Well, the buzz on 2015's Mad Max: Fury Road has been ridiculously, uniformly, amazingly positive. Critically and with audiences, it is finding its spot in the summer blockbuster world. I really wanted to see it, but then when people were absolutely RAVING about it, I N-E-E-D-E-D to see it. So here we are. It took me a couple weeks, but away with one of the best movies of the year!
Years into the future, the world has torn itself apart, the Earth seemingly on the brink of total destruction. The land is a scorched wasteland where water, food and all the necessities for survival are in incredibly short supply. On this post-apocalyptic, scorched wasteland, a drifter named Max (Tom Hardy) is on his own, an armored car to his name with little else. He's captured by the enforcers of a brutal ruler, Immortan Joe (Hugh Keays-Byrne), and kept as a prisoner and universal blood donor, but this isn't the end for this quiet drifter. Immortan Joe's brutal dictatorship is up in the air though as one of his sub-commanders, Imperator Furiosa (Charlize Theron), has gone rogue. The Imperator has hijacked one of Joe's armored convoys and stole five of his beautiful women breeders and is on the run. Immortan Joe rolls out his entire armored army and tears across the desert in pursuit. Along for the ride in his role as blood donor? Max, waiting for his chance to break free.
Holy crazy movie. It's been three days since I saw this movie, and I'm still recovering! Oh, totally in a good way if there was any confusion. Director George Miller directed the three Mad Max movies from the late 1970s and into the 1980s, the trilogy starring Mel Gibson as Max. Miller has stayed busy in the years since, but he returns here to put an incredible new spin on a familiar character and franchise. And that's my rule. If you're going to reboot a franchise, DO....IT....RIGHT. This film takes the elements that made the original Mad Max so popular (some in cult classic fashion), throws it in the blender, adds some new extreme elements -- I would say mind-inducing drugs -- and tears it up. As a post-apocalyptic story, as an action movie, as a gigantically successful blockbuster, 'Fury' is unlike just about any movie you've ever seen and very much for the better.
As a visual medium, in storytelling technique, in its frenetic action, Miller creates a world. His post-apocalyptic world is bizarre and trippy and unsettling and deranged and completely amazing to watch. Whole studies and papers could be written about the visual look of the world. Immortan Joe wears a bizarre suit that encapsulates its lecherous body while also favoring a mask covering his teeth that gives him a predatory look. His army of War Boys wear black pants, no shirts, have shaved heads and are painted an immaculate white. The surviving peasants wear rags, desperately awaiting handouts from Joe and his forces. It's more than that though. It's how they talk, how they interact, the culture we're introduced to, the little excruciatingly cool details. Not everything is spelled out, not everything is explained, but the trip into this drugged out, sand-ravaged world where death is incredibly cheap and even trivial, it all works. All those little things come together to work in perfect fashion, like puzzle pieces clicking into place.
So if you ask me, Tom Hardy can do no wrong. I've loved just about every role he's done, but this one is interesting. This is his first personal starring franchise as he's signed on for several more Mad Max movies, supposedly four. What's remarkable about this part? He says virtually nothing the entire movie other than one late monologue, and that's all strategy and planning, nothing personal about him. This is a performance of presence and owning the screen without much in the way of dialogue. We know little about Hardy's Max Rockatansky other than that he has hallucinations of his daughter, which clicks with the original trilogy. We know virtually nothing about him and are given even less as the money goes along. What are we left with? A man hell-bent on survival even as he's thrust into a horrific battle of life and death that he has nothing to do with. I hope the future Mad Max movies delve into Max's character and background more, but in the meantime, his presence and on-screen persona are more than enough.
Let's be honest though. This movie could have been called Mad Max and Imperator Furiosa: Fury Road. The movie's success hinges on Hardy and Theron. There just aren't many female action heroes, and Theron's Furiosa is a doozy of a success. Hair cropped close to her head, black makeup over her eyes and forehead, one-armed, Furiosa is a true film badass. She's had enough of working for Immortan Joe and steals his women, escapes and plans to resettle in the Green Place, where she grew up. It's cool to see a strong female action hero, on the same level as her male counterpart. There just isn't much dialogue for Max and Furiosa to bond, but through their horrific trials on the run, they do form an uneasy, somewhat trusting partnership. An excellent one-two punch in lead performances.
A cast member of the original Mad Max movie from 1979, Keays-Byrne is an incredible villain, an imposing and intimidating presence who's visual look is as terrifying as the character itself. His rivals turned partners are named the Bullet Farmer (Richard Carter) and the People Eater (John Howard), their armies of enforcers along for the ride. Representing the War Boys is Nux (Nicholas Hoult), a young fighter so desperately seeking and fighting for Immortan Joe's approval. With names like Toast the Knowing, the Splendid Angharad, Capable, the Dag and Cheedo the Fragile, Joe's breeding women include Zoe Kravitz, Rosie Huntington-Whiteley, Riley Keough, Abbey Lee and Courtney Eaton. Also look for Nathan Jones as Rictus, Joe's muscle-bound son, always by his side ready to dispatch any enemies.
The style and world is awesome. Hardy and Theron are quite memorable. Blah blah blah. This is one of the most ridiculously entertaining, hugely stylized action movies EVER. E-V-E-R. What's special though is that Miller and Co. appeared to have actually filmed much of the action sequences. Novel concept, ain't it? Sure, there's CGI sprinkled here and there, but a majority of the action was filmed with real cars and real people doing some crazy, goofy stunts. This is a 2-hour car chase. That's it and that's all. We get little glimpses of the people, who they are and the world they live in, but this is a 2-hour car chase. Process that. It's crazy and high-reaching when you think about what Miller set out to do and then execute the plan so strongly. Max, Furiosa and the breeders end up on the War Rig, a tricked out, armored oil tanker hauling ass across the desert with warring caravans of scavengers and marauders hot on their trail. The long shots of these murdering scavengers tearing across the desert are beautiful and simple and straightforward, always keeping the viewer apprised of where the action is and how it's developing.
It's hard to put into words how visceral, how adrenaline-pumping these scenes really are. There's just this manic energy on display with each passing scene. As Tyrese said in Fast/Furious 6, it's vehicular warfare....on steroids. Immortan Joe's forces hunt them down with brutal intensity, cars and motorcycles and trucks chasing them across the desert. The action is one thing though. The execution is another. Joe's forces ride into battle to War Boys riding on trucks playing snare drums. One man wearing red footy pajamas is strapped to a truck as he plays a three-pronged guitar that is also...a flamethrower. What? WHAT?!? The score -- heavy drums, heart-pounding throughout -- from Dutch multi-instrumentalist Junkie XL is perfectly suited to the action, adding more energy and chaos (because that's what it needed) to the already energetic, chaotic, frenetic violence. Give the soundtrack a listen HERE. Watch the movie for yourself. It's better seen several times than read in a review.
What a movie. WHAT A MOVIE. A gusty script from Miller, Brendan McCarthy and Nick Lathouris takes so many chances with its sparse dialogue and almost complete lack of characterization. The formula they used instead is pretty perfect. It took me a couple days to really process this one, but I liked and loved it more with each passing day. So freaking good. It shouldn't work this well -- just shouldn't -- but it does in all its unpredictable chaos.
Mad Max: Fury Road (2015): ****/****
The Sons of Katie Elder
"First, we reunite, then find Ma and Pa's killer...then read some reviews."
Showing posts with label Tom Hardy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Tom Hardy. Show all posts
Friday, June 12, 2015
Thursday, March 19, 2015
The Drop
If you're looking for a solid, gritty, hard-edged crime thriller, a good place to start is author Dennis Lehane. Just some of his film adaptations include Mystic River, Gone Baby Gone, and a great read removed from the crime genre, Shutter Island. Back to basics, Lehane turned his short story 'Animal Rescue' into a feature length screenplay for 2014's The Drop. Remember it? Not many people have even heard of it.
Working at his cousin's bar in a beat-up Brooklyn neighborhood, Bob Saginowski (Tom Hardy) lives a quiet, peaceful life, a self-imposed quiet, peaceful life. He lives by himself in the house he grew up in, goes to the same church service each day and tends bar for Cousin Marv (James Gandolfini), a former small-time mobster now trying to scrape by. One day walking home from the bar, Bob hears wimpering from a closed garbage can and finds a bloodied, beaten pit bull puppy inside. He meets the owner of the garbage cans, Nadia (Noomi Rapace), and agrees to take care of the puppy until a better alternative comes along for both Bob and the displaced dog. As for the bar, it's not your ordinary bar. It is a drop bar where money carriers working for the Chechen mafia can drop off their gambling money, all of it piling up in a safe before being picked up. That's the set-up at least...until two low-level hoods walk in one night brandishing shotguns and looking for all the money they can find.
If there's a relative complaint to make about this movie...well, it's not necessarily the fault of 'Drop' itself. The issue more is that crime budgets seem to be hitting theaters at an all-time high, and most of them star Liam Neeson. I kid! I kid! I love Liam Neeson...but it's true. From Belgian director Michael Roskam, 'Drop' is an excellent flick featuring an interesting cast, well-told story and a generally somber, moody outlook on life. Calling it 'familiar' isn't necessarily accurate, but this isn't a film that breaks a ton of new ground. Don't get me wrong -- I'm giving it an easy recommendation -- but don't expect anything world-shaking.
None of this is a huge, deal-breaking criticism. I enjoyed the movie a lot and read Lehane's fleshed-out story too that was released as a novel (check it out HERE). Like the best crime thrillers, you feel thrust into this world Lehane's screenplay/story has created. It's a run-down neighborhood in Brooklyn with crime and crooks around every corner. The movie clearly does not have the most positive outlook on life. It rests on the assumption that people are generally pretty nasty, always looking out for themselves no matter the impact on others. Visually, the movie looks crowded, even claustrophobic, with scenes often shot in deep focus. It works. You feel like you're part of the scene. It is a bleak, gritty world, composer Marco Beltrami turning in a solid, mood-setting score. This is a lower middle class world, and there's nothing flashy about it.
Tom Hardy is fast becoming untouchable in my eyes. The guy finds something new with each new role, some new spin or new energy. Reading Lehane's story and knowing Hardy played the Bob character, I was intrigued, but curious in a good way. Hardy manages to make the part his own including an accent that I just can't place! This is one interesting main character. His Bob minds his own business and blends in with the scenery. Something from his past clearly hangs over his head, but we don't find out what until late. The most accurate thing I can come up with is that Hardy delivers a very human performance. Not necessarily sympathetic, but VERY human. Some little touches, some physical awkwardness, his quiet conversations, they all add up to make this a great lead character. As for Hardy, I can't wait to see what he does in the upcoming Mad Max reboot.
Leading the rest of the cast, Gandolfini is his imposing, intimidating self as Cousin Marv, the bar owner who holds quite a lot of resentment over how he lost total control of the bar. Gandolfini tragically passed away before the film was released so this was the actor's last film appearance, and while it isn't flashy, it's a key, solid supporting part. In a role that reminded me somewhat of her part in Dead Man Down, Rapace does a good job as the tortured, beaten-down woman. I think she's an above average actress, but with the Girl With the Dragon Tattoo series, she's getting typecast a lot in that wounded woman character. There's also key parts for Matthias Schoenaerts as Eric Deeds, an unbalanced local man who's a threat to all around him, and John Ortiz as Detective Torres, an investigating officer in the robbery.
So, yeah, things feel a tad familiar at times. Along with Hardy's lead performance though, the strongest aspect of 'Drop' is its mystery. You don't always know where it is going. We meet a lot of characters, a lot of situations, and though they may seem unrelated....well, they be related. If you find the story to be a touch frustrating -- it does feel like it is meandering at times -- my biggest recommendation is that you should definitely stick with it. There is a genuine twist that works so, so well in the finale because it's just there. It isn't meant to confuse or trick you, but IT WORKS. A highly recommended flick. It wasn't in theaters long and didn't make much money, but 'Drop' is definitely worth catching up with.
The Drop (2014): ***/****
Working at his cousin's bar in a beat-up Brooklyn neighborhood, Bob Saginowski (Tom Hardy) lives a quiet, peaceful life, a self-imposed quiet, peaceful life. He lives by himself in the house he grew up in, goes to the same church service each day and tends bar for Cousin Marv (James Gandolfini), a former small-time mobster now trying to scrape by. One day walking home from the bar, Bob hears wimpering from a closed garbage can and finds a bloodied, beaten pit bull puppy inside. He meets the owner of the garbage cans, Nadia (Noomi Rapace), and agrees to take care of the puppy until a better alternative comes along for both Bob and the displaced dog. As for the bar, it's not your ordinary bar. It is a drop bar where money carriers working for the Chechen mafia can drop off their gambling money, all of it piling up in a safe before being picked up. That's the set-up at least...until two low-level hoods walk in one night brandishing shotguns and looking for all the money they can find.
If there's a relative complaint to make about this movie...well, it's not necessarily the fault of 'Drop' itself. The issue more is that crime budgets seem to be hitting theaters at an all-time high, and most of them star Liam Neeson. I kid! I kid! I love Liam Neeson...but it's true. From Belgian director Michael Roskam, 'Drop' is an excellent flick featuring an interesting cast, well-told story and a generally somber, moody outlook on life. Calling it 'familiar' isn't necessarily accurate, but this isn't a film that breaks a ton of new ground. Don't get me wrong -- I'm giving it an easy recommendation -- but don't expect anything world-shaking.
None of this is a huge, deal-breaking criticism. I enjoyed the movie a lot and read Lehane's fleshed-out story too that was released as a novel (check it out HERE). Like the best crime thrillers, you feel thrust into this world Lehane's screenplay/story has created. It's a run-down neighborhood in Brooklyn with crime and crooks around every corner. The movie clearly does not have the most positive outlook on life. It rests on the assumption that people are generally pretty nasty, always looking out for themselves no matter the impact on others. Visually, the movie looks crowded, even claustrophobic, with scenes often shot in deep focus. It works. You feel like you're part of the scene. It is a bleak, gritty world, composer Marco Beltrami turning in a solid, mood-setting score. This is a lower middle class world, and there's nothing flashy about it.
Tom Hardy is fast becoming untouchable in my eyes. The guy finds something new with each new role, some new spin or new energy. Reading Lehane's story and knowing Hardy played the Bob character, I was intrigued, but curious in a good way. Hardy manages to make the part his own including an accent that I just can't place! This is one interesting main character. His Bob minds his own business and blends in with the scenery. Something from his past clearly hangs over his head, but we don't find out what until late. The most accurate thing I can come up with is that Hardy delivers a very human performance. Not necessarily sympathetic, but VERY human. Some little touches, some physical awkwardness, his quiet conversations, they all add up to make this a great lead character. As for Hardy, I can't wait to see what he does in the upcoming Mad Max reboot.
Leading the rest of the cast, Gandolfini is his imposing, intimidating self as Cousin Marv, the bar owner who holds quite a lot of resentment over how he lost total control of the bar. Gandolfini tragically passed away before the film was released so this was the actor's last film appearance, and while it isn't flashy, it's a key, solid supporting part. In a role that reminded me somewhat of her part in Dead Man Down, Rapace does a good job as the tortured, beaten-down woman. I think she's an above average actress, but with the Girl With the Dragon Tattoo series, she's getting typecast a lot in that wounded woman character. There's also key parts for Matthias Schoenaerts as Eric Deeds, an unbalanced local man who's a threat to all around him, and John Ortiz as Detective Torres, an investigating officer in the robbery.
So, yeah, things feel a tad familiar at times. Along with Hardy's lead performance though, the strongest aspect of 'Drop' is its mystery. You don't always know where it is going. We meet a lot of characters, a lot of situations, and though they may seem unrelated....well, they be related. If you find the story to be a touch frustrating -- it does feel like it is meandering at times -- my biggest recommendation is that you should definitely stick with it. There is a genuine twist that works so, so well in the finale because it's just there. It isn't meant to confuse or trick you, but IT WORKS. A highly recommended flick. It wasn't in theaters long and didn't make much money, but 'Drop' is definitely worth catching up with.
The Drop (2014): ***/****
Wednesday, September 24, 2014
Locke
Though he has worked regularly since 2001, Tom Hardy really seemed to hit his stride in 2011, starring in a string of movies that include Inception, Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, Warrior, This Means War, The Dark Knight Rises and Lawless. Next May, Hardy will even star in a Mad Max reboot. An actor and a movie star, a rare breed. Let's watch him do that dramatic thing, a movie equivalent of a one-man show, 2013's Locke.
It's quitting time at a construction site in Birmingham, England, and construction foreman and site manager Ivan Locke (Hardy) has a difficult night ahead of him. The next morning construction is scheduled to begin on one of the largest skyscrapers in the country, Locke having ramrodded the process the entire way. He has received a phone call though that could drastically change his job, his family and his life as a whole. Now as he drives from Birmingham to London to hopefully resolve the situation, everything Locke knows is now thrown for a loop. It's not a long ride in terms of distance, but for Locke? This is one ride that could take its toll on him.
Okay, let's get this out of the way. I liked this movie, liked it a lot from beginning to end. All that said, it is definitely a film that deserves some warning. 'Locke' is described as a drama (most appropriate) and a thriller (less appropriate) depending on the review you're reading. I'm going to do my best to offer no real spoilers because the development of the story is best served when you discover it as Locke does. But enough with that. What is this movie? This is a movie about a man driving on the expressway talking on his synced-up phone. That is it. That is all. He doesn't talk face-to-face with a single person. He doesn't get in a traffic accident/incident. For 84 minutes, Tom Hardy talks on the phone with a variety of people with a variety of issues. Just know that going in, and don't say you weren't forewarned.
Tom Hardy is one talented mother...well, you know what. I've written more than a few reviews of movies based on plays that remotely feel like those plays they're based on. This is about as close to a one-man play as we're going to get in a modern feature film. This is Hardy's movie from beginning to end -- a fast-moving, fast-paced 85 minutes -- as he makes the drive from Birmingham to London. There's the potential for it to derail quickly, but Hardy keeps it going at all times. You see the inner struggles, the personal demons tearing him apart as he processes a decision that he wasn't quite ready to make. The voice inflection changes as we hear calm and cool, calculated and thoughtful, upsetting and frustrated, and it can change from one to the other with a snap of his finger. At no point does it ever feel forced, the rhythm and pacing flowing smoothly from one phone call conversation to another. Wow. Just wow for Mr. Hardy, already one of my favorites and here cementing that status.
Hardy's movie, no doubt about it. He's the only person you actually see, but we do hear the conversations he's having. Listen for Olivia Colman, Ruth Wilson, Andrew Scott, Ben Daniels, Tom Holland and Bill Milner as the key voices at the other end of the line on the phone. Again, no spoilers, but it is definitely interesting to see the variety of responses and answers this small group of individuals responds to quite a trying situation. Nice voice work all around.
Replacing the stage is Hardy's Locke's car, our setting for almost the entire movie. We see Locke leave the work site and enter the car and from there, this is one car-bound movie. Director/screenplay writer Steven Knight keeps it visually interesting at all times. Told entirely at night, 'Locke' succeeds in the darkness. It's a movie that would not work in the daylight. The lights and traffic and lens flares add a nice visual dimension to the story. The camera is almost always moving, focusing on Hardy straight-on, from the side, as a peripheral almost. It may sound stupid to go into this much detail, but it is a smart, smooth style that isn't overpowering. It is a style that is content to be a quiet part of the story. Don't expect a crazy twist ending. Instead, 'Locke' has an ending that simply put, is human. It's real.
Definitely not an easy movie to like. It's not your everyday thriller or drama. Something better, something entertaining and a film that deserves some buzz.
Locke (2013): *** 1/2 /****
It's quitting time at a construction site in Birmingham, England, and construction foreman and site manager Ivan Locke (Hardy) has a difficult night ahead of him. The next morning construction is scheduled to begin on one of the largest skyscrapers in the country, Locke having ramrodded the process the entire way. He has received a phone call though that could drastically change his job, his family and his life as a whole. Now as he drives from Birmingham to London to hopefully resolve the situation, everything Locke knows is now thrown for a loop. It's not a long ride in terms of distance, but for Locke? This is one ride that could take its toll on him.
Okay, let's get this out of the way. I liked this movie, liked it a lot from beginning to end. All that said, it is definitely a film that deserves some warning. 'Locke' is described as a drama (most appropriate) and a thriller (less appropriate) depending on the review you're reading. I'm going to do my best to offer no real spoilers because the development of the story is best served when you discover it as Locke does. But enough with that. What is this movie? This is a movie about a man driving on the expressway talking on his synced-up phone. That is it. That is all. He doesn't talk face-to-face with a single person. He doesn't get in a traffic accident/incident. For 84 minutes, Tom Hardy talks on the phone with a variety of people with a variety of issues. Just know that going in, and don't say you weren't forewarned.
Tom Hardy is one talented mother...well, you know what. I've written more than a few reviews of movies based on plays that remotely feel like those plays they're based on. This is about as close to a one-man play as we're going to get in a modern feature film. This is Hardy's movie from beginning to end -- a fast-moving, fast-paced 85 minutes -- as he makes the drive from Birmingham to London. There's the potential for it to derail quickly, but Hardy keeps it going at all times. You see the inner struggles, the personal demons tearing him apart as he processes a decision that he wasn't quite ready to make. The voice inflection changes as we hear calm and cool, calculated and thoughtful, upsetting and frustrated, and it can change from one to the other with a snap of his finger. At no point does it ever feel forced, the rhythm and pacing flowing smoothly from one phone call conversation to another. Wow. Just wow for Mr. Hardy, already one of my favorites and here cementing that status.
Hardy's movie, no doubt about it. He's the only person you actually see, but we do hear the conversations he's having. Listen for Olivia Colman, Ruth Wilson, Andrew Scott, Ben Daniels, Tom Holland and Bill Milner as the key voices at the other end of the line on the phone. Again, no spoilers, but it is definitely interesting to see the variety of responses and answers this small group of individuals responds to quite a trying situation. Nice voice work all around.
Replacing the stage is Hardy's Locke's car, our setting for almost the entire movie. We see Locke leave the work site and enter the car and from there, this is one car-bound movie. Director/screenplay writer Steven Knight keeps it visually interesting at all times. Told entirely at night, 'Locke' succeeds in the darkness. It's a movie that would not work in the daylight. The lights and traffic and lens flares add a nice visual dimension to the story. The camera is almost always moving, focusing on Hardy straight-on, from the side, as a peripheral almost. It may sound stupid to go into this much detail, but it is a smart, smooth style that isn't overpowering. It is a style that is content to be a quiet part of the story. Don't expect a crazy twist ending. Instead, 'Locke' has an ending that simply put, is human. It's real.
Definitely not an easy movie to like. It's not your everyday thriller or drama. Something better, something entertaining and a film that deserves some buzz.
Locke (2013): *** 1/2 /****
Saturday, August 18, 2012
This Means War
Just try. Do something a little different. If it fails, at least you made an attempt and didn't go for the same old, same old formula. Here we are again at the romantic comedy where humor and schmaltzy love stories go to die in mediocrity. If you try, and it's a little goofy, even dumb at times, at least the effort was made. Take 2012's This Means War. Goofy? Yes. Dumb? At times. But it's fun, and it's different. I'm a cheap date. That's all I'm looking for.
Working on a case in Hong Kong, C.I.A. field agents F.D.R. (Chris Pine) and Tuck (Tom Hardy) are best friends and have been for years to the point where they're like family. FDR is a bit of a ladies man while Tuck is divorced/separated from his wife and their 7-year old son. Tuck though decides he wants more, a meaningful relationship and hits it off immediately with product tester Lauren (Reese Witherspoon) on a date set up by an online dating site. Saying goodbye to Tuck, Lauren meets FDR down the street coincidentally at a video store, and they too hit it off. It isn't long before the two CIA agents figure out they're dating the same girl. Who will get Lauren? It's spy vs. spy.
Because a last name is unnecessary, director McG (of Charlie's Angels, Terminator Salvation fame) certainly has some fun with this one. As I mentioned earlier, 'War' is goofy, dumb and even a little stupid at times, but it commits to being all those things. This is no hardcore story of CIA agents looking for love, the opening over-the-top action scene on a Hong Kong skyscraper's roof points to that. This is a world where well-trained, world class secret agents use all sorts of government software to track each other down, track a pretty girl down, monitor each others' dates. It is goofy, dumb and a little stupid at times, and that's not a bad thing. It owns up to that. No message here, no bigger picture about secret agents in love. Just two old friends going toe to toe for a girl....oh, and they're epically talented government killing machines. How can that not be enjoyable?
So as a romantic comedy on steroids, 'War' works in a lot of ways. Two of the bright young stars in Hollywood, Pine and Hardy are perfectly cast alongside each other. Their friendship of many years -- not to mention working as partners in the field -- seems genuine. They jab and mock and ridicule each other like only close friends can. They compete at everything so when they meet a girl like Witherspoon's Lauren, it's game on. The biggest laughs come from this competition, each agent trying to sabotage the other. FDR sets the sprinklers off in Tuck's loft at a romantic dinner. Tuck drills FDR with a knock-out dart from across a street as he makes a move on Lauren. Pine and Hardy are perfect together, and Witherspoon is about as adorably cute as you'd expect. She has some funny scenes with Chelsea Handler as Trish, Lauren's sister(?)/friend, confidant and adviser in love.
As for the CIA agent storyline, we get a pretty straightforward, nuts and bolts type story. FDR and Tuck are after one bad German dude, Heinrich (Til Schweiger), who is up to no good. What exactly? It's enough to know that's he up to no good, and now he's looking for revenge against these two CIA agents. Any more information would just be wasted. The action sequences are ridiculously over the top and ultra-choreographed, slow motion galore. They're the type of scenes where a car explodes when it flips because....well, cars look cool when they explode on impact. The scenes are action-packed but funny too, Tuck always needing to use FDR's pistol clips in the midst of a chaotic gun battle. The focus is obviously on the love triangle, but that whole secret agent thing is pretty cool too.
Through all the goofiness that ensues, I found myself really liking this movie. It sounds simple, but I liked the characters, and too often in rom-coms, that's left by the wayside. Characters become cliches, stereotypes or something nasty in between. I liked all the characters here. FDR realizes he genuinely likes Lauren and doesn't intend to play her. Lauren is the same, looking for a good normal guy, and Tuck's looking for love. I'm a huge Tom Hardy fan, and he was my favorite here, especially his background with his ex-wife (Abigail Spencer) and son, Joe (John Paul Ruttan). Nothing groundbreaking, but it is different from the usual romantic comedy. It is a good, old-fashioned popcorn movie. Easily digestible and fun from start to finish.
This Means War <---trailer (2012): ***/****
Working on a case in Hong Kong, C.I.A. field agents F.D.R. (Chris Pine) and Tuck (Tom Hardy) are best friends and have been for years to the point where they're like family. FDR is a bit of a ladies man while Tuck is divorced/separated from his wife and their 7-year old son. Tuck though decides he wants more, a meaningful relationship and hits it off immediately with product tester Lauren (Reese Witherspoon) on a date set up by an online dating site. Saying goodbye to Tuck, Lauren meets FDR down the street coincidentally at a video store, and they too hit it off. It isn't long before the two CIA agents figure out they're dating the same girl. Who will get Lauren? It's spy vs. spy.
Because a last name is unnecessary, director McG (of Charlie's Angels, Terminator Salvation fame) certainly has some fun with this one. As I mentioned earlier, 'War' is goofy, dumb and even a little stupid at times, but it commits to being all those things. This is no hardcore story of CIA agents looking for love, the opening over-the-top action scene on a Hong Kong skyscraper's roof points to that. This is a world where well-trained, world class secret agents use all sorts of government software to track each other down, track a pretty girl down, monitor each others' dates. It is goofy, dumb and a little stupid at times, and that's not a bad thing. It owns up to that. No message here, no bigger picture about secret agents in love. Just two old friends going toe to toe for a girl....oh, and they're epically talented government killing machines. How can that not be enjoyable?
So as a romantic comedy on steroids, 'War' works in a lot of ways. Two of the bright young stars in Hollywood, Pine and Hardy are perfectly cast alongside each other. Their friendship of many years -- not to mention working as partners in the field -- seems genuine. They jab and mock and ridicule each other like only close friends can. They compete at everything so when they meet a girl like Witherspoon's Lauren, it's game on. The biggest laughs come from this competition, each agent trying to sabotage the other. FDR sets the sprinklers off in Tuck's loft at a romantic dinner. Tuck drills FDR with a knock-out dart from across a street as he makes a move on Lauren. Pine and Hardy are perfect together, and Witherspoon is about as adorably cute as you'd expect. She has some funny scenes with Chelsea Handler as Trish, Lauren's sister(?)/friend, confidant and adviser in love.
As for the CIA agent storyline, we get a pretty straightforward, nuts and bolts type story. FDR and Tuck are after one bad German dude, Heinrich (Til Schweiger), who is up to no good. What exactly? It's enough to know that's he up to no good, and now he's looking for revenge against these two CIA agents. Any more information would just be wasted. The action sequences are ridiculously over the top and ultra-choreographed, slow motion galore. They're the type of scenes where a car explodes when it flips because....well, cars look cool when they explode on impact. The scenes are action-packed but funny too, Tuck always needing to use FDR's pistol clips in the midst of a chaotic gun battle. The focus is obviously on the love triangle, but that whole secret agent thing is pretty cool too.
Through all the goofiness that ensues, I found myself really liking this movie. It sounds simple, but I liked the characters, and too often in rom-coms, that's left by the wayside. Characters become cliches, stereotypes or something nasty in between. I liked all the characters here. FDR realizes he genuinely likes Lauren and doesn't intend to play her. Lauren is the same, looking for a good normal guy, and Tuck's looking for love. I'm a huge Tom Hardy fan, and he was my favorite here, especially his background with his ex-wife (Abigail Spencer) and son, Joe (John Paul Ruttan). Nothing groundbreaking, but it is different from the usual romantic comedy. It is a good, old-fashioned popcorn movie. Easily digestible and fun from start to finish.
This Means War <---trailer (2012): ***/****
Labels:
2010s,
Chris Pine,
Espionage,
Reese Witherspoon,
Til Schweiger,
Tom Hardy
Monday, July 23, 2012
The Dark Knight Rises
Considering the quality of both Batman Begins and The Dark Knight, was there pressure for director Christopher Nolan to deliver an epic close-out film for his Batman trilogy? Reviews were somewhat mixed as Nolan's final Batman movie hit theaters last weekend, and the tragic shootings in Colorado will almost certainly hang over the film (to a point at least). If there was ever a case of ignoring reviews (other people's that is, I assume you'd take mine as the God honest truth), this is it. Not a surprise, but 2012's The Dark Knight Rises is a great film, one that gives the trilogy the send-off it deserves.
It has been eight years since Batman (Christian Bale) has taken the fall for Harvey Dent's murderous rampage, and Gotham City is better than ever. Crime has almost completely disappeared, and the city has experienced a rebirth of sorts. Hiding away at Wayne Manor, Batman/Bruce Wayne is wasting away, a recluse who hasn't appeared publicly for years. But when things seem just right -- even perfect -- for Gotham, a new terror arises, a madman in the form of mysterious and masked Bane (Tom Hardy), a criminal who vows to rock the foundation, destroying the city to rubble. Having questioned if everything/anything he ever did as Batman accomplished anything, Bruce must now decide what's best for Gotham. Let the city save itself? Or is the only thing stopping Bane the return of Batman?
First off, I have to say how impressed I was both with this final movie, but the trilogy on the whole. I rewatched the first two movies over the last week-plus before checking out 'Rises' and can very much recommend doing the same if you can. There's a continuity, a comfort level that permeates through an extended viewing of sorts. What can I say that I haven't in the other Batman reviews? Christopher Nolan is an immense talent, and I hope he continues to direct movies of this superb quality. The best description I can come up with to describe my enjoyment is hopefully simple to understand. You watch these movies -- 'Rises' especially -- and you just have that feeling you're watching what a movie should be. Not what it could be. SHOULD. Immensely entertaining, well-acted and well-written, an epic scale but also a connection on the personal level, spot-on soundtrack/musical score. Batman Begins started the ball rolling, The Dark Knight perfected the formula, and The Dark Knight Rises continues to use that formula.
What struck me most watching this newest arrival was the quality of drama here with kudos to a script from Nolan and Jonathan Nolan. I almost took it for granted, but over three movies, you honestly come to like/hate these characters, but if nothing else you get to know them. As pure drama, this is the best of the three films. It is by far the most personal of the three. Bale delivers his finest performance as the tortured Bruce Wayne, questioning what his actions accomplished while hiding away at Wayne Manor. This is an individual with inner demons that threaten to tear him apart. Buzz started circulating in the weeks prior to its release that Batman would die in this final installment (no finale spoilers here), and the darkness of the story reflects that. Batman has become the true tragic hero; an individual who genuinely wanted to do right but through his own fault, society, greed, and so many other things is forced to change, adapt and improvise. A credit to Bale for doing such a fine job with a character that could have easily been phoned in.
Using that as a jumping off point, Bale isn't on-screen for seemingly long stretches of the 164-minute movie. While Batman is the obvious key and focal point, this is also a story about the people of Gotham City. Michael Caine returns as Alfred, Bruce's butler, and hits every single note he can in a pitch-perfect performance. Three key scenes are the heart of the movie -- two with Bruce and Alfred, one with Alfred on his own -- and they are heartbreaking to watch. Didn't think you'd hear that in a Batman review, did you? Caine is so good I hope he gets some Oscar consideration for Best Supporting Actor. Gary Oldman rises to the occasion late as Commissioner Gordon, also questioning the actions he's taken and Morgan Freeman is solid as always as Wayne Enterprises engineering genius Lucius Fox. One other smaller new addition is Matthew Modine as one of Gordon's fellow high-ranking police officers.
Then there's the rest of the cast, Nolan seemingly trying to put together Inception 2: The Reckoning. Tom Hardy has some epic shoes to fill, following Heath Ledger's performance as The Joker, and he's quite capable of that. It's not fair to compare the part to the Joker, but there is similarities. Hardy's Bane is all business, all chaos, all anarchy. He's a bear of a man, like a caged but highly intelligent animal. Joseph Gordon-Levitt is a scene-stealer as John Blake, a Gotham police officer who grows increasingly frustrated with the limitations of his badge. Marion Cotillard plays Miriam Tate, a rich philanthropist trying to work with Wayne Enterprises to create a powerful sustainable energy force. Anne Hathaway holds her own as well, putting in a memorable turn as Selina Kyle, a master thief dubbed 'the Cat' but never actually dubbed Catwoman. SEMI SPOILERS ABOUT CASTING In the surprise department, look for Liam Neeson and Cillian Murphy briefly reprising their roles from the previous Batman entries. END OF SPOILERS A great cast though from top to bottom.
Some reviews pointed to the rather twisty-turny early portions of the story as a detriment to the end result, and I go both ways here. Through the first hour, we're not always sure of what's going on or even where the story is heading. Characters and some background are introduced and dealt with, but it's all laying the groundwork. When the knock-out punch does come, all I can say...brace yourself. The final 45-60 minutes threw me for a loop, but in a good way. It is everything epic you would hope a final showdown to be; in this case, Bane turning Gotham City into a city cut off from the rest of the world and threatening to destroy it all, killing 12 million people in the process. If you struggle with the early pacing, stick with it. The pay-off in the end is incredibly worth it in so many ways.
As I mentioned, this is a movie that has it all. The finale packs the biggest action punch, but an earlier motorcycle chase through the city following a Bane robbery is also highly memorable, as is Bane's takeover of the city with an abundance of explosives taking out bridges and even a quasi-NFL game. The dialogue is spot-on too, especially the scenes with Bale and Caine. On pure drama, it's hard to beat Bane's backstory (quick though it is), but also how Batman deals with solving the identical problem the mysteriously masked villain had to figure out. And then there's the ending. Should it come as a surprise that it is basically the perfect way to close out the trilogy? Hans Zimmer's musical score is solid throughout, but it's at its best in the final montage as everything is wrapped up. Two different twists make the ending a little surprising, but mostly? It's an appropriate dramatic and emotional ending for all involved.
Well, here we are. I'm sorry to see this trilogy go. As far as superhero movies go (and I struggle limiting these to just superhero movies), they've set the bar as high as they can. All other future efforts will be compared to these films, and I can't think of a better compliment to a director, cast and crew for turning out such a quality finished product. A classic on par with The Dark Knight, if not a slightly, tiny bit better.
The Dark Knight Rises <---trailer (2012): ****/****
It has been eight years since Batman (Christian Bale) has taken the fall for Harvey Dent's murderous rampage, and Gotham City is better than ever. Crime has almost completely disappeared, and the city has experienced a rebirth of sorts. Hiding away at Wayne Manor, Batman/Bruce Wayne is wasting away, a recluse who hasn't appeared publicly for years. But when things seem just right -- even perfect -- for Gotham, a new terror arises, a madman in the form of mysterious and masked Bane (Tom Hardy), a criminal who vows to rock the foundation, destroying the city to rubble. Having questioned if everything/anything he ever did as Batman accomplished anything, Bruce must now decide what's best for Gotham. Let the city save itself? Or is the only thing stopping Bane the return of Batman?
First off, I have to say how impressed I was both with this final movie, but the trilogy on the whole. I rewatched the first two movies over the last week-plus before checking out 'Rises' and can very much recommend doing the same if you can. There's a continuity, a comfort level that permeates through an extended viewing of sorts. What can I say that I haven't in the other Batman reviews? Christopher Nolan is an immense talent, and I hope he continues to direct movies of this superb quality. The best description I can come up with to describe my enjoyment is hopefully simple to understand. You watch these movies -- 'Rises' especially -- and you just have that feeling you're watching what a movie should be. Not what it could be. SHOULD. Immensely entertaining, well-acted and well-written, an epic scale but also a connection on the personal level, spot-on soundtrack/musical score. Batman Begins started the ball rolling, The Dark Knight perfected the formula, and The Dark Knight Rises continues to use that formula.
What struck me most watching this newest arrival was the quality of drama here with kudos to a script from Nolan and Jonathan Nolan. I almost took it for granted, but over three movies, you honestly come to like/hate these characters, but if nothing else you get to know them. As pure drama, this is the best of the three films. It is by far the most personal of the three. Bale delivers his finest performance as the tortured Bruce Wayne, questioning what his actions accomplished while hiding away at Wayne Manor. This is an individual with inner demons that threaten to tear him apart. Buzz started circulating in the weeks prior to its release that Batman would die in this final installment (no finale spoilers here), and the darkness of the story reflects that. Batman has become the true tragic hero; an individual who genuinely wanted to do right but through his own fault, society, greed, and so many other things is forced to change, adapt and improvise. A credit to Bale for doing such a fine job with a character that could have easily been phoned in.
Using that as a jumping off point, Bale isn't on-screen for seemingly long stretches of the 164-minute movie. While Batman is the obvious key and focal point, this is also a story about the people of Gotham City. Michael Caine returns as Alfred, Bruce's butler, and hits every single note he can in a pitch-perfect performance. Three key scenes are the heart of the movie -- two with Bruce and Alfred, one with Alfred on his own -- and they are heartbreaking to watch. Didn't think you'd hear that in a Batman review, did you? Caine is so good I hope he gets some Oscar consideration for Best Supporting Actor. Gary Oldman rises to the occasion late as Commissioner Gordon, also questioning the actions he's taken and Morgan Freeman is solid as always as Wayne Enterprises engineering genius Lucius Fox. One other smaller new addition is Matthew Modine as one of Gordon's fellow high-ranking police officers.
Then there's the rest of the cast, Nolan seemingly trying to put together Inception 2: The Reckoning. Tom Hardy has some epic shoes to fill, following Heath Ledger's performance as The Joker, and he's quite capable of that. It's not fair to compare the part to the Joker, but there is similarities. Hardy's Bane is all business, all chaos, all anarchy. He's a bear of a man, like a caged but highly intelligent animal. Joseph Gordon-Levitt is a scene-stealer as John Blake, a Gotham police officer who grows increasingly frustrated with the limitations of his badge. Marion Cotillard plays Miriam Tate, a rich philanthropist trying to work with Wayne Enterprises to create a powerful sustainable energy force. Anne Hathaway holds her own as well, putting in a memorable turn as Selina Kyle, a master thief dubbed 'the Cat' but never actually dubbed Catwoman. SEMI SPOILERS ABOUT CASTING In the surprise department, look for Liam Neeson and Cillian Murphy briefly reprising their roles from the previous Batman entries. END OF SPOILERS A great cast though from top to bottom.
Some reviews pointed to the rather twisty-turny early portions of the story as a detriment to the end result, and I go both ways here. Through the first hour, we're not always sure of what's going on or even where the story is heading. Characters and some background are introduced and dealt with, but it's all laying the groundwork. When the knock-out punch does come, all I can say...brace yourself. The final 45-60 minutes threw me for a loop, but in a good way. It is everything epic you would hope a final showdown to be; in this case, Bane turning Gotham City into a city cut off from the rest of the world and threatening to destroy it all, killing 12 million people in the process. If you struggle with the early pacing, stick with it. The pay-off in the end is incredibly worth it in so many ways.
As I mentioned, this is a movie that has it all. The finale packs the biggest action punch, but an earlier motorcycle chase through the city following a Bane robbery is also highly memorable, as is Bane's takeover of the city with an abundance of explosives taking out bridges and even a quasi-NFL game. The dialogue is spot-on too, especially the scenes with Bale and Caine. On pure drama, it's hard to beat Bane's backstory (quick though it is), but also how Batman deals with solving the identical problem the mysteriously masked villain had to figure out. And then there's the ending. Should it come as a surprise that it is basically the perfect way to close out the trilogy? Hans Zimmer's musical score is solid throughout, but it's at its best in the final montage as everything is wrapped up. Two different twists make the ending a little surprising, but mostly? It's an appropriate dramatic and emotional ending for all involved.
Well, here we are. I'm sorry to see this trilogy go. As far as superhero movies go (and I struggle limiting these to just superhero movies), they've set the bar as high as they can. All other future efforts will be compared to these films, and I can't think of a better compliment to a director, cast and crew for turning out such a quality finished product. A classic on par with The Dark Knight, if not a slightly, tiny bit better.
The Dark Knight Rises <---trailer (2012): ****/****
Monday, January 23, 2012
Warrior
When I stumble across an actor/actress I really like, I'm a happy camper. It's like finding an author you like to read or a TV series you missed out on. You can catch up, seeing them in all the things you previously missed. Take Tom Hardy and Joel Edgerton, two actors who've been around for years but really came into their own over the last two or three. Nowhere are their talents more evident than 2011's Warrior, a movie that quickly climbs into my list of favorite movies.
Thanks to his drinking for years, Paddy Conlon (Nick Nolte) has torn his family apart. Years have gone by since he's even seen his sons until one night his estranged son, Tommy (Hardy), shows up on his doorstep in Pittsburgh. He's popping pills and doesn't say much. He asks Paddy to help him train, start fighting again after years away from it, years away from his high school career as a state champion wrestler. In Philly, Paddy's other son, Brendan (Edgerton), is married with two kids but struggling to make ends meet. He's months away from being foreclosed on his house. Neither brother has seen each for years, and Tommy is even going by his deceased mother's maiden name. Both have fighting experience though and manage to get into Sparta, a 2-day, 16-man tournament of single elimination MMA bouts. The pay-out? $5 million, winner take all.
The best sports stories -- in film or real life -- are those that are personal. We can't always relate as viewers to a multimillionaire pulling down ridiculous amounts of money. This movie is Rocky. It's Rudy. It's Remember the Titans. This is one of the great sports movies of all-time in a quickly developing sport, MMA (mixed martial arts). Director Gavin O'Connor is clearly invested in his story and it shows in the film. Sports in all their emotions can hit you right in the gut, packing quite the emotional wallop. Just like its fights though, 'Warrior' doesn't let up. It whales away at you, emotionally throwing punch after punch. It is an incredible, realistic, humanity at its most base type of story. I love this movie. LOVE it.
Playing brothers who have long since drifted apart, Hardy and Edgerton are revelations as Tommy and Brendan. I've seen and knew they could both act, but their performances are perfect in their familiarity. Hardy is a caged animal and a wounded one at that. Intensity doesn't begin to describe him. He doesn't look like he's acting. He appears ready to literally rip your head off. His Tommy is an Iraq war vet just brimming with hatred, anger and demons that threaten to tear him apart inside. Edgerton is the high school physics teacher and family man, married to Tess (Jennifer Morrison) with two kids. His family has fallen on hard times with some medical issues, and Brendan is out of options. What more can you ask? Tommy is fighting to right a wrong, to save himself in a way. Brendan is fighting for his family and their future. Edgerton's Brendan is the more obviously sympathetic of the two, but you're rooting for both. Great, great performances.
With this script, O'Connor does something impressive. It is familiar. It isn't particularly new. If you've seen a sports movie, you've seen variations on it before. In a lot of ways right down to the music (great score from Mark Isham, soft and subtle but driving emotionally), Warrior reminded me of Friday Night Lights. More or less, you have a good sense of where it's going in terms of story. Getting to that end goal, that final fight though is the fun. O'Connor takes what we know as a viewer and manages to tweak it just enough to not only make it worthwhile and enjoyable, but to make it unique and original. I can't even put my finger on it as to why this works so well. Supporting performances are uniformly good, starting with Morrison as the loving but obviously quite worried wife, Frank Grillo as Frank Campana, Brendan's out-of-the-box thinking trainer, Kevin Dunn as Zito, the principal of the school Brendan works at, and Bryan Callen and Sam Sheridan as themselves, providing ringside commentary for the fights.
Clocking in at 140 minutes, Warrior has time to breathe. The first 75 minutes set everything up, putting characters where they need to be and hinting at the backstories for all these individuals, hinting but never spelling anything out. A scene between Hardy and Edgerton on the beach in Atlantic City the night before the fights begin is a tour de force scene, intensity exploding off the screen as the two brothers talk for the first time in years. I didn't think you could top the emotion of that scene...for about 5 minutes, and then the fights start. Hardy's Tommy is a brawler, fighting with brute strength and power, Edgerton's Brendan fighting technically, waiting to strike with an array of moves. As a non-fan of MMA, I came away impressed with the brutality of these fights, movie or not. They keep building and building on momentum until you can't take it anymore. The final fight -- no SPOILERS here, but come on, think about it -- is one of the more gut-wrenching, emotionally charged scenes I can even think of. The final shot of the movie is a thing of beauty too, couldn't have asked for a better one.
I'm searching for something, anything to rip about this movie, and I can't. Hardy and Edgerton carry this movie both physically and emotionally with Nolte not far behind as a father who admits he did a hell of a lot of wrong things to his family growing up, driving his wife away and scarring the kids. I hope there's a Best Supporting nod for Nolte. His scene late with Tommy in a hotel room is picture perfect; two individuals who are scarred and beaten down, one holding the other. The scene the night before in an Atlantic City casino is just as heart-breaking, making it all that much more effective. Underdog, fighting against the odds, fighting to save themselves and their loved ones, this has it all. Too many moments like that to even bring up. There aren't any easy answers for this torn-apart family, and the movie doesn't try to fix things thankfully. This is a movie in real life, and that real life thing, it's messy. It ain't easy, and you can't always fix it.
I loved, loved, LOVED this movie. Easily one of the great sports movies of all-time, but more than that, it rises above a genre distinction. It's just a great movie.
Warrior <---trailer (2011): ****/****
Thanks to his drinking for years, Paddy Conlon (Nick Nolte) has torn his family apart. Years have gone by since he's even seen his sons until one night his estranged son, Tommy (Hardy), shows up on his doorstep in Pittsburgh. He's popping pills and doesn't say much. He asks Paddy to help him train, start fighting again after years away from it, years away from his high school career as a state champion wrestler. In Philly, Paddy's other son, Brendan (Edgerton), is married with two kids but struggling to make ends meet. He's months away from being foreclosed on his house. Neither brother has seen each for years, and Tommy is even going by his deceased mother's maiden name. Both have fighting experience though and manage to get into Sparta, a 2-day, 16-man tournament of single elimination MMA bouts. The pay-out? $5 million, winner take all.
The best sports stories -- in film or real life -- are those that are personal. We can't always relate as viewers to a multimillionaire pulling down ridiculous amounts of money. This movie is Rocky. It's Rudy. It's Remember the Titans. This is one of the great sports movies of all-time in a quickly developing sport, MMA (mixed martial arts). Director Gavin O'Connor is clearly invested in his story and it shows in the film. Sports in all their emotions can hit you right in the gut, packing quite the emotional wallop. Just like its fights though, 'Warrior' doesn't let up. It whales away at you, emotionally throwing punch after punch. It is an incredible, realistic, humanity at its most base type of story. I love this movie. LOVE it.
Playing brothers who have long since drifted apart, Hardy and Edgerton are revelations as Tommy and Brendan. I've seen and knew they could both act, but their performances are perfect in their familiarity. Hardy is a caged animal and a wounded one at that. Intensity doesn't begin to describe him. He doesn't look like he's acting. He appears ready to literally rip your head off. His Tommy is an Iraq war vet just brimming with hatred, anger and demons that threaten to tear him apart inside. Edgerton is the high school physics teacher and family man, married to Tess (Jennifer Morrison) with two kids. His family has fallen on hard times with some medical issues, and Brendan is out of options. What more can you ask? Tommy is fighting to right a wrong, to save himself in a way. Brendan is fighting for his family and their future. Edgerton's Brendan is the more obviously sympathetic of the two, but you're rooting for both. Great, great performances.
With this script, O'Connor does something impressive. It is familiar. It isn't particularly new. If you've seen a sports movie, you've seen variations on it before. In a lot of ways right down to the music (great score from Mark Isham, soft and subtle but driving emotionally), Warrior reminded me of Friday Night Lights. More or less, you have a good sense of where it's going in terms of story. Getting to that end goal, that final fight though is the fun. O'Connor takes what we know as a viewer and manages to tweak it just enough to not only make it worthwhile and enjoyable, but to make it unique and original. I can't even put my finger on it as to why this works so well. Supporting performances are uniformly good, starting with Morrison as the loving but obviously quite worried wife, Frank Grillo as Frank Campana, Brendan's out-of-the-box thinking trainer, Kevin Dunn as Zito, the principal of the school Brendan works at, and Bryan Callen and Sam Sheridan as themselves, providing ringside commentary for the fights.
Clocking in at 140 minutes, Warrior has time to breathe. The first 75 minutes set everything up, putting characters where they need to be and hinting at the backstories for all these individuals, hinting but never spelling anything out. A scene between Hardy and Edgerton on the beach in Atlantic City the night before the fights begin is a tour de force scene, intensity exploding off the screen as the two brothers talk for the first time in years. I didn't think you could top the emotion of that scene...for about 5 minutes, and then the fights start. Hardy's Tommy is a brawler, fighting with brute strength and power, Edgerton's Brendan fighting technically, waiting to strike with an array of moves. As a non-fan of MMA, I came away impressed with the brutality of these fights, movie or not. They keep building and building on momentum until you can't take it anymore. The final fight -- no SPOILERS here, but come on, think about it -- is one of the more gut-wrenching, emotionally charged scenes I can even think of. The final shot of the movie is a thing of beauty too, couldn't have asked for a better one.
I'm searching for something, anything to rip about this movie, and I can't. Hardy and Edgerton carry this movie both physically and emotionally with Nolte not far behind as a father who admits he did a hell of a lot of wrong things to his family growing up, driving his wife away and scarring the kids. I hope there's a Best Supporting nod for Nolte. His scene late with Tommy in a hotel room is picture perfect; two individuals who are scarred and beaten down, one holding the other. The scene the night before in an Atlantic City casino is just as heart-breaking, making it all that much more effective. Underdog, fighting against the odds, fighting to save themselves and their loved ones, this has it all. Too many moments like that to even bring up. There aren't any easy answers for this torn-apart family, and the movie doesn't try to fix things thankfully. This is a movie in real life, and that real life thing, it's messy. It ain't easy, and you can't always fix it.
I loved, loved, LOVED this movie. Easily one of the great sports movies of all-time, but more than that, it rises above a genre distinction. It's just a great movie.
Warrior <---trailer (2011): ****/****
Labels:
2010s,
Frank Grillo,
Joel Edgerton,
Nick Nolte,
Sports,
Tom Hardy
Friday, January 13, 2012
Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy (2011)
I love reading, always have and hope I always will. So when I saw a trailer this past summer for a spy movie based off a book from English novelist John Le Carre, I wanted to check out the book before seeing the movie. I can't tell you how much I struggled through the book, forcing myself to finish it because if a movie was made, the source novel has to be good, right? Thankfully, 2011's Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy was infinitely more enjoyable than its source novel.
When a mission is badly botched in Budapest, Control (John Hurt) and his right hand man, George Smiley (Gary Oldman), are forcefully pushed out the door at MI6. A new power system rises to the top, and most of a year later with Control dead, Smiley is approached with an important mission. More and more intelligence points to a high-up official in British intelligence being a mole working deep, deep undercover for Russia. The suspects have been narrowed down to four key individuals, but none of them seem any more likely to be the mole than the others. With the help of a younger but very capable agent, Peter Guillam (Benedict Cumberbatch), Smiley is tasked with exposing the mole. Can they do it in time?
Le Carre's book is something else. Countless characters, seemingly endless passages of dialogue on top of dialogue, and a non-linear story that I for one had trouble keeping up with. I hate calling a book dull or boring because it sounds very high school, but I struggled to maintain an interest in the very slowly developing story. Even when things were revealed, I had to re-read and double check just to make sure I'd read right. It defines a low-key, subtle spy story with little sense of urgency. Thankfully the movie streamlines the characters, the dialogue and the story, all the while remaining true to Le Carre's novel. It certainly isn't a movie for everyone, and it has its flaws, but 'Tinker' is quite the thinking man's spy movie.
Let's start with the tone and look of the movie. Like the novel, it is incredibly low-key, almost comatose in its development. For a story revolving around a high-level mole, no one seems particularly worried. The story utilizes flashbacks and bounces around constantly, throwing new characters in and out of scenes as needed. You know, just know, they're somehow related, and for the most part they do fit together in the end. It is a self-assured movie, and will probably lose some viewers with its leisurely pacing. The look of the movie is incredible from the sets and costumes to the camera work. The spies all wear suits and ties, constantly smoke cigarettes, and always have some liquor close by. This was the Cold War fought by gentlemen, not the gung-ho, shoot 'em up James Bond and Jason Bournes. These spies did their best when not seen by their opposition, slinking in and out as quickly as they arrived.
My biggest motivation for finishing the book was the cast assembled in director Tomas Alfredson's spy drama. I'll begin with Gary Oldman as George Smiley, a part that has already started to earn the actor some Oscar buzz for Best Actor. Like its story, Oldman is understated beyond belief as Smiley, a veteran agent with years of experience under his belt. He's experienced more than most can dream of, and the wear and tear shows. Pushed out of a job he was damn good at, his Smiley holds some earned resentment at the government and superiors that turned their back on him. Above all else, he is a professional though. He's a dogged investigator, able to piece together clues and information as needed, always thinking how the pieces fit together. I love Oldman as an actor -- playing good or bad guy -- but it's great seeing him truly acting, not just hamming it up. Great lead performance.
That's saying something considering the rest of the cast. The treacherous suspects include Alleline (Toby Jones), Haydon (Colin Firth), Esterhase (David Dencik), and Bland (Ciaran Hinds), both Jones and Firth making the best impressions. Cumberbath too holds his own at Oldman's side, an agent with a possible secret of his own, and Hurt is Hurt, legitimizing his small part because he's John Hurt. One of my new favorite actors, Mark Strong, has a solid supporting part as Prideaux, an agent who's stumbled into a botched mission and must pay the consequences. Another favorite of mine, Tom Hardy plays Ricki, a "scalphunter," an agent usually relegated to the more sinister missions, this time trying to move up a level with some info he stumbled into. Kathy Burke and Stephen Graham have key parts as former Intelligence members Smiley investigates. Not a false performance in the bunch, an ensemble working perfectly together. Not showy at all, just professionals doing what they do, seemingly effortlessly.
The movie isn't perfect though, but I did enjoy it considerably more than Le Carre's novel. Problems persist though. We learn little to nothing about the suspects so even when the mole is revealed, it makes little impact. A throwaway line explains the reasoning in a weak wrap-up. I would have liked some reasoning, some background on these men, allowing us to connect emotionally in some way whether it be hatred, respect, whatever. The story drifts at time -- like the novel -- in an 127-minute movie. Still, it's almost a must-see movie because it is so rare to see a movie of this quality, especially among the spy genre. The ending especially is a winner, a montage set to French song La Mer, later Americanized by Bobby Darin's Beyond the Sea. Style and acting to spare, just know what you're about to watch.
Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy <---trailer (2011): ***/****
When a mission is badly botched in Budapest, Control (John Hurt) and his right hand man, George Smiley (Gary Oldman), are forcefully pushed out the door at MI6. A new power system rises to the top, and most of a year later with Control dead, Smiley is approached with an important mission. More and more intelligence points to a high-up official in British intelligence being a mole working deep, deep undercover for Russia. The suspects have been narrowed down to four key individuals, but none of them seem any more likely to be the mole than the others. With the help of a younger but very capable agent, Peter Guillam (Benedict Cumberbatch), Smiley is tasked with exposing the mole. Can they do it in time?
Le Carre's book is something else. Countless characters, seemingly endless passages of dialogue on top of dialogue, and a non-linear story that I for one had trouble keeping up with. I hate calling a book dull or boring because it sounds very high school, but I struggled to maintain an interest in the very slowly developing story. Even when things were revealed, I had to re-read and double check just to make sure I'd read right. It defines a low-key, subtle spy story with little sense of urgency. Thankfully the movie streamlines the characters, the dialogue and the story, all the while remaining true to Le Carre's novel. It certainly isn't a movie for everyone, and it has its flaws, but 'Tinker' is quite the thinking man's spy movie.
Let's start with the tone and look of the movie. Like the novel, it is incredibly low-key, almost comatose in its development. For a story revolving around a high-level mole, no one seems particularly worried. The story utilizes flashbacks and bounces around constantly, throwing new characters in and out of scenes as needed. You know, just know, they're somehow related, and for the most part they do fit together in the end. It is a self-assured movie, and will probably lose some viewers with its leisurely pacing. The look of the movie is incredible from the sets and costumes to the camera work. The spies all wear suits and ties, constantly smoke cigarettes, and always have some liquor close by. This was the Cold War fought by gentlemen, not the gung-ho, shoot 'em up James Bond and Jason Bournes. These spies did their best when not seen by their opposition, slinking in and out as quickly as they arrived.
My biggest motivation for finishing the book was the cast assembled in director Tomas Alfredson's spy drama. I'll begin with Gary Oldman as George Smiley, a part that has already started to earn the actor some Oscar buzz for Best Actor. Like its story, Oldman is understated beyond belief as Smiley, a veteran agent with years of experience under his belt. He's experienced more than most can dream of, and the wear and tear shows. Pushed out of a job he was damn good at, his Smiley holds some earned resentment at the government and superiors that turned their back on him. Above all else, he is a professional though. He's a dogged investigator, able to piece together clues and information as needed, always thinking how the pieces fit together. I love Oldman as an actor -- playing good or bad guy -- but it's great seeing him truly acting, not just hamming it up. Great lead performance.
That's saying something considering the rest of the cast. The treacherous suspects include Alleline (Toby Jones), Haydon (Colin Firth), Esterhase (David Dencik), and Bland (Ciaran Hinds), both Jones and Firth making the best impressions. Cumberbath too holds his own at Oldman's side, an agent with a possible secret of his own, and Hurt is Hurt, legitimizing his small part because he's John Hurt. One of my new favorite actors, Mark Strong, has a solid supporting part as Prideaux, an agent who's stumbled into a botched mission and must pay the consequences. Another favorite of mine, Tom Hardy plays Ricki, a "scalphunter," an agent usually relegated to the more sinister missions, this time trying to move up a level with some info he stumbled into. Kathy Burke and Stephen Graham have key parts as former Intelligence members Smiley investigates. Not a false performance in the bunch, an ensemble working perfectly together. Not showy at all, just professionals doing what they do, seemingly effortlessly.
The movie isn't perfect though, but I did enjoy it considerably more than Le Carre's novel. Problems persist though. We learn little to nothing about the suspects so even when the mole is revealed, it makes little impact. A throwaway line explains the reasoning in a weak wrap-up. I would have liked some reasoning, some background on these men, allowing us to connect emotionally in some way whether it be hatred, respect, whatever. The story drifts at time -- like the novel -- in an 127-minute movie. Still, it's almost a must-see movie because it is so rare to see a movie of this quality, especially among the spy genre. The ending especially is a winner, a montage set to French song La Mer, later Americanized by Bobby Darin's Beyond the Sea. Style and acting to spare, just know what you're about to watch.
Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy <---trailer (2011): ***/****
Labels:
2010s,
Benedict Cumberbatch,
Colin Firth,
Espionage,
Gary Oldman,
John Hurt,
Mark Strong,
Toby Jones,
Tom Hardy
Wednesday, January 26, 2011
Layer Cake
This is one of those movies you stumble across almost by accident, love it, and then can't convince enough people to watch it. I watched it based solely because I was a Daniel Craig fan, and shame on me, the DVD box looked cool. I've seen it called all kinds of things, a Guy Ritchie knock-off especially, but it's one of those rare great movies that works almost in spite of itself. Based off a novel by J.J. Connolly, Layer Cake has too many characters, more style than substance often enough, and twists and turns so much it took me a couple viewings to piece everything together for sure. All that out of the way, I love this movie. I'll explain later.
A high-end drug distributor, a man known only as XXXX (Craig) has quickly risen through the ranks of the very stylish but still cutthroat underworld. In fact, he's done so well with his crew of chemists, bodyguards and distributors, that he's calling it quits at the age of 30 and going into early retirement. Not so fast, his boss (Kenneth Cranham) has two more jobs for him, and then he'll let him walk away. First, a shipment of 1 million ecstasy pills is on the market, and they're just sitting there for the taking. Two, the daughter of an old friend of the boss is missing, and she must be found before something happens to her. Completely backed into a corner unless he wants to risk a bullet in his head, X takes both jobs in his effort to leave the business cleanly. But as he so well knows, nothing comes easy, and nothing here goes as planned.
The basic idea of the last job is nothing new here as X tries to pull off these last two jobs. The novel is a great jumping off point -- even if the ending sucks in the book -- and director Matthew Vaughn runs with the idea. The movie has the action style of a Bourne movie, the look of a glossy British crime thriller, the dark humor of a Scorsese gangster flick, and the twists and turns you'd expect from a Shyamalan movie. What's so odd is that all these vastly different pieces click together and work so smoothly. It's stylish without overdoing it, violent without being gratuitous, funny without pandering for laughs, and keeping you on your toes without trying to straight out confuse you. A winner on all accounts.
As I mentioned earlier, Craig is a huge bright spot here, showing a different side as an actor. He hadn't yet done a Bond film so he's not in crazy, ridiculous physical shape here. He's on the thin side which is important because he isn't this superhero dealer. X explains, "He's just a business man" and a highly intelligent one at that. Nothing about these two jobs is as simple as they seem, and he's got to figure everything out before it's too late. X is smooth, smart and very capable of handling himself...although if the chance arises he'll hire someone who is also capable of handling themselves. His narration is spot-on, especially in the movie's opening (watch HERE) and sets the stage perfectly for the rest of the movie. The tone is going to be cynical with its dark look at the criminal underworld and all its shady dealings. As a front man for this movie, Craig was a perfect choice.
Don't get confused though and think this is just Daniel Craig's movie because the cast has so much more to offer. Where to start, where to start? Vaughn assembles this great list of British actors to play this long list of eclectic, often rather eccentric characters. Here's just some, starting with George Harris as Morty, X's security with a checkered past, with Tom Hardy and Tamer Hassan as X's crew. Cranham is Jimmy Price, X's shady boss who pawns off much of his work on Colm Meaney's Gene, X's link to Jimmy. Sienna Miller is Tammie, a club girl who X instantly feels a connection too. Miller is sexy as hell, check here out HERE. Michael Gambon is Eddie Temple, Jimmy's old friend and current rival, ready to throw X for a loop in his perfect plan. Then there's Dexter Fletcher, Steve John Shepard, Stephen Walters, and Louis Emerick, all recognizable faces if you don't know their names in great supporting parts that requires barely more than a scene or two to establish who they are and what they're up to.
What's funny as I write this is that the list previously mentioned is only the key characters. Yeah, there's more characters that bounce in and out as needed. Almost every single one of the above characters mentioned is so well-written that they could all get their own movie. So throw all these individuals in one movie -- with surprising amounts of background -- and you've got a gem. Harris' Morty and Meaney's Gene stand out from the rest, two quick flashbacks revealing all you need to know about them. With X, Morty, Gene and the crew, there is a perfect chemistry, a relationship formed from men having worked together in difficult, strenuous situations and bonding through it. A great scene between Craig, Harris and Meaney has them talking about strategy, what their next move is as the walls start closing in on them. It reminded me of a scene that Peckinpah would have used in The Wild Bunch, Scorsese in Goodfellas, John Sturges in The Magnificent Seven. Would it have been great to see a 4-hour version where every single character gets his chance to shine? Sure, absolutely, but Vaughn somehow finds a way to weave all these people together and make it work. Kudos to you, Mr. Vaughn.
What else is there to say? I love this movie, and try to watch it at least once a year. It's one of those hidden gems you're beyond happy you stumbled upon. Stylish, funny, entertaining with some gunplay, some sex, and a story that will keep you guessing right until the end. Make sure to watch all the way until the credits because the ending is a whopper of a surprise. It says it all in a movie that doesn't need to deliver a message but does anyway, a good one on the irony scale. For all the epic moves and detailed planning, it can be the smallest detail that ends up making the biggest impact.
Layer Cake <---trailer (2004): ****/****
Labels:
2000s,
British crime,
Colm Meaney,
Daniel Craig,
Dexter Fletcher,
Gangsters,
Michael Gambon,
Tom Hardy
Wednesday, October 27, 2010
RocknRolla
Before I saw Sherlock Holmes last winter, my knowledge of Guy Ritchie was limited to knowledge of a couple cult classic British crime stories, his marriage to Madonna and subsequent disastrous movie starring Mrs. Ritchie. I liked Sherlock Holmes but didn't love it, and looking at his short list of movies none of them really jumped out at me, especially 2008's RocknRolla. I remember seeing the trailer and thinking it looked like an annoyingly ultra-stylish story that knows it's cool and is going to take every opportunity it gets to show you how cool it is. But then I really looked at the cast, and thought I had to at least give it a try. I'm glad I did.
Ritchie has taken all sorts of abuse over the years for everything from his directing style -- as a Tarantino rip-off -- to his not-so private life with Madonna. And even in a period piece about one of literature's most famous characters, Ritchie was able to make it an ultra-stylish period piece. Not having seen Snatch or Lock, Stock... but knowing their reputation, it seems Ritchie is most at home in the London underworld where heavy accents and dialects dominate and everyone and anyone will turn on you for a buck. RocknRolla is at times convoluted, at times overly concerned in its style, but in the end a very enjoyable, very entertaining British crime caper.
When a business deal goes south, two members of a British gang called the Wild Bunch, One Two (Gerard Butler) and Mumbles (Idris Elba), find themselves in needs of some quick cash, turning to an icy accountant (Thandie Newton) for some inside information. The man they owe, criminal kingpin Lenny Nelson (Tom Wilkinson), doesn't necessarily need the money, but principle is principle. Lenny, with right hand man Archy (Mark Strong), is caught up in a real estate deal with a Russian businessman (Karel Roden), who loans Lenny a famous, lucky painting of his until the deal can be completed. The painting wastes no time disappearing, and Lenny is up the creek, even more so when he finds out his stepson, drugged out rocker Johnny Quill (Toby Kebbell), is the thief. So it goes as all these crooks work to save their own backsides, a vicious cycle as One Two and Mumbles end up stealing the money that Lenny is due from the Russian, the painting playing a key role, and in the end everyone is going to run into each other.
Screwy enough for you? There were times as all these various storylines cross and re-cross that I wondered if I was watching a Seinfeld episode. But like the best Seinfeld episodes, Ritchie fixes everything in the end as all these characters, storylines and predicaments come together, everything tied up nicely with a bow. Confusing at times, surely, but never to the point where you feel lost. Because there is so much going on, you're not always sure quite where everything is going, but it's fun to go along for the ride. At a certain point, you just go along and enjoy some really cool characters interact in some very stylish ways. The London criminal underworld never looked so good.
The characters I included above covers about half the actual cast. Jeremy Piven and rapper Ludacris have two small parts as Johnny Quill's former manager roped into helping Lenny get his painting back. Tom Hardy plays Handsome Bob, a member of the Wild Bunch and friend of One Two and Mumbles. There's other characters that drift in and out, but those are the biggies. Two main storylines dominate all the action, Wilkinson and Strong as the kingpin and his tough as nails assistant trying to track down a stolen painting (the ridiculousness of the premise somehow works perfectly) while Butler, Elba and Hardy keep going after piles of money just waiting to be stolen.
Going away, my favorite parts of RocknRolla was the Wild Bunch. They have a great dynamic among all the members of a gang that isn't low-level crooks but isn't top-shelf thieves either. They're somewhere in between, knowing their place in the underworld. Butler has struggled finding good roles since the success of 300, but this is a very funny gem for him. Elba is equally perfect in an underused part as Mumbles, and Hardy (another great supporting part along with this summer's Inception) has a great twist to his character that produces some very funny results. The high point for the Wild Bunch is a robbery gone bad when two Chechnyan thugs do everything they can to protect the cash they're guarding. A running, chaotic chase scene with some great dark humor, knock down violence runs for almost 10 minutes and is the runaway favorite for the best scene in the movie. Watch a portion of it HERE. The end of course says the Wild Bunch will be back, and I'm looking forward to it.
As strong as the cast was, I was skeptical going into this movie and ended up really liking it. Almost every member of the cast is given their own chance to shine and none disappoint. Wilkinson is his smarmy, intimidating best, Strong's narration is dripping with subtle humor, Newton is a sexy femme fatale that film noir would be jealous of, Butler, Elba and Hardy have a chemistry that speaks to longtime friends, and in the big picture, the stylish elements never go overboard. Ritchie has a real winner here. If I can offer any advice, watch the trailer below, but don't hold it against the movie. Don't do what I did, and hold it against the movie.
RocknRolla <---trailer (2008): ***/****
Ritchie has taken all sorts of abuse over the years for everything from his directing style -- as a Tarantino rip-off -- to his not-so private life with Madonna. And even in a period piece about one of literature's most famous characters, Ritchie was able to make it an ultra-stylish period piece. Not having seen Snatch or Lock, Stock... but knowing their reputation, it seems Ritchie is most at home in the London underworld where heavy accents and dialects dominate and everyone and anyone will turn on you for a buck. RocknRolla is at times convoluted, at times overly concerned in its style, but in the end a very enjoyable, very entertaining British crime caper.
When a business deal goes south, two members of a British gang called the Wild Bunch, One Two (Gerard Butler) and Mumbles (Idris Elba), find themselves in needs of some quick cash, turning to an icy accountant (Thandie Newton) for some inside information. The man they owe, criminal kingpin Lenny Nelson (Tom Wilkinson), doesn't necessarily need the money, but principle is principle. Lenny, with right hand man Archy (Mark Strong), is caught up in a real estate deal with a Russian businessman (Karel Roden), who loans Lenny a famous, lucky painting of his until the deal can be completed. The painting wastes no time disappearing, and Lenny is up the creek, even more so when he finds out his stepson, drugged out rocker Johnny Quill (Toby Kebbell), is the thief. So it goes as all these crooks work to save their own backsides, a vicious cycle as One Two and Mumbles end up stealing the money that Lenny is due from the Russian, the painting playing a key role, and in the end everyone is going to run into each other.
Screwy enough for you? There were times as all these various storylines cross and re-cross that I wondered if I was watching a Seinfeld episode. But like the best Seinfeld episodes, Ritchie fixes everything in the end as all these characters, storylines and predicaments come together, everything tied up nicely with a bow. Confusing at times, surely, but never to the point where you feel lost. Because there is so much going on, you're not always sure quite where everything is going, but it's fun to go along for the ride. At a certain point, you just go along and enjoy some really cool characters interact in some very stylish ways. The London criminal underworld never looked so good.
The characters I included above covers about half the actual cast. Jeremy Piven and rapper Ludacris have two small parts as Johnny Quill's former manager roped into helping Lenny get his painting back. Tom Hardy plays Handsome Bob, a member of the Wild Bunch and friend of One Two and Mumbles. There's other characters that drift in and out, but those are the biggies. Two main storylines dominate all the action, Wilkinson and Strong as the kingpin and his tough as nails assistant trying to track down a stolen painting (the ridiculousness of the premise somehow works perfectly) while Butler, Elba and Hardy keep going after piles of money just waiting to be stolen.
Going away, my favorite parts of RocknRolla was the Wild Bunch. They have a great dynamic among all the members of a gang that isn't low-level crooks but isn't top-shelf thieves either. They're somewhere in between, knowing their place in the underworld. Butler has struggled finding good roles since the success of 300, but this is a very funny gem for him. Elba is equally perfect in an underused part as Mumbles, and Hardy (another great supporting part along with this summer's Inception) has a great twist to his character that produces some very funny results. The high point for the Wild Bunch is a robbery gone bad when two Chechnyan thugs do everything they can to protect the cash they're guarding. A running, chaotic chase scene with some great dark humor, knock down violence runs for almost 10 minutes and is the runaway favorite for the best scene in the movie. Watch a portion of it HERE. The end of course says the Wild Bunch will be back, and I'm looking forward to it.
As strong as the cast was, I was skeptical going into this movie and ended up really liking it. Almost every member of the cast is given their own chance to shine and none disappoint. Wilkinson is his smarmy, intimidating best, Strong's narration is dripping with subtle humor, Newton is a sexy femme fatale that film noir would be jealous of, Butler, Elba and Hardy have a chemistry that speaks to longtime friends, and in the big picture, the stylish elements never go overboard. Ritchie has a real winner here. If I can offer any advice, watch the trailer below, but don't hold it against the movie. Don't do what I did, and hold it against the movie.
RocknRolla <---trailer (2008): ***/****
Sunday, July 25, 2010
Inception
I really have no idea at all about where to even start reviewing Inception, released last weekend in theaters and the most recent movie from director Christopher Nolan. If you choose to stop reading my review now, just know that it is everything that is good about movies, one that keeps you interested from start to finish, has a polish to it and a style all it's own, and in general is better than 99.9 % of most movies that ever make the theaters. So if you're going to stop reading my most likely ranting review, know that I'm giving it a 4-star rating and enjoy the movie.
Working on a script for ten-plus years, Nolan does what very few writer/directors can do; he creates a unique world that is unlike anything you've ever seen. It is intelligent in a way few movies are and it requires, it demands that you pay attention. People walked into the theaters 4 or 5 minutes late, and all I could think was "Well, they're screwed." Coming up with the best way to recommend this movie, I'll say this. Watching it, you get that feeling that you're watching what a movie should be; an experience. The visuals, the acting, the writing, Hans Zimmer's pulsing score, it all comes together in a way few movies do. Here comes the hard part, trying to explain the plot.
Dom Cobb (Leonardo DiCaprio) is the best of the best at what he does. He's a dream thief, able to steal your deepest, darkest secrets through your subconscious while you are asleep. With a specialized team and his partner Arthur (Joseph Gordon-Levitt), he is able to insert himself into someone's dreams and find out everything and anything about them. But this time, he's messed up and he is being blackmailed by an employer, an extremely powerful business man named Saito (Ken Watanabe). Instead of stealing an idea, Saito wants to implant an idea in someone's head, a rival businessman, Fischer (Cillian Murphy), so that he'll dissolve his huge empire. Cobb isn't interested until he finds out the stakes, then he goes about assembling a team to perform this 'inception,' a more dangerous technique and harder to accomplish where all the risks are raised.
To say that is the whole plot is underselling the movie. I could do reviews and reviews that really delve into what the movie is about and probably still miss something. In creating this world of dreams and subconscious, Nolan has made his own sets of rules as to what can and can't happen. Because of that, as a viewer we have no background with any of this and are forced to pay that much more attention to keep up. Honestly though, I paid attention -- no talking, no texting, no bathroom breaks -- and feel I have a pretty good grasp of what's going on. If you're worried about being confused, just go in with an open mind and do your best to keep up. At a certain point, just go along for the ride and enjoy yourself.
As was the case with Nolan's previous big-budget movies (the two Batman movies and The Prestige), he's able to put an impressive cast together. If you had told me 10 years ago watching Titanic that I'd like DiCaprio as an actor, I'd have said you were crazy. But starring as Cobb, he continues a string of movies where he's not just tolerable, he's a strong actor who can stand on his own. Joining him on his team are Ariadne (Ellen Page), the architect of the dream worlds they go into, Eames (Tom Hardy), the forger, Yusuf (Dileep Rao), the chemist, and Gordon-Levitt as Arthur. Hardy especially stands out, but all of the team more than hold their own. Watanabe and Murphy are more chess pieces to be played with, but their presence alone helps the story. French beauty Marion Cotillard is perfectly scary in a supporting role, and then add in Tom Berenger, Pete Postlethwaite and Michael Caine with small parts, and you've got a can't miss cast.
One reason I enjoyed the TV show 'Lost' so much was that it played with your perception of time and space. Where better to continue that trend than in your dreams where anything and everything from your own subconscious can make an impact? That was an element that caught me by surprise here. You can be in someone else's dream, but your own thoughts, fears, worries can fight their way into the dream-world. DiCaprio's Cobb is a prime example of this, a tortured individual with a checkered past. The best part of the movie though is the execution of the inception, a three-leveled dream as Cobb's team goes deeper into Fischer's "mind." Time is shorter in certain levels than others, what may only be seconds in one level is years in another. There of course has to be limbo then, where there is no time and dreams float about with the minds they belong to. Trippy ideas all of them, but certainly incredibly creative.
The Chicago Tribune's Michael Phillips made an excellent point about Inception, stating that this is at its heart, a heist movie, that one last job. That's the movie's strength. All these crazy visual tricks play into it as cities fold in on each other, gravity goes out the window, and time doesn't mean as much. It's basically the craziest, most involved heist ever with Cobb looking to pull off that one last job that will reunite him with his family. At its heart, Inception has that small angle, a family man trying to right a wrong, and on a bigger angle, a huge, incredibly unique storyline that pulled me in from the get-go. It's a movie that is nearly impossible to review without giving away far too much. If you've made it this long, I'll say it again. Just go see Inception and decide for yourself.
Inception <----trailer (2010): ****/****
Working on a script for ten-plus years, Nolan does what very few writer/directors can do; he creates a unique world that is unlike anything you've ever seen. It is intelligent in a way few movies are and it requires, it demands that you pay attention. People walked into the theaters 4 or 5 minutes late, and all I could think was "Well, they're screwed." Coming up with the best way to recommend this movie, I'll say this. Watching it, you get that feeling that you're watching what a movie should be; an experience. The visuals, the acting, the writing, Hans Zimmer's pulsing score, it all comes together in a way few movies do. Here comes the hard part, trying to explain the plot.
Dom Cobb (Leonardo DiCaprio) is the best of the best at what he does. He's a dream thief, able to steal your deepest, darkest secrets through your subconscious while you are asleep. With a specialized team and his partner Arthur (Joseph Gordon-Levitt), he is able to insert himself into someone's dreams and find out everything and anything about them. But this time, he's messed up and he is being blackmailed by an employer, an extremely powerful business man named Saito (Ken Watanabe). Instead of stealing an idea, Saito wants to implant an idea in someone's head, a rival businessman, Fischer (Cillian Murphy), so that he'll dissolve his huge empire. Cobb isn't interested until he finds out the stakes, then he goes about assembling a team to perform this 'inception,' a more dangerous technique and harder to accomplish where all the risks are raised.
To say that is the whole plot is underselling the movie. I could do reviews and reviews that really delve into what the movie is about and probably still miss something. In creating this world of dreams and subconscious, Nolan has made his own sets of rules as to what can and can't happen. Because of that, as a viewer we have no background with any of this and are forced to pay that much more attention to keep up. Honestly though, I paid attention -- no talking, no texting, no bathroom breaks -- and feel I have a pretty good grasp of what's going on. If you're worried about being confused, just go in with an open mind and do your best to keep up. At a certain point, just go along for the ride and enjoy yourself.
As was the case with Nolan's previous big-budget movies (the two Batman movies and The Prestige), he's able to put an impressive cast together. If you had told me 10 years ago watching Titanic that I'd like DiCaprio as an actor, I'd have said you were crazy. But starring as Cobb, he continues a string of movies where he's not just tolerable, he's a strong actor who can stand on his own. Joining him on his team are Ariadne (Ellen Page), the architect of the dream worlds they go into, Eames (Tom Hardy), the forger, Yusuf (Dileep Rao), the chemist, and Gordon-Levitt as Arthur. Hardy especially stands out, but all of the team more than hold their own. Watanabe and Murphy are more chess pieces to be played with, but their presence alone helps the story. French beauty Marion Cotillard is perfectly scary in a supporting role, and then add in Tom Berenger, Pete Postlethwaite and Michael Caine with small parts, and you've got a can't miss cast.
One reason I enjoyed the TV show 'Lost' so much was that it played with your perception of time and space. Where better to continue that trend than in your dreams where anything and everything from your own subconscious can make an impact? That was an element that caught me by surprise here. You can be in someone else's dream, but your own thoughts, fears, worries can fight their way into the dream-world. DiCaprio's Cobb is a prime example of this, a tortured individual with a checkered past. The best part of the movie though is the execution of the inception, a three-leveled dream as Cobb's team goes deeper into Fischer's "mind." Time is shorter in certain levels than others, what may only be seconds in one level is years in another. There of course has to be limbo then, where there is no time and dreams float about with the minds they belong to. Trippy ideas all of them, but certainly incredibly creative.
The Chicago Tribune's Michael Phillips made an excellent point about Inception, stating that this is at its heart, a heist movie, that one last job. That's the movie's strength. All these crazy visual tricks play into it as cities fold in on each other, gravity goes out the window, and time doesn't mean as much. It's basically the craziest, most involved heist ever with Cobb looking to pull off that one last job that will reunite him with his family. At its heart, Inception has that small angle, a family man trying to right a wrong, and on a bigger angle, a huge, incredibly unique storyline that pulled me in from the get-go. It's a movie that is nearly impossible to review without giving away far too much. If you've made it this long, I'll say it again. Just go see Inception and decide for yourself.
Inception <----trailer (2010): ****/****
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)











