DRAFT DAY…3.2***

This is a good but not great sports movie and serves as a  great vehicle for Kevin Costner to do what he does best. As you may recall Costner has had some major hits in some classic sports movies… “Durham Bulls” “Field of Dreams” and” For the Love of the Game”., The movie takes place entirely on NFL Draft Day as Costner's character, the Cleveland Browns' General Manager, pulls off a huge trade early in the day with the Seattle Seahawks, and the "big prize" is a big-named quarterback who won the Heisman Trophy. He has only hours to decide what to do … to keep him or go for other players he may think are a better fit for the team.  After doing some other wheeling and dealing during the last hours…..even  last minutes , Costner finally does what he thinks is best for the team which along the way produces even more suspenseful surprises.

 

“Draft Day takes full advantage of telling an engaging behind-the-scenes story using the America’s most popular sport and it’s league ( THE NFL !!!!).  The film might appear to be one giant commercial for the NFL, but thankfully it turns out to be a well-scripted, charming and exciting sports movie.” Draft Day” is a fun-loving popcorn flick through and through and with the kind of perfectly balanced story that draws people to the movies. It  incorporates just enough drama, subtly places humor in stressful situations, and fulfills  its promise to unveil a compelling mystery. It starts a little slow but quickly picks up the pace so that during the last 20 minutes or so you will  be glued to your seat and guessing how the heck it will work out. For anyone that loves football, or any big time sports, or is interested in the power-play politics that go on  behind the scene, you'll have a fun time watching this film.

 

Frank Langella as the bombastic team owner is excellent. Ellen Burstyn as Costner’s Mom,  Denis Leary as the agonizing team coach, and Jennifer Garner as Costner’s romantic interest are also entertaining as are all the other cast members. Holding it all together is Costner. He is just as great as ever and was born for this role. A real  downside to the movie is the lack of any real chemistry between Costner and Garner.

 

It is rated PG-13 for some rough language and sexual content.

 

Clark.

            

            

THE GRAND BUDAPEST HOTEL  3.7***

 

 

       Can a film be absurd, funny, exciting, violent and colorful all at the same time? Yes. “The Grand Budapest Hotel” combines all those elements. And I didn't even mention the most important characteristic: it is visually spectacular !!

 

Wes Anderson directed and co-wrote this zany/dark all-star comedy about a popular European concierge trying to clear his name of murder, with the aid of a recently employed lobby boy named Zero (who becomes his closest friend). The story is set between the two world wars and stars Ralph Fiennes as the concierge M. Gustave  at a once famous European hotel  during the height of its popularity (between the two world wars). M. Gustave is well liked by the hotel's richest guests (for his excellent customer service), especially older blonde women (who he personally made sure got all their needs met). When one such regular guest passes on, named Madame D. ( Tilda Swinton), Gustave is left a very valuable Renaissance painting. This causes quite a controversy with Madame D.'s family, especially her son Dmitri (Adrien Brody), and Gustave soon finds himself imprisoned for the Madame's murder. He then must rely on Zero, the lobby boy to get him out and to help him clear his name.  

 

M. Gustave is a personification of high level service, schooling the young Zero in the art of understanding what a guest wants, owning few possessions save for a perfume called "Eau de Panache" and a large collection of romantic poetry which is he quick to quote even in the most dire of circumstances. The whole movie is centered around the illusion that Mr. Gustave maintains and without it the whole thing would collapse.

Presenting itself as a story within a story, the movie jumps back to the eighties, to the sixties and finally to the late thirties, where the story of a romantic living in a cynical era takes place. The main story surrounding M.. Gustave and Zero moves fast and takes the characters to perfectly framed and constructed setting after setting, each looking like a new page in a gorgeous pop-up book. It's full of humor,  chase scenes, gunfights, a prison break and hilariously fake special effects, all meant to makes the events look increasingly amazing and ridiculous.

 

Fiennes, who's not known for his comedies, is superb as the gentlemanly Gustave, and he drives the movie with equal parts British reserve and explosive irritation and profanity - but always with the utmost in manners. Tony Revolori as young Zero and Saoirse Ronan as Agatha are remarkable. And then there were: F. Murray Abraham, Jude Law, Tilda Swinton, Adrien Brody, Willem Defoe, Jeff Goldblum, Edward Norton, Léa Seydoux, Harvey Keitel, Tom Wilkinson, Bill Murray, Owen Wilson. WHAT a cast !!! Just to be able to get all these heavy weights to sign up for minor roles, demands respect. To get them to all perfectly set their mark in a few minutes, is awesome

.

The movie is  beautifully shot from the stylish grand structure of the hotel to the stark desolation of the Alps and the result is feast for the eyes. This is a delightful film which showcases beauty combined with dirt, great cinematography with dry jokes, and art with silliness. If you like to be amazed, see something quite out of the ordinary, and can relax and go with the flow, you will LOVE this movie.

 

Rated R for language, some sexual content and violence.

Clark

CAPTAIN AMERICA  THE WINTER SOLDIER…  3.5***

 

 So arrives yet another  Marvel Comics superhero movie and the surprising thing is that it actually manages to live up to the hype. “Captain America: The Winter Soldier” is a sequel to the original “Captain America” movie rather a than sequel to the “Avenger’s but if you haven't seen the original there is a nice rehash with plenty to enjoy even as a stand-alone movie.

Set in the modern day, CA ( Chris Evans is back and better )is now part of a SHIELD covert ops team with his partner being Black Widow ( Scarlett Johansson is also back and even better), all under the helm of Nick Fury ( Samuel Jackson….more and better).. A nice intro sets the scene as a reminder that CA is a ”marvel” of a hero. However, things turn quickly  sour  with the apparent assassination of Nick Fury leaving CA to save the day and not knowing whom he can trust in SHIELD other than Black Widow. However there is a newcomer to CA’s team, Falco( Anthony Mackie ) who  makes for a great addition. And then the bad guys,. HYDRA, have their own super soldier dubbed the Winter Soldier who is seemingly stronger, faster and more bad-ass than CA.  Is he ?? See the movie. Robert Redford makes for another more sophisticated Bad guy as the head of HYDRA…he’s the thinking man’s menace.

Action pieces are tight and well-choreographed although it never approaches the spectacle of “Avengers” or “Thor” which for this movie is not a bad thing. And here the stakes are much higher and it is  clear from the outset that none of our heros is safe, these are characters who can bleed and die! This is a solid action thriller. The 2 hour plus running time goes fast and the action scenes are nicely interspersed with interesting espionage twists and turns that keep you connected to the movie.  

Seeing CA in action is really enjoyable regardless of whether he's taking down people stealth-style in near silence or whether he's taking down huge fighter jets single handedly.  He makes it  believable that someone can be a one man army!
Black Widow is even more impressive this time around and there is an undeniable chemistry between her and CA which helps to engage the audience. She has quite a few action scenes of her own and Johansson is now clearly far more comfortable in the role than she ever was before.  

 

Of course there will be a further sequel and you should stay while the credits run to get a preview.

 

Rated PG-13 for some violence but ok for the kids.

 

Clark

NOAH  2.5****    

 

 

       If you want to make a Science Fiction movie then choose and write or imagine a good one and hopefully the story line /the effects/the acting will be good enough for the people to enjoy. BUT when you choose a Bible story you should respect certain things and be as faithful to the story as possible. From a Christian point of view,  if someone wants to recreate a Bible event, in a big budget movie, they should try to make it follow as closely as possible to the Biblical text. In this movie, the only thing in common with the Bible text, found in Genesis 6, is the name Noah, and the fact that there was an Ark and a flood. Everything else is mostly a Hollywood misrepresentation . You can see for yourself by reading the Bible. Therein God told Noah what He was going to do and gave specific instructions on how to build the Ark. Also He stated that the people who would be saved and could  enter the Ark were Noah's family including his sons along with their wives. And each of his 3 sons  had a wife of their own upon entering the Ark.

My take on this  movie is that it unfortunately gives a false view of the Noah Bible story and of God’s purpose, and this was a film-making mistake that has caused a big negative reaction.   Anyone intending to watch this movie should first read  Genesis 6 even if you are not the religious type so as not to be misled by this movie. Below are some of the misrepresentations:

1.The serpent skin Noah's father wrapped around his arm which lists the descendants isn't in the Bible at all. (Hollywood)

2. The Watchers were a form of angels that God had sent to help and protect the righteous on earth. They also guarded the garden of Eden and protected Adam and Eve. They were banished by God for being unfaithful. They were NOT transformed into rock- like transformers as the film depicts (Hollywood). And  the Watchers never helped Noah build the Ark as the film depicts. According to the Bible it took Noah and his sons 120 years to build the Ark. He lived to be over 700 years old. ( All per the Bible)

3. God spoke directly to Noah. There was no grandpa mediator. God even told Noah the exact measurements for the Ark. The scene of the Grandpa drugging him to see God's vision isn't Biblical nor is the scene where he gives Noah a seed like shrub to plant into order to produce a forest to build the Ark (Hollywood)

4, Noah's three sons were all married when they entered the Ark. In the film only the oldest Son had a wife (Hollywood).

5.  In the Bible Noah is faithful and good hearted… not the psycho and potential baby killer portrayed in the movie (Hollywood).

6. Nor in the Bible was there a stowaway on the Ark (Hollywood).

For anyone who'd like proof that  actual Bible stories really are good enough on their own without Hollywood rewriting should remember the overwhelming success of last year’s 10 part series “The Bible”. A huge ratings and critics success story.

Clark

NOTE: The 2.5*** gives credit for certain artistic and filmmaking achievements and for okay acting… can’t blame the actors for a bad story.