Duplicity

How far can charm take a movie? A story, an actor, a soundtrack, they can all have charm, but to what point? Usually it's a jumping off point to at least liking a movie, and hopefully somewhere in the process, you like something more. Thanks to a misleading trailer, I watched 2009's Duplicity, thinking I was getting a light espionage mystery relying on the charm and star power of two bankable stars. Even charm -- or lack of -- could save this one.

Two former intelligence agents, Ray (Clive Owen) from MI6 and Claire (Julia Roberts) from the CIA, have a bit of a history together...a checkered one at that. Several years ago in Dubai, Claire drugged Ray and took some valuable information he had hidden away. Now they're meeting up again but under different circumstances and different emotions. For one, they've fallen for each other, well, sort of, if they can trust each other. Wanting to retire to a life of luxury, they've decided to go into corporate espionage, working from the inside as two warring corporations (run by rivals Paul Giamatti and Tom Wilkinson) do battle over a new product that could revolutionize the market with billions of dollars at stake.

For starters, the trailer for this flick definitely made it look like a light, even romantic comedy a la Spy vs. Spy with Owen and Roberts going toe to toe. Yeah, about that...not quite. It's not like that at all, and it's not even close. Instead, director Tony Gilroy (of the Bourne movies, Michael Clayton) has crafted a twisting, weaving and generally pretty dark story about a corporate espionage where everything is not what it seems. I'm not claiming the movie isn't any good because the trailer was misleading. I'm claiming the movie isn't any good because it's dull and drifting with characters who aren't even close to sympathetic territory and a story that wraps itself up in its own cleverness.

Not surprisingly, the message boards are divided as to the quality of the movie. Some claim it's stupid and boring because the story isn't linear. Then there's the posters who blindly defend it because it's smart. Can both sides be wrong and right at the same time? I resent it when holier-than-thou moviegoers claim someone doesn't like a movie because they "didn't get it." It's also mindblowingly dumb to claim a movie is dumb because you simply didn't understand it. The odd thing about Duplicity is that nothing really works, and both sides are in fact very right. The story is flashback heavy, bringing us up to date (as much as possible) with how the characters got into this spot. Then, there's the current story, Ray and Claire working from the inside. None of it is particularly interesting, and it doesn't change much over the course of a slow-moving 125 minutes.

As far as bankable stars go, it's hard to top Julia Roberts and Clive Owen. Their parts in Duplicity are lacking in so many ways, and neither looks that interested in the story or their characters. Like the story, they look bored with the proceedings. And charm? Chemistry? Yeah, I'm still looking for that. The two stars never click, their scenes lacking any real passion. Their relationship gets repetitive almost immediately, two intelligence agents who struggle with trust issues because their job requires it of them. Roberts questions Owen, Owen flips, Roberts reveals she's joking and trying to pull a fast one on them. Repeat to your desire three or four more times, the joke falling short over and over. As for Giamatti and Wilkinson, it's about what you'd expect. They're playing themselves in extended cameos, neither given a chance to do anything.

More than a few times during the slowly developing story I was close to bailing, but I stuck with it and was at least partially rewarded with the ending. It features a twist that works in terms of the story and characters, but also is surprisingly entertaining and unique. It is far from a happy twist either, adding a dark element to the already pretty dark proceedings. Not enough to recommend the movie, but enough to say 'stick with it' if you're struggling mightily to make it through like I did.

Duplicity <---trailer (2009): */****

Killer Elite (2011)

Not to be confused with Sam Peckinpah's 1975 flick The Killer Elite -- a mess of a movie but entertaining -- came 2011's Killer Elite. See, they dropped the 'The' to help us out. Throwing me for a loop even more was that the stories sounded somewhat similar. The more recent Killer Elite looked pretty generic to me, but I've been in a bit of a slump at Netflix lately so I thought I'd give it a try. Not a classic, but it was much better than I anticipated.

It's 1980 and after a mission doesn't go off quite as planned, mercenary Danny Bryce (Jason Statham) decides to leave the business and heads home to Australia. A year later, he finds out that his old partner, Hunter (Robert De Niro), is being held prisoner for not completing a high-paying but risky job. Danny takes the job on to save his friend. Working for a Middle Eastern sheikh, Danny must avenge the deaths of the deposed sheikh's three sons, the deaths coming at the hands of SAS (British Special Forces) agents. He must not only kill them, but get taped confessions in the process. With some help from his former team, Danny goes about finding them, but he isn't privy to the whole scenario. Waiting for him is a former SAS agent with a shadowy past, Spike (Clive Owen), who will do his best to protect his former partners too.

Based on the novel The Feather Men by Ranulph Fiennes, 'Elite' is supposedly based on real-life events. The Feather Men were a group of mercenary vigilantes who did all sorts of shady things, most of them helping protect others from killers and murderers. Now whether it's true or not is one thing. Take it's honesty however you want it -- it is certainly possible -- but what surprised me is how much I liked the movie. Set in 1980, it has the distinct feel of a 1980s action movie. No frills, no wasted efforts, and little to no sense of humor. All the characters aren't black and white, but shades of gray, and the world is one nasty place where everyone is in it for themselves. There are some twists toward the end that work pretty well, but as far as action movies go, it rises above the majority of those released recently.

This may sound odd concerning an action movie, but I liked the look and feel of 'Elite.' Director Gary McKendry -- in his first feature film -- does a great job of setting things up. He shot the movie on-location in Wales, England and Australia, and it doesn't have that generic look of 'been there, seen that.' With a story set in 1980, it actually feels like 1980 whether it be the clothes, the bad hair cuts, or even the throwback cars that make the chases that much more interesting. Throw in a solid score from Reinhold Heil and Johnny Klimek -- seemingly channeling Hans Zimmer's Inception score at times -- and you've got all the makings of a real winner.

With all those shadowy good/bad guys, McKendry certainly must have had some fun casting. All the sudden, it feels like Jason Statham is in every movie hitting theaters, but I'm a fan, and I'm okay with that. His steely-eyed, cold mercenary is what Statham does best. He glares and sneers, growls his lines, and when needed kicks/punches/shoots anyone in his way. Like some of his other movies though, it isn't mindless fight scenes repeated one after another. The fights have something to do with a...wait for it...story! As his SAS opponent, Clive Owen again shows he can be an action star. He's a great actor, but with roles like this that allow him to have some fun, he doesn't disappoint. Rocking an epic mustache, Owen's Spike is an enforcer of sorts for what the book dubbed 'the Feather Men.' We learn very little about him or his background other than that he's extremely capable and a highly dangerous man.

And then's there Robert De Niro.....freaking De Niro! It's great to see him play more mainstream, commercial roles too. Now are these especially good parts? No, not in the least. Playing Hunter, Danny's mentor and former partner, De Niro isn't exactly phoning it in, but it's close. He has some great one-liners and does have a good give-and-take with Statham. It's really more of a cameo than anything as he disappears for long stretches. Other worthwhile parts go to Dominic Purcell as Davies, the hot-headed Welshman (with handlebar mustache, epic sideburns, nasty, greasy hair), and Aden Young as Meier, the quiet killer, two former members of Danny's team now working with him once again. Star of TV's Chuck, Yvonne Strahovski plays Anne, the love interest that Danny must protect when threatened. Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje has a good part too as Agent, Danny's link for jobs and missions around the world.

Struggling in theaters -- making around $25 million -- and receiving mixed to negative reviews, Killer Elite is probably doomed to the $5 bin of movies at Wal-Mart. It's too bad because while not a classic, it is very watchable and I enjoyed it. Maybe it's that throwback feel to 1980s action movies or a solid cast working so well together, but I'd recommend this one. It isn't the tongue in cheek, over the top action movie that trailers and commercials presented it as. Cool globe-trotting cast, great action, and a solid and possibly true story.

Killer Elite <---trailer (2011): ***/****

The International

Paranoia is a funny thing when it comes to utilizing that fear as a storytelling technique.  It goes both ways. It can show a genuine, real fear of someone afraid of something bigger than them trying to take them down. Second, it can also illustrate a character's loss of sanity and reality as their life crumbles around them. When handled correctly, it can be as scary or frightening as a more obvious scare from a horror or thriller movie, 2009's The International a prime example of it.

Since the end of World War II, certain large shadowy groups dominated movies as the ever-present but rarely seen enemy. It went from Soviet Russia and the KGB to American organizations like the CIA and then in the 1970s and 1980s assassins and terrorists. They were obvious villains, perfect for that type of story that required bad guys to be mysterious yet still appropriately evil. Now in the 21st century, it's a new villain on the street, banking, big business and shadowy corporations trying to rake in billions of dollars. What works so well with those damned evil bankers in The International is that they're more evil than you'd ever think. When cash is on the line, watch out.

For two years, Interpol agent Louis Salinger (Clive Owen) and New York assistant district attorney Ella Whitman (Naomi Watts) have worked on a case that will hopefully take down the shady International Bank of Business and Credit. The IBBC is rumored to be involved in a mult-billion dollar deal with an Italian arms dealer, and something doesn't add up. But through years of investigation, Salinger and Whitman always seem to hit a dead end, including recently several key witnesses turning up dead. As the bodies continue to drop, Louis and Ella begin to think they've been noticed by the wrong people. With pressure from above to shut down their case, time is running out.

I remember clearly this political, very current events thriller hitting theaters and landing with a dull thud. Reviews were mixed, and maybe the story of evil banking and big business corporations hit too close to home for audiences as The International made just $25 million in theaters. All I can think having watched it now, maybe it was just too smart of a movie. Think of a more reality based Bourne movie, and you've got this flick. It is a somewhat cold movie, but it reflects the reality of the story with these gigantic banks/corporations coldly going about its business, collateral damage be damned.

It hits a lot on the ever-growing paranoia that someone is watching you, pulling the strings to make you do what they need or want you to do. Owen's Salinger has been on the case for years and has become obsessed with the increasing feeling of being followed or tracked wherever he goes. With billions of dollars on the line, one life doesn't mean much to these people sitting in their lavish, decorated offices. Based in some reasonable feeling of reality (for movies at least), The International is dark, cynical, and perfectly appropriate for 2009. The ending is a whopper of a downer, and to be fair, it could have gone further if it wanted. As is, the ending feels like a punch to the gut as one man realizes that he's just that...one man against the world.

For a smart, stylish and sophisticated political thriller, who better to star than the smart, stylish and sophisticated British actor Clive Owen? He is quickly becoming one of my favorite actors currently in movies, and this is just one more above average, very solid part for him. His Salinger is driven to the point of pure obsession, not really caring what happens to himself as long as he closes the case in the end. Owen is that rare actor who can do drama and action, handling both adeptly well, holding his own in a run and gun shootout (more on that later) or an intense interrogation scene where his deep voice feels like it echoes off the walls. Watts makes the most of her part as the assistant DA who ends up being more of a tag-along to Owen than anything else. Also worth mentioning are Armin-Mueller Stahl and Ulrich Thomsen as IBBC executives, and Felix Solis and Jack McGee as two NYPD detectives helping on the case.

Yes, this is a smart, well thought out, well developed thriller. But don't for a second think this movie will be dull. It has one of the great action set pieces I've seen in recent years as Owen's Salinger and Solis' detective follow an IBBC hit man (Brian O'Byrne in a great supporting part) into the Guggenheim Museum in New York City. For starters, the shootout is choreographed like an action sequence should be, quick and hard-hitting but still coherent and not edited to the point where its impossible to follow. Two, it's unique. Set up action scenes in recognizable places/landmarks and you've got a winner. This is a doozy. It's an underrated, globe-trotting thriller that probably won't put a smile on your face, but with all the lowest common denominator dreck out there, it's nice to see a smart action movie like this one.

The International <---trailer (2009): ***/****

King Arthur

Few stories have resonated through the centuries like the legend of King Arthur. There are some who question whether he actually existed or if this knight was just the stuff of legends passed down through the years.  However you want to interpret the person -- fictional or real -- the names instantly ring a bell when mentioned.  There's Arthur, Lancelot, Guinevere, the Round Table, and all Arthur's noble knights.  So how do you make a movie about a person/character who may or may not be real with little in the way of concrete information existing on him? Here's a doozy for you. Do the best you can, and fill in any necessary blanks with battle scenes.

That's basically 2004's King Arthur which claims to tell the most accurate account of the Arthurian legend. One of the biggest issues surrounding Arthur is when did he actually live?  Was he around in the Middle Ages and the Crusades searching for the Holy Grail? Was he around near the fall of the Roman Empire in the fifth and sixth centuries?  Directed by Antoine Fuqua (Training Day, Tears of the Sun), this action-packed historical epic goes with the second premise and does a fair share of rewriting when it comes to the legend.  This is not your grandparent's King Arthur with a romantic view of a vicious, incredibly dark historical time.  It's down and dirty, and everyone is at risk.

After serving a 15-year term as a protector of Britain, half-Roman, half-Briton Knight Arthur (Clive Owen) is ready to go home to Rome.  His men, Sarmatian men enlisted as Roman soldiers, similarly want to return home after many years of service while seeing their fellow knights drop one by one. With their release coming though, they are enlisted for one more dangerous mission, a trek into Woad territory (natives trying to expel the Romans) where a Roman family's villa stands.  Bring them back and they will be free. Arthur convinces his men to go along on the nearly suicidal mission, but even he doesn't know what awaits them.  The Woads wait in ambush for them, but news drifts down from the north.  A Saxon army (led by Stellan Skarsgard) is marching south, killing everything in its path.  Arthur and his knights must now band together with the Woads (blue paint warrior Keira Knightley leading) to not only accomplish their mission, but somehow survive and get home.

Historical epics are right up my alley, I'll give just about anything a try.  But with an action-heavy director like Fuqua and producer Jerry Bruckheimer in charge, you're going to get a ridiculously action-heavy movie that's short on story.  How often can you say that for a movie that runs 138 minutes? There is a ton of potential here because of the money clearly spent in getting the movie made.  The cast is impressive, the action is on a huge scale, Hans Zimmer's musical score appropriately epic, and the story is the stuff of legend no matter what pretensions the movie has about being the most accurate telling of Arthur's story.  But with all that said, it's a mess of a movie overall.  An exciting, interesting mess, but still a mess.

I'm not an Arthur aficionado who will complain about the mangling of the legend's story, but this pushes even beyond my basic knowledge of the story.  It doesn't have to be the romantic portrayal of Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table, but some of the choices here were just odd.  Arthur's remaining Knights serving their 15-year tour of duty for Rome are Sarmatians, a people from Eastern Europe with an Iranian background.  That's fine, but they all look very British.  Guinevere is a Woad, a Briton barbarian by all accounts who is an expert with a long bow and fights alongside the men.  By the by, Knightley in a skimpy leather battle attire is never a bad thing.  Merlin (Stephen Dillane) is not a magician, but a Woad medicine man who looks like a barbarian heathen. Skarsgard sleepwalks through his performance, and Til Schweiger is laughably bad as his son, the also-evil Saxon warrior. Now I'm not sure what was or wasn't accurate -- history is always open for interpretation -- but this one just went too far for me.

What does work is the portrayal of Arthur and his knights, mostly because the actors playing the parts are so talented, not because these individual parts are well-written.  Owen is a suitable Arthur, a commander who is not like his men but has earned their respect through his leadership and in battle.  His Knights include shifty and intelligent Lancelot (Ioan Gruffudd), expert bowmen, falconer and scout Tristan (Mads Mikkelsen), quiet but capable Gawain (Joel Edgerton), young hopeful Galahad (Hugh Dancy), boorish, brutish fighter Bors (Ray Winstone), and ferocious man of few words Dagonet (Ray Stevenson). As a fan of men on a mission stories, I was a sucker for this part of the story, and all of the characters left an impression on me, especially Gruffudd, Mikkelsen, and Winstone.  I would have loved to see a story that focused more on these characters as opposed to such a large-scale story, but overall they are the best part of King Arthur.

Finishing the movie, I was more than a little surprised to find out it had a PG-13 rating.  This movie is VIOLENT.  We're not taking Braveheart violence, but it's close.  Battle scenes are incredibly graphic with blood spurts, decapitations, limbs being hacked off, and countless uses of axes, knives, spears, arrows impacting and tearing bodies apart.  All that said, the action is top-notch.  If anything it's too good and too much.  A showdown between a huge Saxon patrol and Arthur's small crew on an iced over lake especially stands out as memorable. The last battle is almost 40 minutes long and becomes tedious.  It's well-handled with CGI kept to a minimum (always a positive), and the action is done on an impressive scale, but it all becomes too much after the 98th stabbing or beheading.  There are only so many ways to see a man die.

King Arthur <---trailer (2004): ** 1/2 /****

Children of Men

When talking about movies and books, one thing my Mom has always been a fan of is dystopian stories like 1984, Fahrenheit 451, The Road, I Am Legend, and any number of other ones.  Well, the like for books about the end of the world or a world about to die rubbed off on me.  Like any genre, these flicks follow a formula that can get repetitive and dull, but when handled right everything clicks into place.  I remember thinking 2006's Children of Men looked like a good movie, but just never got around to seeing it (I notice that trend a lot with movies I want to see). Well, I caught up with it, and it was worth the wait.

Watching this movie, I had that feeling you get every so often when checking a movie out for the first time.  It's 40, 45 minutes in, story is moving along nicely, the characters are interesting, and the setting unique and entertaining, even thought-provoking.  So you sit back and think 'Hey, I really like this movie...I hope they don't mess it up.'  Well, director Alfonso Cuaron didn't mess it up.  This is a gem of a picture, a movie that struggled in theaters but will almost certainly become a cult favorite in the coming years.  It's got everything going for it, and as I write this five days after watching it, I like the movie more now than I did right after. How often can you say that?

In the year 2027, the world is slowly crumbling as the remaining population continues to deal with an unexplainable situation that has made the world sterile.  A child hasn't been born in 18 years, and the Earth is dying a slow death with no one to step in as the next generation.  A somewhat well-to-do government worker, Theo (Clive Owen), is approached by his ex-wife, Julian (Julianne Moore), who needs help. With the underground movement she's involved with, Julian needs to transport a young black girl, Kee (Clare-Hope Ashitey), out of the country. Still tortured by his past, Theo somewhat unwilling agrees to help, but quickly realizes he's stepped into something bigger.  Somehow, some way, Kee is pregnant, and there are some who want to use the teenage girl for personal gain.  All that stands in their way is a stubborn, resolute Theo.

I'm going to start by saying more movies should be made this way.  Nothing gets sacrificed at the expense of making something else stronger or better.  Cuaron establishes this premise and does just enough to let us know as viewers what has happened without going overboard on detail.  No reason is given for the world's infertility, and none is really needed.  It's happened. Deal with it.  There are allusions to the rest of the world being gone, countries destroying themselves through in-fighting and chaos.  There are pockets of humanity left, but can they hold out?  Who knows for sure, but we know that Great Britain is trudging on, struggling through what the world has become.  And in under 2 hours, Cuaron creates this incredible world, a place where England is the country we know, but somehow it isn't.  It's recognizable, and at times like a completely different planet.

Having seen a grand total of ONE of his movies, I can say that Cuaron is an incredibly talented director.  Lost amid the great story and interesting characters is a beautifully shot, incredible looking movie.  In the age of ultra-editing and choppy cuts through everything, he goes against the grain.  Several times through the movie, he uses long uncut shots that are hard to fathom.  We're talking shots that go on for minutes without a single cut, and not dialogue minutes, action minutes as Owens' Theo walks through downtown, or drives through a forest, or most impressively, maneuvers through a war zone.  Cuaron's camera follows the action in these incredible shots that must have been nearly impossible to set up with camera and crew, cast and stuntmen, explosions and gunfire.  Ambitious to even tackle or attempt shots like these, the director nails them again and again, especially the finale as Theo and Kee navigate through a war zone, a scene that has to be seen to be believed.

So the movie's all crazy cool camerawork and no heart, right?  That would be a big N-O.  I loved the cast, from Owens as the star to some great parts that amount to extended cameos.  Clive Owens is one of the more underrated stars in movies right now, and on top of that, he's ridiculously cool.  His Theo is the perfect anti-hero here, a man thrust into a position he wants nothing to do with but realizes he has to do so.  He's dealing with past demons that at times can cripple him, but he must overcome.  As for the rest of the cast, Cuaron certainly keeps you on your toes.  You never know who or when someone might be dispatched.  Moore is solid as Theo's ex-wife, an idealist who wants to right wrongs, Chiwetel Ejiofor as Luke, Julian's possibly treacherous right hand man, Ashitey as young, pregnant Kee, Danny Huston as a source of Theo's also working in the government, Pam Ferris as a former nurse working as Kee's protector, and Peter Mullan as Syd, a corrupt soldier who will look the other way for some cash.

And then there's a part from somebody called Michael Caine, a favorite here at 'JHP.' I could have sworn Caine was nominated for a Best Supporting Actor Oscar, but maybe I'm confusing movies.  Anyways, he at least deserved a nomination. It is a small part over two extended scenes -- maybe 15 or 20 minutes all told -- that shows what that caliber of actor can do with little screen time.  He plays Jasper, a hippie, pot-growing friend of Theo's who has come to terms with the end of the world and plans to enjoy his last years on Earth, laws, government and police be damned.  It is the type of part that makes you remember a movie for those little touches it adds to make it that much better, even if it is only a little bit.  That's this movie.  Lots of little things working together to form a gem of a finished product.

Children of Men <---trailer (2006): ****/****