Deja Vu

The thought of time travel in film rattles my brain. It's never as simple as John Smith goes back in time and explores. There are dire consequences and horrific consequences for each and every action!!! Cue intense, foreboding music! When handled correctly though -- or as much as my feeble mind can grasp -- it can be a gem, like 2006's Deja Vu.

It's Fat Tuesday in New Orleans when late in the morning the Canal Street Ferry explodes in a fiery blast that claims 500-plus lives. There is little doubt the attack was the work of a terrorist with countless law enforcement agencies descending on the town to investigate. Among them is ATF agent Doug Carlin (Denzel Washington) out of the New Orleans office. A dogged investigator, Carlin follows the clues, trying to find out why a suspicious corpse ended up in the explosion's aftermath. He's approached by an FBI agent (Val Kilmer) leading a special investigative team that has some special technology at its disposal. They say it enables them to compile satellite images to see what happened some four days before. Carlin goes along with it, starting to piece it all together, all in hopes of finding some clue that will lead them to the terrorist bomber. It isn't long though before he figures out the "satellite" description is garbage. Somehow, some way, he's literally looking back in time...

What a fun, smart, stylish movie. Like I mentioned, time-travel movies are inherently complicated to the point it is difficult/impossible to 1. Keep up with it and 2. Not shake your head at the goofiness of it. With director Tony Scott at the helm, it has some of the stylistic elements of his previous efforts, especially Man on Fire, Spy Game and Enemy of the State. The quick cuts, the rapid camera movement, the unique shooting angles, it's all there, combining with a memorable score from Harry Gregson-Williams to add that great secondary layer to the story.

For me though what sets 'Deja Vu' apart from so many time travel movies -- Back to the Future to The Terminator, Looper to Planet of the Apes and many more -- is its creativity. It seems to revel in that creativity, that original, generally unique idea. How so? SPOILERS Carlin figures out they're not looking back in time, they're literally watching the past happen through some time-bending technology this investigative team has stumbled upon. Plot holes, time discrepancies aside, it's so cool as a premise. Scott's clearly having some fun with the time-bending concept, especially with a bit of technology that allows Carlin to wear a goggle headset so the time-traveling moves with him, what he sees through the goggles is what happened previously. Wwwwwhhhhaaaatttt? The premise injects some crazy energy into the always fun car chase sub-genre. Just watch this extended chase scene, sit back and smile, take it all in.

There is something eternally watchable about Denzel Washington in just about any movie he does, from heavy drama like Philadelphia or Glory to more mainstream, fun affairs like 2 Guns, Out of Time and Deja Vu. His Doug Carlin is a career agent with the ATF, and a good agent at that. He's a dogged investigator, stubbornly pursuing his cases, especially a terrorist attack that tears apart a city with the deaths of 500-plus people. Washington is so good, so effortless, it's just a pleasure to watch him do his thing. He's calm and cool...until he isn't like when he pieces it all together and figures out exactly what kind of technology he's working with. The case develops around the dead body of a beautiful young woman (Paula Patton) from New Orleans, Carlin wondering what he could have done to save her. Could he have done something different? Not one of his best performances, but just about any Denzel is good Denzel.

Dezel is the star, and Paula Patton gets a chance to shine in the final act, but who else to look for? Doc Holliday himself, Val Kilmer, has some good chemistry as Carlin's quasi-counter, not always telling the full truth while not lying either. His team includes the always reliable Adam Goldberg, Erika Alexander and Elden Henson. As for the villain who we see in all sorts of different ways courtesy of the time-bending story, Jim Caviezel is perfectly creepy, a so-called patriot but an unhinged one willing to go to horrific measures. Bruce Greenwood is a high-ranking FBI official on the case while Matt Craven appears briefly as Doug's long-time partner in the field.

It can be so easy with time-traveling stories for things to derail and do so quickly. That's not the case here with a story that manages to hold it all together under some post-movie scrutiny. The multiple storylines (and timelines) hold together when you really (really) think about it. Through it all, it's fun, even a final act that comes across as a little forced, a little too gimmicky. Still, 'Deja' is ridiculously fun from beginning to end with a finale that's frustrating a touch, but mostly, it just works so well. So freaking entertaining. Highly recommended, a great time-bending thriller.

Deja Vu (2006): ***/****

The Equalizer

So you know that review I wrote last week about middle-aged action stars getting a crack at their own movies? You know, with Sean Penn in The Gunman which I gave a very solid 3 stars. Which we can trace to Liam Neeson piling up an incredible body count in one movie after another. Well, I like Sean Penn and Liam Neeson is one of the coolest people and actors around. But.....then there's Denzel Washington. He takes his shot at the middle-aged action star sub-genre with the very entertaining and fun 2014 flick, The Equalizer.

Living in a small apartment in Boston, Bob McCall (Washington) goes day-to-day with an almost monk-like existence. He wakes up, readies for the day, leaves his spartan apartment, goes to work at a Home Depot-like hardware store, goes home, reads and spends time at a 24-hour diner in the dead of night. He's made friends with Alina (Chloe Grace Moretz), a young prostitute who works for the Russian mob. He sees how she's treated by her brutal pimp/handler and when Bob spots her with a fresh set of bruises, decides something has to be done. He approaches the men and when they laugh at him and his efforts, Bob brutally but efficiently kills five men in the blink of an eye. Bob McCall is a retired black ops specialist who's put that life behind him...until now. With the deaths catching the eye of the mafioso back in Russia, Bob has just set the match to the powder keg. Heading to Boston to fix things is a brutal killing machine, Teddy (Marton Csokas), who has no moral objections to anything at all and is obsessed with finding whoever is responsible. Let the bullets fly...

Man, I liked this movie a lot. Bloody, bullet-riddled (and more death-producing projectiles) fun with Denzel at his coolest, a dastardly, horrifically cruel villain, and a simple, straightforward good vs. bad type of story. I'm a cheap date in general when it comes to movies -- I'll forgive just about anything as long as I'm entertained -- but this one from director Antoine Fuqua is a hell of a lot of fun. I liked it in the same way I did 'Gunman' but this one isn't so downbeat, so glum. Just a fun action movie.

Who better to direct a movie with that formula than Mr. Fuqua? No one I can think. This is a talented director who specializes in guy's guys action movies, including Training Day, Tears of the Sun, King Arthur, Shooter, and Olympus Has Fallen (haven't seen Southpaw yet but it's on my list!). Those are some damn entertaining movies. If the basic description from 'Equalizer' sounds familiar it borrows touches here and there from Death Wish and Taxi Driver, among others. It isn't always the most subtle flick around, but it doesn't need to be. There's good and there's bad and sometimes you've got to do something about the bad before it becomes too powerful. I liked that no-nonsense attitude that Fuqua, Washington and Co. take. It's hard not to root for Washington's Bob, and it's easy to root against the Russian mob. Who doesn't like seeing scumbag mobsters get knocked off in gruesome fashion? I, for one, like it very much.

This was the first time since 2001's Training Day that Washington and Fuqua worked together. It was a pairing that won Washington a well-deserved Best Actor Oscar. Here? Nothing award-winning, but clearly two guys who know how to bring a badass character to life. We don't learn a ton about Bob's past, only tidbits here and there referring to his bloody black ops past. We do learn how horrifically skilled he is at what he does. Putting that life past him, Bob reads, works and helps those around him, sometimes in horrifically bloody ways. He helps friends and co-workers with a pat on the shoulder, a smile, an encouraging word, but when the chips are down, watch out. Don't get in his way and definitely don't hurt anyone even remotely close to him because you'll be next on his list. Part vigilante, part guardian angel, Washington does a great job with the part.

If this sounds like an insult or a dig on my part, it most assuredly is NOT. Fuqua knows the action genre and knows all the little touches to bring his hero to life. Cliched? Yep. Stereotypical? Surely. Supremely cool? You'd better freaking believe it. There are some cool little style moments, Washington scanning a room and planning his attack out in a quick second. We see a hardness come into his eyes when the killing moment comes along. And yes, we get the cool Action Star moments, walking away from a huge fire/explosion. Walking through a mansion littered with dead bodies, nameless henchmen he dispatched off-camera with ease. It could be cheesy or too cliched, but Fuqua and Washington commit and take it seriously. It's never overdone or tries too hard. 'Equalizer' finds that right balance right down the middle.

Csokas may not be a huge star or recognizable name but you've no doubt seen him before. He's a gem, biting into his villain's role like his life depended on it. Cold, brutal, efficient and without emotion, his Teddy has a bottom line that he needs to get accomplished and doesn't care how he gets it done or who he has to kill. If that don't make a good villain, I don't know what does! Moretz is solid with a strong chemistry with Washington as does Johnny Skourtis as Ralphie, a co-worker Bob is trying to help lose weight so he can become a security guard. In the familiar faces department, look for David Harbour, Bill Pullman and Melissa Leo in key supporting parts as well.

This isn't a flick that tries to rewrite the genre. In fact, its general familiarity within the genre and some character and story conventions works in its favor. Sure, it isn't perfect and goes for some easy, pull the heart-string moments at times, but Denzel Washington is one badass action hero and the story and action is fun from beginning to end. Highly recommended.

The Equalizer (2014): ***/****

2 Guns

I love a good crime thriller. Don't you? You can decide how dark one should be, how action-packed, even how funny it is. Maybe all of the above even. If there was ever a decade that helped put the crime thriller on the map, it was the 1970s. Watching 2013's 2 Guns -- which I liked a lot -- I felt almost like it was a tribute film, a buddy crime thriller reminiscent of so many good 1970s thrillers.

Low-level criminals Bobby Beans (Denzel Washington) and Michael 'Stig' Stigman (Mark Wahlberg) have been working together, providing odds and ends for a drug cartel for almost a year now. When a deal with cartel kingpin Papi Greco (Edward James Olmos) doesn't go quite as planned, Bobby goes along with Stig's plan that he's been brewing about for months. Greco keeps a ridiculous amount of money as the Tres Cruces bank, somewhere around $3 million. Bobby and Stig are both keeping a secret from each other though, Bobby an undercover D.E.A. agent, Stig an undercover agent with Navy Intelligence. With backing from their supervisors, they pull off the robbery but get far more than they expected. Someone is setting them up. There isn't $3 million in the bank, and it doesn't belong to Greco. There's $43 million, and its powerful owner (Bill Paxton) wants it back at all costs.

It was hard not to like this movie. From director Baltasar Kormakur (who worked with Wahlberg on Contraband), 'Guns' is based off a graphic novel of the same name. It received mixed reviews last summer, but audiences seemed to like it, piling up a $131 million box office. The appeal is obvious, a buddy flick along the U.S./Mexico border with drug cartels, shootouts, corrupt government agencies, some cool car chases, and two very likable leads. Watching the DVD special features, writer Blake Masters clearly is a fan of the genre, mentioning Sam Peckinpah and Butch and Sundance as influences. The graphic novel author, Steven Grant, is the same way, a huge fan of where this genre has come from. Above all else, this is a really fun movie. It's content to be fun too, and there's absolutely nothing wrong with that.

Before I figured out what the story was about, my initial reaction was.....come on, do I really need to spell it out? It's Denzel Washington and Mark Wahlberg, two of my favorite actors, working together!! How can that go wrong? I submit that IT CANNOT. That's the beauty of films like this. You get two or three or four actors/actresses, hand them a script and let them go. These are fun parts that Washington and Wahlberg clearly had some fun bringing to life. Buddy/road movies like this have a perfection in following their formula. Two guys working together, not quite trusting each other but they don't have any other options, and everyone is against them. Their personalities are different -- Bobby quieter, smooth and charming, Stig a motor-mouthed, likable tough guy -- but really? They're not so different. Similar backgrounds, similar loyalties when it comes to getting the job done.

It doesn't hurt that both Washington and Wahlberg are two very likable actors on-screen. Nowhere is that more evident than their dialogue together. These are fast-paced, lightning-quick delivered scenes that certainly reflect two guys who've spent too much time together doing shady deals for drug cartels. The opening scene has Stig in a diner trying to order breakfast for Bobby, Bobby correcting everything that's said and then arguing about why the other one was so very wrong. It's a formula that's used a handful of times in some contagiously funny scenes, Stig trying to convince Bobby that they're actually friends, Bobby stubborn as ever in opening up some. Just a fun to watch and listen to chemistry that gives a humorous edge to the crime aspect of the story.

As for the rest of the cast, they're there to keep us guessing. Who's good? Who's bad? Who's got some tricks up their sleeve? Olmos is having some fun as Papi Greco, smooth and slimy, always ready to turn on anyone for a payday. Paula Patton gets the eye candy role (the topless eye candy, very essential to the story) as Deb, Bobby's quasi-girlfriend and contact officer within the D.E.A., Robert John Burke as Jessup, their commanding officer. Paxton gets to ham it up as Earl, the man who wants his money back, greasy hair, thin mustache and quirky to a T. James Marsden is good too as Quince, Stig's commanding officer within Navy Intelligence trying to put together a hugely successful case. Even Fred Ward makes a quick appearance as a Navy Admiral who may be able to help Stig. Definitely some fun, cool parts.

I just liked this movie, plain and simple. It reminded me of everything from Charley Varrick (robbing mafia money) to The Outfit (low level hoods) to Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Garcia (the border setting). There is absolutely nothing wrong with a movie wanting to be entertaining with absolutely no other intentions. By the time the story builds to a showdown at Greco's Mexican villa, it's just too perfect. About 28 different sides in a glorious shootout with a whole lot of money on the line. It's hard not to like movies about this. A buddy/road movie with tones of film noir, 1970s crime thrillers and that oh so perfect pulpy feel, how can you lose?

2 Guns (2013): ***/****

Flight

Released in theaters in November 2012, director Robert Zemeckis' film Flight has generated all sorts of positive buzz. It received almost uniformly glowing reviews, and star Denzel Washington has earned a Best Actor nomination for his lead performance. It's a decent enough film, but seriously....did I miss something? I came away hugely disappointed, even bored, with this one.

A longtime pilot, Captain Whit Whittaker (Washington) heads to the Orland airport to pilot a quick flight from Orlando to Atlanta, barely in the air for an hour. But as the flight nears its destination, Whittaker's co-pilot (Brian Geraghty) freaks out when the plane's controls go dead in his hand. Whittaker calmly tries to right the ship, but nothing he do seems to help, especially when the airliner starts to nose dive straight down to the Earth. With time running out, Whittaker does save the day, controlling the plane and turning it so he's actually flying upside down. He puts the plane down in a field, and 96 of 102 people onboard make it through the horrific incident. Whittaker is a hero, or is he? A toxicology report says otherwise, and an investigation reveals a much deeper, darker side to the supposedly heroic Captain Whittaker.

I'm vastly disappointed that I have to say I was hugely disappointed with this film. The combination of Washington, Zemeckis and a strong supporting cast seemed like it would be all I needed to go along with this one. So what happened somewhere along the road? I'm not quite sure. The best I can come up with is that I don't really know the point of the movie. I don't know what Zemeckis and screenwriter John Gatins are trying to say. The movie clocks in at 138 minutes, and we get our money's worth. It feels long, very long. The story isn't quite episodic, but that's only because nothing really happens. We see Whittaker talk to a long list of people, all in hopes of figuring out his own fate and involvement with the crash. There are some truly dumb transitions, plot twists and turns that are horrifically stupid, but the story needs them to happen. That's never a good reason. Dumb rarely helps a smart movie.

All I can come up with as to Zemeckis and Gatins' intentions is a character study of a truly unpleasant, very dark, flawed individual. Washington has done dark before, but nothing quite like this. His Whit Whittaker is one of his most easily hated characters. SPOILERS STOP READING SPOILERS Whit is addicted to all sorts of drugs and is a functioning alcoholic. He flies the plane drunk and with drugs in his system, most notably cocaine. Was it his fault? No, it was a mechanical issue, but how can anyone trust him? Does he want anyone to trust him END OF SPOILERS KEEP ON READING I don't need a main character to be 100% sympathetic -- I love dark main characters -- but here, I was actually rooting against Whit. He is offered help by everyone around him, and still he refuses. It's a decent enough performance from Washington, but Oscar nomination worthy? I think not.

Where the movie doesn't fall short is in the supporting cast. Bruce Greenwood plays Charlie Anderson, the pilots' union representative working closely with Whit as the crash investigation grows. Don Cheadle plays Hugh Lang, a top-level lawyer who knows every nook and cranny, and he's going to use all of them to help get Whit off unscathed. I liked both performances a lot, two men genuinely trying to help Whit even though they're rebuffed at every opportunity. John Goodman hams it up as Harling Mays, Whit's drug supplier, who is around for three quick scenes. Along with Geraghty, Nadine Velazquez and Tamara Tunie play two of the flight attendants on the doomed flight. Kelly Reilly plays Nicole, a woman in her late 20s struggling with drug addiction who meets Whit following the crash. And last, Melissa Leo plays Ellen Block, the head of the NTSB investigating committee.  

Is the point of the movie to show a truly flawed, not particularly likable character like Washington's Whit Whittaker? I feel like there should have been more going on than just that. Flaws are interesting, but alcoholism doesn't translate well in the interesting department. Similar to Days of Wine and Roses, it isn't appealing in the least to watch an individual keep regressing into their own inner demons. How many times can we see the same thing before it gets repetitive? I was intrigued by Whittaker, but that's all. I was never truly into the character, the film, or the story. His budding relationship with Reilly's Nicole doesn't go anywhere and drags down an already slow-moving story.

Some scenes do work. The opening plane crash sequence is startling and unsettling, but it doesn't come as much of a surprise. If you've seen the trailer, you've seen it. Just the same, the image of Whit's plane flying upside down is an amazing visual to watch. As well, the final scenes at the NTSB hearing are solid as Whit is interrogated, his inner demons torturing him as he decides how much to admit to. The build-up to those scenes feature some of those awfully dumb twists that come across as unnecessary. I just don't know. Almost all the reviews were positive, but I just didn't like this film enough to recommend it. Very disappointing.

Flight (2012): ** 1/2 /****

He Got Game

As a director, producer, New York Knicks fan, and writer, Spike Lee is one of the most dividing names currently working in films. Just about everyone has an opinion on Lee -- for good or bad -- but somewhere in there around the strong opinions and controversial comments is a very talented director. One of his best was obviously an important film for the diehard basketball fan, 1998's He Got Game.

A high school senior living in Brooklyn and caring for his sister (Zelda Harris), Jesus Shuttlesworth (NBA star Ray Allen) is a basketball star and the No. 1 recruit in the country. The world is smothering Jesus as he makes his future plans. Does he forgo his college eligibility and declare for the NBA Draft or does he decide on a university to attend? It's a decision that could cost or produce millions depending on how it works out. It's a decision that the Governor -- an alum of Big State University -- is interested in. He cuts a deal with Jesus' father, Jake (Denzel Washington), currently wasting away in Attica. Jake will be "released" for a week with one goal; get Jesus to commit to Big State, and his sentence will be severely shortened. 

I'm a fan of Spike Lee, not a diehard fan, but his films are always interesting. Now whether you take them as good or bad interesting, that's a different story, but I typically enjoy his films. However you feel about Lee, I think this is a film where you have to give him credit. 'Game' tries to accomplish a lot in its storytelling, and for the most part, it accomplishes that. It's frightening in Lee's ability to make a film that so accurately predicts the future, in this case the business of sports. Jesus' decision in theory just effects him, but that's a naive way to look at it. Everyone in the world and business of sports will be dramatically affected by his plans. Look at 'Game' in 2012, and the things we see are familiar, normal, everyday things we'd see on ESPN. Not so much in 1998. Think LeBron James, and you've got this movie.

One of Lee's trademarks as a director is his style, and that's evident here. The opening montage shows basketball (and sports on a bigger level) at its purest, kids and teenagers playing from a wide variety of backgrounds and locations. They play out of love because they want to. Watch it HERE starting at :30.  A monologue later from one shady guy (Roger Guenveur Smith) who claims to have Jesus' best intentions at heart is frightening in its accuracy. Everyone Jesus has ever met is about to become his best friend. What should be a pure, innocent and personal decision -- a 17, 18 year old kid picking his college choice -- becomes something dirty. Everyone involved starts to see the $ all over Jesus. It's sad that this is where sports has gone, but it's the truth of the business.

When this movie is clicking on all cylinders, it's that cynical nature that works. The most effective dramatic, emotional moments come from the interaction and completely shattered relationship between Jake and Jesus. We learn why Jake is in Attica, and more importantly why Jesus despises him. The performances from Washington and Allen are the best things going for 'Game.' When has Washington ever not delivered a worthy performance? None I can think of. His Jake is not an easy character to like, but that's the beauty of it. He knows he made mistakes, but he also did certain things the right way. The best thing going is we're not sure of his intentions. Does he want Jesus to go to Big State because it's what is best for him or because it will get him a reduced sentence? Playing Jesus, Allen (a Milwaukee Bucks star at the time) delivers a natural, heartfelt performance, better than just about 99% of all athletes' performances in a movie. Oh, and his jump shot is disgustingly beautiful to watch.

There are moments of perfection in this father-son relationship. The movie is at its strongest when focusing on this reconnecting, but certain scenes ring truer than others. The best scenes are those of Jake and Jesus on a basketball court. In quick, little snippets, we see Jake pushing Jesus as a little boy to get better. Later, we see an encounter where maybe Jake pushes too far, and a 12-year old Jesus responding with frustration like a 12-year old should. The best scene -- and one of my all-time favorites -- is a one-on-one game between Jake and Jesus as time runs out on Jake's "mission." Jesus is a significantly more skilled player now, but it's still a battle, Jake giving him nothing. Watch it in its entirety HERE. Stylized, message, story, I think it's one of those rare perfect scenes.

Before I forget, there are some other halfway decent actors/actresses around. Milla Jovovich plays Dakota, a prostitute Jake meets, while Rosario Dawson is particularly memorable as LaLa, Jesus' girlfriend who is up to something. 32-year old Hill Harper is effective playing Booger, Jesus' cousin and teammate. Jim Brown and Joseph Lyle Taylor have some fun as Jake's ever-present parole officers with Ned Beatty playing the warden at Attica cutting a deal with Jake. Bill Nunn is a slimy scene-stealer as Jesus' money-grubbing uncle with Michelle Shay as his more thoughtful aunt. Also look for Lee favorite John Turturro as a coach pulling out all the stops to recruit Jesus. Sports fans should also look for countless cameos from Michael Jordan to Shaq to Reggie Miller with countless coaches and TV personalities making an appearance.

Say what you want about Spike Lee, but he's a talented director, and this is one of his best. Give it a shot. I don't know how long this link will stay up there, but check out the full movie HERE at Youtube.

He Got Game <---trailer (1998): *** 1/2 /****  

Safe House

Denzel Washington is one of a rare breed in Hollywood. He's an Academy Award-winning actor who has shown that regardless of the role he's in, he is truly an actor. On the other side, he's also a movie star, a true movie star. There aren't many actors/actresses around who have the cache that Washington does. Oh, he's in a new movie? Sign me up. It doesn't hurt that with 2012's Safe House, it's also a good movie.

Having been stationed in Cape Town, South Africa for 12 months, CIA agent Matthew Weston (Ryan Reynolds) is at the end of his rope. His lone task is to care for and watch over a CIA safe house, one that in his year on duty has seen absolutely zero visitors. That is, until now. One day, a CIA extract team (led by Robert Patrick) arrives at the safe house with a prisoner, Tobin Frost (Washington), a rogue agent suspected of selling intelligence secrets to the highest bidder. Before the interrogation can begin though, the safe house is attacked with Tobin as the target. Weston takes him out and finds himself on the run, needing to hide long enough until help can arrive. What isn't Tobin telling him though? And how did the attackers know the time and place to attack? Someone most definitely wants Tobin dead, and Weston may be the collateral damage.

An espionage thriller set in South Africa with Denzel Washington, Ryan Reynolds, and a crew of more than reliable actors in supporting roles? Oh, count me in. From director Daniel Espinosa, Safe House doesn't break new ground in the genre. There is a familiarity with the story and characters, but not that overdone feel of having seen everything done before and done to death. With its washed out colors and quick editing, it has the look and feel of a Tony Scott flick crossed with a Jason Bourne movie. It isn't like those movies, just similar. Espinosa handles the twisting, fast-moving story very professionally. As a viewer, you're always aware the revelations are coming (somewhat predictably), but the enjoyment comes from the ride along the way. The action is impressive, but there's not too much. The twists make sense and fit logically into the story. And the characters? Stock characters from the spy/espionage genre, but good ones at that.

Much of the appeal from Safe House will no doubt come from Denzel Washington as spy come in from the cold Tobin Frost. Washington isn't the type of actor who's in 9 or 10 movies a year, picking and choosing his roles more carefully. When they come along, you've got to enjoy and appreciate them. When he's on-screen, Washington is effortlessly cool, making him an ideal choice to play a possibly rogue agent looking to come in. Tobin is a master manipulator, highly intelligent, very capable of handling himself, and ready and willing to use a wide network of associates and contacts to help his cause. His motivations are kept in the dark to a point -- left in the dark -- but it's clear he's fed up with living a hidden life. He's the one who sets the action in motion, and when it starts, it never slows down. There are very few must-see actors, but Washington is one of them. The actor and character leave you wanting more.

As his counter, Ryan Reynolds shows again why he's one of the rising stars in Hollywood. We meet him in the beginning; an inexperienced agent looking for actual field work, wasting away in a pointless job. He keeps secrets about his job from his girlfriend (Nora Arnezeder), hoping to get reassignment somewhere. As he's thrust into the world he's only dreamed of up to this point, we see a transformation, a young agent learning in a do-or-die situation. His comedic abilities as an actor have never been in question, but with parts like this and 2006's Smokin' Aces, Reynolds shows he is very capable of being an action star. Let's not talk about Green Lantern which looked like all sorts of awful. Most importantly though, Reynolds isn't overshadowed by Washington. Their scenes together keep things flowing when the bullets aren't flying. Tobin is playing Weston to a point so can the inexperienced agent figure it out and fight back?

Who else to look for? Washington is the drawing card, but there's no drop-off between him and the rest of the cast. Back in Langley at CIA headquarters, Sam Shepard, Brendan Gleeson and Vera Farmiga play CIA supervisors trying to piece everything together. What exactly is going on in South Africa, and who's on who's side? Ruben Blades makes a quick appearance as Carlos, an old associate of Tobin's who helps him out as he tries to get out of South Africa. Patrick helps legitimize the small part as Keifer, the leader of the CIA extract team, with Liam Cunningham briefly appearing as an MI6 link to Tobin. Two other worthwhile parts include Vargas (Fares Fares), the killer tasked with killing Frost and Weston, and Keller (Joel Kinnaman), another safe house operative looking for any sort of excitement.

With a 115-minute long movie, director Espinosa keeps things flowing and never really lets up in the action department. Expansive, loud shootouts, harrowing car chases through Cape Town's crowded streets, and knock down, brutal hand-to-hand fights pepper the story throughout. The editing is lightning-paced, but you're always able to keep up and see what's going on. Thankfully, the brakes were tapped before 'Safe' reached Bourne-editing territory. The shaky camera never goes too far, but you do feel like you're there with the action. South Africa is an exotic, different location for the thriller as well, not the typical backdrop for an espionage story. A classic? No, but it's an above average flick with its fair share of unique qualities.

Safe House <---trailer (2012): ***/****

The Pelican Brief

Serial killers, lunatic murderers, freaky alien attacks, deranged animal assaults; all creepy and scary in their own way, all played up in all sorts of movies. What could be the creepiest thing? How about a government meant to protect and look out for its people up to all sorts of shady activities? Conspiracies left and right with millions and even billions of dollars on the line to the point where a few lives don't matter. Nothing flashy, just good entertainment, 1993's The Pelican Brief.

Two U.S. Supreme Court judges have been assassinated, and no one knows where to start. A Tulane law student, Darby Shaw (Julia Roberts), starts her own investigation and gives her findings to boyfriend/law professor, Thomas Callahan (Sam Shepard). The brief she's written seems a little far-fetched, but in the intelligence community it has hit a nerve. Anyone associated with the brief starts turning up dead, leaving Darby to assume she's next. She turns to an investigative reporter, Gray Grantham (Denzel Washington), working in Washington D.C. for help. Darby and Gray begin to look into her findings, realizing they've stumbled into something bigger than them. Can they prove the brief as accurate before they too are taken care of?

Any movie based off a John Grisham novel is off to a flying start so 'Pelican' earns points before the movie has even started. Directed by Alan J. Pakula, this government thriller is polished and professional, well-told and well-executed. It keeps you guessing, giving you that uncomfortable feel of a shady, sinister government up to no good. Would you expect anything less from the director of All the President's Men?  The movie is maybe a little long at 141 minutes, but it doesn't drag, staying true to Grisham's novel. James Horner's score is a good one, using samples from Glory and Braveheart among a few other recognizable stings.

Starring together in 1993, Roberts and Washington were two of the rising stars in Hollywood.  As so many reviews point out, no one does distressed and terrified quite like Julia Roberts.  Playing Darby Shaw, Roberts does a good job of making her character frazzled without being obnoxious. Seeing what she sees? I don't blame her being frazzled. She composes herself and turns it outward, intending to prove her theory right. As the bloodhound-like investigative reporter, Washington has the best part as Gray. He can sniff out a story and get it to print like few others can.  Once they meet about halfway through the movie, 'Pelican' picks up some, Roberts and Washington showing off an easy-going, likable chemistry. Good performances to lead the way. 

Like any good thrillers, this is a movie that unsettles you in an incredibly smart way. They aren't 'Gotcha!' moments. Instead, they're quiet moments that build up the tension. Is someone waiting around a corner to kill you? More importantly, who's behind all this killing? The idea/premise of a government agency with all its resources trying to kill one person is what so many government thrillers are based in. What's one little murder to people like that? You never know when they'll strike or where, and that's where 'Pelican' works so well.

The performances in support of Roberts and Washington are something else. With a long list of speaking roles, most are only around for two or three scenes so enjoy them, and don't blink! Robert Culp is particularly memorable as the President of the United States, Tony Goldwyn playing his shifty Chief of Staff. Stanley Tucci is startling as Khamel, an assassin with seemingly no rival. John Lithgow plays Smith, Gray's beaten-down but trusting newspaper editor. Playing the head of the FBI, James Sikking is just the right amount of ability and paranoia, balancing out someone turning on him at any time. Even Hume Cronyn makes a quick appearance as an aging Supreme Court Justice. That is by no means all of the names worth mentioning, but the list could go on for several more reviews. Lots of talent assembled here, lots of recognizable faces.

I was surprised to find a relatively modest 6.3 rating out of 10 at IMDB for this movie. It isn't anything that new, and the ending is a little too tidy, but I enjoyed it nonetheless. Well-written and with good performances from top to bottom. You can't ask for too much more in a movie.

The Pelican Brief <---trailer (1993): ***/****

Unstoppable

What makes a good bad guy? I'm not talking run of the mill, everyday type villains.  We're talking epically bad, that perfect villain that doesn't have an ounce of good, a shred of decency in them. There's Darth Vader, the T-1000, Anton Chigurh, and any number of quality ones that I could write whole reviews about.  For the most part, the problem with many villains is that they can be stopped. Morals, principles, exhaustion, a bullet to the head (or a thousand), things can stop them. What about something man-made though with no conscious or thought process to slow it down. In the case of 2010's Unstoppable, that villain is a runaway train carrying thousands of gallons of diesel fuel and a cargo of highly dangerous chemicals.

Before I go into the movie too much, I'm going to say that I like director Tony Scott and several of the movies he's made over the years. There is nothing wrong with a director who finds a niche and sticks with it.  Whole careers have been made off that premise.  But in Scott's case, I'm struggling to think of a director currently working in Hollywood who has become more cliched, more of a stereotype of himself than Scott.  His movies are good, mindless flicks that require no thinking at all.  But seriously, I feel like I could do a movie for him with all his personal touches and audiences might not know the difference.  Unstoppable is like that, one cliche after another.  The movie isn't bad, but it's not good either.

On his first day at a new job as a train conductor for a railroad line in Pennsylvania, Will Colson (Chris Pine) is assigned to work with veteran engineer Frank Barnes (Denzel Washington) hauling 20 rail cars from one stop to another. Arriving at her office, yardmaster Connie Hooper (Rosario Dawson) receives a call that one of her trains is loose on the tracks with no one on board controlling it. The report says it's a coaster, a train that should be easily stopped, but it isn't. The half-mile long train is picking up speed, and with thousands of gallons of diesel fuel and seven cars of a dangerous chemical, it is becoming an immense missile heading into a highly populated area full of towns every few miles. All sorts of rescue efforts are brought up, but it may come down to Will and Frank riding their engine backwards, desperately trying to catch up to the runaway train, latch on and brake it before it derails. But is there enough time?

Yes, of course there's enough time. Did you really think a major studio release starring Denzel Washington and Chris Pine was going to have a downer ending? Shame on you if you did. This has to be one of the most cliched movies I've ever seen. The trailer I'll link to later basically throws everything at the wall with the hope that something sticks, something makes the audience nervous.  A train full of little kids is on the same track as the runaway train. A horse trailer is almost smashed to bits. Washington's character is about to be fired. Pine's character is having struggles back at the old homestead with the wife. There is nothing here that you won't have seen before. Nothing at all.  It's never boring, but you certainly have that feeling of having been there and done that with countless other movies.

You can't chalk that all up to Scott because the script is obviously a major contributor to the damage.  Some of it though? Oh, yeah, the blame goes on his shoulders.  Tony Scott has a very distinctive, unique shooting style.  His editing is fast, even choppy and hard to decipher at times, throwing countless quick cuts and images at you in an almost non-stop barrage.  With a story like this, that is almost necessary.  It keeps things going, adding to the sense of urgency settling in on all these people desperately trying to stop the runaway train.  But just like the issues with the story, it's the same thing over and over again.  If you saw Man on Fire, Taking of Pelham 123, Deja Vu, Spy Game, Enemy of the State (all movies I like and recommend), you've seen it all, and Scott feels like he's mailing it in here.  Not the director's best work.

The saving grace amidst all the chaos is Washington -- one of Hollywood's most bankable stars -- being paired with Pine -- one of Hollywood's up and coming stars.  In the worst movies, Denzel is worth watching, and that's no different here. He is as natural, as easygoing, as personable as any movie star I've ever seen. The fact that his character is basically a rehash of the one he played in Pelham 123 is a minor thing. His chemistry with Pine is great, their dialogue scenes so perfect you question if this movie could have been so much better if more time could have been focused on these two guys.  I've had a crush for years on Rosario Dawson so I'll basically watch anything she's in. Her part is one that just about any actress could play, but she's good nonetheless.  Also worth mentioning is Ethan Suplee as Dewey, the conductor who let his train go rogue, Kevin Dunn as a railroad exec trying to figure out what to do, Kevin Corrigan as a railroad safety expert helping Dawson, and Lew Temple as a railroad employee who may be a wild card in solving the situation.

Watching this based on a true story movie, I was never bored. How could a suicidal runaway train not be interesting, right? But that's it. There's nothing else. At 98 minutes, the movie felt stretched out, like Scott used everything he had at his disposal to get it to that length. The portrayal of the media coverage is interesting as incidents like this in the modern world of a 24/7 news cycle don't go unnoticed.  But though it may try for all it's worth, the movie never amounts to anything other than mindless -- very mindless -- entertainment.  Know what you're getting, and hopefully you'll get some enjoyment out of it.

Unstoppable <---trailer (2010): ** 1/2 /****   

The Book of Eli

Apocalypse movies have been all the rage of late, and why not? Maybe people like to see a picture of what the world we live in is heading for -- possibly that is -- but there's clearly a formula developing as to how to make apocalyptic movies. There's been a recent string of these movies including 2012 and The Road, and most recently The Book of Eli which opened in theaters yesterday.

A combination of Mad Max, The Road and Fahrenheit 451, The Book of Eli appeals to me in the same way many westerns do. The setting is the west in the U.S. some 30 years after 'the flash,' some cataclysmic incident where the ozone layer was torn open and the Earth began to burn. It wasn't a world destroyer though as many people survived, some forming into smaller groups and building communities and towns that dot the country. During the incident -- it's never spelled out although religion is hinted at for being a cause -- a revolution resulted where books, all books, burned. Now a quarter century later the world tries to build up again.

One of those people who survived the blast is Eli (Denzel Washington), a man in his late 30s, maybe early 40s who travels across the country, all the while heading west. In his possession is a leather-bound King James Bible, possibly the last one in existence with all the book burnings. He protects it closely, ready to dispatch anyone who tries to take it from him as he crosses the bleak, vacant stretches of land. One day, he walks into a small town run by a man known only as Carnegie (Gary Oldman) who rules the area because he controls the all-important water supply. In trying to gain as much power as possible, Carnegie has been looking for years for a copy of the Bible and through a young woman, Solara (Mila Kunis), working in his bar finds out that Eli has one. Carnegie wants it and will spare nothing or no one to get it, but Eli has no plans of giving it up easily.

Making their first movie in nine years, the Hughes brothers, Albert and Allen, turn in a strong movie in their return to the big screen. Working with cinematographer/director of photography Don Burgess, the twin brother directing combo create an intensely visual movie full of washed out colors -- almost like sepia -- that give everything a tired, beaten down by the world look. As Eli treks cross-country, it feels like the viewer is in this desert wasteland with him. The desert presents all sorts of dangers like hijackers (Eli's handling of an ambush is a great introductory sequence, one of the better recent action scenes) and an almost complete lack of water.

The action scenes are inspired as Eli equipped with a razor-sharp machete, pistol and pump-action shotgun deals with hijackers, thugs, and Carnegie's men. Unlike many action movies, these scenes are shown in one continuous shot without a cut. So instead of a flurry of quick-cut individual shots, we get one fast yet clear shot of Eli dispatching his attackers. As if those weren't cool enough, there's also a gunfight straight out of the old west as Eli turns to his pistol to get him out of a sticky situation with Carnegie and his demands.

This builds and builds to a phenomenal final 30 minutes. The first 90 are strong and highly enjoyable on their own, but the last half hour takes it to another level. There's one major twist -- think Sixth Sense -- that is hinted at throughout the movie but is handled so well it would be hard to pick up on an initial viewing. I didn't see it coming at all and am still coming around with it. But on a bigger level (no twist involved) it's a very emotional ending, surprisingly so since this movie is being marketed as an action flick, that goes back to what all apocalypse movies have...there will always be a remnant, a group to carry on where others have fallen. This ending features a great cameo from Malcolm McDowell, quite a departure from his Clockwork Orange part.

Starring as a man of few words on a mission, Denzel Washington is phenomenal as Eli. With little in the way of dialogue and even less background, Washington brings Eli to life, a character you find yourself rooting for because somehow you know he is in the right and doing something incredibly worthwhile. When Eli does speak, Washington shows off the old acting chops, especially when he explains how the book came into his possession. An actor more than a movie star, it's always nice to see Washington get to do some heavy-duty fight scenes too. Oldman gets back to his bad guy roots as Carnegie, and Kunis continues a string of movies where she's shown she is more than just shrill Jackie Burkhart. Also worth looking out for is Ray Stevenson as Redridge, Carnegie's right hand man, Jennifer Beals as Claudia, Solara's blind mother, Tom Waits as a suspicious storekeeper, and Frances de la Tour and Michael Gambon as an old married couple Eli meets on the road.

Not overly religious and not quite a straight action movie, The Book of Eli has a little bit of everything for the audience. Great casting, especially Washington and Oldman, help boost this apocalyptic story into something more than just its spare parts. As for the twist, it is one of those revelations that make you want to go back and watch the movie again, see if you can spot all the clues as they're presented. In this movie's case, I look forward to seeing it again because it certainly fooled me the first time around.

The Book of Eli <----trailer (2010): *** 1/2 /****

American Gangster

Any star/director combo that turned out a movie as good as 2000's Gladiator basically gets a free pass from me. I'll pretty much watch anything that comes as a result of that duo, star Russell Crowe and director Ridley Scott, working together again. It took a little while, but they did team up together in 2007's American Gangster, based on a true story as well. And as if those two weren't good enough, throw in Oscar-winner Denzel Washington into the mix.

With a Scott-produced and directed movie, it's obvious what you're going to get from the finished product. There's going to be an air of professionalism with the movie that some directors just can't produce. Great performances from the leads is almost a given, and probably most importantly of all, it'll be an entertaining movie, so much so you might not realize how real or authentic the story feels. American Gangster has all this (almost), but never reaches it's potential for whatever reason thanks to some rather leisurely storytelling. To be fair, I watched the extended DVD version which clocks in at 173 minutes opposed to the theatrical version's 154 minutes so keep that in mind as I complain.

It's 1969 in Harlem and Frank Lucas (Washington) is at a crossroads. His longtime boss/friend/father figure Bumpy Johnson -- basically the king of New York gangsters -- has died, and everyone else in NY thinks Frank's going to go with him. But Frank goes into business for himself, traveling to war-torn Vietnam to arrange a deal for a consistent supply of heroin into the U.S. which he names 'Blue Magic' for street sale. That's all Lucas needs as he takes off and the money starts rolling in, carrying him higher than even the Italian crime families. Then, there's Richie Roberts (Crowe), an honest detective infamous in the force for turning in $1 million dollars when he could have kept it for himself. Directed by supervisors, Roberts sets up a force to take down the heavy hitters in the drug industry, and sure enough, the evidence leads to a mystery man no one knows anything about, one Frank Lucas.

The story covers about seven years from Lucas' rise to his eventual conviction and jail time. It never feels rushed, and the proceedings are always pretty clear but Scott takes too much time setting things up. The first hour is downright boring and almost lost me. I realize he has to establish a background for the next two hours, but he takes a little too long. The second hour is a little better as things start moving along, but it's still not up to par with a typical Ridley Scott movie. The third hour saves the movie from being a complete bust as there's a sense of urgency, an excitement that was missing from the previous 120 or so minutes.

What surprised me most here was that Washington is not at his best. For me, Denzel is about as bankable a star as Hollywood has right now, and I'll watch him in just about anything -- maybe even read a phone book. But his Lucas is too subdued most of the time with a few quick outbursts of extreme violence, including maybe the movie's best scene because it shows the paradox Lucas has created. Like the 1972 classic The Godfather, Lucas wants to provide for his family and protect them as best he can, breaking the law be damned. He will do anything to keep them safe, including his wife Eva (Lymari Nadal) and loving mother (Ruby Dee in an Oscar-nominated supporting role).

In the same way I look at Washington, I look at Crowe. They're both actors, not movie stars. Crowe is the highpoint of Gangster as Richie Roberts, a cop trying to juggle his chaotic home life and divorced wife (an underused Carla Gugino) and the task force he's been assigned to take down the drug producers and suppliers. A New Zealand native, Crowe pulls off a pretty decent Jersey accent too in helping make Roberts the sympathetic cop. The story demands it, but a major problem is that Crowe and Washington don't have a scene together until the last 30 minutes. Their meeting (<----SPOILERS) is another great scene, and the following conversation is reminiscent of De Niro and Pacino in the coffee shop in Heat. It is scenes like this that show the potential of how good the movie should have been, but never is.

With an almost three-hour long movie, Scott fills out the ranks with a phenomenal supporting cast. Some are better than others and more than a few are left by the wayside as the story moves along, but that's almost a given with a cast list this big. Rapper RZA and John Hawkes play two members of Richie's task force, Chiwetel Ejiofor, Common, and T.I. as some of Frank's family, Ted Levine as Frank's police supervisor, and even Cuba Gooding Jr and Armand Assante as two of Frank's underworld 'contacts.' And since the movie doesn't paint Lucas as the bad guy, that part goes to Josh Brolin as the Special Investigations detective Trupo who's not too proud to take a bribe, lots of bribes.

It's disappointing writing an average review of this movie because I wanted to like it, and I was expecting a lot more. Something just doesn't click though. I won't go as far as saying it's a boring movie, but there's no heart to it, no real energy to keep things moving over an almost three hour movie. Sure, there's positives from the casting to the great 70s feel to the story, but I was expecting more. Still worth a watch though because an average movie with Crowe, Washington and Scott is still better than a ton of other new releases. Check out one of the all-time best trailers for a recent movie below.

American Gangster <----trailer (2007): **/****

The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3

Asking movie fans about remakes can be a touchy subject. I tend to agree most of the time that remakes aren't necessary depending on the movie and studios should just come up with new, creative ideas instead of going back to the well repeatedly. On the other hand, I don't get it when fans are against ANY remake. If you don't want to see it, don't. I've rarely gone into a remake thinking, "Hey, I bet this is better than the original." I'm usually looking for an entertaining story with some alterations to the story, casting, whatever. I got that with the new The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3.

The original Pelham One Two Three is a cult classic in its own right with Walter Matthau and Robert Shaw as the two leads with one big claim to fame, providing inspiration for Quentin Tarantino's Reservoir Dogs. So the remake, with bigger names headlining, still had some pretty big shoes to fill. Is it as good as the original? I'll have to think about that, but gut reaction, close but not as good.

The story is the same with a few slight changes. On a New York subway train, Pelham 123, four men led by Ryder (John Travolta) hijack a single car with its 18 passengers. Getting in contact with the Metro Transit Authority headquarters, they make their demands. They want $10 million in one hour or else they will start shooting a passenger for every minute they're late. At the other end of the radio at MTA HQ is Walter Garber (Denzel Washington), a former supervisor demoted to a desk job while under investigation for supposedly taking a bribe. What follows is a cat and mouse game as Ryder and Garber talk back and forth while NY desperately tries to put together the $10 million ransom.

The heist-like premise is a good one that quickly brings up interesting questions. They've hijacked a train, but how will they escape once they get the money? They're underground after all. It's a tense movie as Ryder, either the sanest villain ever or the craziest, I just can't decide, plays mind games with Garber and hostage negotiator Camonetti (John Turturro, good as always). A SWAT team waits at either end of the single car waiting for the order to take down the hijackers while inside the quartet are one push away from blowing away the hostages.

Enough has been changed that director Tony Scott left his mark on the movie to set it apart from the original. There's an element of technology added to the heist as Ryder has a wireless connection to Google his counterpart on the other end of the radio, and the aspect of the stock market comes up. The heist isn't as straightforward as the original with bigger plans at work, but with a reveal of Ryder's identity late in the movie the additions work. Scott's movies are often more known for their style and flash than story, and that's true here to a point, lots of slow motion blurry shots, quick cuts that can be hard to keep up with, but the director doesn't go too far with it.

There's a natural tension in the story that would be hard to mess up from the director's chair. An hour is not a long time, especially when talking about getting $10 million from a bank and then driving it through NY traffic with the time remaining. The mayor (James Gandolfini in a great part) does question at some point, "Why didn't we just use a helicopter?" Because Mr. Mayor, then we couldn't have the cool race through Manhattan as a squad car with motorcycle escort weaves through traffic.

Working with Scott for the fourth time, Washington is the heart of the movie. His Garber character is an everyman, John Smith trying to care for his family, go to work and pay his mortgage and his kids' tuition. It's the type of part that Washington could do with his eyes closed, and he doesn't disappoint. Most of the running time, all Garber can do is talk, desperately trying to stop Ryder or at least slow him down. There's a twist that works to a fault and does come as a surprise because well....he's Denzel Washington. Hamming it up as the villain, Travolta goes too far at times, but for the character his theatrics are appropriate. He's the bad guy you love to hate but can laugh at too with how off the wall some of his comments can be.

'Pelham' is Washington's and Travolta's movie. The rest of the cast makes the most of smaller parts, especially Turturro and Gandolfini, but other than those two parts no one stands out. One of my favorite character actors Luis Guzman is criminally underused in his part as Ramos, one of the four hijackers. The other two hijackers, Victor Gojcaj and Robert Vataj, are intimidating, but I don't even recall hearing their names. The two are characters with automatic weapons, and that's it, but I guess that is what the script called for. Michael Rispoli and Ramon Rodriguez are good in smaller roles as two members of MTA headquarters.

I didn't love the remake like I wanted to, but I did enjoy it. I can chalk up a lot of that to the trailer which really convinced me to see it. The ending is forced a little too much for me, but the build-up makes up for that. So overall, it lived up to my expectations of a remake. Good but not great, and worth a watch. I do recommend seeing the original, if for nothing else than to compare the two. Go see the Pelham remake, if for nothing else than Washington in a great part going toe to toe with villainous Travolta.