joe Land.
1. Kill Channing Tatum..nanobots
2. Kill mountain ninjas……avalanche
3. Kill Cobra guards….Bruce Willis in the back of an El Camino.
4. Kill protein shakes…..The Rock
Chuck Finley: I would’ve made the sequel so G.I. Joseph battles all things Cobra. Including but not limited to: Cobra Kai, Team Purple Cobras, and Cobra Starship.
O’Lasavath: Indiana jones would never have cut it as a joe. The last thing he would ever do is take on a cobra.
Tony 9.5: Cobra Kai; never dies…
Mark: I hope that scene where they climb out of the well is 20 minutes long. Like a mini Gus Van Sant film…
Chuck Finley: And they get help from Aron Ralston.
Mark: I would love to see the girl from The Ring attack The Rock in the well. I think we’d see a ghost get punched in the face.
O’Lasavath: I’m afraid of all this has been for naught as the movie has been postponed to March 2013. The delay is because the movie is being converted to 3d. Yes folks, it takes a whole year to render the Rock’s huge pecs into 3d.
Mark: The internet moviesphere is abuzz with the nine month delay of GI Joe 2. 3D conversion, terrible advance screenings and the need for more Tatum due to Channing fever. I don’t believe any of this. The reason for the reshoots can be summed up in two words. “mountain ninjas.” Why do you think the film is being delayed?
Sweet Sugar: Crouching Tiger Hidden Joe would be a more appropriate title after the reshoots.
John: There was a West Side Story Sharks/Jets clash between the Joes and the Expendables. The Expendables may have guns, knives and crime-fighting muscles. But Tatum has Step Up flip-kicking skills, Ray Parks has his Episode I corkscrew flairs and Byung-hun has one cold I Saw the Devil stare. The fight started 9 months ago and persists like a Ragnarok trilogy. OMFG!!!! We need a Ragnarok trilogy!
Chuck Finley: Everyone associated with the movie came off their cocaine buzz and realized they needed to think about things.
John: Either that or they ate those Vegas lotus flowers from Percy Jackson The Lightning Thief. And, of course, as Johnny Depp taught us, “there is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge.” Maybe they got their hands on some of it.
Mark: I can’t think of anything better than a depraved, confused and drug addled GI Joe film directed by the troubled soul who did Step Up 3D.
John: Step Up 3D: worst of the series. I hope it gets Drag Me to Helled!
Mark: I hope Step Up 4D stars Bruce Campbell, Julianne Hough and is directed with Sam Raimi. Groovy!
Share this post:
The Hunger Games (2012)
MY CALL: This surprisingly mature film presents an admixture of coming-of-age, bravery and family altruism with an intriguing score spot on for mood setting. Ignore the young adult readership of this film and see it with your best bro, girlfriend or family. So worth it. [A-] IF YOU LIKE THIS, WATCH: For suggestions see my “sidebars” at the end of the article.
“From the Treaty of Treason: In penance for their uprising each district shall offer up a male and female between the ages of 12 and 18 at a public ‘Reaping.’ These tributes shall be delivered to the custody of the Capitol. And then transferred to a public arena where they will fight to the death, until a lone victor remains. Henceforth and forever more this pageant shall be known as The Hunger Games.”
The future looks grim. Our story begins with two sisters. One young (Prim; Willow Shields), suffering from recurring nightmares of being chosen in The Reaping, the other a mid-teen (Katniss; Jennifer Lawrence of Winter’s Bone and X-Men: First Class), struggling to raise and feed her junior. Residing in what appears to be a destitute Eastern European village, Katniss wanders the forest with her bow in search of their next meal after putting her sister to bed. Demonstrably a talented huntswoman, she uses the wind and clever tricks to lure her prey into the open. At home they bathe with buckets and rags and embrace a simple barter economy in which a squirrel can buy you a piece of bread no bigger than your fist or, with consequence, increased odds at The Reaping will garner extra rations.
Nice jacket, Katniss.
At The Reaping ceremony their worst nightmare comes true when Prim’s name is drawn. To spare her young, innocent sister, Katniss volunteers as District 12’s tribute in her stead. It was during this scene that I realized this movie was suited for adults and not just the young adult readership of the books. The scene was tactful and, emotionally, felt very real. Katniss is nothing if not credibly heroic; motherly, protective, brave and altruistic. After being chosen she shows no fear for anything but the future well-being of Prim and their emotionally vacant, widowed mother.
The Reaping: District 12
“Our lucky winner. Share a few words with your fans.” –said the zombie fashion queen (Elizabeth Banks), holding the mic.
Stanley Tucci, with highlighted Victorian hair as ridiculous as The Fifth Element’s opera scene boasted, rises above his silly outfit to perform fantastically as the event’s ongoing emcee. And Wes Bentley (Gone; Ghost Rider) looks ridiculously diabolical with weird facial hair and vest suits, as the promoter and director of the event. Even more strangely wardrobed is the villainous Elizabeth Banks (Our Idiot Brother; The Next Three Days), a striking purple and powdered pale menace to high society who acts as if the chosen tributes are to be congratulated for their participation. Woody Harrelson (Friends with Benefits, Rampart), who I normally love, is rather unimpressive as their hesitant, alcoholic mentor and previous Hunger Games victor. He explains that the best means of survival (i.e., food and shelter) is to get people to like you; to have sponsors.
Woody is just never credible with hair. Somehow Banks was more credible in that wardrobe atrocity.
Some take to the Hunger Games’ pageantry like a Sith to the Dark Side, enjoying the exploitative glamour and solicitously glad-handing the high rollers in search of sponsorship and fanfare. Meanwhile Katniss quietly resents the process and waits to carry out her sentence. But she learns she must play the game of pageantry for this broadcast finale which boasts all of the hype of an NFL draft on an Academy Award show red carpet.
Participants get time to train and learn skills to survive the harsh climate of their expansive battlefield. The process is interesting. Woody becomes a more likable character into this phase, but no more credible really. The preparations combine pre-season training camp with political campaigning complete with stylists, publicists, and a Tonight Show interview vying for public favor.
X-Men, suit up!
Unexpectedly, the actual Hunger Games competition was the least entertaining part of The Hunger Games—not because it wasn’t well-executed, but because all of the backstory and build-up were so inexplicably perfectly-executed! As for the free-for-all death match, I was surprised that they managed to minimize the violence so much without harming the moviegoers’ believability of the story. The combat and kills were effective, tactful, and actually quite appropriate for family viewing while still managing to convey the dire futility of the games.
So I say kudos to all filmmakers involved. I expected a lame Twilight-saga-esque, young adult, female-empowerment disappointment. Instead, I got something that I think will please everyone from the pre-teen daughter, 20-something son, middle-aged parents and everyone in-between. The writing was solid and it never felt like it was meant for young crowds. The relationships were ageless whether about love, betrayal, alliance or trust. And the scenario, while admittedly a bit far-fetched, was justified about as well as it could have been by some well-placed scenes between Donald Sutherland and Shane West politically addressing how to control the poor, spare them their hope, and reap what is needed.
A little hope is effective. A lot of hope is dangerous.
SIDEBAR: Jennifer Lawrence has some big things coming up. Later this year horror fans will enjoy her in The House at the End of the Street. The Hunger Games: Catching Fire has tentatively been announced for 2013, followed by the next X-Men sequel in 2014 in which she’ll continue her role as Raven/Mystique.
SIDEBAR: I love free-for-all to-the-death competition flicks. If you do, too, you should certainly seek out Battle Royale (2000; ultra-violent, weak action), The Condemned (2007; rather violent, awesome action), Surviving the Game (1994; more plotty than violent), and The Running Man (1987; just plain Schwarzenegger-classic fun).
Share this post:
The Vow (2012) [second opinion]
MY CALL: Just see this if you like romantic dramas. Don’t tell me you don’t like Channing Tatum. Just impress your girlfriend and pick it out yourself. As long as you’re past your first few weeks with her, I think you’ll thank me. IF YOU LIKE THIS, WATCH: If you enjoy Tatum here, move right on to Dear John (2010). Anyone looking for a more mature version of this with a more involved plot and heavier drama, then go for Regarding Henry (1991).
Paige (Rachel McAdams; Mean Girls, The Notebook, Morning Glory) and Leo (Channing Tatum; Dear John, 21 Jump Street) are an adorable, young married couple whose car is violently hit by a truck rendering Paige with no memory of the last five years, which happen to include marrying, loving, and even ever meeting Leo.
Their first date. Awwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww.
Hospital scenes after the accident alternate with flashbacks which show us how picture perfect their life together has been. These scenes will roll men’s eyes and swoon women’s hearts. It’s straight out of the Cosmo article: “How you know you’ve met Mr. Right.” Paige and Leo exchange a kind glance, she accidently leaves something behind which he returns as he catches up to her, and he suggests that they owe it to the universe to have a drink together because of some cute coincidence—barf, right guys? Of course it’s wine at a quaint corner café (Café Mnemonic, for the sake of irony) where he surprises her with hand-fed chocolates. Then we cut to Paige waiting tables with the sniffles and she finds a gift waiting for her at a vacant table and Leo watching from outside, soaking in the rain with a mild-mannered smile. The contents? Tissues for her nose, Advil for her head, a photo of him for her heart, and a negligee for later. He’s every bit as spontaneous and thoughtful as any women’s magazine could imagine.
Every girl’s dream. A soaking wet Channing Tatum. Let’s get you out of those clothes.
After the accident: Now awake and confused, Paige’s parents (whom she hadn’t spoken to in years due to a serious disagreement about how Paige should run her own life as an adult) compete with Leo for her affection, trust and rehabilitation. She doesn’t recall their bad terms. But Leo unwaiveringly fights for her and she chooses him. As they re-begin living together, there are a lot of cute/funny firsts: seeing Leo naked by accident, explanations of their daily routines, the awkwardness of when you feel comfortable going in for a goodbye kiss in the morning—even though it used to be second nature.
The one woman in the world who doesn’t want to see Tatum nude.
But in a panic, familiarity trumps presumed love and Paige’s affluent parents re-enter the competition by introducing all of the seductive, high society pageantry that Paige remembers so well (forgetting that she chose to turn her back on it). Leo had difficulty when it was only the two of them, but now he had to complete with all of the things she did remember, including a debutante lifestyle and even her ex-fiancé with whom, by her memory, she never broke it off! Other challenges include Leo trying one of their personal adorablisms to jog her memory and it only startles her, yielding the opposite effect. And when Leo shows Paige (an artist) to her studio she feels alienated as she looks upon someone else’s space.
Paige tries to put the pieces together and find her last memory before the accident–while looking all cute collaging on top of the table in her pajama pants.
The ride is bumpy and frustrating, but cuddlingly warm and fuzzy by the end.
Sam Neil (The Event Horizon) and Jessica Lange (FX’s American Horror Story) do a great job as Paige’s overly controlling but good-intentioned parents. Scott Speedman (Underworld, The Strangers) plays her re-smitten ex-fiancé. And Tatum is convincing as a man who desperately, if not fearfully, needs to get his wife to fall in love with him again while she wears a mask of her past that she had abandoned before meeting him. Actually, let’s just say that all of the cast, regardless of how their characters may initially appear, get a serious chance to be open and vulnerable—and they all left me feeling the same way.
Give Tatum a shot on this one—even you simply think he’s some good-looking punk from Tampa. Among the muscled action-friendly actors, Ryan Reynolds has championed the RomCom. Just Friends (2005), Definitely Maybe (2008) and The Proposal (2009) all rely on his expressive face, dashing ego, and quippy contributions to the script. But Channing Tatum has mastered the sincere romance story. I loved Dear John (2010), The Vow won me over right away, and I can’t wait for Magic Mike (2012). His charm comes from a more quiet personality and his characters love more than want.
I loved this movie. But if you aren’t sure about this movie, know that opinions are quite mixed. The Hof had a different take on this movie. Click here to read it.
Share this post:
Shame (2011)
MY CALL: The character development is unsubtle, but impressive, and the characters may first be considered hyperboles, but with time they are nothing short of being a little too real for comfort. For those who like the gritty, satisfying-for-not-being-satisfying films, this is for you. No story, little development, but I was heavily affected. [A] IF YOU LIKE THEN, THEN WATCH: You’ll find all of the emotional intensity but more redemption in Crash (2004). I’d also suggest American Psycho (2000).
If our favorite self-loathing, vain American Psycho and his self-abusive little sister had all of the sexual hang-ups of Rodger Dodger (2002) then we’d have Michael Fassbender (X-Men: First Class, Haywire) and Carey Mulligan (Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps, Drive) from Shame.
Brandon (Fassbender) is a NYC exec with an ostentatiously modern, white, sterile condo and a serious sex addiction. He ever so casually saunters high society lounges and effortless finds company for the evening. But that doesn’t seem to be enough to quench his deep-seeded thirst for—something. On a daily basis his only smiles are elicited by flirtations or discussions thereof with his partner in crime, his boss.
Brandon apathetically ignores his sister’s routine calls until one day he comes home to find that she, Sissy (Mulligan), has dropped in unannounced. This turns into an uncomfortable, family-valueless argument during which Sissy is naked. She makes no effort to cover up nor does Brandon try to avert his eyes. They bicker like participants in an unhealthy marriage, which sets the stage for their even more unhealthy relationship as brother and sister. At this point we can imagine that they’ve been through something serious together and that they, at some point, strongly depended on one another. We can also imagine that moral lines may have been crossed.
Working a few gigs as a lounge singer, Sissy draws the attention of Brandon’s business cohort. Their affections clearly displease Brandon. In fact, it incites frustration, resentment, enmity and rage. Masturbation, full frontal nudity, intense sexual tension and a brilliantly tactful score make this film all about a tone of depravity—much as were the differently but equally intense 127 Hours and Drive. You never quite feel comfortable watching this film, yet you need to know where it’s going and why Brandon and Sissy are the way that they are. Keeping in tune with American Psycho, Brandon has an addiction to pornography and an often cold demeanor that accompany him even in the workplace.
Let’s see now…donkey + midget + gang + blonde…hmmmm. “GO.”
On another note, I can’t help but to wonder if the man cast as Brandon’s waiter (during a date scene) wasn’t cast because he looked like a very American Psycho Christian Bale. The waiter has a surprising amount of dialogue, all somewhat humorous, and all interrupting a scene designed to demonstrate that Brandon is romantically challenged and generally disconnected.
As Brandon becomes ever more removed from emotionally connecting with anyone else, his sister included, the sexuality becomes rather intense, more frequent and, for some, perhaps difficult to watch. This film probably won’t make you laugh or cry, nor will it lead you to anything resembling catharsis. It will, however, impress you with the cast’s ability to take on this intense—I dare not call it a story—series of scenes. The character development is unsubtle, but impressive, and the characters may first be considered hyperboles, but they are nothing short of being a little too real for comfort. In Sissy’s words, “We’re not bad people. We just come from a bad place.”
SIDEBAR: Between this emotionally chilly performance and his stone-cold killer act in Haywire I can’t wait to see how he fares as Weyland Industries’ Bishop-ish android in the upcoming Alien prequel Prometheus.
Michael Fassbender as David, the emoting android.
Share this post:
Game Change (2012)
MY CALL: Lots of well-quipped laughs. Love Woody Harrelson. Love Julianne Moore. Love this satire! [A] IF YOU LIKE THIS, THEN WATCH: Recount (2008), Margin Call (2011) and Too Big to Fail (2011). And while we’re pulling the curtain on backstage politics, how about The Ides of March (2011).
Ed Harris (Man on a Ledge), as always, does a fine job playing a more-likable-than-reality John McCain running in the 2008 presidential election. I’m not taking a jab at McCain so much as suggesting that the writers and director allowed Ed Harris to be as charismatic as Ed Harris, rather than the rash McCain who described Obama as “a man who has no major life accomplishments…beating an American hero by double digits…simply sailing on his charisma and star power.” McCain’s campaign team is horrified that “this guy [Obama] is raising money like he’s some sort of a human ATM machine.” The use of campaign stock footage presents Obama as exactly what we all saw during the campaign while meta-analyzing Harris as McCain.
HBO has a strong resume when it comes to non-theatrical films. Cinema Verite (2011), depicting reality television before there was reality television, captivated viewers leaving them gasping over a time before Snooki and “The Situation” were poisoning television with alcoholic tendencies, recreational steroid abuse and Jersey-Italian grammar. Recount (2008) managed to tickle both humorous and strong political senses. I’m not suggesting that HBO’s filmmakers didn’t clearly have a biased (anti-Palin/McCain) agenda in this story, but they did an excellent job of pulling back the curtain and revealing the Great and powerful Oz; the demons mitigating the reality of how our political system functions and the campaign designs architected for their circumvention. Such vexing reality is painted with lines like “Lieberman is the right thing to do but the wrong way to win…none of these middle-aged white guys are game changers.” The solution: “So find me a woman.” Perhaps aiming closer to satire than history, this is handled by a Google search complemented by viewing speeches on YouTube—as if the campaign team had no clue about any of these women.
Woody Harrelson (Zombieland, Friends with Benefits, The Hunger Games), wandering somewhat askew of his normally beaten path of sarcastic and histrionic humor, does an exemplary job playing McCain’s media-damage-controlling campaign manager, Steve Schmidt. The humor is all in the situations and Woody delivers them with a straight face that keeps me smiling whenever he has screen time. He always seems a bit nervous supporting the notion of Palin, a high-risk/high-reward nobody who is “so outside the box that she’ll help [McCain] recapture the Maverick label,” all the while credibly serving as her Jedi Master offering guidance and tenets of political success.
As the moose-hunting, mother-of-five Sarah Palin, Julianne Moore (Boogie Nights, The Kids Are all Right) amazes as usual. While being admonished of the frequent, harsh, unfair examination her private life would undergo she simply smiles glibly, explaining that the Alaska primary was “pretty rough, too.” Her speeches’ fur-ruffling feminism, considerate attention to small towns and special needs children, and family ideals are tinglingly uplifting—so much, in fact, that we momentarily forget where this movie will inevitably lead us. A momentary interaction between Palin and a mother of a Down’s syndrome child even broke me to tears; in the movie she practically had my vote (early in the movie, anyway). She starts to win the campaign team’s belief that they can actually win…all except for Nicole Wallace (Sarah Paulson), who quietly dreads that what Palin doesn’t know will serve as rat poison to the campaign.
I’m half surprised they didn’t go for Tina Fey. But I guess no one would have taken this seriously with all of the SNL skits behind her.
But now it seems that Julianne Moore could play Tina Fey if the need should ever arise.
Not knowing why North Korea and South Korea are different countries or what the FED is, believing the Queen of England to be the head of British government, and that Saddam Hussein attacked the USA on 9/11—Palin requires high school-level history lessons and explanations of recent current events to stand her ground in interviews. Deeper in the race the expressions of campaign personnel, once awestruck by the podium words of a strong woman, have been distorted to expressions of horror; horror of the child-like ignorance Palin has for even the most basic concepts of the government and history of American history. Woody Harrelson is eating a grapefruit during a scene in which Palin is being prepped…I’ve never seen an actor make a grapefruit look so painful to eat. These scenes are soul-crushing.
What…?
I endorse this political satire very much and would like to close with a few not-yet-mentioned favorite quotes:
“It’s not that she doesn’t know the answer. It’s that she clearly doesn’t understand the question.”
“She’s a great actress, right? Why don’t we just give her some lines.”
Debacle after debacle… “If John McCain wins, then this woman will be one 72-year old man’s heartbeat away from being the president of the United States.”
It doesn’t end pretty for this overwhelmed, ill-prepared Alaskan.
Share this post:
Bad Movie Tuesday: One for the Money
42, 8, 40, 11, 0, 90, 41, 13, 28, 11, 7 and 2. Guess what those numbers represent? They represent the Rotten Tomatoes scores for Katherine Heigls latest films. Only one of those movies was certified fresh. That movie was Knocked Up. The lovely comedy grossed $150 million and was positively reviewed by 90% of the nations critics. It is one of the highest grossing R-rated comedies of all time.
Heigl also starred in the lowest grossing theatrically released film of all time according to Entertainment Weekly. The 2006 film Zyzzyx Road made $30 theatrically.
Guess which movie she publicly attacked? Heigl lashed out at Knocked Up for being sexist. That is why Heigl is awesome. She is like the female Nic Cage. Heigl unnecessarily lashes out at her good roles and Cage buys dinosaur fossils. Cage spent himself into bankruptcy. Now, he has to act in terrible/enjoyable (AKA terribly enjoyable) films like Season of the Witch, Ghost Rider 2, Drive Angry 3D and an upcoming film where he plays an Alaskan Cop hunting John Cusack.
Heigl talked her way out of being an A list movie star. She spoke out against the roles that made her famous and got stuck playing a New Jersey bail recovery person. Her words wrote checks her acting skills couldn’t cash. She spent all of her good will and her films are seeing dwindling returns. Heigl is stuck in romantic comedy purgatory (AKA New Years Eve, Killers, The Ugly Truth and Life as We Know it.)
You gotta respect that because it makes for some wonderful reviews of her films. Take for instance this fantastic article from Grantland:
Does Everyone Still Hate Katherine Heigl? A Thoroughly Unscientific Grantland Survey
One for the Money is about a New Jersey woman who becomes a bounty hunter because she got fired from her job at Macy’s. She gets a job with her shady cousin who smacks his food angrily. In fact, this movie features intense smacking. The worst part is that each bite sounds squishy. So, you have squishy chewing, bad dialogue, bored Heigl and a depressed looking John Leguizamo.
That is all the summary I can muster. If I only had to write one sentence for the film I’d write this:
One for the Money is not a prequel to Two for the Money.
I had to watch this film due to the 2% Rotten Tomato score and my past, present and future support of John Leguizamo. I hope he performs another one man show where he talks about his time on this film…
Movies, Films & Flix 