Iron Man 3

Okay, so can everyone agree that Robert Downey Jr. was born to play Tony Stark, the coolest of the Avengers, Iron Man? No?!? What's wrong with you? The first movie, released in 2008, started up a superhero franchise that was fun and exciting and action-packed with lots of cool characters. The series is almost a perfect companion piece to Christopher Nolan's Batman trilogy in all their cynicism and darkness. Now it's five years later and we've got our third flick for Downey, 2013's Iron Man 3. Will it be the last?

It's been several months since Tony Stark (Downey Jr.) helped the Avengers turn back Loki and his alien minions in New York City, but Tony is still struggling with what he saw and did. He hallucinates, can't sleep at night and exhibits all sorts of signs of PTSD. He may have found something to bring him out of his funk and in a big way. A mysterious terrorist dubbed the Mandarin (Ben Kingsley) is unleashing attacks all across the world, defying anyone to stop him. Governments can't stop him, countries just waiting to be attacked. Tony steps up to the plate, telling the Mandarin to come and find him. Iron Man will put an end to the worldwide tyranny. Tony gets more than he bargained for when an attack is unleashed on his coastal home. His life is torn apart and he is feared dead by everyone who knows him as well as international media outlets. Forced to work from the ground up, can Tony rebuild from the ashes to take down this new, seemingly unbeatable enemy?

Now heading into this third Iron Man installment -- this one from director Shane Black -- I was under the assumption that it would be the last of the series, excluding the Avengers sequels. Downey Jr. has said he won't continue with the Iron Man series, but he'll be there for the Avengers 2 and 3. Good news there! I went in here with mild expectations. I liked Iron Man 2, but on a second viewing liked it a little less. Reviews were fairly mixed for this third installment, but that didn't seem to matter. It is currently the fifth highest-grossing film of all-time. Woo, money! I came away disappointed with this one though and can't quite put a finger on it. It's entertaining enough if a little long. Self-indulgent? Sure, most superhero movies are. Something else is missing though. It's more than a little schizophrenic, wasting a deep cast and some really solid moments.

What's above questioning? Though the script doesn't know what to do with most of the characters, Downey Jr. steps up to the plate. This is Tony at his most human. He's been beaten down, and even though he helped the Avengers win in NYC, it took a physical and emotional toll on him. Once the Mandarin unleashes his debilitating attack, Tony/Iron Man almost has to start over. It's cool and refreshing to see this other side of a character you feel like we've gotten to know pretty well. What sets it apart is somewhere in Tony's head is the smarmy, smart-ass, ultra-billionaire Tony Stark we all know and love. This is a great character however you cut it. Black's script has its issues, its flaws from the get-go, but delving into a familiar character in a way we haven't seen before certainly makes it a worthy film.

The rest of the cast is loaded, however misused or underused. Gwyneth Paltrow returns as Pepper Potts, now in charge of Stark Industries and trying to work out her relationship with Tony as much as possible. She's given little to do for much of the movie, but gets her chance at the badass spotlight late. Don Cheadle is basically completely wasted as Rhodes, Tony's friend who's been tasked with piloting the Iron Patriot, the military's version of Iron Man. Jon Favreau returns as Happy, Tony's former bodyguard, but it's a background part here. Paul Bettany also returns and has some fun as the voice of Jarvis, Tony's robotics assistant. Young Ty Simpkins has a good part as Harley, a young boy who comes across Tony at his lowest.

Maybe the weakest part of 'Man 3' is in the Villain Department.The always solid Guy Pearce plays Aldrich Killian, a brilliant scientist who has developed the technology to manipulate human DNA and create super soldiers. Pearce is a good counter to Downey Jr., his cocky demeanor a worthy foe to Tony's similarly cocky attitude. Kingsley is a great addition to the franchise too as the underused Mandarin, a mysterious international terrorist with no qualms about death on massive levels. Rebecca Hall plays Maya Hansen, an engineer who worked with Aldrich in the past and is now caught in the middle between right and wrong. James Badge Dale is perfectly creepy as Savin, Aldrich's enhanced henchman. Two separate twists disappoint but for different reasons. One is really, truly stupid and messes with the whole tone of the movie while the other doesn't come as nearly a big a surprise as it had to be intended.

It's a superhero movie. The technology is supposed to be goofy and not in any way reality. Somewhere along the way, this one really disappointed me. Aldrich's super soldiers are a cool concept, seemingly indestructible killing machines brimming with dangerous amounts of energy in them. Maybe it's taken too far, maybe it's the relatively unexplained motives of all the bad guys (other than POWER and WORLD DOMINATION), or just the general excess of the finale, but I didn't go along with this movie as much as the previous two. The action-packed finale at a cargo shipping yard has about 50 automated Iron Man suits and Tony and Rhodey and Aldrich and Pepper and everything going on. It was just too much.

There were parts I liked, most of them dealing with Tony. The intro scene goes back to Bern in 1999 as we meet a younger but still cocky Tony, including a nice nod to the first Iron Man as we meet Shaun Toub's Ho Yinsen who we later meet in a cave with Tony in Afghanistan. Stark's monologue at the beginning and end is fitting, a man learning who he is and how he get there. Mostly, I felt like this was wasted potential. A somewhat disappointing conclusion to the trilogy (if it is the conclusion) but still worth watching for the always fun Robert Downey Jr.

Iron Man 3 (2013): ** 1/2 /****

The King's Speech

There the movie sat in my Netflix queue for well over a year. I wanted to see it. It had claimed several Oscars and had been nominated for that many more. I knew it was a good movie. Some people I talked to and some reviews I read said it was a great movie. I couldn't quite bring myself to put it up at the No. 1 spot, well, until now. Safe to say 2010's The King's Speech was worth the wait.

Since he was a young boy, Prince Albert, the Duke of York (Colin Firth), has had to deal with an at times crippling stammer whenever he speaks. He fears addressing more than a few people at a time, always knowing at any moment the stammer could kick in, and he will freeze up. His wife, Elizabeth (Helena Bonham Carter), has helped him as much as he can, going to any and all speech therapists and experts. Their latest is Lionel Logue (Geoffrey Rush), an Aussie with some out-of-the-box ideas. As Albert and Logue start to work together though, England is hurtling toward World War II where Prince Albert may be thrust into a power position he wants nothing to do with.

Big action movies, raunchy comedies, and schmaltzy romance stories. And then there are historical dramas like this where the focus is.....acting. Go figure. The focus is on the actors and actresses as they develop these characters that just happen to be real-life people. All three lead performances were nominated for an Oscar -- Firth winning, with Carter losing to Melissa Leo in The Fighter, Rush to Christian Bale in the same movie -- and this will sound simple, but it's fun to watch the actors act, especially actors as talented as these. Even the supporting performances (however small) ring true. It's always a good start when the acting is as memorable as this.

How come? Because as was the case here in director Tom Hooper's film, everything else falls into place behind it. Hooper joined Firth in the Oscar-winning department for his job behind the camera, and he deserves it. At just under two hours, the story covers a lot of ground, beginning in 1925 and running all the way to the start of World War II as Albert -- now George, 'Albert' sounds so Germanic according to Churchill -- rises to the throne of England. Hooper does a subtle but effective job with his camera, turning ordinary shots into interesting shots, making so many scenes look like paintings. From the costuming to the locations, the look of the movie helps make this period piece something special. Like period pieces that work, you feel like you're in 1930s England. It's easy to mess that up -- the audience realizing they're watching a movie -- but it is handled very effectively here.

Oh, right, back to the acting. In a performance that saw him win his second straight Oscar, Firth delivers a very human part. For all his Royal upbringing, Prince Albert has struggled through life for as long as he can remember. The opening scene where he crumbles giving a speech is heartbreaking as are several others as we see him battle his stammer while speaking. He wants to speak, to be a strong leader, but his personal make-up just won't allow it. While Firth is very good, I thought the best performance was from Rush. It's not a showy part, but it could have been. This is a supporting part that in the wrong hands would have been very obvious and even annoying. Rush never lets it get there. As Lionel, he sees all of Albert's potential and through all his unique, even odd ideas, genuinely wants to help him. In the smallest of the three parts, Carter still manages to leave a positive impression. Her Elizabeth is a loving wife who tirelessly wants to help her husband.

The period piece, where movie fans get to see some always solid character actors do their damnedest to upstage the stars. Well, sort of. 'Speech' has a handful of those parts, starting with Guy Pearce as Prince Edward, Albert's older brother who causes a stir when he becomes king because of his relationship with a twice-divorced American woman, Wallis Simpson (Eve Best). Also look for Michael Gambon as King George, Albert's dying father, Derek Jacobi as the Archbishop, Jennifer Ehle as Myrtle, Lionel's wife, and Timothy Spall as Winston Churchill, the soon-to-be Prime Minister of England.

I don't know what I was expecting going into this Best Picture-winning film. I didn't love it as much as appreciate it, but I think that was the objective. The acting is great as is the visual look of the movie, but it's never anything Earth-shattering in its execution. Sit back and enjoy the natural drama and even some humor of the situation. I especially enjoyed the relationship and friendship that develops between Albert and Logue as they work together. An actor's got to act, and that's on display here.

The King's Speech <---trailer (2010): ***/****

Prometheus

With moves like 1979's Alien and 1982's Blade Runner, director Ridley Scott created two of the most well-known, well-respected, and popular science fiction movies of the last 30-plus years, and seemingly was on the road to becoming a sci-fi master. To be fair, with those two movies alone, he is a sci-fi master. He hadn't returned to science fiction until the recent release, 2012's Prometheus, a prequel to Alien. Worth the wait? Flawed overall, but an epic success when it does work.

It is the year 2089 and two scientists, Dr. Elizabeth Shaw (Noomi Rapace) and Dr. Charlie Holloway (Logan Marshall-Green), have made a series of discoveries -- cave paintings from different places and eras in human history -- that all have a common link. They all contain a drawing of some sort of being pointing to the same galactic location. Some two years later onboard the spaceship Prometheus, Shaw and Holloway are part of an expedition traveling to the darkest corners of the universe in search of what those paintings might mean. Is there intelligent life out there? Did they create us as a race? After the two-year journey, Prometheus arrives at the moon LV-223 to continue the investigation. They find evidence of another race but something else as well. What did this race create?

Some film directors just have credibility at the very mention of their name, and Ridley Scott is one of those few. When this movie is good, it is great. I didn't see it in 3-D, but the look of the movie is incredible, especially a mysterious opening sequence...but more on that later. The musical score is kept to a minimum, but when it's used, it makes quite an impression (kudos to composer Marc Streitenfeld). Like the most effective science fiction stories and movies, it succeeds because it makes you think, makes you question. What better place to do that than the far reaches of the universe? Anything could exist out there, friendly or aggressive. Were we put on Earth for a reason? Does faith mean anything? Do your beliefs truly mean something to you? When you're in a spot, how do you react? At its best, Scott's film explores some of these issues. Oh, he also does a fair job trying to scare the hell out of you as a viewer.

It's been years since I've seen the Alien movies, but as a prequel, it has a distinctly different feel. The visual is stunning here. Yes, it's a science fiction movie that degenerates into a creature feature (unfortunately), but it can also fairly and accurately be described as an artsy, minimalist take on mankind, space travel, the future and so much more. Basically the exact opposite of a summer blockbuster. It forces you to pay attention and think for yourself. It isn't always an easy movie to follow, but for the most part you're rewarded in the end. Nothing is ever really spelled out for you. That can be both rewarding and frustrating, especially in the finale. It is different though, and Scott tries for something more than the norm.

An effective, solid ensemble cast steps to the forefront for Scott's prequel, starting with Rapace and Holloway as the archeologists searching for answers. Charlize Theron is brutally cold and efficient as Vickers, the Weyland Corporation representative in charge of making sure the mission goes off according to plan. Her looks can deceive you, but she's cold and calculated. Idris Elba has another scene-stealing part as Janek, the Prometheus captain (with co-pilots Emun Elliott and Benedict Wong), an everyman but highly intelligent and able to piece things together for his job and mission. Guy Pearce in heavy make-up plays Weyland, the aging, decrepit CEO who finances the deep space mission. Sean Harris and Rafe Spall have smaller but just as important parts as Fifield and Millburn, two members of the investigating team, each with their own hopes on the mission. Also look for Patrick Wilson in a one-scene part, Shaw's father in a dream sequence.

The part that no doubt most moviegoers will remember though is David, an android created by the Weyland Corp. to blend in as a human, possessing everything but a soul. David is played to perfection by rising star Michael Fassbender in a part that could/should earn him an Oscar nod. The obvious comparison is to Hal in Space Odyssey, but that's limiting and not a completely fair comparison. This android has human mannerisms and touches -- he moves like a man, rides bikes, plays basketball, mimics Peter O'Toole in Lawrence of Arabia -- but there's also that one thing, that one little thing that prevents him from being a man. It's hard to put my finger on it, but Fassbender does an incredible job. His David is sympathetic, menacing, brilliant, intimidating and conniving. Because he can be programmed, it's can be difficult to get a read on his intentions, but whatever they may be, Fassbender is the star of Prometheus without a doubt.

Certain moments in Prometheus have stuck with me since seeing it and no doubt will stick with me in the days and weeks to come. The opening sequence is a jaw-dropper; a supremely muscle-bound, albino humanoid being left on a desolate, isolated landscape (a pre-civilization Earth?) as a spaceship takes off. He takes a potion that kills him, his body decomposing in seconds. Is it the creation of mankind? Who knows for sure? The arrival at LV-223 is equally impressive, the Prometheus attempting to find a landing zone as it travels through the atmosphere and the terrain below. Stunning visual sequences, both of them. Once the crew detects some variation on life, the visual turns to the dark and unsettling, the feeling of Doomsday looming in the air.

While I will readily recommend the movie overall, I can also say I came away slightly disappointed in the end. I don't need everything wrapped up nicely with a bow, and open-ended endings aren't a movie killer for me. But as is here, the ending left me unsatisfied. I wanted more.....of something. It doesn't have to be answers spelled out for me, but there's got to be something. Here, it just ends. On the whole, I'll heartily recommend it. Know there are flaws, but the positives ended up being particularly memorable for this moviegoer. Definitely give this one a try! Also check out the great teaser trailer below. The full-length trailer (watch HERE) is also above average as trailers go.

Prometheus <---trailer (2012): ***/****

The Hard Word

An Aussie crime drama with a handful of recognizable actors, a story that is both highly dramatic and oddly funny, and in general a feeling of originality (if somewhat misplaced and odd) that a lot of movies just don't have. All these things work for and against 2002's The Hard Word, a genuinely weird movie that I still managed to enjoy.

Working as pawns for a greedy, backstabbing lawyer, Frank (Robert Taylor), and a group of corrupt politicians and policemen, three brothers, Dale (Guy Pearce), Shane (Joel Edgerton) and Mal (Damien Richardson) are three of the most successful bank robbers Australia has ever seen, always trying to pull jobs without violence. Now though they've been caught and are serving time, but Frank has a plan, a heist that will net them $20 million dollars while they're "on parole." None of the brothers, especially Dale, thinks much of it, but they're basically blackmailed into the spot. Their goal? Take down the gambling winnings from the Melbourne Cup, but with Frank sleeping with Dale's wife, Carol (Rachel Griffiths), nothing goes off quite as planned. Now all that's to be decided is whether the brothers can get out alive.

Not as a judgment against Australian films, but there is something indescribably odd crime drama. It is violent and harsh, but it also has some out of left field comedic moments (most of them incredibly dark and twisted). Director Scott Roberts must have had a lot of ideas brewing in his head, and he throws it all together. The weirdness of all those different elements have a surprising affect in that they work. How? Oh, I have no idea, but it does. Maybe because it is so genuinely different and unique, but I went along with it. Part of me didn't always believe what I was watching, and another part might not have even liked certain parts of the movie. Still, it's weird but that good sort of weird.

What works through and above and around that weirdness is the camaraderie we see among the three brothers. In jail or not, working a job, eating a meal, I believed in them. They have a bond that would be hard to fake. They bitch and moan at each other but all the while want what's best for the others. When Shane gets sick and is almost left behind, Dale and Mal fake a similar illness and stick around with him, putting the job off for a little. So we have these three brothers who are extremely close, and they just happen to be good at....robbing banks. They're good at it but never seem to have any money, constantly needing a new, better job. Pearce, Edgerton and Richardson are the best things going for the movie, all three brothers coming across as believable. And more on this later, but they're some of my favorite characters...the doomed variety.

Sifting through the odd comedy and off the wall, scatter-brained storytelling is the basis of a great crime drama featuring many aspects of a 1940s film noir. Those aspects are when the movie is moving along at a good pace, knowing where it wants to go. Griffiths as Carol is the femme fatale, a beautiful, smart and sexy woman who's going to do what she needs to do to survive. She loves Pearce's Dale but also knows she has to make it on her own while he's inside. Taylor as the slimy Frank is the real villain, the conniving lawyer who will no doubt get what he deserves in the end. There's also the insane hired gun, Tarzan (Dorian Nkono), the damaged but still strong woman, Jane (Rhondda Findleton), Shane's love interest and psychiatrist, and of course, the two corrupt cops (Paul Sonkkila and Vince Colosimo). All it needed was black and white film, some cigarette smoke hanging in the air, and some shadows here and there and we're talking full-on 40s noir.

Now almost from the start, the three brothers are pegged as the tragic characters, doomed individuals who have no way out from the predicament they find themselves in. The momentum keeps building, and the story seems destined to end that way. Heist movies have taught us that. The heist is almost always the easy part. The aftermath is where things get bloody. Even following the job, it seems like the movie will go one way but doesn't. That disjointed feel, the bizarre attempts at humor, it all stops the ending from being a classic. It ends on a surprising attempt at a laugh. It works while still managing to feel out of place. The movie is really a mess, but I can't help but like it.

The Hard Word <---quasi-trailer (2002): ***/****

Memento

With the first two Batman movies and 2010's huge hit Inception, director Christopher Nolan has cemented himself as one of Hollywood's go-to directors. Anyone who makes such high quality finished products -- a true movie experience -- is okay in my book. Just his second movie directing, 2000's Memento is similarly one held in high regard by fans and critics alike.

Staying at a cheap motel, Leonard Shelby (Guy Pearce) is looking for the man who raped and murdered his wife. The clues have built up as he tracked him down, and now he seemingly is closer than ever to finding him. Leonard has a problem though, he sustained a head injury by his wife's killer and because of the incident has short term memory loss. He can remember everything that happened before the murder, but everything since? He can't create new memories. How then can he manage to track down the killer? Everything is difficult for him from finding his car to remembering which hotel room he's staying in.

Crazy ridiculous innovative and unique storytelling technique. Like nothing I've seen before. Nolan tells this story backwards, showing the ending at the beginning. Trippy, huh? As one reviewer pointed out, it takes a premise from a classic Seinfeld episode, but that's another story. Leonard's short-term memory loss allows for this technique to work. He remembers only what is in front of his face, constantly writing down notes and even tattooing his body to remind himself of major clues about the killer. So what we remember is obviously more detailed than Leonard, especially as more people get involved with the murder we see in the opening five minutes. One scene following another explains what we've just seen while adding another layer. It's something else to behold in one of the more original premises I've ever seen for telling a story.

Nolan helps pull this off through two techniques, albeit not simple ones. Starters, a flashback of sorts, Leonard sitting in his motel room on the phone, explaining his routine to help him "remember." He's also on the phone with someone -- who? We don't know -- telling about his pre-accident life as a husband and insurance investigator. He worked a case with a husband and wife (a great Stephen Tobolowsky and Harriet Sansom Harris) who went through something similar to Leonard's current situation. Then there's the present-time story (relatively present time) as we move backwards through the investigation. Each little flashback breaks up Leonard's actions, serving as almost a default start over button. He starts over each flashback, clean slate for the memory.

With this sort of storytelling technique or anything so unique in movies, the acting can get lost in the shuffle. Important but far from essential, a performance has to be more workmanlike. Pearce does more than that though playing the memory-challenged Leonard. It's something else how he brings this character to life, both equal parts confidence with a complete helplessness to the world around him. Think how easy it would be to mess with someone with no short term memory, and that person would have no idea in about 2 minutes. Pearce keeps the story grounded as we root for him to find his wife's killer. Without revealing any of the twists, I can't say much about the cast, but both Carrie-Anne Moss and Joe Pantoliano are equally as good in key supporting parts.

Innovative storytelling technique. Check. Interesting characters with solid performances. Check. Even throw in an eerie, moving score from composer David Julyan, which you can listen to HERE. All those positives were there, but I just didn't love the movie. Going ending to beginning was something I've never seen before in a movie, but the gimmick -- for lack of a better word -- didn't sustain the whole movie for me. Finding out more isn't necessarily as interesting as I thought it would be. It even gets tedious at times. The end of the movie (actually the beginning of the story) does deliver a punch, but even that feels like it's missing something. The movie is still something any movie buff should see, and I'm recommending it, but not as much as I would have liked.

Memento <---trailer (2000): ** 1/2 /****

Animal Kingdom

American, English, French, Italian, Japanese, I've tried my best to review movies from all over the world, not just flicks from the good old United States. Well, add Australian to that list thanks to 2010's Animal Kingdom. A drama that received mostly positive reviews, the detractors were still out there. Too derivative, too much of stuff we've seen before. I'm not comparing it to the classic The Godfather, but it is in a similar vein in its story revolving around a crime family, albeit a smaller, less powerful one. Solid story, several nearly perfect performances, and a great soundtrack. Win, win and win.

When his mother overdoses on heroin, 17-year old Josh (James Frecheville) moves in with his estranged family, a family his mother intentionally isolated her son from. The Cody family, including family matriarch Janine (Jacki Weaver), has their hand in everything criminal, ranging from armed robbery to drugs. Josh is able to mostly avoid this criminal life until one of his uncles, Baz (Joel Edgerton), is gunned down by the police in an attempt to lure another uncle, Pope (Ben Mendelsohn), out of hiding. It seems now that there's no way for Josh to avoid the family name, especially when a detective (Guy Pearce) comes asking questions.

I stumbled across this film thanks to a preview/trailer on a Netflix DVD, and I'm glad I did. This was director David Michod's first feature film, and he certainly makes a positive, lasting impression. It is familiar without being too repetitive, and the comparisons to other recent crime thrillers (The Departed, The Town among others) aren't entirely fair. This is a movie that knows what it wants to do and how to get its message across. Understated and subtle, 'Kingdom' focuses on the characters that come out of the situation, not the other way around.

In its subtle, understated way, 'Kingdom' is a polished finished product with plenty of style but not just for the sake of having style. It serves a purpose. One striking shot has a SWAT team invading the Cody household, no natural sound or dialogue, just Antony Partos' quiet, moving score playing. Partos' score is a flashback to the quasi-electronic scores of the 1980s, reminding me at times of Tangerine Dreams. It is one of the best scores I can think of from the last 10 years though, and it ends up being a key character. One character's death scene is a near-classic because of Partos' score driving the action.

It's surprising with the performances that the most important one, Frecheville as Josh, the one we're supposed to care about the most, is the weakest one. Josh is supposed to be quiet, unassuming, withdrawn and removed from life in a lot of ways. So in that sense, Frecheville's performance is either the most brilliant thing around or the worst. There just isn't enough emotion or personality to make Josh truly interesting. Other interesting, smaller performances include Luke Ford as Darren, the quietest of the Cody brothers, and Sullivan Stapleton as Craig, the most emotional and intense of the brothers. Edgerton's character is gone too fast while Pearce is the calming influence, the conscience of the story who asks all the questions.

The two best performances though belong to two of the most sinister, creepiest villains around, Weaver as Janine "Smurf" Cody, the family matriarch, and Mendelsohn as Andrew, known as 'Pope.' Weaver is phenomenal, the mother/grandmother who lives to care for her sons. An incestuous relationship is hinted at, or at least an overly physical hold on her boys, but that could be me reading too far into things. Janine drops to new levels late to protect her family, cementing her status as an epically scary villain. As Pope, Mendelsohn is the psycho, the unhinged brother capable of anything, saying he's looking out for the family but really just focusing on himself.

I was surprised even more with the uproar over the film's ending. First off, it is a great, powerful and even a little shocking in its execution. I thought it was going one way, and then 'Kindgom' does an 180, going in a vastly different route. The finale didn't leave much room for interpretation in my opinion, but apparently lots of other viewers disagreed. I'll leave it up to you. Aussie, American, British, French, it doesn't matter. This is just a good movie.

Animal Kingdom <---trailer (2010): *** 1/2 /****

The Road

Read enough of an author's work, and I've always thought you get a decent look at their outlook on life.  More specific than that, look at the endings to books/novels/short stories, and often enough you get a window into their heads.  I've read four of Cormac McCarthy's novels and realize it's impossible to peg this guy down.  In 'No Country for Old Men' and 'Blood Meridian,' the endings are cynical, incredibly dark and pessimistic.  McCarthy is not one to write a happy ending, but for 'All the Pretty Horse' and 'The Road' there are endings that at least offer hope.

Most recently, The Road was made into a feature length movie of the same name in 2009.  Granted, it was in theaters for about 90 minutes -- if at all on Chicago's Southside -- so I didn't get a chance to see it, but the movie hit DVD last week.  The book is a critical favorite, and McCarthy shows his ability to spin a simplistic story that can still be profound (maybe because of its simplicity).  When I found out the novel was being made into a movie, I was suspicious at first.  This post-apocalyptic novel is not full of action or dialogue, and to tell you the truth, not much happens at all.  But somehow, just like the source novel, the film is worthwhile almost in spite of itself at times

Director John Hillcoat has made a movie that creates a tangible, very real look at what a post-apocalyptic world would look and feel like.  He filmed all over the U.S. including Pennsylvania and Oregon and drops the viewer into this world.  The only color we ever see is in a few quick flashbacks to a pre-apocalypse world while everything else is shot in shades of gray and brown.  Nothing specific is ever mentioned as to what happened to the world, but plants are dying, animals are seemingly extinct, and the sky is always covered in dark, gloomy clouds.  As one character points out, the world is dying, and we are too.  Uplifting message, huh?

In this dreary God-forsaken world, a man (Viggo Mortensen) travels along the vacant roads with his young son (Kodi Smit-McPhee) just trying to survive from day-to-day.  Food and water are scarce, and they trudge along looking for anything that might help them survive.  It's been years since something happened to the world and almost destroyed civilization, leaving very few people alive.  Those that are left? Some are like the father and son doing their best to survive.  Others have joined together into roving gangs ready and willing to kill for any reason.  The father and son travel south, hoping to eventually reach the coast and hopefully find a better place.  But in this world, there's no guarantees of anything.

McCarthy's novel is simple and to the point in creating this sparsely-occupied world.  Translating that to a 2-hour movie is/was a daunting task if you ask me because whole stretches in the novel are just descriptions of the things they find and places they walk through.  That's really my only issue with the movie.  To call it leisurely paced is a huge understatement.  I realize the movie's trying to tell us and show us how these two people survive in this world, but it drags in a big way.

The movie is at its best when dealing with the trials and tribulations father and son must make their way through.  Very few people are still alive, but when they do find them, it's every man for himself.  It is kill or be killed, and look out for the individual first.  In this vast, desolate world, someone trying to kill you could be anywhere waiting for their chance.  When these moments do come along, they're the type of scenes that can send chills up and down your back like no thriller/horror movie ever could.  These scenes show how alone this father and son really are.  No one's there to help them.  They're on their own.  Maybe that's the purpose of the slower scenes -- to lull you into a comfort zone -- and in that sense, the deliberate pacing works.

Viggo Mortensen, besides having basically the coolest names ever, is one of the best actors around, and this is a performance that lets him show off his talent.  His sole goal in life is not for himself to survive, but to help his son survive and keep going.  This is a man who's survived for years -- and looks it too -- who is driven by that one desire and goal to help his son.  13-year old Smit-McPhee is impressive as well in his first big-budget movie.  This is a boy who doesn't know any other existence, but still has a humanity and a belief in morality as they cross this ravaged world.  Other parts include Charlize Theron (only in flashback) as Viggo's wife, Robert Duvall as Ely, a 90-year old nearly blind man they meet on the trail, and Guy Pearce and Molly Parker as a man and woman traveling south too.

As for McCarthy's ending, the movie sticks pretty close to what the novel presented.  And as depressing as it could be taken, it offers some semblance of hope.  All these apocalyptic, dystopian stories almost have to end with a remnant surviving, one last pocket of humanity that offers some sort of hope for the future -- however bleak that future may be.  The moral of the story is this, I can't get a read on McCarthy at all, and maybe that's a good thing.  His novels aren't always easy to read, and the movie translations can be difficult at times, but in the end they're worth it.

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

L.A. Confidential

In its heyday, the film noir genre turned out more than its fair share of classic movies in the late 1940s and early 1950s. These were tough stories often shot in black and white with a typically cynical view of the world. Tough guy actors like Robert Mitchum and Robert Ryan dotted these stories which appealed to audiences then and especially now over 60 year later. But as great as some of these movies were, they were limited by the times they were made in with censorship and production codes keeping a tight rein on these stories.

No such problem in 1997 when L.A. Confidential was released in theaters with a moderate success in theaters and almost complete critical acclaim. Director Curtis Hanson revisits much of what made film noir popular with this hard-bitten, rough-edged movie. Hanson uses Los Angeles extensively in location shooting, and much like 1974's Chinatown did, produces a feeling of what the city must have felt like in the past. With no censors holding him back, the story is blunt and straightforward, full of language and violence that never seems extreme and is almost always essential to the story. This one slipped by me since its release, but am I ever glad I caught up with it.

Based on a novel by James Ellroy, L.A. Confidential has a plot that is pretty near impossible explaining here without giving away many of the key twists and turns it takes. Anyways, here's the gist of it. It's 1953 Los Angeles where the LAPD is full of corruption and scandal with three very different cops stepping into the limelight. First, there's Ed Exley (Guy Pearce), a rising star on the force looking to make a name for himself the right way, the moral way. Second, there's Jack Vincennes (Kevin Spacey), a veteran of the force and a bit of a celebrity for his work with 'Badge of Honor,' a thinly veiled Dragnet rip-off. Don't be confused though, Vincennes is a good cop, even if he may take some shortcuts in his detective work. And last, there's Bud White (Russell Crowe), a brutish homicide detective not above planting some evidence or beating a confession out of a suspect.

Not always working together, the three officers are all involved in one way or another with a massacre at a little diner where 5 people, including a former cop, were murdered, apparently by three young black men wielding shotguns. But as the trio soon figures out, everything is not so cut and dry as it seems. It's nice to see a deeply-layered story like this that requires the viewer to pay attention to each and every scene, every line of dialogue. Even paying close attention, the story is so convoluted and full of twists and turns that it can be hard to follow. Never fear though, the last 30 minutes wraps everything up nicely with an impressive body count too.

Movies with a big ensemble cast have always appealed to me, and this is one of the best. Pearce, Spacey and Crowe all bring something different to their parts, cops who are very different but also very similar. They go about things differently, but they want the same results. Joining them in the cast is Kim Basinger who won a Best Supporting Actress Oscar for her part as Lynn Bracken, a high-price callgirl involved with Crowe's White and the case they're all working. Often more recognized for her good looks than her acting chops, Basinger delivers a strong performance as a woman who ends up as a pawn in a huge conspiracy. Rounding out the cast are James Cromwell as commissioner Dudley Smith, Danny DeVito as Sid Hudgens, a paparazzi before there was TMZ, and David Strathairn as Pierce Patchett, a millionaire working with the movies, cops, drug dealer and prosititutes.

Racking up Oscar nominations in 1997 like crazy, but only winning two -- stupid Titanic -- this is one of those movies that has it all from casting to cinematography to a great understated score from Jerry Goldsmith. It's a throwback to the movies of classic Hollywood, the Golden Age of movies, albeit with a lot more language, cursing and graphic violence. LA Confidential has a professional feeling hovering around it that too often movies are lacking. Can't recommend this one enough, although the final scene does have a bit of a cop-out. Small potatoes I guess in the bigger picture.

L.A. Confidential <----trailer (1997): ****/****

Traitor

Even though the 9/11 attacks happened eight years ago, making a movie about any of the following -- Iraq, Afghanistan, terrorists -- is about the equivalent of trying to sneak into the White House to talk to Obama. You won't be successful, and there's no way your plan ends well. Yet, people in Hollywood still continue to try to put their own spin on the conflicts going on around the world. Maybe the wounds are still too fresh, but it's hard to imagine a big box office for any movie dealing with these sticky topics. Even the critically loved 'The Hurt Locker' struggled in theaters, never getting a wide release. By the way, definitely looking forward to seeing that on DVD.

Part of the problem is that these current world issue war on terrorism movies just haven't been that good. Finally saw one this week, 2008's Traitor, that while not great is an interesting look at modern terrorism, government intrigue, and personal beliefs, both morally and religious. But instead of being too preachy, there's some good action, several exciting chase sequences, and a not so surprising performance from star Don Cheadle. Be forewarned, from here on in, I'm going to be throwing SPOILERS left and right because this is one of this flicks that's more than a little hard to review without a few key (read *twists*) plot revelations.

As a young boy in Yemen, Samir Horn sees his father killed in a car bombing. It's an event that changes his life as a grown-up Samir (Cheadle) joins the U.S. Special Forces only to stay in the Middle East following his discharge. There he works with Muslim terrorist cells, using his expertise with explosives and engineering to keep these cells occupied with bombs. It's at a meeting to sell these explosives that Samir is captured and thrown in a Yemenese prison. There he forms a friendship with Omar (Said Taghmaoui), a member of the cell Samir was working with. An FBI agent, Roy Clayton (Guy Pearce), visits Samir, offering to help him get out, but he wants none of it.

It is not long before Omar and Samir escape the prison, hooking up with the higher-ups and remaining members of their cell. The group, known as Al Nathir, plans to cause chaos in the U.S., not just with one attack, but with 50 attacks happening simultaneously. Al Nathir has been planting sleeper agents throughout the U.S. for years, and now they will each board a different bus on the same day at a prearranged time. The lynch pin is this, they'll all be carrying bombs Samir builds. Continuing his investigation, Clayton sees all the evidence pointing to Samir, but something seems a little off. Can he stop it before the attack?

SPOILERS If you disregarded my previous warning and kept reading, now would be the appropriate time to stop if you don't want the movie spoiled for you. SPOILER Let's face it, Don Cheadle isn't a terrorist, and that's the only big flaw this movie has. There is no way in hell a movie with a major Hollywood actor starring as a hardcore terrorist would get released in theaters. So to resolve that, Cheadle is an agent deep undercover trying to expose the cell that trusts him so closely. His only link to the government he works for is an intelligence operator, Carter (Jeff Daniels making the most of a small part).

But what does work in this context is that none of the story is whitewashed. To convince the cell and his superiors that he is legit, Samir does actually build bombs for them, including one that goes off in an embassy and kills several people that weren't supposed to be there. Cheadle shows off his acting chops in the aftermath, silently tearing himself apart as he reads the newspaper recounting the attack. He doesn't say a word throughout, and it's a powerful, very moving scene. And even riskier, Taghmaoui's Omar is presented as a sympathetic character. That's a ballsy play showing a terrorist as anything but pure evil, but it works. Their unlikely friendship (man, that sounds like a Disney movie) is a key as the movie develops.

Director Jeffrey Nachmanoff chose to set this story in modern times, but it does have elements of any number of genres; the spy movie, the political thriller, the action epic. On a purely entertainment level, Traitor goes up a notch because of that. The characterization and development sets the groundwork for a good movie, and then all those other things lift it up some. There's a message without being preachy, and at the same time it's entertaining as Samir and Omar seemingly race around the world. Locations include Chicago, France, Canada, Morocco, London and Marseilles. Pretty good for a relatively small budget and a somewhat controversial storyline.

This one slipped through the cracks upon its initial release, but it's one worth catching up with. One of the most underrated actors in Hollywood, Cheadle delivers both an emotionally charged and understated role at the same time. Pearce is the FBI agent trying to do his job as best he can, only to realize he's not so different from the man he's chasing. A nice blend of action, intrigue and a message. Definitely worth a rent.

Traitor <----trailer (2008): ***/****