Released in 1987, the original Predator is one of the best action movies of all-time. The Magnificent Seven meets Alien, it's a gem, an almost perfect movie for what it set out to do. But wait...there's more! Sequels! I'd never sat down and watched the first sequel in one sitting, but I can check it off my list now. The first of several sequels, here's 1990's Predator 2.
It's 1997 and it's a scorching hot summer in Los Angeles. The never-ending heat wave is made that much worse by a drug war between warring factions that threatens to tear the city apart, both sides fighting for turf and not too interested in who gets caught in the crossfire. Right in the middle is an overworked, shot-up police force trying its best to keep the peace. Among those officers is Lt. Mike Harrigan (Danny Glover) who with a small team of officers tries to take the fighting to the drug factions. Some weird crime scenes have been popping up though -- no spent bullets, horrific wounds on the dead, bodies skinned and hung up like trophies -- that no one can rightfully explain. What the hell's going on? Is a new hired killer tearing both sides apart that Harrigan and the police have no idea of? No, well...sorta. The enemy they're fighting is nothing of this world...
The killer of course is the Predator, a big-game killer from a far-off galaxy, a space traveler who goes from planet to planet and solar system to solar system killing for sport, for trophies, for the love of the hunt and kill. Last we saw he was somewhere in central America dispatching Arnold Schwarzenegger's team of specialists, but now he's made it to Los Angeles! Semi-spoilers I guess. There's a brief mention of the first movie but nothing heavy, and this 1990 sequel works fairly well as a stand-alone action flick. Does it help to see the first one? It certainly doesn't hurt but it is far from a deal-breaker.
I liked this sequel from director Stephen Hopkins but didn't love it. It's dumb, mindless, shoot 'em up fun and completely unnecessary other than the fact that the idea and concept behind the Predator is so freaking cool. Released in 1990, the sequel is set in the not so distant future of glorious 1997 where the only major difference seems to be some higher tech pistols and automatic weapons. The heat wave covering the city is a nice touch, giving the story a boiled over, sweaty look as everyone tries to survive the heat. That's kinda the entire movie. Gritty, in your face, violent, not too polished, fun and pretty dumb. Alan Silvestri returns to do the soundtrack, the Predator theme thankfully making a repeat performance. Not nearly as good as the first one but not bad for an unnecessary sequel. More of a guilty pleasure than a genuinely good movie.
Danny Glover is a Just Hit Play favorite, and the late 80's and early 90's are a big reason why. We're talking Lonesome Dove (my all-time favorite Glover part), the Lethal Weapon series, and a couple Disney classics called Angels in the Outfield and Operation Dumbo Drop (CLASSICS. GO SEE THEM). Here, he's in tweaked Lethal Weapon mode but hold the Mel Gibson. Glover's Harrigan is a veteran cop who plays by his own rules (yeah!) to get the job done. He's perennially pissed off and curses a blue streak the entire movie. No-nonsense, all business and sick of his streets getting shot up and littered with bodies on a daily basis. His crew includes Ruben Blades, Maria Conchita Alonso and Bill Paxton in full-on hamming it up mode. I would have liked some more scenes among the team, but some good supporting parts.
Only sorta crazy Gary Busey shows up as Keyes, a government agent who arrives on the scene and pisses everyone off immediately. Sorta, he's not telling the whole truth of why he's there, but it's Gary Busey in perpetual angry, in your face acting mode and that is ALWAYS entertaining. Also look for Robert Davi, Calvin Lockhart, Adam Baldwin, Kent McCord and Morton Downey Jr. in other supporting parts.
Probably the most appealing aspect of this 1990 sequel is the development of the Predator. SPOILER We see the Predator killed at the end of the 1987 original, but obviously he was not the only one of his kind. It's a whole breed of killers, going wherever their prey takes them. In this case, it's drug war-torn L.A. in the midst of a heat wave. The budget is somewhat limited so the special effects are okay at best, but the knowledge of a futuristic, other-worldly killer who moves among us so effortlessly to kill is a GREAT villain. Where there was Arnie in the original, there's pissed off Danny Glover in the sequel, an incredibly capable cop who always gets the job done. In other words, a more than worthy adversary for the universe's most brutally effective big game hunters. Kevin Peter Hall returns to play the Predator, a physically imposing, terrifying villain.
The action and shootouts are pretty consistent throughout, finally building up to the Predator vs. Glover's Harrigan in a drawn-out chase/fight scene that dragged on a little too much for my liking. It's still cool, leading to a finale with some cool twists about the Predator culture and most importantly, its past. So in the end, good sequel that's pretty entertaining. There have been five Predator movies, and I especially liked the attempt at a reboot in 2010 Predators. Where will it go? Who knows for sure so soak up the ones you can.
Predator 2 (1990): ** 1/2 /****
The Sons of Katie Elder
"First, we reunite, then find Ma and Pa's killer...then read some reviews."
Showing posts with label Bill Paxton. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bill Paxton. Show all posts
Monday, November 16, 2015
Tuesday, June 23, 2015
History's Texas Rising
I am a self-admitted, fully nuts, obsessed Alamo nut. I grew up watching Disney's Davy Crockett episodes and John Wayne's The Alamo and have been reading and watching everything I could find in the many years since. A few years back, I found out I was even related to one of the Alamo defenders who died in the infamous 1836 battle. So when I discovered that History was doing a TV miniseries about the Texas Revolution following the battle of the Alamo, I almost lost my mind. Here it is, the recent five-part TV miniseries, 2015's Texas Rising.
It's March 6, 1836, and Mexican forces under president and dictator Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna (Olivier Martinez) have wiped out the Alamo garrison in a brutal, bloody massacre. Some miles to the west, Texas forces under General Sam Houston (Bill Paxton) are trying to build an army to combat Santa Anna's troops that severely outnumber the Texans. Much of Houston's staff and many of his men want to turn and fight the Mexicans, avenge the Alamo massacre, but Houston knows -- even though it's difficult -- that he must pick and choose his spot to fight, even if it means retreating much to the chagrin of his men. So as Houston's men move east across Texas, Santa Anna's forces chase close behind, both sides waiting for their moment to strike. Many will be impacted, from a former slave, Emily West (Cynthia Addai-Robinson), to a deaf Texas Ranger named Erastus Smith (Jeffrey Dean Morgan). In the process, a whole bunch of history will be made.
Much like the western genre, the TV miniseries has gone the way of the do-do bird. Basically, it's extinct. History (formerly the History Channel) seems to have found a way to revive it starting with Hatfields and McCoy and more recently the so-so but generally well-received Sons of Liberty. This recent venture is a five-part miniseries, covering about eight months in 1836 following the massacre at the Alamo. It's a daunting task taken on by director Roland Joffe and his cast and crew with tons of moving pieces from real-life historical figures and events, an immense backdrop, characters covering the entire gamut and so much more. The verdict? Pretty good but not great. I think Joffe and his screenplay writers did a pretty admirable job assembling this whole story into something digestible for casual fans and diehard fans of the time and history.
Maybe the biggest thing going for 'Rising' is that the history just isn't as well known as what precedes the story we see. It starts with an effective scene that takes place maybe an hour or so after the end of the Battle of the Alamo. Most Texas Revolution-themed movies use the following history as an afterthought, but here, it's the guts of the story. Plain and simple, it's cool to see the Runaway Scrape with some detail. Houston and Santa Anna are at the forefront, but we also see Colonel James Fannin (Rob Morrow) and the disaster he causes at Goliad. We see President Andrew Jackson (Kris Kristofferson) back in Washington, keeping tabs on the ever-escalating conflict in Texas. We get a genuine picture of the history and the bigger picture of the time and its impact. I won't bore with the history details, but there's also cool parts for Jeff Fahey, Crispin Glover, Chad Michael Murray while also meeting real-life figures life Alamo messenger Juan Seguin and Mexican officer Juan Almonte. Some cool parts.
The focus of course is on two things, Houston vs. Santa Anna and then the early development of the Texas Rangers. Paxton and Martinez both have some fun with their parts, generally avoiding cliches that could have gone really badly. Paxton's Houston speechifies too much, but in the quieter, more personal moments, you feel like you get a picture of the man who became known as the Father of Texas. Martinez is okay but the script has Santa Anna portrayed far more as a straight villain, a bloodthirsty dictator and ruler. By all accounts, this portrayal is at least somewhat accurate, but it plays too much like an over the top Bond villain.
My favorite part of the movie though was those Texas Rangers, led by Morgan's Erastus 'Deaf' Smith. A hero of the Texas Revolution, 'Deaf' (pronounced 'deef') finally gets his due, and Morgan gives the miniseries' strongest performance. He's dying of tuberculosis but he's going to play out his hand as the revolution heats up. A very strong part for an underrated actor. His men include Brendan Fraser as a white man who lived with the Comanches, Christopher McDonald (Yes, Shooter McGavin) as Karnes, Smith's right-hand man, Jeremy Davies as cowardly Knowles, Rhys Coiro as ladies man Vern, Joe Egender as goofy Beans, Stephen Monroe Taylor as outlaw on the run Gator Davis, and Trevor Donovan as Kit Acklin, a good rider, good guy and a trustworthy partner. The scenes focusing on the Rangers were the movie's strongest I thought whether it be on the trail, in camp or during battle. Some fun parts with Morgan, Fraser and McDonald especially standing out.
It's the rare miniseries that is able to juggle so many balls in the air, and 'Rising' has its flaws. For the most part, the historical accuracy is pretty decent with a few liberties taken here and there. Not much is known about the real-life Emily West so the script fills in the holes by adding a love interest with Sam Houston. It feels forced although Paxton and Robinson do have some chemistry. There are too many plotlines, as simple as that. Thomas Jane and Sarah Jones play the Wykoffs, a family moving into Texas with a story that never gets much development. Robert Knepper's evil empresario is too evil for his own good venturing into caricature as well. Things move around a lot to cover so much ground so it's understandable to get mixed up if you're not familiar with the history. History also aired quick mini-movies about a subplot that seemingly got cut for time. Face it. There's a TON to be dealt with, and 'Rising' I thought did an admirable job juggling it all.
What else to look for? I especially liked Ray Liotta's especially dark turn as Lorca, an Alamo defender who though badly wounded survives the massacre and goes on the warpath, murdering all the Mexicans he meets. I also liked the subplot between two real-life rangers, Jack Hays (Max Thieriot) and Bigfoot Wallace (Robert Baker) as they ride across Texas toward the fighting.
I very much enjoyed this History venture into a known part of history that definitely needs more spotlight. It's cool seeing these people and stories so often brushed to the side in the portrayals of Texas history. From the Alamo to Goliad to the Runaway Scrape to San Jacinto to the fallout following as Texas becomes its own republic, 'Rising' tackles a lot and comes through pretty well. I look forward to seeing this one on DVD again soon. Definitely worth giving a shot, especially if you're a history/Texas/Alamo buff!
Texas Rising (2015): ***/****
It's March 6, 1836, and Mexican forces under president and dictator Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna (Olivier Martinez) have wiped out the Alamo garrison in a brutal, bloody massacre. Some miles to the west, Texas forces under General Sam Houston (Bill Paxton) are trying to build an army to combat Santa Anna's troops that severely outnumber the Texans. Much of Houston's staff and many of his men want to turn and fight the Mexicans, avenge the Alamo massacre, but Houston knows -- even though it's difficult -- that he must pick and choose his spot to fight, even if it means retreating much to the chagrin of his men. So as Houston's men move east across Texas, Santa Anna's forces chase close behind, both sides waiting for their moment to strike. Many will be impacted, from a former slave, Emily West (Cynthia Addai-Robinson), to a deaf Texas Ranger named Erastus Smith (Jeffrey Dean Morgan). In the process, a whole bunch of history will be made.
Much like the western genre, the TV miniseries has gone the way of the do-do bird. Basically, it's extinct. History (formerly the History Channel) seems to have found a way to revive it starting with Hatfields and McCoy and more recently the so-so but generally well-received Sons of Liberty. This recent venture is a five-part miniseries, covering about eight months in 1836 following the massacre at the Alamo. It's a daunting task taken on by director Roland Joffe and his cast and crew with tons of moving pieces from real-life historical figures and events, an immense backdrop, characters covering the entire gamut and so much more. The verdict? Pretty good but not great. I think Joffe and his screenplay writers did a pretty admirable job assembling this whole story into something digestible for casual fans and diehard fans of the time and history.
Maybe the biggest thing going for 'Rising' is that the history just isn't as well known as what precedes the story we see. It starts with an effective scene that takes place maybe an hour or so after the end of the Battle of the Alamo. Most Texas Revolution-themed movies use the following history as an afterthought, but here, it's the guts of the story. Plain and simple, it's cool to see the Runaway Scrape with some detail. Houston and Santa Anna are at the forefront, but we also see Colonel James Fannin (Rob Morrow) and the disaster he causes at Goliad. We see President Andrew Jackson (Kris Kristofferson) back in Washington, keeping tabs on the ever-escalating conflict in Texas. We get a genuine picture of the history and the bigger picture of the time and its impact. I won't bore with the history details, but there's also cool parts for Jeff Fahey, Crispin Glover, Chad Michael Murray while also meeting real-life figures life Alamo messenger Juan Seguin and Mexican officer Juan Almonte. Some cool parts.
The focus of course is on two things, Houston vs. Santa Anna and then the early development of the Texas Rangers. Paxton and Martinez both have some fun with their parts, generally avoiding cliches that could have gone really badly. Paxton's Houston speechifies too much, but in the quieter, more personal moments, you feel like you get a picture of the man who became known as the Father of Texas. Martinez is okay but the script has Santa Anna portrayed far more as a straight villain, a bloodthirsty dictator and ruler. By all accounts, this portrayal is at least somewhat accurate, but it plays too much like an over the top Bond villain.
My favorite part of the movie though was those Texas Rangers, led by Morgan's Erastus 'Deaf' Smith. A hero of the Texas Revolution, 'Deaf' (pronounced 'deef') finally gets his due, and Morgan gives the miniseries' strongest performance. He's dying of tuberculosis but he's going to play out his hand as the revolution heats up. A very strong part for an underrated actor. His men include Brendan Fraser as a white man who lived with the Comanches, Christopher McDonald (Yes, Shooter McGavin) as Karnes, Smith's right-hand man, Jeremy Davies as cowardly Knowles, Rhys Coiro as ladies man Vern, Joe Egender as goofy Beans, Stephen Monroe Taylor as outlaw on the run Gator Davis, and Trevor Donovan as Kit Acklin, a good rider, good guy and a trustworthy partner. The scenes focusing on the Rangers were the movie's strongest I thought whether it be on the trail, in camp or during battle. Some fun parts with Morgan, Fraser and McDonald especially standing out.
It's the rare miniseries that is able to juggle so many balls in the air, and 'Rising' has its flaws. For the most part, the historical accuracy is pretty decent with a few liberties taken here and there. Not much is known about the real-life Emily West so the script fills in the holes by adding a love interest with Sam Houston. It feels forced although Paxton and Robinson do have some chemistry. There are too many plotlines, as simple as that. Thomas Jane and Sarah Jones play the Wykoffs, a family moving into Texas with a story that never gets much development. Robert Knepper's evil empresario is too evil for his own good venturing into caricature as well. Things move around a lot to cover so much ground so it's understandable to get mixed up if you're not familiar with the history. History also aired quick mini-movies about a subplot that seemingly got cut for time. Face it. There's a TON to be dealt with, and 'Rising' I thought did an admirable job juggling it all.
What else to look for? I especially liked Ray Liotta's especially dark turn as Lorca, an Alamo defender who though badly wounded survives the massacre and goes on the warpath, murdering all the Mexicans he meets. I also liked the subplot between two real-life rangers, Jack Hays (Max Thieriot) and Bigfoot Wallace (Robert Baker) as they ride across Texas toward the fighting.
I very much enjoyed this History venture into a known part of history that definitely needs more spotlight. It's cool seeing these people and stories so often brushed to the side in the portrayals of Texas history. From the Alamo to Goliad to the Runaway Scrape to San Jacinto to the fallout following as Texas becomes its own republic, 'Rising' tackles a lot and comes through pretty well. I look forward to seeing this one on DVD again soon. Definitely worth giving a shot, especially if you're a history/Texas/Alamo buff!
Texas Rising (2015): ***/****
Thursday, March 26, 2015
Million Dollar Arm
It's that time of the year again, the best sports time of the year! For the sports fan in your life, there's March Madness mixed in with the home stretch of both the NBA and NHL regular seasons before the playoffs begin. What am I forgetting? Hmm, I'm drawing a blank. Oh, right! It's baseball season! If that isn't as good a time as any for a baseball-themed movie, I don't know what is. I missed it in theaters last year, but here's 2014's Million Dollar Arm.
A longtime sports agent with a solid reputation, J.B. Bernstein (Jon Hamm) has hit a bit of a rough patch. Check that, an EPIC rough patch. The firm he started with a friend and fellow agent has lost almost all of its clients, most of them to retirement, others for various other reasons. The money is running out quickly and the threat of completely losing his business is becoming more and more likely. He's got to come up with something unique and by pure, dumb luck, J.B. might be onto something. Watching cricket one night, the agent begins to question if he could turn a cricket player from India with no baseball experience into a major league baseball pitcher. It sounds crazy, but maybe just perfectly crazy enough to work. He finds a sponsor who gives him an impressive budget and just a year with which to make the transformation. Traveling to India with limited time, can J.B. pull it off?
Over a two or three-month span last year, I saw the trailer for 'Million' in front of every single movie I saw. EVERY movie. Inevitably, whoever I was with would usually say 'Hey, that movie looks like you.' I took it as a compliment. Sports? Yes, I approve. Baseball? Yep, my favorite sport. Underdog story based on a true story? Yes and Yes, count me in. I enjoyed this movie after a somewhat slow start. Is it anything particularly new or groundbreaking? That would be a big N-O. Still, if you like sports movies, you'll get a kick out of this one.
From director Craig Gillespie, 'Million' is in fact based on a true story, the real-life Bernstein developing his reality contest dubbed 'Million Dollar Arm.' If I have any recommendation, it's this; don't read into the story that inspired the movie. Go in with a clean slate and enjoy the screenplay as it develops. I don't want to go into too much detail, but there is a cookie-cutter feel to the underdog sports movie. It covers a lot of ground and feels a little forced at times but never goes too far overboard. It's the type of story you wouldn't believe if you didn't know it was based in reality. From California to an extended trip to India and then back to sunny California and Arizona, 'Million' is a solid, good, old-fashioned sports flick. Nothing less. Nothing more.
Now as it heads into its final season, I'll admit I've never seen an episode of AMC's Mad Men. Therefore, I don't have a huge background with Mr. Don Draper himself, Jon Hamm. I thought he was very good in The Town but that's about the extent of my knowledge. How about here as agent J.B. Bernstein? It's a good part, not a great part, the character limited by a script that sticks to the cliches when the chips are down. Hamm's Bernstein's is a single, smooth, charming ladies man who finds his single life thrown upside down when his business starts to struggle. We try to humanize him through normal, attractive, perfect fit for him even though he can't see it renter of his backyard bungalow, Brenda (Lake Bell in adorable, every girl mode). This possible love interest teaches him to feel, to be nice to people, to not always look out for himself. Yeah, it's that type of subplot. So while it isn't always Hamm's fault, it does become an issue.
So six paragraphs in, you might think this is going to be a negative review (It sure reads like one). I liked this one a lot, but not because of the Bernstein character who I found generally unlikable. If more focus would have been placed on the Indian cricket players, I think the movie becomes that much stronger. We meet Rinku (Suraj Sharma, of Life of Pi) and Dinesh (Madhur Mittal), two young Indian men with no real baseball experience who are athletically inclined enough they can throw a baseball semi-accurately around 85 mph. Transplanted to America because of that skill, it is the definition of a fish out of water story. With some help from a baseball-loving translator, Amit (Pitobash), who travels with them, they try to adjust, try to learn English and baseball and a new culture, not exactly an easy thing to pull off. In these moments, the movie is at its strongest.
A movie through the boys' eyes would have been fascinating. Instead, we get a movie about the boys through the eyes of J.B.. It is a formula that works, but the story could have been stronger with some tweaks here and there. I really liked Bill Paxton as Tom House, the USC pitching coach trying to introduce the boys to all the nuances of American baseball, and also liked Aasif Mandvi as Aash, J.B.'s friend and fellow agent. Alan Arkin isn't around for long other than to be a crotchety, curmudgeonly old man as Ray, an experienced baseball scout who's past his prime but still has the eye for that special talent. Also look for Darshan Jariwala as Vivek, J.B.'s office manager of sorts who introduces him to all the ways of doing business in Indian fashion.
'Million' does have some surprises up its sleeve in the second half, and things definitely pick up for the better as a potential tryout with MLB scouts approaches. Yeah, there are too many moments that are for the Disney-crowd, family and all that sugary sweet stuff. Still, it is a tried and true formula that when handled correctly....man, it just works. If you like sports movies, you'll like this one. Remember to stick through the credits as we see the real J.B., Rinku and Dinesh in some great pictures. I like Sharma and Mittal a lot, the two actors able to humanize their parts without resorting too much to any sports cliches. Nothing flashy but a good movie just the same.
Million Dollar Arm (2014): ***/****
A longtime sports agent with a solid reputation, J.B. Bernstein (Jon Hamm) has hit a bit of a rough patch. Check that, an EPIC rough patch. The firm he started with a friend and fellow agent has lost almost all of its clients, most of them to retirement, others for various other reasons. The money is running out quickly and the threat of completely losing his business is becoming more and more likely. He's got to come up with something unique and by pure, dumb luck, J.B. might be onto something. Watching cricket one night, the agent begins to question if he could turn a cricket player from India with no baseball experience into a major league baseball pitcher. It sounds crazy, but maybe just perfectly crazy enough to work. He finds a sponsor who gives him an impressive budget and just a year with which to make the transformation. Traveling to India with limited time, can J.B. pull it off?
Over a two or three-month span last year, I saw the trailer for 'Million' in front of every single movie I saw. EVERY movie. Inevitably, whoever I was with would usually say 'Hey, that movie looks like you.' I took it as a compliment. Sports? Yes, I approve. Baseball? Yep, my favorite sport. Underdog story based on a true story? Yes and Yes, count me in. I enjoyed this movie after a somewhat slow start. Is it anything particularly new or groundbreaking? That would be a big N-O. Still, if you like sports movies, you'll get a kick out of this one.
From director Craig Gillespie, 'Million' is in fact based on a true story, the real-life Bernstein developing his reality contest dubbed 'Million Dollar Arm.' If I have any recommendation, it's this; don't read into the story that inspired the movie. Go in with a clean slate and enjoy the screenplay as it develops. I don't want to go into too much detail, but there is a cookie-cutter feel to the underdog sports movie. It covers a lot of ground and feels a little forced at times but never goes too far overboard. It's the type of story you wouldn't believe if you didn't know it was based in reality. From California to an extended trip to India and then back to sunny California and Arizona, 'Million' is a solid, good, old-fashioned sports flick. Nothing less. Nothing more.
Now as it heads into its final season, I'll admit I've never seen an episode of AMC's Mad Men. Therefore, I don't have a huge background with Mr. Don Draper himself, Jon Hamm. I thought he was very good in The Town but that's about the extent of my knowledge. How about here as agent J.B. Bernstein? It's a good part, not a great part, the character limited by a script that sticks to the cliches when the chips are down. Hamm's Bernstein's is a single, smooth, charming ladies man who finds his single life thrown upside down when his business starts to struggle. We try to humanize him through normal, attractive, perfect fit for him even though he can't see it renter of his backyard bungalow, Brenda (Lake Bell in adorable, every girl mode). This possible love interest teaches him to feel, to be nice to people, to not always look out for himself. Yeah, it's that type of subplot. So while it isn't always Hamm's fault, it does become an issue.
So six paragraphs in, you might think this is going to be a negative review (It sure reads like one). I liked this one a lot, but not because of the Bernstein character who I found generally unlikable. If more focus would have been placed on the Indian cricket players, I think the movie becomes that much stronger. We meet Rinku (Suraj Sharma, of Life of Pi) and Dinesh (Madhur Mittal), two young Indian men with no real baseball experience who are athletically inclined enough they can throw a baseball semi-accurately around 85 mph. Transplanted to America because of that skill, it is the definition of a fish out of water story. With some help from a baseball-loving translator, Amit (Pitobash), who travels with them, they try to adjust, try to learn English and baseball and a new culture, not exactly an easy thing to pull off. In these moments, the movie is at its strongest.
A movie through the boys' eyes would have been fascinating. Instead, we get a movie about the boys through the eyes of J.B.. It is a formula that works, but the story could have been stronger with some tweaks here and there. I really liked Bill Paxton as Tom House, the USC pitching coach trying to introduce the boys to all the nuances of American baseball, and also liked Aasif Mandvi as Aash, J.B.'s friend and fellow agent. Alan Arkin isn't around for long other than to be a crotchety, curmudgeonly old man as Ray, an experienced baseball scout who's past his prime but still has the eye for that special talent. Also look for Darshan Jariwala as Vivek, J.B.'s office manager of sorts who introduces him to all the ways of doing business in Indian fashion.
'Million' does have some surprises up its sleeve in the second half, and things definitely pick up for the better as a potential tryout with MLB scouts approaches. Yeah, there are too many moments that are for the Disney-crowd, family and all that sugary sweet stuff. Still, it is a tried and true formula that when handled correctly....man, it just works. If you like sports movies, you'll like this one. Remember to stick through the credits as we see the real J.B., Rinku and Dinesh in some great pictures. I like Sharma and Mittal a lot, the two actors able to humanize their parts without resorting too much to any sports cliches. Nothing flashy but a good movie just the same.
Million Dollar Arm (2014): ***/****
Labels:
2010s,
Aasif Mandvi,
Alan Arkin,
Bill Paxton,
Jon Hamm,
Sports
Friday, December 5, 2014
Nightcrawler
Name the best actors currently working in Hollywood. You know what name doesn't always come up but definitely should? For me, Jake Gyllenhaal's name certainly belongs on that list with movies like Prisoners, Zodiac, Jarhead, End of Watch and Brokeback Mountain to his name. There's a new movie at the top of the list, 2014's Nightcrawler.
Living in Los Angeles in a small, sparsely furnished apartment with no job, a crappy car and no real prospects, Louis Bloom (Gyllenhaal) is looking for a career. He just doesn't know what. One night as he's driving on the expressway, he drives past a flaming wreck as two police officers pull an unconscious woman from the car. Two cameramen rush past him to get footage of the incident, footage they intend to sell to local news stations. The better the footage? The better the money. With that, Louis sees a new possible career. Through some dubious means, he gets a used video camera and even hires an assistant -- an intern really -- to help him navigate Los Angeles in the dead of night in search of the best, the juiciest (read = bloodiest, most graphic, most grizzly), and most salacious footage. How far is Louis willing to go to create this new niche for himself? Is there even a limit?
Yikes. What a movie, a movie I didn't expect when I headed into it. The plot description mentioned a driven man in L.A. muscling into the world of crime journalism. That is an apt description, an accurate one but one that only gives a sense of what's coming. There's so much more happening here. Reading more into the film, I was a little worried when I saw Dan Gilroy had both written and directed 'Nightcrawler.' Not a hugely recognizable name but one who's worked pretty regularly in Hollywood. My problem was that he'd written Real Steel, Two for the Money and The Bourne Legacy, two films I really didn't like and one I was disappointed in. Making his directorial debut, Gilroy doesn't disappoint, shaking off those disappointments (for me at least, and THAT'S what matters) for an incredible movie to watch, both uncomfortable and entertaining.
There's no place to start here other than Gyllenhaal. When I say I didn't know what to expect of the movie heading into it, it's because of Gyllenhaal. This isn't a movie about L.A. crime journalism. This is a character study of a man in L.A. crime journalism. It isn't an action movie as some previews and trailers might have you think. This is Jake Gyllenhaal's movie, and my goodness, he delivers a captivating performance. You meet his Lou early on and think "Okay, nerdy, quirky dude with no real skillset who's still trying to make something of himself." Yeah, that's what you think. There's so, SO much more to this performance. There is little to nothing in the way of background about Lou got to this point, but as you see the movie develop, you just know that backstory is not a pleasant one. The details? They would be as uncomfortable -- if not more -- if we learned more about Lou.
So how do you describe this character? Hmm, well....Lou is insane. He's a lunatic. He's a sociopath, and Gyllenhaal brings him to life with each passing scene that gets more and more uncomfortable, unsettling and downright scary at times. You laugh at times because what he says is so profoundly wrong. Lou Bloom isn't well-educated or come from an upper class background. He learns. He teaches himself, and he plans. His life is cold, calculating and bottom line with everything. Can you help him? Yes? You're okay. Are you expendable? Watch out. Gyllenhaal commits to the part from his simple wardrobe to his slicked back hair, his lifeless eyes transitioning immediately to rage-filled eyes ready to explode. This is an incredible acting job. It's early for movie awards season, but Gyllenhaal definitely deserves Best Actor consideration.
Three other key parts dot the movie, starting with Rene Russo as Nina Romina, a news director at an L.A. news station looking for some ratings. She sees the talent in Lou but doesn't realize the depths he'll go to for a story or footage. Riz Ahmed is excellent as Rick, Lou's poorly paid intern who is desperate and needs work, dealing with all of Lou's drama and outbursts. Last but not least, look for Bill Paxton as Joe Loder, another nighttime crime journalist who butts heads with Lou and his general aggressiveness.
What Gilroy does so well is build up and create this world. The glimpses of daylight in a 117-minute movie are rare. This is a nighttime movie for the nigthcrawling world. This is a story on the streets of Los Angeles, the fluorescent and neon lights paving the way. It's a dark, grimy, gritty and incredibly violent world. The business is cutthroat if you want to make a name for yourself. You have to push the limits, and in Lou's case, slam through those limits and make up your own. The ending is about as close as you get to a more mainstream action movie, a chase through the open, empty streets of Los Angeles as Lou and Rick push those limits. It builds to an ending I found disappointing, but one that works as you think about the reality of the world we live in right now. Sadly enough, people are incredibly interested in the gory, graphic, bloody and horrifically violent. That's it. That's all.
Oh, and Jake Gyllenhaal is excellent. If you like that sort of thing.
Nightcrawler (2014): *** 1/2 /****
Living in Los Angeles in a small, sparsely furnished apartment with no job, a crappy car and no real prospects, Louis Bloom (Gyllenhaal) is looking for a career. He just doesn't know what. One night as he's driving on the expressway, he drives past a flaming wreck as two police officers pull an unconscious woman from the car. Two cameramen rush past him to get footage of the incident, footage they intend to sell to local news stations. The better the footage? The better the money. With that, Louis sees a new possible career. Through some dubious means, he gets a used video camera and even hires an assistant -- an intern really -- to help him navigate Los Angeles in the dead of night in search of the best, the juiciest (read = bloodiest, most graphic, most grizzly), and most salacious footage. How far is Louis willing to go to create this new niche for himself? Is there even a limit?
Yikes. What a movie, a movie I didn't expect when I headed into it. The plot description mentioned a driven man in L.A. muscling into the world of crime journalism. That is an apt description, an accurate one but one that only gives a sense of what's coming. There's so much more happening here. Reading more into the film, I was a little worried when I saw Dan Gilroy had both written and directed 'Nightcrawler.' Not a hugely recognizable name but one who's worked pretty regularly in Hollywood. My problem was that he'd written Real Steel, Two for the Money and The Bourne Legacy, two films I really didn't like and one I was disappointed in. Making his directorial debut, Gilroy doesn't disappoint, shaking off those disappointments (for me at least, and THAT'S what matters) for an incredible movie to watch, both uncomfortable and entertaining.
There's no place to start here other than Gyllenhaal. When I say I didn't know what to expect of the movie heading into it, it's because of Gyllenhaal. This isn't a movie about L.A. crime journalism. This is a character study of a man in L.A. crime journalism. It isn't an action movie as some previews and trailers might have you think. This is Jake Gyllenhaal's movie, and my goodness, he delivers a captivating performance. You meet his Lou early on and think "Okay, nerdy, quirky dude with no real skillset who's still trying to make something of himself." Yeah, that's what you think. There's so, SO much more to this performance. There is little to nothing in the way of background about Lou got to this point, but as you see the movie develop, you just know that backstory is not a pleasant one. The details? They would be as uncomfortable -- if not more -- if we learned more about Lou.
So how do you describe this character? Hmm, well....Lou is insane. He's a lunatic. He's a sociopath, and Gyllenhaal brings him to life with each passing scene that gets more and more uncomfortable, unsettling and downright scary at times. You laugh at times because what he says is so profoundly wrong. Lou Bloom isn't well-educated or come from an upper class background. He learns. He teaches himself, and he plans. His life is cold, calculating and bottom line with everything. Can you help him? Yes? You're okay. Are you expendable? Watch out. Gyllenhaal commits to the part from his simple wardrobe to his slicked back hair, his lifeless eyes transitioning immediately to rage-filled eyes ready to explode. This is an incredible acting job. It's early for movie awards season, but Gyllenhaal definitely deserves Best Actor consideration.
Three other key parts dot the movie, starting with Rene Russo as Nina Romina, a news director at an L.A. news station looking for some ratings. She sees the talent in Lou but doesn't realize the depths he'll go to for a story or footage. Riz Ahmed is excellent as Rick, Lou's poorly paid intern who is desperate and needs work, dealing with all of Lou's drama and outbursts. Last but not least, look for Bill Paxton as Joe Loder, another nighttime crime journalist who butts heads with Lou and his general aggressiveness.
What Gilroy does so well is build up and create this world. The glimpses of daylight in a 117-minute movie are rare. This is a nighttime movie for the nigthcrawling world. This is a story on the streets of Los Angeles, the fluorescent and neon lights paving the way. It's a dark, grimy, gritty and incredibly violent world. The business is cutthroat if you want to make a name for yourself. You have to push the limits, and in Lou's case, slam through those limits and make up your own. The ending is about as close as you get to a more mainstream action movie, a chase through the open, empty streets of Los Angeles as Lou and Rick push those limits. It builds to an ending I found disappointing, but one that works as you think about the reality of the world we live in right now. Sadly enough, people are incredibly interested in the gory, graphic, bloody and horrifically violent. That's it. That's all.
Oh, and Jake Gyllenhaal is excellent. If you like that sort of thing.
Nightcrawler (2014): *** 1/2 /****
Tuesday, July 8, 2014
Edge of Tomorrow
When I think of Tom Cruise, I think of any number of movies from Top Gun and Risky Business to the Mission Impossible series. He's the type of movie star who if he's in a movie, I'll give it a shot. What genre has provided some of Cruise's best work? That would be the science fiction genre, including Oblivion, War of the Worlds, Minority Report, and a new entry to the list, 2014's Edge of Tomorrow.
It has been five long, bloody years since an alien race dubbed 'Mimics' has landed on Earth, specifically all across Europe. Banding together, mankind is finally seeing some victories coming together, their forces pushing back to the point that an immense, world-encompassing invasion of the European continent is fast-approaching. Among the military forces is Major William Cage (Cruise), a PR man who has done his best to promote the war, get the people behind the effort. Through an argument with a superior officer, Cage finds himself not as a PR man, but as a front-line infantry soldier ready to lead the first wave of the invasion. The attack is horrific, a surprise invasion not so surprising. Cage himself is killed when a new kind of Mimic strikes, but he isn't quite dead. He wakes up at the same point a day before, experiencing the identical day down to each personal interaction. A figurehead of the fighting forces, an international hero, Rita Vrataski (Emily Blunt), knows exactly what's going on with Cage. Can this inexperienced soldier hold the key to Earth's salvation?
Wow, this is the sort of story and premise you hope for in a really well-written, well-executed science fiction film. Heck, in any film. It will be difficult to review this sci-fi flick from director Doug Liman without giving away at least some sort of spoiler so be forewarned. I'll be discussing the major twist that propels 'Edge' into the guts of its story, one you no doubt may have heard about, but still....I WARNED YOU!!! SPOILERS!!! So what is the oh-so-original premise? This description minimizes how good the movie is, but this is Groundhog Day with a sci-fi edge. Through a mishap in battle, Cruise's Cage is reborn at the same instance every time he dies in battle. In other words, he can die seemingly infinite times only to be thrown back a day later before the invasion and do it all over again. His death literally signifies a "Re-do" button for not only himself, but the world as a whole. Life goes on, getting a fresh start each and every time Cage dies.
So yeah, that could be called a gimmick. 'Groundhog' is a classic, loved by fans. Another somewhat similar movie, Vantage Point, used a storytelling format that rewound the story so we could see it from a different perspective. I saw that one in theaters, the audience audibly groaning by the second or third "rewind." That most assuredly is not the issue here. The screenplay isn't content to be just smart. It takes the story somewhere, and once we learn what Cage is going through, we don't see everything. We see snippets of his seemingly never-ending life of one day. He dies on the beach in countless ways -- the battle showing all the countless ways he can meet his demise -- and starts over, meeting his squad leader, meeting his fellow soldiers and then is thrown into the battle. Some "days" we see a lot, others bits and pieces. It is a difficult premise to explain but just know that in the end, it is worth it. We're introduced to it, and then the story breathes.
Look, here it is. I like Tom Cruise, and yes, I know everybody doesn't feel that way. He's an actor and a movie star, and I especially liked his performance here. Where I described the story's background a little bit, I'm not going to delve too much into Cruise's Cage or how he ends up in the situation he does. I will say it surprised me because he plays against type early on, an unlikely hero thrust into a situation that could save or doom mankind. Nothing big, right? Joining him is rising star Emily Blunt, her Rita a modern day Rosie the Riveter of sorts, except she's right at the forefront of the fighting. She may not look like a prototypical action hero, but it ends up working exceptionally well. On top of that, her chemistry with Cruise is spot-on. There is a simple, effective chemistry between them that simply put....just works. Another big positive, the possible developing relationship between them is kept in the background, hinted at but never addressed head-on. Two very good performances that don't get lost in the epic qualities and scale of the science fiction story.
Who else to look for? Brendan Gleeson is the face of mankind's defense, his General Brigham the commander of the United Defense Forces. Bill Paxton plays Master Sergeant Farell, Cage's new squad leader who becomes the face of Cage's improbable dilemma. In the squad, look for Jonas Armstong, Tony Way, Kick Gurry, Franz Drameh, Dragomir Mrsic and Charlotte Riley.
As cool as the premise is (and it is very cool), I especially liked some of the quieter moments, even the scenes with some truly dark humor. In the second half of the movie, Cage and Rita are talking, Rita discovering that the two of them have been in this situation countless times before. Cage remembers. Rita doesn't. What if they stopped trying over and over again to save the world? What if they just ran away? Scenes like that add some emotional depth to a story with style and interesting story to burn. I didn't love the last 20 minutes or so, but there is a relative twist added that I thought worked especially well. The final scenes had a timeline discrepancy that I can't quite wrap my head around, but that's a minor thing.
Big picture? This is what you look for in a science fiction flick. With touches of Groundhog Day, Starship Troopers and more recently, Source Code, 'Edge' is excellent. History buffs will no doubt get a kick out of it too, the current invasion of Europe resembling D-Day right down to the tiny details. By the time the troops actually hit the beaches, it's like a modern-day attack on the beaches at Normandy. A very cool movie with lots to offer.
The Edge of Tomorrow (2014): ***/****
It has been five long, bloody years since an alien race dubbed 'Mimics' has landed on Earth, specifically all across Europe. Banding together, mankind is finally seeing some victories coming together, their forces pushing back to the point that an immense, world-encompassing invasion of the European continent is fast-approaching. Among the military forces is Major William Cage (Cruise), a PR man who has done his best to promote the war, get the people behind the effort. Through an argument with a superior officer, Cage finds himself not as a PR man, but as a front-line infantry soldier ready to lead the first wave of the invasion. The attack is horrific, a surprise invasion not so surprising. Cage himself is killed when a new kind of Mimic strikes, but he isn't quite dead. He wakes up at the same point a day before, experiencing the identical day down to each personal interaction. A figurehead of the fighting forces, an international hero, Rita Vrataski (Emily Blunt), knows exactly what's going on with Cage. Can this inexperienced soldier hold the key to Earth's salvation?
Wow, this is the sort of story and premise you hope for in a really well-written, well-executed science fiction film. Heck, in any film. It will be difficult to review this sci-fi flick from director Doug Liman without giving away at least some sort of spoiler so be forewarned. I'll be discussing the major twist that propels 'Edge' into the guts of its story, one you no doubt may have heard about, but still....I WARNED YOU!!! SPOILERS!!! So what is the oh-so-original premise? This description minimizes how good the movie is, but this is Groundhog Day with a sci-fi edge. Through a mishap in battle, Cruise's Cage is reborn at the same instance every time he dies in battle. In other words, he can die seemingly infinite times only to be thrown back a day later before the invasion and do it all over again. His death literally signifies a "Re-do" button for not only himself, but the world as a whole. Life goes on, getting a fresh start each and every time Cage dies.
So yeah, that could be called a gimmick. 'Groundhog' is a classic, loved by fans. Another somewhat similar movie, Vantage Point, used a storytelling format that rewound the story so we could see it from a different perspective. I saw that one in theaters, the audience audibly groaning by the second or third "rewind." That most assuredly is not the issue here. The screenplay isn't content to be just smart. It takes the story somewhere, and once we learn what Cage is going through, we don't see everything. We see snippets of his seemingly never-ending life of one day. He dies on the beach in countless ways -- the battle showing all the countless ways he can meet his demise -- and starts over, meeting his squad leader, meeting his fellow soldiers and then is thrown into the battle. Some "days" we see a lot, others bits and pieces. It is a difficult premise to explain but just know that in the end, it is worth it. We're introduced to it, and then the story breathes.
Look, here it is. I like Tom Cruise, and yes, I know everybody doesn't feel that way. He's an actor and a movie star, and I especially liked his performance here. Where I described the story's background a little bit, I'm not going to delve too much into Cruise's Cage or how he ends up in the situation he does. I will say it surprised me because he plays against type early on, an unlikely hero thrust into a situation that could save or doom mankind. Nothing big, right? Joining him is rising star Emily Blunt, her Rita a modern day Rosie the Riveter of sorts, except she's right at the forefront of the fighting. She may not look like a prototypical action hero, but it ends up working exceptionally well. On top of that, her chemistry with Cruise is spot-on. There is a simple, effective chemistry between them that simply put....just works. Another big positive, the possible developing relationship between them is kept in the background, hinted at but never addressed head-on. Two very good performances that don't get lost in the epic qualities and scale of the science fiction story.
Who else to look for? Brendan Gleeson is the face of mankind's defense, his General Brigham the commander of the United Defense Forces. Bill Paxton plays Master Sergeant Farell, Cage's new squad leader who becomes the face of Cage's improbable dilemma. In the squad, look for Jonas Armstong, Tony Way, Kick Gurry, Franz Drameh, Dragomir Mrsic and Charlotte Riley.
As cool as the premise is (and it is very cool), I especially liked some of the quieter moments, even the scenes with some truly dark humor. In the second half of the movie, Cage and Rita are talking, Rita discovering that the two of them have been in this situation countless times before. Cage remembers. Rita doesn't. What if they stopped trying over and over again to save the world? What if they just ran away? Scenes like that add some emotional depth to a story with style and interesting story to burn. I didn't love the last 20 minutes or so, but there is a relative twist added that I thought worked especially well. The final scenes had a timeline discrepancy that I can't quite wrap my head around, but that's a minor thing.
Big picture? This is what you look for in a science fiction flick. With touches of Groundhog Day, Starship Troopers and more recently, Source Code, 'Edge' is excellent. History buffs will no doubt get a kick out of it too, the current invasion of Europe resembling D-Day right down to the tiny details. By the time the troops actually hit the beaches, it's like a modern-day attack on the beaches at Normandy. A very cool movie with lots to offer.
The Edge of Tomorrow (2014): ***/****
Labels:
2010s,
Bill Paxton,
Brendan Gleeson,
Emily Blunt,
Sci-Fi,
Tom Cruise
Wednesday, February 5, 2014
2 Guns
I love a good crime thriller. Don't you? You can decide how dark one should be, how action-packed, even how funny it is. Maybe all of the above even. If there was ever a decade that helped put the crime thriller on the map, it was the 1970s. Watching 2013's 2 Guns -- which I liked a lot -- I felt almost like it was a tribute film, a buddy crime thriller reminiscent of so many good 1970s thrillers.
Low-level criminals Bobby Beans (Denzel Washington) and Michael 'Stig' Stigman (Mark Wahlberg) have been working together, providing odds and ends for a drug cartel for almost a year now. When a deal with cartel kingpin Papi Greco (Edward James Olmos) doesn't go quite as planned, Bobby goes along with Stig's plan that he's been brewing about for months. Greco keeps a ridiculous amount of money as the Tres Cruces bank, somewhere around $3 million. Bobby and Stig are both keeping a secret from each other though, Bobby an undercover D.E.A. agent, Stig an undercover agent with Navy Intelligence. With backing from their supervisors, they pull off the robbery but get far more than they expected. Someone is setting them up. There isn't $3 million in the bank, and it doesn't belong to Greco. There's $43 million, and its powerful owner (Bill Paxton) wants it back at all costs.
It was hard not to like this movie. From director Baltasar Kormakur (who worked with Wahlberg on Contraband), 'Guns' is based off a graphic novel of the same name. It received mixed reviews last summer, but audiences seemed to like it, piling up a $131 million box office. The appeal is obvious, a buddy flick along the U.S./Mexico border with drug cartels, shootouts, corrupt government agencies, some cool car chases, and two very likable leads. Watching the DVD special features, writer Blake Masters clearly is a fan of the genre, mentioning Sam Peckinpah and Butch and Sundance as influences. The graphic novel author, Steven Grant, is the same way, a huge fan of where this genre has come from. Above all else, this is a really fun movie. It's content to be fun too, and there's absolutely nothing wrong with that.
Before I figured out what the story was about, my initial reaction was.....come on, do I really need to spell it out? It's Denzel Washington and Mark Wahlberg, two of my favorite actors, working together!! How can that go wrong? I submit that IT CANNOT. That's the beauty of films like this. You get two or three or four actors/actresses, hand them a script and let them go. These are fun parts that Washington and Wahlberg clearly had some fun bringing to life. Buddy/road movies like this have a perfection in following their formula. Two guys working together, not quite trusting each other but they don't have any other options, and everyone is against them. Their personalities are different -- Bobby quieter, smooth and charming, Stig a motor-mouthed, likable tough guy -- but really? They're not so different. Similar backgrounds, similar loyalties when it comes to getting the job done.
It doesn't hurt that both Washington and Wahlberg are two very likable actors on-screen. Nowhere is that more evident than their dialogue together. These are fast-paced, lightning-quick delivered scenes that certainly reflect two guys who've spent too much time together doing shady deals for drug cartels. The opening scene has Stig in a diner trying to order breakfast for Bobby, Bobby correcting everything that's said and then arguing about why the other one was so very wrong. It's a formula that's used a handful of times in some contagiously funny scenes, Stig trying to convince Bobby that they're actually friends, Bobby stubborn as ever in opening up some. Just a fun to watch and listen to chemistry that gives a humorous edge to the crime aspect of the story.
As for the rest of the cast, they're there to keep us guessing. Who's good? Who's bad? Who's got some tricks up their sleeve? Olmos is having some fun as Papi Greco, smooth and slimy, always ready to turn on anyone for a payday. Paula Patton gets the eye candy role (the topless eye candy, very essential to the story) as Deb, Bobby's quasi-girlfriend and contact officer within the D.E.A., Robert John Burke as Jessup, their commanding officer. Paxton gets to ham it up as Earl, the man who wants his money back, greasy hair, thin mustache and quirky to a T. James Marsden is good too as Quince, Stig's commanding officer within Navy Intelligence trying to put together a hugely successful case. Even Fred Ward makes a quick appearance as a Navy Admiral who may be able to help Stig. Definitely some fun, cool parts.
I just liked this movie, plain and simple. It reminded me of everything from Charley Varrick (robbing mafia money) to The Outfit (low level hoods) to Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Garcia (the border setting). There is absolutely nothing wrong with a movie wanting to be entertaining with absolutely no other intentions. By the time the story builds to a showdown at Greco's Mexican villa, it's just too perfect. About 28 different sides in a glorious shootout with a whole lot of money on the line. It's hard not to like movies about this. A buddy/road movie with tones of film noir, 1970s crime thrillers and that oh so perfect pulpy feel, how can you lose?
2 Guns (2013): ***/****
Low-level criminals Bobby Beans (Denzel Washington) and Michael 'Stig' Stigman (Mark Wahlberg) have been working together, providing odds and ends for a drug cartel for almost a year now. When a deal with cartel kingpin Papi Greco (Edward James Olmos) doesn't go quite as planned, Bobby goes along with Stig's plan that he's been brewing about for months. Greco keeps a ridiculous amount of money as the Tres Cruces bank, somewhere around $3 million. Bobby and Stig are both keeping a secret from each other though, Bobby an undercover D.E.A. agent, Stig an undercover agent with Navy Intelligence. With backing from their supervisors, they pull off the robbery but get far more than they expected. Someone is setting them up. There isn't $3 million in the bank, and it doesn't belong to Greco. There's $43 million, and its powerful owner (Bill Paxton) wants it back at all costs.
It was hard not to like this movie. From director Baltasar Kormakur (who worked with Wahlberg on Contraband), 'Guns' is based off a graphic novel of the same name. It received mixed reviews last summer, but audiences seemed to like it, piling up a $131 million box office. The appeal is obvious, a buddy flick along the U.S./Mexico border with drug cartels, shootouts, corrupt government agencies, some cool car chases, and two very likable leads. Watching the DVD special features, writer Blake Masters clearly is a fan of the genre, mentioning Sam Peckinpah and Butch and Sundance as influences. The graphic novel author, Steven Grant, is the same way, a huge fan of where this genre has come from. Above all else, this is a really fun movie. It's content to be fun too, and there's absolutely nothing wrong with that.
Before I figured out what the story was about, my initial reaction was.....come on, do I really need to spell it out? It's Denzel Washington and Mark Wahlberg, two of my favorite actors, working together!! How can that go wrong? I submit that IT CANNOT. That's the beauty of films like this. You get two or three or four actors/actresses, hand them a script and let them go. These are fun parts that Washington and Wahlberg clearly had some fun bringing to life. Buddy/road movies like this have a perfection in following their formula. Two guys working together, not quite trusting each other but they don't have any other options, and everyone is against them. Their personalities are different -- Bobby quieter, smooth and charming, Stig a motor-mouthed, likable tough guy -- but really? They're not so different. Similar backgrounds, similar loyalties when it comes to getting the job done.
It doesn't hurt that both Washington and Wahlberg are two very likable actors on-screen. Nowhere is that more evident than their dialogue together. These are fast-paced, lightning-quick delivered scenes that certainly reflect two guys who've spent too much time together doing shady deals for drug cartels. The opening scene has Stig in a diner trying to order breakfast for Bobby, Bobby correcting everything that's said and then arguing about why the other one was so very wrong. It's a formula that's used a handful of times in some contagiously funny scenes, Stig trying to convince Bobby that they're actually friends, Bobby stubborn as ever in opening up some. Just a fun to watch and listen to chemistry that gives a humorous edge to the crime aspect of the story.
As for the rest of the cast, they're there to keep us guessing. Who's good? Who's bad? Who's got some tricks up their sleeve? Olmos is having some fun as Papi Greco, smooth and slimy, always ready to turn on anyone for a payday. Paula Patton gets the eye candy role (the topless eye candy, very essential to the story) as Deb, Bobby's quasi-girlfriend and contact officer within the D.E.A., Robert John Burke as Jessup, their commanding officer. Paxton gets to ham it up as Earl, the man who wants his money back, greasy hair, thin mustache and quirky to a T. James Marsden is good too as Quince, Stig's commanding officer within Navy Intelligence trying to put together a hugely successful case. Even Fred Ward makes a quick appearance as a Navy Admiral who may be able to help Stig. Definitely some fun, cool parts.
I just liked this movie, plain and simple. It reminded me of everything from Charley Varrick (robbing mafia money) to The Outfit (low level hoods) to Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Garcia (the border setting). There is absolutely nothing wrong with a movie wanting to be entertaining with absolutely no other intentions. By the time the story builds to a showdown at Greco's Mexican villa, it's just too perfect. About 28 different sides in a glorious shootout with a whole lot of money on the line. It's hard not to like movies about this. A buddy/road movie with tones of film noir, 1970s crime thrillers and that oh so perfect pulpy feel, how can you lose?
2 Guns (2013): ***/****
Monday, April 29, 2013
Navy Seals
The Navy Seals have gotten a lot of publicity over the last few years, most of it positive. Seal Team 6 led the assault that ultimately killed Osama bin Laden, and then saw their mission get a big screen treatment in Zero Dark Thirty. Just last year, Act of Valor was released in theaters, a great action movie starring real-life seals as themselves. Those are pretty good movies though. How about some oh so bad guilty pleasure flick? Enter stage right, 1990's Navy Seals.
Trying to rescue American pilots taken hostage by extremist terrorists, veteran Navy Seal Lt. James Curran (Michael Biehn) leads his Seal team into a heavily guarded terrorist hideout and executes the mission. During the mission though, his right hand man, Lt. Dale Hawkins (Charlie Sheen), discovers a warehouse full of Stinger missiles, accurate handheld American surface-to-air missiles. Under heavy fire though, the Seals can't destroy the missiles and must leave for their extract point. The missiles remain a high objective though, but the trail goes cold except for a link to an unknown terrorist, Ben Shaheed (Nicholas Kadi). Curran follows a lead in a Lebanese journalist (Joanne Whalley) who has ties and sources in the Middle East. Can they find Ben Shaheed, his extremist followers and their extremely dangerous missiles before they're put into use?
Released in 1990, 'Seals' barely recouped its budget, making about $25 million before finding popularity on home video. It was almost universally panned by critics and is currently rocking a sterling 5.2 IMDB rating. So why then do I like it so much? The only real response I can come up with is that it's a bad movie, and it embraces the badness. The complaints are ridiculous. Sheen and Biehn's hair doesn't fly with Navy regulation. The script is pretty lousy, relying on cliches and stereotypes with just about each passing scene. The one-liners are beyond goofy. Not one of those complaints is unfair in the least. They're all quite legit. It's a pretty stupid movie, and you know what? It's the better for it. 'Seals' tries to entertain, and it never lets us down as an audience in that way.
Part of the fun comes from the casting. An underrated star of the 1980s, Biehn is all business, no nonsense as Lt. Curran, the tough as nails Seal team leader. His second-in-command is Sheen's Lt. Hawkins, a crazy thrill seeker who pushes it too far at times in getting his "rush" on. There's a solid, enjoyable dynamic between the two as they butt heads over how to get things done. Curran's team includes Leary (Rick Rossovich, another 80s icon in Top Gun), the corpsman, Rexer (Cyril O'Reilly), explosives, Dane (Bill Paxton), the sniper, Graham (Dennis Haysbert), the team chief, and Ramos (Paul Sanchez), the interpreter. The only real development any of them are given is Graham getting a fiance story (a pre-Law and Order S. Epatha Merkerson), but that's beyond the point. This is a men-on-a-mission movie at its best (and worst I suppose).
At its heart, this is an action movie pure and simple. A movie running 113-minutes never goes too long without some shootouts and pyrotechnics. The opening raid on the terrorist port hideout is a great scene-setter for what's to come. In an episodic story that has the Seals moving from location to location, we never stay in one place more than a few minutes. Mission after mission, some quick and hard-hitting, others a little more drawn out and allowed to breathe. The finale when Curran's team tracks down the Stinger missiles is not surprisingly the best. The Seals must fight their way through the bombed-out, war-torn streets of Beirut in Lebanon in the night. It's a tense scene with a more than solid payoff as the surviving Seals (Yes, there are casualties) race through the streets with heavily armed terrorists behind them in hot pursuit. Sure, the action is a tad overdone at times, but it's fun stuff.
This is a dudes being dudes movie. You don't go into it for the dialogue scenes between Biehn's Curran and Whalley's comely journalist. You go into it for the action and ridiculousness in director Lewis Teague's shootout-heavy flick. Where else can you see a goofy 1980s-esque montage with the Seals goofing around on a golf course to an awful cover of the Boys Are Back in Town? Cheesy soundtrack in general in a movie that won't strain any brain cells. An introduction has Sheen's Hawkins jumping off a bridge out of a moving jeep to avoid going to a fellow Seal's wedding. How stupidly over the top is that? But that's the movie. Entertaining at times in spite of itself, it's a movie released in 1990 that might as well be considered as a schlocky 1980s flick. Whatever and whenever it was released, it's a good one that's oh so bad.
Navy Seals (1990): ***/****
Trying to rescue American pilots taken hostage by extremist terrorists, veteran Navy Seal Lt. James Curran (Michael Biehn) leads his Seal team into a heavily guarded terrorist hideout and executes the mission. During the mission though, his right hand man, Lt. Dale Hawkins (Charlie Sheen), discovers a warehouse full of Stinger missiles, accurate handheld American surface-to-air missiles. Under heavy fire though, the Seals can't destroy the missiles and must leave for their extract point. The missiles remain a high objective though, but the trail goes cold except for a link to an unknown terrorist, Ben Shaheed (Nicholas Kadi). Curran follows a lead in a Lebanese journalist (Joanne Whalley) who has ties and sources in the Middle East. Can they find Ben Shaheed, his extremist followers and their extremely dangerous missiles before they're put into use?
Released in 1990, 'Seals' barely recouped its budget, making about $25 million before finding popularity on home video. It was almost universally panned by critics and is currently rocking a sterling 5.2 IMDB rating. So why then do I like it so much? The only real response I can come up with is that it's a bad movie, and it embraces the badness. The complaints are ridiculous. Sheen and Biehn's hair doesn't fly with Navy regulation. The script is pretty lousy, relying on cliches and stereotypes with just about each passing scene. The one-liners are beyond goofy. Not one of those complaints is unfair in the least. They're all quite legit. It's a pretty stupid movie, and you know what? It's the better for it. 'Seals' tries to entertain, and it never lets us down as an audience in that way.
Part of the fun comes from the casting. An underrated star of the 1980s, Biehn is all business, no nonsense as Lt. Curran, the tough as nails Seal team leader. His second-in-command is Sheen's Lt. Hawkins, a crazy thrill seeker who pushes it too far at times in getting his "rush" on. There's a solid, enjoyable dynamic between the two as they butt heads over how to get things done. Curran's team includes Leary (Rick Rossovich, another 80s icon in Top Gun), the corpsman, Rexer (Cyril O'Reilly), explosives, Dane (Bill Paxton), the sniper, Graham (Dennis Haysbert), the team chief, and Ramos (Paul Sanchez), the interpreter. The only real development any of them are given is Graham getting a fiance story (a pre-Law and Order S. Epatha Merkerson), but that's beyond the point. This is a men-on-a-mission movie at its best (and worst I suppose).
At its heart, this is an action movie pure and simple. A movie running 113-minutes never goes too long without some shootouts and pyrotechnics. The opening raid on the terrorist port hideout is a great scene-setter for what's to come. In an episodic story that has the Seals moving from location to location, we never stay in one place more than a few minutes. Mission after mission, some quick and hard-hitting, others a little more drawn out and allowed to breathe. The finale when Curran's team tracks down the Stinger missiles is not surprisingly the best. The Seals must fight their way through the bombed-out, war-torn streets of Beirut in Lebanon in the night. It's a tense scene with a more than solid payoff as the surviving Seals (Yes, there are casualties) race through the streets with heavily armed terrorists behind them in hot pursuit. Sure, the action is a tad overdone at times, but it's fun stuff.
This is a dudes being dudes movie. You don't go into it for the dialogue scenes between Biehn's Curran and Whalley's comely journalist. You go into it for the action and ridiculousness in director Lewis Teague's shootout-heavy flick. Where else can you see a goofy 1980s-esque montage with the Seals goofing around on a golf course to an awful cover of the Boys Are Back in Town? Cheesy soundtrack in general in a movie that won't strain any brain cells. An introduction has Sheen's Hawkins jumping off a bridge out of a moving jeep to avoid going to a fellow Seal's wedding. How stupidly over the top is that? But that's the movie. Entertaining at times in spite of itself, it's a movie released in 1990 that might as well be considered as a schlocky 1980s flick. Whatever and whenever it was released, it's a good one that's oh so bad.
Navy Seals (1990): ***/****
Labels:
1990s,
Bill Paxton,
Charlie Sheen,
Dennis Haysbert,
Michael Biehn,
Military
Monday, January 30, 2012
Haywire
First appearing in the public eye as a mixed martial arts fighter, Gina Carano has made the jump from athlete to actress, and the early return is nothing but positive. For her first movie, she chose a role that's right in her wheelhouse, a fastball down the middle. She made a wise decision, picking an ideal role that gets to show off her immense physical talent and ability, starring in 2012's Haywire.
Working for a private contractor who works for the government, former Marine Mallory Kane (Carano) is as good as it gets when black ops work is needed. She takes jobs on an individual basis from her boss, Kenneth (Ewan McGregor), sometimes working alone, other times working with a team. After a successful job in Barcelona though, everything hits the fan. Suddenly, Mallory has been set up and international law enforcement is after her wherever she goes. Who burned her, and what's their motive? Left on her own and abandoned in Europe, Mallory must now find out who set her up before they complete their mission.
From director Steven Soderbergh, Haywire is just more proof of the director's already visible talent. Dark comedies, crime dramas, heist movies, disaster epics, historical period pieces, Soderbergh can do it all, and he manages to put a unique, personal spin on all of them. I really liked this movie from the talented director. His familiar style is there, but it's a no-frills sort of style. Title cards keep us abreast of where Mallory has traveled to, and what better music than a fast-paced jazzy score to accompany the action? Composer David Holmes does a variation on his Ocean's 11 score, a more subtle, sinister sound. Listen to the main theme HERE. The whole soundtrack/score is surprisingly worthwhile, appropriate in a quirky sort of way. It's a small-scale spy story -- somewhat similar to the Bourne movies -- that feels familiar with a 'been there, done that' quality, but Soderbergh and his cast are so good at what they do, you don't even notice. It's too good of a movie.
Appearing in her first starring role, Carano does not disappoint as the vengeful Mallory. There are too few female action stars out there -- legitimate ones that an audience can buy -- and Carano certainly has that potential to fill the void. Basically, don't expect her to do any romantic comedies anytime soon...although that could be interesting. This isn't a part that requires her to be a big, showy performer. It's a subtle, quiet performance that relies on intensity and few words. Most importantly, Carano is incredibly believable in the part. As an athlete/MMA fighter, she's quite capable, something she gets to show off in her handful of hardcore fight scenes. She does all of her own stunts (that I could see), and also important, more than holds her own in the fight scenes. Fight sequences between a man and a woman can look forced and stagey, but not here. A welcome addition to the action genre, I look forward to seeing where Carano goes from here as an actress. Incredibly talented and one of the sexiest, seductive spies ever.
It is a testament to Soderbergh's talent and reputation that countless actors/actresses want to work with, as is the case here. Haywire features a handful of smaller performances from some not small names and not a one disappoints. McGregor gets the most screentime as Kenneth, Mallory's employer and former boyfriend/lover, and makes the most of his supporting part. Channing Tatum plays Aaron, a fellow agent/operative who's worked with Mallory in the past and is now trying to piece things together. Michael Douglas is nicely cast as Coblenz, a government higher-up who hired Kenneth for some off the books work, and Antonio Banderas is appropriately mysterious as Rodrigo, a key part of the mission and deception. In a brutally efficient part, rising star Michael Fassbender again shows he's capable of bigger and bigger things, playing Paul, an Irish source for Mallory. Bill Paxton plays John Kane, Mallory's father, who knows what his daughter is up to, constantly hoping she leaves the business.
For better or worse, some of those performances are there for Carano's Mallory to beat the crap out of. With her mixed martial arts background, Carano leads the charge in the action department. That no-frills, brutal style is reflected in these fight scenes, one with Tatum and Fassbender each, among some other quality action. These are fights that leave the viewer hurting, and Soderbergh wisely shoots it without the frenetic editing. We see the fights, see the individual moves, all of them done so quickly they're almost a blur. Even better, no music is played over these scenes, all of the focus on the brutal hand-to-hand combat. This is where Carano shines, a physical presence who can stand toe-to-toe with her male counterparts. The sequences are so well done there's almost a dark beauty to it all, so good it makes you marvel at what's going on.
Above all else, that's what this flick is; an action movie. A chase through Barcelona, and later Mallory fleeing a SWAT team in Dublin are criminally simplistic. It isn't lots of quick cutting and crazy out of this world explosions and pyrotechnics, just one person on the run and/or chasing someone. Holmes's jazzy score plays over this portion that bounces back and forth between color and black and white photography. Stylish without being overdone, just enough to call attention to itself without being overly aggressive. The story itself is half flashback, half current time, and while they're explained, the betrayals and double crosses are almost unnecessary. From Barcelona to Dublin, upstate New York to the New Mexico desert, Haywire starts off at a sprint and never slows down at just 93 minutes. Simply put, a professionally made, beautifully choreographed espionage/spy thriller that is well worth a watch.
Haywire <---trailer (2012): ***/****
Working for a private contractor who works for the government, former Marine Mallory Kane (Carano) is as good as it gets when black ops work is needed. She takes jobs on an individual basis from her boss, Kenneth (Ewan McGregor), sometimes working alone, other times working with a team. After a successful job in Barcelona though, everything hits the fan. Suddenly, Mallory has been set up and international law enforcement is after her wherever she goes. Who burned her, and what's their motive? Left on her own and abandoned in Europe, Mallory must now find out who set her up before they complete their mission.
From director Steven Soderbergh, Haywire is just more proof of the director's already visible talent. Dark comedies, crime dramas, heist movies, disaster epics, historical period pieces, Soderbergh can do it all, and he manages to put a unique, personal spin on all of them. I really liked this movie from the talented director. His familiar style is there, but it's a no-frills sort of style. Title cards keep us abreast of where Mallory has traveled to, and what better music than a fast-paced jazzy score to accompany the action? Composer David Holmes does a variation on his Ocean's 11 score, a more subtle, sinister sound. Listen to the main theme HERE. The whole soundtrack/score is surprisingly worthwhile, appropriate in a quirky sort of way. It's a small-scale spy story -- somewhat similar to the Bourne movies -- that feels familiar with a 'been there, done that' quality, but Soderbergh and his cast are so good at what they do, you don't even notice. It's too good of a movie.
Appearing in her first starring role, Carano does not disappoint as the vengeful Mallory. There are too few female action stars out there -- legitimate ones that an audience can buy -- and Carano certainly has that potential to fill the void. Basically, don't expect her to do any romantic comedies anytime soon...although that could be interesting. This isn't a part that requires her to be a big, showy performer. It's a subtle, quiet performance that relies on intensity and few words. Most importantly, Carano is incredibly believable in the part. As an athlete/MMA fighter, she's quite capable, something she gets to show off in her handful of hardcore fight scenes. She does all of her own stunts (that I could see), and also important, more than holds her own in the fight scenes. Fight sequences between a man and a woman can look forced and stagey, but not here. A welcome addition to the action genre, I look forward to seeing where Carano goes from here as an actress. Incredibly talented and one of the sexiest, seductive spies ever.
It is a testament to Soderbergh's talent and reputation that countless actors/actresses want to work with, as is the case here. Haywire features a handful of smaller performances from some not small names and not a one disappoints. McGregor gets the most screentime as Kenneth, Mallory's employer and former boyfriend/lover, and makes the most of his supporting part. Channing Tatum plays Aaron, a fellow agent/operative who's worked with Mallory in the past and is now trying to piece things together. Michael Douglas is nicely cast as Coblenz, a government higher-up who hired Kenneth for some off the books work, and Antonio Banderas is appropriately mysterious as Rodrigo, a key part of the mission and deception. In a brutally efficient part, rising star Michael Fassbender again shows he's capable of bigger and bigger things, playing Paul, an Irish source for Mallory. Bill Paxton plays John Kane, Mallory's father, who knows what his daughter is up to, constantly hoping she leaves the business.
For better or worse, some of those performances are there for Carano's Mallory to beat the crap out of. With her mixed martial arts background, Carano leads the charge in the action department. That no-frills, brutal style is reflected in these fight scenes, one with Tatum and Fassbender each, among some other quality action. These are fights that leave the viewer hurting, and Soderbergh wisely shoots it without the frenetic editing. We see the fights, see the individual moves, all of them done so quickly they're almost a blur. Even better, no music is played over these scenes, all of the focus on the brutal hand-to-hand combat. This is where Carano shines, a physical presence who can stand toe-to-toe with her male counterparts. The sequences are so well done there's almost a dark beauty to it all, so good it makes you marvel at what's going on.
Above all else, that's what this flick is; an action movie. A chase through Barcelona, and later Mallory fleeing a SWAT team in Dublin are criminally simplistic. It isn't lots of quick cutting and crazy out of this world explosions and pyrotechnics, just one person on the run and/or chasing someone. Holmes's jazzy score plays over this portion that bounces back and forth between color and black and white photography. Stylish without being overdone, just enough to call attention to itself without being overly aggressive. The story itself is half flashback, half current time, and while they're explained, the betrayals and double crosses are almost unnecessary. From Barcelona to Dublin, upstate New York to the New Mexico desert, Haywire starts off at a sprint and never slows down at just 93 minutes. Simply put, a professionally made, beautifully choreographed espionage/spy thriller that is well worth a watch.
Haywire <---trailer (2012): ***/****
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)







