Category: Movie Reviews

Pain & Gain
Starring Mark Wahlberg, Dwayne Johnson and Anthony Mackie
Directed by Michael Bay (Transformers)
Rated R for bloody violence, crude sexual content, nudity, language throughout and drug use

    Apparently based on a true story, Pain & Gain tells the story of three moronic but ambitious body builders in Florida who jump head first into a kidnapping and extortion scheme that goes terribly wrong.  Unlike my slam on the recent home entertainment release of Gangster Squad, this story is apparently mostly true.  I’m sure liberties were taken and blanks were filled in with a lot of comedy, but these events did actually take place.  That three incredibly buff guys with not one brain between them could get as far as they did is staggering. 

    Billed as a low budget film by tentpole director Michael Bay (the movie is estimated to have only cost $25 million to make), Pain & Gain still looks like a bloated budget Hollywood picture.  The supporting cast, including Ed Harris, Rebel Wilson, Tony Shalhoub and Rob Corddry, turn in solid and believable performances, in spite of the subject matter.  I am especially impressed though with Wahlberg and Johnson who pretend to be the way many on the outside believe them to be in real life.  This is a brave feat and they dig into their roles with everything they’ve got. 

    What works best here is the extreme amount of comedy, even in the face of disgusting human behavior.  For instance, after a grisly crime, they stop to pump biceps, as if drawing power and emotional strength from the iron.  It’s as funny as anything I’ve seen this year, although I’ll admit that not everyone in the theater was laughing as hard as me. 

    The biggest problem with the film is that it is far too long at 130 minutes.  I expect that length from a big action film or an even a short epic, but for a  crime comedy it is far too excessive and it shows.  If this film were directed by almost any director other than Bay, I can guarantee the movie would be easily missing 20-30 minutes. 

Trance
Starring James McAvoy, Vincent Cassel and Rosario Dawson
Directed by Danny Boyle (Slumdog Millionaire)
Rated R for sexual content, graphic nudity, violence, some grisly images, and language

    A young UK art auctioneer (McAvoy) gets entangled with a group of criminals (led by Cassel) when he protects a hugely valuable piece of art from being stolen by the crafty gang.  After the foiled heist and a bit of torture, they force him into hypnotherapy by a beautiful young therapist (Dawson) to try to remember where he might have put the painting once they realize that an injury sustained during the robbery has left him with amnesia. 

    I was shocked to see a Danny Boyle film released with such little fanfare.  After all, he is one of the most respected directors of our time and his films are usually so enjoyable.  This one saw very little attention and they didn’t even hold a press screening, which gave me a bad feeling about what I was about to watch.

    The good news is that while the film has no chance of becoming a hit – it is still somewhat interesting.  Boyle has a signature style that captures your attention and doesn’t let go until the very end.  The bad news is that the subject matter isn’t nearly as enticing as you think its going to be after the first act. 

    The performances here are all solid and really showcase the actors’ talents.  I’m convinced that Boyle has a real gift for getting exactly the right performances from his casts and this film is no exception.  In addition, his pacing is phenomenal.  Yes the production feels a little ADD, but what a way to dress up a movie. 

    Ginger and Rosa are two teenage girls growing up in London during the 1960s, trying to figure themselves out as well as the world around them.  In the shadow of the Cuban missile crisis, as well as family strife at home, Ginger must come to terms with her lousy choice in friends and her less than ideal parents. 

    In spite of coming in at only 90 minutes, this little indie feels oh so long, mostly due to its extremely uncomfortable subject matter.  For half of the film you wonder where they are going with the story and then the second half you wish they hadn’t gone there.  I don’t want to give anything away, but I think its safe to say that this movie takes its audience to a pretty miserable place. 

    That being said, its not a horrible film just because its not an entertaining one.  Elle Fanning is budding into an exceptional actress and if she keeps turning in these kinds of performances she just might beat her sister Dakota in the race to win an Oscar.  The rest of the cast, even while playing very ugly characters, also turn in great performances. 

    Ultimately this film is about loss of innocence as seen through the eyes of a young girl.  Not maybe in the way these stories are traditionally told, but definitely in regard to a naive teenager coming to the realization that adults lie and scheme and also make huge, huge mistakes that manage to drag down everyone around them. 

Admission
Starring Paul Rudd, Tina Fey, and Lily Tomlin, and Bat Wolff
Directed by Paul Weitz (About a Boy)
Rated PG-13 for language and some sexual material

    Princeton admissions officer Portia Nathan (Fey) is up for a major promotion when her life is turned upside down upon discovering that one of the applicants could possibly be her son that she gave up for adoption.  While working closely with one of his teachers (Paul Rudd), her simple life becomes more and more complex as she tries to deal with the many conflicts of interest being thrust upon her. 

    From the trailers and commercials I was convinced that this was going to be nothing more than a romantic comedy for Fey and Rudd.  And I was completely fine with that.  But then it hit me at the beginning of the second act that this was was no romantic comedy, but rather a more substantive  and thought-provoking picture.  Any silliness or potential big laughs are shown in the trailer and while usually I hate that, I have to admit that in this particular case, that is not a bad thing.  I honestly believe that the studio was clueless how to market the project and they chose this path because they thought it was a good match that people would like to see.  Now I’m not saying that there isn’t romance.  In fact, there is a very sweet romantic story in place here.  But that is not the primary thrust of the movie.

    Over the last decade I’ve learned to trust Fey and Rudd in their choice of projects and have rarely been sorry for it.  They are both extremely smart actors and comedians and capable of pulling off performances that actually make them believable as real people with real problems.  Here there is an authenticity that shines through, with a bit of humor sprinkled in throughout.  And to help the movie achieve an even greater level of relevance is Lily Tomlin as Fey’s mother who gives her best performance since 1975’s Nashville.  I wouldn’t be at all surprised if her name comes up frequently during awards season. 

    Another party I trust here is director Paul Weitz.  While the American Pie director has brought us some stinkers like Cirque du Freak and Little Fockers, he has also given us some gems like About a Boy and In Good Company.  Here he and writer Karen Croner bring us deep into the inner workings of Ivy League school admission while still representing the difficulty that goes into making decisions and the integrity needed to make them.  I would even say that the way the story is presented, this might be an important film to watch for any high schooler with dreams of getting into a great school. 

Jack the Giant Slayer
Starring Nicholas Hoult, Eleanor Tomlinson, Ewan McGregor and Stanley Tucci
Directed by Bryan Singer (X-Men)
Rated PG-13 for intense scenes of fantasy action violence, some frightening images and brief language

    Loosely based on the classic fairy tale Jack and the Beanstalk, Jack the Giant Slayer follows the journey of a young man named Jack, obviously, played here by Nicholas Hoult, fresh off his last modest success Warm Bodies.  Upon selling his horse for a handful of magic beans, Jack proceeds to accidentally lose one, causing a giant beanstalk to grow into the clouds.  Unfortunately it takes his house with it while a young incognito princess is paying a visit and trapped inside.  Upon learning of her disappearance, the king sends Jack, the queen’s sinister fiancé (Stanley Tucci) and his royal guard, led by Ewan McGregor to rescue her.  Upon arriving at the top of the beanstalk, they discover an evil race of giants determined to travel back to Earth in order to destroy humankind.

    I expected much from this film.  I expected it to be lame.  I expected it to be dumb.  I expected to be bored.  I was wrong on all counts.  Recently we’ve seen a rash of movies based on fairy tales including Red Riding Hood, Hansel and Gretel: Witch Hunters and the two Snow White films from 2012.  With the exception of Snow White and the Huntsman, all of these movies have been fairly terrible.  So then along comes Jack and you can probably see why I didn’t think much of it.  But I can always admit when I’m wrong, especially with movies. 

    What really impressed me the most here is the combination of storytelling with phenomenal special effects.  I’m not sure if the 3D was necessary, but the effects are remarkable, making the story come to life like only a big-budget Hollywood film can.

Identity Thief
Starring Jason Bateman and Melissa McCarthy
Directed by Seth Gordon (Horrible Bosses)
Rated R for sexual content and language

    Ever since Bridesmaids, Melissa McCarthy has been a hot property for Hollywood.  In her newest tale, she plays an identity thief who takes on the identity of an unsuspecting victim (Jason Bateman) by stealing his credit cards, driver’s license data and in the process ruining his already less than happy existence.  In an attempt to keep from losing his job, Bateman must go to Florida and bring his predator back with him to Colorado in the hopes of clearing his name. 

    You would think that this would be an excellent buddy comedy looking at the talent involved.  McCarthy is a wonderful and believable comedic miscreant and Bateman is one of the best straight men in the business.  The combination of these two should work.  While McCarthy does have some funny moments (most of which can be seen in the trailer), it seems like there was no comedy actually written but rather there was a dependance on McCarthy’s improvisation and personality to bring laughs.  And thus the film isn’t very funny at all.  So if you are in need of stress reducing laughter, you won’t get it here.  If all you need is an occasional chuckle, you’ll probably be satistfied. 

    Part of the reason this occurs is because the film is trying to be too much like Plains, Trains and Automobiles, transferring empathy from the hero to the villain (or at least away from the hero).  That worked for Planes, but here it seems like they are trying too hard, leaving an overall unsatisfactory result. 

    In addition, each and every single little plot point feels completely contrived.  I know for a fact that identity theft is a common crime, but I also know that banks and the authorities are very good at fighting it and at the very least don’t completely ignore it.  The very thought that the police would tell Bateman’s character to go apprehend a criminal and bring her back across the country is absolutely insane.  And that’s the most believable part unfortunately. 

Warm Bodies
Starring Nicholas Hoult, Teresa Palmer and John Malkovich
Directed by Jonathan Levine (50/50)
Rated PG-13 for zombie violence and some language

    Based on the book by Isaac Marion, Warm Bodies tells the story of a young male zombie (Hoult) who falls in love with a young human (Palmer) after eating the brains of her boyfriend and thus stealing his memories of her.  When he saves her life from a massive zombie attack, the two begin to warm up to each other, literally, as it appears that something is bringing him slowly back to life.  Unfortunately, its a relationship doomed to fail since her father (Malkovich) is the human military leader, determined to immediately kill any zombie he comes across.

    Very loosely based on Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet (his name is R, hers in Julie), the story might not be the first zombie comedy, but it is extremely cute in a somewhat disturbing manner.  Where it differs from traditional zombie films is that zombies aren’t the scariest kids on the block but rather the skeletons named “bonies” are the completely heartless and ruthless killers that are to be most feared.  That is also where it separates from the typical zombie genre.  In most zombie films there is a biological cause of the disease afflicting the dead.  Here they touch on that, but when the bonies pop out, that completely kills the scientific basis for the creatures, even though that scientific explanation might be overall weak.  In this regard the story is more supernatural than you would expect from a genre that is typically meant to be a potential possibility in our worst nightmares. 

    What is most enjoyable about the movie is the narration and humor of the main character who describes the goings on almost like a director doing a commentary on a DVD.  It is very funny at times and between Hoult and his best friend zombie played by Rob Corddry, there is much to keep a smile on your face. 

    Where it fails is in its predictability.  If you’ve seen the trailer then there are really no surprises here.  If you were to hear the basic premise, the movie in your head would be much like what you end up seeing.  So aside from the clever dialogue, you get a very standard script with little in the way of originality or nuance. 

    Director Kathryn Bigelow and writer Mark Boal were already hard at work on a project about a failed hit on Bin Laden directly after they finished teaming up for the Oscar-winner The Hurt Locker.  But in 2010, when it was announced that Seal Team Six killed America’s enemy number one, they changed course and made the film about the successful mission as well as the person most responsible for the kill.  Based on a true story about the intelligence going on behind the scenes for almost a decade before Bin Laden’s death, Zero Dark Thirty follows a young and committed CIA agent (Chastain) who is determined to track down a courier that most think is dead, but who she knows is the key to solving the mystery of the target’s location.  

    This is a film that is largely familiar to most of the world.  It starts with two planes crashing into the twin towers and ends with Americans raiding a compound in Pakistan.  But the details are what make this film so interesting and even if this is a completely fictional account, it seems true and our need to fill in the gaps will cause what I think will be a massive audience to see this much anticipated film.  

    There is no doubt that this is an adventure that fantasy-lovers have wanted to take for some time.  I remember as a kid watching the old Warner Brothers animated version, never dreaming that a live-action Hobbit could ever become a reality.  But then after Jackson released the third Lord of the Rings film, fans started screaming for him to recreate the book that started it all. 

    So does it live up to the hype?  In ways yes, but in other ways it is disappointing. 

    The good news is that Jackson’s vision delivers a wonderfully written and directed story with the same production values everyone expects.  If you’re not familiar with the tale, you might be a little surprised at how playful the movie is, but this is with good intent.  Tolkien’s book is much, much lighter than The Lord of the Rings.  It is a fun and whimsical journey through middle earth with plenty of danger but also loads of fun. 

    As you would expect from a project like this, the special effects are magnificent.  Looking back at the trilogy, there are many moments that now look kind of fake.  Here you can tell that they’ve taken a leap forward in visual effects technology.  It looks so perfect that only your common sense tells you its not real. 

    But that’s also where the movie slips up.  Jackson was so thrilled that this would be the first theatrically released film shot and projected in 3D at 48 frames per second instead of the the traditional 24.  He has even convinced theater owners worldwide to upgrade their projection systems in order to exhibit the movie in this fashion.  I am not an expert in this field and thus I really want to trust the filmmakers and other movie experts about this new technology, but personally I found the image on screen to be unsettling and extremely distracting.  The hyper-realism this sort of image capture and projection provides might have greater clarity and smoothness, but to my initial view, it just doesn’t look right on the big screen.  It reminds me of the look of a soap opera, a look that doesn’t belong in a movie theater.  I’m not trying to sound like a purist.  I really like to see progress and want to believe there is something to the technology, but I found myself concentrating more on the strange look of the film and less on the film itself.  I feel that I’ve really missed out on a great experience that I’m hoping I can recapture when I try to see the film again in a theater that hasn’t upgraded its equipment yet. 

    Based on the much loved novel by Yann Martel, Life of Pi tells the story of a young boy with an usual life story.  Literally raised in a zoo, Pi’s family in India decides to sell their animals to a zoo in Canada and on the boat journey there, Pi becomes the sole human survivor as he escapes on a life raft after a deadly storm.  Soon to find out that also on the lifeboat is a ferocious tiger, Pi must find a way to not only survive his new boat mate, but also survive months lost at sea. 

    From frame one, you can tell that this isn’t an ordinary film.  So much of this movie passes for the surreal.  The images are extraordinarily beautiful and in 3D it’s hard not to just sit back and meditate on the fact that you are in movie heaven.  So many movies made today might offer a 3D gimmick, but there is no gimmick here.  This is one of the most impressive 3D offerings to date and exactly the kind of movie worth paying the extra dollars for the glasses. 

    Perhaps what is most impressive about Life of Pi is the vision of Oscar winning director Ang Lee and Oscar nominated cinematographer Claudio Miranda.  Apparently I’m one of the few folks out there that hasn’t read the book, but I can’t imagine a description this vivid on paper.  This is the work of brilliant people that know exactly how to deliver the images in their heads onto the screen.  Of course it takes the special effects wizardry offered today to create this vision.  After all, the CG tiger couldn’t have looked this real a few years ago and there’s absolutely no way to make this movie with a real beast, so it helps to make a film after finally having the technology to do so. 

    As for the story, I found every minute to be exhilarating.  If you think a two hour movie about a boy and a tiger floating on the ocean can’t be exciting, you simply must see it to believe.  The way the story is told, you feel almost every emotion felt by the young man at sea.  Had they made Pi and the tiger friends, the picture wouldn’t be half as strong, but here when Pi is fearful for his life, you become fearful also. I bit my fingernails down to nubs and found myself squirming in my seat wondering how Pi was going to stay alive while constantly thinking “so better him than me.”