Eastern Promises: Review

David Cronenberg's films are something of an acquired taste and in most aspects, Eastern Promises fits what it means to be a Cronenberg work to a T. Excessive violence and sexuality fill out the film's narrative and his unflinching gaze forces the audience to bask in the more lewd moments. However, also like the rest of Cronenberg's work, the film is steeped with dense thematic concerns that force the film onto another plane, one in which the audience is forced to examine human nature in a profound and moving way. Eastern Promises is a film that will not soon be forgotten: a riveting crime drama with a heart and a brain, a perfect genre picture that simultaneously entertains while making us think. Built on the mesmerizing performances of its leads, Cronenberg's follow up to 2005's superb A History of Violence, is a sure fire contender for year's best.

For most mainstream moviegoers, Viggo Mortensen will forever be remembered as Strider/Aragorn, his now iconic roles in Peter Jackson's epic Lord of the Rings trilogy. Unfortunately, many will be missing out on his truly classic performances that, unsurprisingly, have both come under the steady direction of Cronenberg. Soon after the climatic chapter of LotR was released, so was A History of Violence, a picture that largely crept up on people, surprising many who had no clue as to Cronenberg's work. Gone were the days of Scanners or The Fly, in their place was the work of a seasoned cinematic master who followed David Lynch's lead in Blue Velvet and crafted a suburban thriller that begins as a small town drama until layer upon layer are stripped away to reveal the town's violent and seedy core. At that core was the wonderful Mortensen, who led with a quiet confidence that perfectly suited his character. Amazingly, his work in Eastern Promises easily trumps the performance from History.


Here, Mortensen plays Nikolai Luzhin, a low level member of the London Vori v Zakone, the Russian Mob. He begins the film as one of his family's drivers/clean up men. Basically, he's doing the dirty jobs of Mafia life, jobs that Cronenberg depicts gleefully. What may seem like a simple performance is deceptively deep, as his Luzhin's steely, tattooed exterior contradicts his relatively good nature. He is nowhere near as vicious as the gang's boss, Semyon (Armin Mueller-Stahl) or his increasingly unstable son, Kirill (Vincent Cassel) and often times, his compassion clashes with their more hardened mindset. Mortensen is truly stunning, giving an emotionally (and physically, but we'll get to that later) naked performance that is quite simply one of the bravest acting jobs that I have ever seen.

Luckily, Mortensen's counterpart Naomi Watts, who plays Anna Khitrova, a midwife at Trafalgar Hospital, is completely up to the task. As the story begins, we find Anna working the ER, attempting to save a young pregnant teenage girl who has come in with bleeding from her abdomen. The girl, who we later know only as Tatiana, gives birth but dies in the process, leaving Anna with a newborn and Tatiana's diary as the only remaining clues as to this girls life. As Anna sets out to translate the diary and discover a location to bring the baby to, she finds herself being drawn deeper and deeper into the London criminal underworld, involving prostitution and the sex trade. Watts imbues Anna with a strength and determination that makes her an utterly likable character, an important part of the puzzle here. Without Anna's moral purity, the film's harsh tones could quickly have overwhelmed the narrative. However, with Anna as the center, the film takes on a humanistic slant, and despite the violence, there are glimpses of hope scattered sparingly throughout.

The dark alleys and gray, raining skies of London add to the film's grim tone that truly gets under the skin of the viewer. While its difficult to discern what exactly is so lingering about this film, the lasting impact is definite and unquestionable. People left my theater shaken and quiet, as if they had just seen something troubling and unforgettable. Often times the gore is a bit much, causing audience members to shield their eyes and cover their gaping mouths as if to stifle a yell. The audience's shock came to a climax in the film's main set piece, a knife fight in a steam bath. Throughout the nearly five minute sequence, Mortensen is completely exposed, losing his towel covering seconds in and the scene is quite frankly stunning. As an acting performance, it is a brave sacrifice to lend the film realism. Many actors would refuse to do this, but Mortensen gives it his all. Not only does he handle the emotional aspects of the performance with subtlety and grace, he gives his body to this important scene. While it is unlikely due to the graphic nature of his work, Mortensen deserves serious consideration for end of the year accolades.

Eastern Promises is a completely involving masterpiece, Cronenberg's second in a row. The cast is superb throughout (I've only mentioned Cassel and Mueller-Stahl in passing but their performances are amazing as well), Steven Knight's script is intelligent and suspenseful, Howard Shore's score complements the film perfectly and Cronenberg's assured direction brings every piece together. The results of it all are breathtaking, leaving Eastern Promises in a small group with The Departed and Miami Vice as the pinnacles of recent crime dramas. As I mentioned earlier, Cronenberg is an acquired taste and there will be those that will be put off by the violence and subject matter. However, for those who sit through this film will be amply rewarded with a modern examination of life in immigrant London, filled with death and suffering but never lacking life and vitality.


*****

The Kingdom: Review

The current Iraqi conflict has been jumped on quickly by Hollywood, who has produced a number of films, almost all being critical of the war. It is then with some fanfare that The Kingdom arrives, being the first First Blood studio film for the conflict in the Middle East and despite all its political leanings, it avoids the Iraq War completely. That conflict, so rife with controversy, is not even mentioned and as a result, the film feels like a bit of revisionist history, its odd tones borrowing from the current political climate but never actually acknowledging it. The film, directed by Peter Berg, produced by the masterful Michael Mann and written by Matthew Michael Carnahan (brother of Joe), unfortunately never takes off and instead of being the in-depth actioner it could have been, it feels more like a neo-con fantasy that never wants to ask, much less answer, the tough questions.

Right from the roaring, in your face opening sequence, it is clear that The Kingdom is not trying to be a subtle political piece but an action flick with some political thought. This opening sequence, of a terrorist attack on a compound in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, is a gripping and violent jolt, launching the audience into the film's narrative almost immediately. After the attacks, the FBI sends a small group of investigators, led by Ronald Fleury (Jamie Foxx). Fleury, who initially is denied permission to travel to Saudi Arabia to investigate, utilizes some back door connections to slide his way into the assignment, bypassing the people who initially forbid his request. In doing so, Berg and Carnahan position Fleury in the long line of freedom fighting mavericks inhabited by Rambo and just about every character Chuck Norris has ever played. Thankfully, they also imbue Fleury with a great deal more of intellectual saavy and never let him reach the mindless depths of the aforementioned characters. Upon the groups arrival in the Kingdom, they begin their investigation into the attacks, which they quickly link to a Bin Laden like cell leader.

The rest of Fleury's group are something of a motley crew, two of which seem to be completely useless, Special Agents Adam Leavitt and Janet Mayes (Jason Bateman and Jennifer Garner) and the third being a grizzled old veteran with a few tricks up his sleeve, SA Grant Sykes (Chris Cooper). For Leavitt, his only reason for being there seems to crack jokes and take up space. Mayes spends most of the film either crying or cowering in a corner until the last moments when she kills some baddies and then gets thrown around a room. Sykes is a bit more useful (i.e. someone an American Citizen might actually want to have in the FBI), pulling his weight throughout the film. Cooper is his usual reliable self, if not somewhat disappointing due to the general lack of depth in his character. While Bateman and Garner have almost nothing to work with, neither do much with their scraps with Bateman just feeling generally out of place. Maybe its the fact that he was so good in Fox's alt-sitcom Arrested Development but I couldn't help but shake the feeling that it was Michael Bluth getting dragged around the Saudi streets.

The best character is probably the unit's Saudi contact, a state policeman named Col. Faris Al-Ghazi, wonderfully played by Ashraf Barhom. Without this character to counterweight the unit's American jingoism, the film might be construed as a fully anti-Muslim statement. However, Barhom's humanistic and believable work stops that from being the case as he is an undeniably likeable and moral character, in fact, maybe the most so in all of the film. His character is given the most depth and Barhom really runs with it, turning in a wonderful performance and is a major highlight for the film.

Unlike Mann's directorial work, which features a great deal of mood and feeling while still handing out riveting action, Berg loses his narrative steam during the action sequence, regardless of how effective they are. For Mann, the acts of violence that inhabit his films are horrific enough as they are. He rarely relies on over the top blood and gore, rather using the speed and precision of the moments to give them their power. Berg chooses an alternate, inferior route to take, utilizing the aforementioned gore to drive home the horrific nature of the acts the film portrays. As a result, where Mann's work never feels like a generic action film, Berg's sometimes does albeit with some exotic trappings. Throughout the film, I couldn't help but wish that Mann had stepped into the director's chair and taken over as the film would have probably been better off. That being said, there are some memorable sequences

The Kingdom is not entirely without merit, far from it. For all its shoot first, speak second ideologies, the film displays a remarkable awareness of the more complex issues that infuse the middle east with such volatility. Take, for example, the opening credits (some of the best I've ever seen) that briefly but effectively sum up the past 70 years of history in the Middle East as it relates to the film's narrative. Unlike Syriana, which required a rather intimate working knowledge of the situation in question to fully comprehend its more complex moments, The Kingdom is easily accessible, largely thanks to the opening moments. For a country that is quickly tiring of the constant bombardment of media coverage regarding the war in Iraq, The Kingdom despite its setting, allows for some simple escapism. I would not be surprised if the film found a strong neo-con following, as its the type of American go get 'em hard body actioner that dominated the Reagan-led 80's. The violence is never really personal, most of the victims are faceless Muslims who serve no purpose other than to get in the way of our heroes bullets. Think of The Kingdom as Live Free or Die Hard, with half the edge of your seat thrills and a 50% more intelligence and you'll leave impressed and entertained. If you go in expecting anything more, expect disappointment.


***

The Wind That Shakes The Barley: Review

The Wind That Shakes The Barley was something of a surprise winner of the 2006 Palme D'Or at the Cannes Film Festival, a film that people enjoyed but no one raved about it. With its release in the UK, it was met with great controversy over its story of Irish Revolutionaries in the early 20th Century. For Britons, Ken Loach's film was a stab in the back of the director's own country. For others, it was a brave artistic achievement that was an emotionally devastating as billed. When it saw release in the US early this year, it passed with nary a yawn, critically admired but commercially ignored. It didn't seem to spark the kind of controversy, which is understandable. What isn't is why this film wasn't more heralded by audiences in America, as The Wind That Shakes the Barley is an undeniable success that has masterful moments of emotional disturbance. If not for its somewhat disappointing ending, we could be looking at a sure fire contender for film of the year.

Loach's film tells the story of two Irish brothers, Damien (Cillian Murphy) and Teddy (Padraic Delany), who join the burgeoning Irish Republic Army to fight the infamous English Black and Tan's, a paramilitary group that was unleashed into Ireland in an attempt to subdue the Irish. The film carefully and successfully mixes in the larger picture with the more intimate portrayal of a family facing upheaval. As a result, the film feels like it is tackling a huge subject from a very personal entry point and its success must be attributed to the wonderful performances all around. Murphy is especially excellent and its with each passing performance that he strikes me more and more as one of the finest actors of his generation. He brings a humanity to the role that forms nuanced contradictions throughout the film, presenting his actions as conflicts for him as well as the audience. Never once does Murphy allow his character to become anything less than completely believable and as his grief over his actions rises, his performance grows into a ferocious command of the screen. This man is a special, special actor and if he continues to make smart artistic (nothing suggests he won't), he'll go down as one of the more talented people of this era.

When viewing The Wind That Shakes the Barley, it is apparent that Loach is a seasoned veteran behind the camera as he provides the film with bracingly realistic feel. While it isn't quite as rough as Paul Greengrass' Bloody Sunday, Loach's film possesses a similar feel with its in your face violence that is never glamorized and really even altered. It is shown as is and that is bracing and startling. Sometimes a film such as TWTSTB comes along and shakes the viewer to the soul in its depictions of humanity's cruelty to each other. Unlike a Hollywood action flick, where the violence is so over the top, it is almost comical, Loach prefers to utilize simple images that are powerful and to the point. I defy anyone to watch the film with the volume raised and not find themselves grimacing at the intensity of certain scenes, at the chaos that erupts from nothing.

The film, regardless of political slant, is a well told, effectively realized drama that blends in romance, action and political intrigue with a envious subtlety that is usually lacking from politically fueled, historical epics (Braveheart, I love you but you're guilty here). For those who are unversed in the events being depicted (such as myself), you'll find yourself quickly researching the film's claims and depictions, to see if what Loach puts on screen is actually true. Unfortunately, much of it does seem accurate. As a result, The Wind That Shakes The Barley is an important documentation of times and events that are too often neglected due to their barbaric nature.

Had it not been for the final sequence of the film, which seems like its first obvious pull at emotional manipulation, TWTSTB would be a masterpiece. However, those concluding moments seem to betray the rest of the film. Where the events that lead up to the ending seem logical and realistic, the conclusion doesn't feel as organic as the rest of the film. These points of the film are not outright failures (in some respects, they are quite good), but it was the first point where I wanted to claim cop out. Its unfortunate, as Loach had hit on all cylinders up to that point. It isn't enough to ruin the film, far from it, but it is enough to dock it a point or two. That being said, this is a film to be viewer and cherished. It is filled with wonderful acting and strong direction. The cinematography by Barry Ackroyd is splendid, giving the film a majestic look, capturing the gentle rolling greens of Ireland with a restrained grace. Its politics may be off putting to some but as a piece of cinema, it is a solid success that will appeal to audiences looking for a historical epic with a strong dose of intelligence and emotion.

****

3:10 to Yuma: Review

Give credit where credit is due and honor James Mangold (Walk the Line), who, in his latest effort 3:10 to Yuma, has revitalized the American Western, as important a cinematic genre as ever has existed. 3:10 is a hard-bitten, potboiler of a film; a masterful frontier story that feels like a Deadwood inflected High Noon. Mangold, who is becoming a wonderful filmmaker, wisely guides the story along, slowly building tension until the breaking point, in which the first hour and 40 minutes of story comes to a nail biting finale that ranks with some of the best Old West celluloid shootouts. Featuring two spectacular performances by Christian Bale and Russell Crowe, 3:10 to Yuma feels like a classic in the making from start to finish.
In this remake of the 1957 original, Bale plays a family man and farmer, Dan Evans, who following the conclusion of the Civil War, packs up his family and heads west. However, the allure and promise of the west quickly becomes hardship and suffering. Faced with enormous debt and a complete lack of water due to a massive, continuing drought, the Evans family begins the film awakened by the burning of their barn. The next day, Evans and his sons, William and Mark (Logan Lerman and Benjamin Petry respectively), ride out to herd their cattle back to the farm. However, their witnessing of a violent and gruesome stagecoach robbery, which quickly degrades into massacre, quickly disturbs that innocent task. The band of outlaws responsible for the attack are led by their fearsome leader, Ben Wade (played by Russell Crowe), and upon realizing that they've been seen, take the Evans' horses but leave them untouched. Dan finds Byron, a survivor of the attack (Peter Fonda), and helps him back into town.

Little does he know that Wade had headed in the same direction and after another chance meeting in a saloon, in which Wade is arrested, Dan finds himself enlisted in a posse whose mission is to deliver Wade to the 3:10 train to Yuma Prison. Unfortunately for Evans, Byron and the rest of the men, Wade's band is close on their tail, now led by the equally dangerous Charlie Prince (Ben Foster). The rest of the film centers along this quest and with each inch traveled, Mangold pushes the audience closer and closer to the edge. The race to the train is a dangerous 24 hours in which many of the members of Wade's escort perish in unfortunate ways. As the group traverses across the unforgiving landscape, which is beautifully shot by Phedon Papamichael (of Sideways fame), the group is physically and mentally punished by the increasing pressure of getting Wade to the station, not only in time but in one piece.

The cast, as a whole, has no real weak points, with everyone more than pulling their weight. The principles, Bale, Crowe, Fonda, Foster and Lerman, are all spectacular, giving their characters complex moral compasses that characterize the great revisionist westerns. Bale and Crowe, in particular, contribute show-stopping performances, something we've come to expect from two of the best actors working today. In Bale's capable hands, Evans possesses not only a physical toughness but a mental and emotional one as well. His continued perseverance really drives the film and serves as the basis for much of the thematic exploration. Crowe's Wade immediately takes his place amongst the pantheon of classic Western villains, a ferocious killer that has the undeniable charisma that reminds one of Wayne's Ethan Edwards. While Crowe's performance isn't quite on the same level as Wayne's (which I consider to be one of the greatest roles in history), it is undeniably powerful and ranks as one of Crowe's better jobs.

It should be noted that this film never truly feels like the classic Peckinpah and Leone examinations of the 1960's and 70's. In other words, the cynicism that was evident in the work of those two masters isn't readily apparent here. Instead, Mangold seems to be concerned with Ford's critiques of masculinity and civilization and while 3:10 to Yuma never attains the full majesty of a Ford epic, it never quite delves into the psychological depravity of Peckinpah. Actually, if pressed and as mentioned earlier, the most notable touchstone here seems to be High Noon, not only in its narrative structure (the continuing march of time) but in its themes as well. Much like Gary Cooper in Zinneman's classic, Evans is forced to deal with a situation that few others want to be involved in.

As this point in the life of the genre, it is almost impossible not to notice the hallmarks of films past. Mangold seems to realize this and continually harkens back (both narratively and thematically) to the great westerns of the past, guiding his film down familiar paths, yet in new and exciting ways. If you have a strong bias against westerns, it is unlikely that 3:10 to Yuma will cure that unfortunate affliction. One might be better off starting with Stagecoach or one of Leone's Dollar Trilogy films to fully get into the genre. However, for those who enjoy a solid western, certainly the best American entry in the genre since 1992's Unforgiven and if not for last year's The Proposition maybe the best since Eastwood's classic period, 3:10 to Yuma is one to check out, a near masterpiece and certainly a worthy remake of the great original.

****

Starter for 10: Review

Romantic comedies are a dime a dozen, sugary confections that often times say little about human nature or the society at large. Too often are they so infatuated with telling a simple, tired love story that they forget the potential power of film. This is not to suggest that a romantic comedy is required to be heavy handed and deal with life and death situation. Many are successful at satirizing aspects of society (Jerry Maguire, It Happened One Night) while remaining comical and lighthearted. Unfortunately for any viewers of Starter for 10, the film does almost nothing worthwhile, instead relying too often on tired and uninspired slapstick for its major laughs.

For a film with some major clout behind it (Tom Hanks and Sam Mendes are both producers), one would think that this might have felt like more than an uninspired TV movie. Unfortunately, it doesn't never leaving the constraints of the silver screen's smaller cousin behind. Rather, Starter for 10 is painfully mediocre all around with it's script attempting to say something regarding class in 1980's Britain but never having the guts to really say something. It frequently touches on just the fringes of the subject, afraid to jump full on into the subject. This would have been excusable if the characters were absorbing or the relationships depicted had any life behind them. Once again, unfortunately, they don't. David Nicholls' script (based on his own novel) rarely displays the intelligence or sharp wit to make for a entertaining romantic comedy, choosing to wallow in half baked relationships and characters.

The story, of a lower middle class boy Brian Jackson (played ably by James McAvoy in a performance that reminds me of a younger Ewan McGregor) who is a whiz at trivia but not girls, feels lifeless. It isn't bad, per say, just very plain. He joins the University Quiz Team and falls in love his teammate Alice (Alice Eve), one who never really returns the feelings, but rather just plays with poor Brian's heart. Another classmate Rebecca (Rebecca Hall) enters the picture to complicate Brian's feelings. There is no memorable dialogue, each exchange is as bland as the last, never giving their characters any personality or traits. The filmmakers here might have felt clever for trying to make a stripped down, plain-coated rom com but that shtick never really works either. The whole film just leaves the audience wanting more, not in a good way, but in a way that one never feels that they have received their money's worth. With BBC Films and Playtone as the production companies, there is money to spend; they just chose not to do it here.

The film's one redeeming and notable quality is its superior soundtrack, albeit misused at times. However, it is difficult to argue with the actual quality of the songs on display, all of which are considered classics of 80's British pop. For this writer, the late appearance of The Smiths' "Please, Please, Please, Let Me Get What I Want" warranted a smile, as it is one of Morrissey/Marr great concoction. That smile quickly soured as it dawned on me at the misuse of the song, which was more or less the story of the film. Whenever something enjoyable would happen, it would quickly be crushed by a moment of almost unbearable embarrassment or awkwardness. In fact, the film made me feel more embarrassed to be watching than anything else.

As has been said earlier, Starter for 10 is not a horrible film but it has almost nothing to separate itself from the crowded pack of romantic comedies. It is no wonder that this film was unceremoniously dumped in theatres and quickly moved to DVD. The critical approval is somewhat confusing to this writer. I can't tell whether I really missed something important or others did. McAvoy is the highlight here and despite his inability to keep up with Forrest Whitaker in Last King of Scotland (but really, who could?), seems like he could be a star in the making. For those in desperate need of a new British comedy, Starter for 10 may be a winner but for something going in without that jones, it just seemed, simply, simple.

**

Fall Film Preview

The fall is typically the season in which the studios begin their ritualistic dumping of Oscar contenders and with each week, the multiplexes are flooded with potential nominees. Over the next couple of weeks, leading up to the first big fall releases on September 7th (I generally consider the end of August to finish the summer movie going months), I'll be posting trailers for some of the more anticipated films of the fall and will continue to do so as the Oscars get closer. Ideally, The Outsider will be attempting to create not only a place to collect reviews but also trailers of upcoming films in an effort to get people to check out some of the films worth seeing. We'll start tonight with a trio of anticipated films, 3:10 to Yuma, The Darjeeling Limited and Eastern Promises, enjoy:

3:10 to Yuma
Director:
James Mangold
Writers:
Halsted Welles
Michael Brandt
Derek Haas
Starring:
Russell Crowe
Christian Bale
Peter Fonda

The Darjeeling Limited
Director:
Wes Anderson
Writers:
Wes Anderson
Roman Coppola
Jason Schwartzman
Starring:
Owen Wilson
Adrian Brody
Jason Schwartzman
Anjelica Huston
Natalie Portman

Eastern Promises
Director:
David Cronenberg
Writers:
Steven Knight
Starring:
Viggo Mortensen
Naomi Watts
Vincent Cassel

Superbad: Review

Judd Apatow has had the Midas Touch now for almost a decade. Anything the man touches, turns to gold, either critical or box office and Superbad, his latest film (as a producer) is no different. Based on a script by Apatow regulars Seth Rogan and Evan Goldberg, Superbad is a gut bustingly raunchy comedic adventure that will undoubtedly quickly become the Animal House of this generation. Much like how Bluto Blutarsky, Otter and Pinto entered the popular lexicon following the release of that John Landis classic, so will (or already has, depending on who you ask) McLovin, characters of such likable ill repute that the mere mention of their names will bring a smile to the faces of most who hear it.

For those who couldn't get into The 40 Year Old Virgin or Knocked Up, Superbad is not for you, the grossest, crudest of the bunch. Where Knocked Up possessed its fair share of language and embarrassing moments, it never comes close to Superbad which seems to outdo just about anything Apatow has penned in its first 10 minutes. That dramatic change can be attributed to Rogan and Goldberg, whose sense of comedic is still being honed. There are a much larger number of jokes in Superbad that don't work when compared to Knocked Up but thanks to their fast and furious nature, there is enough being thrown on screen that more often than not, the audience was left gasping for breath.

Much of the film's success comes from it's three primary leads, Michael Cera, Jonah Hill and newcomer Christopher Mintz-Plasse, all of whom give their body and souls to the script, delivering even the crudest, most far-fetched lines with a dose of naivety and heart. Cera, best known for his stellar work in TV's Arrested Development, is perfectly suited for his character, his comedic timing honed to a fine science. While Hill breathlessly spews profanity at rapid-fire speeds, Cera works his lines in with a subtlety and grace that he undoubtedly learned from his cast mates on AD. Mintz-Plasse, the now infamous McLovin is wonderful in his role, a riotous mix of overconfidence and clumsiness. It is only Hill's character, who is constantly cursing, that ever wears on the audience and even his inspired foulness is redeemed by a genuine good nature. Despite his rough exterior, he is like every other 18-year-old guy, insecure and worried about his future.

Superbad is not the most innovative or original film: it tells the story of three guys who try to score girls and booze on the night before their last high school summer vacation starts. Seth (Hill) and Evan (Cera) are long time best friends who are now faced with the fact that they will be going to different colleges and for the first time, they will be separated. Fogell (Mintz-Plasse), who quickly becomes known as his pseudonym McLovin, is the third wheel here, a fellow student who will be attending Dartmouth with Evan. The hijinks that follow track the trio through the course of one day and night, with each situation being more ridiculous than the last.

Superbad's charms don't come from its originality but its heart; without that, it is no more than a Van Wilder clone. Instead, one can tell that Apatow's skills have rubbed off favorably on Rogan, who has crafted a screenplay that is heartfelt and sincere. Mr. Rogan gracefully enters the realm of late teen males, who have discovered swearing, alcohol and sex, and runs with it, making the film as raunchy as anything else on screen. However, under the harsh and uninviting exterior is a gentle core, a couple of guys who are unsure of themselves and just trying to get girls to like them. While they may try to act tough, it quickly becomes clear that they don't know how to talk to girls, stumbling over their words whenever a pretty member of the opposite sex walks by. While Rogan doesn't have quite the same ear for normal, male dialogue that Apatow does, he is certainly on his way and the sky's the limit for a guy who could quickly become one of the major stars of American comedy.

Superbad never hits the same high notes that Knocked Up does, but to be honest, almost no contemporary American comedy has. With his pregnancy comedy, Apatow created the first truly worthwhile mainstream comedy for this generation, a film that doesn't preach or moralize but merely presents the issues at hand in a humane and original way. Superbad never aspires to those heights, it merely wants to be a genuine teen comedy that allows its audience a couple hours of laughter. It achieves its goal with style and panache, leaving its audience exhausted from the on screen hilarity. In other words, it aims low and hits high: it is, without a doubt, a gross out comedy but one with a huge helping of feeling. For that, it will likely takes its place in the pantheon of great comedies, sitting alongside Animal House, Fast Times at Ridgemont High and Ferris Bueller's Day Off. It isn't quite Knocked Up, but like I said, few are.

****

Bridge to Terabithia: Review

Given the considerable amount of acclaim that has surrounded Bridge to Terabithia, both the children's book and feature film, it was with mild anticipation that I sat down to watch Gabor Csupo's adaptation. I guess thats why its so disappointing to say that I was lukewarm at best on the film and rather than finding a children's classic, the film was painfully mediocre at times, never living up to what it could have been. It treads the line between being a fantasy and coming of age story, and while this is not to say that the two are mutually exclusive, when it comes down to the film's finale, it is its inability to fully meld the two genres that is its ultimate downfall: the fantastical elements are never given full enough attention and the coming of age story is marred by hokey schoolyard bullying and musical numbers.

Jesse Aarons (Josh Hutcherson) is something of a social outcast, a young boy from a working class family that has never fit in with a group of friends at school. It isn't until he is beat in a footrace by the new girl, Leslie Burke (AnnaSophia Robb), and subsequently "followed home" until he finds a friend. After all, you see, the new girl lives down the street from him and despite his initial hesitancy, the two form a bond over an imaginary world that they create by swinging over a river into a forest. That imaginary world, Terabithia, allows them a place to escape from their everyday ills: chores, bullies and siblings. The duo's relationship is never anything but contentious, that is until the film's concluding act, in which it is made out to be the best thing in the world. Up until then, Jesse views Leslie with a mix of love and hate, deriding her fantastical creations as wonderful one minute and ridiculous the next.

The audience has the same issue with those creations as they are given minimal screen time and never fully feel like a real part of the story but more of a simple diversion, much like they are with the kids. This approach would be fine if the real world narrative had been stronger. However, it is more of a string of clichés and stereotypes than anything else. When one walks away from the film, the only moral of the story seems to be that being nice to people, your friends, your siblings, your parents is the cool thing to do and valuing friendships is one of the most important aspects of living a happy life. I don't disagree with these assertions but they have been made time and time again.

Unlike some of the more recent Pixar movies, which deal with deeper but still meaningful themes for children and are the current pinnacle of family entertainment, Bridge to Terabithia is a one trick pony, ending in the ultimate of clichés. Many have made out the ending to be a deeply saddening affair and while it is moving, never does it reach the heights (or lows) of some of the film's predecessors. It feels manipulative and forced, a twist that happens so quickly and is so painfully obvious, the artificial emotional effect never really hit me. Instead, Bridge's climax is essentially My Girl 3 and what might have been effective 15 years ago is now no more than a re-hash, regardless of when the source material was published (1977).

The cast here is adequate but never spectacular. The children's performances are hit and miss, as one might expect, with Hutcherson and Robb as definite standouts from the group. The bully of the school, Janice Avery (Lauren Clinton), makes her character into more of a joke than actual threat. Watching the film with three guys in their early 20's elicited more laughs as Janice's antics than feelings of sympathy. None of us could figure out why more kids didn't stand up to her, despite her ludicrous demands. She struck us more as the type of girl who would have been mocked, rather than doing the mocking. Robert Patrick leads the cast of adults, who handle the material well, making the real world half of the film much better than the Terabithia side.

Ultimately, Bridge to Terabithia was a disappointment, a film that doesn't come close to living up to the considerable hype. For children, it may be a meaningful and sad film that will resonate with them. For me, it seemed like just another film dealing with themes that have been dealt with before and in better ways. While I would not venture as far as to say that the film is bad (it really isn't), it just seems more mediocre than anything else. Given the hefty weight behind the source material, one could have hoped for so much more. Rather, what we have is a schizophrenic film that never makes up its mind as to what it wants to be.

**

This is England: Review

Usually films dealing explicitly with themes of coming of age are tired, clichéd experiences that endlessly re-hash the conventions of the genre over and over. This is why This is England, the newest feature by Shane Meadows is as refreshing as it is, a moving exploration of the effects hatred and racism can have on a young boy. Featuring spectacular performances throughout, this is the feature where Meadows fully graduates into the upper echelon of modern British filmmakers. His steady direction and highly intelligent script is the base of a devastatingly effective drama that works on every level it intends.

The film tells the story of Shaun, played by Thomas Turgoose, a small boy growing up in small town England in the mid 1980’s. His father has been killed in the Falklands War and while his mother (played by Jo Hartley) is a capable, loving woman, Shaun is a lonely outsider at school, frequently being picked on by his classmates. However, as he’s walking home one day, he meets Woody (Joseph Gilgun) and his band of friends, all skinheads, who take Shaun under his wing. After a few days of acceptance and harmless fun, Woody introduces our protagonist to Combo, who has been recently paroled. However, where Woody and friends are a relatively harmless, accepting group, Combo is a firm believer in the National Front, an ultra right wing political group, and his talks drive a wedge in the group.

Led by Turgoose is his debut performance, the cast shines from top to bottom, giving Meadows’ characters a lived in realism. Never once do they seem like caricatures of people; every performer imbues their already richly drawn characters with humanity and grace. Even the more dislikeable characters, such as Stephen Graham’s Combo are oddly vulnerable at times despite his violent, hateful exterior. The actual story is not a tremendously complicated narrative, but the characters are so thoroughly thought out that they jump off the screen and as a result, the basic storyline is greatly aided. Turgoose is tremendous and deserves to be recognized for his spectacular performance. Shaun is one of the more memorable child characters in recent times; without him, the film would suffer.

Now before everyone gets up in arms about the idea of likable skinhead characters, one has to realize that initially, the skinhead culture was not based on the same ideals that tend to characterize it today. For most Americans, skinhead is somewhat of an interchangeable term with Neo-Nazism. However, at their start, skinheads were an offshoot of the Mods and as a result, tended to be based around music culture. It really wasn’t until the National Front appropriated the culture that it became what many people associate it with now.

This is England is vibrantly alive, featuring a spectacular soundtrack and cinematography. Both the audio and visual aspects of the film allow it to jump off the screen. In fact, some of the film’s best scenes are really extended musical sequences, brilliantly shot and executed. These sequences are funny, sad but most of all involving. They welcome the viewer farther into the story and the characters lives, painting a better picture of what life was like for these people. Unlike so many other musical sequences today, which feel tired and bloated, Meadows utilizes these sequence’s screen time to maximum effect.

If Dead Man’s Shoes, the predecessor to This is England in Meadows’ filmography, was a startling show of talent, This is England is a magnificent realization of all those talents, a film where everything comes together at the right time. This is a film that defiantly British but can speak to people of all countries. It is a brutal indictment of hatred and racism and the detrimental effects those can have, not only on those who possess them but for those who surround those people as well. This is England is a film that deserves, nay, demands to be seen. It is an important and vital work, a feather that will stand for a long time as one of, hopefully, many in the cap of Shane Meadows.


*****

The Lookout: Review

The Lookout, written and directed by Scott Frank (writer of Out of Sight and Get Shorty), was heralded upon its release as one of the first pleasant surprises of the year, a small thriller that featured in-depth characters and some legitimate suspense. It was with this hype, along with the long held belief by many Hollywood insiders that the script has been one of the best not-produced works floating around, that I viewed the film and unfortunately, it doesn't quite live up to expectations. This is not to say that it isn't worth a viewing, far from it, but rather than an innovative neo-noir, the type of which we were promised, it is really no more than a small time heist film filled out with some more in-depth characterization. Had it not been for the lead performance by Joseph Gordon-Levitt, who is surely one of the finest young talents in film today, The Lookout could have been a crushing disappointment. It is due to Mr. Gordon-Levitt that the film has some weight and might stick with some viewers past the conclusion of the final credit.

Gordon-Levitt, who also anchored 2006's instant indie classic Brick, has wonderfully moved from his now signature role on NBC's 3rd Rock From The Sun to more independent and adult oriented fare. His seeming penchant for small thrillers helped to make Brick into one of the best noirs this side of Chinatown and greatly aids The Lookout, allowing Frank's script to come to life on screen. Gordon-Levitt plays Chris Pratt, an struggling janitor at a Kansas Bank, who on his high school prom night, was involved in a horrific accident that left 2 of his classmates and friends dead on the scene. Pratt sustains a severe head injury and as a result, struggles with his memory, depression and self-forgiveness, something he has never allowed to himself to achieve. One night in a bar, Pratt meets Gary Spargo, (played by Matthew Goode) who claims he graduated a few years before Pratt and through a series of events, Pratt finds himself waist deep in a bank robbery.

The narrative may feel simple enough, and it is, but that’s because the film uses it as a jumping off point to examine the effects of a life-changing event, such as Pratt's accident, might have on someone in their early 20's. As a character study, The Lookout is an interesting and at times, well constructed view into Pratt's life. He lives with a blind friend, played by Jeff Daniels, and it quickly becomes clear that it is Pratt who relies on his roommate, despite the more obvious handicap. Pratt is frequently unable to construct a normal day and Gordon-Levitt really nails the frustration and aggravation that results from his inability to live a normal life. For someone who was a star hockey player in high school, Pratt has been reduced to one of the outliers in a society, a young man who had his life ripped from him due to an unfortunate event. While not a full on outcast, it is apparent that Chris is no longer a member of mainstream, everyday society due to his injury.

As a whole, the cast here is wonderful, the best part of the film, and is able to carry the weight of the subject matter at hand with ease. Daniels and Gordon-Levitt take their parts and run with them, imbuing their characters with a definite humanity. Isla Fisher, as Pratt love interest, is good here as well but as I've mentioned before, Gordon-Levitt is the star here. Label me surprised that he has been able to break away from what could have been a career-defining role to make films that are unique and relevant. Unlike many other child stars, who seem to spend more time in the tabloids than on-screen, Gordon-Levitt has matured with grace and class, honing his considerable talents to a point where his career is extremely promising. If he continues to make good decisions on projects, look for him to become a massive indie star.

Frank, who also penned Minority Report, seems to work better with source material. His skills seem better fit enriching others characters for the screen instead of creating his own. As a director, he is a talented stylist, using a realistic feel here that positively works with the characters. The snow-covered plains of Kansas immediately bring to mind the Coen's Fargo and while The Lookout has nothing on that masterpiece, there are definite similarities in its style and setting. One gets a feeling that Frank has seen that film a couple of times and used it partially as a template here to guide his story. His shooting of the climatic bank robbery is assured although there is a jarring shift where the film switches into an almost Mann like use of a digital camera, making the final shootout look more like Collateral or Miami Vice. While this necessarily isn't a bad thing, given the rest of the look of the film, it was immediately noticeable and worked to remove me from the suspense of the situation.

For fans of noir, The Lookout will probably be a pleasant find, an under the radar flick that moves quickly along and utilizes its time well (a pitch perfect 95 minutes) and for that, its worth a rental. While the film didn't floor me as I hoped it would, and it doesn't come close to Brick, I did find myself riveted at moments of the film. However, it never fully came together like I hoped it would and had a few awkward moments (the continued use of the phrase "Whoever has the money, has the power", which is too similar to Scarface's ideological ground zero). It was never enough to ruin the film, just enough to knock it down a few notches. That being said, there is enough promise here between Frank's direction and Gordon-Levitt's performance that one can't help but eagerly await their next projects.

***

Shooter: Review

Let's get it on the table first off: Shooter was hands down, the worst film I've seen this year, a horrid attempt at both action and satire that ends up falling on its face more often than not. Despite an interesting cast and a director who has shown flashes of brilliance in the past, Shooter has almost nothing going for it, largely due to an awful script loaded with terrible dialogue and plot holes. The fact that this film was mildly well received and currently holds a rating of 7.2 on IMDB.com is not only absurd, it should be insulting to any self-respecting film fan with a half a brain.

Antoine Fuqua, the director behind this mess, imbues the film with very little unique style rather working strictly in the clichés of the action genre and coming out with a film that is, well, painfully generic. Even the look of the film, typically the most important part of big budget actioners, feels dull and drab and save for a few admittedly spectacular views of scenery, there is almost nothing that discerns this from the next Model T action flick. Fuqua, who made the enjoyable Training Day, does not strike me as an untalented director when working out of the confines of studio control. Despite its predictability at times, Training Day strayed far enough from the norm to make for an experience that felt like a unique take on the good cop/bad cop scenario. Shooter, however possesses nothing other than cliché after cliché, and by film's end, I was left exhausted and drained at the sheer idiocy of the whole thing.

The cast as a whole is terrible, anchored by laughable performances by Mark Wahlberg and Danny Glover. Wahlberg, who plays a retired Marine scout sniper who is brought out of retirement to help prevent a presidential assassination, seems to be confused as to what film he is in, unable to decide whether he is playing Bob Lee Swagger (his actual name, I'm not joking) or Brock Landers. Wahlberg, who was riding high on his wonderful performance in The Departed is just miserable here, delivering the clunky lines in a way that it can't even be construed as camp. Unfortunately for Mr. Swagger, the real plot is to frame him and for the rest of the film, Wahlberg is on the run from the Feds, trying to figure out why he was set up. Through a convoluted plot twists, it becomes known that it has to do with an African village, the United States' continued meddling in other countries and a prominent American senator. By films end, I was as confused as you are however, I wasn't necessarily confused as to what happened, but why exactly it needed to happen. The film spends so much time on useless, unintelligible pseudo-politicizing that it too often forgets the interesting action.

Glover is a complete mess, which is another disappointment, given his considerable talents and intelligence when choosing films that regardless of genre, have a moments of entertainment. Now, I'm not entirely sure if anything has happened to Mr. Glover (I searched around to no avail) but throughout the film, he speaks with a strange lisp that makes him sound like a gruffer, throatier Mike Tyson. As first, it was a humorous sideshow that distracted me from the story. Then it just became old and tired and to this point, I cannot figure out why Glover would have decided to include that character trait. The rest of cast is up to Wahlberg's and Glover's standards. Kate Mara, who many will recognize as Heath Ledger's oldest daughter in Brokeback Mountain, and Michael Pena, who may be the most unconvincing FBI agent in cinematic history, pull the film down further. It isn't until a brief scene in which Levon Helm, of The Band, provides a much-needed kick of life and humor that the film has any sort of acting leg to stand on.

Jonathan Lemkin's script is one of the worst in recent memory. The dialogue is clunky and idiotic and the plot itself is fairly dull and lacking suspense. By the film's end, I was too busy laughing at the futility on screen to care at all about any of the characters. Lemkin, who seems to have forgotten to do the research part of screenwriting, peppers the story with moments that will have the audience grimacing. For example, did you know that ultra Black Op Military Forces use Google Maps to locate where a phone trace comes from? I sure didn't but if that’s true, it is all the more clear as to how the Federal Government so butchered the WMD situation in Iraq: they were using the satellite views on Google to determine their next course of action. The dialogue is a veritable pick and choose of lines from How to Write an Action Script 101, devoid of life, humor or thematic exploration.

The sheer atrociousness of Shooter struck me as disappointing. I would consider myself a fan of Wahlberg, who I think, having burst onto the scene with his wonderful Boogie Nights performance, has steadily improved and had a wonderful performance in The Departed. That being said, his and everyone else's performances were crippled by a bad script, most had no chance and upon the start of the film, were DOA. The fact that I've gotten this far in the review with barely mentioning the action sequences is never a good sign but those are middling at best, relying on over the top gunplay and explosions instead of actual cinematic skill and intensity. Unlike, say, The Bourne Ultimatum, which brilliantly utilized the cinematic form to tell its story, Shooter never hits it stride. As a result, it is, without a second thought, the worst film I've seen thus far in 2007 and should be considered an avoid, at all costs.

*

The Simpsons Movie: Review

The Simpsons Movie has been something a long time in the making and with its recent release, it was met with near unanimous praise, most of which seemed to be merely because it was a film dealing with the characters that we've grown to love for the past 19 or so years. Unfortunately, the film doesn't deal with all of its characters (no one really expected it too) and in reality, it doesn't even deal with most of its characters (but runs at a measly 87 minutes) resulting in a film that is, at times, mercilessly funny but doesn't quite cover enough ground to be fully satisfying.

Now I wholeheartedly understand, as most supporters are quick to point out, that almost every character in the show's history is in the movie at one point or another but for the most part, those appearances amount to cameos at best and with the exception of Flanders, none of those characters play a truly vital role to the film's progression. The Simpsons Movie is very much like the show in its focus on the Simpson's nuclear family as the narrative center. However, unlike the other bad boys of animation, Matt Stone and Trey Parker, who took their small scale aspirations for South Park and transformed them into the magnificent South Park: Bigger, Longer and Uncut, one of the finest musical comedies in recent memory. The team behind The Simpsons doesn't seem to have the same cinematic aspirations as Stone and Parker and despite the immense film experience the cast and crew possess, the drive, the ambition seems lacking here.

In many ways, the film itself is nothing more than a longer episode of The Simpsons and all in all, there is nothing wrong with that. It tracks the Simpson clan through their usual perils, this time starting with Homer dumping a giant silo of pig waste into the local lake, thus polluting it to a point where the Federal Government lowers a giant glass dome onto our beloved Springfield. Needless to say, an angry mob quickly descends onto the Simpson plot demanding Homer's head and only with the help of Maggie is the family able to live to see another day. They escape to Alaska but are soon drawn back to their hometown to save the day from the evil government agency that trapped them there in the first place.

Despite the possibility of the narrative, the film plays it tight, relying on the tried and true comedic styling of the show and for the most part, the film is very funny. In fact, more often than not, I found myself laughing hysterically, enjoying even the slightest visual gags the film had to offer. However, by the end of The Simpsons Movie, I had trouble finding many specific parts that I could talk about as being funny, certainly less than I had during the best years of the show. With little to no memorable scenes with the secondary characters, the humor was left to the family and too many of the jokes seemed familiar (yet funny) to fully leave a lasting memory. The best way I can describe it is that after a while, if one experiences life's great moments too often, they are still enjoyable, yet ultimately, mean less and less, each time they happen.

Unfortunately, there were too few instances of the sharp, biting humor that once made the show so indispensable and while the physical comedy that Homer and Bart endure is entertaining, without having the counter effects of a separate source of laughs, they blur together. After all, Modern Times without the political satire is a funny but meaningless film. City Lights without the painstakingly integrated pathos is a funny but emotionless film. The Simpsons Movie without the wit of the show's classics is a entertaining yet unfulfilling experience.

I don’t mean to completely bash the film as more often than not, I enjoyed it. It is just imperative to point out that the film leaves little lasting impact compared to the show's best moments. While it is obvious that the heyday of The Simpsons has come and gone, it still is slightly disappointing that these characters feature film debut could not better represent the glory days of the past. Rather, the film is no more than a diversion, a small pleasure for fans of the show but nothing to convert any of the non-believers. I wish it could have been more, I really do but I imagine that most would rather spend their hour and a half by just re-watching 3 or 4 episodes that one holds dear to their heart.

***