Larry Crowne

It's pretty easy to see why 2011's Larry Crowne was a disappointment in theaters and reviewed less than favorably by many critics. It doesn't deliver a huge, high-arcing message, doesn't tell us anything about the human race or society. The performances aren't groundbreaking, and the story doesn't explore any new territory. What is it then? Just a good, old-fashioned (if sometimes sappy and/or sentimental) story with likable characters. Every so often, that's not a bad thing to stumble across.

A 20-year veteran of the Navy and a divorcee, 40-something Larry Crowne (Tom Hanks) is fired from his blue collar job because he doesn't have a college degree. He's completely taken back by the news, never realizing it was an issue. Struggling to find a job, Larry really only has one alternative left open to him. He enrolls in the local community college, taking several classes, including a speech class taught by Mercy Tainot (Julia Roberts), a professor burned out by the profession, and an econ class taught by Dr. Matsutani (George Takei). Surrounded by a much younger student body, Larry is most definitely out of his comfort zone. But as he adjusts, he begins to find that it's never too late to change in life.

Yes, that could be sappiest, most sugary thing I've ever written in 800-plus reviews. But you know what? That's the whole movie wrapped up in one quick sentence. 'Crowne' is about the people. It is a personal story based in the little people on their day-to-day lives. We see the good and bad, and more often than not, the individual rising out of the bad situation and moving toward the good. It's refreshing to see movies like this. There's no violence or sex or twists or turns or betrayals. Director/producer/writer/star Hanks does a great job putting it all together. Sure, there are bigger things at work -- Larry's struggles at the job search are certainly very timely with current economic struggles -- but when it comes down to it, this is a story about people looking for happiness. 

Now that said, I do see the objections some viewers and critics had with this movie. It is so ridiculously sugary sweet and sappy that any diabetics watching should be careful. Larry attends a community college that only exists in the movies with administration leading tai chi classes in the quad, stoner kids who hang with the jocks, that sort of thing. He meets one student, Talia (Gugu Mbatha-Raw), the free spirit and insanely adorable college girl who won't be tied down by society's conventions. Talia invites Larry to ride with her "scooter gang," where he also meets Dell (Wilmer Valderrama), her possibly jealous but just downright nice boyfriend. There's also Cedric the Entertainer and Taraji P. Henson as his intensely stereotypical neighbors, identified in one review as the "magical Negro" characters. In any other movie, I might have called Hanks out, but nope, not this one. This movie doesn't have a mean bone in its body.

Two stars who worked together previously in 2007's Charlie Wilson's War, Hanks and Roberts team up again here in a much lighter story.  Neither star has quite the star power they did in the 1990s or even early in the 2000s, but it's still Tom Hanks and Julia Roberts for goodness sake! Hanks brings his usual easygoing tone and manner to his part as Larry. Partially because it's Hanks and partially because the character is so sympathetic and a genuinely nice, good guy, you can't help but root for him. Roberts is given the darker of the two parts, a jaded, more than a little cynical professor who questions what she's doing as a teacher. Their scenes together have an easy flow that only two pros like this could show. And I add this as the shallow guy, if any of my professors ever looked like Julia Roberts, I'd have gotten an A+....just saying.

Behind the camera for just the second time with a feature film, Hanks fills out his cast with some solid names including those already mentioned earlier, Takei especially having some fun as the econ professor with a devilish laugh. Bryan Cranston does what he does best playing a sketchy, cocky son of a you know what, Roberts' husband who's fallen on some self-imposed hard times. Pam Grier has a small part as Frances, a fellow member of the faculty and friend of Mercy's. I feel safe saying this isn't a great movie, and who knows? Maybe it isn't even a good movie. I can say there's a comfort with this movie. Just enjoy this one and don't overthink it.

Larry Crowne <---trailer (2011): ***/****

Escape from L.A.

If you're going to do a sequel, you might as well commit and do it right, right? You'd think so, or at least that's usually my hope when I stumble across a sequel -- especially an unnecessary one. That is partially why I avoided John Carpenter's 1996 sequel Escape from L.A.. The 1981 original doesn't need a sequel so somewhat skeptical, I dove in.

It's 2013 and the United States is very much a dystopian country still, even 16 years since Special Forces soldier turned criminal Snake Plissken (Kurt Russell) rescued the President in New York. Now though, an immensely powerful earthquake has ripped Los Angeles apart, the city now an island destination for any "undesirables." Now a new religious fanatic (Cliff Robertson) has become the President, and his extremist daughter (A.J. Langer) has hijacked an item that could destroy the world, retreating to L.A. to work with fellow extremist Cuervo Jones (Georges Corraface). Snake's services are called on once more. Blackmailed and working against a deadline of death, Snake must sneak into L.A., retrieve the item, kill the daughter, and only then will he be safe. Can he pull off the impossible again?

I didn't love the original Escape from New York, but I certainly liked it. Made on a small budget, there was a certain B-movie charm to Carpenter's film. It was cheesy and ridiculous and over the top and most importantly of all, fun to watch. The dystopian setting of an America that is nothing like the country we know now is ideal, opening the door for all kinds of outlets to take a story. Carpenter and Russell worked together a handful of times over their careers, clearly enjoying making movies together. Russell liked it so much -- and playing Snake too -- that he worked with Carpenter on writing a sequel. It was held up for years, finally coming to fruition in the mid 1990s. With that long of a wait and this much talent involved, why then is the sequel so bad?

The obvious answer is that it is basically the same movie. Sequels are fine when they add another step, a new layer to a pre-existing world and characters. But making the same movie -- quite literally -- with all the same features, characters and settings? Replacing New York with Los Angeles isn't unique or new. It's a road trip. I guess I just expected more. If you've got 15-plus years to write a sequel, couldn't you manage something better than this?  It bombed in theaters, not making a profit, so I'm not the only one with complaints. The repeat of New York's success is one thing, but this 'Escape' has too much really awful CGI, too many similar characters, and did I mention the almost identical story?

What carries both movies on different levels is Kurt Russell. 'New York' is just a genuinely good B-movie that's aided and boosted by Russell. 'L.A.' is basically watchable only because of Russell. Snake Plissken is Russell's most iconic character from a successful career, and there's nothing about him that isn't cool. Okay, check that, the odd, fetishisized leather outfit is a little much. But other than that, Snake is the perfect anti-hero. A high profile crook with a reputation, he has no regard for any authority and only goes along with the plan because his life depends on it. Yes, he growls everything he says. Yes, he makes some awfully stupid decisions. But is he cool doing it? Yes, Kurt Russell is awesome, and he's cooler than you.

While the rest of the cast and characters are pretty ridiculous, Carpenter nonetheless assembles quite a cast. Start with Robertson, having some fun taking some jabs at the religious nuts. His U.S. President is one big stereotype, hamming it up like nobody's business. Stacy Keach plays Malloy, Snake's "handler" of sorts, with Michelle Forbes as his assistant. Steve Buscemi, Bruce Campbell, Valeria Golino and Peter Fonda play just some of the eccentric nuts trying to survive in Los Angeles who Snake runs across, Buscemi and Fonda making the best impressions. Look also for Pam Grier as Hershe Las Palmas, a drag queen who Snake used to work with on other jobs. I've gotta admit though, it's a little unsettling hearing a man's voice coming from Grier's mouth.

So watching a rehash of the more enjoyable Escape from New York, there are some saving graces in this most unnecessary of sequels. The ending features a couple very cool twists, some you can see coming if you're paying attention, but enjoyable nonetheless. Was there ever any doubt Snake was going to get duped repeatedly by these morons? I think not. Cool character, cool ending, but that doesn't save the movie.

Escape from L.A. <---trailer (1996): * 1/2 /****

Jackie Brown

One of the breakout stars of 1970s movies, Pam Grier shot to fame in blaxploitation movies like Coffy and Foxy Brown. She was tough, sassy and sexy, and not surprisingly became a fan favorite. Her best performance though is an easy one to peg, Quentin Tarantino's 1997 film Jackie Brown. 

After being busted years before for transporting drugs, stewardess Jackie Brown (Grier) again finds herself in trouble with the authorities. Working for a low-level airline, Jackie is transporting large shipments of cash for an arms dealer, Ordell Robbie (Samuel L. Jackson), stationed out of Los Angeles. Not looking to do jail time and avoid probation at all costs, Jackie has to figure out what to do. The authorities (including ATF agent Michael Keaton) are pressing her, but with some help from a friendly bail bondsman, Max Cherry (Robert Forster), Jackie comes up with a complicated if hopefully successful plan to get out clean....and with a boatload of money too.

As I've mentioned before, Tarantino as a director can be a tad bit polarizing among fans. Watching his movies, I've come to be a huge fan, enjoying some movies and loving others. It's a given going in. You can expect a hip soundtrack, style in general to burn, some characters and acting you might not expect, lots, lots of dialogue and some startling violence. For Tarantino haters, this might be a good intro. At 154 minutes, it is a little long in the tooth. The dialogue is a little self-indulgent and too much, but because of the immense talents involved you go along with it. The violence is probably at an all-time low for Quentin with a story focusing more on the characters, the betrayals and the double crosses. So if you despise Tarantino, give this one a try.

More of a sex symbol in the 1970s than an actress, Grier shows that without a doubt, no question about it, she can act and do it well. Part of it is the script (based off an Elmore Leonard novel), but this is a great character. Grier puts her own spin on it. Jackie is backed into a corner with nothing left to lose at this point. She's looking at minimum at probation, more likely serving jail time. With no ace up her sleeve, she plays everyone around her -- except for one person -- to her own benefit. The catch? We're rooting for her. She's likable (okay, I thought so). We want her to succeed. Oh, and just an FYI, at 48 years old....still sexy.  Just saying.

What I don't understand with Tarantino haters is that whatever you dislike about him personally or his style as a director, he consistently gets original, unique, and entertaining performances from his cast. You know what's a good sign of a deep cast? Read the plot synopsis, and it doesn't even mention Robert De Niro. Not bad when a movie uses De Niro as a supporting part, involved but not essential to the story. He plays Louis Gara, an ex-con working with Jackson's Ordell, underplaying his part to the point you question if he's acting. Bridget Fonda plays Melanie, one of Ordell's girlfriends, spending most of her screentime in a bikini and stoned out of her mind. Keaton plays Keaton, a kinda finicky, eccentric ATF agent while Chris Tucker has a small part as  Beaumont, one of Ordell's "associates."

Right up there with Grier though, I thought the best performance was from Robert Forster as Max Cherry, a bail bondsman with 20 years of experience and some 15,000 bonds written. When he meets Grier's Jackie, he's instantly drawn to her and ends up getting involved in her scheme like he never planned. I don't know what it was about the performance, but I liked it. Like most of the acting here, it's underplayed and subtle. Max has a bright spot in his life when Jackie enters. His voice mail message checking in with her says it all, a rambling stream of thought providing every single one of his contact numbers. It's a human part amidst all the quick, fast-paced dialogue, just one aging guy looking for something in his life. Oh, and Samuel L. Jackson is intimidating and an all-around great bad guy.

Add another win for Tarantino with this one. Similar in some ways to his other films, it is also very different. However you feel about him though, it is well-written and the performances keep you interested from beginning to end. Not a bad follow-up to Pulp Fiction at all.

Jackie Brown <---trailer (1997): ***/****