It’s a “Big Miracle” that Drew Barrymore is Still Acting

Big Miracle  

Big Miracle came out a while ago, but here's a picture for it.

Dir. Ken Kwapis

Written by Jack Amiel & Michael Begler (Screenplay)

and

Thomas Rose (Book)

Stare at the word ‘Miracle’ for a while and see if it looks as strange to you as it does to me now….

An aspiring reporter in Alaska happens upon three grey whales who are stuck at a small opening in the ice, unable to make it to open water without air. Thanks to this initial report, the world realizes that these whales are in trouble and people from all walks of life begin to lend a hand.

Solid fairy tale story from Disney. Good job, boys. You churned out another money maker.

……..What?

This is based on a true story? And Disney didn’t have anything to do with it?

Well….. Okay, then.

Anyway, if you’re wondering whether or not this movie is right for you or a member of your party, please consider these credits for the writing team involved in this film:

Exhibit A: Julia Stiles’ grammatically incorrect “The Prince and Me“

Exhibit B: The film that thrust Tim Allen back into the spot light, “The Shaggy Dog“

Exhibit C: One single episode of “Malcolm in the Middle” – Lois vs. Evil

If any of these interest you, you’re heading in the wrong direction, because this film seems to have been written with care, surprisingly. Maybe because there was a book to base the events and dialog off of. They didn’t have that luxury while writing their 2 episodes of “Who’s the Boss” “The Tony Danza Show.”

Ok, I don’t mean to be harsh. Let’s get into the meat of it all:

The acting was actually really good. Even if I can’t stand Drew Barrymore. I guess her agent said “Let’s give people a more substantial reason to hate you by making you a Green Peace activist who doesn’t wear make-up and cares about animal life over human life.”

The key to this film was the comedy. It’s sometimes not the happiest tale, but when you fill the dull moments with jokes from trained comic actors, you get something special.

John Krasinski is Jim from The Office. He’s taken out of that environment and tossed into one that’s also got him as one of the most level-headed people in the state. His news story is given to a major network, picked up by more major networks, and people everywhere take notice. He’s had a relationship with Drew Barrymore’s character before and she feels compelled to rush up to Alaska to lend a hand somehow.

Drew Barrymore is typecast as an Annoying Person. To make it worse, she has all 43(+/-) members of Green Peace behind her. She makes it her number one goal to go to Alaska and save these “gentle” creatures, even if she puts her own life at risk and tells the natives that they’re not allowed to kill the whales, even though that’s exactly what they’ve done for sustenance for hundreds of years. Damn white women, messing with rituals and shit.

Ted Danson is Ted Danson, an old rich guy who wants to destroy Alaskan animal preserves for more oil.* He faces opposition from Drew Barrymore and the rest of her hippies, but gets onto America’s good side when he donates his ice-breaking equipment to help free the whales, just for the good press. Your typical scum bag move. But people can change, right?

Stephen Root is in this film. Only for about a minute or two, but he’s hilarious as ever. Don’t know who he is? Take a look at his photo and you’ll know right away.

Stephen Root

Kristen Bell provides the love interest who helps “Johnny K” get even more fame. But when she proves that she has no compassion and only cares about the story, “JK” realizes she may not be the one… She’s not a bitch, but she definitely doesn’t have a heart. She’s actually pretty close to her role in “Forgetting Sarah Marshall.”

John Michael Higgins and Rob Riggle fall into the same category of hilarious, except Higgins plays his jerk-character that he’s known for and Riggle sticks as a home-town hero with subtle jokes. Higgins is there to oppose Bell’s character in the news world. And all Riggle wants to do is prove that his invention works by helping keep the whales’ air hole from freezing over. Both comedic geniuses in my mind.

Dermot Mulroney is one of my heroes of 2012, thanks to his acting in “The Grey” last month. And even though this is supposed to be a family movie, he still puts on a bad-ass persona and seems like the one person with a major flaw that he’s hiding. It takes a smokin’ hottie from the White House, Vanessa Shaw, to help him out of his funk. You may remember Vanessa from her role in the 2001 hit “Corky Romano.”

SIDE NOTE: The real life Col. Scott Boyer that Mulroney is playing should be on his knees thanking the production for making him look 100x more awesome than he really was. Wait for the photos during the end credits and you’ll get what I mean.

There was a mix of Animated and Practical effects used to bring the whales to life. For the first sighting of the whales, the three of them pop their heads out of the water to get their breaths, then submerge again, and continue to do so for the rest of the film. These are the practical whale heads that operators off-screen control. They’re very well done and you get a sense that these puppets are whales that are really in danger.

Then there’s the CG underwater crap they show, capped off with Barrymore’s character deciding to go into the water with the whales, despite every whale expert telling her that the whales will kill her. Well, that doesn’t happen. Sorry, here’s your post-spoiler SPOILER ALERT.

The whales don’t look terrible, but the underwater close up shots of Barrymore do. They add CG bubbles on the sides of her mask and provide random light sources, attempting to mimic the sin going through the waves above. The problem is, there are no waves above. It’s ice. Poorly done and it really took me out of it.

One final note: The US, right after the Cold War fiasco, decides that in order to save these whales, they had to call the Russians and ask if they could borrow their ice-breaking ship. Like it was a hedge trimmer they were borrowing from their neighbor’s garage. Reagan calls up the Russians, who then ‘break the ice’ and free the whales.

Get it? It’s a metaphor!!!! Hooray, knowledge!!!!!!!

My final rating: 7.5 out of 10

This is a quality movie for anyone to go see. Your kids will like the animals. Teens will like the familiar faces helping them through the crisis. Young adults will like the eye candy, whether it be Kristen Bell in “snow bunny” getup, or the rough and tough soldier with a heart made for melting (women like that, right?) And adults will enjoy the jokes tailored for the more mature crowd, along with actors they’re familiar with.

They never put someone in a role they weren’t right for, and it was a major strength for this film. I just can’t get over that terrible underwater animation of the whales missing their chance to thrash Drew Barrymore with their tails.

Such a tragedy.

*There is no proof that Ted Danson wants to, or has ever wanted to, destroy Alaskan animal preserves to get oil. Though if he wanted to get started now, he’d probably be dead by the time he had to show up to court…

Harry Potter and the Woman in Black*

The Woman in Black

The Woman in Black is out today, Feb. 3

Dir. James Watkins

Written by

Susan Hill (novel)

and

Jane Goldman (screenplay)

A young lawyer travels to a remote village where he discovers the vengeful ghost of a scorned woman is terrorizing the locals.

I want to start out by saying that when it comes to scary movies, I am not a brave man.

Scary movies and snakes…

I will spend a night out in the woods. I will walk the streets of Brooklyn at 2am. But if you put me in a movie full of those “SURPRISE!!!” scares (or get me within 5 feet of any kind of snake) I will have my teeth clenched for an hour and a half and my hands will be ridiculously sweaty.

This film capitalizes on using SHADOWS, EMOTIONLESS CHILDREN, and the CREEPIEST TOYS you’ll ever see in a child’s room.

All of that being said, I put on my big boy pants and went to see The Woman in Black. I wanted to see Daniel Radcliffe in a role that didn’t involve him using wizardry.

Let’s get into it. The film starts out with three little girls throwing themselves out a second story window after seeing the title character, this terrible “person” referred to as the Woman in Black. It’s a surprisingly unsettling open to the film. But I felt like I knew what I was getting myself into.

Not really.

Arthur Kipps (Daniel Radcliffe) is the lawyer who is in charge of taking care of the final documents involved with a recently deceased woman’s house in a small town, some time in the early 1900′s, I’m assuming. Once there, he’s told to go away by practically everyone, save for the richest man in the country who owns the only car in the country (Hmm… thanks for telling us this. Maybe Harry Arthur can use this info later in the movie to his benefit…)

It seemed like his work was done before he even got off the train. He meets his contact who says the work has been done and that Arthur could go home. But, being the pencil-pushing perfectionist that he is, Arthur decides to ignore everyone and go out to this house himself and look for paperwork to do.

CREATIVE TIMEOUT: This old house is located on an island. This island is not very big; just enough room for a mansion, a graveyard, and some shrubs surrounded by rocks. This island is only accessible by one road. And this road is surrounded by water that FLOODS THE ROAD AT HIGH TIDE, TWICE A DAY, trapping anyone on the island until the tide goes back out.

Now I’ve been told by a post-production friend that what I saw was not actually real. That the island-inhabiting house, the winding flood-prone road, and the island itself may have been faked. But I told him I saw it with my own two eyes, so it had to be real. Why would a movie have things in it that were fabricated? It just doesn’t seem right.

TIME IN: So, after that description of the island and mansion, why would anyone want to go there?

Here’s a better question: After seeing this Woman in Black on multiple occasions, getting the crap scared out of him by ghosts inside and outside the building, and hearing noises all over the house, why would Harry Arthur (sorry, I can’t help it) choose to STAY THE ENTIRE NIGHT ALONE?

Answer: No one in this time period had ever seen a horror film, so Arthur don’t know that he was being stupid.

As for the effects, the CG ghosts and stuff like that were done well enough. But they’re nothing we haven’t seen before. Of course I was scared when they popped out of shadows, but who wouldn’t be? What really stuck with me were the moments when there was no sound effect and nothing popping up. Instead we just see a head turn from the shadows behind Arthur, and I know something terrible COULD have happened.

This film functions very well as a creepy movie. But when it crosses the line into cheap scares, it fails after the 4th or 5th “Boo!”

And in case anyone was wondering, there’s literally 5 seconds of blood on screen in this film. It’s not a gore-fest, so no need to worry about that.

But there are a lot of instances of children being swayed to kill themselves. If that’s something that would bug you, don’t see this film.

My final rating: 6 out of 10

Daniel Radcliffe is no longer Harry Potter, despite the title of this post. He’s quite impressive here, even if he doesn’t look old enough to have a child (The sideburns were a strange choice, but I got over that quickly). And I was genuinely scared pretty much all the way through. But it felt like a poorly told ghost story at a family campfire.

It’s a good movie to go to if you just want to be spooked a lot. But the story is weak, if it’s even there. And it just felt like everything we saw on screen, combined with anything we learned about our characters, meant nothing and we were just in a haunted house for 90 minutes.

*If you’ve gotten this far and still think the title of the movie is actually “Harry Potter and the Woman in Black,” then I hate you.

Kill List: The UK Action/Suspense/ Thriller/Horror Film that Will Haunt Your Dreams

Kill List hits US theaters on February 3rd

Dir. Ben Wheatley

Written by Amy Jump & Ben Wheatley

What the hell did I just watch???

It’s a good thing there was a bar attached to the theater because I needed a drink or 3 to figure out what had just happened on that screen.

Sorry, let me get you the synopsis and I’ll continue with this review:

“Nearly a year after a botched job, a hitman takes a new assignment with the promise of a big payoff for three killings. What starts off as an easy task soon unravels, sending the killer into the heart of darkness.”

I thought it sounded like it was going to be a suspense/action movie filled with shooting and killing all over the place. I was just a bit little thrown off when the promo flyer said it was “Bloody Disgusting’s Top Horror Film of 2011“.

Turns out I was not disappointed. This film started out as a family drama, shifts into suspenseful “hitman-style” action, falls suddenly into a bloody torture film, quickly moving into a revenge film, and then scaring the hell out of me as a terrifying horror sequence hit me out of nowhere.

If you can’t tell already, even though it’s covering a lot of genres, it’s very artsy and not for everyone. If you’re a fan of any of the “genres” that the film touches on, then you may like the style of Kill List. Oh, also there are these convenient title cards before each ‘hit’ the characters go into, so you won’t be confused. (Attention: “MP” in this film means “Member of Parliament,” not “Military Police” as we found out straight from the director.)

(I should mention that this film had been released in the UK back in September 2011, but is just now hitting America.)

The Director: I had the pleasure of participating in a Q&A with director Ben Wheatley immediately after the screening of his film. He gave us some great insight into the making of the film and other aspects. With an amazing accent, Wheatley told us that the filming was completed in just three 6-day weeks. That’s damn impressive. And I’m a guy who’s worked on a film for an identical period of time and the end result of our adventure… Well, let’s just say Kill List had a little better luck compared to our project.

Wheatley also responded to a question about his casting, stating that he had worked with all of his cast before at different times, had them all in mind for Kill List, and tailored the roles and dialog especially for each actor. An interesting note, Wheatley had the actors do a take that was scripted, followed by a take that was in the actors’ own words, then back to a scripted take again. This undoubtedly made sure that a performance would feel genuine and please both the director and the cast.

The Cast: The cast for this film was strong. The film started off slowly, almost like a family drama. But once I learned more about the characters, the energy skyrocketed and I was floored by sudden bursts of emotion. It was always a pleasant surprise when someone would ‘blow up’ out of nowhere, taking the rest of the group off guard, only to be back in a loving relationship in the next scene.

I didn’t think much of Neil Maskell at the start of the film. He plays such a ‘nobody’ to start, I had trouble sympathizing with him. But once I learned more about his character, and thought about the few details of his troubled past, I began to love the performance I was watching. The transformation from loving family man into impulsive lunatic with a gun happened so quickly, I found myself with my jaw dropped just trying to comprehend what had happened.

To balance out the craziness that was Neil Maskell’s character, Jay, there was Michael Smiley playing Jay’s long-time friend and hitman partner Gal. We first meet Gal when he arrives for dinner at Jay’s. He’s a fun-loving guy who jokes around and drinks a bunch. He even seems to have a new ‘plaything’ with Emma Fryer‘s character Fiona (She’s pretty damn creepy in this film). But Gal is actually the level-headed man with the plan, and tells Jay there’s a job waiting for them. As the job goes on, Gal struggles to understand Jay as the craziness continues to ramp up.

Jay’s wife Shel, played by MyAnna Buring, is a joy to watch. I don’t know how she does it, but it seems as though she can just flip a switch and go absolutely crazy on Jay, then turn it off and smile lovingly. She’s a woman at her end with all the faith in the world in a husband who doesn’t have faith in himself. Let me tell you, the fights that Shel and Jay have, even off screen, sound extremely real, to the point it’s scary and awkward, like you shouldn’t be listening.

Weapons, Torture, and Practical Effects: Attention film nerds, indy filmmakers, and anyone interested in making believable practical effects such as torture methods or, let’s say, beating someone to death with a claw hammer. If you fall into any of these categories, then please see this film and keep your eyes wide open for the hit on “The Librarian” (remember to keep track with the convenient title cards).

I don’t think I’ve seen anything recently that comes close to the life-like brutality that I saw in this film. I saw some CG blood from a bullet wound early on and my stomach sank. But when I saw the damage done to one unfortunate man, my eyes were wide and jaw dropped, again.

I’d have to watch the film again to see exactly how some of the effects were done, but I think it’ll be a spectacle for anyone interested in making fake gore effects. The realism makes some of it hard to watch, but because it looks so real, you’ll want to keep looking to see if you can confirm that it was fake. That scene stuck with me for the rest of the picture and had me freaked out way after the film was over.

But if you really want to have the crap scared out of you, wait until you see the people involved in the cult toward the end. I know you’re probably pretty confused right now with all the directions I’m taking this topic, and that’s a good thing because I don’t want to tell you too much. But I knew once I got home that I would have nightmares featuring the masked attackers from the cult. If this film gets popular enough, I predict the hot new costume of the year will be inspired by this film. And I will stay indoors so I’m not scared by those freaky things.

Faults: The major areas this film suffered were the slow beginnings. I liked that it took a little effort for us to figure out what was happening, but it seemed to drag just a bit until Gal and Fiona show for dinner. It didn’t take me out entirely, but I was definitely itching to see some solid action. I mean, Jay just pulls out a semi-automatic rifle from a crate in his garage to show Gal, and I just thought “Finally,” even though they didn’t use it until later (What’s the saying about showing a gun in the first act?). But if a slow pace was the only problem for this film, and I was in awe the rest of the time, I say that’s just fine.

My final rating: 8.5 out of 10

Kill List is a film for people who want a little bit of art in their action movie. People who want blood and guts in their family drama. And especially for people who like the idea of an action/suspense/thriller/horror/drama combination film. It’s different and not everyone will like it, but there is a group of people, along with myself, who will really enjoy and appreciate this film.

Kill List deserves a second, and maybe even third, viewing just to go back and piece everything together. Thinking back to the beginning, there are definitely both blatant and subtle hints about what will happen in the end. It’s a thrill ride. It’s a confusing tornado of a film. And the shit inside of it will haunt your dreams for days.

Go see this film.

Why the Reviews Have Halted

Here’s the deal. I know I began writing on here frequently and there are SO many of you who rely on my reviews every day…

Ok, let’s get serious. I have seen a ton of films, and I’m going to continue seeing them. But I end up seeing a lot of movies well before the hit theaters.

So to honor some NDAs (Non-Disclosure Agreements) I may sign in the future, I will be waiting until each film premiers before I post a review.

If you’re curious about a film, wait until the day of the premier and I should have my review up early.

And if there are any films you think I should see and review, or maybe just add to my “List of Films I’ve Seen” then shoot me a message or comment on a post.

I’m always up for seeing some obscure film and shoving it down people’s throats *cough* Attack the Block *cough*

So, until the next premiere…

Act of Valor: The “Call of Duty: Modern Warfare” Movie

Act of Valor

Dir. Mike McCoy and Scott Waugh

Written by Kurt Johnstad

A team of Navy SEALs take on a mission to rescue a kidnapped operative, only to uncover a much bigger plot which threatens America. Showcasing state of the art weapons and gear, the group travels around the world in search of the men behind the proposed attacks.

As an American, I felt compelled to watch Act of Valor and see if it was as awesome as the trailer made it out to be.

Answer: Yes and No

I came to find out that this project started out as a recruitment piece for the Navy, meant to only last a few minutes. After some talks and serious studio deliberation (I hope), we now get 101 minutes of propaganda, showcasing the skills and prowess of the US Navy SEALs.

The stand-out issue is the fact that the main characters in this film are not actors. They’re real Navy SEALs, which has it’s pluses and minuses. Think of this film as having two problems, like most films. One major problem, obvious on top and the driving force behind the movie (Navy SEALs having to rescue an agent, then stop a terrorist attack on America). The other smaller, more personal problem or issue makes you care for the characters (Some of the SEALs have families and want to get home to them).

Why don’t I start off with the good stuff? You guys like the good stuff, right?

The main story in this film (SEALs stopping terrorists and showing off their high-tech gear) was pretty awesome. The SEAL team executes missions almost flawlessly, with minimal casualties. They use unmanned drones, underwater teams, snipers, helicopters, and (my favorite) patrol boats armed with 2 high-powered rail guns each (when that part happens, you’ll know why I got chills down my spine).

Watching a professional team (remember, they’re actual SEALs doing this in the film) was pretty special. Emotions run high during each of the incursions and you see what could actually happen during a night raid or a desert stakeout.

And yes, many times the film utilizes the ‘first person’ view that you’re used to in your XBOX shooters. They even go so far as to have the screen go red and begin to fade out when someone is hurt. It’s a cool effect, but it reminds you that you’re not really in a firefight.

Now, on to the smaller story at hand. The issue of families back home. Think about one of your relatives talking about how much they love their family and how there were times when they were away on a trip that they missed them terribly. Now, imagine they wrote it all down and recited the speech in front of everyone. Not as heart warming, is it?

That’s what you get when you put people who don’t act into the role of actor. It loses a lot of its feeling and is hard to believe. I found myself just wanting to get back to the firefight on screen so I could get some action.

The saving grace of the SEALs turned actors was the Chief (I think that’s what they called him). The men brag about his interrogation skills, and we get to see his skill in action later on. He is friggin’ impressive, and intimidating as hell. I wouldn’t want to be sitting across from him when I had something he wanted to know.

The other actual actors were the villains. The acting wasn’t bad here either. The bald guy freaked me out because of his piercing stare. And the long-haired one, Christo, seemed to have it all worked out. He had no fear in his eyes, even when threatened.

It’s not a terrible film. If you want to go on an adventure, this one may be for you. If you’re looking for A-plus acting, steer clear. There’s not much more to say about the movie, other than there were times I was really into it, and wanted to see how the American SEAL team would fare.

My final rating: 6.5 out of 10

Patriotism galore. Action a-plenty. A 101-minute propaganda film that will have you on a roller coaster ride of fighting and family.

Plus, real soldiers playing Call of Duty for you to see.

Haywire: The Short Film that Lasted 93 Minutes

Haywire

Dir. Steven Soderbergh

Written by Lem Dobbs

A highly-skilled special agent is betrayed during a mission and must find out who’s behind it to set things right.

I walked in, like many others I’m sure, thinking this would be “The Bourne Identity” with a female lead. And it’s hard not to draw the comparisons when you talk about a secret agent being potentially hunted by the people they work for.

While in “Bourne” you had Chris Cooper and Julia Styles pulling the strings with Brian Cox running the program, “Haywire” finds Ewan McGregor (amazingly pulling off a great American accent) as the program head with Michael Douglas running the show from on high. Fairly similar schemes.

And even the supporting cast paradigm is similar, with Michael Fassbender playing the almost-identical role that Clive Owen played in the first “Bourne.”

But there are noticeable differences between the films in plot, performance, and style.

Plot: Here we have an agent who knows what she’s doing and where she comes from. Still in contact with her father (played by Bill Paxton), she contacts him when necessary. She’s extremely skilled in hand to hand combat and displays her unconventional fighting style over and over.

Let’s address that:

Gina Carano is a Mixed Martial Arts champion and (little known fact) she was “Crush” on the attempted “American Gladiator” TV show reboot. Yeah I watched it, but Hulk Hogan hosted it and Crush was a looker!

Aside from looking amazing the entire film, she beats the shit out of everyone she meets. A hot chick beating down an army of assailants? Yes, please!

But it’s not just that she fights them. She uses her MMA knowledge and tosses it out there to bust skulls. The moves she uses confuse the guys and give her the edge most of the time. And the combination of sound, edits, and camera angles make some of the impacts (especially when something is smashed over a head, or a face goes into a bar stool) seem amazingly brutal.

Good stuff!

Performance: Again, along with her great fighting display, her acting was not bad at all. She blended into the acting world and she rarely took me out of it. And it probably didn’t hurt that she had some all-star actors to play off of. It’s a great trade off. They’re expert actors and she’s an expert fighter. They each try the other one’s game and it’s a nice blend.

If there’s one performance that lacks it would be Channing Tatum. And only because he was cast as almost a background actor to Gina’s standout character. If he had been given more to work with and more than 10 minutes on screen, he could have shined.

Ewan McGregor plays a really interesting “villain” in this film. His smile is deceiving, just like in “Angels & Demons” and that should be a plus for anyone. He plays this game so well, until his plan backfires and he must try to clean up the mess.

Antonio Banderas is in this movie.

Yup.

Style: I guarantee that, if a person doesn’t like the film, the main reason will be that it was too “stylized” or “artsy” for their taste. And I know what they mean, even if I only slightly agree with them.

The film is cluttered with what would be “glamour” shots for the cinematographer, though Steven Soderbergh fills that role, as well as director. It guarantees he gets what he wants, shot-wise, but it leaves a lot for the viewer to think about and piece together. A shot that’s a major offender is a “hostage rescue” scene that’s almost without sound.

Another bit of style that people will love or hate is the lighting or lack there of. Any scene that takes place indoors but shows the exterior will hurt your eyes. The light infiltrates the area and blows everything out. Interior shots are (supposedly) purposely colored to an extreme, usually orange. And practical lights are almost always blown out.

It’s fairly distracting and it’s enough to have certain reviewers throw out the film entirely.

In my opinion, the shots should have been cut to an extreme. Some shots linger “because they look good” and could be shortened for the audience’s sake. I get that it’s what the director wants, but there may be a limit to it all, especially if the film is being marketed as a spy/fight movie and not a stylized film.

If the film were cut down drastically, simplified, and tightened up to a 35 or 45 minute show, it would be AMAZING!!! The fights would have so much more of an impact and the story wouldn’t run on. It would get rid of the “artsy” feel that will be all the buzz in other reviews. And it would impress the hell out of a lot more people.

My rating: 7.5 out of 10

The movie is entertaining, and the fight scenes are guaranteed to be something new. It’s just long, that’s all. It’s up to you whether to see it or not, but if you’re looking for an action movie where a guy’s not afraid to smash a coffee cup over a woman’s head and then punch her in the face, it may be your kind of flick.

(Sorry about not including links to IMDb in this review. I’m doing it on my phone)

I’ll see you all next week with my thoughts on Act of Valor.

Apologies!

To the 12 of you who read this, I’m sorry I’ve been neglecting the site.

I have good news and bad news.

Bad News: I won’t be giving my next review until Wednesday.

Good News: I’ve seen a handful of new movies this week and I’ll have plenty of reviews for you all!

So stick with me, and hopefully tonight’s/tomorrow’s review of Haywire will hold you for a while!

Man on a Ledge: Not a documentary, but the director thought it was?*

Man on a Ledge in theaters Jan. 27

Man on a Ledge

Dir. Asger Leth

Written by Pablo F. Fenjves

Nick Cassidy (Sam Worthington) stands on the ledge of a New York City hotel building and proceeds to draw out a standoff between himself and the NYPD’s crisis team, lead by a troubled Lydia Mercer (Elizabeth Banks). All of this is a distraction, as Nick’s brother, Joey Cassidy (Jamie Bell), attempts to steal a valuable diamond from billionaire David Englander (Ed Harris), who had framed Nick for the theft of the diamond years before, sending him to jail, until his recent escape.

Basically, what you have here is one half jewel heist, with Jamie Bell and Genesis Rodriguez (Bell’s on-screen girlfriend, Angie) taking on Ed Harris and his higher-than-high-tech security system, and one half boring filler, with Sam Worthington standing on a ledge, threatening to jump, all while being a huge ass to Elizabeth Banks.

Just to tackle that issue right now, Banks is in charge of talking people out of doing terrible things to themselves. Worthington says he wants her on the scene in 30 minutes or he jumps, and when she arrives, he explains that, since a cop killed himself on her watch the week before, he knew that he’d have a larger crowd for when he jumps. Dick move, but I’ll address him in a few minutes.

I guess the best place to go would be the good stuff:

Camera work: I was thoroughly impressed with the things they were capable of doing with the cameras in this film. Mainly, it was the angles they caught and the feeling of dread, in case someone were to fall. I’m not an idiot, and I know they didn’t film a ton of stuff with Sam Worthington dangling 10-ish stories above the New York City pavement, but it felt like it. The way the camera would sweep all around the exterior of the building gave the simulation of a bird’s eye view, if that bird was flying right next to the cast of the film ten stories high.

And, as I said before, if someone slipped, or even joked about jumping, the camera made you think that you were going along for the ride. But, I guess that’s what you get when you put a man as accomplished as Paul Cameron (Gone in Sixty Seconds, Man on Fire) behind the lens.

And that’s about it for the technical stuff. Not much else stood out, aside from a few stunts. That’ll come soon though. For now, let’s talk acting.

Actors: I have to say that I really enjoyed the supporting cast a hell of a lot more than the leads. I like the performances that Edward Burns has given in past films, and I think he falls into a nice groove in this film as the officer forced to play backup to Elizabeth Banks. It’s a great mix of humility and disdain, as he watched Banks try and fail over and over again, even though Worthington has asked for her by name.

Another performance, on par with Burns was from Ed Harris. Though he looks like he’s lost considerable weight, Harris is still able to portray the villain that we love to hate. He’s dirty and ruthless, and has the money, power, and reputation to back everything he does. One of our first scenes with Harris has him receiving a gift from a friend, and “accepting” the gift before basically telling him to “Fuck off” in true Ed Harris fashion.

I have to give the “Middle of the Road” award to Anthony Mackie for his performance as Mike Ackerman, Nick Cassidy’s former partner. He shows up from time to time to make us believe that he’s a good guy. He hides evidence and makes many attempts to help Cassidy. But in the end, he’s kind of a rogue cop, without enough justification. And by the end of the film, I think everyone in the movie had forgotten about him.

SPOILER ALERT – PLOT POINT REVEALED (Only for the next two paragraphs.)

I have one more issue with casting to talk about before getting into some of the dismal performances. And here’s what I have to say: When you’re trying to hide the fact that a character is essential to the plot but the audience shouldn’t know about it, DON’T CAST A KNOWN ACTOR FOR THE THREE SCENES THE ROLE CALLS FOR! Especially not someone as well-known and recognizable as William Sadler! Come on, people! “The Shawshank Redemption” as Heywood? “Die Hard 2” as the badass Colonel Stuart? I feel like that’s Casting 101. But even though he was stuck in such a demeaning role, I enjoyed seeing him on screen for the part he plays in the whole mess.

One more spoiler thought: By my count, two very important people, to both the plot and the world of police, have been killed or seriously injured. Yet the entire “Man on a Ledge” universe has forgotten about them in the following five minutes. I’d take an explanation from anyone, if you have one.

THIS CONCLUDES YOUR SPOILER ALERT. ON WITH THE REVIEW.

Sam Worthington, what are we going to do with you? I understand that you don’t have much to work off of, just standing on the ledge of a building for an hour and some change. But that is no excuse for providing no emotion (except for when you yelled when the chopper comes close, but come on, the chopper motivated you). Watching you on the ledge was my cue to take a nap until they cut back to Jamie Bell and Genesis Rodriguez attempting some “Mission: Impossible” styled acrobatics (The stunts were fairly entertaining, and the heist/relationship was the only thing I really cared about in the movie).

I honestly would have preferred anyone else besides you, Mr. Worthington, out on that ledge. Michael Cera doing his “I’m awkward” bit would have been more entertaining because at least I would have laughed a few times. There were times when I really wanted you to jump because it would be a change of pace from the “I’m jumping, but I don’t want to jump, but I may still jump, but I don’t think it would be healthy if I want to date you later, Ms. Banks” routine. I know it’s not entirely your fault, and I’m getting to what I’m considering your ‘other half’ next, but come on. I hope you don’t expect to get more work with a performance like that.

Elizabeth Banks, what are we going to do with you? (See what I did there? I asked Elizabeth the same question that I asked Sam. Because her performance was terrible as well… Moving on.)

When the director said you would be playing a crisis negotiator who was tortured by the thoughts of the people she lost, leading her to drink herself into oblivion every night, did you go out every night and actually drink yourself into oblivion every night? Because it seemed like I was watching one of my college friends waking up after an all-night bender, trying to fake their way through work. If so, congrats! You managed to fake your way through acting like someone who was faking their way through work, if that makes sense to anyone.

The point of acting like you’re hungover is so that you can still ACT when needed. If they wanted a drunken slob to read the lines they could have called up any one of the girls from Jersey Shore, or Linsday Lohan, assuming she’s lost the ankle bracelet already. I felt nothing from what you were spewing out (no, she wasn’t actually puking, though that would have actually been funny to see) and I have no idea why Sam Worthington didn’t just take the plunge to get it over with.

Okay, let me take a minute to calm down……….

Maybe I was a bit harsh. But to the general public, the actors are the face of a film. Not a ‘second-time’ director whose only experience (according to the only source that’s official: IMDb) is in documentary filmmaking… All he’s ever done is make a documentary! He direct one documentary, back in 2006. One that he directed, wrote, shot, and, for some reason, was production designer for. Maybe everyone involved should think about that next time before signing the contracts?

My final rating: 5 out of 10

Here we go, folks. This is my middle of the road film, and it’s only mid-January. By June, I may look back and have a different opinion, but for now it’s a good baseline. If you see the movie, I told you there are definite pluses. But I recommend bringing a pillow or at least save some food for the middle section where nothing happens… Good luck!

*I make no assumptions as to whether or not the director, Asger Leth, actually thought “Man on a Ledge” was supposed to be a documentary. Maybe in his mind it was a biopic?

Red Tails: Why Pilots should be Pilots, and Actors should be Actors

Red Tails

Dir. Anthony Hemingway

Written by: John Ridley and Aaron McGruder

Before we start, I feel it’s important to point out that one of the producers was Mr. George Lucas. Fun Fact of the Day!

“Red Tails” is the story based off of the real life brigade of black men who served in the US army in WWII, known best as the Tuskegee Airmen. As the white pilots prove less and less reliable in the protection of American bombing planes, the men of the Tuskegee program are given their chance for the first time to assist in real combat, and prove they have what it takes to serve and protect.

Not a scene from the film, but you get the idea. Image via Wikipedia

Obviously, if that was all that was happening in the film, it would just be a documentary and it would be shown in 8th grade history class. But, believe it or not, there are some characters in this film that we get to know. And some of them are even likable!

Let’s start with a name you know: Cuba Gooding Jr.

Now, it seemed (at least to me) that he had disappeared from film for a while. Maybe taking some time to actually spend some of the money he’d been making. But it made sense for him to return in this film to portray someone in a movie based on true events. After all, he played the real life Carl Brashear in “Men of Honor,” real life Petty Officer Doris Miller in “Pearl Harbor,” and even had a role in a 1995 HBO movie “The Tuskegee Airmen.” Why would he turn down this most recent role in a film that’s not only based on a real life event, but one he’s familiar with already from previous acting experience?

That said, even though he’s an amazing actor capable of incredible things on screen, it seemed like he was handed this role without anyone giving the casting a second thought. Think back to any time you’ve seen Cuba in a film. He’s very reserved, very calm. He rarely gets angry or loses his cool. Yet, here he is as a Major in the US Military, in charge of hundreds of men on his base, and tasked with keeping them in line and inspiring them.

Unfortunately, it felt like he was just another pilot, though they gave him a fancy jacket, crooked hat, and a pipe. If he had been given the role of Chief ‘Coffee’ Coleman, the base mechanic, granted to Andre Royo, I believe he would have stood out in the best way. Instead, we have a flat Cuba Gooding Jr. and a hilarious Royo, yelling at the pilots for wrecking “his” planes.

Cuba Gooding Jr. was our baseline here, folks. He served his purpose and performed to the best of his ability with the role given him. From now on, you’ll get stand-out performances, or forgettable ones.

Let’s start with what I’ll call was the ‘best on-screen duo’: Terrence Howard vs. Bryan Cranston

Both of these men have had outstanding careers, and will be delighting us on screen for years to come. To see them together, Howard as the Colonel responsible for the inclusion of the Red Tails into the armed forces, and Cranston as the Major who opposed the project with all of his heart, was poetry. They played off of each other so well. Howard’s eyes said it all when he and his men were criticized, or even talked down to. And Cranston, with the slightest touch of a southern accent, had me almost hating him for the things he was saying. These two men break up some of the monotony that comes from a movie with as little as maybe 10 locations (not including the sky…)

And I have to congratulate Ne-Yo on his performance as Andrew “Smokey” Salem. You may be curious about this, but I honestly had no idea who he was when I watched the film. I just felt like he belonged there with these men, and I was hoping that, out of all of the other men flying in the movie, he wouldn’t die. (Not a spoiler. Does he die? Doesn’t he die? Who knows?) Just think about your friends right now. Do you have that “realist” that just shoots straight about everything, but with the best intentions? That’s Smokey. With an ever-present wad of ‘chew’ in his lip (or maybe that’s part of his character’s anatomy) and smart one-liners and observations, he was a source of comedic relief that was needed at times.

I guess it’s about time I talk about some of the lesser performances of the film. If Terrence Howard and Bryan Cranston were the ‘best on-screen duo,’ then Marty “Easy” Julian (Nate Parker) and Joe “Lightening” Little (David Oyelowo) would be ‘worst on-screen duo.’

Easy is supposed to be the squad leader of a group of pilots. Why he was put in charge in the first place, I’ll never know. He’s always second-guessing himself, giving in when other pilots prod him or beg, and he’s just a sad character to watch. Oh yeah, he’s constantly drunk, especially when he’s flying. He is responsible for multiple mishaps in the sky and is never punished for them, except by himself.

Lightening is a jerk. He takes advantage of Easy’s nice-guy persona and whines when he doesn’t get his way. BUT, he’s the “best damn pilot we got,” according to multiple people on the base, including at least one commanding officer. He’s reckless and treats the job like a game. But he kills SO many Nazi’s! He does exactly what he was brought in to do, yet he plays second fiddle to Easy.

These to fight on and off through the whole film, and instead of making you take sides, you kind of hate them both. Whatever they were attempting to do with those arguments between so-called best friends didn’t work very well, and I was just praying for the next aerial fight so I had something else to focus on.

Now, onto the absolute best part of the film: The Dogfights (No, not actual animals being harmed. It’s a term for aerial plane battles. I don’t think any animals at all were shown as being mistreated, harmed or killed in this film.)

Obviously, you can’t grab 30-40 WWII era planes, send them up into the sky, and have them duke it out. Not even if you tried to stage it; the risk is too high. But thanks to CGI, that problem is fixed. The plane battles can be created via computer and the planes are capable of any number of moves most pilots today wouldn’t try. And the best part is that the dogfights were done well. Very well.

For the amount of time we’re in the sky with these guys, I was never bored. I never got the feeling that it was the same thing, over and over. If you’re a fan of the black and white WWII movies that are constructed in the style of the John Wayne film “Flying Tigers,” then these fights are for you. Plus, the actors can’t bicker to each other in poorly written dialog while they’re being shot at/shooting down Nazis.

Which leads me back to the title of this post: Pilots should be Pilots, and Actors should be Actors

Overall, if you’re a fan of Terrence Howard, Bryan Cranston, WWII dogfights, or Ne-Yo, you’ll probably enjoy this movie. If you have the chance, it’s worth a look, just from the production value standpoint.

My final rating: 7 out of 10 4 out of 10.

Not the best of 2012, but definitely not the worst, I’m sure.

As always, I hope you enjoyed it, and gave you a little insight as to whether or not this film might be for you.

Weekends: I Call It ‘Me Time’

I just wanted to let anyone who follows this know that I’m pretty much avoiding writing on here on weekends.

Really, there’s football on today and tomorrow.

This is a football player... Image via Wikipedia

I know, I’m disappointing all 45 of you (if that) but I want to space my reviews out a bit.

Don’t be too upset.

I’ll have a fresh new review for you all on Monday.

Should I give you a hint?

Fine: It’s a period piece that’s not in theaters yet…

Guess it in the comments and you win a prize.*

Thanks everyone, and I’ll see you after the weekend.

*Prize will be me congratulating you in the Monday post. Deal with it.