COP OUT 1.5****
The disappointment in this movie could be described by that famous Marlon Brando line from “On the Waterfront”…”I coulda been a contender”…yes, this film had coulda been good but it “copped out” by settling for a really weak script and uninspired, even hokey direction.
The movie is an attempt to revive the buddy-cop film genre of the 1980s which had such really fine and funny films as “Lethal Weapon”, “Beverly Hills Cop” and “48 Hours”. As you'll recall, those action comedies generated their laughs from the antics of ill-matched crime fighters, one of them a somewhat straight arrow and the other somewhat looney . "Cop Out" botches this basic concept. Its two detectives Bruce Willis, as the straight man, and Tracy Morgan, as the looney one, just don’t have the zingy banter these films require..the writing is, instead, one big “groan”. The opening scene of the movie, an interrogation of a suspect by Tracy Morgan, is a precursor of the rest of the movie…funny at times but way too long and way too over the top. It coulda, it shoulda been funny but misses the mark by a city block both in that scene as well as in the rest of the movie.
The story begins with the two of them being suspended, without pay. This is especially bad news for Willis, who needs to come up with $48,000 to pay for his daughter's wedding — which will otherwise be gloatingly funded by her snotty stepfather. Willis’ only valuable asset is a very rare baseball card. But just as he's about to make a big-bucks deal for it at a memorabilia shop, two zany robbers burst in and loudly taser Willis, loudly rip off his baseball card, and loudly make their getaway. Morgan is standing right outside the shop, but he doesn't hear any of this because he's ranting on while making a phone call. The rest of the movie is about Willis’ desperate attempt to get the card back. Of all things, it ends up in the hands of a Mexican drug lord who, of all things, is a baseball memorabilia collector....come on now, that’s ridiculous, but indicative of the poor writing.
Another problem is the casting of Bruce Willis as the straight guy…the problem is he’s TOO straight, too lifeless… he has the animated presence of a man waiting for a check to clear, and that impassiveness just doesn’t play well with a comedian like Tracy Morgan who's in your face, over the top and then behind your back pulling down your pants. There are lots of old-movie references, as you'd expect, and even a couple of knock-knock jokes, which you probably wouldn't expect and sadly aren’t funny. The picture has no comic rhythm, and no action style. It sits on the screen begging you to take an interest when, in fact, your interest lies elsewhere — over by the exit.
So, I suggest you “opt out” and rent instead a great buddy-cop film such as “Beverly Hills Cop (1984).
Clark
NOTE: It has a “R” rating for the bad language…many “f’ words.
Saturday, February 27, 2010
Thursday, February 25, 2010
SHUTTER ISLAND 3.0**** out of 4****
Shutter Island is Martin Scorsese’s newest film. It was four months late in being released so as to retune it some. Apparently they did a fairly good job as this is a very captivating movie… it is part drama, part thriller and part horror. Regardless as to what it is, Shutter Island is one worth seeing as it is a remarkable “departure” by Scorsese from his usual type of movie to his first real turn at themes, particularly psychological themes, so brilliantly presented by Hitchcock ( “Psycho”, “North by Northwest”, etc), Stanley Kubrick ( “The Shining”) and M. Night Shyamalan (“The Sixth Sense”)… Scorsese has learned well from these creative directors and it’s reflected in “Shutter Island”
“Shutter Island” is a difficult film to review. The way the film unfolds with its many twists and turns, it makes it difficult to explain without spoiling the suspense and especially the ending…so I’ll be careful to not give anything away. The movie takes you down so many different paths that guessing how the film will end is nearly impossible. Watching the film is a real challenge because you’re not sure what is real and what is not….is it a flashback or is it a hallucination? You must don your thinking cap at the very beginning to keep up with this movie…it’s a mindbender and if you’re not up for the mental effort required to enjoy it, then I suggest you go see something less cerebral such as “The Tooth Fairy”.
Shutter Island is the story of Teddy Daniels (Leonardo DiCaprio) and Chuck Aule (Mark Ruffalo), two U.S. Marshals who, in 1954, are sent to Ashecliffe Hospital, the federal maximum security hospital for the criminally insane located on Shutter Island where a patient has somehow escaped. Once on the island, they find that the hospital and prison staffs aren't very forthcoming with their investigation. It seems that the staff is hiding a big secret. Teddy and Chuck are seen as nuisances at best, intruders at worst: they're met with a lack of a cooperation bordering on outright hostility. They are forced to surrender their firearms, and have trouble getting a straight answer out of anyone. What's also clear is that Teddy isn't that stable himself: he's haunted by dreams of his WWII Dachau experience and the death of his wife Dolores (Michelle Williams) and their children , as well as being prone to migraines and horrifying hallucinations. And it also soon becomes clear that Teddy has come to island with his own agenda…he’s determined to "blow the lid off" what he believes to be the illegal and horrifying things being done at Shutter Island in the disguise of medicine..
The cast is full of heavyweights–everyone from DiCaprio and Ruffalo to Ben Kingsley, Michelle Williams, Max von Sydow, and Patricia Clarkson--–all of whom give solid and even memorable performances. DiCaprio is stunning as Teddy, delivering a memorizing timeless performance that at times is reminiscent of Bogart or Nicholson, but yet he always remains a true DiCaprio and makes the emotional scenes between Teddy and his deceased wife all the more believable and heartbreaking.
Shutter Island looks just how it feels: dark, haunting, eerily beautiful and very forbidding.
NOTE: It has an “R” rating mostly because of the language…several F bombs but not nearly as many in other Scorsese movies..also some disturbing and graphic scenes of people and places.
FOOTNOTE: After you’ve seen the movie you may wonder, as I did, how they found such a perfect location as Shutter island to shot the film. Well, that’s where Hollywood magic comes in : Shutter Island was “created” by taking scenery from Peddocks Island (initial island approach), Acadia National Park in Maine (MA), Medfield State Hospital in Medfield, MA, and the Rice Estate at Turner Hill Country Club in Ipswich, MA…all of which were combined via CGI to create the imagery of Shutter Island .The large mountainous area of the island seen during the ferry approach and during the storm sequence was added in post-production and does not exist, but the decaying brick buildings on the lowlands are real ruins from Peddocks Island.
Shutter Island is Martin Scorsese’s newest film. It was four months late in being released so as to retune it some. Apparently they did a fairly good job as this is a very captivating movie… it is part drama, part thriller and part horror. Regardless as to what it is, Shutter Island is one worth seeing as it is a remarkable “departure” by Scorsese from his usual type of movie to his first real turn at themes, particularly psychological themes, so brilliantly presented by Hitchcock ( “Psycho”, “North by Northwest”, etc), Stanley Kubrick ( “The Shining”) and M. Night Shyamalan (“The Sixth Sense”)… Scorsese has learned well from these creative directors and it’s reflected in “Shutter Island”
“Shutter Island” is a difficult film to review. The way the film unfolds with its many twists and turns, it makes it difficult to explain without spoiling the suspense and especially the ending…so I’ll be careful to not give anything away. The movie takes you down so many different paths that guessing how the film will end is nearly impossible. Watching the film is a real challenge because you’re not sure what is real and what is not….is it a flashback or is it a hallucination? You must don your thinking cap at the very beginning to keep up with this movie…it’s a mindbender and if you’re not up for the mental effort required to enjoy it, then I suggest you go see something less cerebral such as “The Tooth Fairy”.
Shutter Island is the story of Teddy Daniels (Leonardo DiCaprio) and Chuck Aule (Mark Ruffalo), two U.S. Marshals who, in 1954, are sent to Ashecliffe Hospital, the federal maximum security hospital for the criminally insane located on Shutter Island where a patient has somehow escaped. Once on the island, they find that the hospital and prison staffs aren't very forthcoming with their investigation. It seems that the staff is hiding a big secret. Teddy and Chuck are seen as nuisances at best, intruders at worst: they're met with a lack of a cooperation bordering on outright hostility. They are forced to surrender their firearms, and have trouble getting a straight answer out of anyone. What's also clear is that Teddy isn't that stable himself: he's haunted by dreams of his WWII Dachau experience and the death of his wife Dolores (Michelle Williams) and their children , as well as being prone to migraines and horrifying hallucinations. And it also soon becomes clear that Teddy has come to island with his own agenda…he’s determined to "blow the lid off" what he believes to be the illegal and horrifying things being done at Shutter Island in the disguise of medicine..
The cast is full of heavyweights–everyone from DiCaprio and Ruffalo to Ben Kingsley, Michelle Williams, Max von Sydow, and Patricia Clarkson--–all of whom give solid and even memorable performances. DiCaprio is stunning as Teddy, delivering a memorizing timeless performance that at times is reminiscent of Bogart or Nicholson, but yet he always remains a true DiCaprio and makes the emotional scenes between Teddy and his deceased wife all the more believable and heartbreaking.
Shutter Island looks just how it feels: dark, haunting, eerily beautiful and very forbidding.
NOTE: It has an “R” rating mostly because of the language…several F bombs but not nearly as many in other Scorsese movies..also some disturbing and graphic scenes of people and places.
FOOTNOTE: After you’ve seen the movie you may wonder, as I did, how they found such a perfect location as Shutter island to shot the film. Well, that’s where Hollywood magic comes in : Shutter Island was “created” by taking scenery from Peddocks Island (initial island approach), Acadia National Park in Maine (MA), Medfield State Hospital in Medfield, MA, and the Rice Estate at Turner Hill Country Club in Ipswich, MA…all of which were combined via CGI to create the imagery of Shutter Island .The large mountainous area of the island seen during the ferry approach and during the storm sequence was added in post-production and does not exist, but the decaying brick buildings on the lowlands are real ruins from Peddocks Island.
Sunday, February 21, 2010
AN EDUCATION 3.5***
This is a charming and heartwarming “coming-of-age” period piece film which I truly enjoyed from beginning to end. And, by the way, it’s one of the 10 films nominated for an Oscar for “Best Picture”
It’s 1961, and 16 year old Jenny(Carey Mulligan) lives with her parents in the London suburb of Twickenham. At her father's wishes—more like demands-- everything that Jenny does is for the sole purpose of being accepted into Oxford University. Jenny is bright, pretty, hard working and naturally gifted. But Jenny is bored with her strict life at home and at school …she’s looking for fun and culture. Jenny's life dramatically changes after she meets David ( Peter Sarsgaard), a man over twice her age. David, who is smooth as they come, convinces Jenny and her family that his interest in her is not improper and that he wants to introduce her to cultural activities and the “good” life which she yearns for. Jenny quickly becomes accustomed to the life to which David and his constant companions, Danny and Helen, have shown her, and, not surprisingly, Jenny and David's relationship becomes a romantic one.
As a period piece, this is without a doubt one of the best I've seen this year. Its attention to period detail is second to none. It gets all the nuances just right, not only in the sets and music, but also in the mannerisms, speech patterns and behavior of the characters. As a result, the film creates an air of authenticity that really gives it that extra winning edge. The movie is also gorgeously shot, with luscious cinematography, and features a musical score that is dead on for the period and the mood of the film. But in a film like this, the technical excellence is all for naught without convincing performances, and here too the film really excels. The cast is headed by newcomer Carey Mulligan, and she is marvelous… truly a revelation ( she’s been nominated for Oscar’s Best Actress). For such a young actress (24), she manages not only to carry an entire movie on her shoulders, but also manages to create a unique and compelling character. As Jenny, she not only drives the plot but imbues the character with unique quirks and speech patterns as well as a maturity and feel for culture that belies her young age. These are the little details that really make a convincing, three-dimensional character, and Mulligan totally nails it. Co-starring with her is Peter Sarsgaard, who delivers a subtle but very effective performance as David, the older, wiser man who sweeps her off her feet.
The title "An Education" can be understood on two levels. As a coming-of-age story, it shows Jenny's "education" in the broader sense of learning lessons about life. Jenny goes from being a bright eyed school girl to a sophisticated young lady, Yet it also deals with her education in the literal sense of the word. So it raises the perplexing question of which is more valuable…formal academic education or informal education gained from living and experiencing the outside world??
A fine, small independent movie that far outshines so many of the big-budget “Hollywood’ movies… a definite “must see”.
Clark
This is a charming and heartwarming “coming-of-age” period piece film which I truly enjoyed from beginning to end. And, by the way, it’s one of the 10 films nominated for an Oscar for “Best Picture”
It’s 1961, and 16 year old Jenny(Carey Mulligan) lives with her parents in the London suburb of Twickenham. At her father's wishes—more like demands-- everything that Jenny does is for the sole purpose of being accepted into Oxford University. Jenny is bright, pretty, hard working and naturally gifted. But Jenny is bored with her strict life at home and at school …she’s looking for fun and culture. Jenny's life dramatically changes after she meets David ( Peter Sarsgaard), a man over twice her age. David, who is smooth as they come, convinces Jenny and her family that his interest in her is not improper and that he wants to introduce her to cultural activities and the “good” life which she yearns for. Jenny quickly becomes accustomed to the life to which David and his constant companions, Danny and Helen, have shown her, and, not surprisingly, Jenny and David's relationship becomes a romantic one.
As a period piece, this is without a doubt one of the best I've seen this year. Its attention to period detail is second to none. It gets all the nuances just right, not only in the sets and music, but also in the mannerisms, speech patterns and behavior of the characters. As a result, the film creates an air of authenticity that really gives it that extra winning edge. The movie is also gorgeously shot, with luscious cinematography, and features a musical score that is dead on for the period and the mood of the film. But in a film like this, the technical excellence is all for naught without convincing performances, and here too the film really excels. The cast is headed by newcomer Carey Mulligan, and she is marvelous… truly a revelation ( she’s been nominated for Oscar’s Best Actress). For such a young actress (24), she manages not only to carry an entire movie on her shoulders, but also manages to create a unique and compelling character. As Jenny, she not only drives the plot but imbues the character with unique quirks and speech patterns as well as a maturity and feel for culture that belies her young age. These are the little details that really make a convincing, three-dimensional character, and Mulligan totally nails it. Co-starring with her is Peter Sarsgaard, who delivers a subtle but very effective performance as David, the older, wiser man who sweeps her off her feet.
The title "An Education" can be understood on two levels. As a coming-of-age story, it shows Jenny's "education" in the broader sense of learning lessons about life. Jenny goes from being a bright eyed school girl to a sophisticated young lady, Yet it also deals with her education in the literal sense of the word. So it raises the perplexing question of which is more valuable…formal academic education or informal education gained from living and experiencing the outside world??
A fine, small independent movie that far outshines so many of the big-budget “Hollywood’ movies… a definite “must see”.
Clark
Thursday, February 18, 2010
CRAZY HEART 3.5****
Having just seen this movie and now relaxing at one of my favorite watering holes in Raleigh, three things immediately come to mind. First is the truly masterful performance by Jeff bridges as an aging , heavy boozing, chain smoking, country western singer, Bad Blake, whose career has sunk to the level of performing at local bowling alleys. How bad is that. Second is the striking similarities to last year’s “The Wrestler”…it sure does walk like and talk like a country western “Wrestler’ .There is the one time great who is hitting the bottom of his career and life although he still has very loyal fans and admirers; the young girlfriend played perfectly by Maggie Gyllenhaal; and the 28 year old son who was abandoned at age four with whom Blake wants to reconcile…sound familiar. Third is the music which is quite superb and, amazingly, is performed quite well and live by Bridges and also by Collin Ferrell, who is a younger, maybe wiser version of Blake. All of the songs are charged either by a drive to bring the house down with the joy of playing and singing , or by the tender moments such as the "Weary Kind" title track, which probably will get T-Bone Burnett his first Oscar. The music is what makes Blake's journey wonderful and bearable to watch …and it is a rough, hard journey, but the music elevates you and comforts you the same as it does Blake.
Jeff Bridges has been nominated for Oscar’s Best Actor for this role and deserves to win and probably will. He bears his soul for this role and completely immerses himself into and becomes Bad Blake…it is a stunning and splendid performance. Maggie Gyllenhaal is also wonderful in the girlfriend role..she make it look so effortless, so smooth. I must confess she is one of my favorite actresses…she has a beauty that is so subtle, so girl-next-door… then there are those long legs and such a lovely smile. AND, her voice..well it’s like being caresses by a sweet and sultry breeze.
This is not a feel good movie but it is has such a towering performance by Bridges and such a good story and wonderful music, it still stands out as a stunning movie. Life is not always kind and people are not always
kind..not even to themselves, and all this plays out before your eyes with Blake and his “getting-to-the-end’ of life’s journey” which is, for the most part, not a pretty sight. But then as the movie tagline says: “The harder the life, the sweeter the song.”
The movie has an “R’ rating mostly for the language and somewhat for some sexual content.
Clark
Having just seen this movie and now relaxing at one of my favorite watering holes in Raleigh, three things immediately come to mind. First is the truly masterful performance by Jeff bridges as an aging , heavy boozing, chain smoking, country western singer, Bad Blake, whose career has sunk to the level of performing at local bowling alleys. How bad is that. Second is the striking similarities to last year’s “The Wrestler”…it sure does walk like and talk like a country western “Wrestler’ .There is the one time great who is hitting the bottom of his career and life although he still has very loyal fans and admirers; the young girlfriend played perfectly by Maggie Gyllenhaal; and the 28 year old son who was abandoned at age four with whom Blake wants to reconcile…sound familiar. Third is the music which is quite superb and, amazingly, is performed quite well and live by Bridges and also by Collin Ferrell, who is a younger, maybe wiser version of Blake. All of the songs are charged either by a drive to bring the house down with the joy of playing and singing , or by the tender moments such as the "Weary Kind" title track, which probably will get T-Bone Burnett his first Oscar. The music is what makes Blake's journey wonderful and bearable to watch …and it is a rough, hard journey, but the music elevates you and comforts you the same as it does Blake.
Jeff Bridges has been nominated for Oscar’s Best Actor for this role and deserves to win and probably will. He bears his soul for this role and completely immerses himself into and becomes Bad Blake…it is a stunning and splendid performance. Maggie Gyllenhaal is also wonderful in the girlfriend role..she make it look so effortless, so smooth. I must confess she is one of my favorite actresses…she has a beauty that is so subtle, so girl-next-door… then there are those long legs and such a lovely smile. AND, her voice..well it’s like being caresses by a sweet and sultry breeze.
This is not a feel good movie but it is has such a towering performance by Bridges and such a good story and wonderful music, it still stands out as a stunning movie. Life is not always kind and people are not always
kind..not even to themselves, and all this plays out before your eyes with Blake and his “getting-to-the-end’ of life’s journey” which is, for the most part, not a pretty sight. But then as the movie tagline says: “The harder the life, the sweeter the song.”
The movie has an “R’ rating mostly for the language and somewhat for some sexual content.
Clark
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
EXTRAORDINARY MEASURES 2.0*** (but barely)
There is nothing “extraordinary” about “Extraordinary Measures”. In fact it comes off as extraordinarily “ordinary”. This was a big disappointment given the cast of Harrison Ford, Brendon Fraser and Keri Russell.
What would you do if two of your children had been diagnosed with the very rare Pompe Disease ( a form of muscular dystrophy and you knew that the average life span for children suffering from the disease rarely goes past nine, and your daughter has just turned eight .Well you’d do everything you could like any loving parent. That’s the initial premise for this story and the father ( Fraser) with the support of his caring wife (Russell) engages in an extensive search on the internet to try to find if there is anyone who can offer hope for a quick cure. He comes upon the theories of one Dr. Robert Stonehill (Harrison Ford), who just may have come up with a potential vaccine to help combat the disease. The story then turns to Fraser’s efforts to enlist Ford and have him expedite his research to develop a cure before his kids die.
Ford barely does a good job of playing himself. He’s supposed to be an irascible, cranky and detached but scientifically brilliant character who lacks common sense and any feel for diplomacy. Rather than acting the part, Ford looks like he just phoned in his performance. None of the charisma, the charm or the enthusiasm we have grown to expect from him is there. Fraser is miscast as the father. He just doesn’t convey the passion and the urgency you’d expect from a desperate father with dying children. There are occasional sparks from Fraser but not the fire that should have been there. Keri Russell is fine as the mother/wife but doesn’t have much of a role…what she does have, she does well.
Overall, at best, it is a good effort for what is an interesting premise, though it has been done better before ( “Lorenzo’s Oil”). But it misses the mark primarily because it fails to draw you into the urgency and drama of the story. Instead, it has the tone of a docu-drama without the drama. It may tug on your heartstrings in some scenes, but the rest just seems forced and plodding . The team behind “Extraordinary Measures” may have had good intentions, but the end result just does not “measure” up to the basic standards of a good movie.
Clark
There is nothing “extraordinary” about “Extraordinary Measures”. In fact it comes off as extraordinarily “ordinary”. This was a big disappointment given the cast of Harrison Ford, Brendon Fraser and Keri Russell.
What would you do if two of your children had been diagnosed with the very rare Pompe Disease ( a form of muscular dystrophy and you knew that the average life span for children suffering from the disease rarely goes past nine, and your daughter has just turned eight .Well you’d do everything you could like any loving parent. That’s the initial premise for this story and the father ( Fraser) with the support of his caring wife (Russell) engages in an extensive search on the internet to try to find if there is anyone who can offer hope for a quick cure. He comes upon the theories of one Dr. Robert Stonehill (Harrison Ford), who just may have come up with a potential vaccine to help combat the disease. The story then turns to Fraser’s efforts to enlist Ford and have him expedite his research to develop a cure before his kids die.
Ford barely does a good job of playing himself. He’s supposed to be an irascible, cranky and detached but scientifically brilliant character who lacks common sense and any feel for diplomacy. Rather than acting the part, Ford looks like he just phoned in his performance. None of the charisma, the charm or the enthusiasm we have grown to expect from him is there. Fraser is miscast as the father. He just doesn’t convey the passion and the urgency you’d expect from a desperate father with dying children. There are occasional sparks from Fraser but not the fire that should have been there. Keri Russell is fine as the mother/wife but doesn’t have much of a role…what she does have, she does well.
Overall, at best, it is a good effort for what is an interesting premise, though it has been done better before ( “Lorenzo’s Oil”). But it misses the mark primarily because it fails to draw you into the urgency and drama of the story. Instead, it has the tone of a docu-drama without the drama. It may tug on your heartstrings in some scenes, but the rest just seems forced and plodding . The team behind “Extraordinary Measures” may have had good intentions, but the end result just does not “measure” up to the basic standards of a good movie.
Clark
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)